Talk:Connacht
|
|
Connacht spelling used in the article as it is by far the most common version used, rather than the older english spelling of Connaught.
- Hmm...I've always seen "Connaught." Certainly the latter is not merely a "little-used old English spelling". john 08:59, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- Connaught has 268,000 references in google, while "Connacht" has only 103,000. (Some of the references to Connaught do not, however, refer to the Irish province) The "Connaught" spelling is, however, used by various Irish sites, including the Connaught Telegraph, presumably a newspaper published in the region...my Rand-McNally atlas, which is usually pretty good about using the contemporary spellings, also uses "Connaught". I tend to think it ought to be moved to "Connaught". john 09:02, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Connaught is to Connacht what Peking is to Beijing. In phases during the twentieth century a group of clumsily anglicised gaelic names (Leix for Laois, Dunleary for Dun Laoghaire) were phased out (in reality, binned) and replaced by their original gaelic anticedents. Connaught is one of these. It remained in usage until the mid-20th century before being respelt in the original gaelic, which is now the correct form in both Irish and english. Part of the change was linked to the introduction of a new latin alphabet into Irish. My 'wikipedia' surname in old Irish used to be spelt Ó Dubtaig (with a dot over the b and g.) For decades now it has been spelt as Ó Dubhthaigh, the dot (I forget the technical term for it) having indicated a place where a h was pronounced but not written in the old gaelic script. Connacht is the correct modern name and has been for decades. Connaught is an old and bad anglicisation akin to Peking. Connaught is still used by people internationally unaware of or uncomfortable with the change, just as they still write Dunleary. (Indeed a small group still call Dun Laoghaire Kingstown and Cobh (which itself was wrongly anglicised as Cove at one stage). But while it was OK to write Connaught until I think the 1960s, just as it was OK to write Peking until the 1970s, both are now old anglicised versions that are incorrect to use today.
As to google searches, google searches here as in so many other areas, are worthless. Most websites are based in the US and reflect US linguistic usage. Connaught is still widely used by Irish-Americans who always read that spelling and continue to use it, their image of Ireland and its nomenclature reflecting inherited definitions, colloquialisms and spellings rather than a contemporary usage. On a side point, that is why, even though the people on the island had long disowned the use of voilence, Irish-Americans tended to be more supportive of the IRA and such groups, they seeing them not as modern Irish people saw them, namely as terrorists, but as 'freedom fighters' akin to those who fought for Irish independence under the same name 80 years ago. It is said about Irish-America that it is usually three to four generations behind Ireland in attitudes. Hence Irish-Americans, to give another example, tend to place heavy emphasis on Roman Catholicism, on Pearse, the Fenians, the Easter Rising, etc., whereas contemporary Ireland is abandoning RCism, has less of an interest in the Irish language (more people in the island speak Chinese as a first language than Irish) and are less enamoured of traditional republicanism. Irish Americans visiting Ireland for the first time are astonished to find empty churches, no Easter Rising Parades anymore and the President of Ireland attending Royal British Legion Remembrance Day ceremonies in St. Patrick's Cathedral. (And they were flabbergasted last year to find Alex Maskey, the Sinn Féin Lord Mayor of Belfast, laying a Remembrance Day wreath in honour of Northern Irish soldiers who died in the First World War, fighting for the British!)
Which is a roundabout way of saying - Connacht is the modern correct spelling in Irish and english, Connaught an out of date anglicisation no longer used in Ireland or among those with contact with Ireland. Connaught is simply an old bad anglicisation still used among the Irish diaspora (largely in the US), their usage of the old spelling reflecting their tendency to be out of step with contemporary Irish attitudes to spelling, language, religion, politics, Anglo-Irish relations and much else besides. And google, as it is prone to do, reflects the cultural and linguistic norms of website creators (largely US orientated) not accuracy. But accuracy is the bottom line in an encyclopædia. Here endeth the lesson. :-) FearÉIREANN 23:38, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Re the atlas, it is depressing but not surprising. I guess even those who should have done their homework better sometimes don't. The fact that they use Baile Atha Cliath for Dublin suggests they are still using names copied from older maps circa mid-20th century. At that stage, many Irish towns adopted the Irish version of the name as the official version as an attempt to force Irish usage on an unwilling populace. So though the world had heard of the Book of Kells, Kells itself on maps was called the rather ludicrous Ceannanas Mór. (That too was binned in the 1980s.) But Baile Átha Cliath never took off on maps, Ceannanas Mór even less so and have long been binned. It sounds like some map makers should stop simply transposing old map names unto new maps and start from scratch with what is used now, not what was used up to the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. Or maybe, because of the similarity between Connacht and Connaught, they presumed that one was the Irish language version, one the English. If so they are mistaken. Connacht is the correct verion in both Irish and english, Connaught the old, now unused badly anglicised version akin to Peking. FearÉIREANN 23:38, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- Hmm...well you've certainly convinced me that the article should be at Connacht. However, I think that the article should begin with "Connacht (sometimes Connaught)", or something like that. Peking (and also the very rarely used Pekin and Pei-ching) is bolded in the Wiki article on Beijing, for instance. john 00:47, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- While I am quite happy to see the article at Connacht, I would balk at saying that Connaught is a bad anglicisation of its sound. Remember that 'gh' was originally pronounced as 'ch' in English words like 'right', 'light', 'ought', 'rough' etc -- in fact it still is in Scots. So the 'Connaught' spelling would have been pronounced in exactly the same way as the 'Connacht' spelling at the time when it was introduced -- not using its modern 'Connott' pronunciation. Linguistic changes in English over the last few hundred years may have made 'Connaught' a misleading spelling for modern English speakers who expect 'gh' to be silent, but it wasn't always so. -- Derek Ross
- I agree that Connacht is the better choice for this entry. My family lived in Ireland from 1980 to 1982, and I visited them during summer vacations. At that time, the form Connacht was the only one I observed in publications, etc. It was only later that I came across the form Connaught (I had a similar experience with the Laois/Leix example cited above; I believe that was also spelled "Laoighis" before orthographic reform took place). Furthermore, the Library of Congress authority file (http://authorities.loc.gov) prefers Connacht to Connaught, citing a few reference sources in support of that decision. Nevertheless, I can see why doubts would remain. The GEOnet name server still gives Connaught as the authorized form, with Connacht as a variant.
- In addition, I notice that the section on the Duke of Connaught duplicates information in the Duke of Connaught article. Could the former be deleted without harm? Or if it is felt that Connacht and the Duke of Connaught should be linked, could that be managed with a little less repetition? -- Flauto Dolce 15:15, 1 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I'd say a link to Duke of Connaught would be sufficient. john 20:52, 1 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Quote: 1 The change in spelling was in part a result of a change in the use of script in Irish from Gaelic to Latin lettering. Many names and spellings of names were changed as a result. Connaught, which was based on an anglicisation of Connacht (the acht is pronounced as aught), was phased out from official usage and the Gaelic Connacht used in both the Irish and English languages. The older spelling is still used by some internationally, though its usage is in decline.
- The change really has nothing to do with Gaelic v. Latin lettering: as far as Connacht is concerned, that merely changed "c with a dot" to "ch".
- "the acht is prounced as aught": no, it isn't (except by some English speakers. In Ireland the reverse is true: where "Connaught" is still used the aught is pronounced acht. -- 217.44.142.112 17:39, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
- The change was not merely Gaelic to Latin lettering (including using h instead of a dot to modify consonant sound), but also standardising Irish spelling (there were a great many irregularities before this). Thus, all sorts of spelling rules/traditions changed.
- In general there is some amount of confusion when using Anglicisations. For example, both Lehinch and Lahinch are seen on roadsigns around An Leacht, both Ennistymon and Ennistimon. In recent years the govt. has even messed up Irish placenames, with Mala standing as a re-Gaelicisation of Mallow (itself an Anglicisation of Magh Ealla). Some particular places, as mentioned earlier, came in for special attention and attempts were made to use only the Irish, not the English. Some were successful (Port Laoise instead of Maryborough, Dún Laoghaire instead of Kingstown, Cóbh instead of Queenstown), others not as unanimously (Rath Luirc sometimes for Charleville, Muine Bheag sort of replacing Bagenalstown but not completely, Ceannanas Mór didn't take over from Kells).
- Connaught/Connacht is definitely in the latter category. Not completely successful, but Connacht is not confined only to official use either. So using Connacht makes sense, as it is used officially, and often colloquially also.
- Oh, as regards Google? Searching only Irish pages: 45,600 for Connaught, 69,800 for Connacht.
- zoney ♣ talk 13:51, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Flag- Some info on the flag would be good. For example why an Irish province has half of the "Albanian eagle" or the "Byzantine/Orthodox Eagle" on its flag?
- Erm. It's just half of some random eagle-ish bird that suffices. The closest I could find to common representations was the one from the Albanian flag. It's not some official link or tradition. Just to clarify.
- zoney ♣ talk 13:51, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I found a flag that looks less Albanian if you're interested... http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/ie-conn.html --Thano 08:50, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)