--- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, Michael Everson <everson@...>
wrote:

> At 15:37 +0000 2003-01-21, etaonsh <rcom@...> wrote:
>
> >Every little attempt to reassert the identity of a semi-conquered
> >people seems worthwhile to an activist, especially where it seems
> >justified from a 'Celtic Studies' perspective.
>
> Piffle.

:)

Want to help the formerly oppressed Celtic peoples?

We still are oppressed. Even (especially?) in
purportedly 'clinical,' 'scientific' academic settings, IMHE.

Do

> something useful. Visit my web site for examples.

Have taken a skeet at your profile and website. I can see that some of
it may be useful (to me, any road, and perhaps in Celtic liberation) at
some future point - PC ownership, for example, in the case of the
technical 'Unicode' stuff, but I am still one of the 'little people' - tho even
by gaining some computer literacy I'm already 'drifting up' out of their
world, as many still see it.

Revisionism

Highly loaded term from Communist politics, strongly
suggesting 'unwanted, inappropriate reform disliked by the Politburo.'

of the

> type you

Or indeed, let's face it, anybody

espousewon't get you anywhere, and irritates others.

All change, valid or otherwise, causes somebody irritation. Avoiding
alphabet/spelling or any other change, or discussion thereof, for that
reason alone, is stagnation, which is an undesirable, indefensible state
even if it had some manufactured consensus behind it, which it hasn't,
as the subject is not usually even up for discussion except at times of
revolution/secession (altho modern communication media open up new
structures and possibilities). The assertion of opposition to change, or
to discussion thereof, is predictable given the level of distrust and
insecurity in modern society, but every person should speak for
him/herself, leaving major decisions affecting millions to the democratic
process.

The

> Latin alphabet was taken up

This fails to convey the historical degree of force and cultural
domination which undoubtedly determined this process.

by all of the Celtic peoples, and they

> borrowed, and later naturalized, the word for letter. Litera (la) >
> litir (ga), litir (gd), lettyr (gv), llythyr (cy), lizher (br),
> lytheren (kw). These terms are perfectly good.

For 'letter,' in the normal, broad sense.

> >'Ogham' ('Owm') is a whole system of alphabets and classification.
> >Apart from the basic 'celts' there is a sign language, a 'colour
> >ogham,' a 'bird ogham,' a tree ogham,' etc. It opens the door to the
> >Druids' whole concept of alphabet as mnemonic aid to (e.g.,
> >scientific) classification.
>
> Those cryptic oghams are not to be taken seriously in terms of being
> a "whole system of alphabets and classification". They were fun.
> People liked to copy the lists. There isn't any science in it. The
> Ogham letter names did not, by the way, all refer to trees in
> antiquity, though I imagine you believe that they do.

Frankly, I have no proof nor certainty of it, any more than I have of your
apparent, and foreseen dismissal of it as medieval constructions.
Unfortunately I have never before got into a real-time discussion with
anyone claiming scholarly interest or knowledge in the subject, and
books on the subject are hard to access. For the record, modern Druids
like to see them/ourselves as part of a continuous, unbroken tradition,
and don't automatically dismiss post-pre-historic innovation as false,
invalid, or humorous, much as the establishment prefers that response
to alternative culture. Yes, I can accept that it's just 'fun' to a lot of
people, as are, say, spiritual explorations, but surely you can see e.g.,
the untapped potential of alphabets as mnemonic codes, or of letters as
broader symbols.

> >When talking about runes as a writing system, the terms 'futhark(s)'
> >and 'rune' are more precise.
>
> Than letter? Nonsense. "Futhark" corresponds to "alphabet",

'Futhark' and 'rune' clearly refer to specific families of alphabets and
their letters - your 'counter-revisionism' is beginning to interfere with the
taxonomy, common usage and common sense.

not to

> "letter of the alphabet". In Scandinavian languages, these are called
> staves, cf bookstaves which literally translates "letter".

Germanic runes are strongly associated with heathen culture, magic
and divination, which contributed, historically to their decline and
suppression. They are not, therefore, 'just letters,' any more than
Roman letters or Romance words are 'neutral' or obligatory.

> Methinks thou wastest thy time and ours with this kind of thing.

There are certain aspects of the discussion of alphabets, their history,
and future, which some participants clearly feel uncomfortable
about/seek to suppress, for reasons that they may not wish to go into.
There is no necessity to suppress discussion, as the opportunity to
ignore posts and threads in which one has no interest, or for which one
has little regard, and set up alternative ones, in this format, are
apparent.

Richard