[Spellyans] UC/UCR

Christian Semmens christian.semmens at gmail.com
Tue Nov 13 10:38:42 GMT 2012


We have a problem here. We cannot keep harking back to UC. UC is not even
in this game.

UC is what it is, fixed, ossified even. Feel free to promote UC as "The Way
Forward" after we have first established that the traditional forms are the
way forward for Cornish, as currently this is very much in doubt.

This battle is the one we MUST win first, we can fight amongst ourselves
later. I have no doubt that if we fail in this endeavour then traditional
graphs will be lost to the mainstream and we will be forever stuck with
this KK style orthographic parody that is being foisted on us today in the
form of the SWF Main form. If this monstrosity becomes the 'Official' form
of Cornish - and it is currently heir-apparent to that title - the
Traditional graphs will then be nothing more than personal hobbies and
historical footnotes.

Sadly I do not share Nicholas' view that reason will prevail and
traditional orthographies will eventually win through. I think that
potentially the SWF process is really significant to the future form of
Cornish orthography, and if it is allowed to proceed the way it is
currently going then it will result in the smothering of traditional
orthographical forms by something that *looks* very like KK, and I don't
think any of us wants that.

Christian


On 12 November 2012 21:59, Herbie Blackburn
<kevin.blackburn1 at ntlworld.com>wrote:

>  I know this might be a stupid thing to say, and may be a daft and
> simplistic opinion, but….****
>
> ** **
>
> How did Cornish ever get into the mess it appears to be in!****
>
> ** **
>
> When I first started studying Cornish in 1980 and obtained a copy of
> Nance’s English-Cornish / Cornish-English dictionary there seemed to be one
> truth. The language held within it seemed mostly self consistent and since
> then I have found it to be very much rooted naturally in the progression of
> Cornish from its earliest writing, through texts like the Ordinalia, BK,
> Jordan, etc. but also to have picked up and corrected / normalised things
> from Lhuyd, Rev. Williams, Pryce etc.****
>
> ** **
>
> Then when I first saw Nicholas Williams’s UCR Dictionary, I thought the
> future of Cornish was secure and resolved.****
>
> ** **
>
> So, I cannot believe how the legacy of Nance, and the fantastic effort of
> Nicholas are still being argued against, and the amount of negative effort
> that has been wasted. ****
>
> ** **
>
> As I say, I know this is a simplistic view, and I’m not close enough
> really to judge, but…..is anyone able to sum up where they believe the
> Cornish language debate has got to, and the likely outcome?****
>
> ** **
>
> Regards****
>
> ** **
>
> An interested (very interested) outsider****
>
> eMail: kevin.blackburn1 at ntlworld.com****
>
> P Please consider the environment before printing this eMail - thanks****
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20121113/04fa8eee/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Spellyans mailing list