Orthography, Revival and Change.

A new forum dedicated to Kernewek - the Cornish language, Cornish culture and the history of the Duchy of Cornwall
Post Reply
Fred
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:23 pm

Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by Fred » Sun Feb 06, 2011 12:13 am

Interesting discussions on here and over at the Spellyans list.It seems there are two camps, those who want 21st Century Cornish to ape the language of the 17th C or even earlier, those who want to form words based on Celtic roots or just use English, those who wish a simple syntax based on the spoken language of the later speakers of Cornish and those who would rather use the full resources of all periods of Cornish and use a more complicated syntax when needed .

The traditionalists argue that KK or some forms of the SWF look like Dutch, but are quite happy to use diacritics which make the language look like Polish, and certainly does not ape the texts either of MC , Tregear or those who wrote Late Cornish,( native speakers ) not Lhuyd who was not a native speaker. People who support the numerous diacritics on KS, are now going into lengthy posts on how to program keyboards to type KS Cornish, it seems they do not see the irony in this. !

A billion Chinese are now using a non traditional orthography

我 是 中国 人
我 是 中國 人

The first sentence is non traditional , yet no-one calls it a Conlang

You can also write Chinese in Latin Characters , not one calls that a Conlang it is still Chinese
wo shi Zhonguo ren. is still Chinese.

It is noted that NJW never used diacritics in his 'Testament Noweth' yet someone has persuaded him now to use numerous diacritics in his new translations, is this a trade off, " you use my diacritics , and I will publish your books for you "

Does writing 'kath' instead of 'cath' make KK a conlang or non Cornish ??

Is 'dëdh' KS close to traditional Cornish then 'dedh' ( SWF/M ).I don't see it, would a speaker of LC or MC Cornish even recognize the KS word.

Should we say ' Yth esov vy ow prena pellwolok ' or ' Yth esov vy ow prena television' ( interesting that KS uses pellwolok, even though they seem to dislike Celtic based neologisms )

The fact that KS has mass produced books or translations does not make it any more valid then Klingon, which even has a translation of Hamlet !.

So look at the discussion on Spellyans join it if you are allowed to, and follow the logic.

User avatar
factotum
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by factotum » Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:25 am

Why are they going hell for leather publishing books in Diacritic Cornish? Well, one reason is that I suggested at the time of the Process that good way to gauge the actual amount of support for the various competing orthographies would be to look at the amount of published material in each over say the previous five or ten years, which would be a measure of the preferences of authors, and if possible, the actual numbers of copies sold, which would be a measure readers' preferences. The virtue of this approach is that it would address the written word, since that's what spelling is all about, and that it couldn't easily be falsified. Publications are after all public! Now it would seem that the message got through to the KS crew and they are making sure there will be loads of titles they can point to if this method of comparison is used in the future. However the advent of POD publishing, where little or no stock has to be paid for upfront, means that the overheads of publishing a title have been drastically reduced. Especially if the work is an out of copyright reprint, a translation, etc. So I imagine we can expect lots more trivial reprints and adaptations over the next two years. How many are actually sold and read will naturally remain a commercial secret ...

The main problem is that by further confusing everyone and reinforcing existing errors, they will make it even harder for beginners to get the feel of correct Cornish pronunciation.

Btw, when it comes to non-intuitive use of the Roman alphabet, Pinyin must take the prize ...


Still as long as they see lots and lots of diacritics are their 'trademark' they will find little favour with an audience that is almost entirely culturally anglophone.

Fred
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by Fred » Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:29 am

The proponents of KS stat that their orthography would be easily recognizable by speakers of traditional Cornish, ( what period though 12th C or 17th C ? and we assuming they can read )

Lets look at this
Here is a KS sentence from ' Enys Tresour '.
Chapter 12

'Me a glôwas tus ow fysky in bàn dhyworth an cabyn ha dhywar an castel arag.'

Lets look at the KK version ( the SWF/M)

'My a glywas tus ow fyski yn ban dhiworth an Kabynn ha dhywar an kastell a-rag.'

So the literate Cornishman from say the 16th C, or maybe the 17th C, will recognize the KS version but not he kK versions.??

He will probably wonder what the funny marks are over the vowels in 'glowes' and 'ban', before he wonders about the 'K' in'Kastell', the the lack of a 'y' in 'fyski'

User avatar
factotum
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by factotum » Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:29 am

Oops! That last sentence somehow got displaced ...

