Re: EAK nouns
| From: | Philip Newton <philip.newton@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Thursday, May 10, 2007, 10:43 |
|---|
On 5/10/07, R A Brown <ray@...> wrote:
> It now seems
> to me that a more satisfactory solution, and more in keeping with the
> spirit of "Latino sine flexione" would be to use the _dative_ singular
> (dropping the 'iota subscript' of the 1st & 2nd declensions).
Ah! Clever, if that works the way you want it.
> Note:
> i. [e] = epicene (masc. or feminine)
> ii. The ancient forms are give *for convenience* with the modern
> monotonic diacritics. Lest anyone is tempted to 'correct' me, I would
> point out that I am very aware of the polytonic accents & breathings
> (I've known them for half a century!) - but there seemed little point in
> making the email more complicated.
That's only relevant for the first column, though, right? IIRC, EAK is
written in the monotonic system, anyway, since breathings are
irrelevant since EAK is psilotic and the pitch accent had given way to
a (uniform) stress accent.
(Are you going to be writing an accent on monosyllables? Either all,
or specific ones for disambiguation of homophones, à la French ou/où
or MG που/πού?)
Cheers,
--
Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>
Replies