[Spellyans] SWF review
ray at spyrys.org
Fri May 9 17:26:48 IST 2014
On 9 Me 2014, at 10:03, Philip Newton wrote:
> On 9 May 2014 10:31, Ray Chubb <ray at spyrys.org> wrote:
>> The only reason that the Review Board decided to 'dumb up' on this
>> issue is
>> because medial 'gh' is part of Kernewek Kemyn.
> Do you have a source for that?
No I don't and it can't be proved unless we are told the names of
those requesting this change.
> Because my assumption was that they did it as a measure to make SWF
> more similar to those things that are shared by UC and KK—a kind of
> Since UC seems to be used by more people than UCR, so this change
> would make SWF more similar to what most people previously used.
This may or may not be true. What I think is true is that most Unified
users are tolerant of UC(r) and are familiar with its Tudor basis,
even if they don't write it, so very few of them now pronounce
[ˈflɛxǝs] etc. On the other hand I have heard a number of Kemyn
users pronounce [ˈflɛxǝs] etc. and one of them told me that one of
the things she found lacking in the SWF was the absence of medial 'gh'
because as a Kemyn user she pronounced [ˈflɛxǝs] etc. I think that
most Kemyn users have no idea that it is an archaic pronunciation when
a medial 'gh' is pronounced whereas most Unified users, especially
those that belong to Agan Tavas, do.
> Philip Newton <philip.newton at gmail.com>
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
Agan Tavas web site: www.agantavas.com
More information about the Spellyans