Lox: Glad we're pals after all. Interesting discussion of R&J / West Side / Chinatown. I'm certainly with you in that my ultimate criterion for judging folk music (or anything else come to that) would be: "Is it any good or not?" That trumps high-flown principles and theories every time.

Don Firth: "I have heard operas translated into English from their original language, and it always loses something. It simply sings better in the original language. I don't see that folk songs and ballads are any different in that respect."

Well, Don, I love folk ballads and I can't stand opera. One of several reasons for this is that I like stories; ballads tell a story (as Barbara said), whereas at an opera you have to look it up in the programme. Clearly it's possible to appreciate vocal music without necessarily understanding it, otherwise I wouldn't enjoy Cajun music or get gigs in European countries where English isn't spoken widely. But in the case of a ballad the story comes first and the music is a mere servant.

Scrump: "Yes, there is a case for "translation" but what you end up with is not the same song at all."

So is Frank Proffit's "Love Henry" not at all the same song as "Young Hunting"? The text is substantially different but it's still recognisably that ballad. You can have more than one great version of the same song - that's what folk music is all about, isn't it? Besides, my most radical "translations" have been performed on old ballads that are scarcely ever sung, precisely because the texts aren't understandable. I'm not about to turn out a BBC English version of "For A' That", if that's what's worrying you.

Apologies to the MacColl -philes and -phobes for hijacking their slanging match. We should have started a new thread really but never mind.