craig at agantavas.org
Tue Apr 7 14:47:40 IST 2009
No one is saying anything about my place-name evidence for 'gaver'.
Personally, I don't mind which spelling is adopted: gaver or gavar.
Both are attested which brings me to the point.
Gaver can't be despised because KK happens to use that spelling. Both
gavar and gaver are attested, so both are genuine and not contrived.
Regarding Trond's alleged rulings, if nothing has been committed to
written record, then his 'rulings" are meaningless. The SWF can only
conform to what has been agreed, or ruled upon, and recorded in
permanent record. If not, then the process is incomplete and mere
recollection as to what Trond ruled upon and what he didn't has no
meaning at all.
What is written and recorded was the Commission's opinion that KD
should be used as a basis and, therefore, if there is doubt (and
without written record of Trond's apparent rulings), then the
Coimmission's is what we must act upon.
On 7 Ebr 2009, at 14:04, Michael Everson wrote:
> In BK we have both "lavar" and "laver".
> Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
More information about the Spellyans