[Spellyans] Is there a future for the SWF?

Christian Semmens christian.semmens at gmail.com
Wed May 9 16:55:11 IST 2012


I believe the time has come to publicly argue again, Ray. Holding our
own council only allows the drift into the acceptance of the current
situation, which is the inevitable deprecation of the "Side Form",
which is patently unacceptable. Even the term "Side Form" is
unacceptable.

The two form process is the result of compromising without compromising.

As I said earlier, without the KK phonology it is the SWF "Main" form
that needs to justify its existence not the traditional form which is
the Cinderella of this particular pantomime.

The problem here has been the last four years of positive
discrimination in favour of this novel variant, the price paid for the
acceptance of vocalic alternation. It is the Main/Side issue that is
at fault here, not the unsuitability of the traditional form. By
"Officially" defaulting to the Main variant there is no point in
having a traditional variant. It is a ghetto, condemned to a short
life in the twilight before complete deprecation.

Also, don't forget that without the backing of traditional spelling
groups you have no SWF, you just have two forms of KK, one without the
phonology and one where it exists, but isn't used.

Christian




More information about the Spellyans mailing list