V Tree
A large V shaped pine tree on the Antony estate near Torpoint...
Seaton Beach
Located at the bottom of the Seaton River valley this sand and shingle beach is popular with families. At low tide it joins up with Downderry around the headland...
Seaton River
The Seaton River as it flows out of the valley and through the village of the same name...
Portwrinkle
Looking down over the one time fishing village of Portwrinkle. In the background is the start of Whitsand Bay as it stretches 4 miles down the Rame Peninsula...
You use this term as if all languages have some mythical academically correct form. It simply isn't as black and white as that.
Take School welsh is that academically correct? By what criteria is it correct rather than North Welsh forms?
What about neologisms? What is the criteria for academically correct neologisms?
In a living language it is the people who use that language who ultimately impact on what is correct or not.
I don't expect an answer because there isn't one.
Whatever happens at the end of standardisation we are not going to end up with some pure language that can't be criticised by other academics.
The nature of Cornish being a revived language means that it is always potential for people to try to suggest that it is inauthentic because we don't have a continuous tradition of its use.
What we do have is a continuous tradition of revived Cornish having been used for the last 100 years and growing in that period despite all the obstacles put in its path through the hard work of those 'amateurs' that you seem so keen to deride.
As an individual you also are free to have your own opinions. Personally I value all those who have been working so hard within the CLP. They are the people who have got the language to a point where we can start talking about standardisation and establishing a plan for developing the language.
In the meantime whilst we are waiting for a standard to be adopted why not go off and learn our language? If you speak it then spelling won't be a problem for you.
Where is the crap which I am supposed to have written? Pray, disclose where the aggression is? It seems as though it is you who is losing your cool.
I have posted a number of observations with which you seem to disagree .
That having been said, to address your points:
Concensus - yes, this is important. However, in the case of our language, Hell is more likely to freeze over, since nobody seems to agree, before cocensus is achieved and my grandsons will be sporting white beards!. In order to achieve concensus, INDEPENDENT, academic analysis of the situation and input is required. KK and the other factions can then get round the table and agree with what the independent Panel comes up with. Simple as that! At the moment, there are too many vested interests and egos which are preventing concensus.
"This is not an academic choice it is a choice based on approaches to language learning."
Ahem! based on approaches to language learning by amateurs, I presume you mean. You must think I have straw between the ears! I am not aware of such a slack, cavalier process having been employed in other minority language standardisations.
As for the criteria - language experts and planners are best qualified to set the criteria. They should most definitely not be set by enthusiasts with vested interests on the outcome!
I never said that KK were against scrutiny. It's just that, from here, it looks that way. What is the big deal??
I never said that language development relies upon the advice of experts only. I said that expert opinion should govern and control the process in order to achieve an unbiased and fair result. The opinion of amateurs, although important, is secondary.
Now that that is off my chest, I await your next postings to tell me why academic input into Cornish standardisation should be less prominent than it has been in other processes (e.g. Rhaeto-Romantsch, Ulster Scots, Scots, Sami, etc) and why, in the case of Cornish, amateurs with no linguistic qualifications, who have a prolonged track record of squabbling and absolutely no experience of administrative procedures should bear the responsibility for the government's implementation of the Council of Europe's Charter for Regional or Minority Languages?
However, before we do, I would like you to clear up a couple of other points.
Your opinions, without doubt, are honestly held and we are all entitled to our opinions. You would like to see an outcome for KK, that is perfectly clear.
Myself - well, I don't really care, as long as it is the right form which comes through.
Your observations on neologisms are your opinions as a Cornish language enthusiast, not as an expert. You are perfectly entitled to articulate your point of view as, indeed am I with whom on this point, you disagree.
That is why academic experts need to play a central pivottal role in this problem because neither you nor I are qualified to pass any judgement.
The process must be seen to be fair, open and honest by all segments of the public and the language community. If it is not, then you know what will happen.
Totally agree with this
I am not adverse to another outcome than KK but at the moment that is my preference because I think we will be able to engage more quickly and effectively at getting Cornish into schools.
What I do think is that the spelling system ought to be phonemic again to help with learning, but it needn't neccessarilly be KK it could be a new orthography, or one that takes in features of existing orthographies.
Personally I don't really care lots because I don't think there is a lot of difference between most of them when you get down to it.
