Jim McLean- my last word is that we ARE talking about the tradition- the poem/song in question has BECOME part of the tradition in its many variants, and we are all the richer for that! You cannot possibly know for sure that Tannahill's
'original' (your word) poem was totally his own- I am not impugning the quality of
his work, nor that of Burns, but at a distance of 200 years, it is not reasonable to claim accept there is any way we can KNOW that this particular work is 'original' on your terms. It doesn't matter a damn anyway, splitting hairs comes to mind, and really, can we just accept that it has been a real asset to the 'tradition', also that it's a bloody good song/poem?