# Welsh: -euyn (llysieuyn)



## Gavril

Hello,

Welsh llysieuyn "vegetable" seems to be composed of the singulative suffix -_yn _added onto the plural form _llysiau_ (from a now-obscure stem *_llys_).

Is _llysieuyn_ the only case (that we know of) where a singulative has been formed using a stem that already ends in the productive plural suffix -_au_?

Thanks for any info


----------



## Cilquiestsuens

I am not sure it might help but this type of formations do exist in the Breton language and they belong to the spoken language rather than the bookish one.

A book by Per Trepos (Pierre Trépos - Le Pluriel Breton) deals with this topic and demonstrates the unmatched flexibility and precision of plural formations in the language used by the common people on the countryside. He gives the example of _*sant*_ (a saint / holyman); whose regular plural is an internal one _*sent*_. However, when one talks about statues of saints (and not actual holymen) the plural has to be _*santoù*_, with the ending used for inanimate (equivalent to your Welsh -_*au*_). When one then talks about one of the statue of saints among a bunch of them, he'd say *santaouenn*; adding the singulative suffix *-enn* (corresponding to Welsh -_*yn*_) to the plural ending -_*où*_...

Such a natural and spontaneous use of the language has died out now one must admit. Per Trépos' observations date back from the 50's / 60's.

A few words did make their way to the standardized and official form of Breton spoken nowadays with this *-aouenn *ending 
( =_* où*_ + _*enn*_), but they are no longer perceived as being made up of those two elements:

_*goulaouenn*_ (one individual light, based on _*gouloù*_ , light in general)
_*kelaouenn*_ (magazine based on *keloù* - a news)

By the way _*keloù*_ and *gouloù *are perceived in nowadays language as singulars; and double plurals have been recreated to show the modern plural : _*gouleier*_ (lights) and* keleier* (news).

There is also *kanaouenn* (song) originally singular of *kanoù*, whose plural is *kanaouennoù*!

I'd bet Welsh has similar formations.


----------



## Gavril

Thanks, Cilquiestsuens, this is very interesting.

My understanding is that Welsh _golau_, Breton _gouloù_ "light" and so on are not plural forms, but instead the diphthong -_au / -où_ is part of the original stem (*_louk_- ?). The singulative of _golau_ would be something like_ goleuyn_, which is attested, but with the diminutive meaning "small light".

Welsh _goleuni_ "light" (I'm not sure if there is any semantic difference from _golau_) may also be of interest here, but I don't know its exact etymology.

The plural of Welsh _cân_ "song" is _caneuon_, which seems to show double plural suffixes (-_au_ + -_on_), but unlike Breton _kanaouenn_, I don't know of any attested singulative for this word.

By the way, does modern Breton have different forms for masculine (Welsh -_yn_) and feminine (Welsh -_en_) singulatives?



Cilquiestsuens said:


> I am not sure it might help but this type of formations do exist in the Breton language and they belong to the spoken language rather than the bookish one.
> 
> A book by Per Trepos (Pierre Trépos - Le Pluriel Breton) deals with this topic and demonstrates the unmatched flexibility and precision of plural formations in the language used by the common people on the countryside. He gives the example of _*sant*_ (a saint / holyman); whose regular plural is an internal one _*sent*_. However, when one talks about statues of saints (and not actual holymen) the plural has to be _*santoù*_, with the ending used for inanimate (equivalent to your Welsh -_*au*_). When one then talks about one of the statue of saints among a bunch of them, he'd say *santaouenn*; adding the singulative suffix *-enn* (corresponding to Welsh -_*yn*_) to the plural ending -_*où*_...
> 
> Such a natural and spontaneous use of the language has died out now one must admit. Per Trépos' observations date back from the 50's / 60's.
> 
> A few words did make their way to the standardized and official form of Breton spoken nowadays with this *-aouenn *ending
> ( =_* où*_ + _*enn*_), but they are no longer perceived as being made up of those two elements:
> 
> _*goulaouenn*_ (one individual light, based on _*gouloù*_ , light in general)
> _*kelaouenn*_ (magazine based on *keloù* - a news)
> 
> By the way _*keloù*_ and *gouloù *are perceived in nowadays language as singulars; and double plurals have been recreated to show the modern plural : _*gouleier*_ (lights) and* keleier* (news).
> 
> There is also *kanaouenn* (song) originally singular of *kanoù*, whose plural is *kanaouennoù*!
> 
> I'd bet Welsh has similar formations.


----------



## Cilquiestsuens

^ I think you must be right, the *où* in *gouloù* might not be a plural ending.

Gouloù however is perceived as a Collective noun and therefore takes the -*enn* singulative ending (which is only feminine and has no masculine counterpart). There are many collective nouns in Breton. They are used thus:




*Gwez
**Gwezenn
**Gwezennoù
*(Trees)
(A tree)
(A few trees)
*Stered
**Steredenn
**Steredennoù
*(Stars)
(A star)
(A few stars)
*Pesked
**Peskedenn
**Peskedennoù
*(Fish)
(A fish)
(A few fish)




I am not really sure if Welsh or Cornish have the same formations?


----------



## Gavril

Cilquiestsuens said:


> I am not really sure if Welsh or Cornish have the same formations?



As far as I know (I'm not an expert), Welsh does not have the regular three-way contrast you describe. I have no idea about Cornish.

Welsh does have many singulative nouns (such as _*coeden* : *coed*_ "tree(s)" _*seren* : *sêr*_ "star(s)", _*pysgodyn *: *pysgod*_ "fish(es)"), but I've never heard of the plural suffix -_au_ being regularly added to the singulative stem (*_coedennau_, *_pysgodynnau_ etc.).

The word *rhosyn *"rose" has plural *rhosynnau *rather than *_rhos_, but this could be a special case: there is a different word _rhos_ meaning "heath", "moor", so giving _rhosyn_ the plural form _rhosynnau_ avoids confusion between the two terms.


----------



## Gavril

By the way, I found another example of a singulative in -_euyn_: _blodeuyn_ "flower" (plural _blodau_). An alternative singular form for "flower" is _blodyn_.

_blodyn_ is probably the earlier form, and _blodeuyn_ may be an attempt to make the singulative more regular relative to the plural _blodau_, which in turn may have been created because the original plural stem (as seen in _blawd_ "flour") had diverged too far phonetically and semantically from _blodyn_.


----------

