[Spellyans] au

[Michael Everson]

At 08:13 +0100 2008-07-24, Craig Weatherhill wrote:
>I note the SWF respells caugh as <cawgh> which appears to change the
>vowel's pronunciation to that which is spoken in "scawen".  Surely au
>and aw have two different values, in which case the SWF is inviting
>confusion.

Quite so. The SWF makes the same mistake about <ay> and <ai>.

I think I know why.

At the first meeting of the AHG, Trond used an 
agenda of issues I had written for him. This did 
not include any reference to <ai> or <au> because 
I hadn't thought about them previously and didn't 
put them on the agenda.

It was that agenda which pointed out all the 
problems of Revived Cornish orthography to 
members of the AHG. Since Agan Tavas and Cùssel 
an Tavas had long recognized the problems, it was 
not difficult for them to deal with the agenda. I 
suspect that actual linguistic "problems with 
orthography" came as a surprise to the KK 
representatives. I was not in the room however, 
and rely on what Andrew told me.

But I think that I can be blamed for this 
particular problem. Had <ai> and <au> been part 
of the agenda, they could have been discussed, 
and might or might not have been accepted into 
the SWF. As it was, Nicholas and I did raise the 
issue in a subsequent discussion document, which 
was evidently discussed to some degree (no idea 
how well or how fleetingly) at the final meeting 
of the AHG -- but as far as I can tell, there was 
no will to entertain any of the suggestions we 
put forward there. Perhaps Mina can tell us. I 
assume that it was once again out of spite 
because of personal dislike on the part of KK 
representatives for the authors of the 
suggestions.

The suggestions we made there were made in good 
faith with the aim of improving the SWF. Nicholas 
and I differed from Ken George in that we 
approved of and supported orthographic reform for 
Cornish. Yet we were kept out of meaningful 
engagement with the process. The result? An SWF 
that attracts little if any loyalty.

Ah well. This list exists so that we can address 
the SWF's problems and move forward, with an 
orthography better than UC/RLC/UCR and indeed 
better than the SWF.
-- 
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com