Re: Spelling pronunciations (was: rhotic miscellany)

On Wednesday, November 10, 2004, at 07:51 , Tristan Mc Leay wrote:

> Andreas Johansson wrote:
>
>> Quoting John Cowan <jcowan@...>:
>>
>>
>>> Old English had [xw-], and though the majority of dialects now have [w-]
>>> ,
>>>
>>> some still have [hw-] or [W].  In Scots, [xw-] became [kw-] for a while,
>>> as shown by older Scots spellings like quha (who) and quhilk (which),
>>> (now written "wha" and "whilk").
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I was of the impression that 'quh' itself indicated [xw], on analogy
>> with 'ch' =
>> [x] and 'th' = [T]? Seems saner than using it for [kw], for which simply
>> 'qu'
>> should immediate present itself.
>>
>>
>
> That's what I thought too.
Yes, you & Andreas are quite correct. Earlier borrowing into Welsh also
have the /xw/ sound (actually [Xw] in Welsh), e.g. chwip ,-- whip, chwisgu
<-- whisk(e)y.

> I also thought some Scottish dialects pronounced it as some f-like sound
> (probably [P] ... I mean,
In fact it was [f]. It persisted in some areas at least till the early
part of 20th century. I suspect it has died out now.

> [p\]), and that this had somehow influenced
> the spelling of Maori so that <wh>=/f/ nowadays (at least by
> English-speakers using Maori words).
Yep - I think there's little doubt about Scots influence. |wh| is still
pronounced either [hw] or [w_O], unlike us lazy southerners who just say
[w].

Ray
===============================================
http://home.freeuk.com/ray.brown
ray.brown@freeuk.com
===============================================
Anything is possible in the fabulous Celtic twilight,
which is not so much a twilight of the gods
as of the reason."      [JRRT, "English and Welsh" ]

Reply