[Spellyans] SWF Review

Craig Weatherhill craig at agantavas.org
Sun Oct 6 19:27:30 IST 2013


KD was not KK.  It was KD.  If allowed more time, KD and KS1 could have come to a meeting point.  Discussions were very much moving in that direction, and KS1 had made several changes accordingly (e.g. muer > meur,  dhewgh > dhwygh>.  Both changes to KS1 and 2 incorporated KK orthography, did they not?

Governments.  You seem to misread my point, Michael.  Westminster would just love to kill Cornish.  It hasn't the slightest interest on saving it, and never has had.  It's obvious - they give millions to Ulster-Scots, a dialect (not a language) that is basically Middle English, but give mere scraps to Cornish.  This leads to a question that maybe Ken McKinnon could answer.  There are between 2,000-3,000 users of Cornish (speakers, writers and to varying degrees of competence).  How many users of Ulster-Scots are there?  Does the funding ratios hold up in the light of that answer?  If the answer is no, then ask yourself why.

Who owns Cornish?  The Cornish people do.  End of.

Yes, KS (2) is the best orthography for Cornish.  No question.  But officialdom refuses to recognize it, and Cornish users haven't (yet) embraced it, irrespective of how much has been published in it.  Regrettable, but true.  At present I have to work with SWF in my role as advisor to the Signage Panel.  That started off as a balanced Panel with equal numbers from Middle, Late and KK.  Now, it's all ex-KK, with me as the sole Trad. voice.  That role is one of damage limitation and, irrespective of spelling (much of which makes me wince), I 've managed to ensure that the Panel does not make the mistakes that the CLB made.  We have decided (albeit in SWF/M) on over 1,000 historic names.  Of those I question (to varying degrees) 12, and utterly oppose 5 (one of which was decided by the Partnership and not the Panel).  Which, overall, ain't bad.  I'm doing better than I ever thought I would, so the effort is more than worthwhile.  And, to be fair, the discussions that I have with Panel members are very positive and therefore rewarding.

MAGA only keeps a Master-list of historic place-names in SWF/M.  I keep a parallel list in both SWF/M and SWF/T.  If you wish to have a current copy, just ask.  I treat nothing as a " state secret" even if others might wish it that way.
But a bit of appreciation for what I've battled at - alone - for 5 years wouldn't go amiss.  I've had next to no support from anyone, which is why I've been quiet for a long time.

Craig



On 2013 Hed 6, at 16:15, Michael Everson wrote:

> On 6 Oct 2013, at 09:01, Craig Weatherhill <craig at agantavas.org> wrote:
> 
>> The problem is that, despite original assurances, SWF/T is not being afforded any workable platform.  Perhaps we should have seen this coming - SWF was supposed to be KD with KS input, and ended up with KK (not considered as an element by the Commission) being used as the default model.
> 
> Craig, I have explained this many times. KD was essentially KK with Trad Graphs. It had the robustness of KK, and the faults of supporting KK phonology. 
> 
>> However it would appear that good faith has not been exercised in return so, if the Review ends up simply as diluted KK as feared by some, then Agan Tavas has the full right (and justification) to withdraw its support for SWF.
> 
> What will be more interesting will be a linguistic analysis of whatever it is that the Review Board comes up with. From what I have heard privately, real problems are not being addressed, though cosmetic problems are, and as far as I can tell in the direction of KK. These are rumours only, 
> 
>> The danger there is that we could find ourselves back in the bad old days of an acrimonious split, and that will kill the language stone dead.  To the absolute delight of London.
> 
> The language will not be saved by any government. The language will live if people learn it and use it. 
> 
>> The daft thing is that, as far as graphs are concerned, there are only 4 common differences between SWF/M and SWF/T.
> 
> Honestly the Trad Graphs thing is the last of the problems with the SWF. The SWF is not fit for purpose because of linguistic ambiguity and error. 
> 
>> A compromise solution isn't hard to achieve, but I'll say no more because I've done so before and been slapped down for suggesting "horse-trading" (which I know a little more about than most).
> 
> Compromise with whom? Who owns Cornish, Craig? 
> 
> Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net





More information about the Spellyans mailing list