[Spellyans] SWF (t) and Maga web site
eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk
Wed Aug 15 18:08:06 IST 2012
Ogh, Jon whek,
MAGA supports SWF/T by not having it in their dictionary, nor in their signage, nor on their website, nor in their 'taster' sessions…nor anywhere else.
In the self same way, as Jenefer says, they support *all* the other forms of Cornish: historical MS Cornish, UC, UCR, RLC in its diverse guises, KS etc. And, from what we're seeing, we can look forward to even more 'support' for Traditional Cornish including SWF/T) after 2013, when it will doubtless disappear utterly from MAGA's remit
Why, that's just how the KKesva and the KKowethas have been supporting 'the whole Revival' since 1987. Did we not hear the 'Big Yin' (or was it the 'Big Yang'?) from the KKowethas as she told us just those same old whethlow at Lostwithiel last October?
Of course, all that 'support' has worked wonders, as shown by the plethora of fine publications in authentic Cornish produced over that period by Spyrys a Gernow, Agan Tavas, Cussel an Tavas, Evertype, Gwask an Orlewen and others.
Rak meth ha sham! Fatel yu hedna cales dhe gonvedhes?
Tullys A Taunton.
On 2012 Est 15, at 14:13, Jon Mills wrote:
> Dear Jenefer,
> If, as you say, "the point with the glossary is not orthography", then why is it in only one version of the SWF. A decision must have been made not to provide the traditional forms. That decision concerns orthography. You say that "The point with the SWF is to provide a neutral spelling for official use." But the spelling chosen for the SWF Glossary is not neutral. It derogates against those who prefer tradtional forms. You also write, "It does not mean and never has, that other orthographies are not supported." So how precisely do you intend to support other orthographies?
> Yours sincerely,
> Jon Mills
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Spellyans