|
24 Oct 02 - 09:32 AM (#810087) Subject: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Naemanson This weekend I heard a performance by a duo calling themselves Celtic Aire. Their pronouciation of Celtic uses a soft c, i.e., sel-tik. I had always heard it pronouced with a hard c, i.e., kel-tik. The primary singer of the duowas introduced as being mutilingual with her primary language being gaelic. When I asked her after the show she confirmed that the proper gaelic word is pronounced with a soft consonant. I'm confused but not an authority. Can anyone out there confirm her explanation? Whatever the result, if you get a chance, hear these women. I wish I could remember their names. The harpist also plays accordion. The singer also plays pennywhistle. They are from the Canadian maritimes and do a lovely job. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 09:37 AM (#810095) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: JedMarum In latin class, reading Caesar's Commentaries on the Gallic Wars, it our teacher pronounced it Keltic. But then could Red Aurbach and the Boston Seltics be wrong, all those years? |
|
24 Oct 02 - 09:39 AM (#810098) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: MMario I have heard arguments for both ways - but while growing up in the Boston Celtic region - our english teachers always said the correct ENGLISH pronunciation of the word used a hard "c"; since then I have heard this is not true, but who knows. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 09:42 AM (#810103) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Snuffy Glasgow Celtic have always been Seltic, not Keltic |
|
24 Oct 02 - 09:46 AM (#810107) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: greg stephens The Greeks called their northern neighbours Keltoi with a K.What the Keltoi called themselves is not recorded. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 09:52 AM (#810116) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: fretless Keltic vs. Seltic: always a hard call. Our usage of the word "Celtic" comes to us from the ancient Greek "Keltos/oi" and as a direct borrowing from the Greek would warrant the hard c = k. The Roman/Latin c was also hard (in other words, they used c when transliterating the Greek kappa, and s when transliterating the Greek sigma). However, we have brought the term into English, in which the c followed by the vowel e softens into c = s. People who study Celts for a living split on the issue. One of my profs -- herself of Celtic descent -- used to insist that she would violate English usage and pronounce Celtic as Keltic only if we would also agree to refer to Keltic kivilization rather than Celtic civilization. Others -- including most scholars of Celtic studies in the US today -- preferred the consistency with the ancient Greek usage and were happier with inconsistencies in English. That's the crowd that would insist that they were from Boston, of Celtic/Keltic descent, and since they were from Boston, always rooted for the Celtics/Seltics in basketball. Is the use of the term in gaelic with the soft c, to which your duo refers, a usage based on direct lineage from antiquity, or is it a borrowing in Europe/the Brit Isles of the Greek/Latin term? I don't know of any evidence to suggest that ancient Celtic Europeans thought of themselves in anything except tribal terms (as Boii, Tolistoagii, Trocmi, Aedui, ec.), much in the same way American Indians didn't really identify themselves as Indians until the Europeans provided them with that collective identity. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 09:53 AM (#810118) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: CraigS A Celt is a member of the Celtic race, who occupied most of Britain and parts of northern France a little over 2000 years ago. Due to invasions by other races the Celts in Britain were pushed out to the extreme parts of the island, ie Cornwall, Wales and the north and south-west (Wigtown and Kirkudbright)of Scotland. The invaders in Scotland were the Scots, who came from Ireland, and were the original sassenachs! A Kelt is a salmon which has mated. A well-mended kelt is a salmon which has mated once, and is coming back for another try. The truth is that the race name Celt was documented by the Romans, and it depends on the interpretation of the pronunciation of Latin - which is speculative, since the language is dead and foreign. Modern Scots generally like the C to be soft. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 10:13 AM (#810134) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Jim McLean 'Sassenach' (sic) is a Saxon NOT a Scot from Ireland! Jim McLean PS sorry I have not e3en around lately but I have been hospitalised with a variant of Guillian Barre Syndron. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 10:15 AM (#810136) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,Old Brown's Daughter When I was in college and took some Irish Gaelic, our professor instructed us that the Irish Gaelic does not have a soft 'c'. As such, I was taught to pronounce the word keltic. That said, however, I'm also not certain if I ever heard him use the word, and if its origins are in fact Greek, who knows how to pronounce it in Irish? I've always been inclined to pronounce words we get from other languages the way they are pronounced in those languages, so if it was pronounced with a hard 'c' in Greek, I'd be inclined to pronounce it with a hard 'c' in English. English borrows so many words from other languages, though... I do also remember that our professor repeatedly reminded us that pronunciation in different parts of Ireland could be very different. He reminded us of this particularly when referring to the spelling practice of lenition, which does things to how one pronounces lots of consonants. I don't remember right now if a 'c' ever got lenited (I don't think so), but if it didn't, then its pronunciation would always be hard. At least in the dialect of Irish he was teaching us, which was what he had learned--but I can't remember where he said he learned it (his parents sent him from Co. Waterford to somewhere else to learn Irish, but I don't remember where). So I'm not much help either, except to say I've always used a hard 'c'. :) Monica |
|
24 Oct 02 - 10:22 AM (#810142) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,Martin Ryan In Ireland, the only occasions I can think of when I have heard the soft 'c' are: 1. Glasgow Celtic 2. Certain provincial newspapers e.g. the Anglo-Celt. Regards p.s. and the second case does not always apply! |
|
24 Oct 02 - 10:26 AM (#810145) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST When I first discovered this controversy in the 60's, the concensus was that Kelt was European and Celt was western. No proof, either way.Personally, I go with CraigS, except about the Sassenach. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 10:34 AM (#810151) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,adavis@truman.edu It's the family-size, ten-gallon pail of worms you've opened up. Language changes over geography, across social strata, and through time. Pronouncing on "correct" forms has to be accompanied by cautions about the combination of these considerations. Language is also pure convention -- what's "right" is not what's historical, but rather, the people who are in a position to impose their will get to rewrite history (ex: the stigmatized usage "I axed him a question" is historically correct, but the population who initiated the error [all language change begins as error] trumped the conservative speakers). K vs S seems an unlikely alternation, but it's the basic dividing line among the Indo-European languages. In very general terms, the eastern IE languages rendered the IE *kmtom (100) something like the Sanskrit "satem," the western languages producing "centum." (an unvoiced velar stop, or a "hard c"; in the Germanic languages, of which English is one, the stop drops further back in the throat and turns into a fricative -- "H" for "hundred"). So Germanic words beginning with "H" are ultimately "K" sounds (and correspond to, say, Russian words beginning with "S": heart/sirtse). Another alternation involves voicing of the K to G (buzzing of the vocal folds). So we get the related terms "Kelt" and "Gael." For reasons nobody has explained satisfactorily, there's a translinguistic tendency for "G" to morph into "W," so that Gaels are ultimately connected with Wales (and Galicia, Galatia, Wallachia, Gaul -- those folks were ALL over). All of this seems less bizarre if we try to put our heads back into the pre-literate days when nobody had any notion of correct spelling. It startles many to realize that there's no "t" sound in "battle," or that the vowels of present day English phonology (not spelling -- a different matter) include M,N, L, and R. So "Kelt" and "Selt" have historical warrant (so does "chelt"). But people get all proprietary about these things, and invest them with political meaning. Down my way, you can start a bar-brawl just by insisting on "Missouree" or "Missourah". Adam |
|
24 Oct 02 - 10:38 AM (#810155) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Malcolm Douglas We've been through all this before. "Fretless" has it. I'll just add that best evidence is that the Celts were a cultural, not racial grouping; and that there was no single "Celtic Race", in the same way that there is no single "European Race", though there were several distinct racial groups described by the Romans as Celts. Modern usage has tended rather to ignore all that and develop a romanticised ideal which isn't really borne out by the historical record. I had better go into hiding now, before somebody brains me with their celtic didgeridoo. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 10:42 AM (#810159) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,Martin Ryan "correct" (pronounced "sorrect"?)is, of course, meaningless. Usage is what matters.
