[Spellyans] SWF (t) and Maga web site

Nicholas Williams njawilliams at gmail.com
Thu Aug 9 10:33:31 IST 2012

The SWF is not a neutral spelling. It uses graphs derived holus bolus from Kernewek Kemmyn.
*Piw rather than pyw, *niver rather than nyver, *dy'Lun rather than de Lun, *melin rather than melyn, *menedh rather than meneth, *genev rather than genef, *orthiv rather than orthyf for example, are not neutral. Nor are they authentic. They derive entirely from Kernewek Kemmyn.
It is disingenuous to call such spellings 'neutral'. It is also offensive to those for whom traditional spelling is essential.
The question then arises, why is public money being spent on a spelling system that is neither phonetic nor authentic and is also repudiated by at least half of all revivalists?
If tax-payers' money is to be spent, should it not be on a linguistically sound and authentic orthography, rather than on an inauthentic, inconsistent and politically motivated compromise?
If something is in official use, it ought to be the best available. The SWF/M and T is certainly not that.

Nicholas Williams

On 9 Aug 2012, at 08:34, Lowe Jenefer wrote:

> The point with the SWF is to provide a neutral spelling for official use.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20120809/c3dc945b/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the Spellyans mailing list