[Spellyans] SWF vowel inconsistencies

Michael Everson everson at evertype.com
Wed Jul 2 20:11:29 IST 2008

Terry has re-subscribed, and says the following:

At 12:15 -0600 2008-07-02, Terry Corbett wrote:

>I don't see how an orthography can be inclusive if it excludes the 
>spelling preferences of a good part of the Revived Cornish 
>community.If they insist on that being their preferred 
>pronunciation, and they have a hard time using it then pronunciation 
>is their problem.
>Since I don't see how the various manuscripts can be dated with any 
>precision, I don't believe that it is possible to define the start 
>of Middle Cornish. After all it is a construct that has no real 
>natural relation to the language. No one woke up on some day and 
>started speaking "Middle Cornish".
>I think it is preferable to include all pronunciations from post Old 
>Cornish Vocabulary onward. For some Cornish speakers this is 
>important. The SWF seems to do this except for a few cases ( for 
>example the [ o ] when it is not [ u ] in Late Cornish). I 
>personally prefer Lhuydian spellings and pronunciations. It is the 
>closest thing we have to what Cornish sounded like at any period of 
>its existance.
>I know that Albert and Ben recognize that the SWF has problems. What 
>is surprising is that considering how it was developed it isn't even 
>far worse tha it is. It's more like a piece of legislation passed by 
>the US Congress than a well developed orthography. This is to be 
>expected considering the fluky way it was put together.

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com

More information about the Spellyans mailing list