[Spellyans] Normalization of words in -ak and -ek

[Eddie Climo]

On 3 Efn 2009, at 23:25, Michael Everson wrote:

> On 3 Jun 2009, at 23:05, Eddie Climo wrote:
>
>>> On balance I suggest the following normalization:
>>>
>>> KS -ak, -ogyon, -ogeth, -egy, -ogyl, -oges, -ogesow,
>>
>> A more balanced suggestion would be
>> KS -ek
>> as that is used by 3 out of the 4 varieties of RC. To accommodate  
>> those who prefer LC forms, this could be expanded to:
>> KS -ek (MC form
>> KS -ak (LC form)
>
> We aren't making an MC/LC distinction for -ak and -ek, both of which  
> are pronounced identically, [ək].
> We're making an orthographic distinction, where -ak is used where  
> the plural stem changes to -og-, and -ek where the plural stem  
> remains -eg-.

Yes, that point was made quite clearly, and is what I was responding  
to. I'm suggesting that we should do so. Traditional Cornish supports  
both endings, and KS should reflect this,

> Why? Because right now there's no help for learners.

This sounds awfully like the condescending 'stupid learner' argument  
used to justify the un-Cornish forms used by KK.

>> And the economical thing about this MC/LC alternation is that  
>> there'd be no call for yet another diacritic!
>
> Non sequitur?

No. My closing comment follows on from what was said before. As my  
signature suggests, I feel we already have too many diacritics in KS,  
The one which is particularly egregious is the diaeresis used for the   
bys/beis alternation.

But that topic will be better discussed in a new thread.


Eddie Foirbeis Climo
- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -
Dres ethom akennow byner re bons lyeshes
Accenti non multiplicandi praeter necessitatem

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20090604/e018bd83/attachment.html>