Re: Some suggestions

[Padraic Brown <pbrown@nova.umuc.edu>]

On Tue, 19 Jan 1999, Andrew Smith wrote:

> I am disinclined to lose such magnificent gobstoppers as ddla, The Grand
> Master Plan would argue against it.  It could be argued that Breathanach
> and Kernu are more radical languages.

No argument there!  Yet another way to spot a nonBrithenig speaker: those
who take a minute to sort out something like "ddla" and then pronounce it
d@la.

> > >> [FINAL AFFRICATES]
> > 
> > Gosh - fancy my forgetting 'Brithenig' !!  I guess we're so used to
> > Brithenig it would be awkward to change it unless we really had to.  I've
> > already gone off final -gh.
> >
> That would place us at square one (or ultimate syllable one) either a
> digraph is permitted *ffelits, *ffelig', *ffeliz or a rule is added to the
> pronunciation to say that some final '-g's are soft for historical
> soundchanges and must be learnt where they are encountered (personally I
> don't believe in one letter, one sound as a law of natlangs).

I wholeheartedly agree with this last.  Though I do like the look of
*ffelits; as I also don't see a problem with having three or four
spellings of the same sound!  The same sound, (dj, yes?), has at least 3
spellings in K: j (and on occasion Y before a vowel) at the beginnings of
words, like il Jowan/Yowan; g before e or i; and dg, like il fridg or la
hadg.

Padraic.

> - andrew.