|
|
24 Oct 02 - 10:51 AM (#810165) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Naemanson Very good. I figured there would be a number of differing explanations. I wish I'd had more time to talk to them about their usage of the word but I was also busy stealing a song and praising their performance. Actually it wasn't so much that I was stealing the song. They pushed it in my direction after I performed some sea songs as an advertisement for Roll & Go's upcoming concert in Houlton, Maine. The song, The Axemen, was written by a Douglas Carter in New Brunswick, Canada, and is a doozy. They say he has more. Douglas, are you out there? What else have you written that you have carefully tucked away in a notebook? |
|
24 Oct 02 - 11:07 AM (#810179) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,Guest, Big Tim Jim: get well soon. A friend of mine had GBS, was laid low for months, unable to move, but made a full recovery. He is a runner and came back to run the Ben Nevis race in 2 hours 25 minutes! Most people in Scotland say Keltic, except for the football team. I always say Celtic, simply cause it easier to say! |
|
24 Oct 02 - 11:30 AM (#810206) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Mooh erratum-de-dumb...Had great fun once when an actual argument broke out about this very subject at a pub. I thought the contenders were going to come to blows. Those bemused bystanders came to refer to the combatants as Scelts...or was it Skelts? Peace, Mooh. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 11:42 AM (#810217) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,adavis@truman.edu I didn't mean any disregard for Fretless' account, which is focussed on the movements of groups of people. And Malcolm is right to deride notions of "race," which are mostly bankrupt from a scientific point of view, and have had no positive effects from a social or philosophical standpoint. But there's nonetheless the matter of cultural affinity, and specific usages do migrate along with individuals and the social units to which they belong. The linguistic evidence is pretty clear that a variety of groups denominated themselves, as distinct from others, by a term which consisted of an initial consonant, a vowel ("accidents happen to vowels" is a historical linguist's proverb)and "L." The discussion was about the "correct" pronunciation of the initial consonant, and the evidence is, the pattern of development was complex but regular. The earlier question was a good one -- about whether the pronunciation was derived from the people's self-designation or Graeco-Roman ethnography. If I were asked to assert my own opinion, I'd say that in the Anglophone world, the "S" version of the initial consonant is a spelling pronunciation which has gained authority from being taught (along with spelling) in school, like putting a "t" in "often" or "L" in "palm," "calm" and "psalm." Now it's for others to decide which authority they recognize: schoolbooks, linguistic history, the prestige of those who have or claim the right to speak for the people in question, newspaper and TV editors (increasingly decisive), the social status of those favoring a given usage, or sheer weight of numbers. All these things contribute to the not-at-all-obvious issue of "usage." My recommendation is to do what feels right and let others do the same. Language is a chameleon behavior, and we all eventually adopt usages we regard as wrong if enough people around us do them with sufficient frequency. Best, Adam |
|
24 Oct 02 - 11:45 AM (#810226) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Kim C Tamayta, tamatta........ |
|
24 Oct 02 - 12:17 PM (#810248) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Malcolm Douglas Actually, I was typing my post while Adam was sending his, so I didn't see it until afterwards. It seems only to have been since the "Celtic Revival" began to get off the ground during the 19th century that people started to refer to themselves as "Celts" (often, at that time, spelled "Kelts"); the word as used nowadays in Gaelic to mean "Celt" rarely appears in older Gaelic dictionaries with that meaning, and explanations to the effect that it "means" something in Gaelic seem to be based on coincidence of orthography rather than any actual etymological relationship; it does appear to be a recent loan-word in the context of its modern usage. If that is indeed the case, conventions of Gaelic pronounciation would be irrelevant to the discussion. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 12:27 PM (#810256) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Scabby Douglas Either, or... either.... Cheers Steven |
|
