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...
Oh, how I am watching the process, Flammnew! Make no mistake, I shall be there in September.
Since I am familiar with how the process should work, I shall be particularly interested to see how the Cornish process will turn out, especially bearing in mind the numbers of amateurs involved.
So, you are a member of the panel? In that case, you will be able to advise on the qualifications of the experts to be involved and the expertise that they possess? The process, in order to be consistent with similar processes involving other minority languages should involve expert input on very similar lines to the process involving Scots. You seem to be taking an authorative position, so I assume that you will be able to answer that question. If no similar experts are envisaged for Cornish, please explain why not?
I am harping on because, although you profess to be an amateur language enthusiast regularly posting remarks on linguistic issues, you don't seem able to address very simple questions. As I said earlier, a "we know best" solution does not address my central queries.
You'd be surprised at just how much I do know.
You have highlighted the main problem with this statement, thank you for being honest. In the face of "vendettas" (your word) it is hard to envisage that resolution of the problem could ever take place unless independent experts take charge of the situation. Even in the absence of "vendettas" between orthographic factionalists, for the reasons that I have explained several times before, independent experts would still be required to impart both fairness and academic scrutiny into the process. You do seem to be a little muddled about this.
You must be referring to yourself, then?
Why do "we" have to cover such costs? Why should the Scots be treated like kings and the Cornish treated like monkeys? Have you not considered a legal challenge? One group being treated differently to an analogous group? Judicial review? If not, why not? Why is there a seemingly resigned approach that the Cornish should accept what they are given and not rock the boat whilst others get everything? What is wrong with you people?
I've explained that before. It means a form that will stand up to the scrutiny and criticism by experts with academic qualifications that Cornish will inevitably face once it is a mainstream university subject. Don't forget, universities conduct research and that, for Cornish, is desperately needed. BTW, ask Ken George for his definition - he refers to KK being academically correct.
Of course we don't know the perfect form but independent experts in specialist doctrines have the knowledge and expertise to, as you say, at the very least "best guess". However, their "best guesses" would be based upon sound scientific/academic principles, rather than an unsupportable, disordered mishmash which would be the result if just amateur enthusiasts were involved.
Close to best guess by amateirs. Get the professionals in and let them get on with it!
I can well understand you making this remark and it seems clear to me that you just haven't understood a word. God help the Cornish language if the process is left to you and others of your ilk. You still think that amateurs, with no experience or qualifications in linguistics, applied or otherwise, know best and experts know nothing about their specialist areas. It's funny that Scots language hobbyists did not seem to have the same entrenched attitude towards the professionals involved in their standardisation process. To use your expression, the independent experts (I've given names and details of some of them) in the Scots experience did just that - it was "pants" for them and Scots is now standardised with its own standard dictionary etc etc.
Talk about fiddling while Rome burns.
So what? I'd rather have nothing than a cobbled together, crappy version of the Cornish language which is clearly could be the result if the decisions are left to a bunch of hobbyists. As for teachers of Cornish....how many are there? I don't mean people who meet in a pub for a lesson and a pint. I mean how many real teachers are there out there who have a qualification? Only qualified teachers can teach in schools.
Of course, I am not so stupid as to be ignorant of the fact that there are only a handful of people who can fit the bill at this time and those would be from all orthographic backgrounds. Dictionaries? Let's use the Scots example which has culminated in a new dictionary. The process took only a few months. As for books and other material? Get on to central government which has made an undertaking (legally binding) with the Council of Europe to take "resolute" action. "Resolute", as I have mentioned before means money! If you don't ask, you most certainly won't get. Wake up for goodness' sake. Realise also that corpus planning must take place now before status planning. To do otherwise as you seem to be suggesting is complete madness and putting the cart before the horse. Get your priorities right. Get standardising so that you can then start to plan for such things as teachers, books, etc.
