"Kensa Lyver Redya" dyllys in Kernowek

A new forum dedicated to Kernewek - the Cornish language, Cornish culture and the history of the Duchy of Cornwall
Post Reply
User avatar
Evertype
Posts: 3167
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:29 am
Contact:

Post by Evertype » Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:38 am




Yma Evertype gans hebma ow notya bos dyllys "Kensa Lyver Redya", aga versyon Kernowek a lyver rag descoryon ha rag redyoryon yonk, gans Harriette Taylor Treadwell ha gans Margaret Free.

An kensa lyver redya-ma a veu trailys gans Eddie Foirbeis Climo, hag yma va têwlys rag an descor avar, be va flogh bò den leundevys. Nyns eus lies ger dyvers i’n lyver, nebes moy ès 200 warbarth. Y fÿdh kefys ino naw whedhel classyk: An Yar Vian Rudh, An Maw a Vara Jynjyber, An Venyn Goth ha’n Porhel, An Maw ha’n Avar, An Grampethen, Ÿdhnyk Lÿdhnyk, An Try Bogh Bewek, Trednar Bian, ha Kensa Gwias an Gefnysen Vian.

Screfys yw an lyver i'n spellyans gelwys Kernowek Standard, hag y fÿdh gwelys ino moy ès deg war peswar ugans a’n delinyansow gwrÿs gans an artyst Frederick Richardson. An lyver-ma yw olsettys ha dyllys gans Evertype, Cathair na Mart, Wordhen.

Copiow a'n lyver a yll bos kefys dhyworth Amazon.co.uk. dhyworth Amazon.com, bò dhyworth Spyrys a Gernow. Gweler evertype.com/books/kensa-lyver-redya.html



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

Post by Evertype » Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:39 am

"Kensa Lyver Redya - First Reading Book published in Cornish

Evertype announces the publication of a Cornish version, translated by Eddie Foirbeis Climo for learners and younger readers, of a book by Harriette Taylor Treadwell and Margaret Free, "Kensa Lyver Redya".

This first reader is aimed at early learners of Cornish, whether children or adults. It has a relatively small vocabulary of just over 200 words, and presents nine classic stories: The Little Red Hen, The Gingerbread Boy, The Old Woman and the Pig, The Boy and the Goat, The Pancake, Chicken Licken, The Three Billy Goats Gruff, Little Tuppens, and Little Spider’s First Web.

The book is written in the spelling called Kernowek Standard. It contains more than 90 illustrations by the artist Frederick Richardson. The book was typeset and published by Evertype of Co. Mayo, Ireland.

Copies may be obtained from Amazon.co.uk. from Amazon.com, or from Spyrys a Gernow. Gweler evertype.com/books/kensa-lyver-redya.html


Morvran
Posts: 2192
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:48 am

Post by Morvran » Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:20 pm

And so another splendid opportunity to help launch the SWF has been thrown away.

Seeing how much effort KS supporters put into lobbying for a compromise that all could agree to, we must seriously question their motives, given that they now appear unsatisified with any of the multiple SWF versions that have been officially sanctioned. Apparently with their agreement. Why, we must ask, publish a beginners'/children's book in a form that has not been approved for use with beginners in schools?

Why indeed burden the Cornish language with yet another spelling 'system', rather than using, for example, Eddie's favourite unreformend Nancian UC? A form well established, well resourced, and eminently stable?

Anyone doubting the reliability of KS need only review the discussions of its supporters on 'Spellyans' at the start of this month. Not only were they unable to agree on how a common word like "goat" ought to be written, they appeared to have no systematic way of deciding such issues.

http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans ... /date.html

One must seriously ask if it is right and proper to issue beginners' books in so unstable a form. Pity anyone who put much effort into learning Dr. Williams' previous creation -- UCR, only to have it summarily declared obsolete by its creator early in the 'Process'.

Dr. Williams ostensibly withdrew UCR as a gesture of goodwill to facilitate arriving at an agreed compromise. A worthy aim. But one that was completely negated by his refusal to back that compromise once it had been achieved.

