[Spellyans] An SWF glossary

Michael Everson everson at evertype.com
Sun Jun 6 20:22:46 IST 2010


On 6 Jun 2010, at 21:15, Eddie Climo wrote:

> On 6 Efn 2010, at 19:07, Michael Everson wrote:
>> It is misleading, and prejudicial against /T forms, for the glossary to be presented the way that it is. 
> 
> It might help improve the credibility and status of the /T forms of the SWF if more publishers were to support it, if only in parallel with any productions in their more favoured orthography.

I don't follow this logic. I publish with Traditional orthographic forms. Those are /T forms, whether or not the orthography I publish with differs from the SWF in any other particulars.

I don't publish in the SWF because as someone who admires and respects the Cornish language, I choose not to use particular spellings which are considered incorrect, linguistically.

> If Authenticist publishers fail to provide such support, they can hardly complain if the /KK form of the SWF sweeps the board, so to speak.

This doesn't speak to the issue at hand. The issue is a Partnership-funded publication (not any of my publications) for which it was decided a-priori that it would not contain SWF/T forms. 

Furthermore, as you know, I worked with Agan Tavas to produce an SWF/T and SWF/K form of Skeul an Tavas. 

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





More information about the Spellyans mailing list