[Spellyans] ragtho, rygthy
everson at evertype.com
Mon Nov 15 12:21:52 GMT 2010
On 15 Nov 2010, at 10:45, Daniel Prohaska wrote:
> Go ahead Michael, bully me instead – insult me,
I did not insult you. I have observed that in many respects you have worked to ensure that KK forms are in the SWF. I don't find that admirable. I don't think those things should be taught to learners.
> dismiss my points and theories as you have others’, because you happen to disagree with them.
I agreed with you that ragtho, rygthy, ragtha(ns) are the correct forms. Where I disagree with you is the blytheness with which you say "George appears to believe that the <g> indicates the <th> may have been voiced" as though it didn't matter. The evidence suggests that he was wrong. Why should learners be taught "ragdho", then?
> You’ve done it before. Who cares… I have a thick skin… Or, on the other hand I dare you to be a little more open minded.
About what? About your argument that we should be happy with -dh and -v in unstressed syllables because German Hand/Hande is [hant]/[handǝ]? I think that argument is poor, since the SWF otherwise permits -p and -k in unstressed syllables while having -b and -g in stressed ones. I think, in fact, that that argument is apologism for a blot in the orthography. It's making an excuse for inconsistency in order to "make it all right", and it's just not "all right". Is pointing this out "bullying" you? Sorry, Dan, but your analogy deserves criticism. Maybe I'm not "nice enough" when I criticize, but I don't, at the end of the day, think that what you are doing is going the right direction. May I not hold such a view? Or do I have to admire you for working to ensure that all the Kemmynisms are implemented completely? You're a tireless worker. You're smart. But it is hard for me to see that you are doing anybody any favours.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
More information about the Spellyans