Former UCR supporters, and supporters of a compromise SWF should both be wary of a faction that no longer appears to support either. Prefering to promote yet another version which to date can only be considered experimental.

The question remains : Why? To what possible end?

truru
Posts: 444
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 12:52 pm
Contact:

Post by truru » Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:42 pm


morvran said:
And so another splendid opportunity to help launch the SWF has been thrown away.



That seems rather an opportunistic statement when a) you have no interest in helping to launch the SWF yourself, and b) you have previously ridiculed hypothetical publications of "my first words in Cornish" or other basic/child-targeted type books. Yes I would also have liked to see that book in the SWF but was your post above just a rant for the sake of ranting?



edited by: truru, Apr 30, 2009 - 04:43 PM

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

Post by Evertype » Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:25 pm


morvran said:
And so another splendid opportunity to help launch the SWF has been thrown away.

You don't want to see books published in any orthography but Kernowek Kebmyn, Keith, so this seems disingenuous (at best).


Seeing how much effort KS supporters put into lobbying for a compromise that all could agree to, we must seriously question their motives, given that they now appear unsatisified with any of the multiple SWF versions that have been officially sanctioned. Apparently with their agreement.

Your question was answered on 6 June 2008:

The “Outline of the Standard Written Form of Cornish” recognizes that adjustments will need be made to the Standard Written Form in order “to better serve the needs of the contemporary Cornish-speaking community”. While Cornwall County Council and other public bodies, now have an orthography they can use, the Standard Written Form has, in our view, shortcomings which make it less attractive to many for personal use. The range of “alternative traditional graphs provided for writers who would like to use more traditional spellings” is not yet extensive enough to permit truly authentic spelling. And more importantly, we in UdnFormScrefys perceive there to be linguistic inconsistencies and indeed errors in the specification. We believe that the general public requires an adapted version of the SWF in which these are rectified.

But you knew that.


Why, we must ask, publish a beginners'/children's book in a form that has not been approved for use with beginners in schools?

Your question was answered on 6 June 2008:

Outside of official contexts, Cornish users are of course free to write in any orthography they choose. In recognition of this and in anticipation of emendations to the Standard Written Form at a future stage of the Partnership process, we believe that discussion of corrections and improvements to the Standard Written Form should begin without delay. In the interim, we would like to offer the public an adapted version of the Standard Written Form for immediate use. We do not ourselves believe that recognized inconsistencies and errors should be taught, if they can be identified and put right.

But you knew that.


Why indeed burden the Cornish language with yet another spelling 'system', rather than using, for example, Eddie's favourite unreformend Nancian UC? A form well established, well resourced, and eminently stable?



This book is written in the spelling called Kernowek Standard. It is very close to the orthography of the new Standard Written Form, the consensual spelling for use in public life and schools, except that some small errors in the Standard Written Form have been amended in this spelling, and diacritical marks are also used to show the differences between homonyms or to indicate vowels which are pronounced in different ways. Anyone who can read the Standard Written Form will be able to read this version without any difficulty.


Anyone doubting the reliability of KS need only review the discussions of its supporters on 'Spellyans' at the start of this month. Not only were they unable to agree on how a common word like "goat" ought to be written, they appeared to have no systematic way of deciding such issues.

The controversy was whether the the KK spelling of that word was justified in the SWF or not.


One must seriously ask if it is right and proper to issue beginners' books in so unstable a form.

There is nothing "unstable" about Kernowek Standard, which you would know if you had read Alys in Pow an Anethow or Adro dhe'n Bÿs in Peswar Ugans Dëdh. Or if you were to read the Kensa Lyver Redya, which comes with a complete glossary.


Pity anyone who put much effort into learning Dr. Williams' previous creation -- UCR, only to have it summarily declared obsolete by its creator early in the 'Process'.

Because a form of spelling was being developed which was better.


Dr. Williams ostensibly withdrew UCR as a gesture of goodwill to facilitate arriving at an agreed compromise. A worthy aim.

It is a pity that Ken George didn't have have the same courage and foresight.


But one that was completely negated by his refusal to back that compromise once it had been achieved.

