From eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk Wed Mar 19 16:44:10 2014 From: eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk (Hedley Climo) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 16:44:10 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] Gwask an Orlewen: Kevres Ranyeth Kernow Message-ID: <73121CB0-24C2-445F-A70B-B623F89B80E3@yahoo.co.uk> A gowetha whek, Kevres Ranyeth Kernow / Cornish Dialect Series Lowen yu Gwask an Orlewen deryvas kevres noweth lyfrow dhe vos vorys hedhyu, a gomprehend daspryntyansow copy-kewar a lyfrow an 19ves cansvledhen, scryfys yn Ranyeth Kernow. Kyn nyns esons yn Kernewek, yma byttele kenyver ger ha lavar Keltek y'n Ranyeth ha hy a yl bos mur dhe les dhe Gernewegoryon ha scolhygyon Geltek kefrys. An kevres a dhalleth ha gans Gerlyver an Ranyeth, ha gans lyver deublek a brof whethlow ha bardhonek. Y re be mes a brynt aga thry nans yu moy es cans bledhen, del hevel, mes lemmyn ymons dhe gafos arta, kefrys yn dyllansow pryntyes, hag yn form r-lyfrow hep cost. An 3sa lyver deublek y'n kevres a vyn sewya whare. - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - ? CDS-I. 1. Glossary of Words in use in Cornwall. a. West Cornwall. Miss M.A. Courteney b. East Cornwall. Thomas Q. Couch (134ff., 8.5"x5.5", aden vedhel; prys shoppa comendys ?7.45) (+ r-lyver, PDF, 136ff., hep cost ?0.00) ? CDS-II. 2. A Budget of Cornish Poems. by Various Authors 3. Humorous Cornish Legends. H.J. Daniel (108ff., 8.5"x5.5", aden vedhel; prys shoppa comendys ?6.95) (+ r-lyver, PDF, 110ff., hep cost ?0.00) Del yu usyes, yma an lyfrow/r-lyfrow dhe gafos adhyworth G an O: gwy: www.GwaskAnOrlewen.com po adhyworth Spyrys a Gernow: gwy: www.agantavas.com/dafar.html r-bost: shoppa at spyrys.org - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - Gwask an Orlewen is pleased to announce a new series of books launched today, which comprises facsimile reprints of 19th century books written in Cornish Dialect. Although they are not in Kernewek, there are nonetheless so many Celtic words and expressions in the Dialect that it can be very useful to Cornish speakers and Celtic scholars alike. The series begins both with a Dialect Dictionary, and a double book with offers stories and poetry. All three of them have been out of print for more than a hundred years seemingly, but now they are available again, both in printed editions, as well as free e-books. The 3rd double book in the series will follow presently. ? CDS-I. 1. Glossary of Words in use in Cornwall. a. West Cornwall. Miss M.A. Courteney b. East Cornwall. Thomas Q. Couch (134pp., 8.5"x5.5", paperback; RRP ?7.45) (+ e-book, PDF, 136pp., free ?0.00) ? CDS-II. 2. A Budget of Cornish Poems. by Various Authors 3. Humorous Cornish Legends. H.J. Daniel (108pp., 8.5"x5.5", paperback; RRP ?6.95) (+e-book, PDF, 110pp., free ?0.00) As usual, the books/e-books are available from G an O: web: www.GwaskAnOrlewen.com or from Spyrys a Gernow: web: www.agantavas.com/dafar.html e-mail: shoppa at spyrys.org - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - Gans gorhemnynadow a'n gwella, Eddie Climo Gwask an Orlewen Kernewek Gwyr--nyns us nahen. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: KRK\CDS logo 4.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 19615 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 46 CDS1) 1-Glossary, cudhlen 2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 119044 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 47 2-Budget, 3-Humorous -cudhlen 2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 130572 bytes Desc: not available URL: From craig at agantavas.org Mon Mar 24 21:53:03 2014 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 21:53:03 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. Message-ID: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain unaltered. DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. SHORT and 1. Change to in , in line with , , , , and 1. everywhere except word-initially. PARTICLE in SWF/L 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. 1. To be respelt (M), or . HYPHENS 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. , , etc. 3. to replace . 4. to replace . (but personal use to remain optional). VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. DHYWORTH/DYWORTH 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and in RLC variants. A/OA ALTERNATION 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them only with -a-. 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . for KK 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. AND 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including those in doubt. 2. to be respelt . APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, e.g. from . 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from . 4. Do not use after (KK ). 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF ). 2. Allow as alternative spellings. 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and (currently in SWF/L). No change to , , . GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . WORTIWEDH, ETC. 1. and to be single words, without apostrophes. 1ST PERSON SINGULAR 1 RC variant , , no longer required. Craig From ajtrim at msn.com Tue Mar 25 02:31:28 2014 From: ajtrim at msn.com (A. J. Trim) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 02:31:28 -0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> Message-ID: Craig, Thanks for that. For what it is worth, I have added my comments to your message. Regards, Andrew J. Trim -----Original Message----- From: Craig Weatherhill Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 9:53 PM To: spellyans at kernowek.net Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've singled out those in which a change was decided upon. *** So there is no change to the / distribution, and no change to the ambiguous problem *** The below is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain unaltered. *** Effectively dead *** DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. 1. Introduce and in roots. *** If diacritical marks are not being used to indicate vowel length, this is the only other viable way to mark length. *** Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. *** This makes Cornish easier to learn but it results in many double consonants that were not in the traditional language. *** 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. *** I do not agree with this! *** SHORT and 1. Change to in , in line with , , , , *** This is OK. *** and 1. everywhere except word-initially.*** This is OK but I prefer everywhere except word-finally. *** PARTICLE in SWF/L 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. *** This is OK. *** PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe.*** This would be confusing. means ?was? so the apostrophe is needed. *** 1. To be respelt (M), or . *** This makes sense but I would prefer all such words to end -th (as in the traditional language) rather than -dh. *** HYPHENS 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . *** This may cause confusion. *** 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. , , etc. *** This is OK. *** 3. to replace . *** This is OK. *** 4. to replace . *** This is OK. *** (but personal use to remain optional). VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. *** If diacritical marks are not being used to indicate vowel length, this is the only other viable way to mark length. However, I do not like a system where you need to know the history of a word to spell it correctly. It is easier to just learn which words have unexpectedly-long vowels. *** 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. *** This is OK. *** DHYWORTH/DYWORTH 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and in RLC variants. *** This is OK. *** A/OA ALTERNATION 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them only with -a-. *** This is OK. *** 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . *** This is OK. *** for KK 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. *** This is OK. *** AND 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including those in doubt. *** I do not like a system where you need to know the history of a word to spell it correctly. I would prefer everywhere. *** 2. to be respelt . *** This is OK. *** APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. *** I would remove this one too. *** 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, e.g. from . *** This is OK. *** 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from . *** This is OK. *** 4. Do not use after (KK ). *** This is OK. *** 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. *** I would keep the ending but make it optionally silent. *** 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF ). *** This is OK. *** 2. Allow as alternative spellings. *** This is OK. *** 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and (currently in SWF/L). *** This is OK. *** No change to , , . *** This is OK. *** GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . *** This is OK. *** GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . *** I do not agree with this! *** WORTIWEDH, ETC. 1. and to be single words, without apostrophes. *** This is OK. *** 1ST PERSON SINGULAR 1 RC variant , , no longer required.*** This is OK for but should be retained. *** Craig _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From philip.newton at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 06:03:05 2014 From: philip.newton at gmail.com (Philip Newton) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 07:03:05 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> Message-ID: On 24 March 2014 22:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've > singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below > is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional > graphs remain unaltered. Is there a fuller description or list? Especially for this bit? > 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton From craig at agantavas.org Tue Mar 25 08:52:27 2014 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:52:27 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> Message-ID: Unfortunately, not for that item, Philip. Obviously, the lists fuller. I have merely highlighted those items where change will occur. The full report is to be placed on MAGA's website in due course. Craig On 2014 Mer 25, at 06:03, Philip Newton wrote: > On 24 March 2014 22:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: >> I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've >> singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below >> is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional >> graphs remain unaltered. > > Is there a fuller description or list? Especially for this bit? > >> 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . > > Cheers, > Philip > -- > Philip Newton > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net From craig at agantavas.org Tue Mar 25 09:03:22 2014 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 09:03:22 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> Message-ID: <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> DIACRITICS: Issue (27) addresses these, and the recommendation is as follows: "NO diacritics EXCEPT in pronunciation guides, dictionaries and teaching materials if the author so wishes. We are seeking a meeting with the Dictionary Board to ensure that such diacritics as are chosen are properly defined and used consistently." It seems obvious to me that MAGA and the Dictionary Board should adopt the same diacritics for these purposes as those currently used by KS, if consistency is to be a serious criterion. I regret the reversion to the medial . To me, this is reintroducing an archaism to a language designed for the modern era. It is obvious that certain recommendations are a shift towards KK; however, the Review turns out to be far less a shift in that direction than I feared or expected Craig On 2014 Mer 25, at 02:31, A. J. Trim wrote: > Craig, > > Thanks for that. > > For what it is worth, I have added my comments to your message. > > > Regards, > > Andrew J. Trim > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Craig Weatherhill > Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 9:53 PM > To: spellyans at kernowek.net > Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. > > I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've singled out those in which a change was decided upon. *** So there is no change to the / distribution, and no change to the ambiguous problem *** The below is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain unaltered. *** Effectively dead *** > > DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. > 1. Introduce and in roots. *** If diacritical marks are not being used to indicate vowel length, this is the only other viable way to mark length. *** Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. *** This makes Cornish easier to learn but it results in many double consonants that were not in the traditional language. *** > 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. *** I do not agree with this! *** > > SHORT and > 1. Change to in , in line with , , , , *** This is OK. *** > > and > 1. everywhere except word-initially.*** This is OK but I prefer everywhere except word-finally. *** > > PARTICLE in SWF/L > 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. *** This is OK. *** > > PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT > 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe.*** This would be confusing. means ?was? so the apostrophe is needed. *** > > > 1. To be respelt (M), or . *** This makes sense but I would prefer all such words to end -th (as in the traditional language) rather than -dh. *** > > HYPHENS > 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . *** This may cause confusion. *** > 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. , , etc. *** This is OK. *** > 3. to replace . *** This is OK. *** > 4. to replace . *** This is OK. *** > (but personal use to remain optional). > > VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. > 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. *** If diacritical marks are not being used to indicate vowel length, this is the only other viable way to mark length. However, I do not like a system where you need to know the history of a word to spell it correctly. It is easier to just learn which words have unexpectedly-long vowels. *** > 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. *** This is OK. *** > > DHYWORTH/DYWORTH > 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and in RLC variants. *** This is OK. *** > > A/OA ALTERNATION > 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them only with -a-. *** This is OK. *** > 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . *** This is OK. *** > > for KK > 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. *** This is OK. *** > > AND > 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including those in doubt. *** I do not like a system where you need to know the history of a word to spell it correctly. I would prefer everywhere. *** > 2. to be respelt . *** This is OK. *** > > APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS > 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. *** I would remove this one too. *** > 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, e.g. from . *** This is OK. *** > 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from . *** This is OK. *** > 4. Do not use after (KK ). *** This is OK. *** > 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. *** I would keep the ending but make it optionally silent. *** > > > 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF ). *** This is OK. *** > 2. Allow as alternative spellings. *** This is OK. *** > 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and (currently in SWF/L). *** This is OK. *** > No change to , , . *** This is OK. *** > > GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) > 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . *** This is OK. *** > > GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES > 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . *** I do not agree with this! *** > > WORTIWEDH, ETC. > 1. and to be single words, without apostrophes. *** This is OK. *** > > 1ST PERSON SINGULAR > 1 RC variant , , no longer required.*** This is OK for but should be retained. *** > > > Craig > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Fri Mar 21 15:19:30 2014 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 16:19:30 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Desky Kernowek Diwedhes, Descans 25 Message-ID: <20B9B23E-3E5F-438D-81C6-AC47795BAF4B@ryan-prohaska.com> Lowena dh whei oll! Otta dhewh descans nowedh a'm cors audio vy. Whei a ell gosowes orto war SoundCloud bo y dhownlodya. Gwary teg 'gas bo ganjo! Dan https://soundcloud.com/danny-prohaska/dan-deskykernowek-25 From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Tue Mar 25 10:17:32 2014 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 11:17:32 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> Message-ID: <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> Here some comments: On Mar 25, 2014, at 9:34 AM, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > Craig posted this on spellyans yesterday. What do you think? > > DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. > 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. > 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. This change is not problematic and indeed helpful to some. The change of ?del? 'that' to ?dell? introduces an inconsistency in that words that carry little stress in the phrase and contain a short vowel are otherwise inconsistently spelt, such as prepositions ?war? 'on', ?rag? 'for' (also ?dherag?, ?arag? etc.), ?yn, en? 'in', ?heb? 'without' which in turn we would expect to be spelt ?**warr, **ragg, **ynn, **hebb? etc. > > SHORT and > 1. Change to in , in line with , , , , > The inability of the Review Board to tackle the most problematic phonological issue of the SWF shows its inability to understand the problem. This is an issue that needs to be sorted out and the Review Board has apparently failed to do this. Even KK is better in this respect! > and > 1. everywhere except word-initially. This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [?b???an]: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: KK.byghan.mp3 Type: audio/mpeg Size: 21786 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- > > PARTICLE in SWF/L > 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. Fine by me. > > PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT > 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. Fine. > > > 1. To be respelt (M), or . Good. > > HYPHENS > 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . Why ?ebost? for ?e-bost?. I don't like it. > 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. , , etc. Completely unnecessary. It's like putting a hyphen between a noun and an adjective. Would you want to write ?den-bras?, ?kath-gwynn?? > 3. to replace . Correct. > 4. to replace . Yes, better. > (but personal use to remain optional). > > VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. > 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. Changes the phonological basic rules of the SWF that makes a short vowel the default pronunciation before an unvoiced stop? bad. > 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. Of course multiple plural forms should be allowed. Not only because traditional Cornish lexemes show a variety of plural forms, but also the split in the Cornish Revival since the 1980s the various language groups have put together reference material with varying plural forms. > > DHYWORTH/DYWORTH > 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and in RLC variants. Good. > > A/OA ALTERNATION > 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them only with -a-. Fine by me. > 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . Fine by me. > > for KK > 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. And the irregular ?skoodhya, scoodhya?? Also ?skodhya, scodhya?? > > AND > 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including those in doubt. Very bad to continue this silliness. Thank you Pol for this one. The sensible and consistent solution would have been to use ?kk? in the K-graph variant, and ?ck? in the traditional graph variant. > 2. to be respelt . Fine, tunes in with ?akontya, acontya?, though in the SWF it should be ?okupia, ocupia?, with four syllables **okupya, ocupya suggests only three syllables. > > APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS > 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. > 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, e.g. from . Good. > 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from . Good. > 4. Do not use after (KK ). How are we to know that ?kal? of all words ought to be pronounced with a short vowel. How about ?kalh, calh? or ?kall, call?? > 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. Fine by me. > > > 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF ). Better. > 2. Allow as alternative spellings. Fine, though ?teudha? would yield the same pronunciation as ?tedha? for RLC speakers. > 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and (currently in SWF/L). > No change to , , . This introduces a systematic irregularity. Writing ?budhi, budhy? and ?bruji, brujy? would yield the same pronunciation as ?bidhi, bidhy? and ?briji, brijy? for RLC speakers. > > GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) > 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . Fine by me. > > GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES > 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . Understandable in the case of ?ggh? if ?gh? is written for former intervocallic ?h?. Bad idea, but consistent at least. There is no proof for the separate phonemic status of ?cch? and ?ssh? and this should be discarded. > > WORTIWEDH, ETC. > 1. and to be single words, without apostrophes. Fine by me. > > 1ST PERSON SINGULAR > 1 RC variant , , no longer required. Fine by me. But what about ?ty, chy, jy? 'thou, thee'? Dan > > > Craig From njawilliams at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 10:35:15 2014 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 10:35:15 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> Message-ID: <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> There is no justification for byghan anyway, since byghan is unattested in the texts. It occurs in PNN but toponymy is likely to maintain archaic forms. In PA beghan occurs twice. In other texts the commonest form is byan, byen. Tregear writes bean, Lhuyd b?an. The use of gh between syllables in UC was suggested by forms in PA, which was Nance's foundation text. PA writes arghans 'silver', vghelder, peghes, yrghys, nagha, fleghys, etc. On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:17, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [?b???an]: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From craig at agantavas.org Tue Mar 25 10:53:30 2014 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 10:53:30 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> Message-ID: <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> The short form does exist, though but seems largely ignored by the revival. It occurs in several place-names. One wonders what will happen in the SWF if current becomes . What about the variant ? What happens to that? (I remain baffled why, of those two forms, one contains and the other , when the vowel is exactly the same length in both, and both should, under SWF rules, contain ). Craig On 2014 Mer 25, at 10:35, Nicholas Williams wrote: > There is no justification for byghan anyway, since byghan is unattested in the texts. It occurs in PNN but toponymy is likely to maintain archaic forms. In PA beghan occurs twice. In other texts the commonest form is byan, byen. Tregear writes bean, Lhuyd b?an. The use of gh between syllables in UC was suggested by forms in PA, which was Nance's foundation text. PA writes arghans 'silver', vghelder, peghes, yrghys, nagha, fleghys, etc. > > On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:17, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > >> This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [?b???an]: > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From janicelobb at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 11:00:11 2014 From: janicelobb at gmail.com (Janice Lobb) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 11:00:11 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> Message-ID: Andrew, you say that traditional graphs are effectively dead, but not so as long as those of us that like them keep on using them! Jan On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:31 AM, A. J. Trim wrote: > Craig, > > Thanks for that. > > For what it is worth, I have added my comments to your message. > > > Regards, > > Andrew J. Trim > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Craig Weatherhill > Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 9:53 PM > To: spellyans at kernowek.net > Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. > > I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've singled > out those in which a change was decided upon. **** So there is no change > to the / distribution, and no change to the ambiguous problem ****The below is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional > graphs remain unaltered. **** Effectively dead **** > > DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. > 1. Introduce and in roots. **** If diacritical marks are not > being used to indicate vowel length, this is the only other viable way to > mark length. **** Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final > syllables where that changes the root. **** This makes Cornish easier to > learn but it results in many double consonants that were not in the > traditional language. **** > 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' > or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, > musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, > torgentrell, yeynell. **** I do not agree with this! **** > > SHORT and > 1. Change to in , in line with , , , > , **** This is OK. **** > > and > 1. everywhere except word-initially.**** This is OK but I prefer > everywhere except word-finally. **** > > PARTICLE in SWF/L > 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. **** This is OK. > **** > > PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT > 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe.**** This > would be confusing. means "was" so the apostrophe is needed. **** > > > 1. To be respelt (M), or . **** This makes sense but I > would prefer all such words to end -th (as in the traditional language) > rather than -dh. **** > > HYPHENS > 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. > . **** This may cause confusion. **** > 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. > , , etc. **** This is OK. **** > 3. to replace . **** This is OK. > **** > 4. to replace . **** This is OK. **** > (but personal use to remain optional). > > VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. > 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. **** If > diacritical marks are not being used to indicate vowel length, this is the > only other viable way to mark length. However, I do not like a system where > you need to know the history of a word to spell it correctly. It is easier > to just learn which words have unexpectedly-long vowels. **** > 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. **** > This is OK. **** > > DHYWORTH/DYWORTH > 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and > in RLC variants. **** This is OK. **** > > A/OA ALTERNATION > 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them > only with -a-. **** This is OK. **** > 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . **** > This is OK. **** > > for KK > 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. **** This is OK. > **** > > AND > 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including > those in doubt. **** I do not like a system where you need to know the > history of a word to spell it correctly. I would prefer everywhere. > **** > 2. to be respelt . **** This is OK. **** > > APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS > 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. **** I would remove this one too. > **** > 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, e.g. > from . **** This is OK. **** > 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from > . **** This is OK. **** > 4. Do not use after (KK ). **** This is OK. **** > 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To > be left to the discretion of individual writers. **** I would keep the > ending but make it optionally silent. **** > > > 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF > ). **** This is OK. **** > 2. Allow as alternative spellings. **** This is OK. > **** > 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and (currently > in SWF/L). **** This is OK. **** > No change to , , . **** This is OK. **** > > GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) > 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . **** This > is OK. **** > > GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES > 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . **** I do > not agree with this! **** > > WORTIWEDH, ETC. > 1. and to be single words, > without apostrophes. **** This is OK. **** > > 1ST PERSON SINGULAR > 1 RC variant , , no longer required.**** This is OK for but > should be retained. **** > > > Craig > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Tue Mar 25 11:09:25 2014 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 12:09:25 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> Message-ID: <7808D506-68E7-41BF-AAF5-77E13DE7BB8D@ryan-prohaska.com> Craig, According to current SWF rules the vowel in ?byhan? is short [?b?h?n] and slightly lower and not quite as front, while in ?bian? it's long [?bi??n], high and front. Dan On Mar 25, 2014, at 11:53 AM, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > The short form does exist, though but seems largely ignored by the revival. It occurs in several place-names. > One wonders what will happen in the SWF if current becomes . What about the variant ? What happens to that? > (I remain baffled why, of those two forms, one contains and the other , when the vowel is exactly the same length in both, and both should, under SWF rules, contain ). > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 25, at 10:35, Nicholas Williams wrote: > >> There is no justification for byghan anyway, since byghan is unattested in the texts. It occurs in PNN but toponymy is likely to maintain archaic forms. In PA beghan occurs twice. In other texts the commonest form is byan, byen. Tregear writes bean, Lhuyd b?an. The use of gh between syllables in UC was suggested by forms in PA, which was Nance's foundation text. PA writes arghans 'silver', vghelder, peghes, yrghys, nagha, fleghys, etc. >> >> On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:17, Daniel Prohaska wrote: >> >>> This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [?b???an]: >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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: From ajtrim at msn.com Tue Mar 25 13:17:46 2014 From: ajtrim at msn.com (A. J. Trim) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 13:17:46 -0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> Message-ID: Jan, I prefer to use traditional graphs. My own orthography uses traditional graphs. However, they don?t have real official status. Children won?t be taught them, you won?t see them on signage or in official documents, and official funding will be harder. Visitors to Cornwall will not see them. It is only when you look harder at what is being published and taught to adults that you will find them. Many will dismiss them as being irrelevant quaint old way but most will not even know they exist. Regards, Andrew J. Trim From: Janice Lobb Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 11:00 AM To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. Andrew, you say that traditional graphs are effectively dead, but not so as long as those of us that like them keep on using them! Jan On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:31 AM, A. J. Trim wrote: Craig, Thanks for that. For what it is worth, I have added my comments to your message. Regards, Andrew J. Trim -----Original Message----- From: Craig Weatherhill Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 9:53 PM To: spellyans at kernowek.net Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've singled out those in which a change was decided upon. *** So there is no change to the / distribution, and no change to the ambiguous problem *** The below is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain unaltered. *** Effectively dead *** DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. 1. Introduce and in roots. *** If diacritical marks are not being used to indicate vowel length, this is the only other viable way to mark length. *** Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. *** This makes Cornish easier to learn but it results in many double consonants that were not in the traditional language. *** 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. *** I do not agree with this! *** SHORT and 1. Change to in , in line with , , , , *** This is OK. *** and 1. everywhere except word-initially.*** This is OK but I prefer everywhere except word-finally. *** PARTICLE in SWF/L 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. *** This is OK. *** PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe.*** This would be confusing. means ?was? so the apostrophe is needed. *** 1. To be respelt (M), or . *** This makes sense but I would prefer all such words to end -th (as in the traditional language) rather than -dh. *** HYPHENS 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . *** This may cause confusion. *** 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. , , etc. *** This is OK. *** 3. to replace . *** This is OK. *** 4. to replace . *** This is OK. *** (but personal use to remain optional). VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. *** If diacritical marks are not being used to indicate vowel length, this is the only other viable way to mark length. However, I do not like a system where you need to know the history of a word to spell it correctly. It is easier to just learn which words have unexpectedly-long vowels. *** 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. *** This is OK. *** DHYWORTH/DYWORTH 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and in RLC variants. *** This is OK. *** A/OA ALTERNATION 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them only with -a-. *** This is OK. *** 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . *** This is OK. *** for KK 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. *** This is OK. *** AND 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including those in doubt. *** I do not like a system where you need to know the history of a word to spell it correctly. I would prefer everywhere. *** 2. to be respelt . *** This is OK. *** APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. *** I would remove this one too. *** 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, e.g. from . *** This is OK. *** 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from . *** This is OK. *** 4. Do not use after (KK ). *** This is OK. *** 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. *** I would keep the ending but make it optionally silent. *** 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF ). *** This is OK. *** 2. Allow as alternative spellings. *** This is OK. *** 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and (currently in SWF/L). *** This is OK. *** No change to , , . *** This is OK. *** GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . *** This is OK. *** GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . *** I do not agree with this! *** WORTIWEDH, ETC. 1. and to be single words, without apostrophes. *** This is OK. *** 1ST PERSON SINGULAR 1 RC variant , , no longer required.*** This is OK for but should be retained. *** Craig _______________________________________________ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.mills at email.com Tue Mar 25 13:47:23 2014 From: j.mills at email.com (Jon Mills) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 09:47:23 -0400 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. Message-ID: <20140325134723.120450@gmx.com> It would seem to me, then, that those who prefer traditional graphs have 2 options: 1. accept the demise of traditional graphs; or 2. protest i. by complaining to all relevant authorities, ii. by taking direct action. Any other suggestions? Jon ----- Original Message ----- From: A. J. Trim Sent: 03/25/14 01:17 PM To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. Jan, I prefer to use traditional graphs. My own orthography uses traditional graphs. However, they don?t have real official status. Children won?t be taught them, you won?t see them on signage or in official documents, and official funding will be harder. Visitors to Cornwall will not see them. It is only when you look harder at what is being published and taught to adults that you will find them. Many will dismiss them as being irrelevant quaint old way but most will not even know they exist. Regards, Andrew J. Trim *From:* janicelobb at gmail.com *Sent:* Tuesday, March 25, 2014 11:00 AM *To:* spellyans at kernowek.net *Subject:* Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. Andrew, you say that traditional graphs are effectively dead, but not so as long as those of us that like them keep on using them! Jan On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:31 AM, A. J. Trim < ajtrim at msn.com > wrote: Craig, Thanks for that. For what it is worth, I have added my comments to your message. Regards, Andrew J. Trim -----Original Message----- From: Craig Weatherhill Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 9:53 PM To: spellyans at kernowek.net Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've singled out those in which a change was decided upon. *** So there is no change to the / distribution, and no change to the ambiguous problem *** The below is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain unaltered. *** Effectively dead *** DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. 1. Introduce and in roots. /*** If diacritical marks are not being used to indicate vowel length, this is the only other viable way to mark length. ***/ Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. /*** This makes Cornish easier to learn but it results in many double consonants that were not in the traditional language. ***/ 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. *** I do not agree with this! *** SHORT and 1. Change to in , in line with , , , , /*** This is OK. ***/ and 1. everywhere except word-initially. /*** This is OK but I prefer everywhere except word-finally. ***/ PARTICLE in SWF/L 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. /*** This is OK. ***/ PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. /*** This would be confusing. means ?was? so the apostrophe is needed. ***/ 1. To be respelt (M), or . /*** This makes sense but I would prefer all such words to end -th (as in the traditional language) rather than -dh. ***/ HYPHENS 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . /*** This may cause confusion. ***/ 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. , , etc. /*** This is OK. ***/ 3. to replace . /*** This is OK. ***/ 4. to replace . /*** This is OK. ***/ (but personal use to remain optional). VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. /*** If diacritical marks are not being used to indicate vowel length, this is the only other viable way to mark length. However, I do not like a system where you need to know the history of a word to spell it correctly. It is easier to just learn which words have unexpectedly-long vowels. ***/ 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. /*** This is OK. ***/ DHYWORTH/DYWORTH 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and in RLC variants. /*** This is OK. ***/ A/OA ALTERNATION 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them only with -a-. /*** This is OK. ***/ 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . /*** This is OK. ***/ for KK 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. /*** This is OK. ***/ AND 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including those in doubt. /*** I do not like a system where you need to know the history of a word to spell it correctly. I would prefer everywhere. ***/ 2. to be respelt . /*** This is OK. ***/ APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. /*** I would remove this one too. ***/ 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, e.g. from . /*** This is OK. ***/ 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from . /*** This is OK. ***/ 4. Do not use after (KK ). /*** This is OK. ***/ 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. /*** I would keep the ending but make it optionally silent. ***/ 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF ). /*** This is OK. ***/ 2. Allow as alternative spellings. /*** This is OK. ***/ 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and (currently in SWF/L). /*** This is OK. ***/ No change to , , . /*** This is OK. ***/ GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . /*** This is OK. ***/ GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . /*** I do not agree with this! ***/ WORTIWEDH, ETC. 1. and to be single words, without apostrophes. /*** This is OK. ***/ 1ST PERSON SINGULAR 1 RC variant , , no longer required. /*** This is OK for but should be retained. ***/ Craig _______________________________________________ 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 ----------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____________________________________ Dr. Jon Mills, University of Kent http://kent.academia.edu/JonMills -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ray at spyrys.org Tue Mar 25 14:37:30 2014 From: ray at spyrys.org (Ray Chubb) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 14:37:30 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> Message-ID: <650EB4CB-D0FD-411B-8F14-6657A054D92C@spyrys.org> The official Agan Tavas position as adopted at the AGM is that, apart from changes that Late Cornish users find desirable and the issue of diacritical marks, the SWF should be left as it is. This decision is on the basis that the changes proposed are very few and tend to make the SWF less authentic than it already is. It was suggested at our committee meeting today that another 5 years should elapse before changes are made. Hopefully in 5 years time people will be able to look at it in a rational and scholarly way and leave behind any baggage that they are carrying from the past. On 24 Mer 2014, at 21:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've > singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below is > given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs > remain unaltered. > > DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. > 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single > letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. > 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies > 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, > karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, > tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. > > SHORT and > 1. Change to in , in line with , , , > , > > and > 1. everywhere except word-initially. > > PARTICLE in SWF/L > 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. > > PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT > 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. > > > 1. To be respelt (M), or . > > HYPHENS > 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, > e.g. . > 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', > e.g. , , etc. > 3. to replace . > 4. to replace . > (but personal use to remain optional). > > VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. > 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. > 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. > > DHYWORTH/DYWORTH > 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and > in RLC variants. > > A/OA ALTERNATION > 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling > them only with -a-. > 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining > . > > for KK > 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. > > AND > 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, > including those in doubt. > 2. to be respelt . > > APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS > 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. > 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been > shed, e.g. from . > 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and > from . > 4. Do not use after (KK ). > 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', > warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. > > > 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF > ). > 2. Allow as alternative spellings. > 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and > (currently in SWF/L). > No change to , , . > > GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) > 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . > > GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES > 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . > > WORTIWEDH, ETC. > 1. and to be single > words, without apostrophes. > > 1ST PERSON SINGULAR > 1 RC variant , , no longer required. > > > Craig > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net Ray Chubb Portreth Kernow From christian.semmens at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 10:41:58 2014 From: christian.semmens at gmail.com (Christian Semmens) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 10:41:58 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <650EB4CB-D0FD-411B-8F14-6657A054D92C@spyrys.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <650EB4CB-D0FD-411B-8F14-6657A054D92C@spyrys.org> Message-ID: I not sure a hands off policy will work. Really I think Jon has hit the nail on the head. It is time to rock the boat. A simple rejection of the SWF in its proposed form, by Agan Tavas, would suffice to put the cat amongst the pigeons. You wouldn't have to say never, just to say that the SWF is an unacceptable orthography because of x, y and z. The SWF only has relevance if it is a consensus orthography. Unfortunately without parity for traditional graphs and the move towards consolidation of the KK aspects, it fails to be of any utility for those of us who would wish to use a traditional orthography. If it is allowed to continue without immediate and explicit challenge than the only outcome in the medium term (the next twenty years) is Jon's option 1. Traditional orthographies will be a splintered hobbyist way of spelling Cornish and the mainstream will use the KK form. We will have failed utterly. Waiting for people to see the light will not work. What is academically acceptable is irrelevant in this scenario. It is the 'boots on the ground' that count If, as I suspect, very few others here *want* to use it in its current form, then that needs to be flagged up. I simply won't use it and I know there are at lest a few more people here that feel that way too. We need a larger group to represent our position and to fight for a traditional orthography. Otherwise we are easily dismissed individually as malcontents. Perhaps you could poll your members and see what their feelings are? That would be interesting. It may be that they are in favour of capitulation, in which case I won't stress over it any more and will visit the grave of traditional Cornish every time I come home whilst trying not to look at the hideous caricature of Cornish daubed on the road signs. Christian On 25 March 2014 14:37, Ray Chubb wrote: > The official Agan Tavas position as adopted at the AGM is that, apart from > changes that Late Cornish users find desirable and the issue of diacritical > marks, the SWF should be left as it is. > > This decision is on the basis that the changes proposed are very few and > tend to make the SWF less authentic than it already is. > > It was suggested at our committee meeting today that another 5 years > should elapse before changes are made. Hopefully in 5 years time people > will be able to look at it in a rational and scholarly way and leave behind > any baggage that they are carrying from the past. > > > On 24 Mer 2014, at 21:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > > I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've >> singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below is given >> in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain >> unaltered. >> >> DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. >> 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single letter in >> unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. >> 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' >> or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, >> musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, >> torgentrell, yeynell. >> >> SHORT and >> 1. Change to in , in line with , , , >> , >> >> and >> 1. everywhere except word-initially. >> >> PARTICLE in SWF/L >> 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. >> >> PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT >> 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. >> >> >> 1. To be respelt (M), or . >> >> HYPHENS >> 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. >> . >> 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. >> , , etc. >> 3. to replace . >> 4. to replace . >> (but personal use to remain optional). >> >> VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. >> 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. >> 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. >> >> DHYWORTH/DYWORTH >> 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and >> in RLC variants. >> >> A/OA ALTERNATION >> 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them >> only with -a-. >> 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . >> >> for KK >> 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. >> >> AND >> 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including >> those in doubt. >> 2. to be respelt . >> >> APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS >> 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. >> 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, >> e.g. from . >> 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from >> . >> 4. Do not use after (KK ). >> 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To >> be left to the discretion of individual writers. >> >> >> 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF >> ). >> 2. Allow as alternative spellings. >> 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and >> (currently in SWF/L). >> No change to , , . >> >> GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) >> 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . >> >> GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES >> 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . >> >> WORTIWEDH, ETC. >> 1. and to be single words, >> without apostrophes. >> >> 1ST PERSON SINGULAR >> 1 RC variant , , no longer required. >> >> >> Craig >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Spellyans mailing list >> Spellyans at kernowek.net >> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >> > > Ray Chubb > > Portreth > Kernow > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From craig at agantavas.org Wed Mar 26 10:59:53 2014 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 10:59:53 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <650EB4CB-D0FD-411B-8F14-6657A054D92C@spyrys.org> Message-ID: As I understand it, all parties on the Partnership voted to approve the Review findings, except Agan Tavas who reportedly abstained. So they do at least know there's some dissatisfaction. Craig On 2014 Mer 26, at 10:41, Christian Semmens wrote: > I not sure a hands off policy will work. Really I think Jon has hit the nail on the head. It is time to rock the boat. A simple rejection of the SWF in its proposed form, by Agan Tavas, would suffice to put the cat amongst the pigeons. You wouldn't have to say never, just to say that the SWF is an unacceptable orthography because of x, y and z. The SWF only has relevance if it is a consensus orthography. Unfortunately without parity for traditional graphs and the move towards consolidation of the KK aspects, it fails to be of any utility for those of us who would wish to use a traditional orthography. > > If it is allowed to continue without immediate and explicit challenge than the only outcome in the medium term (the next twenty years) is Jon's option 1. Traditional orthographies will be a splintered hobbyist way of spelling Cornish and the mainstream will use the KK form. We will have failed utterly. Waiting for people to see the light will not work. What is academically acceptable is irrelevant in this scenario. It is the 'boots on the ground' that count > > If, as I suspect, very few others here *want* to use it in its current form, then that needs to be flagged up. I simply won't use it and I know there are at lest a few more people here that feel that way too. We need a larger group to represent our position and to fight for a traditional orthography. Otherwise we are easily dismissed individually as malcontents. Perhaps you could poll your members and see what their feelings are? That would be interesting. > > It may be that they are in favour of capitulation, in which case I won't stress over it any more and will visit the grave of traditional Cornish every time I come home whilst trying not to look