You stand to make a complete and utter shambles of it unless experts are central to a decision affecting development. If, as an example, Unified is accepted on the sole basis that the hobbyists all agree that it is a sound form, or to use Ken George's expression, it is "academically sound", without academic scrutiny now, then there is a very distinct possibility that....
a university which eventually establishes a Cornish language faculty might conduct research into the language and discover that its codicology, its lexicography or whatever is seriously flawed.
What sort of problems will that create? Answer: bearing in mind the expenditure of significant sums of public money, there would, quite rightly, be public outrage, both from within the language community and without. The damage to the langauge's reputation, public image (all too important these days) etc could be catastrphic. And you, with a professed interest in the language are seemingly prepared to accept this possibilty. If that is the case, then shame upon you.
From my comments, you will appreciate that my opinion on the language is that it is already in a shambles, with a very low status in the eyes of the public at large. This is largely due to the squabbling and petty quarrelling between the three orthographic factions which has resulted in a lack of a SWF, chaos in local councils who would like to promote the language but fear an orthographic backlash, very little Cornish in schools etc etc etc etc etc. Heavily factionalised language enthusiasts cannot possibly be allowed to remain in overall charge of the decision making process for these reasons - but I digress as you did concede that experts will be involved from now on. Nevertheless, I must emphasise one additional point; language enthusiasts must not be allowed to veto any decision reached by the experts in view of their heavily factionalised and unobjective positions.
At last! My pojnt is this:
THAT INDEPENDENT EXPERTS (OF THE SORTS THAT WERE INVOLVED IN THE SCOTS PROCESS) BE INVITED TO CORNWALL URGENTLY TO SORT THE BLOODY MESS OUT ONCE AND FOR ALL AND DETERMINE WHICH CONCOCTION OR MIXES OF CONCOCTIONS ARE SUITABLE FOR PUBLIC USE. It's as simple as that.
A 2:20 AM posting? You don't live in Australia by any chance, do you?
Sorry I don't have time to respond fully (due to having a job!), I'll just respond to a couple of brief points.
If you'd come to Jenefer's presentation you'd know the sort of experts they want to be included. But as you're keeping such a close eye on the process, you'd know that, wouldn't you?
Meeeow! If you had read my previous posts on this thread you'll see my position, that I'll make every effort to get on with whatever SWF is chosen, even if it's not my first choice.
Here's a hint: I was being sarcastic (look it up). You are saying that linguists with no knowledge of Cornish can produce a perfect SWF. But you are also saying that the versions of Cornish we have are produced by amateurs with apparently no knowledge of what they are doing. As the latter group are going to be advising the former, and the former will be basing the SWF on the work of the latter, I find it hard to comprehend how you will be so much happier with the "academic correctness" of the outcome. I can understand that there might be benefits to a new group of linguists starting from first principles and producing a (preferably phonemic for ease of learning) spelling system straight from the texts, but that'd be a long process.
You seem to think that campaigners have not been "resolute" enough in trying to get funding, well I think that's an insult to them. It's not for lack of trying that we haven't had funding, more due to government intransigence.
Sadly 100% true. Something I found incomprehensible was that, after Tremough where we (almost!) all agreed on the need for a SWF, Carrick and Kerrier settled on *different* orthographies for their street signs!
I don't think this squabbling is getting us anywhere: a process is in place and is under way, so can we just accept things are moving ahead towards a SWF and wait and see how things develop at the conference in Tremough in September? I know different people have different ideas about how the SWF should be arrived at, but now we have a system let's just run with it and see what it comes up with. Shake?
Well said! This applies to a number of different issues including the Duchy/Stannary situation and the national minority status.
As a Cornishman who eventually wants to learn more Cornish the various Cornish language groups have a responsibility towards me and others like me to fight and win every last penny avaliable.
Why have next to no Cornish groups approached the FUEN - Vice - President who is a member of the Cornish Stannary Parliament?
As the language groups are run by people who often have other jobs and so have limited time, and who don't get paid for what they do, I don't think they've got a responsibility towards you or anyone, and it's rather arrogant to claim they do. If you don't like the way things are being run you should get involved and do it yourself.
