Re: nu alltr e gw alltr?

[Andrew Smith <hobbit@mail.earthlight.co.nz>]

interesting message that one, is there enough evidence to suggest that
Brithenig would develop features like nu-h-alltr and gw-h-alltr.  I like
inclusive/exclusive marking as a language feature, but I would like a
discussion before it is formally adopted.

some other thoughts going on at the moment:

1. on the evidence of germination in Italian, should Brithenig prep. _a_
be followed by aspirant mutation;

ad + C > a + CC > a + Ch

2. with the loss of final plural -s, should Brithenig develop a more
definite indefinite plural than just yn + aspirant mutation?

3. I'm working on the architecture of the Brithenig page, breaking each
section down into separate pages, do readers still want a full page
option?  Other editorial advice welcome.  New update posting in the next
few weeks, depending on how much time I spend tidying it up.

- andrew.

Andrew Smith, Intheologus 			hobbit@earthlight.co.nz
Life is short, so am I!

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GL d+ s-:+ a32 C+ UL P? L E? W++ N+ o-- K- w O M+ V PS++ PE- Y+ PGP- t+*
5+ X- R tv b+++ DI+ D-- G e++ h- !r y-
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------