at the hideous caricature of Cornish daubed on the road signs. > > Christian > > > On 25 March 2014 14:37, Ray Chubb wrote: > The official Agan Tavas position as adopted at the AGM is that, apart from changes that Late Cornish users find desirable and the issue of diacritical marks, the SWF should be left as it is. > > This decision is on the basis that the changes proposed are very few and tend to make the SWF less authentic than it already is. > > It was suggested at our committee meeting today that another 5 years should elapse before changes are made. Hopefully in 5 years time people will be able to look at it in a rational and scholarly way and leave behind any baggage that they are carrying from the past. > > > On 24 Mer 2014, at 21:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > > I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain unaltered. > > DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. > 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. > 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. > > SHORT and > 1. Change to in , in line with , , , , > > and > 1. everywhere except word-initially. > > PARTICLE in SWF/L > 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. > > PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT > 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. > > > 1. To be respelt (M), or . > > HYPHENS > 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . > 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. , , etc. > 3. to replace . > 4. to replace . > (but personal use to remain optional). > > VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. > 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. > 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. > > DHYWORTH/DYWORTH > 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and in RLC variants. > > A/OA ALTERNATION > 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them only with -a-. > 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . > > for KK > 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. > > AND > 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including those in doubt. > 2. to be respelt . > > APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS > 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. > 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, e.g. from . > 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from . > 4. Do not use after (KK ). > 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. > > > 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF ). > 2. Allow as alternative spellings. > 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and (currently in SWF/L). > No change to , , . > > GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) > 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . > > GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES > 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . > > WORTIWEDH, ETC. > 1. and to be single words, without apostrophes. > > 1ST PERSON SINGULAR > 1 RC variant , , no longer required. > > > Craig > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > Ray Chubb > > Portreth > Kernow > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From clive.baker at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 12:01:36 2014 From: clive.baker at gmail.com (Clive Baker) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 12:01:36 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <650EB4CB-D0FD-411B-8F14-6657A054D92C@spyrys.org> Message-ID: Well said Christian...I ,as the recently elected chairman of Agan Tavas, agree with you entirely... Clive Baker On Mar 26, 2014 10:42 AM, "Christian Semmens" wrote: > I not sure a hands off policy will work. Really I think Jon has hit the > nail on the head. It is time to rock the boat. A simple rejection of the > SWF in its proposed form, by Agan Tavas, would suffice to put the cat > amongst the pigeons. You wouldn't have to say never, just to say that the > SWF is an unacceptable orthography because of x, y and z. The SWF only has > relevance if it is a consensus orthography. Unfortunately without parity > for traditional graphs and the move towards consolidation of the KK > aspects, it fails to be of any utility for those of us who would wish to > use a traditional orthography. > > If it is allowed to continue without immediate and explicit challenge than > the only outcome in the medium term (the next twenty years) is Jon's option > 1. Traditional orthographies will be a splintered hobbyist way of spelling > Cornish and the mainstream will use the KK form. We will have failed > utterly. Waiting for people to see the light will not work. What is > academically acceptable is irrelevant in this scenario. It is the 'boots on > the ground' that count > > If, as I suspect, very few others here *want* to use it in its current > form, then that needs to be flagged up. I simply won't use it and I know > there are at lest a few more people here that feel that way too. We need a > larger group to represent our position and to fight for a traditional > orthography. Otherwise we are easily dismissed individually as malcontents. > Perhaps you could poll your members and see what their feelings are? That > would be interesting. > > It may be that they are in favour of capitulation, in which case I won't > stress over it any more and will visit the grave of traditional Cornish > every time I come home whilst trying not to look at the hideous caricature > of Cornish daubed on the road signs. > > Christian > > > On 25 March 2014 14:37, Ray Chubb wrote: > >> The official Agan Tavas position as adopted at the AGM is that, apart >> from changes that Late Cornish users find desirable and the issue of >> diacritical marks, the SWF should be left as it is. >> >> This decision is on the basis that the changes proposed are very few and >> tend to make the SWF less authentic than it already is. >> >> It was suggested at our committee meeting today that another 5 years >> should elapse before changes are made. Hopefully in 5 years time people >> will be able to look at it in a rational and scholarly way and leave behind >> any baggage that they are carrying from the past. >> >> >> On 24 Mer 2014, at 21:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: >> >> I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've >>> singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below is given >>> in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain >>> unaltered. >>> >>> DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. >>> 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single letter in >>> unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. >>> 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies >>> 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, >>> karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, >>> tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. >>> >>> SHORT and >>> 1. Change to in , in line with , , , >>> , >>> >>> and >>> 1. everywhere except word-initially. >>> >>> PARTICLE in SWF/L >>> 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. >>> >>> PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT >>> 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. >>> >>> >>> 1. To be respelt (M), or . >>> >>> HYPHENS >>> 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. >>> . >>> 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', >>> e.g. , , etc. >>> 3. to replace . >>> 4. to replace . >>> (but personal use to remain optional). >>> >>> VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. >>> 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. >>> 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. >>> >>> DHYWORTH/DYWORTH >>> 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and >>> in RLC variants. >>> >>> A/OA ALTERNATION >>> 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling >>> them only with -a-. >>> 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . >>> >>> for KK >>> 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. >>> >>> AND >>> 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, >>> including those in doubt. >>> 2. to be respelt . >>> >>> APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS >>> 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. >>> 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, >>> e.g. from . >>> 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from >>> . >>> 4. Do not use after (KK ). >>> 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To >>> be left to the discretion of individual writers. >>> >>> >>> 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF >>> ). >>> 2. Allow as alternative spellings. >>> 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and >>> (currently in SWF/L). >>> No change to , , . >>> >>> GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) >>> 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . >>> >>> GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES >>> 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . >>> >>> WORTIWEDH, ETC. >>> 1. and to be single >>> words, without apostrophes. >>> >>> 1ST PERSON SINGULAR >>> 1 RC variant , , no longer required. >>> >>> >>> Craig >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Spellyans mailing list >>> Spellyans at kernowek.net >>> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >>> >> >> Ray Chubb >> >> Portreth >> Kernow >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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: From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Wed Mar 26 12:59:03 2014 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 13:59:03 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF Review; Final Report Message-ID: <1F495820-84F8-497B-9455-69D06B0CFD12@ryan-prohaska.com> Here you are? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SWF Review Board - Final Report.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 308680 bytes Desc: not available URL: From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Wed Mar 26 13:07:56 2014 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 14:07:56 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <650EB4CB-D0FD-411B-8F14-6657A054D92C@spyrys.org> Message-ID: <32C73B4E-74EB-42BF-93C9-C257EB8A0110@ryan-prohaska.com> I find that the inability to reach a solution for distinguishing short /?/ (e.g. ?bronn ~ brodn? 'breast, hill'; ?toll? 'hole') from short /?/ (e.g. ?bronn ~ brodn? 'rushes'; ?toll? 'deceit, fraud') to be the biggest phonological shortcoming of the SWF. I've said this since day one of the SWF and had hoped that this problem would be tackled in the Review. It hasn't. This goes against one of the fundamental principles of the SWF, to ensure that there should be a minimum amount of change for the maximum section of the Cornish users. Since all Cornish spelling systems have a way of distinguishing the two (Jenner ?o? : ?u?; UC/R ?o? : ?u?; KK ?o? : ?oe?; KS ?o? : ???) this is an important change for ALL Cornish users. according to reports the issue at had was not understood by a majority of the Review Board, and thus this unfortunate ambiguity remains unchanged in the SWF. Very unfortunate indeed. Dan On Mar 26, 2014, at 1:01 PM, Clive Baker wrote: > Well said Christian...I ,as the recently elected chairman of Agan Tavas, agree with you entirely... > Clive Baker > > On Mar 26, 2014 10:42 AM, "Christian Semmens" wrote: > I not sure a hands off policy will work. Really I think Jon has hit the nail on the head. It is time to rock the boat. A simple rejection of the SWF in its proposed form, by Agan Tavas, would suffice to put the cat amongst the pigeons. You wouldn't have to say never, just to say that the SWF is an unacceptable orthography because of x, y and z. The SWF only has relevance if it is a consensus orthography. Unfortunately without parity for traditional graphs and the move towards consolidation of the KK aspects, it fails to be of any utility for those of us who would wish to use a traditional orthography. > > If it is allowed to continue without immediate and explicit challenge than the only outcome in the medium term (the next twenty years) is Jon's option 1. Traditional orthographies will be a splintered hobbyist way of spelling Cornish and the mainstream will use the KK form. We will have failed utterly. Waiting for people to see the light will not work. What is academically acceptable is irrelevant in this scenario. It is the 'boots on the ground' that count > > If, as I suspect, very few others here *want* to use it in its current form, then that needs to be flagged up. I simply won't use it and I know there are at lest a few more people here that feel that way too. We need a larger group to represent our position and to fight for a traditional orthography. Otherwise we are easily dismissed individually as malcontents. Perhaps you could poll your members and see what their feelings are? That would be interesting. > > It may be that they are in favour of capitulation, in which case I won't stress over it any more and will visit the grave of traditional Cornish every time I come home whilst trying not to look at the hideous caricature of Cornish daubed on the road signs. > > Christian > > > On 25 March 2014 14:37, Ray Chubb wrote: > The official Agan Tavas position as adopted at the AGM is that, apart from changes that Late Cornish users find desirable and the issue of diacritical marks, the SWF should be left as it is. > > This decision is on the basis that the changes proposed are very few and tend to make the SWF less authentic than it already is. > > It was suggested at our committee meeting today that another 5 years should elapse before changes are made. Hopefully in 5 years time people will be able to look at it in a rational and scholarly way and leave behind any baggage that they are carrying from the past. > > > On 24 Mer 2014, at 21:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > > I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain unaltered. > > DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. > 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. > 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. > > SHORT and > 1. Change to in , in line with , , , , > > and > 1. everywhere except word-initially. > > PARTICLE in SWF/L > 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. > > PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT > 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. > > > 1. To be respelt (M), or . > > HYPHENS > 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . > 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. , , etc. > 3. to replace . > 4. to replace . > (but personal use to remain optional). > > VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. > 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. > 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. > > DHYWORTH/DYWORTH > 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and in RLC variants. > > A/OA ALTERNATION > 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them only with -a-. > 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . > > for KK > 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. > > AND > 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including those in doubt. > 2. to be respelt . > > APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS > 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. > 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, e.g. from . > 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from . > 4. Do not use after (KK ). > 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. > > > 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF ). > 2. Allow as alternative spellings. > 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and (currently in SWF/L). > No change to , , . > > GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) > 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . > > GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES > 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . > > WORTIWEDH, ETC. > 1. and to be single words, without apostrophes. > > 1ST PERSON SINGULAR > 1 RC variant , , no longer required. > > > Craig > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > Ray Chubb > > Portreth > Kernow > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clive.baker at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 13:11:05 2014 From: clive.baker at gmail.com (Clive Baker) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 13:11:05 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <650EB4CB-D0FD-411B-8F14-6657A054D92C@spyrys.org> Message-ID: I should add that I was not chairman at the time of the vote, and we did not abstain, rather we dissaproved the changes proposed as we felt they were a backward move...hope that clarifies the matter Clive Baker Well said Christian...I ,as the recently elected chairman of Agan Tavas, agree with you entirely... Clive Baker On Mar 26, 2014 10:42 AM, "Christian Semmens" wrote: > I not sure a hands off policy will work. Really I think Jon has hit the > nail on the head. It is time to rock the boat. A simple rejection of the > SWF in its proposed form, by Agan Tavas, would suffice to put the cat > amongst the pigeons. You wouldn't have to say never, just to say that the > SWF is an unacceptable orthography because of x, y and z. The SWF only has > relevance if it is a consensus orthography. Unfortunately without parity > for traditional graphs and the move towards consolidation of the KK > aspects, it fails to be of any utility for those of us who would wish to > use a traditional orthography. > > If it is allowed to continue without immediate and explicit challenge than > the only outcome in the medium term (the next twenty years) is Jon's option > 1. Traditional orthographies will be a splintered hobbyist way of spelling > Cornish and the mainstream will use the KK form. We will have failed > utterly. Waiting for people to see the light will not work. What is > academically acceptable is irrelevant in this scenario. It is the 'boots on > the ground' that count > > If, as I suspect, very few others here *want* to use it in its current > form, then that needs to be flagged up. I simply won't use it and I know > there are at lest a few more people here that feel that way too. We need a > larger group to represent our position and to fight for a traditional > orthography. Otherwise we are easily dismissed individually as malcontents. > Perhaps you could poll your members and see what their feelings are? That > would be interesting. > > It may be that they are in favour of capitulation, in which case I won't > stress over it any more and will visit the grave of traditional Cornish > every time I come home whilst trying not to look at the hideous caricature > of Cornish daubed on the road signs. > > Christian > > > On 25 March 2014 14:37, Ray Chubb wrote: > >> The official Agan Tavas position as adopted at the AGM is that, apart >> from changes that Late Cornish users find desirable and the issue of >> diacritical marks, the SWF should be left as it is. >> >> This decision is on the basis that the changes proposed are very few and >> tend to make the SWF less authentic than it already is. >> >> It was suggested at our committee meeting today that another 5 years >> should elapse before changes are made. Hopefully in 5 years time people >> will be able to look at it in a rational and scholarly way and leave behind >> any baggage that they are carrying from the past. >> >> >> On 24 Mer 2014, at 21:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: >> >> I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've >>> singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below is given >>> in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain >>> unaltered. >>> >>> DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. >>> 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single letter in >>> unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. >>> 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies >>> 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, >>> karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, >>> tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. >>> >>> SHORT and >>> 1. Change to in , in line with , , , >>> , >>> >>> and >>> 1. everywhere except word-initially. >>> >>> PARTICLE in SWF/L >>> 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. >>> >>> PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT >>> 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. >>> >>> >>> 1. To be respelt (M), or . >>> >>> HYPHENS >>> 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. >>> . >>> 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', >>> e.g. , , etc. >>> 3. to replace . >>> 4. to replace . >>> (but personal use to remain optional). >>> >>> VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. >>> 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. >>> 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. >>> >>> DHYWORTH/DYWORTH >>> 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and >>> in RLC variants. >>> >>> A/OA ALTERNATION >>> 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling >>> them only with -a-. >>> 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . >>> >>> for KK >>> 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. >>> >>> AND >>> 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, >>> including those in doubt. >>> 2. to be respelt . >>> >>> APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS >>> 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. >>> 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, >>> e.g. from . >>> 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from >>> . >>> 4. Do not use after (KK ). >>> 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To >>> be left to the discretion of individual writers. >>> >>> >>> 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF >>> ). >>> 2. Allow as alternative spellings. >>> 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and >>> (currently in SWF/L). >>> No change to , , . >>> >>> GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) >>> 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . >>> >>> GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES >>> 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . >>> >>> WORTIWEDH, ETC. >>> 1. and to be single >>> words, without apostrophes. >>> >>> 1ST PERSON SINGULAR >>> 1 RC variant , , no longer required. >>> >>> >>> Craig >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Spellyans mailing list >>> Spellyans at kernowek.net >>> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >>> >> >> Ray Chubb >> >> Portreth >> Kernow >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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: From j.mills at email.com Wed Mar 26 13:30:49 2014 From: j.mills at email.com (Jon Mills) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 09:30:49 -0400 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. Message-ID: <20140326133049.120460@gmx.com> Perhaps a way forward might be to organise a petition stating that the undersigned find that the Review was inadequate and that they are not satisfied with the SWF in its current form (or somethjing like that). Ol an gwella, Jon ----- Original Message ----- From: Clive Baker Sent: 03/26/14 12:01 PM To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. Well said Christian...I ,as the recently elected chairman of Agan Tavas, agree with you entirely... Clive Baker On Mar 26, 2014 10:42 AM, "Christian Semmens" < christian.semmens at gmail.com > wrote: I not sure a hands off policy will work. Really I think Jon has hit the nail on the head. It is time to rock the boat. A simple rejection of the SWF in its proposed form, by Agan Tavas, would suffice to put the cat amongst the pigeons. You wouldn't have to say never, just to say that the SWF is an unacceptable orthography because of x, y and z. The SWF only has relevance if it is a consensus orthography. Unfortunately without parity for traditional graphs and the move towards consolidation of the KK aspects, it fails to be of any utility for those of us who would wish to use a traditional orthography. If it is allowed to continue without immediate and explicit challenge than the only outcome in the medium term (the next twenty years) is Jon's option 1. Traditional orthographies will be a splintered hobbyist way of spelling Cornish and the mainstream will use the KK form. We will have failed utterly. Waiting for people to see the light will not work. What is academically acceptable is irrelevant in this scenario. It is the 'boots on the ground' that count If, as I suspect, very few others here *want* to use it in its current form, then that needs to be flagged up. I simply won't use it and I know there are at lest a few more people here that feel that way too. We need a larger group to represent our position and to fight for a traditional orthography. Otherwise we are easily dismissed individually as malcontents. Perhaps you could poll your members and see what their feelings are? That would be interesting. It may be that they are in favour of capitulation, in which case I won't stress over it any more and will visit the grave of traditional Cornish every time I come home whilst trying not to look at the hideous caricature of Cornish daubed on the road signs. Christian On 25 March 2014 14:37, Ray Chubb < ray at spyrys.org > wrote:The official Agan Tavas position as adopted at the AGM is that, apart from changes that Late Cornish users find desirable and the issue of diacritical marks, the SWF should be left as it is. This decision is on the basis that the changes proposed are very few and tend to make the SWF less authentic than it already is. It was suggested at our committee meeting today that another 5 years should elapse before changes are made. Hopefully in 5 years time people will be able to look at it in a rational and scholarly way and leave behind any baggage that they are carrying from the past. On 24 Mer 2014, at 21:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain unaltered. DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. SHORT and 1. Change to in , in line with , , , , and 1. everywhere except word-initially. PARTICLE in SWF/L 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. 1. To be respelt (M), or . HYPHENS 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. , , etc. 3. to replace . 4. to replace . (but personal use to remain optional). VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. DHYWORTH/DYWORTH 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and in RLC variants. A/OA ALTERNATION 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them only with -a-. 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . for KK 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. AND 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including those in doubt. 2. to be respelt . APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, e.g. from . 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from . 4. Do not use after (KK ). 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF ). 