From everson at evertype.com Sat May 9 22:42:32 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Sat, 9 May 2009 22:42:32 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF, KK, KS, and Bailey. Message-ID: The C24 forum is mostly both a wasteland and a waste of time, but just for the record, I made the following posting there: Keith Bailey said to "PieterCharles" (whoever that is): ===== > Pieter : What is the point of a 'compromise' where only one side > changes its position? That looks rather more like a surrender to me. > I don't doubt that some of those involved acted in good faith. But > since that good faith has now been abused by the intransigence of > the other side, they have nothing to gain by continueing to honour > the agreement. > > It should be clear by now that the SWF is an expensive failure. That > should be impressed on the Council and the Kesva and Kowethas should > only support KK which can be justified linguistically, whereas the > SWF is a mess which cannot be justified from *any* standpoint, > neither ours nor theirs. It's only justification was as a compromise > that everyone would accept and use. And since the others will not > use it, but continue to press for something more to their liking... > > Well I hope you see the point. It's easy to see your point, Keith. I've been asked by a colleague to say a word here. Keith is wrong. This should come as little surprise to readers of this forum. Yes, the SWF has faults. We (who have participated in the open discussion on Spellyans) believe that the faults are serious. We have examined the SWF, identified its faults, and have both provided a set of corrections to those faults, and begin publishing with those corrections made. We are aware, of course, that the CLP may or may not adopt all or some or any of the corrections in 2013. That's up to them and whatever structures they have in place then. Of course, this is no secret. What is interesting is Keith's confession. He has never wanted any kind of compromise, and never been interested in the least feature of the SWF. (Actually, I believe he likes the use of the hyphen with *- ma* and *-na* in KS.) But we see here just what I predicted we would see. As a diehard KK supporter, he likes each and every one of the faults in the SWF. He wants the SWF to fail. He won't use it. He doesn't want the Cowethas to use it. He doesn't want the Kesva to use it. He doesn't want us to help to fix it. He wants it to die, because he is wedded to a non- traditional orthography that represents a theoretical phonology that nobody uses, *not even the inventor of the theoretical phonology*. He lies, quite constantly, on this forum, saying that KK represents Cornish as it was actually spoken, when of course there is *no evidence of this at all at all at all*. The only evidence we *really do have* for how Cornish was spoken was Lhuyd's phonetic respelling. And Keith will turn handsprings to show how that cannot be trusted. The only thing that can be trusted is the thesis Ken George proposes. It's not verifiable. And it's not been put into practice by speakers of Revived Cornish. But that's all Keith wants. Kernowek Kebmyn or nothing. I am sure that this has been the aim of the Kesva hardcore all along. I am sure it was part of their plan to make sure that the SWF/T (which Traditionalists are meant to use) had non-traditional graphs in it, precisely so we would have to derogate?so they could claim that the SWF was a failure. So they could claim that only Kernowek Kebmyn should be used, because it has all the books, and all the grammars, and all the dictionaries. I don't believe that will be true for very long. Well, that's my word. I believe I might repeat this on Spellyans, so it gets recorded in a reputable archive. I'll get back to working on a forthcoming publication now. ===== Just for the record. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From ray at spyrys.org Mon May 11 12:37:43 2009 From: ray at spyrys.org (Ray Chubb) Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 12:37:43 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF, KK, KS, and Bailey. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8901BC56-2A4A-44B0-889A-78998BDD534D@spyrys.org> You have summed up the position well Michael. It seems to me that there are some users of Kemyn who are happy to use and support the Standard Written Form and others who are hoping it will just fade away. The Kemyn camp is therefore divided. The position of Agan Tavas is quite clear, members support the SWF although we recognise that KS is better and, while we do not wish to undermine the SWF, we do indeed hope that KS can be used to inform the review of it. The mood that I picked up at our Special General Meeting was that members wish to be actively involved with the SWF in all its variations. I think those Kemyn users who hope that the SWF will quietly disappear will be shocked when the outcomes of that desire of Agan Tavas members start to appear. On 9 Me 2009, at 22:42, Michael Everson wrote: > The C24 forum is mostly both a wasteland and a waste of time, but > just for the record, I made the following posting there: > > Keith Bailey said to "PieterCharles" (whoever that is): > > ===== >> Pieter : What is the point of a 'compromise' where only one side >> changes its position? That looks rather more like a surrender to >> me. I don't doubt that some of those involved acted in good faith. >> But since that good faith has now been abused by the intransigence >> of the other side, they have nothing to gain by continueing to >> honour the agreement. >> >> It should be clear by now that the SWF is an expensive failure. >> That should be impressed on the Council and the Kesva and Kowethas >> should only support KK which can be justified linguistically, >> whereas the SWF is a mess which cannot be justified from *any* >> standpoint, neither ours nor theirs. It's only justification was as >> a compromise that everyone would accept and use. And since the >> others will not use it, but continue to press for something more to >> their liking... >> >> Well I hope you see the point. > > It's easy to see your point, Keith. > > I've been asked by a colleague to say a word here. > > Keith is wrong. This should come as little surprise to readers of > this forum. > > Yes, the SWF has faults. We (who have participated in the open > discussion on Spellyans) believe that the faults are serious. We > have examined the SWF, identified its faults, and have both provided > a set of corrections to those faults, and begin publishing with > those corrections made. > > We are aware, of course, that the CLP may or may not adopt all or > some or any of the corrections in 2013. That's up to them and > whatever structures they have in place then. > > Of course, this is no secret. > > What is interesting is Keith's confession. He has never wanted any > kind of compromise, and never been interested in the least feature > of the SWF. (Actually, I believe he likes the use of the hyphen with > *-ma* and *-na* in KS.) > > But we see here just what I predicted we would see. As a diehard KK > supporter, he likes each and every one of the faults in the SWF. He > wants the SWF to fail. He won't use it. He doesn't want the Cowethas > to use it. He doesn't want the Kesva to use it. He doesn't want us > to help to fix it. He wants it to die, because he is wedded