[Spellyans] <kk> and <ck>

Thomas Leigh callanish at gmail.com
Wed Dec 17 16:09:37 GMT 2008

Hi Dan,

I agree with you re: <kk> in SWF/M and <ck> in SWF/T. That's much more
sensible than the current Hodge-podge (ba-dump bum!)

Also, since I'm a newbie here as well, I've gotten a bit confused wading
through the archives as well: are we mostly further developing KS, or taking
the current SWF as a starting point and discussing how to modify it so that
it's acceptable to, shall we say, those of stronger orthographic preferences
than I? (My apologies if this was explicitly stated somewhere that I missed
— but I couldn't tell.)


On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 10:41 AM, Daniel Prohaska
<daniel at ryan-prohaska.com>wrote:

>   Dear all,
> Apart from our continued work on KS, I would like to propose that we put
> together a list of issues that need to be discussed until and when the SWF
> undergoes further tweaks in 2013. The Partnership has stated that no more
> changes are to be recognised until then.
> The issue I would like to bring up here is the matter of when to write <ck>
> and <kk> in the SWF. We have Paul Hodge to "thank" for the current
> SWF-solution of spelling <ck> in loanwords and <kk> in native Cornish words.
> I don't find this particularly helpful for either users of traditional
> graphs (SWF/T) or for users of the main form (SWF/M). I should rather
> propose that the SWF/M should write <kk> and SWF/T <ck>. I would like to
> hear opinions on this.
> Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20081217/b08eb8b1/attachment.htm>

More information about the Spellyans mailing list