Re: Cyninglic (was: RE: Runes (was: Re: RV: Old English))

And wrote:
> Dan (Dan):
> > And wrote:
> > > Vasili Gsrernov (Basileus):
> > > > On Wed, 29 Mar 2000 17:11:00 +0100, hæfþ yl-ruil <yl-ruil@...>
> > > > gewriten:
> > > >
> > > > >Se cyning (Basileus) haþ writen
> > > >
> > > > Se Cyninglic (Basilius), probably... or Þéodenlic ;)
> > >
> > > What would modern English reflexes of _Cyninglic_ and _Þéodenlic_
> > > be? Is _king_ regularly from _cyning_, so _Kingly_ (boringly), or
> > > might we instead have something like _Kinningly_?
> >
> > If king was very rarely used, yes. But king from cyninglic is by
haplology.
>
> Isn't _kingly_ from _cyninglic_ and _king_ from _cyning_? At any rate, if
> the haplology is irregular, as haplology generally is, then the *name*
> _Cyninglic_ might be exempt, in which case we might render
_Vasily/Basileus_
> as _Kinningly_. No?
Good point, but out of pure orthographical aesthetics, I think Kinningly
looks ugly.

> --And.
Dan