[Spellyans] Spelling and linguistics - Yes
brynbow at btinternet.com
Tue Jun 22 08:13:52 IST 2010
Thankyou for your reply, Michael. The problem with writing "ow" and saying
you should pronounce it schwa is that most people, on seeing "ow"
immediately pronounce it "oh", the old UC pronounciation. KK, UCR, RLC,
Lhuyd, KS and SWF on the other hand all describe this diphthong as starting
from a short form of the vowel in English 'for', 'law' etc gliding to 'w'.
The English diphthong in "oh", "boat" etc. starts from schwa and glides to
'w'. Does this matter? It gets worse when the English "oh" pronunciation is
transferred to Cornish words ending in "o" which does not represent a
diphthong at all. But I speak from a Welsh perspective. Here, the use of the
English sound system when speaking Welsh or just used in place names, can be
considered something of an insult.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Everson" <everson at evertype.com>
To: "Standard Cornish discussion list" <spellyans at kernowek.net>
Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 7:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Spellyans] Spelling and linguistics - Yes
> On 15 Jun 2010, at 09:25, Chris Parkinson wrote:
>> What for example is to happen to the verbal particle 'ow'? RLC leaves it
>> out or reduces it to 'a'. Would this be acceptable using SWF, or in
>> using KS for that matter.
> In my opinion you should either write it "ow" and pronounce it schwa, or
> drop entirely if you wish to show that it has been dropped in speech. I do
> not like re-spelling it "o'" or "a".
> Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
More information about the Spellyans