eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk
Wed Nov 14 14:12:20 GMT 2012
On 2012 Du 14, at 11:20, Michael Everson wrote:
> Do you think there is a road back to UC?
'Back'? UC/r is still in active use today, with a large corpus that is still being added to by several publishers. It has an established position as the classic form of Revived Cornish, so there's no need for an imaginary 'road back', nor indeed any need for grandiose claims about its stature in the history of our language.
The boot, if anything, is on the other foot: is there a 'road forward' for KS? Does it have a long-term future? Only one person writing in it, only one person publishing in it, no classes in it, no public signage in it, not adopted by any Cornish organisation. It could be said to be periously close to an idiolect--one person's written form, albeit with a growing published corpus produced by him.
> That the authorities will drop the SWF,
Of course they won't, silly boy!
> and [drop] everything we have learned about Cornish that informs KS, or that informed UCR previously?
Hah! That they might very well do, albeit that some of that so-called 'learning' is actually no more than the opinion of one or two people. From what has been said to me by sources in or near to MAGA, there will only be 'minor changes to the SWF in 2013'. The chances, I fancy, are vanishingly small that for SWF2 they will adopt much of KS or of 'everything we have learned about Cornish...'
> UC writes ‹map›
WRONG! Please get your facts right and stop misquoting what UC allegedly writes. What UC actually offers is 'map/mab' (Nance 1938, 1952, 1955). The choice is left to individuals as to whether to write or pronounce 'map' or 'mab. This is in fact a fundamental option in UC, along with quite a lot of optional Late Cornish forms.
Nance's 1938 Pronunciation guide says this:
> b as final commonly hardens to p, as in heb to hep, mab to map, ryb to ryp, but may remain b before following initial vowels, though M. Cor. MSS make no such discrimination. Final b is actually commoner in all but Ordinalia spelling.
...Michael Everson wrote:
> which people say as [mæp], though the recommended pronunciation is now [mæːb]. It writes ‹scul› which is [skyːl]~[skiːl], though the word is [skøːl]~[skeːl] (UCR ‹scuel›, KS/SWF ‹skeul›). I can't think of those things as anything but unfortunate choices, whether by error or by design.
As the quote above proves, the choice to disregard <heb, mab, ryb...> has been that of individual teachers or speakers, rather than part of the design of UC. UC correctly points out that the M.Corn. MSS attest both forms, and allows Kernewegoryon to choose which they prefer to use.
> Fathers and mothers want their children to learn from them and to do better. Isn't it right for us to believe that what Jenner and Nance and Smyth would have wanted for us to do is to make Cornish orthography better?
This fallacy is sometimes dubbed the 'Argument of Absent Authority'; Jenner, Nance, Smith [sic] et al are no longer here to dispute any crackpot notions that are put forward in their names...nor yet to endorse any valid ones either. They might well have wanted Cornish Orthography to be improved, but that is far from saying they'd have endorsed KS (as you've asserted on this forum in the past, Michael).
KS = SWF2? Vanishingly unlikely.
KS = UC3? Piffle!
KS = Jenner Mark II? Ditto!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Spellyans