Fred
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by Fred » Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:36 am

factotum wrote:Why are they going hell for leather publishing books in Diacritic Cornish? Well, one reason is that I suggested at the time of the Process that good way to gauge the actual amount of support for the various competing orthographies would be to look at the amount of published material in each over say the previous five or ten years, which would be a measure of the preferences of authors, and if possible, the actual numbers of copies sold, which would be a measure readers' preferences. The virtue of this approach is that it would address the written word, since that's what spelling is all about, and that it couldn't easily be falsified. Publications are after all public! Now it would seem that the message got through to the KS crew and they are making sure there will be loads of titles they can point to if this method of comparison is used in the future. However the advent of POD publishing, where little or no stock has to be paid for upfront, means that the overheads of publishing a title have been drastically reduced. Especially if the work is an out of copyright reprint, a translation, etc. So I imagine we can expect lots more trivial reprints and adaptations over the next two years. How many are actually sold and read will naturally remain a commercial secret ...

The main problem is that by further confusing everyone and reinforcing existing errors, they will make it even harder for beginners to get the feel of correct Cornish pronunciation.

Btw, when it comes to non-intuitive use of the Roman alphabet, Pinyin must take the prize ...


Still as long as they see lots and lots of diacritics are their 'trademark' they will find little favour with an audience that is almost entirely culturally anglophone.

Agreed Pinyin is not the best romanization for Chinese, but it was concocted during the Soviet/Chinese period,by I think Romanians ,they almost used Cyrillic instead of the Latin Alphabet.

We could publish e-books or websites in Klingon/Cornish, even if we publish 1 million words it does not make it valid, as the proponents of KS claim, regardless how wonderful the editions are, and I must admit Evertype does produce good books.

Fred
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by Fred » Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:38 am

Pinyin was produced by a committee, apparently so was KS, but I am wondering now, looking at the Spellyans debate, seems KS is product of one man,

Fred
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by Fred » Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:49 am

deleted as duplicated
Last edited by Fred on Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

Fred
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by Fred » Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:52 am

The publications in KS are all by one person, so that should not validate anything, KK and UC and now the SWF are being produced by numerous people, so KS has lost out, unless it it taken on by others, which I doubt, as most of the Spellyans contributors cannot even write Cornish and those that do are sticking to UC ( Eddie, Ray ) or the SWF ( Dan ) or LC such as Truru, can McKinnon write fluent Cornish /?

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

Re: Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by Evertype » Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:52 am

This looks like a job for the Crumb.

Fred
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by Fred » Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:54 am

You could respond as an adult instead of a child.

Fred
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by Fred » Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:55 am

So Evertype is the Crumb, or the Crumb is his puppet, are you that insecure ?? about your orthography ??

Fred
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by Fred » Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:00 am

Evertype wrote:This looks like a job for the Crumb.

Hey I did say you publish good books I just wish they were in the SWF or even Latin , ( I just read Alice in latin ).

Fred
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by Fred » Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:02 am

Now if I am banned it proves that the KS or traditionalist faction control this board. I would have more freedom in Cairo or Tehran regarding free speech then on this forum.

User avatar
factotum
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by factotum » Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:07 am

Well, fwiw, lets rewrite that line in the manner of the historical texts, obviously variations are possible but we can follow their main rules of thumb and deficiancies :

Original :

Me a glôwas tus ow fysky in bàn dhyworth an cabyn ha dhywar an castel arag.

Classical Middle Cornish :

My a glyuas tus ov fysky yn ban 3yworth an cabyn (?) ha 3ywar an castel a2ak

Late Tudor-ish

Me a glowas tus ow fysky yn ban theworth an cabyn (?) ha thewar an castall a2ak

Late (much variation possible here)

Me glouaz teez (a) feske aman dort an cabben ha thewarr an castall raag

---

KK is

My a glywas tus ow fyski yn-bann dhiworth an kabynn ha dhiwar an flour-rag

In my KK++ I would have 'tuz' otherwise unchanged.

Late in a KK spelling, something like :

Me glouaz tiz o feske a-man(n) dort an kabenn ha dh'war(?) an flour-rag

Fred
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Orthography, Revival and Change.

Post by Fred » Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:27 am

So the argument that KS would be understood by Cornish fishermen, farmers and miners. ,and KK or SWF would not be , is really invalid. By the way what are the LC people up to, their website was under construction for a year, now it is down.!.
Agan Tavas is using UC, and the Kesva and Kowethas are using KK and on occasion the SWF/M . Apparently KS has not yet set up its own language board. , ( if you don't hear from me again, that means that Everson got me banned, oh the insecurity ! )

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests