Jump to content

Talk:Cornish language

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Duke Atreides (talk | contribs) at 16:50, 19 July 2009 (→‎"Central" versus rounded.: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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)[reply]

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))[reply]

Pronouns

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

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)[reply]

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 (talkcontribs) 10:29, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

Number of speakers

Hi, we've had an IP editor continue to say there are 3,500 people fluent in everyday conversation in the language. The source cited in the table gives only 840 at best (as far as I can see - it wasn't easy to open). While I'm not arguing with the potential numbers involved, it would be good to stick to some kind of reliable source and report what that says. Everything else is OR. If we want to big this one up we'd be better off saying that around 800 people are fluent and 3-5,000 people have some knowledge of speech. I've reverted the change again (even though it now says 2,000 - also higher than the citation). Cherz Stevebritgimp (talk) 19:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's not exactly a reliable reference; it doesn't give any official accounts, only "impressions" of numbers by language groups and activists. --Joowwww (talk) 19:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say it was :) I just think it's a bit mental saying 'x' speakers then citing a source that doesn't say that. We need to find a reliable source. Stevebritgimp (talk) 19:54, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think the reality is that about 800 people have some knowledge of Cornish, some thousands have maybe some few words of Cornish, and about 80 are competent speakers. -- Evertype· 08:43, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Evertype's estimate seems correct, if a bit conservative, to me. An estimated number of 100-150 fluent speakers has been mentioned to me by a Kowethas officer, but that really seems to be about the extent of it. My own guess would be ca 80-90 speakers of Revived Middle Cornish and ca. 10-15 speakers of Revived Late Cornish. Pokorny (talk) 17:14, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My RLC contacts suggest that there are more of them out there. They just don't join groups or participate on the internet. -- Evertype· 22:36, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted the number of speakers to 840, as that is what the reference states (those fluent in everyday conversation). 90.211.80.231 (talk) 12:47, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you actually read the reference fully, they put more credibility on a number closer to 245. 75.164.175.181 (talk) 05:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Today estimates of numbers of speakers can run into several hundred, but speakers of Kemmyn fairly consensually estimated around two hundred effective speakers. Unified Cornish (Revised) claims about 20. Late/Modern Cornish speakers claimed around 25. Numbers in other areas where the language is known to be studied (including those outside the United Kingdom) can only be conjectural." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.164.175.181 (talk) 05:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

Cornish word for time

In the "comparison table" it lists the words for time as awel, but an online Cornish dictionary (http://www.cornishlanguage.co.uk/dictionary.htm) lists the word for time as "prys". Could someone check this please? For info, the word "awel" means "breeze" in Welsh. ThanksUnewydd (talk) 23:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could be right, my dictionary gives "prys" (among others) for time too, and "wind, gale, weather" for "awel". I'll remove that line to be on the safe side. --Joowwww (talk) 20:46, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


There is also the Cornish word "kewer" which means "weather". In fact the Cornish concept of time is quite complicated as it depends on to what is being referred. In the Gerlyver Kernewek-Sowsnek we have:- basic meaning: prys, termyn occasion: treveth, gwyth, tro epoch/era: os clock time: owr etc Generally speaking "prys" is used in a more open sense whereas "termyn" is used more specifically. It is not unusual for the concepts of time and weather to overlap. In Italian the word "tempo" can refer to both chronological time or meteorological weather. Yet when asking the time one would have to ask "Che ora è?" lit. "What hour is it?". This might help in understanding the confusion in Cornish. Brythonek (talk) 09:57, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Funding for Ulster Scots vs. Cornish

The Ulster Scots article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster_Scots#Linguistic_Status ) quite clearly states, with refs, "Among academic linguists Ulster Scots is treated as a dialect of English, for example Raymond Hickey[33], or by others as a variety of the Scots language, for example Dr. Caroline Macafee, who writes "Ulster Scots is [...] clearly a dialect of Central Scots. Using the criteria on Ausbau languages developed by the German linguist Heinz Kloss, Ulster Scots could qualify only as a Spielart or 'national dialect' of Scots (cf. British and American English), since it does not have the Mindestabstand, or 'minimum divergence' necessary to achieve language status through standardisation and codification" (emphises added).