to a non- > traditional orthography that represents a theoretical phonology that > nobody uses, *not even the inventor of the theoretical phonology*. > He lies, quite constantly, on this forum, saying that KK represents > Cornish as it was actually spoken, when of course there is *no > evidence of this at all at all at all*. The only evidence we *really > do have* for how Cornish was spoken was Lhuyd's phonetic respelling. > And Keith will turn handsprings to show how that cannot be trusted. > The only thing that can be trusted is the thesis Ken George > proposes. It's not verifiable. And it's not been put into practice > by speakers of Revived Cornish. > > But that's all Keith wants. Kernowek Kebmyn or nothing. I am sure > that this has been the aim of the Kesva hardcore all along. I am > sure it was part of their plan to make sure that the SWF/T (which > Traditionalists are meant to use) had non-traditional graphs in it, > precisely so we would have to derogate?so they could claim that the > SWF was a failure. So they could claim that only Kernowek Kebmyn > should be used, because it has all the books, and all the grammars, > and all the dictionaries. > > I don't believe that will be true for very long. > > Well, that's my word. I believe I might repeat this on Spellyans, so > it gets recorded in a reputable archive. > > I'll get back to working on a forthcoming publication now. > ===== > Just for the record. > > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net Ray Chubb Caderyer Agan Tavas Portreth Kernow From njawilliams at gmail.com Mon May 18 18:16:52 2009 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (nicholas williams) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 18:16:52 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] The Cornish for 'fisherman' Message-ID: <086416AC-1C62-4191-AD22-CDAF5AB3C166@gmail.com> In his 1938 and 1951 dictionaries Nance gives pyscajor as a variant of pyscador 'fisherman'. The only examples of this word I can find are: piscadur 'piscator' Old Cornish Vocabulary puscador TH 45a Poscaders (plural) x 2 Rowe Pysgadar 'A fisher-man' AB; 17a Pysgadar yn mytern 'kingfisher' AB: 65a Pysgadar 'fisherman' AB: 120c. Pysgadar 'A fisherman' AB: 240c. Every example has -d- rather than -j-. Where did Nance get pyscajor? Was it his own invention? Nicholas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Mon May 18 18:28:41 2009 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 19:28:41 +0200 Subject: [Spellyans] The Cornish for 'fisherman' In-Reply-To: <086416AC-1C62-4191-AD22-CDAF5AB3C166@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090518172843.73ED413BC0AF@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Nicholas, I reckon he reconstructed it by way of analogy with UC dyscajor which must be from Lhuyd's deskadzher. I, too, can only find forms of pyscador with not with *j, *g or *dzh. Dan _____ From: nicholas williams Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 7:17 PM "In his 1938 and 1951 dictionaries Nance gives pyscajor as a variant of pyscador 'fisherman'. The only examples of this word I can find are: piscadur 'piscator' Old Cornish Vocabulary puscador TH 45a Poscaders (plural) x 2 Rowe Pysgadar 'A fisher-man' AB; 17a Pysgadar yn mytern 'kingfisher' AB: 65a Pysgadar 'fisherman' AB: 120c. Pysgadar 'A fisherman' AB: 240c. Every example has -d- rather than -j-. Where did Nance get pyscajor? Was it his own invention? Nicholas" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From everson at evertype.com Mon May 18 18:46:55 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 18:46:55 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] The Cornish for 'fisherman' In-Reply-To: <086416AC-1C62-4191-AD22-CDAF5AB3C166@gmail.com> References: <086416AC-1C62-4191-AD22-CDAF5AB3C166@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 18 May 2009, at 18:16, nicholas williams wrote: > In his 1938 and 1951 dictionaries Nance gives pyscajor as a variant > of pyscador 'fisherman'. The only examples of this word I can find > are: piscadur 'piscator' Old Cornish Vocabulary puscador TH 45a > Poscaders (plural) x 2 Rowe Pysgadar 'A fisher-man' AB; 17a Pysgadar > yn mytern 'kingfisher' AB: 65a Pysgadar 'fisherman' AB: 120c. > Pysgadar 'A fisherman' AB: 240c. Every example has -d- rather than - > j-. Where did Nance get pyscajor? Was it his own invention? Your UCR dictionary gives marhajor 'marketeer' (no -dor form) descajor 'teacher' (no -dor form) (-dzher from Lhuyd) cuscajor 'sleeper' (no -dor form) pyscajor 'fisherman' (as a second form against the main pyscador) Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From craig at agantavas.org Mon May 18 18:52:54 2009 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 18:52:54 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] The Cornish for 'fisherman' In-Reply-To: References: <086416AC-1C62-4191-AD22-CDAF5AB3C166@gmail.com> Message-ID: <51DA33C8-32FC-4F73-9B7D-3DEABC52FFAB@agantavas.org> I can find no sign of the -j- or -zh- form in Gendall's source dictionary. Craig On 18 Me 2009, at 18:46, Michael Everson wrote: > On 18 May 2009, at 18:16, nicholas williams wrote: > >> In his 1938 and 1951 dictionaries Nance gives pyscajor as a variant >> of pyscador 'fisherman'. The only examples of this word I can find >> are: piscadur 'piscator' Old Cornish Vocabulary puscador TH 45a >> Poscaders (plural) x 2 Rowe Pysgadar 'A fisher-man' AB; 17a >> Pysgadar yn mytern 'kingfisher' AB: 65a Pysgadar 'fisherman' AB: >> 120c. Pysgadar 'A fisherman' AB: 240c. Every example has -d- rather >> than -j-. Where did Nance get pyscajor? Was it his own invention? > > Your UCR dictionary gives > > marhajor 'marketeer' (no -dor form) > descajor 'teacher' (no -dor form) (-dzher from Lhuyd) > cuscajor 'sleeper' (no -dor form) > pyscajor 'fisherman' (as a second form against the main pyscador) > > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -- Craig Weatherhill From everson at evertype.com Mon May 18 18:55:05 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 18:55:05 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] The Cornish for 'fisherman' In-Reply-To: <20090518172843.73ED413BC0AF@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> References: <20090518172843.73ED413BC0AF@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Message-ID: <42B0B82D-B110-4DD1-8E12-5AACC2EAE5B5@evertype.com> On 18 May 2009, at 18:28, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > I reckon he reconstructed it by way of analogy with UC dyscajor > which must be from Lhuyd?s deskadzher. I, too, can only find forms > of pyscador with not with *j, *g or *dzh. Jenner p. 77 gives "pescajor 'a fisherman', from 'pescas', plur. of pesk, fish." On the same page he gives: revader or revajor 'a rower' from rev 'an oar' g?nnadoror gonajor 'a sower' from g?nas 'to sow or plant' Nance gives for these ?revador, -jor and gonador. Lhuyd has -dor only for these. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From everson at evertype.com Mon May 18 21:16:57 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 21:16:57 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Is there in truth no beauty? Message-ID: <57130769-72B7-4F87-A81E-E03399BBDC4C@evertype.com> We have beawta currently; I see Dan has beowta with the to-me- improbable [b??o?t?]. The word is attested in BK, as beawta... [?bea?t?]