RE: VMs: Has anyone been down this route before?

["Brian Tawney" <btawney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> /h/ is always preceded by /c/  with or without intruding
> gallows. /c/ is always followed by /h/, again with or
> without intruding gallows. So we can have only:

> 1. ch
> 2. c<gallows>h

> There are only four gallows.

> Arabic rules itself out. Just consider:

Alas, my transcription of the text must be unorthodox, or there must be
something I don't understand about it.  I count over 1000 different words
that have an /h/ not preceded by a /c/,  which occur (in total) over 4000
times.  For example, I find:

aifhhy
	f105v.P.25:
kchdaldy.alfo.lfcheedy.ofaiis.opchey.fchedy.qotor.oeeeodr.qopar.aifhhy.dl
aifhy, raithty
	f107r.p.49: o.alain.aifhy.chkain.okair.chtl.lkaiin.okair.chtl.raithty

I also find 91 words that have /c/ not followed by /h/ (which is admittedly
a discouraging number).  For example,

aicky
	f46v.p.7:
dchedy.cheeky.dam.ched.l.chedy.chedyokeedchsy.qokeedy.chetedar.or.aicky

Unfortunately, I'm not sure where I picked up this transcription, since I
was trolling the web.  Could someone point me at a more orthodox one?

Shukraan.

Brian Tawney



______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list