HAVING always made it a point to learn some of the language of every country I’d be visiting, the time finally came to hang up my travelling shoes and learn Scots Gaelic, if only to exercise an elderly brain. In the event I have found it a delightful tongue; one full of surprises and traps for the unwary.
However, in a key respect and one that may cause me to give it up, it is truly absurd in its written form. A simple example known to all Rebus fans is that Shivon is spelled Siobhan. Why? Cat is spelled and said "cat". Fine. But Gaidhlig is pronounced Garlic. Again, why?
I know a thing or two about both learning and languages. My father was a missionary in the then Belgian Congo at the turn of the 20 century. He patiently wrote down the vocabulary of the people amongst whom he worked and was thus able to produce the first ever book in their tongue, the New Testament's Gospel of St John. This was achieved with the aid of the Roman (Latin) alphabet using close grapheme/phoneme correspondence, much the same as I’m using here.
When the ancient Greeks decided it was time for a written language they also adopted the principle of grapheme/phoneme correspondence. They created symbols that put together composed a given word. Cyril did much the same thing when he converted the Russians to Christianity and wrote down their language. As a result anyone who bothers to learn the two dozen or so symbols in either alphabet can read and write and say aloud every town name, shop sign, warning, direction, station and much else including newspapers and books even if they don’t understand a word. Writing Shivon in Russian and Greek is a doddle. It can be written in Mandarin and Japanese, too. I can’t guarantee it can be in Arabic or a host of other alphabets, but there isn’t a European language using the Roman script in which Shivon can’t be jotted down.
My question is: why have our Gaels almost uniquely decided to use (misuse?) the Roman alphabet when a simple transliteration would make mastering their excellent tongue so very much simpler? As matters stand written Gaelic is confusing, inconsistent and needlessly discouraging. Here are some suggestions (with apologies to purists and pedants).
1. Feasgar math (afternoon good) "fesker va".
2. Phiuthar (sister) "peethooer".
3. A sheanair (grandfather) "a henner".
4. Oidche math (night good) "aysher va".
I know that English has many faults, but it’s now the world’s language and hard to change. Garlic is the opposite.
Also, Garlic pronunciation varies even between islands, but then so does spoken English, yet we all cope.
Tioraidh agus tapadh leibh, "cheweree agus taffa lee" (Bye, and thanks).
Tim Flinn, Garvald, East Lothian.
Read more: Poor maintenance of roadside drains contributed to trauma of flooding
Catalogue of errors over plaque
Edinburgh City Council Leader Cammy Day’s recent letter to the editor (September 30) about the removal of the plaque on the Melville Monument is misleading.
Unlike the City of Edinburgh, the Melville Monument Commitee (MMC) discharged all of its regulatory obligations regarding the plaque. We notified every owner in St Andrew Square of our planning application, and informed them about our intention to remove the plaque. Then, we notified them again. The owners expressed not a single objection.
The council, on the other hand, failed to take similar precautions when it installed the plaque, which are mandated by regulation. The owners, many of whom reside outside of Scotland, were left to learn about the details from the media.
Councillor Day also appears to be unaware that the planning commitee granted approval on March 2 to remove the plaque, subject to a condition regarding “method of removal”. The MMC met that condition, which was discharged on May 28.
I would encourage the council to pay more attention to its own breaches of planning regulations – especially the continued display of unauthorised signs in the square that repeat the false accusations against Henry Dundas. These signs were subject to enforcement action, and the council promised to remove them when it installed the plaque. That was over two years ago.
Council has made repeated errors in its approach to the plaque, from ignoring historians, to ignoring planning controls, to forgetting about the rights of the owners under the lease. The council does not own the plaque. It should stop making false accusations against the MMC, concentrate on complying with its own obligations, and take down the inaccurate and unlawful signs in St Andrew Square.
Viscount Bobby Melville, Melville Monument Committee, Edinburgh.
We must act now on climate
WILLIAM Loneskie (Letters, October 10) writes of "the rise of green fascism". Does he not understand that we have a real climate crisis which could kill us all through drought, flooding of coastal cities, forest fires, glacier collapse, hurricanes, changing ocean currents and the release of ancient bacteria from the melting tundra?
Yes, the Industrial Revolution in the UK improved our quality of life. But the climate simply cannot cope when greenhouse gases rise too high. And that's a fact.
Scientists have been trying to get this out for the last 30 years. If governments and business owners had started to make changes earlier, we wouldn't be in this situation.
Act now. Save us all. People, environment and planet.
Carolyn Jane Brooke, Glasgow.
I prefer a turbine to a mine
AILEEN Jackson (Letters, October 9) is correct: I do live in Hamilton and am not affected in any way by wind farms.
I do understand however that people, and animals, living very close to one can be adversely affected by the noise of the turbines.
Since I first came across, unexpectedly in Spain many years ago, my first wind farm, I found it to be striking, and quite beautiful.
This may not be the opinion of many people, but I would ask this: “Would you prefer to have as a neighbour an open-cast mine, or a nuclear power station?” They are the obvious alternatives.
Thought not.
Elspeth Russell, Hamilton.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel