[Spellyans] SWF principles

Michael Everson everson at evertype.com
Thu Jun 26 20:41:38 BST 2008

At 13:29 -0600 2008-06-26, Terry wrote:
>Are the 5 principles of the SWF set in stone or are they open for
>discussion when the 5 year review occurs?

As far as I am concerned they are open for discussion now.

>These principles are listed as:
>1. *Inclusivity *- Users of all varieties of Revived Cornish should be
>able to write as they speak.
>2. *Accessibility *- The SWF should be as easy as possible for speakers,
>learners, and teachers to learn and use.
>3. *Accuracy *- The SWF should reflect the pronunciation of both
>traditional and Revived Cornish.

I don't have any problem with these.

>4. *Authenticity *- The SWF should use spellings that reflect
>established traditions of Cornish orthography.

This is disingenuous. Indeed it is bollocks. Evidently the authors 
believe -- or pretend to believe -- or want some people to believe 
that they believe -- that KK is an "established tradition", which is 
why <kw> and <hw> and <-i> were not simply thrown out as they ought 
to have been.

>5. *Continuity *- Where practical, the SWF should produce the smallest
>possible number of changes for the largest possible number of speakers.

This "principle" was devised and added by the Arbitrator, and it is 
likewise unacceptable, because it is clear that some choices were 
made in order to produce few changes for KK users, since KK users 
"are the largest number of speakers". The "principle" was not 
discussed at either of the first two AHGs and when this appeared in 
the first SWF draft, Agan Tavas and its Linguistic Advisors protested 
and requested that the text be removed.

The distribution of <i> and <y> is the worst example of this 
"principle". No matter how many times Nicholas and I tried to get 
discussion of the distribution, we were just ignored. The 
distribution of <i> and <y> in the SWF is as it is in KK. That is why 
it is incoherent. It's not based on phonetic or phonemic principles. 
It's based on George's etymologies. I don't accept that as sufficient.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com

More information about the Spellyans mailing list