2. Allow as alternative spellings. 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and (currently in SWF/L). No change to , , . GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . WORTIWEDH, ETC. 1. and to be single words, without apostrophes. 1ST PERSON SINGULAR 1 RC variant , , no longer required. Craig _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net Ray Chubb Portreth Kernow _______________________________________________ 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 _____________________________________ Dr. Jon Mills, University of Kent http://kent.academia.edu/JonMills -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.mills at email.com Wed Mar 26 13:41:40 2014 From: j.mills at email.com (Jon Mills) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 09:41:40 -0400 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. Message-ID: <20140326134140.120450@gmx.com> That this issue and presumably other issues were "not understood by a majority of the Review Board" is of particular concern. It is surely a reasonable expectation that those appointed to the Review Board were done so on the understanding that they have sufficient expertise for the task in hand. Ol an gwella, Jon ----- Original Message ----- From: Daniel Prohaska Sent: 03/26/14 01:07 PM To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. I find that the inability to reach a solution for distinguishing short /?/ (e.g. ?bronn ~ brodn? 'breast, hill'; ?toll? 'hole') from short /?/ (e.g. ?bronn ~ brodn? 'rushes'; ?toll? 'deceit, fraud') to be the biggest phonological shortcoming of the SWF. I've said this since day one of the SWF and had hoped that this problem would be tackled in the Review. It hasn't. This goes against one of the fundamental principles of the SWF, to ensure that there should be a minimum amount of change for the maximum section of the Cornish users. Since all Cornish spelling systems have a way of distinguishing the two (Jenner ?o? : ?u?; UC/R ?o? : ?u?; KK ?o? : ?oe?; KS ?o? : ???) this is an important change for ALL Cornish users. according to reports the issue at had was not understood by a majority of the Review Board, and thus this unfortunate ambiguity remains unchanged in the SWF. Very unfortunate indeed. Dan On Mar 26, 2014, at 1:01 PM, Clive Baker wrote: Well said Christian...I ,as the recently elected chairman of Agan Tavas, agree with you entirely... Clive Baker On Mar 26, 2014 10:42 AM, "Christian Semmens" < christian.semmens at gmail.com > wrote: I not sure a hands off policy will work. Really I think Jon has hit the nail on the head. It is time to rock the boat. A simple rejection of the SWF in its proposed form, by Agan Tavas, would suffice to put the cat amongst the pigeons. You wouldn't have to say never, just to say that the SWF is an unacceptable orthography because of x, y and z. The SWF only has relevance if it is a consensus orthography. Unfortunately without parity for traditional graphs and the move towards consolidation of the KK aspects, it fails to be of any utility for those of us who would wish to use a traditional orthography. If it is allowed to continue without immediate and explicit challenge than the only outcome in the medium term (the next twenty years) is Jon's option 1. Traditional orthographies will be a splintered hobbyist way of spelling Cornish and the mainstream will use the KK form. We will have failed utterly. Waiting for people to see the light will not work. What is academically acceptable is irrelevant in this scenario. It is the 'boots on the ground' that count If, as I suspect, very few others here *want* to use it in its current form, then that needs to be flagged up. I simply won't use it and I know there are at lest a few more people here that feel that way too. We need a larger group to represent our position and to fight for a traditional orthography. Otherwise we are easily dismissed individually as malcontents. Perhaps you could poll your members and see what their feelings are? That would be interesting. It may be that they are in favour of capitulation, in which case I won't stress over it any more and will visit the grave of traditional Cornish every time I come home whilst trying not to look at the hideous caricature of Cornish daubed on the road signs. Christian On 25 March 2014 14:37, Ray Chubb < ray at spyrys.org > wrote:The official Agan Tavas position as adopted at the AGM is that, apart from changes that Late Cornish users find desirable and the issue of diacritical marks, the SWF should be left as it is. This decision is on the basis that the changes proposed are very few and tend to make the SWF less authentic than it already is. It was suggested at our committee meeting today that another 5 years should elapse before changes are made. Hopefully in 5 years time people will be able to look at it in a rational and scholarly way and leave behind any baggage that they are carrying from the past. On 24 Mer 2014, at 21:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain unaltered. DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. SHORT and 1. Change to in , in line with , , , , and 1. everywhere except word-initially. PARTICLE in SWF/L 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. 1. To be respelt (M), or . HYPHENS 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. , , etc. 3. to replace . 4. to replace . (but personal use to remain optional). VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. DHYWORTH/DYWORTH 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and in RLC variants. A/OA ALTERNATION 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them only with -a-. 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . for KK 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. AND 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including those in doubt. 2. to be respelt . APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, e.g. from . 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from . 4. Do not use after (KK ). 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF ). 2. Allow as alternative spellings. 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and (currently in SWF/L). No change to , , . GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . WORTIWEDH, ETC. 1. and to be single words, without apostrophes. 1ST PERSON SINGULAR 1 RC variant , , no longer required. Craig _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net Ray Chubb Portreth Kernow _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____________________________________ Dr. Jon Mills, University of Kent http://kent.academia.edu/JonMills -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From craig at agantavas.org Wed Mar 26 14:43:46 2014 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 14:43:46 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <650EB4CB-D0FD-411B-8F14-6657A054D92C@spyrys.org> Message-ID: <07BA6BD7-8D0F-4EB9-9806-E2B3CB8FB042@agantavas.org> Thanks for that, Clive. I'll check back and see who made the claim that AT had abstained. Craig On 2014 Mer 26, at 13:11, Clive Baker wrote: > I should add that I was not chairman at the time of the vote, and we did not abstain, rather we dissaproved the changes proposed as we felt they were a backward move...hope that clarifies the matter > Clive Baker > > Well said Christian...I ,as the recently elected chairman of Agan Tavas, agree with you entirely... > Clive Baker > > On Mar 26, 2014 10:42 AM, "Christian Semmens" wrote: > I not sure a hands off policy will work. Really I think Jon has hit the nail on the head. It is time to rock the boat. A simple rejection of the SWF in its proposed form, by Agan Tavas, would suffice to put the cat amongst the pigeons. You wouldn't have to say never, just to say that the SWF is an unacceptable orthography because of x, y and z. The SWF only has relevance if it is a consensus orthography. Unfortunately without parity for traditional graphs and the move towards consolidation of the KK aspects, it fails to be of any utility for those of us who would wish to use a traditional orthography. > > If it is allowed to continue without immediate and explicit challenge than the only outcome in the medium term (the next twenty years) is Jon's option 1. Traditional orthographies will be a splintered hobbyist way of spelling Cornish and the mainstream will use the KK form. We will have failed utterly. Waiting for people to see the light will not work. What is academically acceptable is irrelevant in this scenario. It is the 'boots on the ground' that count > > If, as I suspect, very few others here *want* to use it in its current form, then that needs to be flagged up. I simply won't use it and I know there are at lest a few more people here that feel that way too. We need a larger group to represent our position and to fight for a traditional orthography. Otherwise we are easily dismissed individually as malcontents. Perhaps you could poll your members and see what their feelings are? That would be interesting. > > It may be that they are in favour of capitulation, in which case I won't stress over it any more and will visit the grave of traditional Cornish every time I come home whilst trying not to look at the hideous caricature of Cornish daubed on the road signs. > > Christian > > > On 25 March 2014 14:37, Ray Chubb wrote: > The official Agan Tavas position as adopted at the AGM is that, apart from changes that Late Cornish users find desirable and the issue of diacritical marks, the SWF should be left as it is. > > This decision is on the basis that the changes proposed are very few and tend to make the SWF less authentic than it already is. > > It was suggested at our committee meeting today that another 5 years should elapse before changes are made. Hopefully in 5 years time people will be able to look at it in a rational and scholarly way and leave behind any baggage that they are carrying from the past. > > > On 24 Mer 2014, at 21:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > > I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain unaltered. > > DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. > 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. > 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. > > SHORT and > 1. Change to in , in line with , , , , > > and > 1. everywhere except word-initially. > > PARTICLE in SWF/L > 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. > > PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT > 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. > > > 1. To be respelt (M), or . > > HYPHENS > 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . > 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. , , etc. > 3. to replace . > 4. to replace . > (but personal use to remain optional). > > VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. > 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. > 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. > > DHYWORTH/DYWORTH > 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and in RLC variants. > > A/OA ALTERNATION > 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them only with -a-. > 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . > > for KK > 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. > > AND > 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including those in doubt. > 2. to be respelt . > > APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS > 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. > 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, e.g. from . > 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from . > 4. Do not use after (KK ). > 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. > > > 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF ). > 2. Allow as alternative spellings. > 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and (currently in SWF/L). > No change to , , . > > GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) > 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . > > GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES > 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . > > WORTIWEDH, ETC. > 1. and to be single words, without apostrophes. > > 1ST PERSON SINGULAR > 1 RC variant , , no longer required. > > > Craig > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > Ray Chubb > > Portreth > Kernow > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From craig at agantavas.org Wed Mar 26 14:45:32 2014 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 14:45:32 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <20140326134140.120450@gmx.com> References: <20140326134140.120450@gmx.com> Message-ID: That very thing concerned me from the outset. Just like Treyarnon, linguists were pointedly frozen out. Nicholas Williams AND Ken George should have been on both panels. Craig On 2014 Mer 26, at 13:41, Jon Mills wrote: > That this issue and presumably other issues were "not understood by a majority of the Review Board" is of particular concern. It is surely a reasonable expectation that those appointed to the Review Board were done so on the understanding that they have sufficient expertise for the task in hand. > Ol an gwella, > Jon > >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Daniel Prohaska >> Sent: 03/26/14 01:07 PM >> To: Standard Cornish discussion list >> Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. >> >> I find that the inability to reach a solution for distinguishing short /?/ (e.g. ?bronn ~ brodn? 'breast, hill'; ?toll? 'hole') from short /?/ (e.g. ?bronn ~ brodn? 'rushes'; ?toll? 'deceit, fraud') to be the biggest phonological shortcoming of the SWF. I've said this since day one of the SWF and had hoped that this problem would be tackled in the Review. It hasn't. This goes against one of the fundamental principles of the SWF, to ensure that there should be a minimum amount of change for the maximum section of the Cornish users. Since all Cornish spelling systems have a way of distinguishing the two (Jenner ?o? : ?u?; UC/R ?o? : ?u?; KK ?o? : ?oe?; KS ?o? : ???) this is an important change for ALL Cornish users. according to reports the issue at had was not understood by a majority of the Review Board, and thus this unfortunate ambiguity remains unchanged in the SWF. Very unfortunate indeed. >> >> Dan >> >> >> On Mar 26, 2014, at 1:01 PM, Clive Baker wrote: >> >>> >>> Well said Christian...I ,as the recently elected chairman of Agan Tavas, agree with you entirely... >>> Clive Baker >>> On Mar 26, 2014 10:42 AM, "Christian Semmens" wrote: >>> I not sure a hands off policy will work. Really I think Jon has hit the nail on the head. It is time to rock the boat. A simple rejection of the SWF in its proposed form, by Agan Tavas, would suffice to put the cat amongst the pigeons. You wouldn't have to say never, just to say that the SWF is an unacceptable orthography because of x, y and z. The SWF only has relevance if it is a consensus orthography. Unfortunately without parity for traditional graphs and the move towards consolidation of the KK aspects, it fails to be of any utility for those of us who would wish to use a traditional orthography. >>> >>> If it is allowed to continue without immediate and explicit challenge than the only outcome in the medium term (the next twenty years) is Jon's option 1. Traditional orthographies will be a splintered hobbyist way of spelling Cornish and the mainstream will use the KK form. We will have failed utterly. Waiting for people to see the light will not work. What is academically acceptable is irrelevant in this scenario. It is the 'boots on the ground' that count >>> >>> If, as I suspect, very few others here *want* to use it in its current form, then that needs to be flagged up. I simply won't use it and I know there are at lest a few more people here that feel that way too. We need a larger group to represent our position and to fight for a traditional orthography. Otherwise we are easily dismissed individually as malcontents. Perhaps you could poll your members and see what their feelings are? That would be interesting. >>> >>> It may be that they are in favour of capitulation, in which case I won't stress over it any more and will visit the grave of traditional Cornish every time I come home whilst trying not to look at the hideous caricature of Cornish daubed on the road signs. >>> >>> Christian >>> >>> On 25 March 2014 14:37, Ray Chubb wrote: >>> The official Agan Tavas position as adopted at the AGM is that, apart from changes that Late Cornish users find desirable and the issue of diacritical marks, the SWF should be left as it is. >>> >>> This decision is on the basis that the changes proposed are very few and tend to make the SWF less authentic than it already is. >>> >>> It was suggested at our committee meeting today that another 5 years should elapse before changes are made. Hopefully in 5 years time people will be able to look at it in a rational and scholarly way and leave behind any baggage that they are carrying from the past. >>> >>> >>> On 24 Mer 2014, at 21:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: >>> >>> I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain unaltered. >>> >>> DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. >>> 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. >>> 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. >>> >>> SHORT and >>> 1. Change to in , in line with , , , , >>> >>> and >>> 1. everywhere except word-initially. >>> >>> PARTICLE in SWF/L >>> 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. >>> >>> PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT >>> 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. >>> >>> >>> 1. To be respelt (M), or . >>> >>> HYPHENS >>> 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . >>> 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. , , etc. >>> 3. to replace . >>> 4. to replace . >>> (but personal use to remain optional). >>> >>> VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. >>> 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. >>> 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. >>> >>> DHYWORTH/DYWORTH >>> 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and in RLC variants. >>> >>> A/OA ALTERNATION >>> 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them only with -a-. >>> 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . >>> >>> for KK >>> 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. >>> >>> AND >>> 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including those in doubt. >>> 2. to be respelt . >>> >>> APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS >>> 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. >>> 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, e.g. from . >>> 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from . >>> 4. Do not use after (KK ). >>> 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. >>> >>> >>> 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF ). >>> 2. Allow as alternative spellings. >>> 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and (currently in SWF/L). >>> No change to , , . >>> >>> GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) >>> 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . >>> >>> GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES >>> 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . >>> >>> WORTIWEDH, ETC. >>> 1. and to be single words, without apostrophes. >>> >>> 1ST PERSON SINGULAR >>> 1 RC variant , , no longer required. >>> >>> >>> Craig >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Spellyans mailing list >>> Spellyans at kernowek.net >>> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >>> Ray Chubb >>> >>> Portreth >>> Kernow >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Spellyans mailing list >>> Spellyans at kernowek.net >>> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > > > > _____________________________________ > Dr. Jon Mills, > University of Kent > http://kent.academia.edu/JonMills _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk Wed Mar 26 16:01:03 2014 From: eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk (Hedley Climo) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 16:01:03 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] Fwd: SWF Review: forms < G an O References: Message-ID: <206C889E-AEA8-44D6-BFDD-C59C14192B07@yahoo.co.uk> A Gowetha whek, For what it might be worth--and to save me some re-typing!--here's an attached copy of the SWF Review Form that I submitted back in January 2013. Among its lengthy blethers, two of the main points I made to the Review Panel may be worth drawing attention to: 1) the SWF has not healed the schisms within the Revival; the CLP and MAGA had the chance to do so--they blew it. Instead, all it has done is to worsen the schisms, and to add yet more orthographies to the pre-existing glut of them. On the 'Trad' side of the community, we've been treated to deliberate disinformation and broken assurances. 2) Gwask an Orlewen has an extensive back-list of Cornish publications aimed at learners and younger people. These are mostly in UC and UCR, with some KS, RLC and SWF-Trad. None are in SWF-'Main' or 'Kernewek' Kemmyn, and none ever will be. It's worth noting that: -- with SWF-Trad marginalised, there has seemed to be no point to GanO going to the trouble and expense of producing further titles in that orthography, when MAGA and the CLP have destroyed any demand there might have been for them in Education. -- GanO's publications will never be republished in non-historical orthographies like 'Kernewek' Kemmyn or SWF-'Main', neither during my lifetime nor during the 70 years of posthumous Intellectual Property rights after my (hopefully distant) demise. -- if SWF-Trad were to be given equal status in Education in Cornwall, my entire back-list of publications for learners/youngsters would be made available for transcription in SWF-Trad, a process which the CLP translation service might wish to advise on. This change in status for SWF-Trad would be a simple matter of saying 'Yes'. As an ordinary member of Agan Tavas, my personal feeling is that AT should prepare a robust rejection of what has been revealed so far about SWF Mark 2. Never mind waiting another 5 yeats, with our collective heads buried in the sand,--and just think where that, metaphorically, leaves our backsides!--let's have a firm response now. I suggest a motion be ballotted to AT members, proposing that support for SWF-Main in AT's constiturion be suspended pending the final outcome of the Review process. Furthermore, AT should make a strong recommendation ot the Review Board that they reconsider their descriminatory approach. Regardless of the outcome of this Review process, like so many of our fellow traditionalist Kernewegoryon, I shall carry on writing and talking in Authentic Cornish, and Gwask an Orlewen will carry on pubishing in all of the Authentic historically-based orthographies of Revived Cornish. To put that in perspective, since our start in 2010, GanO have published over 65 items in Cornish, both in print and in electronic media, using just about all of the authentic revived orthographies, and with lots of other European languages appearing alongside the Kernewek. Dheugh yn lel, Eddie Climo Gwask an Orlewen Kernewek Gwyr yu an gwella, Yn pup le, tre ha pella. Begin forwarded message: > From: Hedley Climo > Date: 2013 Mys Genver 31 09:39:52 GMT+00:00 > To: [REDACTED] > Subject: SWF Review: forms > > A gowetha whek, > > My forms for the SWF Review have just gone off to MAGA by email, here on the last day for submissions to be made. > > I've left the detailed orthographic points to those with the expertise (and desire) to argue them. Instead, I focussed on a single issue: that the Review should grant equal status, especially in Education, to the SWF-'Trad' forms. In case anyone might wish to see what I said, my submission form B is attached below in PDF format. > > My fear is that this whole Review is a stitch up, and that the Kemmynnites have packed all the committees so as to finagle the outcome that they wish for: to ditch SWF-'Trad', and make SWF-'Main' more like Kemmyn. This is, after all, the same tired old underhandedness that they've relied on for so long now. > > However, we must continue in hope, I guess, lest our fears become a self-fulfilling prophecy. > > Oll an gwella, sos, > > Eddie Climo > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: E-Form SWF Review Part B- Eddie Climo v2.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 102310 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clive.baker at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 17:45:31 2014 From: clive.baker at gmail.com (Clive Baker) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 17:45:31 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <20140326134140.120450@gmx.com> Message-ID: Checked with Ray Craig, apparently, we abstained at the partnership meeting... He says he will add a comment here. It is on our next agenda for discussion On Mar 26, 2014 2:45 PM, "Craig Weatherhill" wrote: > That very thing concerned me from the outset. Just like Treyarnon, > linguists were pointedly frozen out. Nicholas Williams AND Ken George > should have been on both panels. > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 26, at 13:41, Jon Mills wrote: > > That this issue and presumably other issues were "not understood by a > majority of the Review Board" is of particular concern. It is surely a > reasonable expectation that those appointed to the Review Board were done > so on the understanding that they have sufficient expertise for the task in > hand. > Ol an gwella, > Jon > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Daniel Prohaska > Sent: 03/26/14 01:07 PM > To: Standard Cornish discussion list > Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. > > I find that the inability to reach a solution for distinguishing short /?/ > (e.g. ?*bronn* ~ *brodn*? 'breast, hill'; ?*toll*? 'hole') from short /?/ > (e.g. ?*bronn* ~ *brodn*? 'rushes'; ?*toll*? 'deceit, fraud') to be the > biggest phonological shortcoming of the SWF. I've said this since day one > of the SWF and had hoped that this problem would be tackled in the Review. > It hasn't. This goes against one of the fundamental principles of the SWF, > to ensure that there should be a minimum amount of change for the maximum > section of the Cornish users. Since all Cornish spelling systems have a way > of distinguishing the two (Jenner ?*o*? : ?*u*?; UC/R ?*o*? : ?*u*?; KK ? > *o*? : ?*oe*?; KS ?*o*? : ?*?