[Spellyans] Is there a future for the SWF?

David Trethewey davidtreth at gmail.com
Wed May 9 14:24:56 IST 2012

I don't see how it is really possible to have parity between the
different forms of the SWF, I mean would you have road signs with both
traditional and 'main form' on? I fear that would lead to Cornish as a
whole being ridiculed in some quarters.

On 5/9/12, Craig Weatherhill <craig at agantavas.org> wrote:
> That pretty much accords with my own view.  The future of SWF is on a
> tightrope.
> It's still very prominent in my mind that the Commission recommended
> that the SWF be based upon KD, with KS input.  The compilers of KD and
> KS had, as you'll recall, held frequent discussions, with agreements
> on several points.  A promising process that seemed the way to go to
> reach a single compromise solution.
> At Treyarnon, an AHG top-heavy with non-traditional supporters, and
> with NJAW and ME excluded under threat of a KK walkout, threw that
> recommendation aside without a single reference to the 200 people
> who'd been at the previous Tremough meeting and applauded it.
> Suddenly , KK was to be the default orthography, when the Commission
> had rejected KK.  They' d only agree to vocalic alternation if the SWF
> was split into a "main form" and "side form" (yet they blame US for
> that!).  The Commission had detailed, as an example, that SWF could
> quite easily do without the universal K and a return to the prctices
> of revived Cornish other than KK.  That was thrown out on the first day.
> Linguistic advisors were appointed (these DID include NJAW and ME),
> and then virtually ignored.
> Since then, and despite assurances to the contrary, SWF/T has been
> treated as though it doesn't exist.  I've even had people state that
> it "isn't the SWF".
> The crunch will come next year at the Review, because we can all see
> the way it's being engineered.  If further, meaningful compromise
> can't be thrashed out there; if it opens the door for further
> Kemmynising, then I can see most Trad. users walking away from it, and
> from the entire Partnership completely. Then it's back to Square One.
> It's clear that not everyone is happy with the "main form" (or SWF/K,
> as I call it).  I noticed, this morning, at Nancledra that the parish
> council (presumably) have erected a very nice, painted, roadside
> signboard, welcoming drivers to "Nancledra: Nans Cludri", even though
> MAGA's Signage Panel had recommended Nansklodri.  From this, it also
> appears that "official use" does not extend to town and parish
> councils.  (Before anyone asks - I had nothing to do with this sign,
> and knew nothing about it until I saw it today).
> Craig
> On 9 Me 2012, at 13:24, Christian Semmens wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> As it is a rather slow and dull afternoon, I thought I'd play devil's
>> advocate and ask this question, as I am having some grave reservations
>> over the direction the "compromise" process seems to be taking. It
>> would seem that the rumble of distant thunder can be heard regarding
>> the future direction of the SWF from some areas. The traditional form
>> of the SWF has lived in an enforced twilight for the last four years
>> and it would seem that some would like to bury it completely. From my
>> point of view, anything less than total and absolute parity for the
>> SWF/T including (especially!) for "Official" purposes and in schools,
>> would be utterly unacceptable. Complaints about possible confusion be
>> damned. Let the people choose.
>> The SWF, so far, has been a vehicle for ditching the dodgy phonology
>> of KK, but maintaining its (now meaningless) spelling system.
>> In the Cornish language movement today, without KK phonology, there is
>> now absolutely no reason for maintaining this spelling system other
>> than that it looks familiar to one fraction of learners, and in a
>> revival we are all learners. It is precisely this spelling form that
>> needs to justify its existence, not the traditional variant.
>> I wonder where others stand on this?
>> Christian
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

More information about the Spellyans mailing list