[Spellyans] Is there a future for the SWF?
daniel at ryan-prohaska.com
Sun May 20 13:53:40 IST 2012
I fear you may be right. Most people want some 'officially' sanctioned standard they can use. They don't want to have to become linguists in order to use the orthography.
On May 16, 2012, at 10:54 PM, ewan wilson wrote:
> I can see where Ray is coming from on this.
> I do wonder if 'apathy' or possible waning enthusiasm for the language is not down to the fact most learners are not high powered linguistics experts and so much of the hotly argued minutiae of things like degrees of stress, etc go right over their heads and the consequent conflicts in orthography and revival 'brands' dissuade folk from investing in a system that might well ultimately be ditched!
> What is the feeling on the ground, I wonder?
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ray Chubb" <ray at spyrys.org>
> To: "Standard Cornish discussion list" <spellyans at kernowek.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 4:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [Spellyans] Is there a future for the SWF?
>> My own view is that unless we can get the SWF into schools big time it does not have much of a future. Agan Tavas is beginning to think that they only way to get schools to teach Cornish is through the compulsion that would be provided by a Cornish Language Act.
>> I am not happy at all about the treatment of the traditional graph option but I am deliberately trying to avoid public arguments over it in order to give the SWF the best possible crack of the whip.
>> Some are of the opinion that it was only the public rows over spelling that were holding the language back. It seems to me that the absence of those arguments in the public forum has only served to increase a general apathy towards the language. Or maybe it's just the recession!
>> 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?
>>> Spellyans mailing list
>>> Spellyans at kernowek.net
>> Ray Chubb
>> Agan Tavas web site: www.agantavas.com
>> Spellyans mailing list
>> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
More information about the Spellyans