[Spellyans] 2013 SWF Review

Daniel Prohaska daniel at ryan-prohaska.com
Thu Apr 18 12:23:19 BST 2013

Here are the 56 issues. I'm afraid they're listed without examples and out of context, which makes it a little difficult to comment on… there are also many typos, so this was obviously put together somewhat halfheartedly…


1       Geminates

                   a       rules for doubling geminates

                   b       lack of ultimate double <nn>

                   c        lack of clarity

d       vowel length in words which double geminates in plural e reduction of <ll>, <mm> & <rr> medially

                   f        suffixes in <-el>, <en>


2       <i> graph used inappropriately in prefixes and suffixes


3       Aesthetics


4       Distribution of <i> and <y> is unclear and incoherent


5       Difficulty in distinguishing different sounds for long <a>, short <o> and <u>


6       varying vowel & consonant values


7       minimal use of <z>


8       reduction of <oo> to <o> and <gh> to <h>, causing confusion and misrepresentation.


9       vocalic alternation - lack of a systematic and understandable rule


10     <th> in RLC variant - standing on its own when reduced from <yth>


11     <ow> - RLC variant <o>: <a> would be preferable


12     RLC e/a - SWF/L uses <e> where RLC would use <a>


13     words containing the umbrella graph <u> - represents seeral different pronunciations


14     words containing or ending in consonants not pronounced in Late Cornish


15     voiced and unvoiced consonants - confusion


16     discrimination against traditional graphs


17     Use of hyphens - optional use is confusing


18     dictionary methodology - collective nouns first causes confusion


19     diferent pronunication values for <s> / <j> / <z>


20     excess number of variants - needs to be reduced


21     use of letter c


22     vowel length in monosyllabic loanwords in -p and -t


23     dhyworth


24     reduction of unstressed vowels to schwa - no spelling issue, but assertion in the specification


25     etymological spellings - must have a pracical rationale, not theoretical


26     graphs <au> and <ai> - shoul dbe used for some loanwords


27     some diacritical marks must be explicitly permitted is not mandated


28     graph <iw> - should be replaced by <yw>


29     lack of a mechanism to mark long vowels in polysyllabic words


30     inconsistent treatment of pre-occlusion


31     alternation ew/ow is unclear


32     ye-/e- alternation not consistent


33     <a> / <oa> alternation is not consistent


34     lack of identification of irregular long vowels


35     pronunciation of <ey> in treylya


36     ambiguity over <ma> and <na>


37     unified <ü> - how is it accommodated?


38     inconsistent conversion of KK <oe> to SWF <oo> in monosyllables


39     loan words with <c>


40     lack of consistency


41     <e> & <y>

                   a       inclusion of <e> / <y> alternatives unneccesary

                   b       & how to deal with secondary i-mutation of <e> to <y>


42     spelling of <nowyth>


43     RLC personal endings - reduction proposed


44     <junnya> - confusion over the vowel


45     <kk> & <ck> - difference depends on knowing the etymology. 46 seulabrys - issue with the use of <eu>


47     use of apostrophes in RLC variants confusing


48     reduction of <ll> to <l> in polysyllables


49     <o> / <u> differentiation


50     extent of use of <uw>


51     <eu> variants


52     <gwr> / <gr> variants


53     final <i> / <ei> variants


54     doubled & hardened endings - superlative/subjunctive


55     inconsistency in verb roots


56     use of <oo>, giving rise to unfortunate or risible spellings



On Apr 18, 2013, at 12:32 PM, A. J. Trim wrote:

> As you may know, the MAGA Kernow website now has a link to “Collated issues for SWF review.pdf” / “List of issues raised for the SWF Review”.
> We have until the end of this month to comment.
> There are apparently 56 issues.
> Regards,
> Andrew J. Trim
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20130418/c9360cd3/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Spellyans mailing list