[palistudy] Eng translation Kacc 1:10-11 (Ole & George)

George (& Ole),

> But I do have difficulty
> applying this to the example in Kacc 10, which has nothing to do with vertically arranged
> consonant clusters, but with vowel sandhi in which 'a' followed by 'a' becomes 'aa'. The
> latter is never, so far as I am aware, written in two vertically arranged components...

It does occur in some epigraphy that I have seen (e.g., from Burma) in
which an initial a ("capital a") is written in subscript precisely as
described.

If you don't believe me, I could indeed try to laboriously scan in a
few examples; but I would prefer that you simply believe me.

> When they are combined into 'aa[, this is written with a diacritic
> stroke following the consonant or cluster but not above or below it.

(1) It is not clear at all that the locus of the verse is expressly
addressing /a/ becoming /aa/ (i.e., the rule can/should include
instances in which /a/ remains /a/, among others)
(2) Initial vowels written as subscripts did exist --but, like the
later redactor of the vutti, George, you do not know this because the
orthographic praxis has become "out of vogue" in your era.  The
millennia are merciless that way!

> Eisel Mazard
> sometimes refers to a convention for overlapping (or repeating?) syllables in compounds,
> not seen in modern texts.

This seems to be an important demonstration of how difficult it is to
clearly communicate anything about orthography in Romanized script; at
some stage, George has mis-understood something I've written in my own
idiom --either that, or I'm wildly mis-understanding his re-statement
of something I've said myself.

E.M.