search pnForum latest posts Note: Registered users can subscribe to notifications about new posts Note: Registered users can subscribe to notifications about new posts

Print topic to next topic

Start ::  Cornwall24 Discussion ::  Cornish Language, Culture and History ::  Cornish language in pre-schools
Moderated by: Admins

Goto page : Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Next Page
Bottom 

Cornish language in pre-schools

marhak Posted: 21.05.2007, 19:22

marhak

registered: Jun. 2006
Posts: 4473

Status: offline
last visit: 10.01.09
There were most surely regional differences in Cornish speech (dialects, if you like), just as there used to be within living memory in Cornu-English speech, when a St Ives man could be distinguished from a Mousehole man (or a St Just man from a Hayle man, etc)
simply by his speech.

Pre-occlusion is, I think an example of this. It is a feature of Cornish used in the western half of Cornwall (not just Penwith/Kerrier hundreds - it occurs as far east as St Ewe).
Top  Profile send PM
 
morvran Posted: 22.05.2007, 00:21

morvran

registered: Mar. 2007
Posts: 1443

Status: online
Yes, there were not doubt local differences in spoken Cornish from place to place throughout it's history. Trouble is we don't have enough evidence to know what they were.

Things like preocclusion were changes that happened in time, not space. Julyan Holmes in particular has shown that preocclusion happened where ever Cornish was spoken, which since it was a fairly late development, means only in the West.
Top  Profile send PM
 
Evertype Posted: 22.05.2007, 00:28

Evertype

registered: Mar. 2007
Posts: 1366

Status: offline
last visit: 08.01.09
There is clear evidence for dialect in traditional Cornish. Holmes has not written a coherent discussion of the matter. I read it. It was a samizdat Word document. Did he submit it to Cornish Studies? Studia Celtica? You know he didn't. There was no real scholarship in that document. It was a rant. Holmes "showed" nothing.
Top  Profile send PM Homepage
 
goky Posted: 22.05.2007, 02:09

goky

registered: May. 2007
Posts: 1828

Status: offline
last visit: 09.11.08
Isn't Cornish Studies biased towards LC??

The blog The Great Goky Blog
Top  Profile send PM
 
morvran Posted: 22.05.2007, 02:14

morvran

registered: Mar. 2007
Posts: 1443

Status: online
I think the above shows what we're up against. Any evidence or reasoning contrary to Williams' creed is dismissed out of hand without consideration or detailed criticism. The usual academic approach is to say, "well he's on the right track here, but he's overlooked such-and-such there ..." and so on, so that one person's insights build on another's. Alas the approach of Everson and his ilk is closer to that of a religious bigot than a scientist or scholar. If the lizard has spots contrary to Aristotle, then the ignorant lizard must by wrong!
Top  Profile send PM
 
marhak Posted: 22.05.2007, 07:22

marhak

registered: Jun. 2006
Posts: 4473

Status: offline
last visit: 10.01.09
I haven't seen much LC in Cornish Studies. Do you get that idea because Bernard Deacon works there?
Top  Profile send PM
 
marhak Posted: 22.05.2007, 07:25

marhak

registered: Jun. 2006
Posts: 4473

Status: offline
last visit: 10.01.09
So, Keith, you and Julyan agree that pre-occlusion was a natural development of Cornish. Therefore it's valid. So why don't we write it in contemporary Cornish (because Nance programmed most people into rejecting it, in my view)?
Top  Profile send PM
 
goky Posted: 22.05.2007, 11:06

goky

registered: May. 2007
Posts: 1828

Status: offline
last visit: 09.11.08
I Was thinking of Peyton,

The blog The Great Goky Blog
Top  Profile send PM
 
goky Posted: 22.05.2007, 11:09

goky

registered: May. 2007
Posts: 1828

Status: offline
last visit: 09.11.08
Even NJW decided not to use pre-occlusion in his UCR. Only Dick Gendall has been consistant in it's use in the written language.

The blog The Great Goky Blog
Top  Profile send PM
 
Evertype Posted: 22.05.2007, 11:35

Evertype

registered: Mar. 2007
Posts: 1366

Status: offline
last visit: 08.01.09
morvranI think the above shows what we're up against. Any evidence or reasoning contrary to Williams' creed is dismissed out of hand without consideration or detailed criticism. The usual academic approach is to say, "well he's on the right track here, but he's overlooked such-and-such there ..." and so on, so that one person's insights build on another's. Alas the approach of Everson and his ilk is closer to that of a religious bigot than a scientist or scholar. If the lizard has spots contrary to Aristotle, then the ignorant lizard must by wrong!
Nonsense. If Holmes had made a case which was in any way convincing I would say so. It was not.

"The approach of Everson and his ilk is closer to that of a religious bigot than a scientist or scholar." Well, Keith, so much for your ability to negotiate. "Everson and his ilk"? You mean "People who do not like KK", don't you? "People who have the temerity to disagree with George's reconstruction and with the fanaticism with which his devotees support it."

It is despicable that you stoop to try to belittle my own reputation in the way that you have. But it belittles you, I think. Fortunately my reputation as a scholar and expert in the writing systems of the world does not depend on what you say, Keith. My work speaks for itself.