? I suppose the pronunciation would be [?be?t?] in which case bewta would be fine (even if spelt beawta?). Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From njawilliams at gmail.com Mon May 18 21:19:34 2009 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (nicholas williams) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 21:19:34 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] The Cornish for 'fisherman' In-Reply-To: <20090518172843.73ED413BC0AF@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> References: <20090518172843.73ED413BC0AF@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Message-ID: <6EE45968-D722-4120-AE56-848C3691308A@gmail.com> Indeed?but Lhuyd's deskadzher is itself his own invention, and is not supported by any writer of traditional Cornish. Lhuyd presumably thought that the OC Cornish agent suffix -adur would have assibilated. As a result he coined the word deskadzher. He also forgot (or perhaps had not learnt) that OC piscadur retained -d- in his own day. Moreover the very common word pehadur, pehador 'sinner' shows the same suffix without assibilation, as does the word sylwador. In fact we would not expect assibilation in the suffix -ador, because the adjacent /r/ prevent the assibilation of intervocalic /d/. Think of Peder, Pedyr 'St Peter', peder 'four (feminine)'. Notice also that the personal name Cador occurs twice in BK. It is also interesting that the OC pridit 'poet' appears in BK as prydyth, where the preceding /r/ has prevented assibilation. The word for 'teacher' is not attested in traditional Cornish, but if it were, it would no doubt be descader, not descager. There is a word related to puscador, namely the word for 'to fish', Lhuyd's pusgetsha. This does assibilate because there is no /r/ in the vicinity of the dental. Nicholas On 18 May 2009, at 18:28, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > I reckon he reconstructed it by way of analogy with UC dyscajor > which must be from Lhuyd?s deskadzher. I, too, can only find forms > of pyscador with not with *j, *g or *dzh. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From everson at evertype.com Sat May 23 19:22:50 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 19:22:50 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Normalization of words in -ak and -ek In-Reply-To: References: <20090523104613.EA6A713BC1AE@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Message-ID: <94C258D8-812C-4360-8B3F-663BA8F3F15D@evertype.com> A persistent problem in Revived Cornish is the spelling of unstressed final syllables, particularly where those syllables are strengthened when a derivational suffix is added. In the case of words in -ak and - ek, the syllable typically changes to -og- or remains -eg-. An investigation of these forms shows a rather haphazard variety of configurations -- doubtless (without disrespecting Nance) due to imprecise normalization in the 1930s. Such a variety adds nothing but confusion to what learners have to learn. What is proposed is that: words in -ak should alternate with -og- words in -ek should alternate with -eg- (two exceptions where -ek > - yg- (but none > -og-) === Here is a list of words in -ak > -og- anserhak 'independent', cf anserhogneth 'independence' marhak 'knight', marhogyon pedrak 'square', pedrogyon pluvak 'cushion', pluvogow tevysak 'adult', tevysogyon teythyak 'native', teythyogyon tiak 'farmer', tiogow === Here is a list of words in ek > -eg- blejyowek 'flower bed', blejyowegow bohek 'hamster' bohegyon crestennek (crestednek) 'crustacean', crestenegyon dorek 'geology, cf doregor 'geologist'* gwlanek 'jumper', gwlanegyon gwlasek 'political' cf gwlasegeth 'politics' keherek 'muscleman', keheregyon Kernowek 'Cornish', cf. kernoweger 'Cornish speaker' kessedhek 'committee', kessedhegow manek 'glove', manegow naturek 'natural' cf natureger 'naturist', naturegoryon peswarcornek 'rectangle' peswarcornegyon poblek 'public', cf poblegyans 'publicity' savonek 'standard' cf savonegy 'standardize' scantek 'reptile' scantegyon === Here is a list of "exceptional" words in ek > -yg- medhek 'doctor' medhygyon gowek 'liar', gowygyon === There is no need to list the regular words in yk > -yg- but perhaos 'Christmas' should be added to this list (rather than being exceptional like medhek): Nadelyk 'Christmas', Nadelygyon === This brings us to some words where we should re-spell them, where the alternation differs from what is more common. === Here is a list of words in where the vowel in the singular should be normalized: dowrak 'watery place', dowregow -- recte dowrek gwarak 'bow' gwaregow, cf gwareger 'archer' -- recte gwarek === Here is a list of words in where the vowel in the plural should be normalized: lavrak 'trousers' lavregow -- recte lavrogow (plural not attested, but the singular is lavrak; cf OC lafroc) othomek 'needy people', othomogyon -- recte othomegyon (PC 2636) === Here is a list of words in -ek > -og- -- recte -ak bardhonek 'poem', bardhonogow -- recte bardhonak bohosek (bohojek) 'poor', bohosogyon (bohojogyon) -- recte bohosak (BK 773) cronek 'toad', cronogow -- recte cronak (BK 3256) culyek 'cock', culyogas -- recte culyak perhennek (perhednek) 'owner', perhenogyon (perhednogyon) - recte perhennak/perhednak scovarnek 'hare' scovarnogyon -- recte scovarnak tavasek 'nagging', tavasogyon -- recte tavasak Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ *leaving aside for the moment the question of 'doregor' pl doregoryon; should the simplex be doreger -oryon as with so many words? (the question is the -er/-or pl -ers/-oryon words. For further study.) From njawilliams at gmail.com Sat May 23 20:41:26 2009 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (nicholas williams) Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 20:41:26 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Normalization of words in -ak and -ek In-Reply-To: <94C258D8-812C-4360-8B3F-663BA8F3F15D@evertype.com> References: <20090523104613.EA6A713BC1AE@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> <94C258D8-812C-4360-8B3F-663BA8F3F15D@evertype.com> Message-ID: <47646CA3-82BE-4A4A-B198-A0516C470534@gmail.com> perhennek is attested, perhenogyon isn't. I should prefer perhednek, perhenegyon. Notice incidentally that marregyon occurs 5 times marrogyon 4 times. There is an argument in favour of marhek, marhegyon Lhuyd give skouarnak s.v. Lepus AB: 78b but he also gives Skouarnog b?an 'leveret' s.v. Lepusculus AB: 78b. You don't mention lagasek but that is lagajak x 2 in BK and ydnlagadzhak in Lhuyd. lagasek is attested twice in BM. Nicholas On 23 May 2009, at 19:22, Michael Everson wrote: > perhennek (perhednek) 'owner', perhenogyon (perhednogyon) - recte > perhennak/perhednak -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Sat May 23 20:44:34 2009 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (nicholas williams) Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 20:44:34 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Normalization of words in -ak and -ek In-Reply-To: <94C258D8-812C-4360-8B3F-663BA8F3F15D@evertype.com> References: <20090523104613.EA6A713BC1AE@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> <94C258D8-812C-4360-8B3F-663BA8F3F15D@evertype.com> Message-ID: <7E106F63-E4A8-487E-9C7C-EDE0C6FF9B25@gmail.com> This occurs several times in AB, always as kranag, e.g. 9b, 11c, 33a, 45a, 136b, etc. On 