everson at evertype.com
Thu May 16 10:09:38 IST 2013
On 16 May 2013, at 09:04, Jon Mills <j.mills at email.com> wrote:
> Using Late Cornish spellings such as "heer" and "feer" that wouldn't be a problem.
Yes it would. We don't want "heer" alongside "hir" contrasting with "feer" alongside "fur". We already have one such alternation in the bÿs/bës class of words, which we have to mark with a diacritic in order to distinguish them from the bys-class and the res-class.
> The SWF is certainly less friendly to RLC learners than it is to RMC learners. Is something more equitable needed?
No. Much of what Richard Gendall considered to be "different" in Late Cornish vis à vis Middle Cornish are features found as far back as the Passion Poem. Gendall tried to use various late orthographies (and could never decide which one to use) and in my view did a disservice to the revival in doing so.
It will come as no surprise to you that in my opinion the best thing to do is what Nicholas and I have been doing: We have considered 1600 to be the target date, not 1500 and not 1700. This is why KS texts we have published favour pre-occlusion, and why we tend to favour later forms like bës over bÿs. Both are legitimate, but when writing a choice has to be made.
Anecdotally it can be observed that some UC users moved "forward" in time to UCR; whether they choose to move forward to KS remains to be seen. And anecdotally I do know that a number of RLC users have moved "backward" in time to KS, because they are interested in reading the literature being produced in it.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
More information about the Spellyans