Pretty much every time you discuss these matters, you end up in ad-hominem attacks on us, as you have done here. Evidently, you despise us because we, as intelligent reviewers, have found fault in the horse you backed two decades ago. We have a right to find fault. And there are faults to find. And there are ways forward, which can be achieved through communication, compromise, and consensus.

I don't understand your motivations, Keith. I don't believe that your actions show that you care about the future of the Cornish language, however. I believe you are interested in the "power" which "running" the Revival through the Language Board gives you. It is shameful that after all this time you can still not accept that supporters of UC, RLC, and UCR have a right to have opinions about the Cornish language, and have a right to have a say in its orthography.

Some people on this forum "accuse" UFS of not wanting to compromise, but unfortunately, while we are interested in the opinions of KK users, the only way that a change we might make to KS would really be a compromise is if that compromise were recognized by the organization that supports KK. We might abandon "ue" for "eu" if Conan made some arguments. But what good would that do? The Kesva refuses to communicate with us; refuses to discuss compromise with us; refuses to move toward consensus with us. We cannot do anything about that. KK users within the Kesva who are tired of the impasse may consider doing so. KK users who are members of the Kowethas may consider pressuring their "leaders" to engage in dialogue. If there is to be change, it will have to come from within. Keith is a member of the Kesva. You can judge his communiciation skills for yourself. I have tried courteous discussion and explanation of our views. He's tried to dismiss that by calling me a religious bigot. Does Keith, as a member of the Kesva, represent your views about the future of the Cornish language?
Top  Profile send PM Homepage
 
CJenkin Posted: 22.05.2007, 11:59



registered: Jan. 2005
Posts: 831

Status: offline
last visit: 09.01.09
QuoteDoes Keith, as a member of the Kesva, represent your views about the future of the Cornish language?


Actually he does, far more than you do. Of course as a democratic organisation you could have stood for Election as Keith Bailey did and people could have voted for you. In which case it could be judged whether your views have support or not and the level of support.

By not engaging in THAT process you are not contributing to the revival. The revival which will continue when you are pushing up daisies.

i have no time for people who try to usurp the democratic process, get involved or shut up. It's as simple as that.

You also clearly didn't notice that I did make an argument regarding the use of "eu". But as it wasn't a linguistic argument it was rejected out of hand. As a non-academic linguist its not my place to put those kinds of arguments, but the lack of consideration of other arguments - told me all I needed to know regarding KS and why it is fatally flawed in comparison to KD for example.

It is also amusing to see your attempts at characterising individuals and organisations which you have clearly had limited or no contact with. Again such un-founded criticism, just like the stuff emenating from marrack and Eddie-C tells me all I need to know and gives me no real confidence in the KS proposal.
Top  Profile send PM Homepage
 
morvran Posted: 22.05.2007, 21:28

morvran

registered: Mar. 2007
Posts: 1443

Status: online
The idea that there's any "power" to be had in or around the Kesva is so laughable as to be unworthy of refutation.

As for Julyan's paper (actually I believe he's written several, and some at least have been published in respectable journals etc), you seem to have dismissed it because it was produced on a word-processor and lacked the typographical refinements that are your stock-in-trade. As I've said before, the four handsome volumes that you've produced recently for your master are of the highest physical quality. A 'proper job' indeed. This however does not alter the fact that (a) they are effectively self-published with no external editing or adjudication, and (b) the contents are c98% tripe.
Top  Profile send PM
 
marhak Posted: 22.05.2007, 21:54

marhak

registered: Jun. 2006
Posts: 4473

Status: offline
last visit: 10.01.09
What's the 2% that isn't tripe, then?
Top  Profile send PM
 
goky Posted: 23.05.2007, 00:29

goky

registered: May. 2007
Posts: 1828

Status: offline
last visit: 09.11.08
that 2%
Maybe the ISBN number and the date.

The blog The Great Goky Blog
Top  Profile send PM
 
morvran Posted: 23.05.2007, 01:10

morvran

registered: Mar. 2007
Posts: 1443

Status: online
gokythat 2%
Maybe the ISBN number and the date.


Now even I think that's unfair, everyone's entitled to the occasional good idea, and some genuine (if minor) errors are pointed out. Unfortunately the endless 'nit-picking' of Williams and Everson makes finding these few gems a most tedious and unpleasant task.

I was actually quite disappointed by TAC, I was expecting some insightful reaction to the arguments of Dunbar and George etc. But I see now that this would have required that Williams take on board these ideas, at least in part, and react to them and build on and from them. As it is he has simply refused to entertain them, which feels rather unfair, given that we must have spent a good many hours attempting to make some sort of sense out of his (to us) rather strange notions.

Top  Profile send PM
 
Goto page : Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Next Page


Users online:
gokyreloaded - morvran - ThingsThatGoFlirInTheShla - Allister

This list bases on the users active in the last 60 minutes
Cornwall24 2006 (c) web design & web hosting by a-connect
Sponsors: Cornwall hotels, Cornwall self-catering, Cornwall restaurant guide,Devon
Cornwall 24 news feed
Cornwall 24 News and Views