The best approach would be for all the interested parties to all band together as a loose alliance to lobby with one large voice which could then claim to represent a larger body of people, but too often the Cornish would rather pull on opposite ends of a rope than pull together.
Yes and when the likes of J Angarrack or the CSP do get involved and do point out that the UK government is having a good old laugh at your expense just get ready to count the ranks of Cornish uncle toms condeming the 'extremists' for daring to involve europe or daring to point out the difference in treatment between Ulster Scots and Cornish.
If you are not up to the fight step aside.
PS i am involved and i support the groups who are ready to fight.
Clearly, Flammnew, you seem to have difficulty understanding my position. I do not intend to get imbroiled with you over this as we are, afterall, on the same side. However, I would like to attempt one final time to make you understand my concerns.
"You are saying that linguists with no knowledge of Cornish can produce a perfect SWF."
Not correct. I am saying that experts with experience in such areas as applied linguistics, socio-linguistics. codicology, lexicography etc are the only ones that are qualified to pontificate on such things as standardisation. It goes without saying that they can only perform this function with the input of Cornish language users and academics who are affiliated to specific orthographies. However, at the end of the day, the independent experts should be the ones to come up with recommendations based on strict academic guidelines relating to their areas of speciality and on the information they glean during the process. The present entrenched attitudes of the language community cannot be the ones who make the decision in the final analysis, neither should they have a right of veto over the recommendations of the independent experts. This was the case with Scots and many other minority language standardisation processes.
"You seem to think that campaigners have not been "resolute" enough in trying to get funding, well I think that's an insult to them. It's not for lack of trying that we haven't had funding, more due to government intransigence."
The government has signed an undertaking to be resolute. At this point in time, when compared to the "resolute" actions (for which they have been praised) the government has taken elsewhere (Ulster Scots for instance), the amount of funding allocated to Cornish is paltry and derisory. It is a matter for conjecture the reasons why this situation has arisen. However, in the past, I have heard individuals associated with the CLP intimate that they wouldn't know what to do with the sums of money available to other groups, a fact which surely has some significance.
If that is the case, the failure to pressurise the authorities for adequate, pro-rata funding is shameful. It is not an insult to those involved, its the reality of a dire situation.
It is my honest opion that certain members of the CLP are completely out of their depth. That is not surprising when you realise that amateurs are, effectively, implementing a government policy in regard to Cornish, having been constituted in a haphazard fashion and having been given very little advice and support. That support should have included legal advice, advice of administrative law and procedures, advice on equality of opportunity - the team has not even approached the Council of Europe for advice on Charter implementation....the list goes on and on. These are more damn good reasons why the present bunch of language hobbyists (who I no doubt are acting honestly and with their hearts in the right place) should not be allowed to control the standardisation process.
However, agree with you entuirely that squabbling gets us nowhere. I only hope you, if you are directly involved in the process, have sufficient lead in your pencil to do the job properly from this point onwards. Having said that, I am sure that you are in no doubt that there are some people out there who are so frustrated by the process to date that they will take measures to see that the job does get done properly.
Just to clarify: I am nothing to do with the CLP or the process towards a SWF, just a frustrated onlooker. Frustrated by the historical disagreements (which occurred long before I started learning), frustrated by people's entrenched positions, and frustrated by the glacial slowness of movement in the year since the first Tremough conference. If the last meeting at County Hall hadn't included some definite dates for reaching a decision I'd have given serious thought to giving up on the language movement.
"the amount of funding allocated to Cornish is paltry and derisory"
It is - but there are many more Scots Gaelic speakers with consequently more clout behind them, and more people backing them with the time and money and expertise to push for more funding. I agree that more assistance should have been offered to the CLP but the govt looks on us as a tiny group who don't vote for them anyway, so why should they bother?