24 Oct 02 - 12:40 PM (#810269) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: KateG When I was a post-graduate student in London 20+ years ago, the preferred pronunciation in Early Medieval Archaelogy & Literature circles was Kelt (with a hard C) when referring to people and languages, and Selt (with a soft C) when referring to stone axes and American sports teams (a very rare occurrance). But as has been pointed out, "correct" pronunciation often depends on time, place and company. A street in New York and a city in Texas share the same name, Houston, but the pronunciation is wildly different and visitors are expected to conform to the local norm or face ridicule. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 12:48 PM (#810277) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST The "most correct" pronounciation in terms of contemporary usage is the hard C, with the exception of two professional sports teams, the Boston Celtics (soft c) and the Glasgow Celtics. Contrary to Martin Ryan, I've never encountered anyone in Ireland using the soft C. The words Celt and Celtic are always pronounced with the hard C. The pronounciation of those words is never an issue in Ireland really, unless it is to point out the cases of the sports teams mentioned above comes up. Then, it is usually agreed by everyone involved that it is the sports teams use an improper/wrong pronounciation. I don't think it is any different in Scotland. Historic usage, as someone has pointed out, is fraught with complexities one is better off ignoring completely, if all you want to know is how to pronouce the words "Celt" and "Celtic" without sounding ignorant. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 01:16 PM (#810300) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Joe Offer I heard a news report on National Public Radio a few years ago, announcing that the Celtics basketball team in Boston had changed the pronunciation of its name to "keltic." The team also issued an apology to those who had been offended or felt discrimination by decades of mispronunciation of the name as "seltic." I believe the date of the broadcast was April 1. -Joe Offer- |
|
24 Oct 02 - 03:40 PM (#810386) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST What a lot of nonsense! Both are accepted by major dictionaries, both are in common use, so "go with the flow;" use whichever the people around you prefer. Kim C and Scabby Doug have the right attitude. Ceramic, i. e., made from clay, is "seramic" to most, but others say "keramic" becuse the root is the Greek word, transliterated into English, "keramos." One who insists on one or the other is just a silly bugger, regardless of his credentials. Many words have regional pronunciations, it "makes no never mind." |
|
24 Oct 02 - 03:58 PM (#810400) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST And where does Guest 3:40 pm live, where both pronounciations would be considered correct? |
|
24 Oct 02 - 04:07 PM (#810411) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,silly bugger This is strange. Guest seems to be troubled at one and the same time by people who ask questions and by people who use some method in answering. Says we should do what we want. What a concept! MY GOD WE HAVE MET THE ENLIGHTENED BUDDHA RIGHT HERE ON MUDCAT THE MAN WITH THE ANSWER TO ALL QUESTIONS BEFORE WE EVEN ASK. thankyouthankyouthankyouthankyouthankyou...... |
|
24 Oct 02 - 04:11 PM (#810417) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST Silly bugger- Ever used a dictionary? |
|
24 Oct 02 - 04:20 PM (#810426) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,silly bugger I serve on the editorial boards of several. Don't really want this to go flam-ish, but the point is, dictionaries are built on the kind of things Fretless, Adam and Malcolm are talking about. You've got to go back behind the conclusions sometimes and look at the reasoning that leads to them. For two reasons: 1) they might be wrong 2) things change. Both reasons lead to new editions. Besides, you learn all kinds of things just in the arguing. I never yet learned a thing from doing what I felt like doing in the first place. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 05:01 PM (#810449) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST KateG: How is the New York "Houston" pronounced?? |
|
