[Spellyans] 'up, upwards'

Daniel Prohaska daniel at ryan-prohaska.com
Sun Jan 25 12:18:52 GMT 2009


Nag ew dhe vos acomptys, sos!

Dan

 

  _____  

From: Christian Semmens
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 7:53 PM



 

Oops, and Dan of course! apologies Dan!
Christian

2009/1/24 Christian Semmens <christian.semmens at gmail.com>

Although I understand there are some aesthetic sensibilities in RLC regading
the use of the letter 'i' but, so far I haven't seen much engagement from
the RLC community here with the exception of Mina and Neil. Is this so
important to them?

I must say, for my part, I tend to side with Eddie and Craig in this matter
and would prefer that, if we must use 'in' then, as Andrew suggests, 'yn' is
optional. I don't think there would be much likelyhood of there being
confusion between the adverbial particle and the preposition if both were
rendered 'yn'.

Christian

2009/1/24 Michael Everson <everson at evertype.com>

 

On 23 Jan 2009, at 23:18, Craig Weatherhill wrote:

Although I run the risk of ruffling feathers, I do wonder if we are not
drifting off track with some of the items being discussed here.  Surely, the
idea was to concentrate upon addressing the faults recognised within SWF.  I
don't understand where the yn/in question comes into this.  Are we, in fact,
in danger of going a little too far?

 

One of the faults is that it has no principled distribution if <i> and <y>
except in stressed monosyllables and some finals. The other is that its
accommodation of RLC cosmetic preferences isn't so great.



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


_______________________________________________

Spellyans mailing list
Spellyans at kernowek.net
http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20090125/b11b22d2/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Spellyans mailing list