We are delighted that the Council and other public bodies have an agreed form that they can use for their documents. The SWF came too early out of the oven, however, and contains mistakes, in addition to forcing non-traditional graphs on Traditionalists in the SWF/T. We believe that the general public requires an adapted version of the SWF in which these are rectified.


Former UCR supporters, and supporters of a compromise SWF should both be wary of a faction that no longer appears to support either. Prefering to promote yet another version which to date can only be considered experimental.

I believe that our publications in Kernowek Standard already outnumber publications in the SWF in terms of word-count. While we have not yet published a formal specification or wordlist, Kernowek Standard is well out of the "experimental" stage, Keith.

But you knew that.


The question remains : Why? To what possible end?

You know the answer to these questions quite well.

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

Post by Evertype » Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:40 pm

I do not confuse the SWF/M with the SWF/T.

Kensa Lyver Redya is not a text in the examination stream. It is a work of literature. We have been assured by the CLP that, although they are obliged to use the SWF/M in first-year materials in schools, there is no restriction on the type of literature to which children can be exposed, and indeed children will be permitted to use SWF/T if they prefer to.

I and many of my colleagues reject any attempt to give priority to the SWF/M and its non-traditional graphs. This should be neither surprising nor amazing.

Our requirements for a suitable orthography for Cornish are simple, and have remained unchanged for a long time now:

• The spelling system must be based on attested traditional orthographic forms.
• In the orthography the relationship between spelling and sounds must be unambiguous.

I am quite proud of Kensa Lyver Redya and hope that it will be enjoyed by learners throughout Cornwall, be they children or adult learners.

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

Post by Marhak » Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:19 pm

Nice rant, Keith and it is becoming painfully obvious to any observer that you have not had a good word to say about any of the books that have been published by Michael this year (but, of course, we don't publish anything, do we?).

Had you or your colleagues on the KK hierarchy shown any interest whatsoever upon finding a compromise solution, this whole mess could have sorted out long ago. But you showed none. You had none when the SWF process itself got under way. An independent commission was appointed to make recommendations. YOU boycotted that meeting and every one since. From the start, your attitude has been: "We'll compromise if the future form is KK".

The rest of us have shifted from our preferred forms, painful though that has been. I happen to like KS but, in the interim between now and 2013, I'm teaching SWF/T. Many in the KK ranks have made the painful shift as well: as I understand it, even Loveday is now teaching SWF/K. Good for her. Everywhere I look, except in your direction, people are contributing towards that compromise and that includes KS which works towards the 2013 revision. How do we know that we won't be selling the 2013 review a pup? By practical application. We do not intend to do what your guys did and force a new, untested and untried system onto people. We are giving it all the necessary road tests, and that means publication. SWF/K is to be used in the early stages of formal education. That we know and respect. Kids can read whatever they like at home, including KS, and they will see the similarities. Later in the curriculum, they will be introduced to SWF/T, if they haven't seen it already. They'll see many more similarities.

Keith, you are embodying the old cliche: those who can't, criticise.



edited by: marhak, Apr 30, 2009 - 07:20 PM

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

Post by Eddie-C » Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:20 pm

The 'Kensa Lyver Redya' (KLR) is intended (as the title implies) as a first, early step to help youngsters learn and enjoy Cornish, by providing them with some well-loved traditional tales, told in simple language. It also aims to make the language interesting to them, and the delightful illustrations by Frederick Richardson should help to 'sugar coat' the harder task of tackling the written part of the stories. It might well be their first taste of literature in Cornish, and what better place to start than tales like these, which many of us will remember fondly from our own childhood.

To go with this book, there's a matching English edition published by Evertype, which is available from Amazon. This may well be helpful to parents and learners whose Cornish is not yet very fluent (although KLR does have an exhaustive Gerva).

Unless youngsters are encouraged to start, and to continue, learning our language, Cornish is doomed. Dead. Finished within a generation. This book aims to try and prevent this from happening.