Clearly, therefore, the comparision & grievance referred to in the present article is between £1M of government funding for the promotion of a regional dialect of English, vs. funding for the Cornish language. I don't really see what your point is, Man Vyi. Ulster Scots is not a "language" and should not be referred to as one in the Cornish language article. Doing so is not only semantically incorrect, it makes it look like Cornish people are just jealous of money going to a another minority language with more speakers than themselves, when in fact the reality is that more money is going to another *dialect* of English for entirely political reasons.--feline1 (talk) 09:42, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, opinion on whether Ulster Scots is a language is divided, as reflected in the pertinent article (and this is not the place for quoting the relevant legislation). As far as the sourced statement in this article goes, the reference is to the Ulster Scots language. Being bold, I'll make the language neutral on the subject, which may avoid misrepresenting the source and sidestep the dialect/language issue. Man vyi (talk) 10:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Well, opinion on whether Ulster Scots is a language is divided" - not amoungst linguists, it's not, as the article makes clear (and wikipedia is trying to be a serious academic encyclopedia, not a platform for political silliness) ... but your rewording does, I guess, sweep that particular issue under the carpet.--feline1 (talk) 11:28, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cornish word for pasty / pastie

Could anybody find the Cornish word for (Cornish) pasty please? — Hippietrail (talk) 10:22, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is "pasti". --Joowwww (talk) 11:00, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll second that! "pasti" Cor. or "pasty" Eng. are both derived from Romance anyway- "pastum". In Modern Italian the word "pasta" can also refer to pastry, pastry being yet another variant of the original Latin root. Brythonek (talk) 10:00, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed all of "pasta", "paste", "pastie", "pastry", "pasty", "pâté", and "patty" are used in English for various things and all go back to the same one Latin source term.
But what about "tiddy oggie" (and variants)? Is this just modern English slang or does it go back to an old Cornish word for pasty? I have seen both "hogan" and "hoggan" given as the Cornish origin for the modern colloquial term. Does either spelling occur in old Cornish sources or dictionaries? — Hippietrail (talk) 09:15, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay... "tiddy" and "teddy" are dialect words for potatoes, compare with Welsh "tatties" etc. As for "oggin/oggie" etc, it is still a bit of mystery as the word "oggin" in Cornish dialect usually means "the sea", so there doesn't seem to be a connection there. The Cornish Balmaidens, mine girls, used to bring the pasties to the mines for their husbands and shout "Oggy, oggy, oggy", to which the miners would shout back "oi, oi, oi" hence the origin of this "call". I will have a look and see if I can find and explanation for the "oggie" part. Brythonek (talk) 12:02, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'Hoggan' comes from 'Hog' the word for pig/pork. Simples ;) --Talskiddy (talk) 13:37, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought of that as a possibility but it doesn't make sense. The Cornish word for pig is indeed hogh, pl. hoghes so we only have a narrow similarity with the word "hoggan", and anyway the dialect word is "oggy" or "oggin". The second point, I may be wrong on this, but I certainly never have heard of or eaten :) a pork pasty. Variants on traditional pasties include lamb/mutton, fish, or no meat and just potato, swede and onion but not pork. I found a recipe for a Pork and Apple pasty at http://www.properpasty.co.uk/products.html but I doubt that this is a traditional recipe. Pasties were the food of poorer people and usually had little meat in them at all, why then the pork connection?

In my Cornish dictionary it simply gives the word "hogen" (dial.hoggan) as meaning a pie. So it seems we have the "true" native Cornish word for a pie/pastry bake here recorded in dialect. Damn it, I have used the word all my life and did not know it's more Cornish than the word pasty! There's one in your eye!!!

Brythonek (talk) 20:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much again! I wonder if your dictionary gives the gender form these terms. Also could you let me know the editor/publisher/date/ISBN of your dictionary please? I'm on the lookout for one to add to my dictionary collection. — Hippietrail (talk) 03:23, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gerlyver Noweth Kernowek gans R.Morton Nance Dyllasnow Truran 1990.

hogen f. pl -gas, dinner cake, baked pastry cake, (Dialect "hoggan" and corruptly "hobbin".). this and fugen are both inter vars. of whyogen.

whyogen is given as a "dinner cake of pastry", with a Welsh cognate (W.) indicated.Brythonek (talk) 12:21, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note below- hawthorn hogan masc. pl. hegyn. I don't think the words are related, different meaning, gender and plural form. Looks like one of those dodgy Victorian explanation for things, e.g. Penzance ."Pen Sands", "head of the sands" was also once given as an explantion of the name... Brythonek (talk) 12:21, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just found another interesting fact. It says in A guide to the Mount's bay and the Land's end (1828) By John Ayrton Paris (page 143) here that (Hoggan) Hogan in Cornish British signifies a Hawthorn berry also any thing mean or vile; but here it means a Pork pasty; and now indeed a Tinner's Pasty is called a Hoggan. --Talskiddy (talk) 09:25, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have a vague recollection many years ago of seeing some huge pastie thing in a shop in Llangollen called and "oggie" or somesuch... Barcud Coch (talk) 10:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bodinar letter and Cranken rhyme

I have just re-entered these two specimens of late native speaker/non-revival Cornish. I don't why they were deleted as they are not under any kind of copyright, not unverifiable and also- in my opinion, extremely relevant to the article. What's the prob people? I see they were deleted "invisibly" by someone. Brythonek (talk) 20:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have re-added Bodinar's letter. I see no reason for deletion as the letter is one of the last examples of native written Cornish and also speaks about the condition of the Cornish language in 1776, therefore it has sociolinguistic value as well. In a spirit of compromise I have redirected the Cranken Rhyme to its own page. Brythonek (talk) 12:43, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied to the comment you left on my talk page. Please acquaint yourself with Wikipedia guidelines, specifically WP:NOT. --Joowwww (talk) 12:53, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sample Texts

I have added two sample texts in comtemporary Cornish. Article I of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Lord's Prayer. Along with the Babel text these are usually included as sample examples on most language pages and so I see no reason for their not being added to the Cornish language page. Brythonek (talk) 12:43, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kernowek/Kernewek

I object to the removal of "Kernowek" from the infobox and first sentence as new user Gwydhennwynn (who has only two edits, both of them here) has done. (In terms of the corpus, it has long been acknowledged that "Kernowek" form is better attested than Nance's "Kernewek" form.) -- Evertype· 20:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When you state that "it has long been acknowledged that 'Kernowek' form is better attested than Nance's 'Kernewek' form", I wonder what sources you have. Is that merely your own opinion or what? Thing is, that the Cornish Wikipedia is using Kernewek as the standard form in the article - and with so many ways of writing the word, it's only just confusing... speaking of that - why doesn't Cornish have a real spelling system? Why do so many of these linguists their own systems? Why can't they just decide that one of them should be used? /Gwydhennwynn (talk) 21:38, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And why shan't we put the forms "Kernûak", "Carnoack", "Curnoack" and "Kornoack" in the article as well, if you're already insisting that the word "Kernowek" should be in it? /Gwydhennwynn (talk) 21:40, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Kernewek and Kernowek are both SWF forms, so both should stay. Considering that the SWF, KK and KS are probably the most popular orthographies these days, adding the others seems like overkill. --Joowwww (talk) 10:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While discussing this, I don't really understand why Cornish still has got so many ways of spelling it. Why can't the Cornish Language Board agree on one form? /Gwydhennwynn (talk) 12:12, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The SWF is the agreed form, a lot of people from all sides have adopted it, and the Cornish Language Partnership uses it. Unfortunately 20 years of disputes can't be buried overnight, and there are still some people who are too stubborn to give up their preferred orthography instead of seeing the greater good. It's quite sad really. --Joowwww (talk) 12:20, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In fairness those of us who favour KS did give up our preferred orthography (UC/UCR); the reason we favour KS is that it corrects infelicities (pretty bad ones) in the SWF. However it treads lightly, as can be seen in the transcription of Bodinar's letter which is now in the improved text for that section. -- Evertype· 12:46, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And what term does SWF use? I thought that Kernewek was the used form in SWF also... /Gwydhennwynn (talk) 19:46, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Kernewek" and "Kernowek" are both recognized by the SWF, please see SWF official document p. 44.--Nil Blau (talk) 21:27, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's just strange. Why do SWF use both forms? It's like if it'd be possible to write the word English both like english and inglish. It'd just be confusing. Why not agree on one form? /Gwydhennwynn (talk) 17:51, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kernowek reflects RLC pronunciation, Kernewek reflects RMC pronunciation. SWF recognizes minor and quite easy-to-learn adaptations to RLC and RMC phonetics. You will find a lot of useful explanations in the KS website and especially in the SWF official document, p. 3 (Variant graphs), p. 12 (Examples of RMC <ew> ~ RLC <ow> in Polysyllables).--Nil Blau (talk) 18:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the RLC/RMC distinction holds; UCR wasn't "RLC" by any means nor did it eschew MC forms. There is a question as to whether Kernewek ever existed in Traditional Cornish; evidence really only shows a form of Kernow + the ending. In fact Williams suggested that following the W/B/C pattern for polysyllables like this (e.g. celynnog/kelenneg/kelynnek 'holly grove' or cymysgu/kemmeskañ/kemmyska 'mingle') the form Kernewek is unusual, and one would expect (in terms of George's reconstruction) to find Cernyweg/kerneveg/*Kernywek. Be that as it may (or indeed because of this), the Kernewek/Kernowek alternation isn't the same kind of attested alternation that one finds with pairs like clêwes/clôwes. In any case, both forms are current and both should appear in this article. -- Evertype· 20:26, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Central" versus rounded.

The section on phonology gives three unarguably front vowels as central when they should be rounded. Considering whoever wrote that up got the unrounded vowels right, it's rather amusing. I've got no skill with html tables, and don't really know an effective way to give the information correctly that looks good, but I'm just putting this out there.Duke Atreides (talk) 16:49, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]