Talk:Old Welsh

message: Please see Talk:Welsh language regarding a potential merge with British language (Celtic).--Mais oui! 14:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested merge 

message: Linguists usually classify 4 periods of Welsh as follows:
Early Welsh is considered to exist from the time that it definitely separated from Brythonic (which cannot be dated at all accurately for lack of written evidence but which is guessed to be the 6th or 7th century) to the end of the 8th century.
Old Welsh is considered to run from the beginning of the 9th century to the end of the 11th century
Middle Welsh is considered to run from the early 12th century to the 14th century and is followed by Modern Welsh.
The article on Old Welsh appears to cover the period of both Early Welsh and Old Welsh.
Ref: Datblygiad yr iaith Gymraeg, Henry Lewis, 1931, chapter 8 (in Welsh)
Lloffiwr 13:22, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  periods of Welsh 

message: I don't know advanced welsh, so I may be wrong; Brawd isn't Judgement but it is Brother. I shall change this unless anyone can provide sufficient evidence otherwise.
Diolch - Twicga  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twicga (talk • contribs) 11:51, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This has already been changed back, but in case you were wondering, there are two Welsh nouns "brawd". The one you're thinking of is masculine, with a plural "brodyr", and means "brother" or "friar". The other is feminine, with a plural "brodiau", means "judgement" or "verdict", and is rarely found outside forms such as "Dydd Brawd" (the Day of Judgement, as we have here) and "brawdlys" (assize court). 𝐨𝐱𝐲𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐧𝐵𝑈𝑇𝐴𝑍𝑂𝑁𝐸 ⓊⓉ 17:21, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistranslations 

message: Newidiais "surexit" i "surrexit" er mwyn dilyn orgraff safonol y Lladin. Wedyn, edrychais ar luniau o'r llawysgrif, ac mae'r gair wedi'i gamsillafu yno. A ddylid ei newid fel camgymeriad dibwys, ynteu'i gadw fel y mae yn y gwreiddiol? 𝐨𝐱𝐲𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐧𝐵𝑈𝑇𝐴𝑍𝑂𝑁𝐸 ⓊⓉ 20:48, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well i gadw'r orgraff fel oedd hi yn y gwreiddiol/better to keep the spelling as it was in the original. garik (talk) 17:53, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Surrexit/Surexit 

message: This is of little importance, but "ein oes oesau" does not exactly mean "for ever and ever". Literally it means "for ages to come" or something to that degree. I thought I should post it here rather than just add it in without checking to see if I'm correct or not. --ConCass (talk) 23:34, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Well if we're talking literal translations, oes oesau means "age of ages". However, Geiriadur y Prifysgol lists yn oes oesau and yn oes oesoedd as meaning (something like) "for ever and ever" since the 9th century. Certainly that's how the phrase is used now (although it's not much used now outside the Lord's Prayer), and I'm happy to trust Geiriadur y Prifysgol as a reliable source for older usage. garik (talk) 14:11, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: By the way, I believe the ``in of ``in ois oisau is an archaic spelling of yn, not ein. And I should add: If you have a reliable source that gives "for ages to come" as a more accurate translation of the phrase in the surrexit memorandum, please do contribute it! It may well be that the meaning of the expression has changed in force over time, whatever the University of Wales might say. garik (talk) 17:49, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Ein Oes Oesau" 

message: This page is looking pretty sparse. In particular, I've come here several times hoping to find someone has added a phonology section. Is there anyone who cares enough about this page and has the time and expertise to do this? I'm not personally knowledgeable enough to get one started myself.
--Scriptor Nemorensis (talk) 19:17, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phonology 

message: "At this stage, the use of ll to represent the lateral fricative /ɬ/ (liuit > Llywyd) (...) had not been developed." But was it present in the first place? The sound /ɬ/ is absent from Cornish and Breton, so it's likely to have developed after the Brythonic languages split. Also, its presence in modern Welsh is closely related to the soft mutation, which turns /ɬ/ into a plain /l/. The article already tells us that mutation was not represented orthographically. This means that it was probably in an early stage at most. So is there any reason to assume that it occurred in old Welsh? Steinbach (talk) 15:06, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: My understanding is that /ɬ/ was a development in Middle Welsh (where it could be spelt  or . The Mutation of /ɬ/ > /l/ represents a blocking of the change of all initial /l/ words to /ɬ/, being in intervocalic position when after a preposition, pronoun or other particles – same with /r̥/ > /r/. I don't think /ɬ/ or /r̥/ existed in Old Welsh. – Dyolf87 (talk) 12:47, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

text: EDIT: Further to my last I found the following in a book called An Introduction to Early Welsh by John Strachan, published in 1909: "(f) The voiceless l is in O[ld] W[elsh] written l at the beginning of a word, e.g. lau 'hand' = Mid.W. llaw, elsewhere ll, e.g. mellhionou gl. violas. In Mid. W. it is in all positions written ll or ỻ. For the voiceless r = Mod.W. rh. Early Welsh has no special symbol; it is written r." (Quoted exactly save for a few symbols which had to be replaced for ease of reading.) So it seems that /ɬ/ did exist during the Old Welsh period, or at least it was believed to have in 1909. – Dyolf87 (talk) 15:01, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is all just speculation really, but Strachan’s context would be the inconsistent, often non-existant marking of mutations in Old Irish.  The inconsistencies, later usage and grammatical tracts show that the mutations were there though.  Textual evidence is very important, but I don’t think you can easily use the lack of orthography alone to argue that the mutation didn’t exist. ⚜ Moilleadóir ✍ 06:21, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phonology