24 Oct 02 - 05:55 PM (#810497) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: greg stephens Not that this has got anything to do with anything, but Claughton north of Lancaster(where I used to live) is pronounced Claffton,Claughton south of Lancaster is pronounced Clyton, and Claughton by Liverpool is pronounced Clauton. And incidentally, why is Scotland referred to as Celtic, whereas England and Denmark(say) arent? Historically it's difficult to spot the difference. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 07:03 PM (#810536) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST NY- "house-ton." The city in Texas- "hews-ton." Other Southern US usages, such as "bew-fort" for Beaufort (South Carolina), but 'bow-fort" (Texas) cause trouble to outsiders. The heading of this thread is- "Which is correct? The answer, of course, is both. Personal preference depends on local usage, and personal training. Good, comprehensive dictionaries, especially the OED, provide origins, historical usage, regional preferences and all other factors that determine both current and past usage. They do not "demand" one single correct practice where others exist. For Celtic-Keltic, the OED gives both spellings and both pronunciations. Celtic-seltic is listed first because it is used by the majority but the other is also acceptable. I admit that I little patience with people who insist that their preference is "correct" when others are valid. I, too, have served on the editorial boards of publications. Often rules are set down by the publisher that demand hewing to one or another usage. Some English language newspapers here in Canada demand North American spelling (honor) while most demand British (honour). Most use Oxford spelling for recognize, but letters to the editor are accepted with recognise (Oxford is out of step with most Britons on the "zed" but persists- a departure from their general policy and, I believe, wrongly insisting on an upper class (in Britain) educational practice). I have worked (thankfully no more) with scientific publications; some are strict, others will accept variance. I tended to accept variance as long as grammar and meaning were clear and usage was consistent throughout the paper. Sometimes one peer would scrawl his preferences over a Ms. copy while another would do the same with his copy; this would have to be reconciled apart from the merit of the article. Thankfully, reviewers of this ilk are few and and tend to receive only short articles or those that the editor plans on rejecting in any case. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 07:58 PM (#810588) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Giac LOL, Mooh -- Love the bystander compromise! I can never think of the word again as other than skeltic (oh, okay, maybe sceltic). ~;o) Mary |
|
24 Oct 02 - 08:27 PM (#810603) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,colwyn dane "The reason the Boston Celtics and Glasgow Celtic and all those other sports teams founded around 1900 (give or take a couple decades) pronounce their names \SELL-tick[s]\ is not because they were founded by ignorant folk who didn't know any better, but because they spoke English and *did* know the proper pronunciation of the English word "Celtic". " So writes Sharon L. Krossa. Go here to find further evidence about this great pronunciation-murder mystery. CD. |
|
24 Oct 02 - 11:05 PM (#810716) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: alison I prefer it hard myself............. *grin* my band Celtic Dreamtime... confuses the Ozzies...... and gets some interesting introductions.... sometimes we are Seltic, sometimes Keltic...... I have heard Ozzies refer to Celtic Crosses as "Seltic Crosses" which strikes me as definately wrong... maybe its just me...... slainte alison |
|
25 Oct 02 - 12:02 AM (#810749) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,adavis@truman.edu Q: Why beat a dead horse? A: It's good exercise, and the horse doesn't mind. The thread establishes pretty clearly that there are two competing pronunciations. Both have respectable pedigrees and a substantial number of supporters. That happens quite a lot in the history of the language. Typically, one of two things will happen. One of the forms drops out ("fore-head" displaces "forrid" at least in most of the U.S.) or there is fission. The fission may be social -- by economic or educational stratum ("tray-zhoor" vs. "treasure" in my area), by register ("I" when talking to socially distant people; "Ah" with intimates in the American Midwest) -- or they develop different meanings: bride/bird; skirt/shirt. Someone observed that "Celt" as an ethnic term is a late borrowing from a period of cultural consciousness raising, and that's an entirely new kind of division. It involves competition for expertise, for cultural bona fides. And whereas earlier cultural masquerades had people aping upper class usage, now British politicians hide posh accents under an adopted working-class idiom (which