To be honest I can't really speak for anyone as a whole ...
You asked about
I think the big deal is that people are really keen to make sure that it is a fair and open process They want it to be right so that everyone can move forward together.
Although I would class myself as an amateur I think others in the language movement couldn't be classed as such. Certainly I don't think we have all the tools to hand so the advice of outside organisations and academics for the process has got to be welcomed and it seems to me that CLP is putting in place that process.
But it is still early days. To be honest the more outside validation for the SWF the better because it will enable people to get behind it.
Reading the exchanges between Conan and Hunlef I can see points by both, even though i think they both want the same thing but misunderstand what each other is saying. We all do this at times, I have found the difference between talking face to face and writing, is that in writing ideas are easily misunderstood, when they are not in conversation.
I do believe the need for the SWF is so very important, and that it must be settled by Academics. This is not because the Language Community needs it, but because everyone else does, sad but true. The General Public see the squabbles and have little faith in it all. The end result of an Academic Investigation and Result will we all hope put an end to that doubt. This is why all factions must go along with it.
I will say thought that there is a Genaral rule for English, which we call the Queens English, but that has not stopped the Variations that still excist. What is killing them is Radio and Television, these have done more to kill off dialect than anything else.
Anyway I can say at least 'I talk proper'
Of course, we all want the same outcome. The situation regarding Cornish is a difficult topic to sort over and there are clearly many subjective facets to discuss. I entirely understand this point. However, it is my view that the argument can only be settled with a fair sprinkling of objectivity which only an academic investigation, with strict rules and criteria, can introduce.
At the end of the day, I couldn't give a stuff about which form is used, as long as it is the right one. CJenkin is quite entitled to hold his/her views and promote them wherever he/she sees fit. Despite this exchange, in which a fair bit of steam has escaped, I think we both wish for our children and grandchildren to be gifted with what is simply the best.
As far as Angofbew is concerned, well, I think he is completely correct in his synopsis. It is often difficult to argue on forums such as this and you can't beat a good face to face chat.
Too true face to face is better and I'm not seeking to promote anything - I'm giving my opinion which is no more valid than anyone elses just as you would do in a face to face conversation.
The analogy of chat down the pub is a good one people can often have strong views but not fall out over them.
I would fully expect people to disagree. The important thing about such forums is that we all respect other peoples POV. There is usually more in common than what divides us.
What we all want is a open, transparent and clearly structured process that will give people confidence in the end result.
Much as it may go against the grain with some, independent academic scrutiny and input has to play a major part if we're all to end up with a credible orthography.
The reason is simple and it is the same one that caused the split 20 years ago. Academics criticised Nance's Unified, which had done us all for 60 years. It was incomplete, rather too much of it cobbled together and adopted too many direct borrowings from Welsh and Breton. Nance can't possibly be condemned for that - he did the very best he could with the material then available. Tregear - the biggest single text of the lot and containing much of what Nance was missing - wasn't discovered until Nance was very old and, frankly, beyond it. And Nance was not himself an academic linguist. The outcome of the criticism (by Prof. Galnville Price and others) was that Unified Cornish was inadequate for academic acceptance. It would not become a university subject, nor have a chance of inclusion in school curriculae.
If Cornish is ever to have a future, it must be in a form that will be accepted into universities and schools. Nothing less will give it that future because our kids won't be learning it - the language will be condemned to remain with hobbyist enthusiasts whose numbers will dwindle over time, and thus ensure the language's fnal demise.
We have got to pull together to ensure that future, or stand to be condemned by future generations - and it's they who matter in this process, not us.
Hunlev, I'm a bit confused by on the one hand you saying
And yet you also said:
Which is actually like saying that if you had a problem with your water supply, you'd want a qualified plumber with no experience of fixing water supplies to come and fix your water supply. Odd viewpoint, I have to say.
You insistence on academic scrutiny of neologisms is also somewhat flawed, because new words in English don't emanate from the OED offices, their usage begins within the populace and eventually they go into the OED. Words like e-mail, hoodie, internet, happy slapping etc have never been scrutunised for their academic acceptability, and yet they are in common usage.
