[Spellyans] 2013 SWF Review
Daniel Prohaska
daniel at ryan-prohaska.com
Thu Apr 18 12:23:19 BST 2013
Here are the 56 issues. I'm afraid they're listed without examples and out of context, which makes it a little difficult to comment on… there are also many typos, so this was obviously put together somewhat halfheartedly…
Issue
1 Geminates
a rules for doubling geminates
b lack of ultimate double <nn>
c lack of clarity
d vowel length in words which double geminates in plural e reduction of <ll>, <mm> & <rr> medially
f suffixes in <-el>, <en>
2 <i> graph used inappropriately in prefixes and suffixes
3 Aesthetics
4 Distribution of <i> and <y> is unclear and incoherent
5 Difficulty in distinguishing different sounds for long <a>, short <o> and <u>
6 varying vowel & consonant values
7 minimal use of <z>
8 reduction of <oo> to <o> and <gh> to <h>, causing confusion and misrepresentation.
9 vocalic alternation - lack of a systematic and understandable rule
10 <th> in RLC variant - standing on its own when reduced from <yth>
11 <ow> - RLC variant <o>: <a> would be preferable
12 RLC e/a - SWF/L uses <e> where RLC would use <a>
13 words containing the umbrella graph <u> - represents seeral different pronunciations
14 words containing or ending in consonants not pronounced in Late Cornish
15 voiced and unvoiced consonants - confusion
16 discrimination against traditional graphs
17 Use of hyphens - optional use is confusing
18 dictionary methodology - collective nouns first causes confusion
19 diferent pronunication values for <s> / <j> / <z>
20 excess number of variants - needs to be reduced
21 use of letter c
22 vowel length in monosyllabic loanwords in -p and -t
23 dhyworth
24 reduction of unstressed vowels to schwa - no spelling issue, but assertion in the specification
25 etymological spellings - must have a pracical rationale, not theoretical
26 graphs <au> and <ai> - shoul dbe used for some loanwords
27 some diacritical marks must be explicitly permitted is not mandated
28 graph <iw> - should be replaced by <yw>
29 lack of a mechanism to mark long vowels in polysyllabic words
30 inconsistent treatment of pre-occlusion
31 alternation ew/ow is unclear
32 ye-/e- alternation not consistent
33 <a> / <oa> alternation is not consistent
34 lack of identification of irregular long vowels
35 pronunciation of <ey> in treylya
36 ambiguity over <ma> and <na>
37 unified <ü> - how is it accommodated?
38 inconsistent conversion of KK <oe> to SWF <oo> in monosyllables
39 loan words with <c>
40 lack of consistency
41 <e> & <y>
a inclusion of <e> / <y> alternatives unneccesary
b & how to deal with secondary i-mutation of <e> to <y>
42 spelling of <nowyth>
43 RLC personal endings - reduction proposed
44 <junnya> - confusion over the vowel
45 <kk> & <ck> - difference depends on knowing the etymology. 46 seulabrys - issue with the use of <eu>
47 use of apostrophes in RLC variants confusing
48 reduction of <ll> to <l> in polysyllables
49 <o> / <u> differentiation
50 extent of use of <uw>
51 <eu> variants
52 <gwr> / <gr> variants
53 final <i> / <ei> variants
54 doubled & hardened endings - superlative/subjunctive
55 inconsistency in verb roots
56 use of <oo>, giving rise to unfortunate or risible spellings
Dan
On Apr 18, 2013, at 12:32 PM, A. J. Trim wrote:
> As you may know, the MAGA Kernow website now has a link to “Collated issues for SWF review.pdf” / “List of issues raised for the SWF Review”.
> We have until the end of this month to comment.
> There are apparently 56 issues.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Andrew J. Trim
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130418/c9360cd3/attachment.htm>
More information about the Spellyans
mailing list