[Spellyans] SWF (t) and Maga web site

Craig Weatherhill craig at agantavas.org
Thu Aug 9 13:30:33 IST 2012


With regard to your final statement there, Michael, I wish I had that  
same confidence but the memories what what happened last time are  
still too fresh.

Craig




On 9 Est 2012, at 11:11, Michael Everson wrote:


> On 9 Aug 2012, at 10:56, christian.semmens at gmail.com wrote:
>
>> It is to the future that we now need to be looking. The  
>> "compromise" reached last time has nearly run its course.
>
> The "compromise" gives MAGA an orthography they can use without  
> anyone arguing about it. I suppose that was the rationale.
>
>> There is a clear issue in perception between Cornish for  
>> officialdom which seems to be what Jenefer is framing SWF/K as, and  
>> Official Cornish, which I fear everyone else sees SWF/K as.
>
> If Jenefer were to ask the Kesva/Cowethas representatives in MAGA if  
> we could produce an SWF/T dictionary and they were to say "No", it  
> would be very interesting to learn what the reason for such a "No"  
> would be.
>
>> Again why should the main communication channels be forced (in the  
>> future) to use a form with a spelling aesthetic that harks back  
>> twenty years to a phonology that it doesn't use?
>
> That's a question for the Review, I should think.
>
>> If round one finalised the phonological and linguistic aspects in  
>> the main,
>
> There are many loose ends.
>
>> this leaves us with the legacy aesthetic issues to deal with.
>
> It is my hope that the Review will deal with linguistic and not  
> political issues. I think the Revival is mature enough that people  
> from all sides should be able to work together.
>
> Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net





More information about the Spellyans mailing list