happens already in the public schools, I'm told), just as speakers of standard American English take on a generalized, artificial folksiness when running for office or -- this is gonna hurt -- aspiring folksingers sometimes adopt a generalized "country" or "southern" dialect that's cobbled together from fragments a dialectician would recognize as coming from all over hell and back, and have nothing in common except they're not in use in the upper Ohio River valley, which is the basis for American Broadcast Standard. West Virginia forms mix with Tidewater and Bayou in a way that's not found in the ordinary language of any speaker anywhere. Olivia Newton-John had a pretty voice, but the dialect was harder on the ears than the tunes and arrangements. Not that I'm pure here -- I'm so self-conscious about pronunciation and audiences I gave up worrying about sincerity or my "real" voice years ago. But notice how worked up we get about the usage of "Celt," and there was no followup to the sensible counterexample offered: "keramikos" -- nobody has much stake in that, do they? My status as "insider" and "authentic" isn't affected either way. The whole conversation -- which is wonderful -- has me thinking about all the issues and arguments in my own field of verbal folklore, where it would be safer to accuse somebody of being a drunk or an adulterer than of being an academic. Maybe it's the doctrine of the Fall: after self-consciousness, zen being is impossible. After you become aware of "folk" as a category, you can never really be entirely sure you're inside of that dividing line you've learned to draw. But the desire to draw it remains very strong, and I can't help believing there's something right about so strong an impulse, even if it's demonstrably futile and absurd. I'm blathering. Thanks for your patience. Adam |
|
25 Oct 02 - 12:10 AM (#810754) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Mooh Mary...Thanks, I've always tried to fit it into Helter Skelter, by that most famous of sceltic bands, the Beatles. Mooh. |
|
25 Oct 02 - 04:33 AM (#810844) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,Boab "Seltic" where I came from, was a football team! |
|
25 Oct 02 - 04:35 AM (#810846) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: AKS "what, spell 'cat' with a 'k'?" - and 'cellar' with an 's'... Why not?? :)AKS |
|
25 Oct 02 - 05:09 AM (#810859) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,GerMan Followers of Celtic FC don't pronounce thier team Seltic or Keltic, they tend to refer to "the 'tic", "sellick" or "sellickfootballclub". The reasons for this phenomena are largely unknown although one theory points to the notion of the majority of them being poorly educated, ignorant, plastic Irish bigots! Of course, this is purely conjecture. |
|
25 Oct 02 - 05:40 AM (#810868) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Fiolar The story which I heard many years ago regarding Glasgow Celtic is that one of the original founders of the team gave a press conference. He called the team "Glasgow Keltic" but apparently the assembled reporters insisted on using the word "Seltic" and the name stuck. Reminds me of the tale about a certain actor (no longer with us) who was approached by a woman who asked him if "he were a Selt." "No", he replied, "No more than you are a sunt." Apocryphal perhaps? |
|
25 Oct 02 - 06:12 AM (#810883) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Wilfried Schaum Some contributors have seen it right: The name Keltoi was imposed by the greeks. The Latin alphabet has no sign for the sound k, initially not even for g. You see this by the abbreviation for one the personal names: Gaius is abbreviated C. The Emperor Claudius invented the "hooked C" for the sound g which survived to our times as G. His efforts to introduce the sign K failed; it only survived in the word Kalendae (first day of the month). The pronounciation of the letter C is manifold: - That it must have been pronounced k in the times of Augustus and his successors is seen by the fact that Latin Caesar is written in Greek Kaisar. Hence the German "Kaiser". - On the contrary the same word was incorporated in Russian as Tsar. In these times the Latin pronounciation must have changed; Greek loanwoards reaching German via Latin are pronounced like Zylinder = Greek kylindros = Latin cylinder with ts . - The French and their noncontinental allies changed the pronounciation to s. - The Bishop of Rome reading mass in Latin today pronounces C in the modern Italian way: ch as in cheese. - The Spaniards pronounce it th (unvoiced). So don't despair, ye friends: however you pronounce it, whether Seltic Glasgow, Keltic Glasgow, Tseltic Glasgow, Cheltic Glasgow, or Theltic Glasgow - anybody interested in soccer will recognize the team immediately. Wilfried |