What about Television with its mixed Latin and Greek roots - should we change it because it's not academically sound? It's been shown that the word used in Cornish for music, ilow historically had nothing to do with music, but its usage is so widespread that to change it now would be counterproductive, even if it would be academically sound to do so, so let's not get totally hung up on academic acceptability here. Sure, the language has to be academically sound dre vras, but 100% is neither possible nor desirable and would delay even further the generation of a SWF.
Interesting comments, Flammnew. I'll see if I might address each point in turn.
Firstly, my analogy with the water supply. In regard to a plummer, I was simply saying that I would require a plummer who knew how to do the job and was qualified to do it. If there was no qualification, how would I know that the job was being done correctly? Putting it another way - a plummer has to know how to fix pipes, although he does not need to know the precise physics and chemistry of the specific fluid flowing within those pipes.
In so far as language development is concerned, experts on planning, applied linguistics, lexicography and a host of other specialities need to be involved. These are the specialists with knowledge of the fixed rules and principles that govern the development of all languages, including English, and it is acepted that those involved do not need to know the ins and outs of the language they are developing or standardising. With the case of Cornish, in order to be familiar with the specifics of the various orthographies the experts will need to consult Cornish language users for that information. That was the way in which the Scots language is being standardised. In that case, linguistic experts, with experience in the specialist areas I mentioned above, were drawn from many different geographical areas and, as far as I know, none of them were fluent in Scots.
It should be born in mind that the Charter calls for the language to be available in all sectors of the education service. That includes university level where research into can be conducted properly in an academic environment. Ultimately, that is where neologisms can be researched and developed.
Your plumber analogy still doesn't work, I'm afraid, because it *is* necessary to understand the liquid being transported (corrosiveness, reactivity etc etc) when designing a system of pipes to transport it. Plumbing a water tank is very different to plumbing a liquid sodium cooling system for a nuclear power station.
I also don't believe that there are "fixed rules" that govern how languages develop - there may be common ways of development, but no language develops along fixed rules because over time it is subjected to different external and internal influences.
You are not a linguist and, although you are perfectly entitled to voice a personal opinion about a professional remit, your opinion carries little weight at this early stage in the Cornish language process. I apologise for the bluntness of my retort. I am not a linguist and, therefore, I rely upon experts to provide answers to such dilemmas.
Having said that, you are not correct in your assertion. There are "fixed rules" that govern language development. That's why, in all language modernisation processes (and that is what we were talking about), socio-linguists deal with language status planning and applied linguists deal with corpus planning. As far as I am aware, the discussion in regard to Cornish has been only about status planning (schools, public authorities etc) and has not really got to grips with corpus planning which includes standardisation, codification, lexicography, modernisation and implementation.
It is putting the cart before the horse to undertake status planning prior to corpus planning. Unless I am greatly mistaken, that is precisely what the CLP are intending to do. The CLP, I think, has agreed upon the bringing in of language status planners (socio-linguists) but I have yet to see any committment to involve the input of applied linguistic experts.
Success stories spotlighted at Cornwall Business Awards
An organic baby clothing company from the Lizard Peninsula has tonight been crowned CornwallÂ’s Business of the Year, as the Cornwall Business Awards shone the spotlight on success stories throughout the region.
JULIA TO PRESENT CORNWALL FACEBOOK PETITION TO PARLIAMENT
A petition calling on Facebook to recognise Cornwall as a region will be presented to Parliament next week by Julia Goldsworthy MP.
Business champions revealed
Success stories spotlighted at Cornwall Business Awards An organic baby clothing company from the Lizard Peninsula has been crowned CornwallÂ’s Business of the Year, as the Cornwall Business Awards shone the spotlight on success stories throughout the county.
Cyclist seriously hurt in crash
A cyclist in his 50s is in a serious condition in hospital after an accident in Falmouth on Sunday.
Crews tackle building blaze
Firefighters using breathing apparatus tackle a blaze at a derelict building in Cornwall.
ShelterBox team in 'good spirits'
ShelterBox volunteers pack another 1,000 survival boxes to send to the Burmese cyclone zone.
'Tombstoner' hurt in plunge
A man suspected of "tombstoning" off a cliff in Cornwall is in hospital with spinal injuries
Work begins to repair canal gates
Work is under way to repair the storm-damaged lock gates of Cornwall's Bude Canal.
