[Spellyans] Collated SWF Review Issues 4.) & 5.)

Janice Lobb janicelobb at gmail.com
Tue Apr 30 08:19:57 IST 2013


"crown"  is a good example of the problem. The SWF dictionary gives*curun;kurun
* giving no indication that the two [u]s are different. Dick has
*kîran*giving a much better pronunciation guide. I don’t know what KS
does.
**

Jan


On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 3:54 PM, A. J. Trim <ajtrim at msn.com> wrote:

>   Yes, and the long sounds of <u> are not distinguished. KS uses <u> and
> <û>.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Andrew J. Trim
>
>
>
>  *From:* Daniel Prohaska <daniel at ryan-prohaska.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, April 29, 2013 1:07 PM
> *To:* corpusplanning at kernowek.net
> *Cc:* Standard Cornish discussion list <spellyans at kernowek.net> ; Albert
> Bock <albert.bock at univie.ac.at>
> *Subject:* Re: [Spellyans] Collated SWF Review Issues 4.) & 5.)
>
>
> **Dear all, **
>
> **Some comments concerning the issues 4.) and 5.)**
> Dan
>
> =====================================================================
>
> 4.)         distribution of ‹*i*› and ‹*y*› is unclear and incoherent;
>
> The Cornish orthographies in use don’t show any consensus as to the use
> and distribution of the graphs ‹*y*› and ‹*i*›.****
>
> ****
>
> -) The orthographies UC and UCR do not distinguish in any meaningful way
> between the graphs ‹*y*› and ‹*i*› with ‹*y*› mainly used.****
>
> ****
>
> -) RLC for the most part tries to avoid the use of ‹y› as it is associated
> with UC and it is felt that this graph is ‘overused’ in that orthography.
> Some forms of RLC use ‹*y*› in word final position though.****
>
> ****
>
> -) KK attempts a systematic and etymological distinction between the
> proposed phonemes /i/ and /ɪ/, which, according to their environment,
> appear in fully long, half-long and short form, ‹*i*› [iː iˑ i] and ‹*y*›
> [ɪː ɪˑ ɪ]. There is some overlap between ‹i› and ‹y› in the short form bot
> in unstressed position (e.g. ‹*melyn*› = ‹*melin*›) as well as in
> stressed position in closed syllables (e.g. ‹*dillas*›). One problem with
> the KK solution is that it does not always conform with the textual
> attestations which show an alternation of both ‹*y*› and ‹*i*› with ‹*e*›.
> Furthermore, the proposed KK-pronunciation is mostly re-interpreted by
> teachers and learners as equating and thus substituting KK ‹*i*› with the
> English phoneme /iː/ (e.g. in E “*see*”) and KK ‹*y*› with the English
> phoneme /ɪ/ (e.g. E “*bit*”). This does not conform to the pronunciation
> rules formulated by Ken George, nor does it reflect a likely reconstructed
> phonology of traditional Cornish.****
>
> ****
>
> -) KS distinguishes the spellings ‹*y*›, ‹*ÿ*› and ‹*i*› and gives them a
> positional and partly morpho-phonemic distribution;****
>
> ****
>
> -) The SWF distinguishes ‹*i*› and ‹*y*› according to KK, though it
> allows for an alternation of ‹*y*› ~ ‹*e*› and partially a variation
> between ‹*i*› ~ ‹*e*› in a few variant forms. The distribution is
> partially phonologically determined, partially etymological and partly
> taken from textual attestations.****
>
> ****
>
> It is desirable to arrive at a predictable spelling of ‹*i*›, ‹*y*› and ‹*
> e*› taking into consideration the forms preferred in both Middle Cornish
> (MC) and Late Cornish (LC) based Revived Cornish (RC). Phonological issues
> such as Vocalic Alternation (VA) and development from MC to RC as well as
> textual attestation and spelling patterns should be taken into
> consideration.****
>
>              ****
>
> 5.)         difficulty in distinguishing different sounds for long ‹*a*›,
> short ‹*o*› and ‹*u*›;****
>
> ****
>
> These are really two separate points.****
>
> ****
>
> 5.1) Distinguishing different sounds for ‹*a*› in a long context (e.g. ‹*
> bras*, *tal*, *clav*›), and don’t only affect the long vowel, but also a
> short vowel (e.g. ‹*brassa*› etc.); The SWF/L variant digraph ‹*oa*› is
> permitted for the long vowel and appears to be suitable for the most part,
> though some RLC users say it is unnecessary. Also, ‹*oa*› does not seem
> suitable for the short vowel.****
>
> ****
>
> 5.2.) The SWF does not adequately distinguish between ‹u› and ‹o›, but
> what it actually fails to do is distinguish between three short sounds [ʊ]
> : [ʏ] : [ɔ]. In KK the former two are often grouped together in ‹*u*› =
> /y/, while ‹*oe*› stands for [ɤ] (a sound otherwise unsupported in other
> reconstructions of Cornish phonology), as well as ‹*o*› for [ɔ]. The SWF
> on the other hand has a mixed distribution: [ʏ] is generally represented by
> ‹*u*›, [ʊ] by both ‹*u*› and ‹*o*›, and [ɔ] also by ‹*u*› and ‹*o*›. This
> is an unsatisfactory situation and needs to be tackled in the current
> Review pocess.****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20130430/a98db4fa/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Spellyans mailing list