23 May 2009, at 19:22, Michael Everson wrote: > cronek 'toad', cronogow -- recte cronak (BK 3256) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From everson at evertype.com Sat May 23 21:31:09 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 21:31:09 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Normalization of words in -ak and -ek In-Reply-To: <47646CA3-82BE-4A4A-B198-A0516C470534@gmail.com> References: <20090523104613.EA6A713BC1AE@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> <94C258D8-812C-4360-8B3F-663BA8F3F15D@evertype.com> <47646CA3-82BE-4A4A-B198-A0516C470534@gmail.com> Message-ID: <70FF44BE-E2A2-4165-B213-7350F49FD091@evertype.com> On 23 May 2009, at 20:41, nicholas williams wrote: > perhennek is attested, perhenogyon isn't. I should prefer perhednek, > perhenegyon. And according to our principles, that would be right. > Notice incidentally that marregyon occurs 5 times > marrogyon 4 times. > There is an argument in favour of marhek, marhegyon In this case the stronger of the arguments would be the preference in the Revival of marhogyon. (It's attested and in use, so no value in changing.) > Lhuyd give skouarnak s.v. Lepus AB: 78b > but he also gives Skouarnog b?an 'leveret' s.v. Lepusculus AB: 78b. Well that doesn't speak to the question of the vowel in the derived form. > You don't mention lagasek but that is lagajak x 2 in BK and > ydnlagadzhak in Lhuyd. > lagasek is attested twice in BM. Ditto. Your dictionary gives: Scotch argus butterfly - lagasek Alban, lagasegyon Alban Cyclops - unlagasek, unlagasogyon starer - lagasek, lagasogyon gazer - lagasek, lagasogyon starer - lagasek, lagasogyon; lagater, lagatoryon wary person - lagasek, lagasogyon >> cronek 'toad', cronogow -- recte cronak (BK 3256) > > This occurs several times in AB, always as kranag, e.g. 9b, 11c, > 33a, 45a, 136b, etc. So cronak, cronogow should be OK. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk Sun May 24 23:06:44 2009 From: eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk (Eddie Climo) Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 23:06:44 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Normalization of words in -ak and -ek In-Reply-To: <47646CA3-82BE-4A4A-B198-A0516C470534@gmail.com> References: <20090523104613.EA6A713BC1AE@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> <94C258D8-812C-4360-8B3F-663BA8F3F15D@evertype.com> <47646CA3-82BE-4A4A-B198-A0516C470534@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 23 Me 2009, at 20:41, nicholas williams wrote: > perhennek is attested, perhenogyon isn't. I should prefer perhednek, > perhenegyon. This statement is incorrect. 'Per(g)henogyon' is given in Nance's 1938 dictionary, and has therefore been attested in the Revived Cornish corpus for at least the last 81 years. The credo of 'Tota Cornicitas' has to embrace the Revived corpus; it cannot simply ignore the ways in which the language has changed and developed over the last few generations, at least not in the hands of skilled linguists like Mordon, Talek, Caradar and the like. The aberrations of KK must, of course, be treated differently. Eddie Foirbeis Climo - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - Dres ethom akennow byner re bons lyeshes Accenti non multiplicandi praeter necessitatem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From everson at evertype.com Mon May 25 00:08:05 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 00:08:05 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Normalization of words in -ak and -ek In-Reply-To: References: <20090523104613.EA6A713BC1AE@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> <94C258D8-812C-4360-8B3F-663BA8F3F15D@evertype.com> <47646CA3-82BE-4A4A-B198-A0516C470534@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 24 May 2009, at 23:06, Eddie Climo wrote: > On 23 Me 2009, at 20:41, nicholas williams wrote: >> perhennek is attested, perhenogyon isn't. I should prefer >> perhednek, perhenegyon. > > > This statement is incorrect. 'Per(g)henogyon' is given in Nance's > 1938 dictionary, and has therefore been attested in the Revived > Cornish corpus for at least the last 81 years. The exercise here is to attempt to rationalize the use of -ek and -ak, both of which have the same pronunciation [?k]. We have seen that there is a pattern where there are are many words in -ek which retain -eg- when a suffix is added. We have seen that there is a pattern where there are are many words in -ak which change to -og- when a suffix is added. We have see a number of words (in UC and in KK, and not necessarily the same ones) which have -ek/-og- or -ak/-eg- Since -eg- and -og- are stressed, the vowels in those syllables are important. The are clearly [?] or [?]. In terms of spelling, we should ensure that the appropriate vowel is used there. Since -ek and -ak are unstressed, the vowels in those syllables are less important. The are [?]. In terms of spelling, we should ensure that the appropriate vowel is used, however, with respect to -eg- and - og-, because this makes things easier for learners. There's no advantage to having a few words go -ek/-og- or -ak/-eg- since the schwa is schwa. For many of these words there's no issue. It's only for those in -ek/- og- or -ak/-eg- that we want to look, to see if there is a reason to normalize one way or t'other. Remember, Nance did a normalization, which is why we ended up with what we did in UC. But Nance did not ask the same questions we are asking. He was doing pioneer normalization.. not trying to optimize for ease and consistency. > The credo of 'Tota Cornicitas' has to embrace the Revived corpus; it > cannot simply ignore the ways in which the language has changed and > developed over the last few generations, at least not in the hands > of skilled linguists like Mordon, Talek, Caradar and the like. You may not like to hear it, but in my opinion Jenner, Talek, and Caradar were better linguists than Mordon was. Mordon did great work, but it was more as a philologist than as a linguist. There's nothing wrong with that. Philologists are important. As are linguists. Eddie, you know PERFECTLY WELL that we do not "ignore" Unified Cornish. But even UCR fixed things which were wrong or which were infelicitous in UC. UC has only /y/, but UCR (and SWF and KS and KK) has /?/ and /y/. Soooooo.... To get back to The Words In Question: >> perhennek is attested, perhenogyon isn't. I should prefer >> perhednek, perhenegyon. This responded to my suggestion that since we had perhennek/ perhenogyon, the normalization should go in favour of -ak/-og-, that is, we should have perhennak/perhenogyon. What Nicholas said is that in this case, no plural is attested, only the singular, and since that has -ek, the derived plural should be perhenegyon. Personally I do not care either way. Perhennak/perhenogyon or perhennek/perhenegyon. Unfortunately we have no evidence in the corpus for the plural which has the stressed vowel, and the stressed vowel is the important one. So, given this discussion, what do you prefer, Eddie? > The aberrations of KK must, of course, be treated differently. Errors in KK can be rejected. But KK, like UCR, distinguish /?/ and / y/. Not *everything* in KK is wrong. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From everson at evertype.com Tue May 26 19:14:48 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 19:14:48 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Dan's dissernya Message-ID: Should be discernya; it would be concernya, not consernya. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From njawilliams at gmail.com Tue May 26 19:59:09 2009 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (nicholas williams) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 19:59:09 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Dan's dissernya In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5BA2E6D4-A767-4E69-A8FF-C9ED1221C211@gmail.com> In the texts this word appears as: decernya x 1 descernya x 2 discernya x 1 desernya x 1 thesernya x 1 Concernya is attested x 3 and consernya x 4 Nicholas On 26 May 2009, at 19:14, Michael Everson wrote: > Should be discernya; it would be concernya, not consernya. > > 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: From everson at evertype.com Tue May 26 20:39:35 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 20:39:35 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Dan's dissernya In-Reply-To: <5BA2E6D4-A767-4E69-A8FF-C9ED1221C211@gmail.com> References: <5BA2E6D4-A767-4E69-A8FF-C9ED1221C211@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5F3118A5-E8B3-4DF9-916D-9313C2F3FB2E@evertype.com> I'm not sure what your point is. Perhaps my point was not clear. It is dis-cernya and con-cernya; it could not be consernya in KS as that would give [k?n?z??nj?] so it should be discernya not dissernya in the SWF. On 26 May 2009, at 19:59, nicholas williams wrote: > In the texts this word appears as: > > decernya x 1 > descernya x 2 > discernya x 1 > desernya x 1 > thesernya x 1 > > Concernya is attested x 3 and consernya x 4 > > Nicholas > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From njawilliams at gmail.com Tue May 26 21:01:20 2009 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (nicholas williams) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 21:01:20 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Dan's dissernya In-Reply-To: <5F3118A5-E8B3-4DF9-916D-9313C2F3FB2E@evertype.com> References: <5BA2E6D4-A767-4E69-A8FF-C9ED1221C211@gmail.com> <5F3118A5-E8B3-4DF9-916D-9313C2F3FB2E@evertype.com> Message-ID: <7F355C3B-499D-4352-9EFD-D9174C4902F2@gmail.com> No, your point was not clear. It is slightly more so now. I did not properly understand that you were talking about the SWF. Isn't decernya the correct spelling in KS? On 26 May 2009, at 20:39, Michael Everson wrote: > I'm not sure what your point is. Perhaps my point was not clear. It > is dis-cernya and con-cernya; it could not be consernya in KS as > that would give [k?n?z??nj?] so it should be discernya not > dissernya in the SWF. > > On 26 May 2009, at 19:59, nicholas williams wrote: > >> In the texts this word appears as: >> >> decernya x 1 >> descernya x 2 >> discernya x 1 >> desernya x 1 >> thesernya x 1 >> >> Concernya is attested x 3 and consernya x 4 >> >> Nicholas >> > > 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: From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Wed May 27 08:04:47 2009 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 09:04:47 +0200 Subject: [Spellyans] Dan's dissernya In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090527070446.7D03413BC2B8@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Yes, I had already changed that a while ago. The SWF draft is not specific about the spelling of such loan words. I will offer discernya and see what the dictionary commission says. Dan -----Original Message----- From: Michael Everson Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 8:15 PM Should be discernya; it would be concernya, not consernya. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From everson at evertype.com Wed May 27 08:45:53 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 08:45:53 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Dan's dissernya In-Reply-To: <20090527070446.7D03413BC2B8@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> References: <20090527070446.7D03413BC2B8@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Message-ID: On 27 May 2009, at 08:04, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > Yes, I had already changed that a while ago. Older draft. > The SWF draft is not specific about the spelling of such loan words. Of course it isn't. The SWF specification (it's not a draft) is incomplete in many ways. > I will offer discernya and see what the dictionary commission says. What dictionary commission? Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From weatherhill at freenet.co.uk Wed May 27 09:05:13 2009 From: weatherhill at freenet.co.uk (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 09:05:13 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Dan's dissernya In-Reply-To: References: <20090527070446.7D03413BC2B8@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Message-ID: Indeed. The idea of a dictionary commission was mooted a while ago and, indeed, it was one of the matters for round-the-table discussion at Lostwithiel in January. As far as I know, nothing further has been done. There was mention of getting Andrew Hawke to head it but I have spoken to him, and he isn't interested in doing so. It does seem to me that the Language Development Office is dragging its feet. We're no closer to getting the language onto school curricula and, if the SWF is to be of any use at all, it is essential to have a dictionary in place. Without one, the SWF can't progress in any way. For the life of me, I can't understand the lack of action. Craig On 27 Me 2009, at 08:45, Michael Everson wrote: > On 27 May 2009, at 08:04, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > >> Yes, I had already changed that a while ago. > > Older draft. > >> The SWF draft is not specific about the spelling of such loan words. > > Of course it isn't. The SWF specification (it's not a draft) is > incomplete in many ways. > >> I will offer discernya and see what the dictionary commission says. > > What dictionary commission? > > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Wed May 27 20:38:20 2009 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 21:38:20 +0200 Subject: [Spellyans] dictionary commission In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090527193822.C104D13BC223@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Dhew'whei oll lowena! No dictionary commission? Do you mean to say you didn't get this invitation to express your interest in the working groups? I thought this went out along with the Maga's April Newsletter. Here's what it said: ___________________________________________________ "31 March 2009 WORKING GROUPS & DATABASE Following the evaluation of the MAGA project and the three year review of the Partnership, it was decided to add to the structure working groups. The aim of this is to widen involvement in the work of the Partnership and to harness skills both from within the language community and from other areas of interest to help monitor and assist in delivering the work programme. These are advisory groups which will work closely with staff and report to the Partnership and its Management Group. Four are envisaged, although it may well be that the work is further divided in the future. The four groups align with the four main areas of language planning: . Acquisition - concerned with learning and teaching at all