"Jowal Lethesow" dyllys in Kernowek

A new forum dedicated to Kernewek - the Cornish language, Cornish culture and the history of the Duchy of Cornwall
pietercharles
Posts: 1182
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 11:51 am

Post by pietercharles » Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:27 pm

marhak said:
Three: for 'launch' read 'imposition'.


No, I have to correct you there, marhak.  It wasn't imposed on anybody.  Is there any evidence one way or the other?
Well, yes, there is. 
It wasn't imposed on you, because you refused to use it and carried on with whatever it was you'd been using before.  Good for you, but clearly no imposition whatsoever.
And it wasn't imposed on the Gorsedh because they just continued with Unified.  Good for them, but clearly no imposition whatsoever.
And it wasn't imposed on the majority of Kowethas members because they just kept voting for Language Board members that used Kemmyn.  Their choice, but clearly no imposition whatsoever.
And it wasn't imposed on the minority of Kowethas members because they just continued to use whatever they used before.  Their choice, but clearly no imposition whatsoever.
And it wasn't imposed on Agan Tavas members because that organisation set itself up as one that would support just about any orthography as long as it wasn't Kemmyn.  Elitist, but clearly no imposition whatsoever.
And it wasn't imposed on me, because I chose to switch to it of my own free will, having weighed up the options.  Categorically no imposition whatsoever.
So just who were the victims of this mythical 'imposition'?  And whence did the imposers get the power to effect this 'imposition'?










pietercharles
Posts: 1182
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 11:51 am

Post by pietercharles » Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:32 pm

marhak said:Oh, do look, everyone.  Pieter is asking for evidence again.  Have you ever noticed that he/she never offers any - even when asked?

Marhak, you're back to skim reading the posts again and getting the wrong end of the stick entirely.
I wasn't asking for evidence at all.
I was telling people where to find it.
The word 'Evidence?' was rhetorical.  To paraphrase for you, it goes like this...'Is there any evidence?  Yes there is - it's all on the Cornishorthography group'.  As I explained.
You must try to read the posts properly so that we don't have to waste energy on clarifying the bits you missed or misunderstood.


User avatar
Anselm
Posts: 1566
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 10:04 pm

Post by Anselm » Sun Nov 22, 2009 6:38 pm

pietercharles said:
.
And it wasn't imposed on Agan Tavas members because that organisation set itself up as one that would support just about any orthography as long as it wasn't Kemmyn.  Elitist, but clearly no imposition whatsoever.



Nyns o henna gwir worttalleth. Kepar dell veu diskwedhys ow tyllo korf-laghys AT war C24, rag skoedhya an yeth kewsys y feu dallethys AT. A-wosa ytho y hwrug tro ha hwegh a'n isili restri omgafoes heb meneges dhe'n re erell, hag ena dalleth leverel dhe'n bys bones AT erbynn KK. Morladrynsi pur, yn gwiryonedh. Worttiwedh y tallethsons i dyllo gowblontyans yn-unn guhudha korf efan an Gernewegoryon a gammwel herwydh aga gis i. Yma enep brest gans nebes tus, yn-sur.
Anselm

'Against a promontory my ship' Rump L. Stiltz-Kinn

'With regret I feel that unless you have a serious change of heart your presence at the Mennaye on Cornish Pirates match days is no longer desired.'
Rod Coward
CEO
Cornish Pirates

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

Post by factotum » Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:19 pm

Where is this wonderful review then? Or did you mean they gave you Hell?


Would someone with a copy care to post two or three sample paragraphs of the text, so we can all see how wonderful it is?


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

Post by factotum » Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:37 pm

Anselm said:

Nyns o henna gwir worttalleth. Kepar dell veu diskwedhys ow tyllo korf-laghys AT war C24, rag skoedhya an yeth kewsys y feu dallethys AT. A-wosa ytho y hwrug tro ha hwegh a'n isili restri omgafoes heb meneges dhe'n re erell, hag ena dalleth leverel dhe'n bys bones AT erbynn KK. Morladrynsi pur, yn gwiryonedh. Worttiwedh y tallethsons i dyllo gowblontyans yn-unn guhudha korf efan an Gernewegoryon a gammwel herwydh aga gis i. Yma enep brest gans nebes tus, yn-sur.


Dell gryzav, henn yw gwir, mez a nynz o an fowt gans an re erell ynmysk ysyli AT y'n termyn-na. An re a dreylyas lagaz dall troha'n "vorladron"? Hedre nynz yns i parez dhe sevel ynbann rag an gwiryonedh, an plontyans a bez.


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

Post by Marhak » Sun Nov 22, 2009 8:51 pm

Then write more clearly ad we won;t have to waste time arguing about it.   Nothing to do with me skim-reading the post.  It read like a question to Eddie.  It still reads like a question to Eddie.  Had 'Evidence?' opened the second paragraph, then I would have agreed with your defence attempt.
In time, Keith – I didn't even know about it until yesterday.  I expect it'll turn up on Amazon before too long.

pietercharles
Posts: 1182
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 11:51 am

Post by pietercharles » Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:24 pm

marhak said:
KS was evolved well before any SWF agreement, as well Pieter knows, but, of course, facts are there to be misrepresented. 

That is true, and I should have taken more care with my statement.  I should have written "And then, before the ink was dry on the SWF agreement, they went off and continued to develop yet another orthography which they tell everyone is easier for learners and very reliably indicates how to pronounce a word.  Tantamount, in their terms, to devising an orthography for people they perceive to be stupid."
I apologise to all readers for the original unintentional misrepresentation.


marhak said:
The Kesva and the Cowethas purported to cater for all tastes. 

No they didn't. 
The Kesva's published strategy statement says that it supports Kemmyn but will make examinations and publications available in Unified.  I don't know when it adopted that policy, but it can't have claimed to cater for all tastes for years now.
Unlike Agan Tavas, the Kowethas has nothing in its constitution about being inclusive only where certain kinds of Cornish are concerned.  And it has members from all orthographic persuasions.  They turn up to language weekends organised by the Kowethas, and by all accounts they enjoy themselves.


marhak said:
In fact, they produced nothing but KK publications. 

That's not true.  An Gannas continued in Unified, then a mix of Unified and KK for some years.  The editor had to ask  for contributions in Unified - and presumably got very few, and then none at all.
And, of course, they produced Cornish lessons in Unified through KDL.  And still do as far as I can tell.
In recent years they've only published in KK, until the SWF came along, but that's no different to Agan Tavas publishing only in UC/UCR until the SWF came along.
Even so, the Kesva's book list tells people how to get hold of Unified books and gives an appropriate contact telephone number for Unified (and they've been accused here in the past of not telling anyone that other forms of Cornish exist.  What a nonsense).  When did Agan Tavas ever tell people how to get hold of Kemmyn books?  Sheesh!
marhak said:
The Kesva concentrated on KK exams, paid lip service to UC exams and ignored the rest (UCR and Late Cornish).

And how, exactly, did they pay lip-service to UC exams?  Was that by devising the exams, writing the papers, recording the orals, enroling candidates, organising exam centres, distributing papers, marking the papers and orals, publishing the results and sending out certificates by any chance?  That was lip-service, huh? 
What was the difference between a real KK exam that you say they 'concentrated on' and a lip-service UC exam?  It certainly had nothing to do with who did the work for the exams - from what I've been told Kemmyn users did - and do - everything.
So it's hardly surprising if the Kesva wasn't too keen to take on UCR and Late exams too, given that they were getting no help whatsoever from the Unified side.  Plus one has to wonder whether there was ever more than one person competent enough in UCR to do an exam - was Nicholas Williams really that keen to do his Kesva exams?  



We've been through all this before.  Readers must find it very boring to have you endlessly asserting the same nonsense and me never letting you get away with it.  
But as I've said before, you keep attempting to rewrite history and I'll keep putting you straight. 

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

Post by Marhak » Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:09 pm

Believe whatever you will, Stevie.  And let's not talk about pulling or you'll set Keith off again.  Poor chap can't find a shag anywhere in his area, or so he tells us.
And, yeah, my typing tends to go off after a long day.

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

Post by Marhak » Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:27 pm

'its', in that context, old bean.

pietercharles
Posts: 1182
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 11:51 am

Post by pietercharles » Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:59 pm

kio2 said:
Is the review of your original story in English or of NJW's interpretation ?
I always did like stories that start
'Hager-awel an hâv re bia genys in cres an Mor Atlantek.'


Agatha could not have done better !


Oh, I don't know.
Rather than following the English structure, and thus using a fairly neutral Cornish structure, Agatha could have exploited the power of Cornish word order and written 'Genys in cres an Mor Atlantek via hager-awel an hâv' .  
That would have put the emphasis in a more appropriate place - the sentence and paragraph discuss where the storm brewed up and then moved on to, not what it was that occured in mid-Atlantic.  They answer an implied question about the movement of the storm, not one about what it was that was moving about the Atlantic.
Still, it's a gripping start to the tale.
 

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

Post by Evertype » Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:36 am

Snottiness, thy name is PieterCharles! How happily he twists what people say!

pietercharles said:

It was people that worked on KS who wrote, on Cornishorthography, that to suggest that KK was easier to learn than other orthographies was tantamount to calling the Cornish stupid.  KK people never suggested that.  KS people did.

It was I, and it was as a supporter of UCR, who wrote this, I believe. In April 2006, a year before Kernowak Standard or KS1 was mooted. The argument at the time was "traditionally-based orthography" vs "phonemic orthography" and, as always, the argument from the KK side was that those who prefer traditional graphs are fools, who ought to admire the logicalness of the KK system and ignore aesthetics.The argument there, in April 2006, was about whether it was legitimate to pronounce f as [v]. Here is the conversation:Keith said:

and in any case learners won't remember, they see so they say [f], and I know you'll say they shouldn't but we're dealing with English bloody monoglots, not multilingual middle-europeans.

Michael said:

Ah yes. Kernowek Kemyn is Cornish For The Stupid.

Keith said:

Put bluntly, YES! Why introduce complications where they are not warranted, life's too short. Or do you want to deliberately limit the pool of potential Cornish speakers to those with the time, background or innate genius to deal with such scholarly eccentricities? So you see, PieterCharles, you've taken it out of context, in an attempt to smear us. Naughty of you.It was people that worked on KS who wrote, on Cornishorthography, that to suggest that Cornish was better off for having an orthography that more reliably indicated how to pronounce a word was tantamount to calling the Cornish stupid.  KK people never suggested that.  KS people did.Well. There's what Keith said. He's a "KK person", isn't he? And there was no KS in April 2006, so there could only be "UCR people". Moreover, the argument was about whether it was sufficient to teach learners an orthographic rule (say, that final -f in monosyllables could be pronounced [v]). it was an argument about UC/UCR graphs (which were used in traditional Cornish literature) vs KK graphs. Keith said no, people didn't learn the rules. So I asked if KK were "Cornish for the stupid". You see his answer above.Afterward, within UdnFormScrefys, a group of us realized that an orthography could be both phonetic and traditional. We realized that we could learn something from the KK experiment. And we did. And both Kernowak Standard (KS1) and to some degree Kernowek Dasunys presented "phonetic" orthographies but using traditionally-based graphs. I have no issue with saying I was "wrong" in saying that KK was "Cornish for the stupid" though it's interesting to see Keith agreeing with the sentiment. But in the context of the argument, that hyperbole on my part is not what dear PieterCharles says it was. And then, before the ink was dry on the SWF agreement, they went off and devised yet another orthography, which they tell everyone is easier for learners and very reliably indicates how to pronounce a word.  Tantamount, in their terms, to devising an orthography for people they perceive to be stupid.

This is incorrect. Since March 2007 when Revision 11 of the KS1 proposal was published, we have maintained:• The spelling system must be based on attested traditional orthographic forms• In the orthography the relationship between spelling and sounds must be unambiguous.We did not "devise yet another orthography". KS1 fed into the AHG process, along with UCR and KK and KD and RLC. What came out was the SWF. The SWF has many ambiguities in it, so it fails the second point; but these ambiguities are not difficult to correct. The SWF/T, for its part, contains elements which are very clearly not based on traditional orthographic forms (which is unnecessary, since additional "side forms" could have been granted), so there again, some derogations need to be made if it is to serve those who are expected to use it. KS is based in the SWF, but with corrections which we made in order to be able to use it. We didn't want to use something with identified errors and inconsistencies, especially if those were easy to correct. I really don't care whether you want to call what we did KS or SWF/T-Amendys or what. I'm sure that whatever we call it some will twist what we say to our evident disadvantage. In the meantime, we're publishing good looking books in good Cornish, without compromising linguistic accuracy (since linguistic inaccuracy can only work to the detriment of learners).

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests