[Spellyans] A 'Censored Message'? Can this be?

Craig Weatherhill craig at agantavas.org
Mon Jan 31 18:58:04 GMT 2011


Ah. but that's not the same as a mental picture.  My mental pic of  
Michael is the Emperor Hadrian (only because his statue is the image  
of Michael, I hasten to add.  Ahem.)

Craig



On 31 Gen 2011, at 18:43, Janice Lobb wrote:

> I've met you, so I know what you look like!
> Jan
>
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Craig Weatherhill <craig at agantavas.org 
> > wrote:
> I'd hate to imagine what your mental picture of me might be!
>
> Craig
>
>
>
> On 31 Gen 2011, at 18:27, Janice Lobb wrote:
>
> I have two lengthy archived posts (saying the same thing?) - one  
> from Truru Truru and the other from Jed Mathews a.k.a. Truru/Carrek.  
> I don't know the gentleman in question, but I do prefer to deal with  
> real names if I'm to take people seriously. Ideally I like to have a  
> mental picture of the writer!
> Jan
>
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Craig Weatherhill <craig at agantavas.org 
> > wrote:
> It's still on my post list.  Maybe he forgot that he posted it as  
> Truru, not Carrek.
>
> Craig
>
>
>
>
> On 31 Gen 2011, at 17:56, Eddie Climo wrote:
>
> Truru (a pseudonym) claims on C24 that our esteemed Moderator,  
> Michael (not a pseudonym), has censored  this post of his to  
> Spellyans. Can this be true? As far as I know, I received a copy of  
> it with the rest of the postings on this list.
>
> Perhaps Michael would care to comment.
>
> Eddie Foirbeis Climo
> - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -
> Dres ethom akennow byner re bo lyeshes
> Accenti non multiplicandi praeter necessitatem
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Truru Truru <ebost.truru at googlemail.com>
> Date: 2011 Mys Genver 30 18:42:44 GMT+00:00
> To: Standard Cornish discussion list <spellyans at kernowek.net>
> Subject: Re: [Spellyans] dictionnaire de l'Académie française
> Reply-To: Standard Cornish discussion list <spellyans at kernowek.net>
>
> May I wade in?
>
> I can't speak for all Cornish speakers, I can only speak for my own  
> experiences. The fact that this discussion is even being had would  
> suggest that there is no consensus on the issue of diacritics.
>
> Whenever I see 'bys' used in a context where it clearly means  
> 'until', I say [bɪz], and whenever I see 'bys' used in a context  
> where it clearly means 'world', I say [biːz]. I can't give examples  
> of other bys/bes type words because I haven't looked into it very  
> much. But I'm sure there would be other times where (for me) context  
> would suffice.
>
> The point has been made that some KK users pronounce bys and pryv  
> incorrectly. I do not believe this is a problem directly caused by  
> the orthography (although it is true it does not help) but by poor  
> teaching. A learner only has to be told once that until is [bɪz] and  
> world is [biːz]. It is not true that this can only work with oral  
> teaching, I have not been to a single class and have learnt Cornish  
> solely through books and yet I know the difference because the books  
> I've read taught it.
>
> Also, the point's been made that in languages like French and  
> Spanish spelling words without the diacritics would be spelling them  
> wrong. This is indeed correct, but I don't believe this argument is  
> relevant to Cornish. Cornish doesn't have one orthography, like  
> those languages, it has many, and so I think it would be impossible  
> to claim that spelling a word without diacritics is wrong when there  
> are so many other orthographies that don't use diacritics. It could  
> be the case that in 100 years time, the idea of spelling Cornish  
> without diacritics is as strange as spelling French without them.  
> However we are not at that point now. Today there are generations of  
> Cornish speakers who are used to spelling without diacritics and it  
> might be rather idealistic to expect them all to suddenly start  
> using them after a directive from above says they should.
>
> Nevertheless, in my opinion, all this discussion is (if you forgive  
> the bluntness) kind of pointless anyway. The SWF in 2013 will be a  
> political compromise, there's no denying it. We can ignore that fact  
> for as long we like but it will be a fact nonetheless. We need to be  
> focusing on how to make the SWF better in a way that could be  
> acceptable to a majority of Cornish users. If it's obvious that KS's  
> current range of diacritics will not find favour with that majority  
> then we should not be stubbornly continuing the matter. I've got the  
> impression (correct me if I'm wrong) that a very limited use of  
> diacritics, for things like anomalous vowel length, might find a  
> majority favour. As for y/e, I don't like the umlaut and don't think  
> it fits in well with the overall 'look' of Cornish. I also don't see  
> it gaining widespread favour. I have always preferred <ei> anyway  
> and would like to see this at least mentioned in 2013 to see if  
> opinion has shifted. If not, then I don't see the y/e distinction  
> going away and we shouldn't spend time trying to fix things that  
> can't be fixed in a manner acceptable to a majority.
>
> This discussion is part of a larger choice that needs to be made.  
> Either you can focus on proposing fixes to the SWF, which means  
> finding solutions that will be acceptable to a majority of users, or  
> you can ditch the SWF, tread your own path, and go back to KS1. If  
> the SWF is ditched, would this send us all back to the pre-SWF days?  
> Would traditional forms end up being cut off from the arena that  
> matters most - schools? Would KS end up being sidelined? Or would  
> there be a surge of support for KS1, meaning that it might stand a  
> chance at becoming a future SWF? Who knows. The options need to be  
> weighed up. The current KS it seems, in my opinion, is too far from  
> the SWF to be accepted by a majority, but not close enough to your  
> ideal of a KS1-type orthography. What shouldn't happen, not at all,  
> is that the traditionalist lobby becomes fractured.
>
> Carrek
>
>
>
>
>
> 2011/1/30 Eddie Climo <eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk>
> On 2011 Gen 30, at 17:14, nicholas williams wrote:
> Whatever orthography one uses one's first concern should perhaps be  
> that the Cornish is accurate.
> Certainly we always ensure as far as possible that our published  
> Cornish is correct.
>
> Eddie himself is not without fault here. Let me cite some examples  
> at random from Whedhlow Dama Goodh FSS/T-C:
>
> Oh, dear, are we now to descend to playground jibes? Am I to emulate  
> your behaviour and scour your published works to hunt for errors to  
> fling in your face, Nicholas? Am I to unearth and repeat some of the  
> incorrect assertions you made to me in private as you proofread my  
> 'Kensa Lyver Redya'?
>
> No, I think not; such conduct is not attractive.
>
> It is gratifying that we have an emerging consensus on this thread  
> about the role diacritics should have in KS, one that diverges from  
> your views.
>
> Nicholas and Michael are, of course, quite free to publish works in  
> whatever orthography they choose, and to encumber them with as many  
> diacritics as they please. In the same way, they're at liberty to  
> lard their Cornish with as many macaronic Tregearisms as they fancy,  
> no matter how 'Kernglish' the result might look.
>
> However, they are NOT free to do the same with the formal  
> specification of KS that will be submitted to the CLP in due course.  
> That must reflect the consensus of this group, at least it must do  
> so if it is to have my name and my support behind it.
>
> Let us hope that the final KS specification is indeed written in the  
> light of this apparent consensus, and is not 'too much encumbered  
> with [mandatory] diaritical signs'.
>
> Eddie Climo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net
>
> --
> Craig Weatherhill
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net
>
> --
> Craig Weatherhill
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net

--
Craig Weatherhill





More information about the Spellyans mailing list