[Spellyans] Is there a future for the SWF?

Daniel Prohaska daniel at ryan-prohaska.com
Sun May 20 10:34:19 IST 2012


Christian, 
You're definitely not alone. I'm with you on this!
Dan


On May 10, 2012, at 10:35 AM, Christian Semmens wrote:

> 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
> Klingon.
> 
> 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.
> 
> Christian
> 
> 
> 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
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net





More information about the Spellyans mailing list