I am concerned by your phrase "take measures" - I hope that doesn't include anything to delay the introduction of the SWF, I think that would be the most damaging outcome of any attempts to influence the process. So long as we end up with a regular, phonemic spelling system (which I think is important to ease learning, and while we have a chance to go for one I think we should) I really don't care what SWF we end up with, provided we do make steady progress towards one and stick to the timeframe. I'm frustrated so much by the whole thing that if it takes outside experts to keep people happy, so be it, but if anything happens to delay the end of the process beyond May I'll be sorely tempted to jack it all in as a waste of time.
Look, just be clear that Cornish is not going to get a penny more of funding until an acceptable SWF has been achieved to a standard that will allow it into formal education. After that, we will be entitled to a hell of a lot more - but not until then.
Flammnew has outlined why none of us is using naturally evolved Cornish, although I would not necessarily agree that "not enough of it has survived". I'd like to see Late Cornish more seriously studied, especially because it's the only period from which we have colloquial Cornish, i.e. how people actually spoke to each other. The earlier texts are very formal and the difference betwen the two is very like formal English and everyday English. Late Cornish used a lot of streamlined grammar - put down by some who really haven't looked at it sufficiently - as one of its supposed "corruptions".
Pronunciation, too. Lhyud is our only eye-witness (ear-witness?). Dick Gendall did a bloody good study of Lhuyd's phonetic code to ascertain the sounds but few other than Dick have ever taken the Late period as seriously as they should (in my own view).
The weakness of this is that Lhuyd recorded pronunciation in West Cornwall. There were few, if any, speakers east of Redruth in 1700 and eastern dialects remain pretty much an unknown.
How do you pronounce "da" (good)? Most Cornish speakers pronounce it as do the Welsh but, from Sennen we have the "a" long, as the "ai" of "air", this being backed up by a fisherman's chart listing the piece of water called Pollen Da in phonetic form as "Pullen Day".
Sennen again - "enys" (island) is traditionally pronounced "ai-nuz", rather like "anus", dare I mention it. No detectable English influence there, I'd venture to add. And, no, it's not bum information!
What I'm trying to get at is that, although we're right to concentrate upon spelling, we've generally neglected pronunciation and may be making the same mistakes as the C19 enthusiasts who considered that gaining research from the proletariat (who actually used the language, or retained knwledge of pronunciation) was beneath them.
I think he was talking about Ulster Scots which is not a celtic language but rather a germanic one spoken by less people than Cornish: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster-Scots_language
You're right Marhak about the lack of colloquial Kernewek, I was a bit peeved while doing grade 4 at the emphasis on the old text I had to do, and being a rampant atheist didn't help. We need more modern texts, and I am myself part-way through a long story, but I am totally disinclined to do ANY writing because I don't know if it'll need re-writing in a different form in a few months. The SWF is where all our efforts need to be put so that we can decide on a form and start ramping up the output. I personally feel that the translation of the Bible was misplaced effort which should have been put towards translating a literary classic like Jane Eyre or Lord of the Rings or overdubbing Star Wars: things that people will actually want to read in the 21st century.
So why the cold sholder when people tell the hobbists that the government is having a good old laugh at the amount of money they have given Cornish? This is a plain fact for all to see.
Why the total division in support for the Cornish national minority status request?
Why have no Cornish language groups approached the Council of Europe.
Why have no Cornish language groups approached the Cornishman who is the vice president of the Federal Union of European Nationalities?
I would love to have a "because" to answer your "why"s, but I don't. Surely individuals and groups clubbing together within a large lobby group would give all of our causes more weight? Each member could write/phone/e-mail/otherwise support campaings run by other members of the group, and we'd also have a greater weight of numbers to back up our claims of how much support we have.
How about some Cornish classics, Flamm? JC Tregarthen's John Penrose; Q and Du Maurier: Castle Dor; Roy Phillips: The Saffron Eaters; Alan Kent's new one (and Clay) to name but a few.
Oh, ho - come on SWF, then we can all REALLY get to work!
