Alys in Pow an Anethow in Kernowek - Alices Adventures in Wonderland in Cornish

A new forum dedicated to Kernewek - the Cornish language, Cornish culture and the history of the Duchy of Cornwall
User avatar
Marhak
Posts: 11075
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:46 am

Post by Marhak » Sat Feb 07, 2009 9:31 pm

Nicholas mixed and spoke with many people, including KK users, with whom he got along very well. Ken didn't mix and stayed with his own entourage, which was a pity. They stayed as far away from Nicholas as they could get. Only at the afternoon break-out session did he sit with those of other persuasions bcause everyone had to.

I suppose that "Pieter" will say this is "hearsay", "fantasy" etc. Except for one thing. I was there.

Ken's dig was the same as Keith's and Pawl's - I am not a fluent speaker and, therefore, I have no right to a say (they ignore the fact that I am a reasonably fluent writer). In which case I will say this - Ken and his CLB close colleagues should keep away from place-names, the history and development of which they haven't the first idea of. Let me give a example from the CLB's
booklet "The Formation of Cornish Place-Names" (Graham Sandercock, Wella Brown, 1996). This boldly states that Lanyon is derived from nans + yeyn = "cold valley". This is utter fiction resulting from the fact that they never bothered to do the research.

There are three places with that name: Lanyon in Wendron parish has only two historic forms: Lanyne, Lanyon 1566, not enough to form any conclusive judgement although neither suggests that 'nans' is involved. The second location, in Gwinear parish was Coswin Wolward until renamed by the Lanyon family (from the Madron site) in the 17th century. The site which was undoubtedly in the authors' minds is the Madron site, with its famous Quoit. This was spelt:

Liniein, Leniein, Lenien 1214; Linyeine 1244; Lenyen 1285; Lenyeyn 1314; Lynyeyn 1326, Lynieyn 1327; Lynyen 1333, 1344; Laneyn 1390; Lanyayn 1443; Lennyen 1447; Lanine 1794.

Not a 'nans' in sight. The derivation is quite obviously lyn + yeyn = "cold pool". The original site of Lanyon is not where the present 18th century farmhouse is, but in the valley to the south, where two medieval longhouses and later structures, known as Old Lanyon, can still be seen. Immediately below is a marsh with some sizeable pools.

Here's another: the booklet includes the name Gunvena, translated by the authors as "down on mountain" (even though menedh normally means 'hillside' in toponyms - Cornwall doesn't have any mountains). Cornwall doesn't have a Gunvena, either.

I presume they mean Gunvenna (St Minver). Goenfynou 1275, Goenfinou 1284. goon + fynnow = "downland at boundaries". Or, possibly, Gonvena, Egloshayle. But this was Gwynveneth 1286; Gwenvene 1315; gwyn + venedh = 'white/fair hillside'.

They, in the name of the Kesva, make these statements as indisputable "facts", sold cheaply to an unsuspecting public who take it as gospel when, not to put too fine a point on it, they have been sold complete unresearched rubbish.







edited by: marhak, Feb 07, 2009 - 09:23 PM

User avatar
Evertype
Posts: 3167
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:29 am
Contact:

Post by Evertype » Sat Feb 07, 2009 9:57 pm


Cawsando said:
I'm pleased to see that the differences in orthography are so minor (judging by the compared passage) that in the near future, when certain personalities are dead, the arguments will also be dead.

How old is Nicholas Williams? How often does he visit Kernow

And when was the last time he sat down with Ken George, and attempted to end difference with face to face dialogue?

Surely that's the most sensible way forward...


UdnFormScrefys invited Ken to discuss the possibility of devising a Fifth Form of Cornish in February 2007. He would have nothing to do with us. He expected, it appears, the Commissioner process to vindicate KK and choose it to be the SWF.

User avatar
Evertype
Posts: 3167
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:29 am
Contact:

Post by Evertype » Sat Feb 07, 2009 10:00 pm

I was there too, Mike. Nicholas spoke to many people, all day, and in fact spoke nothing the entire day but Cornish (and a little Irish).

User avatar
Marhak
Posts: 11075
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:46 am

Post by Marhak » Sat Feb 07, 2009 10:16 pm

Apart from a few seconds at the beginning of his 10 minute presentation, I never heard Ken use Cornish all day.

User avatar
Evertype
Posts: 3167
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:29 am
Contact:

Post by Evertype » Sat Feb 07, 2009 10:53 pm

Nicholas was a member of UdnFormScrefys which extended the invitation to Ken.

User avatar
Eddie-C
Posts: 1820
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 8:31 am

Post by Eddie-C » Sat Feb 07, 2009 11:31 pm

I see that you're just as fond of fake statistics as Keith and Tim.

Dream on!

User avatar
Evertype
Posts: 3167
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:29 am
Contact:

Post by Evertype » Sun Feb 08, 2009 1:13 am


Mike said:
Marhak, you've edited the post and added more since I had the rolling eyes attack. My point on that was the pettiness of it all and that it contradicts my knowledge of Ken George who I find most approachable.

You might. I'm sure people do. At the last MAGA meeting, when we were in a discussion group about future corpus work, there was little more than animosity on offer. Ken and Pauline tried to push the idea the the Kesva (which does not represent the interests of those who respect traditional orthographic forms) "run" future corpus development work. Honestly, we were most surprised because of the complete lack of comprehension that such a suggestion would not in any way be acceptable to us. Approachable? I'm afraid "entrenched" is the adjective I can find for it.

User avatar
Evertype
Posts: 3167
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:29 am
Contact:

Post by Evertype » Sun Feb 08, 2009 1:18 am


Mike said:
[quote=Evertype]Nicholas was a member of UdnFormScrefys which extended the invitation to Ken.



I think that Goky meant the other way round. For someone with 10% captive audience (UCR) to invite someone with 50-70% captive audience (KK) doesn't sound like a good business proposition to me and not to be taken very seriously.[/quote]UdnFormScrefys was not representative of UCR users. It was representative of UCR, UC, and RLC users (at the time the offer of discussion was made). Later on some (few) KK users took part in UFS work, as they do now in Spellyans... but the point is that even at a reasonable 55% KK ~ 45% Other distribution, there was no attempt at rapprochement from them.

We proposed a Fifth Form. The Commissioners specified a Fifth Form. We have now a Fifth Form. Many former KK-users are using that form now. There are some who are still entrenched however.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests