everson at evertype.com
Wed May 15 15:17:30 IST 2013
On 15 May 2013, at 15:08, Ray Chubb <ray at spyrys.org> wrote:
> Reading some of the opinions here it is almost as if Nicholas had never published Cornish Today. I never thought that it would be necessary to regurgitate the points made in that volume 18 years after its publication. At least not in the company of Celtic language scholars.
In fact, Nicholas has written extensively on all of these points.
Writings on Revived Cornish
Towards Authentic Cornish
The burden of discussion is on people who want to dispute Nicholas' view that unstressed vowels become schwa early. I don't say the burden of proof, but the fact is that he has devoted many, many pages, with citations from the texts, to bolster his arguments. To date, no one has refuted any of it.
Saying "some people think it was later" and fairly blithely assuming that [ˈtavɛs] is a suitable form for the Revived language need, at least, to address the argument about the date of the shift.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
More information about the Spellyans