*?) this is an important change for ALL > Cornish users. according to reports the issue at had was not understood by > a majority of the Review Board, and thus this unfortunate ambiguity remains > unchanged in the SWF. Very unfortunate indeed. > > Dan > > > On Mar 26, 2014, at 1:01 PM, Clive Baker wrote: > > > Well said Christian...I ,as the recently elected chairman of Agan Tavas, > agree with you entirely... > Clive Baker > On Mar 26, 2014 10:42 AM, "Christian Semmens" > wrote: >> >> I not sure a hands off policy will work. Really I think Jon has hit the >> nail on the head. It is time to rock the boat. A simple rejection of the >> SWF in its proposed form, by Agan Tavas, would suffice to put the cat >> amongst the pigeons. You wouldn't have to say never, just to say that the >> SWF is an unacceptable orthography because of x, y and z. The SWF only has >> relevance if it is a consensus orthography. Unfortunately without parity >> for traditional graphs and the move towards consolidation of the KK >> aspects, it fails to be of any utility for those of us who would wish to >> use a traditional orthography. >> >> If it is allowed to continue without immediate and explicit challenge >> than the only outcome in the medium term (the next twenty years) is Jon's >> option 1. Traditional orthographies will be a splintered hobbyist way of >> spelling Cornish and the mainstream will use the KK form. We will have >> failed utterly. Waiting for people to see the light will not work. What is >> academically acceptable is irrelevant in this scenario. It is the 'boots on >> the ground' that count >> >> If, as I suspect, very few others here *want* to use it in its current >> form, then that needs to be flagged up. I simply won't use it and I know >> there are at lest a few more people here that feel that way too. We need a >> larger group to represent our position and to fight for a traditional >> orthography. Otherwise we are easily dismissed individually as malcontents. >> Perhaps you could poll your members and see what their feelings are? That >> would be interesting. >> >> It may be that they are in favour of capitulation, in which case I won't >> stress over it any more and will visit the grave of traditional Cornish >> every time I come home whilst trying not to look at the hideous caricature >> of Cornish daubed on the road signs. >> >> Christian >> >> On 25 March 2014 14:37, Ray Chubb wrote: >>> >>> The official Agan Tavas position as adopted at the AGM is that, apart >>> from changes that Late Cornish users find desirable and the issue of >>> diacritical marks, the SWF should be left as it is. >>> >>> This decision is on the basis that the changes proposed are very few and >>> tend to make the SWF less authentic than it already is. >>> >>> It was suggested at our committee meeting today that another 5 years >>> should elapse before changes are made. Hopefully in 5 years time people >>> will be able to look at it in a rational and scholarly way and leave behind >>> any baggage that they are carrying from the past. >>> >>> >>> On 24 Mer 2014, at 21:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've >>>> singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below is given >>>> in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain >>>> unaltered. >>>> >>>> DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. >>>> 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single letter >>>> in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. >>>> 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies >>>> 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, >>>> karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, >>>> tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. >>>> >>>> SHORT and >>>> 1. Change to in , in line with , , , >>>> , >>>> >>>> and >>>> 1. everywhere except word-initially. >>>> >>>> PARTICLE in SWF/L >>>> 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. >>>> >>>> PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT >>>> 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. To be respelt (M), or . >>>> >>>> HYPHENS >>>> 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. >>>> . >>>> 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', >>>> e.g. , , etc. >>>> 3. to replace . >>>> 4. to replace . >>>> (but personal use to remain optional). >>>> >>>> VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. >>>> 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. >>>> 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. >>>> >>>> DHYWORTH/DYWORTH >>>> 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and >>>> in RLC variants. >>>> >>>> A/OA ALTERNATION >>>> 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling >>>> them only with -a-. >>>> 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . >>>> >>>> for KK >>>> 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. >>>> >>>> AND >>>> 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, >>>> including those in doubt. >>>> 2. to be respelt . >>>> >>>> APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS >>>> 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. >>>> 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, >>>> e.g. from . >>>> 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from >>>> . >>>> 4. Do not use after (KK ). >>>> 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. >>>> To be left to the discretion of individual writers. >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF >>>> ). >>>> 2. Allow as alternative spellings. >>>> 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and >>>> (currently in SWF/L). >>>> No change to , , . >>>> >>>> GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) >>>> 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . >>>> >>>> GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES >>>> 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . >>>> >>>> WORTIWEDH, ETC. >>>> 1. and to be single >>>> words, without apostrophes. >>>> >>>> 1ST PERSON SINGULAR >>>> 1 RC variant , , no longer required. >>>> >>>> >>>> Craig >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Spellyans mailing list >>>> Spellyans at kernowek.net >>>> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >>> >>> Ray Chubb >>> >>> Portreth >>> Kernow >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > > > > > _____________________________________ > Dr. Jon Mills, > University of Kent > http://kent.academia.edu/JonMills_______________________________________________ > 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: From craig at agantavas.org Wed Mar 26 18:12:23 2014 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 18:12:23 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <20140326134140.120450@gmx.com> Message-ID: <017737EE-02BD-4DF8-A55B-B94E6F7F579E@agantavas.org> I was Chairman when we voted to accept the SWF, but this was done in good faith - which was assumed from all sides. Good faith has not been shown, in my opinion. Trad. graph SWF, declared to be equal in all respects other than for official use and the earlier stages of formal education, has been utterly sidelined to the point where it is not even recognized and condemned as "not SWF". From Treyarnon onwards the slant has been heavily in one direction, that favouring an orthographical ideology that was excluded by the Commissioners at Tremough before Treyarnon took place. That was that the SWF be constructed from (and I quote), "KD with KS input", which I very much supported. In reality neither KD nor KS was given as much as a thought. I had hoped, when Chairman of AT, that good faith would be universal. Sadly and maybe predictably, it has not been. In my opinion, AT should now reject it totally. Craig On 2014 Mer 26, at 17:45, Clive Baker wrote: > Checked with Ray Craig, apparently, we abstained at the partnership meeting... He says he will add a comment here. It is on our next agenda for discussion > > On Mar 26, 2014 2:45 PM, "Craig Weatherhill" wrote: > That very thing concerned me from the outset. Just like Treyarnon, linguists were pointedly frozen out. Nicholas Williams AND Ken George should have been on both panels. > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 26, at 13:41, Jon Mills wrote: > >> That this issue and presumably other issues were "not understood by a majority of the Review Board" is of particular concern. It is surely a reasonable expectation that those appointed to the Review Board were done so on the understanding that they have sufficient expertise for the task in hand. >> Ol an gwella, >> Jon >> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Daniel Prohaska >>> Sent: 03/26/14 01:07 PM >>> To: Standard Cornish discussion list >>> Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. >>> >>> I find that the inability to reach a solution for distinguishing short /?/ (e.g. ?bronn ~ brodn? 'breast, hill'; ?toll? 'hole') from short /?/ (e.g. ?bronn ~ brodn? 'rushes'; ?toll? 'deceit, fraud') to be the biggest phonological shortcoming of the SWF. I've said this since day one of the SWF and had hoped that this problem would be tackled in the Review. It hasn't. This goes against one of the fundamental principles of the SWF, to ensure that there should be a minimum amount of change for the maximum section of the Cornish users. Since all Cornish spelling systems have a way of distinguishing the two (Jenner ?o? : ?u?; UC/R ?o? : ?u?; KK ?o? : ?oe?; KS ?o? : ???) this is an important change for ALL Cornish users. according to reports the issue at had was not understood by a majority of the Review Board, and thus this unfortunate ambiguity remains unchanged in the SWF. Very unfortunate indeed. >>> >>> Dan >>> >>> >>> On Mar 26, 2014, at 1:01 PM, Clive Baker wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Well said Christian...I ,as the recently elected chairman of Agan Tavas, agree with you entirely... >>>> Clive Baker >>>> On Mar 26, 2014 10:42 AM, "Christian Semmens" wrote: >>>> I not sure a hands off policy will work. Really I think Jon has hit the nail on the head. It is time to rock the boat. A simple rejection of the SWF in its proposed form, by Agan Tavas, would suffice to put the cat amongst the pigeons. You wouldn't have to say never, just to say that the SWF is an unacceptable orthography because of x, y and z. The SWF only has relevance if it is a consensus orthography. Unfortunately without parity for traditional graphs and the move towards consolidation of the KK aspects, it fails to be of any utility for those of us who would wish to use a traditional orthography. >>>> >>>> If it is allowed to continue without immediate and explicit challenge than the only outcome in the medium term (the next twenty years) is Jon's option 1. Traditional orthographies will be a splintered hobbyist way of spelling Cornish and the mainstream will use the KK form. We will have failed utterly. Waiting for people to see the light will not work. What is academically acceptable is irrelevant in this scenario. It is the 'boots on the ground' that count >>>> >>>> If, as I suspect, very few others here *want* to use it in its current form, then that needs to be flagged up. I simply won't use it and I know there are at lest a few more people here that feel that way too. We need a larger group to represent our position and to fight for a traditional orthography. Otherwise we are easily dismissed individually as malcontents. Perhaps you could poll your members and see what their feelings are? That would be interesting. >>>> >>>> It may be that they are in favour of capitulation, in which case I won't stress over it any more and will visit the grave of traditional Cornish every time I come home whilst trying not to look at the hideous caricature of Cornish daubed on the road signs. >>>> >>>> Christian >>>> >>>> On 25 March 2014 14:37, Ray Chubb wrote: >>>> The official Agan Tavas position as adopted at the AGM is that, apart from changes that Late Cornish users find desirable and the issue of diacritical marks, the SWF should be left as it is. >>>> >>>> This decision is on the basis that the changes proposed are very few and tend to make the SWF less authentic than it already is. >>>> >>>> It was suggested at our committee meeting today that another 5 years should elapse before changes are made. Hopefully in 5 years time people will be able to look at it in a rational and scholarly way and leave behind any baggage that they are carrying from the past. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 24 Mer 2014, at 21:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: >>>> >>>> I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so I've singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The below is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of Traditional graphs remain unaltered. >>>> >>>> DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. >>>> 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root. >>>> 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which implies 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, hornell, karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, skwychell, tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. >>>> >>>> SHORT and >>>> 1. Change to in , in line with , , , , >>>> >>>> and >>>> 1. everywhere except word-initially. >>>> >>>> PARTICLE in SWF/L >>>> 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. >>>> >>>> PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT >>>> 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. To be respelt (M), or . >>>> >>>> HYPHENS >>>> 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. . >>>> 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. , , etc. >>>> 3. to replace . >>>> 4. to replace . >>>> (but personal use to remain optional). >>>> >>>> VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. >>>> 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. >>>> 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. >>>> >>>> DHYWORTH/DYWORTH >>>> 1. Accept and as alternatives, and and in RLC variants. >>>> >>>> A/OA ALTERNATION >>>> 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , spelling them only with -a-. >>>> 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining . >>>> >>>> for KK >>>> 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. >>>> >>>> AND >>>> 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, including those in doubt. >>>> 2. to be respelt . >>>> >>>> APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS >>>> 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. >>>> 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been shed, e.g. from . >>>> 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and from . >>>> 4. Do not use after (KK ). >>>> 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF ). >>>> 2. Allow as alternative spellings. >>>> 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and (currently in SWF/L). >>>> No change to , , . >>>> >>>> GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) >>>> 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . >>>> >>>> GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES >>>> 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . >>>> >>>> WORTIWEDH, ETC. >>>> 1. and to be single words, without apostrophes. >>>> >>>> 1ST PERSON SINGULAR >>>> 1 RC variant , , no longer required. >>>> >>>> >>>> Craig >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Spellyans mailing list >>>> Spellyans at kernowek.net >>>> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >>>> Ray Chubb >>>> >>>> Portreth >>>> Kernow >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Spellyans mailing list >>>> Spellyans at kernowek.net >>>> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >> >> >> >> >> _____________________________________ >> Dr. Jon Mills, >> University of Kent >> http://kent.academia.edu/JonMills _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ken at ferintosh.org Thu Mar 27 12:28:56 2014 From: ken at ferintosh.org (Ken MacKinnon) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 12:28:56 -0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> Message-ID: <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> Craig, I have always felt that placenames are a valuable source for the revived language. In that placenames are recorded in written documents, they are as valid an attestation as any other written source, and should feed into the principle of ?total Corniah?. - An ken Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 25 March 2014 10:54 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. The short form does exist, though but seems largely ignored by the revival. It occurs in several place-names. One wonders what will happen in the SWF if current becomes . What about the variant ? What happens to that? (I remain baffled why, of those two forms, one contains and the other , when the vowel is exactly the same length in both, and both should, under SWF rules, contain ). Craig On 2014 Mer 25, at 10:35, Nicholas Williams wrote: There is no justification for byghan anyway, since byghan is unattested in the texts. It occurs in PNN but toponymy is likely to maintain archaic forms. In PA beghan occurs twice. In other texts the commonest form is byan, byen. Tregear writes bean, Lhuyd b?an. The use of gh between syllables in UC was suggested by forms in PA, which was Nance's foundation text. PA writes arghans 'silver', vghelder, peghes, yrghys, nagha, fleghys, etc. On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:17, Daniel Prohaska wrote: This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [?b???an]: _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7242 - Release Date: 03/24/14 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From craig at agantavas.org Thu Mar 27 13:24:11 2014 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 13:24:11 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> Message-ID: <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> I've always said the same thing, Ken. Surviving textual Cornish is limited and, therefore, we have to include place-name history in that category, although some disagree. After about 1600, we need to be careful, though. Before that date, the records tend to be locally sourced: Pipe Rolls, Assize Rolls, etc., but after 1600, there is an ever-increasing amount of spelling from non-Cornish sources. Many of these wrote what they THOUGHT they heard, not what they were actually being told by local people, hence some of the terrible mistakes on Tithe Maps c.1840, and the Ordnance Survey. Just one example: "Scarrabine" (St Endellion) is actually Roscarrek Bian. How Boslowen ever became Bellowal (Paul) is a mystery! There is a move afoot to replace SWF with . I find that I can't really disagree with this, or condemn it as a Kemmynism, for historical reasons. The vast majority of the spellings of in Middle Cornish place-name history write . One name, Goenrounsan (St Enoder) retains that spelling to this day. and are often found, too. For me is too Anglicised, but I'm sure some will disagree with me. Craig On 2014 Mer 27, at 12:28, Ken MacKinnon wrote: > Craig, > > I have always felt that placenames are a valuable source for the revived language. In that placenames are recorded in written documents, they are as valid an attestation as any other written source, and should feed into the principle of ?total Corniah?. > > - An ken Ken > > From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill > Sent: 25 March 2014 10:54 > To: Standard Cornish discussion list > Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. > > The short form does exist, though but seems largely ignored by the revival. It occurs in several place-names. > One wonders what will happen in the SWF if current becomes . What about the variant ? What happens to that? > (I remain baffled why, of those two forms, one contains and the other , when the vowel is exactly the same length in both, and both should, under SWF rules, contain ). > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 25, at 10:35, Nicholas Williams wrote: > > > There is no justification for byghan anyway, since byghan is unattested in the texts. It occurs in PNN but toponymy is likely to maintain archaic forms. In PA beghan occurs twice. In other texts the commonest form is byan, byen. Tregear writes bean, Lhuyd b?an. The use of gh between syllables in UC was suggested by forms in PA, which was Nance's foundation text. PA writes arghans 'silver', vghelder, peghes, yrghys, nagha, fleghys, etc. > > On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:17, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > > > This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [?b???an]: > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > > This email has been scanned by Netintelligence > http://www.netintelligence.com/email > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7242 - Release Date: 03/24/14 > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ken at ferintosh.org Thu Mar 27 17:38:07 2014 From: ken at ferintosh.org (Ken MacKinnon) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 17:38:07 -0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> Message-ID: <004001cf49e3$5125f680$f371e380$@ferintosh.org> Craig, and friends, Yes I very much agree with oe ? as in Goen Bren (Bodmin Moor). I never felt at all at ease with oo ? just a copy of an English graph. On the OS maps this is often ? in West Cornwall, which I also have accepted from long familiarity. Familiar too with Goenrounsen. As a war evacuee in Summercourt I had a favourite ramble, down Crago Lane, past Goenrounsen to Rosewin, and back again! - Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 27 March 2014 13:24 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. I've always said the same thing, Ken. Surviving textual Cornish is limited and, therefore, we have to include place-name history in that category, although some disagree. After about 1600, we need to be careful, though. Before that date, the records tend to be locally sourced: Pipe Rolls, Assize Rolls, etc., but after 1600, there is an ever-increasing amount of spelling from non-Cornish sources. Many of these wrote what they THOUGHT they heard, not what they were actually being told by local people, hence some of the terrible mistakes on Tithe Maps c.1840, and the Ordnance Survey. Just one example: "Scarrabine" (St Endellion) is actually Roscarrek Bian. How Boslowen ever became Bellowal (Paul) is a mystery! There is a move afoot to replace SWF with . I find that I can't really disagree with this, or condemn it as a Kemmynism, for historical reasons. The vast majority of the spellings of in Middle Cornish place-name history write . One name, Goenrounsan (St Enoder) retains that spelling to this day. and are often found, too. For me is too Anglicised, but I'm sure some will disagree with me. Craig On 2014 Mer 27, at 12:28, Ken MacKinnon wrote: Craig, I have always felt that placenames are a valuable source for the revived language. In that placenames are recorded in written documents, they are as valid an attestation as any other written source, and should feed into the principle of ?total Corniah?. - An ken Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 25 March 2014 10:54 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. The short form does exist, though but seems largely ignored by the revival. It occurs in several place-names. One wonders what will happen in the SWF if current becomes . What about the variant ? What happens to that? (I remain baffled why, of those two forms, one contains and the other , when the vowel is exactly the same length in both, and both should, under SWF rules, contain ). Craig On 2014 Mer 25, at 10:35, Nicholas Williams wrote: There is no justification for byghan anyway, since byghan is unattested in the texts. It occurs in PNN but toponymy is likely to maintain archaic forms. In PA beghan occurs twice. In other texts the commonest form is byan, byen. Tregear writes bean, Lhuyd b?an. The use of gh between syllables in UC was suggested by forms in PA, which was Nance's foundation text. PA writes arghans 'silver', vghelder, peghes, yrghys, nagha, fleghys, etc. On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:17, Daniel Prohaska wrote: This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [?b???an]: _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7242 - Release Date: 03/24/14 _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From craig at agantavas.org Thu Mar 27 18:28:56 2014 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 18:28:56 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <004001cf49e3$5125f680$f371e380$@ferintosh.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> <004001cf49e3$5125f680$f371e380$@ferintosh.org> Message-ID: It would, of course, shorten to in plurals and derivatives (, , etc.). Craig On 2014 Mer 27, at 17:38, Ken MacKinnon wrote: > Craig, and friends, > > Yes I very much agree with oe ? as in Goen Bren (Bodmin Moor). I never felt at all at ease with oo ? just a copy of an English graph. On the OS maps this is often ? in West Cornwall, which I also have accepted from long familiarity. > > Familiar too with Goenrounsen. As a war evacuee in Summercourt I had a favourite ramble, down Crago Lane, past Goenrounsen to Rosewin, and back again! > > - Ken > > > > From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill > Sent: 27 March 2014 13:24 > To: Standard Cornish discussion list > Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. > > I've always said the same thing, Ken. Surviving textual Cornish is limited and, therefore, we have to include place-name history in that category, although some disagree. > > After about 1600, we need to be careful, though. Before that date, the records tend to be locally sourced: Pipe Rolls, Assize Rolls, etc., but after 1600, there is an ever-increasing amount of spelling from non-Cornish sources. Many of these wrote what they THOUGHT they heard, not what they were actually being told by local people, hence some of the terrible mistakes on Tithe Maps c.1840, and the Ordnance Survey. Just one example: "Scarrabine" (St Endellion) is actually Roscarrek Bian. How Boslowen ever became Bellowal (Paul) is a mystery! > > There is a move afoot to replace SWF with . I find that I can't really disagree with this, or condemn it as a Kemmynism, for historical reasons. The vast majority of the spellings of in Middle Cornish place-name history write . One name, Goenrounsan (St Enoder) retains that spelling to this day. and are often found, too. For me is too Anglicised, but I'm sure some will disagree with me. > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 27, at 12:28, Ken MacKinnon wrote: > > > Craig, > > I have always felt that placenames are a valuable source for the revived language. In that placenames are recorded in written documents, they are as valid an attestation as any other written source, and should feed into the principle of ?total Corniah?. > > - An ken Ken > > From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill > Sent: 25 March 2014 10:54 > To: Standard Cornish discussion list > Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. > > The short form does exist, though but seems largely ignored by the revival. It occurs in several place-names. > One wonders what will happen in the SWF if current becomes . What about the variant ? What happens to that? > (I remain baffled why, of those two forms, one contains and the other , when the vowel is exactly the same length in both, and both should, under SWF rules, contain ). > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 25, at 10:35, Nicholas Williams wrote: > > > > There is no justification for byghan anyway, since byghan is unattested in the texts. It occurs in PNN but toponymy is likely to maintain archaic forms. In PA beghan occurs twice. In other texts the commonest form is byan, byen. Tregear writes bean, Lhuyd b?an. The use of gh between syllables in UC was suggested by forms in PA, which was Nance's foundation text. PA writes arghans 'silver', vghelder, peghes, yrghys, nagha, fleghys, etc. > > On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:17, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > > > > This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [?b???an]: > > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > > This email has been scanned by Netintelligence > http://www.netintelligence.com/email > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7242 - Release Date: 03/24/14 > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > > This email has been scanned by Netintelligence > http://www.netintelligence.com/email > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From everson at evertype.com Thu Mar 27 18:51:34 2014 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 18:51:34 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> Message-ID: <204C936E-EAE6-49B2-BBE8-3AF5B39956D0@evertype.com> On 27 Mar 2014, at 13:24, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > I've always said the same thing, Ken. Surviving textual Cornish is limited and, therefore, we have to include place-name history in that category, although some disagree. Place-names in Cornwall, as in Ireland, were very often recorded by monoglot English speakers who had no knowledge of the local language or of its scribal and orthographic traditions. Place-name evidence is important for its content, but the analysed place-name forms should be spelt in accordance with a rigorous orthography for the language. The tail should not wag the dog, however, in determining what such a rigorous orthography?s graphs should be. > There is a move afoot to replace SWF with . I find that I can't really disagree with this, or condemn it as a Kemmynism, for historical reasons. The vast majority of the spellings of in Middle Cornish place-name history write . One name, Goenrounsan (St Enoder) retains that spelling to this day. and are often found, too. For me is too Anglicised, but I'm sure some will disagree with me. In place-names, both and reflect the habits of English orthography. While is found in extended Cornish-language documents, is not. It is a mistake to say that is more Anglicized than . Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From ken at ferintosh.org Fri Mar 28 05:36:05 2014 From: ken at ferintosh.org (Ken MacKinnon) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 05:36:05 -0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> <004001cf49e3$5125f680$f371e380$@ferintosh.org> Message-ID: <000001cf4a47$9d96c170$d8c44450$@ferintosh.org> Craig, Does that also apply to compound where a word with an sound gets compounded into another word ? e.g. Degoel Enoder (St Enoder?s feast-day, shortly upon us) ? - Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 27 March 2014 18:29 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. It would, of course, shorten to in plurals and derivatives (, , etc.). Craig On 2014 Mer 27, at 17:38, Ken MacKinnon wrote: Craig, and friends, Yes I very much agree with oe ? as in Goen Bren (Bodmin Moor). I never felt at all at ease with oo ? just a copy of an English graph. On the OS maps this is often ? in West Cornwall, which I also have accepted from long familiarity. Familiar too with Goenrounsen. As a war evacuee in Summercourt I had a favourite ramble, down Crago Lane, past Goenrounsen to Rosewin, and back again! - Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 27 March 2014 13:24 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. I've always said the same thing, Ken. Surviving textual Cornish is limited and, therefore, we have to include place-name history in that category, although some disagree. After about 1600, we need to be careful, though. Before that date, the records tend to be locally sourced: Pipe Rolls, Assize Rolls, etc., but after 1600, there is an ever-increasing amount of spelling from non-Cornish sources. Many of these wrote what they THOUGHT they heard, not what they were actually being told by local people, hence some of the terrible mistakes on Tithe Maps c.1840, and the Ordnance Survey. Just one example: "Scarrabine" (St Endellion) is actually Roscarrek Bian. How Boslowen ever became Bellowal (Paul) is a mystery! There is a move afoot to replace SWF with . I find that I can't really disagree with this, or condemn it as a Kemmynism, for historical reasons. The vast majority of the spellings of in Middle Cornish place-name history write . One name, Goenrounsan (St Enoder) retains that spelling to this day. and are often found, too. For me is too Anglicised, but I'm sure some will disagree with me. Craig On 2014 Mer 27, at 12:28, Ken MacKinnon wrote: Craig, I have always felt that placenames are a valuable source for the revived language. In that placenames are recorded in written documents, they are as valid an attestation as any other written source, and should feed into the principle of ?total Corniah?. - An ken Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 25 March 2014 10:54 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. The short form does exist, though but seems largely ignored by the revival. It occurs in several place-names. One wonders what will happen in the SWF if current becomes . What about the variant ? What happens to that? (I remain baffled why, of those two forms, one contains and the other , when the vowel is exactly the same length in both, and both should, under SWF rules, contain ). Craig On 2014 Mer 25, at 10:35, Nicholas Williams wrote: There is no justification for byghan anyway, since byghan is unattested in the texts. It occurs in PNN but toponymy is likely to maintain archaic forms. In PA beghan occurs twice. In other texts the commonest form is byan, byen. Tregear writes bean, Lhuyd b?an. The use of gh between syllables in UC was suggested by forms in PA, which was Nance's foundation text. PA writes arghans 'silver', vghelder, peghes, yrghys, nagha, fleghys, etc. On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:17, Daniel Prohaska wrote: This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [?b???an]: _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7242 - Release Date: 03/24/14 _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ray at spyrys.org Fri Mar 28 08:17:18 2014 From: ray at spyrys.org (Ray Chubb) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 08:17:18 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <20140326134140.120450@gmx.com> Message-ID: <1BE786BF-E0FC-44AE-8DA4-9C786EAFADFB@spyrys.org> Yes we abstained on the vote to adopt the draft report from the SWF Review Board at the Partnership meeting before last. I explained at the last meeting that we had done this because, as seems usual now for reports from the Partnership, it was dropped on us at the last minute before we had had to time to consider it. I also reported on the decision taken at our AGM to recommend to the Review Board that no changes should be made to the SWF as it currently stands. (Except for the Late variant.) On 26 Mer 2014, at 17:45, Clive Baker wrote: > Checked with Ray Craig, apparently, we abstained at the partnership > meeting... He says he will add a comment here. It is on our next > agenda for discussion > > On Mar 26, 2014 2:45 PM, "Craig Weatherhill" > wrote: > That very thing concerned me from the outset. Just like Treyarnon, > linguists were pointedly frozen out. Nicholas Williams AND Ken > George should have been on both panels. > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 26, at 13:41, Jon Mills wrote: > >> That this issue and presumably other issues were "not understood by >> a majority of the Review Board" is of particular concern. It is >> surely a reasonable expectation that those appointed to the Review >> Board were done so on the understanding that they have sufficient >> expertise for the task in hand. >> Ol an gwella, >> Jon >> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Daniel Prohaska >>> Sent: 03/26/14 01:07 PM >>> To: Standard Cornish discussion list >>> Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. >>> >>> I find that the inability to reach a solution for distinguishing >>> short /?/ (e.g. ?bronn ~ brodn? 'breast, hill'; ?toll? >>> 'hole') from short /?/ (e.g. ?bronn ~ brodn? 'rushes'; >>> ?toll? 'deceit, fraud') to be the biggest phonological >>> shortcoming of the SWF. I've said this since day one of the SWF >>> and had hoped that this problem would be tackled in the Review. It >>> hasn't. This goes against one of the fundamental principles of the >>> SWF, to ensure that there should be a minimum amount of change for >>> the maximum section of the Cornish users. Since all Cornish >>> spelling systems have a way of distinguishing the two (Jenner >>> ?o? : ?u?; UC/R ?o? : ?u?; KK ?o? : ?oe?; >>> KS ?o? : ???) this is an important change for ALL Cornish >>> users. according to reports the issue at had was not understood by >>> a majority of the Review Board, and thus this unfortunate >>> ambiguity remains unchanged in the SWF. Very unfortunate indeed. >>> >>> Dan >>> >>> >>> On Mar 26, 2014, at 1:01 PM, Clive Baker wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Well said Christian...I ,as the recently elected chairman of Agan >>>> Tavas, agree with you entirely... >>>> Clive Baker >>>> On Mar 26, 2014 10:42 AM, "Christian Semmens" >>> > wrote: >>>> I not sure a hands off policy will work. Really I think Jon has >>>> hit the nail on the head. It is time to rock the boat. A simple >>>> rejection of the SWF in its proposed form, by Agan Tavas, would >>>> suffice to put the cat amongst the pigeons. You wouldn't have to >>>> say never, just to say that the SWF is an unacceptable >>>> orthography because of x, y and z. The SWF only has relevance if >>>> it is a consensus orthography. Unfortunately without parity for >>>> traditional graphs and the move towards consolidation of the KK >>>> aspects, it fails to be of any utility for those of us who would >>>> wish to use a traditional orthography. >>>> >>>> If it is allowed to continue without immediate and explicit >>>> challenge than the only outcome in the medium term (the next >>>> twenty years) is Jon's option 1. Traditional orthographies will >>>> be a splintered hobbyist way of spelling Cornish and the >>>> mainstream will use the KK form. We will have failed utterly. >>>> Waiting for people to see the light will not work. What is >>>> academically acceptable is irrelevant in this scenario. It is the >>>> 'boots on the ground' that count >>>> >>>> If, as I suspect, very few others here *want* to use it in its >>>> current form, then that needs to be flagged up. I simply won't >>>> use it and I know there are at lest a few more people here that >>>> feel that way too. We need a larger group to represent our >>>> position and to fight for a traditional orthography. Otherwise we >>>> are easily dismissed individually as malcontents. Perhaps you >>>> could poll your members and see what their feelings are? That >>>> would be interesting. >>>> >>>> It may be that they are in favour of capitulation, in which case >>>> I won't stress over it any more and will visit the grave of >>>> traditional Cornish every time I come home whilst trying not to >>>> look at the hideous caricature of Cornish daubed on the road signs. >>>> >>>> Christian >>>> >>>> On 25 March 2014 14:37, Ray Chubb wrote: >>>> The official Agan Tavas position as adopted at the AGM is that, >>>> apart from changes that Late Cornish users find desirable and the >>>> issue of diacritical marks, the SWF should be left as it is. >>>> >>>> This decision is on the basis that the changes proposed are very >>>> few and tend to make the SWF less authentic than it already is. >>>> >>>> It was suggested at our committee meeting today that another 5 >>>> years should elapse before changes are made. Hopefully in 5 years >>>> time people will be able to look at it in a rational and >>>> scholarly way and leave behind any baggage that they are carrying >>>> from the past. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 24 Mer 2014, at 21:53, Craig Weatherhill wrote: >>>> >>>> I managed to get these today. Many items are "no change", so >>>> I've singled out those in which a change was decided upon. The >>>> below is given in SWF/M for convenience, but the status of >>>> Traditional graphs remain unaltered. >>>> >>>> DOUBLE CONSONANT SPELLINGS. >>>> 1. Introduce and in roots. Do not revert to single >>>> letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the >>>> root. >>>> 2. Introduce for , <-ell> for the suffix which >>>> implies 'tool' or 'device', e.g., dewynnell, draylell, gwariell, >>>> hornell, karrigell, musurell, pibell, rostell, skitell, skubell, >>>> skwychell, tempredhell, torgentrell, yeynell. >>>> >>>> SHORT and >>>> 1. Change to in , in line with , , >>>> , , >>>> >>>> and >>>> 1. everywhere except word-initially. >>>> >>>> PARTICLE in SWF/L >>>> 1. Join particle with verb as in , without a gap. >>>> >>>> PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT >>>> 1. Retain (present participle), but drop the apostrophe. >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. To be respelt (M), or . >>>> >>>> HYPHENS >>>> 1. Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, >>>> e.g. . >>>> 2. Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal >>>> noun', e.g. , , etc. >>>> 3. to replace . >>>> 4. to replace . >>>> (but personal use to remain optional). >>>> >>>> VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t. >>>> 1. To be written as , if they contain a short vowel. >>>> 2. Accept both permissible plural endings, e.g. >>>> >>>> DHYWORTH/DYWORTH >>>> 1. Accept and as alternatives, and >>>> and in RLC variants. >>>> >>>> A/OA ALTERNATION >>>> 1. Remove RLC variants , , , , >>>> spelling them only with -a-. >>>> 2. Add , , in RLC variants to the remaining >>>> . >>>> >>>> for KK >>>> 1. to become . Otherwise, no change. >>>> >>>> AND >>>> 1. to be used in all borrowings; in all other cases, >>>> including those in doubt. >>>> 2. to be respelt . >>>> >>>> APOSTROPHES IN RLC VARIANTS >>>> 1. Retain before nouns like <'manyn>. >>>> 2. Do not use elsewhere where the beginning of a word has been >>>> shed, e.g. from . >>>> 3. Do not use internally, e.g. from and >>>> from . >>>> 4. Do not use after (KK ). >>>> 5. May be used where -th, -dh is dropped, e.g. pro', for', >>>> warbar'. To be left to the discretion of individual writers. >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. Add SWF/L , SWF/M (presently SWF >>>> ). >>>> 2. Allow as alternative spellings. >>>> 3. Add to SWF/L (currently only); and >>>> (currently in SWF/L). >>>> No change to , , . >>>> >>>> GWR & GR (SWF/L VARIANT) >>>> 1. Write in RMC and RLC, inclusing , . >>>> >>>> GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES >>>> 1. Retain , introduce corresponding , , . >>>> >>>> WORTIWEDH, ETC. >>>> 1. and to be >>>> single words, without apostrophes. >>>> >>>> 1ST PERSON SINGULAR >>>> 1 RC variant , , no longer required. >>>> >>>> >>>> Craig >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Spellyans mailing list >>>> Spellyans at kernowek.net >>>> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >>>> Ray Chubb >>>> >>>> Portreth >>>> Kernow >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Spellyans mailing list >>>> Spellyans at kernowek.net >>>> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >> >> >> >> >> _____________________________________ >> Dr. Jon Mills, >> University of Kent >> http://kent.academia.edu/JonMills >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net Ray Chubb Portreth Kernow Agan Tavas web site: www.agantavas.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From craig at agantavas.org Fri Mar 28 10:45:28 2014 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 10:45:28 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <000001cf4a47$9d96c170$d8c44450$@ferintosh.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> <004001cf49e3$5125f680$f371e380$@ferintosh.org> <000001cf4a47$9d96c170$d8c44450$@ferintosh.org> Message-ID: <6C99A42E-2C81-4667-A743-5BBFB577CF49@agantavas.org> Yes, it would, as it becomes unstressed, so becomes . There were some weird and wonderful ways of saying "St Piran's Day" this year. Some were writing , some , etc., but there's a simple traditional way of expressing this: , e.g Golowan (gol-Jowan); Goldsithney, originally Golsydhny (feast of St Sithney). Craig On 2014 Mer 28, at 05:36, Ken MacKinnon wrote: > Craig, > > Does that also apply to compound where a word with an sound gets compounded into another word ? e.g. Degoel Enoder (St Enoder?s feast-day, shortly upon us) ? > > - Ken > > From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill > Sent: 27 March 2014 18:29 > To: Standard Cornish discussion list > Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. > > It would, of course, shorten to in plurals and derivatives (, , etc.). > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 27, at 17:38, Ken MacKinnon wrote: > > > Craig, and friends, > > Yes I very much agree with oe ? as in Goen Bren (Bodmin Moor). I never felt at all at ease with oo ? just a copy of an English graph. On the OS maps this is often ? in West Cornwall, which I also have accepted from long familiarity. > > Familiar too with Goenrounsen. As a war evacuee in Summercourt I had a favourite ramble, down Crago Lane, past Goenrounsen to Rosewin, and back again! > > - Ken > > > > From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill > Sent: 27 March 2014 13:24 > To: Standard Cornish discussion list > Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. > > I've always said the same thing, Ken. Surviving textual Cornish is limited and, therefore, we have to include place-name history in that category, although some disagree. > > After about 1600, we need to be careful, though. Before that date, the records tend to be locally sourced: Pipe Rolls, Assize Rolls, etc., but after 1600, there is an ever-increasing amount of spelling from non-Cornish sources. Many of these wrote what they THOUGHT they heard, not what they were actually being told by local people, hence some of the terrible mistakes on Tithe Maps c.1840, and the Ordnance Survey. Just one example: "Scarrabine" (St Endellion) is actually Roscarrek Bian. How Boslowen ever became Bellowal (Paul) is a mystery! > > There is a move afoot to replace SWF with . I find that I can't really disagree with this, or condemn it as a Kemmynism, for historical reasons. The vast majority of the spellings of in Middle Cornish place-name history write . One name, Goenrounsan (St Enoder) retains that spelling to this day. and are often found, too. For me is too Anglicised, but I'm sure some will disagree with me. > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 27, at 12:28, Ken MacKinnon wrote: > > > > Craig, > > I have always felt that placenames are a valuable source for the revived language. In that placenames are recorded in written documents, they are as valid an attestation as any other written source, and should feed into the principle of ?total Corniah?. > > - An ken Ken > > From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill > Sent: 25 March 2014 10:54 > To: Standard Cornish discussion list > Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. > > The short form does exist, though but seems largely ignored by the revival. It occurs in several place-names. > One wonders what will happen in the SWF if current becomes . What about the variant ? What happens to that? > (I remain baffled why, of those two forms, one contains and the other , when the vowel is exactly the same length in both, and both should, under SWF rules, contain ). > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 25, at 10:35, Nicholas Williams wrote: > > > > > There is no justification for byghan anyway, since byghan is unattested in the texts. It occurs in PNN but toponymy is likely to maintain archaic forms. In PA beghan occurs twice. In other texts the commonest form is byan, byen. Tregear writes bean, Lhuyd b?an. The use of gh between syllables in UC was suggested by forms in PA, which was Nance's foundation text. PA writes arghans 'silver', vghelder, peghes, yrghys, nagha, fleghys, etc. > > On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:17, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > > > > > This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [?b???an]: > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > > This email has been scanned by Netintelligence > http://www.netintelligence.com/email > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7242 - Release Date: 03/24/14 > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > > This email has been scanned by Netintelligence > http://www.netintelligence.com/email > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > > This email has been scanned by Netintelligence > http://www.netintelligence.com/email > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From janicelobb at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 11:25:46 2014 From: janicelobb at gmail.com (Janice Lobb) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 11:25:46 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <6C99A42E-2C81-4667-A743-5BBFB577CF49@agantavas.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> <004001cf49e3$5125f680$f371e380$@ferintosh.org> <000001cf4a47$9d96c170$d8c44450$@ferintosh.org> <6C99A42E-2C81-4667-A743-5BBFB577CF49@agantavas.org> Message-ID: I'll remember Golperan for next year Jan On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > Yes, it would, as it becomes unstressed, so becomes . > > There were some weird and wonderful ways of saying "St Piran's Day" this > year. Some were writing , some , etc., but > there's a simple traditional way of expressing this: , e.g > Golowan (gol-Jowan); Goldsithney, originally Golsydhny (feast of St > Sithney). > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 28, at 05:36, Ken MacKinnon wrote: > > *Craig,* > > *Does that also apply to compound where a word with an sound gets > compounded into another word ? e.g. Degoel Enoder (St Enoder?s feast-day, > shortly upon us) ?* > > - *Ken* > > *From:* Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] *On Behalf Of *Craig > Weatherhill > *Sent:* 27 March 2014 18:29 > *To:* Standard Cornish discussion list > *Subject:* Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. > > It would, of course, shorten to in plurals and derivatives (, > , etc.). > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 27, at 17:38, Ken MacKinnon wrote: > > > *Craig, and friends,* > > *Yes I very much agree with oe ? as in Goen Bren (Bodmin Moor). I never > felt at all at ease with oo ? just a copy of an English graph. On the OS > maps this is often ? in West Cornwall, which I also have accepted from long > familiarity.* > > *Familiar too with Goenrounsen. As a war evacuee in Summercourt I had a > favourite ramble, down Crago Lane, past Goenrounsen to Rosewin, and back > again!* > > - *Ken* > > > > *From:* Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net > ] *On Behalf Of *Craig Weatherhill > *Sent:* 27 March 2014 13:24 > *To:* Standard Cornish discussion list > *Subject:* Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. > > I've always said the same thing, Ken. Surviving textual Cornish is > limited and, therefore, we have to include place-name history in that > category, although some disagree. > > After about 1600, we need to be careful, though. Before that date, the > records tend to be locally sourced: Pipe Rolls, Assize Rolls, etc., but > after 1600, there is an ever-increasing amount of spelling from non-Cornish > sources. Many of these wrote what they THOUGHT they heard, not what they > were actually being told by local people, hence some of the terrible > mistakes on Tithe Maps c.1840, and the Ordnance Survey. Just one example: > "Scarrabine" (St Endellion) is actually Roscarrek Bian. How Boslowen > ever became Bellowal (Paul) is a mystery! > > There is a move afoot to replace SWF with . I find that I can't > really disagree with this, or condemn it as a Kemmynism, for historical > reasons. The vast majority of the spellings of in Middle Cornish > place-name history write . One name, Goenrounsan (St Enoder) > retains that spelling to this day. and are often found, too. > For me is too Anglicised, but I'm sure some will disagree with me. > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 27, at 12:28, Ken MacKinnon wrote: > > > > Craig, > > I have always felt that placenames are a valuable source for the revived > language. In that placenames are recorded in written documents, they are > as valid an attestation as any other written source, and should feed into > the principle of ?total Corniah?. > > - An ken Ken > > *From:* Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net > ] *On Behalf Of *Craig Weatherhill > *Sent:* 25 March 2014 10:54 > *To:* Standard Cornish discussion list > *Subject:* Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. > > The short form does exist, though but seems largely ignored by the > revival. It occurs in several place-names. > One wonders what will happen in the SWF if current becomes > . What about the variant ? What happens to that? > (I remain baffled why, of those two forms, one contains and the other > , when the vowel is exactly the same length in both, and both should, > under SWF rules, contain ). > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 25, at 10:35, Nicholas Williams wrote: > > > > > There is no justification for byghan anyway, since byghan is unattested in > the texts. It occurs in PNN but toponymy is likely to maintain archaic > forms. In PA beghan occurs twice. In other texts the commonest form is > byan, byen. Tregear writes bean, Lhuyd b?an. The use of gh between > syllables in UC was suggested by forms in PA, which was Nance's foundation > text. PA writes arghans 'silver', vghelder, peghes, yrghys, nagha, > fleghys, etc. > > On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:17, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > > > > > This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? > prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as > native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute > [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear > KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by > Ken George as [?b???an]: > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > > ------------------------------ > This email has been scanned by Netintelligence > http://www.netintelligence.com/email > ------------------------------ > ------------------------------ > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7242 - Release Date: 03/24/14 > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > > ------------------------------ > This email has been scanned by Netintelligence > http://www.netintelligence.com/email > ------------------------------ > ------------------------------ > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > > ------------------------------ > This email has been scanned by Netintelligence > http://www.netintelligence.com/email > ------------------------------ > ------------------------------ > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 > _______________________________________________ > 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: From ken at ferintosh.org Fri Mar 28 11:32:18 2014 From: ken at ferintosh.org (Ken MacKinnon) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 11:32:18 -0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <6C99A42E-2C81-4667-A743-5BBFB577CF49@agantavas.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> <004001cf49e3$5125f680$f371e380$@ferintosh.org> <000001cf4a47$9d96c170$d8c44450$@ferintosh.org> <6C99A42E-2C81-4667-A743-5BBFB577CF49@agantavas.org> Message-ID: <003a01cf4a79$610ffe10$232ffa30$@ferintosh.org> Meur ras, Craig. I am relieved that Degol + saint?s name is still the recommended spelling. This year Enoder?s feast Sunday is 27th April. So Degol Enoder or Golenoder are both in order. Golenoder lowen dhysso-jy - Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 28 March 2014 10:45 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. Yes, it would, as it becomes unstressed, so becomes . There were some weird and wonderful ways of saying "St Piran's Day" this year. Some were writing , some , etc., but there's a simple traditional way of expressing this: , e.g Golowan (gol-Jowan); Goldsithney, originally Golsydhny (feast of St Sithney). Craig On 2014 Mer 28, at 05:36, Ken MacKinnon wrote: Craig, Does that also apply to compound where a word with an sound gets compounded into another word ? e.g. Degoel Enoder (St Enoder?s feast-day, shortly upon us) ? - Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 27 March 2014 18:29 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. It would, of course, shorten to in plurals and derivatives (, , etc.). Craig On 2014 Mer 27, at 17:38, Ken MacKinnon wrote: Craig, and friends, Yes I very much agree with oe ? as in Goen Bren (Bodmin Moor). I never felt at all at ease with oo ? just a copy of an English graph. On the OS maps this is often ? in West Cornwall, which I also have accepted from long familiarity. Familiar too with Goenrounsen. As a war evacuee in Summercourt I had a favourite ramble, down Crago Lane, past Goenrounsen to Rosewin, and back again! - Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 27 March 2014 13:24 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. I've always said the same thing, Ken. Surviving textual Cornish is limited and, therefore, we have to include place-name history in that category, although some disagree. After about 1600, we need to be careful, though. Before that date, the records tend to be locally sourced: Pipe Rolls, Assize Rolls, etc., but after 1600, there is an ever-increasing amount of spelling from non-Cornish sources. Many of these wrote what they THOUGHT they heard, not what they were actually being told by local people, hence some of the terrible mistakes on Tithe Maps c.1840, and the Ordnance Survey. Just one example: "Scarrabine" (St Endellion) is actually Roscarrek Bian. How Boslowen ever became Bellowal (Paul) is a mystery! There is a move afoot to replace SWF with . I find that I can't really disagree with this, or condemn it as a Kemmynism, for historical reasons. The vast majority of the spellings of in Middle Cornish place-name history write . One name, Goenrounsan (St Enoder) retains that spelling to this day. and are often found, too. For me is too Anglicised, but I'm sure some will disagree with me. Craig On 2014 Mer 27, at 12:28, Ken MacKinnon wrote: Craig, I have always felt that placenames are a valuable source for the revived language. In that placenames are recorded in written documents, they are as valid an attestation as any other written source, and should feed into the principle of ?total Corniah?. - An ken Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 25 March 2014 10:54 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. The short form does exist, though but seems largely ignored by the revival. It occurs in several place-names. One wonders what will happen in the SWF if current becomes . What about the variant ? What happens to that? (I remain baffled why, of those two forms, one contains and the other , when the vowel is exactly the same length in both, and both should, under SWF rules, contain ). Craig On 2014 Mer 25, at 10:35, Nicholas Williams wrote: There is no justification for byghan anyway, since byghan is unattested in the texts. It occurs in PNN but toponymy is likely to maintain archaic forms. In PA beghan occurs twice. In other texts the commonest form is byan, byen. Tregear writes bean, Lhuyd b?an. The use of gh between syllables in UC was suggested by forms in PA, which was Nance's foundation text. PA writes arghans 'silver', vghelder, peghes, yrghys, nagha, fleghys, etc. On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:17, Daniel Prohaska wrote: This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [?b???an]: _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7242 - Release Date: 03/24/14 _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7257 - Release Date: 03/27/14 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ken at ferintosh.org Fri Mar 28 11:38:28 2014 From: ken at ferintosh.org (Ken MacKinnon) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 11:38:28 -0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <6C99A42E-2C81-4667-A743-5BBFB577CF49@agantavas.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> <004001cf49e3$5125f680$f371e380$@ferintosh.org> <000001cf4a47$9d96c170$d8c44450$@ferintosh.org> <6C99A42E-2C81-4667-A743-5BBFB577CF49@agantavas.org> Message-ID: <003f01cf4a7a$3d380220$b7a80660$@ferintosh.org> Meur ras, Craig. I am relieved that the recommended spelling is e.g. Degol Enoder. I also favour the alternative of Golenoder, which will be celebrated on Enoder?s Feast Sunday, which is 27th April this year. Golenoder lowen dhysso-jy - Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 28 March 2014 10:45 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. Yes, it would, as it becomes unstressed, so becomes . There were some weird and wonderful ways of saying "St Piran's Day" this year. Some were writing , some , etc., but there's a simple traditional way of expressing this: , e.g Golowan (gol-Jowan); Goldsithney, originally Golsydhny (feast of St Sithney). Craig On 2014 Mer 28, at 05:36, Ken MacKinnon wrote: Craig, Does that also apply to compound where a word with an sound gets compounded into another word ? e.g. Degoel Enoder (St Enoder?s feast-day, shortly upon us) ? - Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 27 March 2014 18:29 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. It would, of course, shorten to in plurals and derivatives (, , etc.). Craig On 2014 Mer 27, at 17:38, Ken MacKinnon wrote: Craig, and friends, Yes I very much agree with oe ? as in Goen Bren (Bodmin Moor). I never felt at all at ease with oo ? just a copy of an English graph. On the OS maps this is often ? in West Cornwall, which I also have accepted from long familiarity. Familiar too with Goenrounsen. As a war evacuee in Summercourt I had a favourite ramble, down Crago Lane, past Goenrounsen to Rosewin, and back again! - Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 27 March 2014 13:24 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. I've always said the same thing, Ken. Surviving textual Cornish is limited and, therefore, we have to include place-name history in that category, although some disagree. After about 1600, we need to be careful, though. Before that date, the records tend to be locally sourced: Pipe Rolls, Assize Rolls, etc., but after 1600, there is an ever-increasing amount of spelling from non-Cornish sources. Many of these wrote what they THOUGHT they heard, not what they were actually being told by local people, hence some of the terrible mistakes on Tithe Maps c.1840, and the Ordnance Survey. Just one example: "Scarrabine" (St Endellion) is actually Roscarrek Bian. How Boslowen ever became Bellowal (Paul) is a mystery! There is a move afoot to replace SWF with . I find that I can't really disagree with this, or condemn it as a Kemmynism, for historical reasons. The vast majority of the spellings of in Middle Cornish place-name history write . One name, Goenrounsan (St Enoder) retains that spelling to this day. and are often found, too. For me is too Anglicised, but I'm sure some will disagree with me. Craig On 2014 Mer 27, at 12:28, Ken MacKinnon wrote: Craig, I have always felt that placenames are a valuable source for the revived language. In that placenames are recorded in written documents, they are as valid an attestation as any other written source, and should feed into the principle of ?total Corniah?. - An ken Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 25 March 2014 10:54 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. The short form does exist, though but seems largely ignored by the revival. It occurs in several place-names. One wonders what will happen in the SWF if current becomes . What about the variant ? What happens to that? (I remain baffled why, of those two forms, one contains and the other , when the vowel is exactly the same length in both, and both should, under SWF rules, contain ). Craig On 2014 Mer 25, at 10:35, Nicholas Williams wrote: There is no justification for byghan anyway, since byghan is unattested in the texts. It occurs in PNN but toponymy is likely to maintain archaic forms. In PA beghan occurs twice. In other texts the commonest form is byan, byen. Tregear writes bean, Lhuyd b?an. The use of gh between syllables in UC was suggested by forms in PA, which was Nance's foundation text. PA writes arghans 'silver', vghelder, peghes, yrghys, nagha, fleghys, etc. On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:17, Daniel Prohaska wrote: This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [?b???an]: _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7242 - Release Date: 03/24/14 _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7257 - Release Date: 03/27/14 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ken at ferintosh.org Fri Mar 28 11:40:06 2014 From: ken at ferintosh.org (Ken MacKinnon) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 11:40:06 -0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> <004001cf49e3$5125f680$f371e380$@ferintosh.org> <000001cf4a47$9d96c170$d8c44450$@ferintosh.org> <6C99A42E-2C81-4667-A743-5BBFB577CF49@agantavas.org> Message-ID: <004401cf4a7a$787569e0$69603da0$@ferintosh.org> Jan ger, And not forgetting Golenoder on 27th April in a month?s time. - An ken Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Janice Lobb Sent: 28 March 2014 11:26 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. I'll remember Golperan for next year Jan On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Craig Weatherhill wrote: Yes, it would, as it becomes unstressed, so becomes . There were some weird and wonderful ways of saying "St Piran's Day" this year. Some were writing , some , etc., but there's a simple traditional way of expressing this: , e.g Golowan (gol-Jowan); Goldsithney, originally Golsydhny (feast of St Sithney). Craig On 2014 Mer 28, at 05:36, Ken MacKinnon wrote: Craig, Does that also apply to compound where a word with an sound gets compounded into another word ? e.g. Degoel Enoder (St Enoder?s feast-day, shortly upon us) ? - Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 27 March 2014 18:29 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. It would, of course, shorten to in plurals and derivatives (, , etc.). Craig On 2014 Mer 27, at 17:38, Ken MacKinnon wrote: Craig, and friends, Yes I very much agree with oe ? as in Goen Bren (Bodmin Moor). I never felt at all at ease with oo ? just a copy of an English graph. On the OS maps this is often ? in West Cornwall, which I also have accepted from long familiarity. Familiar too with Goenrounsen. As a war evacuee in Summercourt I had a favourite ramble, down Crago Lane, past Goenrounsen to Rosewin, and back again! - Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 27 March 2014 13:24 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. I've always said the same thing, Ken. Surviving textual Cornish is limited and, therefore, we have to include place-name history in that category, although some disagree. After about 1600, we need to be careful, though. Before that date, the records tend to be locally sourced: Pipe Rolls, Assize Rolls, etc., but after 1600, there is an ever-increasing amount of spelling from non-Cornish sources. Many of these wrote what they THOUGHT they heard, not what they were actually being told by local people, hence some of the terrible mistakes on Tithe Maps c.1840, and the Ordnance Survey. Just one example: "Scarrabine" (St Endellion) is actually Roscarrek Bian. How Boslowen ever became Bellowal (Paul) is a mystery! There is a move afoot to replace SWF with . I find that I can't really disagree with this, or condemn it as a Kemmynism, for historical reasons. The vast majority of the spellings of in Middle Cornish place-name history write . One name, Goenrounsan (St Enoder) retains that spelling to this day. and are often found, too. For me is too Anglicised, but I'm sure some will disagree with me. Craig On 2014 Mer 27, at 12:28, Ken MacKinnon wrote: Craig, I have always felt that placenames are a valuable source for the revived language. In that placenames are recorded in written documents, they are as valid an attestation as any other written source, and should feed into the principle of ?total Corniah?. - An ken Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill Sent: 25 March 2014 10:54 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. The short form does exist, though but seems largely ignored by the revival. It occurs in several place-names. One wonders what will happen in the SWF if current becomes . What about the variant ? What happens to that? (I remain baffled why, of those two forms, one contains and the other , when the vowel is exactly the same length in both, and both should, under SWF rules, contain ). Craig On 2014 Mer 25, at 10:35, Nicholas Williams wrote: There is no justification for byghan anyway, since byghan is unattested in the texts. It occurs in PNN but toponymy is likely to maintain archaic forms. In PA beghan occurs twice. In other texts the commonest form is byan, byen. Tregear writes bean, Lhuyd b?an. The use of gh between syllables in UC was suggested by forms in PA, which was Nance's foundation text. PA writes arghans 'silver', vghelder, peghes, yrghys, nagha, fleghys, etc. On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:17, Daniel Prohaska wrote: This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [?b???an]: _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7242 - Release Date: 03/24/14 _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 _______________________________________________ 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 _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7257 - Release Date: 03/27/14 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 13:33:36 2014 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 13:33:36 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <003a01cf4a79$610ffe10$232ffa30$@ferintosh.org> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> <004001cf49e3$5125f680$f371e380$@ferintosh.org> <000001cf4a47$9d96c170$d8c44450$@ferintosh.org> <6C99A42E-2C81-4667-A743-5BBFB577CF49@agantavas.org> <003a01cf4a79$610ffe10$232ffa30$@ferintosh.org> Message-ID: <0882B04E-2BF1-407D-84F0-F4CF089495B6@gmail.com> Golowan is, I believe, not from Gool and Jowan but from the earlier Yowan < Iohannes. In the texts Yowan survives only in this word. In the hundred or so years that the Cornish were under the West Saxons, Yowan seems to have disappeard to be replaced by the Norman French form Jowan after the conquest. Two things should be noticed. In the Celtic church saints names were not used as names for children. The Irish could for example call a boy Giolla Padraig and Maoil Eoin. It was not until the Norman conquest of Ireland that they began to use the saint's name as a name for children and then the name appears in a Norman form. We thus have doublets: Saint: Eoiin - boy: Sean Saint Muire - girl: Maire. It is clear that Yesu for Jesus was used in Pantersbridge < Pont Iesu but in the texts the name of Jesus was Jesu, Jesus will initial dZ. If the name had ever been *Yesu in the MC period, one would expect some texts to write *Esu, *Esus as they write Ethewon as well as Yethewon 'Jews' or ehes as well as yehes 'health'. The KK New Testament has Jamys 'James' but Yowan 'John', when it is much more likely that the two names had the same initial consonant. I take it as certain that the MC and thus revived Cornish names should be Jesu(s), Jowan, Josef/Josep, etc. Notice incidentally the attested forms for St John the Baptist sen iowen baptyst BM 4450 S. Johan baptist TH 8 S Johan baptist TH 29a Jowan baptist TH 43a. The saint should therefore be called Sen Jowan Baptyst or perhaps better Jowan Baptyst. There is no warrant for *Yowan an Besydhyer. Nicholas On 28 Mar 2014, at 11:32, Ken MacKinnon wrote: > Golowan (gol-Jowan); -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 14:11:56 2014 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:11:56 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite Message-ID: I have mentioned this before but it is perhaps worth repeating. When I was recently at the Kesc?ssulyans I noticed a little book for children on the stall of the Cowethas/Kowethas. The title was STERENN AN KOLIN KERNOW. I think that this title was meant to be understood as 'Sterenn the Cornish Puppy'. Unfortunately it cannot bear that sense. If it means anything it could possibly mean 'The star of the puppy of Cornwall', but the syntax is still wrong. The problem arises from the difficulty in the Celtic languages of having indefinite nouns dependent on definite ones. In Irish for example to say 'a king of France' one has to say r? de r?the na Fraince i.e. a king of the kings of France, and for 'a city bus' (as distinct from a country bus) one has to say bus de chuid na cathrach i.e. 'a bus of the share of the city'. The same rule applies in Cornish, though Nance did not seem to have understood it properly so he writes *an Yeth Kernow for Yeth Kernow 'the language of Cornwall' and Lyver *an Pymp Marthus Seleven for Lyver Pymp Marthus Seleven. Since Kernow and Seleven are both definite, the nouns dependent upon them are all definite. If one wants to say 'Sterenn, a Cornish puppy' one would need to write (and I am using the orthography of the author) one of the following: STERENN, KOLIN DHIWORTH KERNOW STERENN, KOLIN A GERNOW KOLIN A GERNOW, STERENN Y HANOW If one wants to say 'Sterenn, the Cornish puppy' one would need to write: STERENN, AN KOLIN A GERNOW STERENN, AN KOLIN DHIWORTH KERNOW though neither is very happy since either could mean 'the Star of the puppy of Cornwall'. Perhaps AN KOLIN A GERNOW, STERENN Y HANOW would be the best rendering. The expression Yeth an Weryn is objectionable for the same reason. It can only mean 'the Lanuage of the People' and is ipso facto definite. It is of doubtful validity anywhere since gweryn has been borrowed from Welsh and is unattested in Cornish. In more authentic Cornish the phrase would be Tavas an Bobel or possible Y?th an Bobel. i have recently heard AN GOOL PYRAN. This is also incorrect. Pyran is a proper noun and is definite. The article is not merely unnecessary, it is incorrect. On Youtube there is a video from 1964 of the first wedding ever in Cornish, which took place in the parish church of St Piran, Perranaworthal. The commentary begins with a shot of the church, the flag of St Piran fluttering in front of it and the spoken words: AN EGLOS SEN PYRAN. This is incorrect; the narrator should have said EGLOS SEN PYRAN 'the church of St Piran' or better still EGLOS PYRAN 'the church of St Piran'. Pyran is a proper name, it is therefore definite; any noun governed by it is therefore also definite; the definite artice is not required and indeed is incorrect. Nicholas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ken at ferintosh.org Fri Mar 28 14:58:40 2014 From: ken at ferintosh.org (Ken MacKinnon) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:58:40 -0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <0882B04E-2BF1-407D-84F0-F4CF089495B6@gmail.com> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> <004001cf49e3$5125f680$f371e380$@ferintosh.org> <000001cf4a47$9d96c170$d8c44450$@ferintosh.org> <6C99A42E-2C81-4667-A743-5BBFB577CF49@agantavas.org> <003a01cf4a79$610ffe10$232ffa30$@ferintosh.org> <0882B04E-2BF1-407D-84F0-F4CF089495B6@gmail.com> Message-ID: <001e01cf4a96$350d07f0$9f2717d0$@ferintosh.org> Many thanks, Nicholas, most informative. In my earlier posts today I was discussing Golenoder in response to Craig?s discussion of Golowan. I was unable to make the recent Cornish language conference owing to a chest infection, and was sorry to have missed it. Julie Tamblin took my place, and reported on the proceedings. Yourself and Brian ? hEadhra had a recorded discussion, which I hope will become available for those who missed the event. I was hoping to make the Celtic Media Festival in St Ives next week, but I am sorry to have to miss out on that as well. - Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Nicholas Williams Sent: 28 March 2014 13:34 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. Golowan is, I believe, not from Gool and Jowan but from the earlier Yowan < Iohannes. In the texts Yowan survives only in this word. In the hundred or so years that the Cornish were under the West Saxons, Yowan seems to have disappeard to be replaced by the Norman French form Jowan after the conquest. Two things should be noticed. In the Celtic church saints names were not used as names for children. The Irish could for example call a boy Giolla Padraig and Maoil Eoin. It was not until the Norman conquest of Ireland that they began to use the saint's name as a name for children and then the name appears in a Norman form. We thus have doublets: Saint: Eoiin - boy: Sean Saint Muire - girl: Maire. It is clear that Yesu for Jesus was used in Pantersbridge < Pont Iesu but in the texts the name of Jesus was Jesu, Jesus will initial dZ. If the name had ever been *Yesu in the MC period, one would expect some texts to write *Esu, *Esus as they write Ethewon as well as Yethewon 'Jews' or ehes as well as yehes 'health'. The KK New Testament has Jamys 'James' but Yowan 'John', when it is much more likely that the two names had the same initial consonant. I take it as certain that the MC and thus revived Cornish names should be Jesu(s), Jowan, Josef/Josep, etc. Notice incidentally the attested forms for St John the Baptist sen iowen baptyst BM 4450 S. Johan baptist TH 8 S Johan baptist TH 29a Jowan baptist TH 43a. The saint should therefore be called Sen Jowan Baptyst or perhaps better Jowan Baptyst. There is no warrant for *Yowan an Besydhyer. Nicholas On 28 Mar 2014, at 11:32, Ken MacKinnon wrote: Golowan (gol-Jowan); _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7257 - Release Date: 03/27/14 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ken at ferintosh.org Fri Mar 28 15:09:08 2014 From: ken at ferintosh.org (Ken MacKinnon) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 15:09:08 -0000 Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <002301cf4a97$ab1fd160$015f7420$@ferintosh.org> I have a copy of Lyver Hymnys ha Salmow (gifted to me by Richard Jenkin). The flyleaf is rubber-stamped: ?Pyth An Orseth Kernow?. I have wondered about this, whether it should more properly have been ?Pyth Gorseth a Gernow?. What do you think, Nicholas? - An ken Ken From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Nicholas Williams Sent: 28 March 2014 14:12 To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite I have mentioned this before but it is perhaps worth repeating. When I was recently at the Kesc?ssulyans I noticed a little book for children on the stall of the Cowethas/Kowethas. The title was STERENN AN KOLIN KERNOW. I think that this title was meant to be understood as 'Sterenn the Cornish Puppy'. Unfortunately it cannot bear that sense. If it means anything it could possibly mean 'The star of the puppy of Cornwall', but the syntax is still wrong. The problem arises from the difficulty in the Celtic languages of having indefinite nouns dependent on definite ones. In Irish for example to say 'a king of France' one has to say r? de r?the na Fraince i.e. a king of the kings of France, and for 'a city bus' (as distinct from a country bus) one has to say bus de chuid na cathrach i.e. 'a bus of the share of the city'. The same rule applies in Cornish, though Nance did not seem to have understood it properly so he writes *an Yeth Kernow for Yeth Kernow 'the language of Cornwall' and Lyver *an Pymp Marthus Seleven for Lyver Pymp Marthus Seleven. Since Kernow and Seleven are both definite, the nouns dependent upon them are all definite. If one wants to say 'Sterenn, a Cornish puppy' one would need to write (and I am using the orthography of the author) one of the following: STERENN, KOLIN DHIWORTH KERNOW STERENN, KOLIN A GERNOW KOLIN A GERNOW, STERENN Y HANOW If one wants to say 'Sterenn, the Cornish puppy' one would need to write: STERENN, AN KOLIN A GERNOW STERENN, AN KOLIN DHIWORTH KERNOW though neither is very happy since either could mean 'the Star of the puppy of Cornwall'. Perhaps AN KOLIN A GERNOW, STERENN Y HANOW would be the best rendering. The expression Yeth an Weryn is objectionable for the same reason. It can only mean 'the Lanuage of the People' and is ipso facto definite. It is of doubtful validity anywhere since gweryn has been borrowed from Welsh and is unattested in Cornish. In more authentic Cornish the phrase would be Tavas an Bobel or possible Y?th an Bobel. i have recently heard AN GOOL PYRAN. This is also incorrect. Pyran is a proper noun and is definite. The article is not merely unnecessary, it is incorrect. On Youtube there is a video from 1964 of the first wedding ever in Cornish, which took place in the parish church of St Piran, Perranaworthal. The commentary begins with a shot of the church, the flag of St Piran fluttering in front of it and the spoken words: AN EGLOS SEN PYRAN. This is incorrect; the narrator should have said EGLOS SEN PYRAN 'the church of St Piran' or better still EGLOS PYRAN 'the church of St Piran'. Pyran is a proper name, it is therefore definite; any noun governed by it is therefore also definite; the definite artice is not required and indeed is incorrect. Nicholas _____ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email _____ _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7257 - Release Date: 03/27/14 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From craig at agantavas.org Fri Mar 28 15:52:52 2014 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 15:52:52 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> <004001cf49e3$5125f680$f371e380$@ferintosh.org> <000001cf4a47$9d96c170$d8c44450$@ferintosh.org> <6C99A42E-2C81-4667-A743-5BBFB577CF49@agantavas.org> Message-ID: I believe that , for Boxing Day, is also attested somewhere. Craig On 2014 Mer 28, at 11:25, Janice Lobb wrote: > I'll remember Golperan for next year > Jan > > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > Yes, it would, as it becomes unstressed, so becomes . > > There were some weird and wonderful ways of saying "St Piran's Day" this year. Some were writing , some , etc., but there's a simple traditional way of expressing this: , e.g Golowan (gol-Jowan); Goldsithney, originally Golsydhny (feast of St Sithney). > > Craig > > > > On 2014 Mer 28, at 05:36, Ken MacKinnon wrote: > >> Craig, >> >> Does that also apply to compound where a word with an sound gets compounded into another word ? e.g. Degoel Enoder (St Enoder?s feast-day, shortly upon us) ? >> >> - Ken >> >> From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill >> Sent: 27 March 2014 18:29 >> To: Standard Cornish discussion list >> Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. >> >> It would, of course, shorten to in plurals and derivatives (, , etc.). >> >> Craig >> >> >> >> On 2014 Mer 27, at 17:38, Ken MacKinnon wrote: >> >> >> Craig, and friends, >> >> Yes I very much agree with oe ? as in Goen Bren (Bodmin Moor). I never felt at all at ease with oo ? just a copy of an English graph. On the OS maps this is often ? in West Cornwall, which I also have accepted from long familiarity. >> >> Familiar too with Goenrounsen. As a war evacuee in Summercourt I had a favourite ramble, down Crago Lane, past Goenrounsen to Rosewin, and back again! >> >> - Ken >> >> >> >> From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill >> Sent: 27 March 2014 13:24 >> To: Standard Cornish discussion list >> Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. >> >> I've always said the same thing, Ken. Surviving textual Cornish is limited and, therefore, we have to include place-name history in that category, although some disagree. >> >> After about 1600, we need to be careful, though. Before that date, the records tend to be locally sourced: Pipe Rolls, Assize Rolls, etc., but after 1600, there is an ever-increasing amount of spelling from non-Cornish sources. Many of these wrote what they THOUGHT they heard, not what they were actually being told by local people, hence some of the terrible mistakes on Tithe Maps c.1840, and the Ordnance Survey. Just one example: "Scarrabine" (St Endellion) is actually Roscarrek Bian. How Boslowen ever became Bellowal (Paul) is a mystery! >> >> There is a move afoot to replace SWF with . I find that I can't really disagree with this, or condemn it as a Kemmynism, for historical reasons. The vast majority of the spellings of in Middle Cornish place-name history write . One name, Goenrounsan (St Enoder) retains that spelling to this day. and are often found, too. For me is too Anglicised, but I'm sure some will disagree with me. >> >> Craig >> >> >> >> On 2014 Mer 27, at 12:28, Ken MacKinnon wrote: >> >> >> >> Craig, >> >> I have always felt that placenames are a valuable source for the revived language. In that placenames are recorded in written documents, they are as valid an attestation as any other written source, and should feed into the principle of ?total Corniah?. >> >> - An ken Ken >> >> From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Craig Weatherhill >> Sent: 25 March 2014 10:54 >> To: Standard Cornish discussion list >> Subject: Re: [Spellyans] SWF review results. >> >> The short form does exist, though but seems largely ignored by the revival. It occurs in several place-names. >> One wonders what will happen in the SWF if current becomes . What about the variant ? What happens to that? >> (I remain baffled why, of those two forms, one contains and the other , when the vowel is exactly the same length in both, and both should, under SWF rules, contain ). >> >> Craig >> >> >> >> On 2014 Mer 25, at 10:35, Nicholas Williams wrote: >> >> >> >> >> There is no justification for byghan anyway, since byghan is unattested in the texts. It occurs in PNN but toponymy is likely to maintain archaic forms. In PA beghan occurs twice. In other texts the commonest form is byan, byen. Tregear writes bean, Lhuyd b?an. The use of gh between syllables in UC was suggested by forms in PA, which was Nance's foundation text. PA writes arghans 'silver', vghelder, peghes, yrghys, nagha, fleghys, etc. >> >> On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:17, Daniel Prohaska wrote: >> >> >> >> >> This is a step back into the dark ages. Not only does intervocalic ?gh? prompt an unlikely pronunciation, it actually prompts mispronunciation as native English speakers who learn and speak Cornish prequently subsitute [k] for aspired [x] or [?] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ?byghan? 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [?b???an]: >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Spellyans mailing list >> Spellyans at kernowek.net >> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >> >> >> This email has been scanned by Netintelligence >> http://www.netintelligence.com/email >> No virus found in this message. >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7242 - Release Date: 03/24/14 >> _______________________________________________ >> Spellyans mailing list >> Spellyans at kernowek.net >> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >> >> >> This email has been scanned by Netintelligence >> http://www.netintelligence.com/email >> No virus found in this message. >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 >> _______________________________________________ >> Spellyans mailing list >> Spellyans at kernowek.net >> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >> >> >> This email has been scanned by Netintelligence >> http://www.netintelligence.com/email >> No virus found in this message. >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7252 - Release Date: 03/26/14 >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 15:57:55 2014 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 15:57:55 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite In-Reply-To: <002301cf4a97$ab1fd160$015f7420$@ferintosh.org> References: <002301cf4a97$ab1fd160$015f7420$@ferintosh.org> Message-ID: <7AFAEDC9-A7A9-439F-B880-9B746ABFE772@gmail.com> I should have put Gorseth Kernow at the head of phrase and would have said: Gorseth Kernow a bew an lyver-ma. That is unambiguous, grammatical and has a verb. Pyth Gorseth Kernow even when the syntax is corrected, looks like a direct translation from Property of the Gorsedd of Cornwall. Nicholas On 28 Mar 2014, at 15:09, Ken MacKinnon wrote: > I have a copy of Lyver Hymnys ha Salmow (gifted to me by Richard Jenkin). The flyleaf is rubber-stamped: ?Pyth An Orseth Kernow?. > > I have wondered about this, whether it should more properly have been ?Pyth Gorseth a Gernow?. > > What do you think, Nicholas? > > - An ken Ken > > From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Nicholas Williams > Sent: 28 March 2014 14:12 > To: Standard Cornish discussion list > Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite > > I have mentioned this before but it is perhaps worth repeating. > When I was recently at the Kesc?ssulyans I noticed a little book for > children on the stall of the Cowethas/Kowethas. > The title was > > STERENN AN KOLIN KERNOW. > > I think that this title was meant to be understood as > 'Sterenn the Cornish Puppy'. Unfortunately it cannot bear that sense. > If it means anything it could possibly mean 'The star of the puppy of Cornwall', but the syntax is still wrong. > > The problem arises from the difficulty in the Celtic languages of having indefinite > nouns dependent on definite ones. > > In Irish for example to say 'a king of France' one has to say r? de r?the na Fraince i.e. a king of the kings of France, > and for 'a city bus' (as distinct from a country bus) one has to say bus de chuid na cathrach > i.e. 'a bus of the share of the city'. > > The same rule applies in Cornish, though Nance did not seem to have understood it properly > so he writes *an Yeth Kernow for Yeth Kernow 'the language of Cornwall' > and Lyver *an Pymp Marthus Seleven for Lyver Pymp Marthus Seleven. > Since Kernow and Seleven are both definite, the nouns dependent upon them are all definite. > > If one wants to say 'Sterenn, a Cornish puppy' > one would need to write (and I am using the orthography of the author) one of the following: > > STERENN, KOLIN DHIWORTH KERNOW > STERENN, KOLIN A GERNOW > KOLIN A GERNOW, STERENN Y HANOW > > If one wants to say 'Sterenn, the Cornish puppy' one would need to write: > > STERENN, AN KOLIN A GERNOW > STERENN, AN KOLIN DHIWORTH KERNOW > though neither is very happy since either could mean 'the Star of the puppy of Cornwall'. > > Perhaps > > AN KOLIN A GERNOW, STERENN Y HANOW would be the best rendering. > > The expression Yeth an Weryn is objectionable for the same reason. > It can only mean 'the Lanuage of the People' and is ipso facto definite. > It is of doubtful validity anywhere since gweryn has been borrowed from Welsh > and is unattested in Cornish. In more authentic Cornish the phrase would be > Tavas an Bobel or possible Y?th an Bobel. > > i have recently heard AN GOOL PYRAN. This is also incorrect. > Pyran is a proper noun and is definite. The article is not merely unnecessary, it is incorrect. > > On Youtube there is a video from 1964 of the first wedding ever in Cornish, which took place in the parish church of St Piran, Perranaworthal. > The commentary begins with a shot of the church, the flag of St Piran fluttering in front of it and the spoken words: > AN EGLOS SEN PYRAN. This is incorrect; the narrator should have said EGLOS SEN PYRAN 'the church of St Piran' or better still > EGLOS PYRAN 'the church of St Piran'. > > Pyran is a proper name, it is therefore definite; any noun governed by it is therefore also definite; the definite artice is not required and indeed is incorrect. > > Nicholas > > > > This email has been scanned by Netintelligence > http://www.netintelligence.com/email > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7257 - Release Date: 03/27/14 > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From craig at agantavas.org Fri Mar 28 16:12:08 2014 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 16:12:08 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite In-Reply-To: <7AFAEDC9-A7A9-439F-B880-9B746ABFE772@gmail.com> References: <002301cf4a97$ab1fd160$015f7420$@ferintosh.org> <7AFAEDC9-A7A9-439F-B880-9B746ABFE772@gmail.com> Message-ID: <2470AD0C-BA4A-42C4-B485-3FD8A9B8E02F@agantavas.org> is never found historically. In place-name history, by far the commonest spelling is and, as a result, all the current place-name spellings containing the name is Craig On 2014 Mer 28, at 15:57, Nicholas Williams wrote: > I should have put Gorseth Kernow at the head of phrase and would have said: Gorseth Kernow a bew an lyver-ma. > That is unambiguous, grammatical and has a verb. > > Pyth Gorseth Kernow even when the syntax is corrected, looks like a direct translation from Property of the Gorsedd of Cornwall. > > Nicholas > > On 28 Mar 2014, at 15:09, Ken MacKinnon wrote: > >> I have a copy of Lyver Hymnys ha Salmow (gifted to me by Richard Jenkin). The flyleaf is rubber-stamped: ?Pyth An Orseth Kernow?. >> >> I have wondered about this, whether it should more properly have been ?Pyth Gorseth a Gernow?. >> >> What do you think, Nicholas? >> >> - An ken Ken >> >> From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of Nicholas Williams >> Sent: 28 March 2014 14:12 >> To: Standard Cornish discussion list >> Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite >> >> I have mentioned this before but it is perhaps worth repeating. >> When I was recently at the Kesc?ssulyans I noticed a little book for >> children on the stall of the Cowethas/Kowethas. >> The title was >> >> STERENN AN KOLIN KERNOW. >> >> I think that this title was meant to be understood as >> 'Sterenn the Cornish Puppy'. Unfortunately it cannot bear that sense. >> If it means anything it could possibly mean 'The star of the puppy of Cornwall', but the syntax is still wrong. >> >> The problem arises from the difficulty in the Celtic languages of having indefinite >> nouns dependent on definite ones. >> >> In Irish for example to say 'a king of France' one has to say r? de r?the na Fraince i.e. a king of the kings of France, >> and for 'a city bus' (as distinct from a country bus) one has to say bus de chuid na cathrach >> i.e. 'a bus of the share of the city'. >> >> The same rule applies in Cornish, though Nance did not seem to have understood it properly >> so he writes *an Yeth Kernow for Yeth Kernow 'the language of Cornwall' >> and Lyver *an Pymp Marthus Seleven for Lyver Pymp Marthus Seleven. >> Since Kernow and Seleven are both definite, the nouns dependent upon them are all definite. >> >> If one wants to say 'Sterenn, a Cornish puppy' >> one would need to write (and I am using the orthography of the author) one of the following: >> >> STERENN, KOLIN DHIWORTH KERNOW >> STERENN, KOLIN A GERNOW >> KOLIN A GERNOW, STERENN Y HANOW >> >> If one wants to say 'Sterenn, the Cornish puppy' one would need to write: >> >> STERENN, AN KOLIN A GERNOW >> STERENN, AN KOLIN DHIWORTH KERNOW >> though neither is very happy since either could mean 'the Star of the puppy of Cornwall'. >> >> Perhaps >> >> AN KOLIN A GERNOW, STERENN Y HANOW would be the best rendering. >> >> The expression Yeth an Weryn is objectionable for the same reason. >> It can only mean 'the Lanuage of the People' and is ipso facto definite. >> It is of doubtful validity anywhere since gweryn has been borrowed from Welsh >> and is unattested in Cornish. In more authentic Cornish the phrase would be >> Tavas an Bobel or possible Y?th an Bobel. >> >> i have recently heard AN GOOL PYRAN. This is also incorrect. >> Pyran is a proper noun and is definite. The article is not merely unnecessary, it is incorrect. >> >> On Youtube there is a video from 1964 of the first wedding ever in Cornish, which took place in the parish church of St Piran, Perranaworthal. >> The commentary begins with a shot of the church, the flag of St Piran fluttering in front of it and the spoken words: >> AN EGLOS SEN PYRAN. This is incorrect; the narrator should have said EGLOS SEN PYRAN 'the church of St Piran' or better still >> EGLOS PYRAN 'the church of St Piran'. >> >> Pyran is a proper name, it is therefore definite; any noun governed by it is therefore also definite; the definite artice is not required and indeed is incorrect. >> >> Nicholas >> >> >> >> This email has been scanned by Netintelligence >> http://www.netintelligence.com/email >> No virus found in this message. >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3722/7257 - Release Date: 03/27/14 >> _______________________________________________ >> 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: From njawilliams at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 16:17:53 2014 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 16:17:53 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> <004001cf49e3$5125f680$f371e380$@ferintosh.org> <000001cf4a47$9d96c170$d8c44450$@ferintosh.org> <6C99A42E-2C81-4667-A743-5BBFB577CF49@agantavas.org> Message-ID: <8B133927-F753-4E9C-9100-B72878A35659@gmail.com> Where? I should very much like to know The only festivals containing gool that I have been able to find are Degl st?l Epiphany - January 6 (AB: 57a) [st?l or st?l is for st?llae, the star seen by the magi; cf. Welsh ystwyll, and Irish Nollaig St?ille 'epiphany'] Goluan St John's Eve - 23 June (Ustick MSS) dugol myhal, dugol myhall Michaelmas - 29 September (BM: 2077, BM 2201) and woyl Myhal (BK 13770). Nicholas On 28 Mar 2014, at 15:52, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > I believe that , for Boxing Day, is also attested somewhere. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 16:18:47 2014 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 16:18:47 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite In-Reply-To: <2470AD0C-BA4A-42C4-B485-3FD8A9B8E02F@agantavas.org> References: <002301cf4a97$ab1fd160$015f7420$@ferintosh.org> <7AFAEDC9-A7A9-439F-B880-9B746ABFE772@gmail.com> <2470AD0C-BA4A-42C4-B485-3FD8A9B8E02F@agantavas.org> Message-ID: <1FBC016D-0597-436F-AD2B-7E2E1C1ACC97@gmail.com> Though e and y in short stressed syllables are allophones in Middle Cornish. On 28 Mar 2014, at 16:12, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > is never found historically. In place-name history, by far the commonest spelling is and, as a result, all the current place-name spellings containing the name is -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From craig at agantavas.org Fri Mar 28 16:22:29 2014 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 16:22:29 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] SWF review results. In-Reply-To: <8B133927-F753-4E9C-9100-B72878A35659@gmail.com> References: <57CE1834-BE78-48F4-AEE7-E43F72120315@agantavas.org> <010008C5-9BA5-40E1-905A-A1A7C5147261@agantavas.org> <976EFE30-A088-4761-93AE-10F7AE78C592@ryan-prohaska.com> <24FBA7C5-BB38-4EFD-AD21-12228055F442@gmail.com> <0E0456DE-190B-4D0B-A9B8-15342DC2ADE1@agantavas.org> <001301cf49b8$200348d0$6009da70$@ferintosh.org> <8FFF0D19-41B1-48CB-9F4A-E2CD12A529B8@agantavas.org> <004001cf49e3$5125f680$f371e380$@ferintosh.org> <000001cf4a47$9d96c170$d8c44450$@ferintosh.org> <6C99A42E-2C81-4667-A743-5BBFB577CF49@agantavas.org> <8B133927-F753-4E9C-9100-B72878A35659@gmail.com> Message-ID: <087EE7DA-2D9B-4049-9373-367603F980EE@agantavas.org> Very good question. To the best of my recollection (probably 20-odd years ago), Dick Gendall had found it. Craig On 2014 Mer 28, at 16:17, Nicholas Williams wrote: > Where? I should very much like to know > > The only festivals containing gool that I have been able to find are > > Degl st?l Epiphany - January 6 (AB: 57a) [st?l or st?l is for st?llae, the star seen by the magi; cf. Welsh ystwyll, and Irish Nollaig St?ille 'epiphany'] > Goluan St John's Eve - 23 June (Ustick MSS) > dugol myhal, dugol myhall Michaelmas - 29 September (BM: 2077, BM 2201) and woyl Myhal (BK 13770). > > Nicholas > > > On 28 Mar 2014, at 15:52, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > >> I believe that , for Boxing Day, is also attested somewhere. > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From philip.newton at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 16:48:56 2014 From: philip.newton at gmail.com (Philip Newton) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 17:48:56 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 28 March 2014 15:11, Nicholas Williams wrote: > If one wants to say 'Sterenn, the Cornish puppy' one would need to write: > > STERENN, AN KOLIN A GERNOW > STERENN, AN KOLIN DHIWORTH KERNOW What about: STERENN, KOLIN KERNOW ? Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton From everson at evertype.com Fri Mar 28 18:12:33 2014 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 18:12:33 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <71FC1F7A-D4B1-483E-9689-79AA76979A86@evertype.com> On 28 Mar 2014, at 16:48, Philip Newton wrote: > What about: STERENN, KOLIN KERNOW ? If there were only one... Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From njawilliams at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 18:32:46 2014 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 18:32:46 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Fine, but is it wise to have a title that depends for its sense on punctuation? Particularly in this case, where the book is aimed at children. On 28 Mar 2014, at 16:48, Philip Newton wrote: > What about: STERENN, KOLIN KERNOW ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk Fri Mar 28 18:37:01 2014 From: eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk (Eddie Climo) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 18:37:01 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite In-Reply-To: <71FC1F7A-D4B1-483E-9689-79AA76979A86@evertype.com> References: <71FC1F7A-D4B1-483E-9689-79AA76979A86@evertype.com> Message-ID: <0F3A616A-B2AE-4850-87B3-76BD8B2D1E30@yahoo.co.uk> The phrase could be glossed, "Steren, Cornwall's dog," in which case there might well only be one of them, or, at least, perhaps only one at a time. However, consider "Jamys, Myghtern Breten." Clearly we'd expect only one at a time, but the kingdom has had a whole string of them (including one known affectionately in Ireland as 'Jamys an Caugh', or the equivalent in Gaeilge). But the phrase could also be glossed as "Steren, a dog of Cornwall," in which case there could be whole packs of the brutes stravaiging aroung. Consider "Jowan, tryger Truru"?I bet there's loads of them in the city! Which way you interpreted any of these would surely depend upon context to determine what made sense. Eddie Climo On 28 Mar 2014, at 18:12, Michael Everson wrote: > On 28 Mar 2014, at 16:48, Philip Newton wrote: > >> What about: STERENN, KOLIN KERNOW ? > > If there were only one... > > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net From eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk Fri Mar 28 18:58:59 2014 From: eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk (Eddie Climo) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 18:58:59 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <19AC19B9-A82C-4D08-B8B4-B30F0651FA92@yahoo.co.uk> I would have thought it wise, after all, punctuation has an integral role in clarifying meaning in written language, and children need to learn this. After all, consider the book title,"thehobbitorthereandbackagain." Isn't it clearer when articulated with spaces, line breaks, and punctuation marks, not to mention soem well-chosen capitalisation, as in: THE HOBBIT, or, There and Back Again. Eddie Climo On 28 Mar 2014, at 18:32, Nicholas Williams wrote: > Fine, but is it wise to have a title that depends for its sense on punctuation? > Particularly in this case, where the book is aimed at children. > > > On 28 Mar 2014, at 16:48, Philip Newton wrote: > >> What about: STERENN, KOLIN KERNOW ? > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From janicelobb at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 19:55:44 2014 From: janicelobb at gmail.com (Janice Lobb) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 19:55:44 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I doubt if children care as much about punctuation as you do Jan On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Nicholas Williams wrote: > Fine, but is it wise to have a title that depends for its sense on > punctuation? > Particularly in this case, where the book is aimed at children. > > > On 28 Mar 2014, at 16:48, Philip Newton wrote: > > What about: STERENN, KOLIN KERNOW ? > > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From everson at evertype.com Fri Mar 28 20:18:38 2014 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 20:18:38 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 28 Mar 2014, at 19:55, Janice Lobb wrote: > I doubt if children care as much about punctuation as you do There?s no reason they shouldn?t. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From njawilliams at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 20:21:21 2014 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 20:21:21 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: They wouldn't see the punctuation and would read Sterenn, an Kolin Kernow as Sterenn an Kolin Kernow which does not mean what the author wanted it to mean. On 28 Mar 2014, at 20:18, Michael Everson wrote: >> I doubt if children care as much about punctuation as you do > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nige.martin at gmail.com Sat Mar 29 10:21:52 2014 From: nige.martin at gmail.com (nige.martin) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 10:21:52 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite Message-ID: Somewhat off-topic, but here goes: I am back in Kernow for my Son's wedding (until 8 Apr). Whilst here I would like to have an authentic Kernewak or Keltek nations tattoo engraved into my right upper-arm - to balance the one tattoo I have on my left upper-arm. I am considering one of the following: A Kernewak crest, depicting the coat of arms as per that on the Tamar bridge (bezants, miner, fisherman, chough, onen hag oll); A map of Kernow with, perhaps, "Kernow" and "Onen Hag Oll" included; A flag of Keltek nations, preferrably to include all Keltek/Celtic nations. If these are too numerous for use in an upper arm-sized tattoo I will happily compromise with an internationally recognised and official Celtic symbol. Whilst being aware that this is not the behaviour expected from a 51-year-old, I am open to constructive suggestions from this learned group of Spellyans contributors; especially, to which reputable artist I should aporoach. Whilst back "home" I would welcome the opportunity to engage with Cornish language advocates and visit some cornish-specific events. As you can tell, planning is not my forte....I should have arranged this well beforehand. I will use other, global events as my excuse in this instance. Nigel Sent from Samsung Mobile
-------- Original message --------
From: Eddie Climo
Date:28/03/2014 18:58 (GMT+00:00)
To: Standard Cornish discussion list
Subject: Re: [Spellyans] definite and indefinite
I would have thought it wise, after all, punctuation has an integral role in clarifying meaning in written language, and children need to learn this. After all, consider the book title,"thehobbitorthereandbackagain." Isn't it clearer when articulated with spaces, line breaks, and punctuation marks, not to mention soem well-chosen capitalisation, as in: THE HOBBIT, or, There and Back Again. Eddie Climo On 28 Mar 2014, at 18:32, Nicholas Williams wrote: Fine, but is it wise to have a title that depends for its sense on punctuation? Particularly in this case, where the book is aimed at children. On 28 Mar 2014, at 16:48, Philip Newton wrote: What about: STERENN, KOLIN KERNOW ? _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From philip.newton at gmail.com Sat Mar 29 15:47:34 2014 From: philip.newton at gmail.com (Philip Newton) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 16:47:34 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Tattoo in Cornwall (was Re: definite and indefinite) Message-ID: On 29 March 2014 11:21, nige.martin wrote: > I am back in Kernow for my Son's wedding (until 8 Apr). [snip] > Whilst back "home" I would welcome the opportunity to engage > with Cornish language advocates and visit some cornish-specific > events. Then you should definitely try to make it to the Pennseythun Gernewek (the Cornish Language Weekend), which takes place in Newquay from the 4th till the 6th of April (Friday till Sunday). Regular registration closed on the 28th of February but it's possible that they might be able to let a latecomer in if you ask nicely :) It's also possible to sign up for only part of the weekend if you're not free all three days. Have a look at http://www.cornish-language.org/pennseythun-2014a , which links to a registration form which contains information about the event itself and also includes contact details for the Kowethas. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton