On Tue, 29 May 2001, daniel andreasson <[log in to unmask]> wrote :

>> isce < Q hiise? < KHIS-? [There seems to be more than Welsh
>> mutation here.]

> Well, I had big problems with _hiisie_. [h] -> 0, leaving _iisie_.
> Then the vowels shortens -> _isie_. Then the vowels are supposed
> to drop, but I didn't really know what to do with [ie].

Well if you want to follow British > Welsh what happens is
/-ie/ >> /-ije/ >> /-ID/ <-ydd>

> So I thought, why not let s+i -> [S]?

You could do that too, looks a bit Irish :-)

> Well, I used _limbe_ 'many' and let that get a more general
> augmentative meaning. I'm not sure if that should be _llif_
> instead. The rules are "nasal + voiced stop -> nasal",
> "medial [m] -> [v]" and "drop final vowel". I'm not sure in
> which order to apply them.

IMHO /limbe/ >> /llimm/ double /m/ resists lenition. Modern Welsh always
writes a single <m> but the sound was double (all single /m/ having
gone to /v/ <f>. Possibly later /mm/ >> /m/ when final, I think this has
happened in Welsh, but not in Cornish where /mm/ sometimes went to /bm/
or even /bb/. N.B. Mod. W. <p t c> are really /pp tt kk/.

> No, {ch} is the mutated form of {c}, which I decided should
> occur after the definite article. I'm still not sure if there
> should be mutation or not after _i_ (sg) and _ir_ (pl).

/i/ might be expected to cause lenition (soft mutation). /ir/ might
just possibly cause germination leading to a spirant mutation and
maybe doubling of /l r m n/. The original /r/ of ir would be lost
except perhaps before vowels.