In Cornish, like many other minority languages, books (and other resources) are nowhere near as plentiful as they might be. Although there are some excellent Cornish items for this age/fluency group (and I include the translations Keith Bailey did way back in 1993 of several little Gaelic books by Lisa Storey -- 2 in KK and 1 in UC), there aren't nearly enough of them.

However, recently we've seen some attractive new books come out for the younger readership; not enough of them, for sure, but not to be disregarded either. To name a few only, they include:
-- the 'Porth' series of books (and other resources), which are in SWF/M and were sponsored by MAGA.
-- the comic-strip book 'An Pylarluth - Un Drolla Petrok' by Nigel Roberts (UC. Published by Spyrys a Gernow).
And now we have
-- 'Kensa Lyver Redya', published by Evertype in KS (very similar to SWF/T).
There are also some other attractive books for children in Spyrys a Gernow's catalogue.

For slightly older, more fluent readers, we've also seen 'Adro dhe'n Bÿs in 80 Dëdh' and 'Alys in Pow an Anethow' come out as well.

We want kids to learn Cornish; to enjoy learning it enough to keep on learning it. These books aim to help that happen. 'Kensa Lyver Redya' is not the first of such books, only the latest.

There will be many more!





edited by: Eddie-C, Apr 30, 2009 - 07:30 PM

Morvran
Posts: 2192
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:48 am

Post by Morvran » Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:12 pm

I have never claimed to support the SWF, or the idea of 'compromise'. This was because I could foresee that the result would be a mess. The result imo is a mess, and I don't therefore support it. I have been entirely honest and consistent in my views throughout.

Others however have judged matters differently and either been unaware of the technical problems, or else have downplayed that aspect. That is they were and are prepared to accept a 'mess' provided everyone else did.

The people who formed the UFS and Spellyans groups claimed they were working towards an acceptable compromise. They provided a substantial proportion of the delegates on the AHG and had substantial input to the AHG as advisors etc. Indeed KS was explicitely named as one of the poles from which the SWF compromise was to be attained.

The meetings were held, an agreement was reached, not without difficulty, but reached nevertheless. All parties afaik signed off that agreement, which was to hold for the next few years. That is it was to be used for that time so that any problems could be identified from the experience of those using it.

The UFS/KS/Spellyans faction campaigned for a compromise, and achieved a compromise. Why therefore are they now not prepared to keep their word and honour that compromise? (The fact that I happen not to support the SWF is neither here nor there, since I have never backed it or worked for it in the first place).

Or, if they never intended to use it, why bother with the Process, AHG etc. Since they were always free to develop, use and promote KS?

The only conclusion I can come to is that they were intent on damaging the standing of the Kesva and the mainstream of the Revival. And indeed still are. If not why object to KK, as the most used and favoured form, being the standard? What advantage have they gained from having an SWF they won't use, vs KK which they won't use? None at all. Only to disadvantage the majority of other users. A completely dog in the manger attitude.

Again, their essentially negative aims are quite clear from the discussions earlier this month on Spellyans re. "goat". I invite everyone to read through those exchanges and reach their own conclusions.

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

Post by Marhak » Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:46 pm

We are all free to use whatever form of Cornish we choose. The SWF is presently imposed only upon formal education (early years) and officialdom (and then, not totally - note that the new Cornwall Council uses 'ONEN hag Oll', drawing the line at casting their seed upon stony ground).

I choose to support the development of KS and to teach SWF/T.

Keith doesn't want anyone to have a choice, except himself. In other words, nothing's changed since 1987. The Henry Ford scenario - any colour you want as long as it's black.







edited by: marhak, Apr 30, 2009 - 10:52 PM

Morvran
Posts: 2192
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:48 am

Post by Morvran » Fri May 01, 2009 12:02 am

I'd like to understand how, at great expense of time and money, and supposedly with the help of international experts, the Process was able to come up with such a silly result. Namely a 'standard' which was not even a single standard but included multiple forms, and which nevertheless has failed to be actively taken up or to replace any of the existing forms.

So what was the point of it all?

Why not just officially acknowledge the two established and well used versions, UC and KK? KK as the "Main Form" and UC as a 'traditional' alternative where only token Cornish was required?

