Talk:Cornish language/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Old Devonian

I really don't think Biddulph qualifies as a linguistic expert, and this reference, and the main article Old Devonian, should be deleted unless substantiated. Evertype 14:21, 2005 Mar 5 (UTC)

It appears that innacurate references to old Devonian are still appearing, verging on slightly fanatical vandalism here. Its needed for people to put accurate stuff about related cornish/celtic usage outside of cornwall but the website "http://members.fortunecity.com/gerdewnansek/" and related sites is a prime example of what should NOT be used as a reference. A linguistic/historical theory referenced by self published and heavily critisised booklets and a few fanatical websites should not be the basis for wikipedia articles. 131.111.8.99

---

I have critically reviewed a text of the Lord's Prayer in Dewnansek. (See the discussion section of the Southwestern Brythonic language entry). This text, which appears on a Devonian website, was taken from Biddulph but with a number of caveats and alternatives removed. It is an amalgam of Middle Breton and Unified (Middle) Cornish with an occasional Welsh influence and a little re-spelling. If it represents anything in the real world, it might be seen as an approximation to the way a Breton immigrant to Cornwall might have spoken around 1500 c.e. It is badly constructed and incomplete and can by no stretch of the imagination be taken as representative of SW Brythonic in the eighth century. I might add that it feels rather odd to be agreeing with Michael Everson for once -- Mongvras 12:49, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

You're welcome. Evertype

Just a warning note. The Biddulph website (apart from being an unreadable mess) also throws large numbers of advertising popups. Go there at your own risk. Cerddaf 18:08 31 July 2008

Information regarding % shared vocabulary with other languages

Does anyone know where this information comes from? Ive seen it given before in books though i cant remember which and if theres a source anyone is aware of id be grateful if you could tell me. An Siarach

yes ive wondered that, it seems to be consistently qouted but i'd also be interested in the method, I'm sure 'the same' must allow some for re-spelling and some accent... WPM 131.111.8.98

Yes im assuming that when they say "same" they mean within reason. Scottish Gaelic has the word "Creag" for rock which is obviously a cognate of the Welsh "Carreg" and the two would presumably be counted as effectively the same word. Also when we consider the different Celtic names for Scotland those in Scottish ( Alba), Irish ( Albain ), Welsh (Yr Alban ) are obviously basically the same - unlike the name of the nation in Breton which is Bro Skos. Thus im assuming that the surveys of shared vocabulary would use a system whereby cognates or words with a common derivation such as the name of Scotland in the 3 British Celtic languages count as a shared word whereas the name in Breton does not. An Siarach

I'm interested in this source too, did you ever find out what it was, or does anyone else know? (Dragonhelmuk (talk) 01:54, 24 May 2008 (UTC))

Pronouns

I took these from here. - Francis Tyers · 02:40, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Confusing sentence

Someone has flagged this sentence as confusing, and having read it a few times, I agree.

"The rationale behind UCR was that only attested Cornish can serve as a guide to its phonology, and that other attempts at regularisation had on the one hand introduced alien elements and on the other hand not known how to interpret the variations in extant material, which it turned to explain in accordance with the assumptions of nineteenth-century Middle European philology."

Now, Middle European can be linked - I'm assuming this means Mitteleuropa like German and Austrian philology. Then there is 'turned to' - is this better as 'tried to'? Finally it says 'it turned (tried?) to'. What is the 'it' here - UCR or 'other attempts at regularisation'?

Whatever the opinions of the various respondents here, can anyone shed a little light on what is actually meant with this sentence? It may be that changing 'turned' to 'tried' and replacing 'it' to 'UCR', plus linking Middle European will be a big enough hammer for this little nail. Cherzen Stevebritgimp (talk) 13:39, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

FSS/SWF

The article currently says of the Standard Written Form (SWF) - "No official spelling for the term has been established, but Furv Savonek Skrifys and Furv Savonek Scrifys have gained some currency". Firstly, it surely does not mean 'no official spelling...has been established'. It means something like 'no offical Cornish name...has been established'. I will change this. Secondly, 'Furv Savonek Skrifys' does not mean 'Standard Written Form', it means 'Written Standard Form' and in my experience a more 'accurate' translation of 'Standard Written Form' has gained currency, which is 'Furv Skrifys Savonek'. So I'm going to change 'Furv Savonek Skrifys' to 'Furv Skrifys Savonek', but leave 'Furv Savonek Scrifys' there too, on the assumption that some people are indeed using that term. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Treylyer (talk • contribs) 10:29, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Part of the latest changes to the article says that Furv Skrifys Savonek is a translation of SWF. It's not of course - the Cornish equivalent of 'SWF' is 'FSS'. I intend to change it.
Also yesterday the article stated as fact "Users of UCR and KS prefer the term Form Standard Screfys". Today it is equally clear that "Users of UCR and KS prefer the term Form Screfys Standard". This judgement on behalf of all users of UCR and KS really needs verification as it would appear that they all changed their preference overnight (how could they all have been canvassed so quickly?), and that none of them prefers the official term "Furv Skrifys Savonek", which seems highly unlikely. Treylyer (talk) 10:12, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Talk page maintenance

I have archived all threads which shewed no activity this year (2008). I have also added a "talk page header" (which includes a link to the archive, and will automatically generate a link to new archives when they are created), and nested the Wikiprojects to make the page tidier. DuncanHill (talk) 19:13, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Nice one. I've added an archivebox which, although there's a link in the header template, is also used a lot. --Joowwww (talk) 19:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Cool. DuncanHill (talk) 19:21, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Some Points I Have to Make

I think that Cornish never did actually go extinct. Why? Well, read some Breton. You'll be amazed at how similar the two languages are. Almost as if they were dialects... Fabrizio Alessandro Bernabéi (talk) 00:15, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Look at Spanish and Italian. You'll be amazed at how similar the two languages are. Almost as if they were dialects... -- Evertype·✆ 16:21, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Inflections

I am confused at the comments that Medieval Cornish was heavily inflected with dative, ablative, etc. Brittonic speech lost all its inflections with the loss of final syllables in around the 5th Century according to Jackson, Ifor Williams, John Koch and almost everyone else. I have never heard that Cornish re-developed inflections... Barcud Coch (talk) 16:11, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Middle Cornish morphology most definitely did not feature dative, ablative, or indeed any other cases. The article just cites what Edward Lhuyd thought possible when collecting contemporary and earlier material in the language in the early 18th century. He has long since been proven wrong. Pokorny (talk) 17:11, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

There are of course some fossilized forms. -- Evertype·✆ 22:37, 27 December 2008 (UTC)