levels . Corpus - concerned with the language itself, linguistic research and discussion . Use - community and business use of Cornish, support for speakers . Status - Cornish in public life, international links. Terms of reference for the groups are attached. The Partnership is asking for expressions of interest from anyone who thinks that they would be interested in taking part. You may also recommend someone else whom you feel should be involved. In expressing interest or recommending someone else, it would be helpful if you would note why you are interested and what experience or knowledge you bring with you - not necessarily of Cornish, as there are many skills that could be of use. Responses should be sent by post or email, to arrive by May 1st, to: Jenefer Lowe, Development Manager, MAGA, Top Office, Dalvenie House, County Hall, Truro, TR1 3AY email: jlowe at cornwall.gov.uk Please mark envelopes as Confidential. You may feel that you do not want to be involved in a working group, but that you do have skills to offer in other ways. Maybe you would be happy to help with events or you have a particular skill you could teach through Cornish, maybe you sing or play, maybe you are prepared to give talks etc. Maybe you have detailed knowledge or experience in other areas. If so, do please let us know as we are establishing a 'skills register' on the database for future projects. If you have any queries, please contact me. Jenefer Lowe, Development Manager." ______________________________________________________ I sent out an expression of interest. I hope to hear from them sometime. -----Original Message----- From: Craig Weatherhill Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 10:05 AM "Indeed. The idea of a dictionary commission was mooted a while ago and, indeed, it was one of the matters for round-the-table discussion at Lostwithiel in January. As far as I know, nothing further has been done. There was mention of getting Andrew Hawke to head it but I have spoken to him, and he isn't interested in doing so. It does seem to me that the Language Development Office is dragging its feet. We're no closer to getting the language onto school curricula and, if the SWF is to be of any use at all, it is essential to have a dictionary in place. Without one, the SWF can't progress in any way. For the life of me, I can't understand the lack of action. Craig" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From craig at agantavas.org Wed May 27 21:54:32 2009 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 21:54:32 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] dictionary commission In-Reply-To: <20090527193822.C104D13BC223@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> References: <20090527193822.C104D13BC223@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Message-ID: Yes, I did, Dan - but why so late? It's been over a year since the SWF agreement was reached. I offered (and delivered) a list of over 3,000 place names in the SWF 9 months ago. Nothing. Not a peep. Baffling. Craig On 27 Me 2009, at 20:38, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > Dhew?whei oll lowena! > > No dictionary commission? Do you mean to say you didn?t get this > invitation to express your interest in the working groups? I thought > this went out along with the Maga?s April Newsletter. Here?s what it > said: > ___________________________________________________ > > > ?31 March 2009 > WORKING GROUPS & DATABASE > > Following the evaluation of the MAGA project and the three year > review of the Partnership, it was decided to add to the structure > working groups. The aim of this is to widen involvement in the work > of the Partnership and to harness skills both from within the > language community and from other areas of interest to help monitor > and assist in delivering the work programme. These are advisory > groups which will work closely with staff and report to the > Partnership and its Management Group. Four are envisaged, although > it may well be that the work is further divided in the future. The > four groups align with the four main areas of language planning: > > ? Acquisition ? concerned with learning and teaching at all levels > ? Corpus ? concerned with the language itself, linguistic research > and discussion > ? Use ? community and business use of Cornish, support for speakers > ? Status ? Cornish in public life, international links. > > Terms of reference for the groups are attached. > The Partnership is asking for expressions of interest from anyone > who thinks that they would be interested in taking part. You may > also recommend someone else whom you feel should be involved. In > expressing interest or recommending someone else, it would be > helpful if you would note why you are interested and what experience > or knowledge you bring with you ? not necessarily of Cornish, as > there are many skills that could be of use. > > Responses should be sent by post or email, to arrive by May 1st, to: > Jenefer Lowe, > Development Manager, MAGA, Top Office, Dalvenie House, County > Hall,Truro, TR1 3AY > email: jlowe at cornwall.gov.uk Please mark envelopes as Confidential. > > You may feel that you do not want to be involved in a working group, > but that you do have skills to offer in other ways. Maybe you would > be happy to help with events or you have a particular skill you > could teach through Cornish, maybe you sing or play, maybe you are > prepared to give talks etc. Maybe you have detailed knowledge or > experience in other areas. If so, do please let us know as we are > establishing a ?skills register? on the database for future > projects. If you have any queries, please contact me. > Jenefer Lowe, Development Manager.? > > ______________________________________________________ > > I sent out an expression of interest. I hope to hear from them > sometime. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Craig Weatherhill > Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 10:05 AM > > ?Indeed. The idea of a dictionary commission was mooted a while ago > and, indeed, it was one of the matters for round-the-table > discussion at Lostwithiel in January. As far as I know, nothing > further has been done. There was mention of getting Andrew Hawke to > head it but I have spoken to him, and he isn't interested in doing so. > > It does seem to me that the Language Development Office is dragging > its feet. We're no closer to getting the language onto school > curricula and, if the SWF is to be of any use at all, it is > essential to have a dictionary in place. Without one, the SWF can't > progress in any way. For the life of me, I can't understand the > lack of action. > Craig? > > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -- Craig Weatherhill From everson at evertype.com Wed May 27 21:59:48 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 21:59:48 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] dictionary commission In-Reply-To: <20090527193822.C104D13BC223@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> References: <20090527193822.C104D13BC223@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Message-ID: <26CAD57A-D189-4456-AE0E-D7138C343709@evertype.com> On 27 May 2009, at 20:38, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > No dictionary commission? Do you mean to say you didn?t get this > invitation to express your interest in the working groups? I thought > this went out along with the Maga?s April Newsletter. Here?s what it > said: It says nothing about a dictionary commission. I got it. I expressed interest in "Corpus". But that doesn't mean that there's any sign of a dictionary commission. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From everson at evertype.com Wed May 27 22:01:29 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 22:01:29 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] dictionary commission In-Reply-To: References: <20090527193822.C104D13BC223@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Message-ID: On 27 May 2009, at 21:54, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > Yes, I did, Dan - but why so late? It's been over a year since the > SWF agreement was reached. I offered (and delivered) a list of over > 3,000 place names in the SWF 9 months ago. Nothing. Not a peep. > Baffling. No matter! Their inaction enouraged us to publish your dictionary! For anyone who hasn't got a copy yet, see http://www.evertype.com/books/concise-cornish-placenames.html Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From everson at evertype.com Thu May 28 14:10:32 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 14:10:32 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Good day Message-ID: <75973222-1F71-47C2-8CF5-E29C510E6059@evertype.com> Dan has: durdadhy?hwi ~ durdadhe?hwei This analysis in orthography is a bit precious. I don't think we should imitate this in KS. I think lexicalizing the first part and leaving the pronoun alone, as "durdadha why" (and "durdadha jy") is sufficient. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From njawilliams at gmail.com Thu May 28 15:24:33 2009 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (nicholas williams) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 15:24:33 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Good day In-Reply-To: <75973222-1F71-47C2-8CF5-E29C510E6059@evertype.com> References: <75973222-1F71-47C2-8CF5-E29C510E6059@evertype.com> Message-ID: <3946B0C9-7B25-41C0-8594-E22ED8D6F11B@gmail.com> No. It should be D?rda dhywgh why and D?rda dhis/dhe jy. If we leave Durdadha as a unit it will be stressed on the penultimate syllable. But Durda is stressed on the . Durda is from Duw roy d?dh d? 'may God give good day' and is a natural unit. It is pronounced with [u], not [iw] or [y] and thus should carry a grave. Nicholas On 28 May 2009, at 14:10, Michael Everson wrote: > Dan has: > > durdadhy?hwi ~ durdadhe?hwei > > This analysis in orthography is a bit precious. I don't think we > should imitate this in KS. I think lexicalizing the first part and > leaving the pronoun alone, as "durdadha why" (and "durdadha jy") is > sufficient. > > 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: From craig at agantavas.org Thu May 28 15:28:40 2009 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 15:28:40 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Good day In-Reply-To: <75973222-1F71-47C2-8CF5-E29C510E6059@evertype.com> References: <75973222-1F71-47C2-8CF5-E29C510E6059@evertype.com> Message-ID: <48CD4C50-2EA8-4421-8531-B6AE2D21F852@agantavas.org> I can't see anything wrong with this suggestion. For the last few years, Andrew Climo and I have recognised the MC and LC pronunciations of such pronouns and, using Kernowek Es, have taught that either is accpetable. It also applies to some nouns as well, e.g. chy and ky. The pronouns concerned are: hy, ny, why, ynjy/anjy (NOT my/me or te/jy). The MC value is (i:) or "ee"; the LC value is (schwa + I:) - the nearest I can get to this is "er-ee" spoken quickly. I think that -y represents this variance rather better than -i or -ei. Craig On 28 Me 2009, at 14:10, Michael Everson wrote: > Dan has: > > durdadhy?hwi ~ durdadhe?hwei > > This analysis in orthography is a bit precious. I don't think we > should imitate this in KS. I think lexicalizing the first part and > leaving the pronoun alone, as "durdadha why" (and "durdadha jy") is > sufficient. > > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -- Craig Weatherhill From everson at evertype.com Thu May 28 15:35:20 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 15:35:20 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Good day In-Reply-To: <3946B0C9-7B25-41C0-8594-E22ED8D6F11B@gmail.com> References: <75973222-1F71-47C2-8CF5-E29C510E6059@evertype.com> <3946B0C9-7B25-41C0-8594-E22ED8D6F11B@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 28 May 2009, at 15:24, nicholas williams wrote: > No. It should be D?rda dhywgh why and D?rda dhis/dhe jy. Then for consistency: Sing. D?rda dhis, d?rda dhe jy Plur. D?rda dhywgh, d?rda dhe why > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From njawilliams at gmail.com Thu May 28 15:38:58 2009 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (nicholas williams) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 15:38:58 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Good day In-Reply-To: References: <75973222-1F71-47C2-8CF5-E29C510E6059@evertype.com> <3946B0C9-7B25-41C0-8594-E22ED8D6F11B@gmail.com> Message-ID: <9982A11F-435C-48AC-9351-573545DAED54@gmail.com> Yes. On 28 May 2009, at 15:35, Michael Everson wrote: > On 28 May 2009, at 15:24, nicholas williams wrote: > >> No. It should be D?rda dhywgh why and D?rda dhis/dhe jy. > > Then for consistency: > > Sing. D?rda dhis, d?rda dhe jy > Plur. D?rda dhywgh, d?rda dhe why > >> > > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Thu May 28 16:25:55 2009 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 17:25:55 +0200 Subject: [Spellyans] Good day In-Reply-To: <75973222-1F71-47C2-8CF5-E29C510E6059@evertype.com> Message-ID: <20090528152557.D1D8713BC06E@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Michael, I should have written durdadhe hwei in the Late Cornish version. According to the SWF spec SWF/MC has dhywgh hwi, while SWF/LC has dhe hwei. I give it as a contraction of Duw roy dydh da dhywgh hwi. I have now changed this. I will give: durda dhe jy, (SWF). Duw roy dydh da dhiso jy, (SWF/MC). durda dhy'hwi, (SWF/MC). durda dhy'whi, (SWF/MCt). durda dhe hwei, (SWF/LC). durda dhe whei, (SWF/LCt). Duw roy dydh da dhywgh hwi, (SWF/MC). Dan -----Original Message----- From: Michael Everson Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:11 PM Dan has: durdadhy'hwi ~ durdadhe'hwei This analysis in orthography is a bit precious. I don't think we should imitate this in KS. I think lexicalizing the first part and leaving the pronoun alone, as "durdadha why" (and "durdadha jy") is sufficient. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Thu May 28 16:32:52 2009 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (nicholas williams) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 16:32:52 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Good day In-Reply-To: <20090528152557.D1D8713BC06E@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> References: <20090528152557.D1D8713BC06E@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Message-ID: <7ADD7C4D-F273-43FC-9105-0F2347CE8B82@gmail.com> And they call it a single written form. It is difficult to see why. On 28 May 2009, at 16:25, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > durda dhe jy, (SWF). > Duw roy dydh da dhiso jy, (SWF/MC). > > durda dhy?hwi, (SWF/MC). > durda dhy?whi, (SWF/MCt). > durda dhe hwei, (SWF/LC). > durda dhe whei, (SWF/LCt). > Duw roy dydh da dhywgh hwi, (SWF/MC). > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From weatherhill at freenet.co.uk Thu May 28 16:40:34 2009 From: weatherhill at freenet.co.uk (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 16:40:34 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Good day In-Reply-To: <7ADD7C4D-F273-43FC-9105-0F2347CE8B82@gmail.com> References: <20090528152557.D1D8713BC06E@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> <7ADD7C4D-F273-43FC-9105-0F2347CE8B82@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Monday, someone asked me how I was getting on with the "Several Written Form". Craig On 28 Me 2009, at 16:32, nicholas williams wrote: > And they call it a single written form. > It is difficult to see why. > > On 28 May 2009, at 16:25, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > >> durda dhe jy, (SWF). >> Duw roy dydh da dhiso jy, (SWF/MC). >> >> durda dhy?hwi, (SWF/MC). >> durda dhy?whi, (SWF/MCt). >> durda dhe hwei, (SWF/LC). >> durda dhe whei, (SWF/LCt). >> Duw roy dydh da dhywgh hwi, (SWF/MC). >> > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net From everson at evertype.com Thu May 28 16:40:48 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 16:40:48 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Good day In-Reply-To: <20090528152557.D1D8713BC06E@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> References: <20090528152557.D1D8713BC06E@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Message-ID: <62200217-A3E2-4483-91FB-34B5E40425F4@evertype.com> Dan, On 28 May 2009, at 16:25, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > I should have written durdadhe hwei in the Late Cornish version. > According to the SWF spec SWF/MC has dhywgh hwi, while SWF/LC has > dhe hwei. I know. So what? > I give it as a contraction of Duw roy dydh da dhywgh hwi. Yes, we know what it is a contraction of. So what? > durda dhy?hwi, (SWF/MC). > durda dhy?whi, (SWF/MCt). I object! We do not write "good b'ye" to indicate that it derives from "be with ye". All that is needed for this fossilized phrase is "durda dhe" + hwi/whi/ hwei/whei One of the worst things about the SWF is its ham-fisted and amateurish way of handling of punctuation and "abbreviation". Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Fri May 29 12:16:57 2009 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 13:16:57 +0200 Subject: [Spellyans] EU Minority Language Report Message-ID: <20090529111658.2199913BC421@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Dear all, The third periodical report on the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages has been released by the UK Government this week. The full text of the third report can be found at the link below: http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/education/minlang/Report/PeriodicalReports/UKPR3_en .pdf Dan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tom.trethewey at yahoo.co.uk Sat May 30 09:49:17 2009 From: tom.trethewey at yahoo.co.uk (tom.trethewey at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 08:49:17 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Spellyans] reson and mason Message-ID: <620426.35911.qm@web24103.mail.ird.yahoo.com> How does KS distinguish between the s in reson (voiced) and the s in mason (unvoiced)? I cannot find anything about this in the specification.? Please advise. Tom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From everson at evertype.com Sat May 30 11:33:06 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 11:33:06 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] reson and mason In-Reply-To: <620426.35911.qm@web24103.mail.ird.yahoo.com> References: <620426.35911.qm@web24103.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 30 May 2009, at 09:49, tom.trethewey at yahoo.co.uk wrote: > How does KS distinguish between the s in reson (voiced) and the s in > mason (unvoiced)? reson [?r?z?n] 'reason', basson [?b?s?n] 'basin', masson [?m?s?n] 'mason'. (Dan should check his transcriptions for these words.) > I cannot find anything about this in the specification. Please > advise. The specification is for KS1 which is quite different from KS. KS1 was a proposal that went in as input to the AHG. I rather doubt most of the AHG members studied it, but that's neither here nor there now. KS starts from the SWF. For instance, KS1 has "beis" but the SWF has "bys"/"bes", for which KS has "b?s"/"b?s". Distribution of "i" and "y" in stressed monosyllables and their derivatives is completely different in KS1 and KS (since KS follows the SWF here). Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Sat May 30 15:40:31 2009 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 16:40:31 +0200 Subject: [Spellyans] reson and mason In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090530144031.70D5413BC1B1@ipsrv02.ip.co.at> Michael, I've changed the IPA transcription. Of course we can only derive a voiced vs. voiceless pronunciation of in reson and mason from English and assume this English contrast remained in these loans into Cornish. Dan -----Original Message----- From: Michael Everson Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 12:33 PM On 30 May 2009, at 09:49, tom.trethewey at yahoo.co.uk wrote: > How does KS distinguish between the s in reson (voiced) and the s in > mason (unvoiced)? reson [?r?z?n] 'reason', basson [?b?s?n] 'basin', masson [?m?s?n] 'mason'. (Dan should check his transcriptions for these words.) > I cannot find anything about this in the specification. Please > advise. The specification is for KS1 which is quite different from KS. KS1 was a proposal that went in as input to the AHG. I rather doubt most of the AHG members studied it, but that's neither here nor there now. KS starts from the SWF. For instance, KS1 has "beis" but the SWF has "bys"/"bes", for which KS has "b?s"/"b?s". Distribution of "i" and "y" in stressed monosyllables and their derivatives is completely different in KS1 and KS (since KS follows the SWF here). 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: From everson at evertype.com Sat May 30 20:40:45 2009 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 20:40:45 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Cornish words in -er, -or, -our, -ar, and -yr Message-ID: <21B6F2A1-6122-4547-A383-936468ABEBCC@evertype.com> I have placed a discussion document at http://kernowek.net/er-or-our.pdf It is proposed to rationalize the spellings of the singulars of nouns whose plural is -oryon or -ers/-ors. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From njawilliams at gmail.com Sun May 31 17:23:28 2009 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 17:23:28 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Cornish words in -er, -or, -our, -ar, and -yr In-Reply-To: <21B6F2A1-6122-4547-A383-936468ABEBCC@evertype.com> References: <21B6F2A1-6122-4547-A383-936468ABEBCC@evertype.com> Message-ID: porther/porthor 'porter, door keeper' has a feminine portheres, attested in PC, Nicholas On 5/30/09, Michael Everson wrote: > I have placed a discussion document at > http://kernowek.net/er-or-our.pdf > > It is proposed to rationalize the spellings of the singulars of nouns whose > plural is -oryon or -ers/-ors. > > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >