I am absolutely sick of reading letters in the newspapers from readers who never miss an opportunity to object to the use of Gaelic in Scotland and to Government funding for the promotion and wider use of the language. They say that it is a complete waste of money because Gaelic is spoken by only 1% of the population of Scotland and is in danger of becoming extinct.
It is high time the decline in the use of Gaelic was stopped and reversed. The Gaelic-speaking people should be doing as much as they can to keep their language alive and should bring up their children to speak Gaelic and to put Gaelic first and English second instead of the other way round. If they do not do this, Government funding will not be enough to keep the language alive. In any case, why should the Government pay for the promotion of Gaelic? Any funding needed for this purpose should come from the National Lottery.
I hope Gaelic never becomes extinct but continues to be used in Scotland and becomes increasingly widely spoken, thereby justifying the expense of Gaelic road signs, literature etc.
Suas leis a' Ghàidhlig!
Tuesday, 13 September 2011
Tuesday, 2 August 2011
Why are most Eurovision Song Contest entries now in English?
Why are most of the Eurovision Song Contest entries in English nowadays? Once upon a time, many many moons ago, each song was mostly in the language of the country that presented it. Having the songs presented in English by countries which normally use other languages completely spoils the European flavour of the contest for me because I enjoy hearing songs in other languages, such as French, German, Dutch, Swedish, Greek, Finnish etc.
Until 1999 it was the rule that every country presented its entry in one of its official languages. For example, in 1989 the Swiss entry was in Romansh, a language derived from Latin and spoken in the mountain regions of Switzerland, and in 1996 the French entry was in Breton, a Celtic language related to Welsh and spoken in northwest France. It is a piece of twisted irony that the United Kingdom has not won in the Eurovision Song Contest a single time in the twelve years since entries were allowed to be presented in English (yet other countries presenting their entries in English have won the contest), whereas before 1999 the United Kingdom won five times. One cannot help feeling that other countries have been allowed to present their Eurovision Song Contest entries in English specifically in order to prevent the United Kingdom from winning.
The rule that every country must present its entry in one of its official languages should be reinstated to give the United Kingdom a better chance of winning. In any case, the song which wins the contest should be the one which most people like best, irrespective of the language in which it is sung, and over thirty winning entries in the Eurovision Song Contest have been in other languages - French, Italian, Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, Norwegian, Swedish, Serbian and Hebrew. This proves that it is possible to win in the contest with songs in other languages.
The United Kingdom should be allowed to present its Eurovision Song Contest entry in one of the Celtic languages, such as Gaelic, as an alternative to English. Similarly, other countries should be allowed to present their entries in their lesser-known languages (as an alternative to their main languages) more often. For instance, the Polish entry could be in Kashubian or Silesian, both of which are Slavic languages and therefore related and similar to Polish, while the Latvian entry could be in Livonian, an almost extinct language which is related to Finnish and Estonian and which may be enjoying a revival. Perhaps then more people would become more aware of the existence of these languages and become interested in them instead of thinking the whole world is turning to English.
Until 1999 it was the rule that every country presented its entry in one of its official languages. For example, in 1989 the Swiss entry was in Romansh, a language derived from Latin and spoken in the mountain regions of Switzerland, and in 1996 the French entry was in Breton, a Celtic language related to Welsh and spoken in northwest France. It is a piece of twisted irony that the United Kingdom has not won in the Eurovision Song Contest a single time in the twelve years since entries were allowed to be presented in English (yet other countries presenting their entries in English have won the contest), whereas before 1999 the United Kingdom won five times. One cannot help feeling that other countries have been allowed to present their Eurovision Song Contest entries in English specifically in order to prevent the United Kingdom from winning.
The rule that every country must present its entry in one of its official languages should be reinstated to give the United Kingdom a better chance of winning. In any case, the song which wins the contest should be the one which most people like best, irrespective of the language in which it is sung, and over thirty winning entries in the Eurovision Song Contest have been in other languages - French, Italian, Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, Norwegian, Swedish, Serbian and Hebrew. This proves that it is possible to win in the contest with songs in other languages.
The United Kingdom should be allowed to present its Eurovision Song Contest entry in one of the Celtic languages, such as Gaelic, as an alternative to English. Similarly, other countries should be allowed to present their entries in their lesser-known languages (as an alternative to their main languages) more often. For instance, the Polish entry could be in Kashubian or Silesian, both of which are Slavic languages and therefore related and similar to Polish, while the Latvian entry could be in Livonian, an almost extinct language which is related to Finnish and Estonian and which may be enjoying a revival. Perhaps then more people would become more aware of the existence of these languages and become interested in them instead of thinking the whole world is turning to English.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)