[Spellyans] An Abecedary Kernowek
everson at evertype.com
Sun Mar 29 16:17:02 BST 2009
On 29 Mar 2009, at 14:34, <ajtrim at msn.com> <ajtrim at msn.com> wrote:
> All vowels have their long sound as their name. That's OK, I think.
> For the long and short forms, I would just add ber or hir, rather
> than trying to describe the diacritical mark used.
We need terms for the marks. Note too that circumflex is not only a
mark of length; in some cases it marks quantity.
> For the alternative forms ë and ÿ, I would add eylyans.
I much prefer dewboynt.
> All consonants use the vowel, e (sometimes long; sometimes short),
> except for q.
> Why not make q = qwê?
For one because q doesn't have the sound of [kw] unless the w is
written with it.
> Most consonant names start with the consonant and have -ê suffixed.
> Why don't f, h, l, m, n, r, s, x conform?
Because of the history of the alphabet. Leaving aside "h" and "x", the
alphabet which the Romans inherited from the Etruscans added -e to the
letters except for those sonants which could be pronounced without a
vowel [f:: l:: m:: n:: r::]. In letter-naming throughout Europe, these
get an epenthetic e-.
> It's because these consonants can be pronounced long, so to
> emphasise these, we start with a short e, we suffix the consonant,
> and we pronounce it long.
> x is an exception to these "rules". It should be called xê.
What? [kse:]? I really do prefer [ɛks], and I think most would agree.
> v could be ev but it is called vê to distinguish it from ef. That's
And conforms with standard European practice. (I know the Welsh do
that weird thing saying "ec" instead of "ce" for c, but that's
> h could be eh. However, this is difficult to say distinctly, so I
> recommend egh.
I think hâ does better.
> Teaching the alphabet will then reinforce the connection between h
> and gh, and it would help to teach the sound of gh at the same time.
> The name, êch does not conform, and it isn't helpful.
Agreed; êch derives from French, and hâ seems sensible enough.
> You could use cû for the letter, and use qwê for the combination qw
> in spelling. The word qwil then becomes qwê î ell.
That would be a bit unprecedented.
I tend to favour "cû wê î ell" or "kyû wê î ell".
> You may wish to consider m = ebm, and n = edn.
I think that would be a mistake. Every one including RLC speakers
calls these [ɛm] and [ɛn]. In KS we write this easily, èm, èn.
> These would conform with the long consonant rule, and it would help
> to teach the correct sound of bm and that of dn, where the b and d
> should be incompletely exploded.
That should be learned in words which pre-occlude. There's no evidence
that the letters m and n had pre-occluding names.
> So here is my suggestion:
> â, bê, cê, dê, ê, ef, gê, egh, î, jê, kê, ell, ebm, edn, ô,
> pê, cû, èr, èss, tê, û, vê, wê, xê, yê, zê, (with qwê for
> qw in spelling out words because you never use q alone.)
> Then, è would be è bèr, ê would be ê hir, ë would be ê
> eylyans, etc.
"Alternation e"? I think "two-point e" is much better.
I had a chat offline with Eddie and so far he and I still think the
best run is:
â, bê, cê, dê, ê, ef, gê, hâ, î, jê, kê, ell, èm, èn, ô,
pê, cû, èr, èss, tê, û, vê, wê, ex, yê, zê
... though whether cû or kyû is better remains uncertain.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
More information about the Spellyans