Clearly something went very seriously wrong. How did this happen, who was behind it, and why?


Morvran
Posts: 2192
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:48 am

Post by Morvran » Fri May 01, 2009 2:01 am


marhak said:
We are all free to use whatever form of Cornish we choose.



And always were -- what is the purpose of the SWF?


The SWF is presently imposed only upon formal education (early years)



Can you show me where this "formal education for early years" is happening? If not -- what is the point of the SWF?


and officialdom (and then, not totally - note that the new Cornwall Council uses 'ONEN hag Oll', drawing the line at casting their seed upon stony ground).



If even the Council are not using the form they spent thousands on developing, then -- what is the use of the SWF?


I choose to support the development of KS and to teach SWF/T.



This seems to suggest that you are a little confused about quite what you support. Why should you want to teach SWF/T on the one hand, and work to undermine it on the other? If you believe the SWF ought to be given up in favour of KS what purpose is served by teaching it? Your students are hardly likely to thank you for teaching something that can't last. Also if you are teaching against you convictions then your heart will hardly be in the task, so again your students will not really get their money's worth.

If someone like Craig will only grudingly teach the SWF, and then reject the Main Form -- what is the function of the SWF?


Keith doesn't want anyone to have a choice, except himself. In other words, nothing's changed since 1987. The Henry Ford scenario - any colour you want as long as it's black.



I don't see this as being a matter of choice, except in so far as the authorities have failed to back either of the most used and most resourced existing forms of Cornish, which in a way is a restriction of choice. You and I and everyone else is just as free to write Cornish any way we wish as we were before the Process.

We were all lead to believe (not that I was taken in for a moment) that if we could only agree on a common spelling, then the flood gates would open and funding would flow into the language organisations, Cornish would be extensively taught in schools, resources would be developed etc etc etc.

Since (surprise, surprise) none of this actually appears to be happening -- what was the reason for the Process?

Come on Craig, just try for once to put two and two together, and figure out who might have been using you and why.





edited by: marhak, Apr 30, 2009 - 10:52 PM [/quote]

Cador
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 11:51 pm

Post by Cador » Fri May 01, 2009 2:32 am


morvran said:
[quote=marhak]We are all free to use whatever form of Cornish we choose.



And always were -- what is the purpose of the SWF?


The SWF is presently imposed only upon formal education (early years)



Can you show me where this "formal education for early years" is happening? If not -- what is the point of the SWF?


and officialdom (and then, not totally - note that the new Cornwall Council uses 'ONEN hag Oll', drawing the line at casting their seed upon stony ground).



If even the Council are not using the form they spent thousands on developing, then -- what is the use of the SWF?


I choose to support the development of KS and to teach SWF/T.



This seems to suggest that you are a little confused about quite what you support. Why should you want to teach SWF/T on the one hand, and work to undermine it on the other? If you believe the SWF ought to be given up in favour of KS what purpose is served by teaching it? Your students are hardly likely to thank you for teaching something that can't last. Also if you are teaching against you convictions then your heart will hardly be in the task, so again your students will not really get their money's worth.

If someone like Craig will only grudingly teach the SWF, and then reject the Main Form -- what is the function of the SWF?


Keith doesn't want anyone to have a choice, except himself. In other words, nothing's changed since 1987. The Henry Ford scenario - any colour you want as long as it's black.



I don't see this as being a matter of choice, except in so far as the authorities have failed to back either of the most used and most resourced existing forms of Cornish, which in a way is a restriction of choice. You and I and everyone else is just as free to write Cornish any way we wish as we were before the Process.

We were all lead to believe (not that I was taken in for a moment) that if we could only agree on a common spelling, then the flood gates would open and funding would flow into the language organisations, Cornish would be extensively taught in schools, resources would be developed etc etc etc.

Since (surprise, surprise) none of this actually appears to be happening -- what was the reason for the Process?

Come on Craig, just try for once to put two and two together, and figure out who might have been using you and why.





edited by: marhak, Apr 30, 2009 - 10:52 PM [/quote][/quote]

Whiner!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests