[Spellyans] SWF review results.

[Daniel Prohaska]

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 <ll> and <rr> in roots.  Do not revert to single letter in unstressed non-final syllables where that changes the root.
> 2.  Introduce <ll> for <dell>, <-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 <o> and <u>
> 1. Change to <o> in <arlodh>, in line with <toll>, <tomm>, <boka>, <bronn>, <koska>
> 

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!


> <GH> and <H>
> 1. <gh> 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 [ɦ] ("arkans, mikturn" etc.). I have yet to hear KK-supporters pronounce, e.g. ‹byghan› 'small, little' as recommended by Ken George as [ˈbɪˑɦan]: 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: KK.byghan.mp3
Type: audio/mpeg
Size: 21786 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20140325/2efb5dad/attachment.mp3>
-------------- next part --------------



> 
> PARTICLE <th> in SWF/L
> 1. Join particle with verb as in <thera>, without a gap.

Fine by me. 


> 
> PARTICLE (ow>- RLC VARIANT <o>
> 1. Retain <o> (present participle), but drop the apostrophe.

Fine. 

> 
> <NOWYTH>
> 1. To be respelt <nowydh> (M), or <nowedh>.

Good. 

> 
> HYPHENS
> 1.  Remove hyphens from numbers, particles and some other words, e.g. <ebost>.

Why ‹ebost› for ‹e-bost›. I don't like it. 

> 2.  Add hyphens in loose compounds of the form 'noun + verbal noun', e.g. <jynn-skrifa>, <skath-wolya>, 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.  <poslev/poslevow> to replace <poos-lev/poos-levow>.

Correct. 

> 4.  <erbynn> to replace <er-bynn>.

Yes, better. 

> (but personal use to remain optional).
> 
> VOWEL LENGTH IN MONOSYLLABIC LOAN WORDS ENDING -p OR -t.
> 1.  To be written as <pp>, <tt> 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. <hattys/hattow>

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 <dhyworth> and <dyworth> as alternatives, and <dhort> and <dort> in RLC variants.

Good. 

> 
> A/OA ALTERNATION
> 1.  Remove RLC variants <toal>, <kloav>, <gwoav>, <gwloan>, spelling them only with -a-.

Fine by me. 

> 2.  Add <boas>, <doas>, <moas> in RLC variants to the remaining <broas>.

Fine by me. 

> 
> <OO> for KK <OE>
> 1.  <goolan> to become <golan>.  Otherwise, no change.

And the irregular ‹skoodhya, scoodhya›? Also ‹skodhya, scodhya›?

> 
> <kk> AND <ck>
> 1.  <ck> to be used in all borrowings; <kk> 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.  <okkupya> to be respelt <okupya>.

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. <skydnya> from <dyskynna>.

Good.

> 3.  Do not use internally, e.g. <metern> from <myghtern> and <mos> from <mowes>.

Good.

> 4.  Do not use after <kal> (KK <kalgh>).

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. 

> 
> <eu>
> 1.  Add SWF/L <enkladhva>, SWF/M <ynkladhva>  (presently SWF <ynkleudhva>).

Better. 

> 2.  Allow <teudhi and <tedha> as alternative spellings.

Fine, though ‹teudha› would yield the same pronunciation as ‹tedha› for RLC speakers. 

> 3.  Add to SWF/L <bidhi> (currently <beudhi> only); and <briji> (currently <breuji> in SWF/L).
> No change to <breusi>, <Meurth>, <feusik>.

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 <gwr-> in RMC and RLC, inclusing <gwra>, <gwruthyl>.

Fine by me. 

> 
> GEMINATION & PROVECTION IN SUPERLATIVES/SUBJUNCTIVES
> 1.  Retain <tth>, introduce corresponding <ggh>, <cch>, <ssh>.

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.  <wortiwedh/wostiwedh> and <wostalleth/wortalleth> to be single words, without apostrophes.

Fine by me. 

> 
> 1ST PERSON SINGULAR
> 1  RC variant <me>, <ve>, no longer required.

Fine by me. But what about ‹ty, chy, jy› 'thou, thee'?
Dan


> 
> 
> Craig