[Spellyans] diacritics

Daniel Prohaska daniel at ryan-prohaska.com
Tue Feb 1 22:12:57 GMT 2011




From: Eddie Climo
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2011 10:25 PM


“I would like to hear from other members of this forum, so that we might form a view of their consensus on this matter. Fellow 'Spellyansoryon', the issue before us is this: 


—      Should the diacritics in KS be mandatory in all writings?”

In KS, yes. I no longer see KS as an improvement to the SWF, but as an orthography in its own right. I would welcome the introduction of a limited number of diacritics in the SWF, but not necessarily those used in KS.


—      Should they be optional in all writings?




—      Should they be hightly recommented in lexicographic/reference/didactic writings and optional elsewhere?


They would be an integral part of the orthography and mandatory in all writings.


—      Or should they have some other role?


Diacritics should have one distinct purpose, e.g. circumflex for irregular vowel length, grave for irregular shortness, diaeresis for a different sound. 


—      Furthermore, do we currently have a surfeit of diacritics? Could we idealy do with fewer of them?”


Yes, I would reduce the number of diacritics where possible.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20110201/9824ccbd/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Spellyans mailing list