[Spellyans] Is there a future for the SWF?

Christian Semmens christian.semmens at gmail.com
Thu May 10 09:35:52 IST 2012

Sadly, Nicky, I think there is now real confusion about the path of the SWF.

It isn't about having an orthography that is basically Kemmyn but
makes allowances for a few awkward types to do what they like until
they die off.

It is about creating an acceptable orthography for Cornish moving
forward into the 21st Century. And for at least myself and possibly a
large number of others, one that recognises and reflects the heritage
and style of the language as it was actually used. For me a revival is
just that, a revival not a re-imagining, and the spelling of Cornish
is part of that. If I wanted something new I could learn Esperanto or

For me, KK is not that orthography, The version of the SWF that the
AHG came up with and called the "Main" variant isn't either and I
doubt that I am alone in this. Without incorporating traditional
graphs there is no compromise. The SWF merely becomes a tarnished
mirror to KK.

Some may say that is what it already is.


On 9 May 2012 17:01, Nicky Rowe <nickyrowe at gmail.com> wrote:
> Lowena dhewgh Spellyans
> I did work experience at the Maga office earlier this year and had a
> discussion with Jenefer about this very topic. She says that there is a lot
> of confusion about the SWF agreement - apparently the traditional form is
> not meant to be a separate orthography, but merely a set of allowed variants
> that individuals can use if they choose to. Anything done in public, and
> anything done by Maga would be in the main form. The AHG agreement regarding
> this is on the SWF page on the Maga site. I don't know who was part of the
> AHG but there surely must have been some representatives from the
> traditional side there.
> I wouldn't mind whichever form is the agreed form, they both have merits,
> but I prefer to stick to cooperation and agreement rather than going off on
> my own. It's unlikely that the situation will change much as of the review.
> According to Jenefer most people use the main form. To me there is no future
> without the SWF, whatever it may look like in the future.
> Besides I don't think that spelling is by any means the most important
> aspect of Cornish that needs attention, but the grammar, syntax and
> pronunciation.
> Nicky Rowe
> On 9 May 2012 16:55, Christian Semmens <christian.semmens at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 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
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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