|
25 Oct 02 - 06:18 AM (#810886) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Bagpuss I found the following here A Rose by Any Other Name ... The part that the Celts played in shaping European civilization has slowly evolved during the past few decades, from a time when the Celtic people were not even mentioned in school textbooks on European history. That role provokes increasing wonder but little controversy. Such is not the case on one feature of the Celts, however. There has arisen an increasingly fractious dispute over how to pronounce the name of the people: is it "selt-Celt" or "kelt-Celt"? It is important to understand that no one is around who heard the word pronounced by the people who called themselves Celts, some two thousand or so years ago. In the virtual absence of a written record left by the Celts themselves, etymologists have to rely on clues left in languages for which we have some knowledge of how words and letters were pronounced. Present-day authorities are divided; for example, Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary prefers "selt-Celt," while the American Heritage Dictionary prefers "kelt-Celt". For the word "Celt", there are two solid clues, mutually contradictory. The Greeks transliterated the word into "keltoi" (here I use Roman letters instead of Greek, for clarity). That might lead us to the conclusion that the Celts called themselves "Kelts." But the Greeks used the letter "k" to transliterate both the sibilant "s" sound and the plosive "k" sound, so the word "keltoi" is not conclusive. In Latin, the word is written "celtoi" or "celtai." If that word was derived directly from the Celtic people's pronunciation, it would indicate that the correct pronunciation is "selt-Celt". But there is some indication that it was derived from the Greek word "keltoi," leaving us with little to go on, as it was common to convert Greek "k" sounds (plosive) into Latin "c" sounds (sibilant). Hence, the Greek "kentrum" became Latin "centrum," from which we get the English word "center". This is a common development; the Latin "caesar" was converted in German into "kaiser" (plosive), but into "czar" in Russian, retaining the Latin sibilant sound. Unfortunately, primitive Celtic language differentiated into several branches many centuries ago, and the word "Celt" in today's Gaelic (for example) is a late back-transformation from a different language, probably English. No other European language gives much help. So we are left with the contradictory clues, the Greek "keltoi" and the Latin "celtai." Which is correct - "selt-Celt" or "kelt-Celt"? There are two questions here - first, what did the people call themselves in, say, 500 BC? Second, how should the word be pronounced in modem English? To the first question, there is no solid answer, and probably never will be. Evidence slightly favors "selt-Celt," but it is by no means conclusive. To the second question, we refer to the rules of pronunciation for our language, one of which is, "c" before "e" is always sibilant, except for a very few foreign words used in English (such as the Italian word "cello", with the sound "ch"). That is true regardless of the earliest origin of the root word - such as the Greek "kentrum" evolving into Latin "centrum" and thence into English "center." The plosive "kelt" heard with increasing frequency today may be a good guess on the original people's pronunciation, but it is bad English. The evolution of the "kelt-Celt" pronunciation is recent. For both English and American authorities, the word was pronounced "selt-Celt" universally during the late 1800s and early 1900s; see English lexicographers John Craig (1849) and Benjamin Humphrey Smart (1836); American Noah Webster (1828). Webster's, American College, and Funk & Wagnalls dictionaries up through the 1950s universally used "selt-Celt" as the preferred or only pronunciation. The dominant American grammar authority John Opdycke in 1939 wrote " 'Celtic' may also be spelt 'Keltic', and the two forms are accordingly pronounced 'sell-tik' and 'keU-tik'..." The Oxford English Dictionary in 1928 sanctioned only "selt-Celt" and "seltic-Celtic". The giant among English usage authorities, H. W. Fowler, wrote in 1926 "The spelling C- & the pronunciation s-, are the established ones, & no useful purpose seems to be served by the substitution ofk-." In 1999 Charles Elster, the dominant American authority in orthoepy (proper pronunciation of words) held firmly with "selt-Celt," describing "kelt-Celt" as a "beastly mispronunciation." The "kelt-Celt" heresy arose in England after the 1950s and spread throughout the rest of Britain and in the last couple of decades into the United States as well. In 1989 the Oxford English Dictionary finally recognized the "kelt-Celt" pronunciation, although still listing "selt-Celt" as preferred. It is now fashionable to hear "kelt-Celt" at Scottish Games in the United States; indeed, I am sometimes viewed as illiterate when I adhere to the orthoepically and historically correct "selt-Celt." Interestingly, the Glasgow Celtic football team (which means rugby, not American football) is still called the "selticks." There are those who will point to the Greek origin and claim that accuracy requires us to violate the rule of English pronunciation and recast the word as "kelt-Celt". There is the attendant requirement, for consistency, to do so with all English words that derive ultimately from Greek. Thus, those who insist on "kelt-Celt" should be prepared to go to the local building supply "kenter" to buy some "kedar" lumber - as both "center" and "cedar" derive from Greek words - or change the spelling to "Kelt" to conform to English rules. Elster proposes a test: "Try going to a Boston Celtics basketball game and yelling, 'Go, Kel-tiks!' If you can get out of there without being slam-dunked, you can say it however you want." None of which can detract from the growing appreciation of a people who had an enormous influence on European history, and whose traits of fierce independence, unparalleled military prowess and courage, and love of education, science, and the arts continue to wield a powerful influence on present-day world civilization. |
|
25 Oct 02 - 06:27 AM (#810891) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST Apart from the Glasgow head-bangers it was always pronounced Keltic in Ireland. |
|
25 Oct 02 - 08:29 AM (#810946) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: manitas_at_work Bagpuss, I'll take that article with a pinch of salt. The man can't tell the difference between rugby and soccer. |
|
25 Oct 02 - 08:46 AM (#810954) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Brían I would change the name of the band before another fight breaks out :-) Brían |
|
25 Oct 02 - 10:16 AM (#811044) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Declan I doubt if the C(S/K)elts ever referred to themselves as anything. Names of tribes or groups of peoples tend to be ascribed from outside, from inside people tend to use words like ourselves. In any event we know that there were many groups of people who were collectively desribed as Celtic - among them are the people known as the Gaels (or the Malesians (I think)) who invaded Ireland at some stage much to the disgust of my tribe the Fir Bolg (this is a joke that only people who have seen me and who speak Gaelic are likely to understand). However if as it appears that some people are basing the Seltic pronounciation on the fact that this is how it is pronounced in Gaelic then this is a complete red herring. To the best of my knowledge there is no soft C sound in Gaelic. Stands back and waits for people to come in with examples which disprove this. |
|
25 Oct 02 - 10:51 AM (#811060) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST Declan--make that people who don't even speak everyday Gaelic, who likely live in England or the US, to come in with examples to disprove the rule. ;-) I agree--neither English or Gaeilge speakers use the soft C in the pronounciation of the words Celt and Celtic in Ireland, which I said quite some time ago. Funny innit, how someone asks a seemingly innocent question about how to pronouce something so that when they go to the pub, they don't feel like an idiot for mispronouncing something, and they get linguistic tomes and controversy as a response? |
|
25 Oct 02 - 11:01 AM (#811075) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: 53 this one is over my head. |
|
25 Oct 02 - 12:00 PM (#811144) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,bbc at work Perhaps this is a related story-- In college, I had a British Lit professor who pronounced Don Juan & Don Quixote as Don Jew-un & Don Quick-sit, respectively. I was horribly embarrassed for him that he didn't know the correct way to say the names until he mentioned that he was using the British pronunciation, not the Spanish. Turned out that he was fine & *I* learned something! What do you think? bbc |
|
25 Oct 02 - 12:28 PM (#811163) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Orac Either is Correct. |
|
25 Oct 02 - 12:40 PM (#811172) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,Q Ho Hum. Round and round she goes. |
|
25 Oct 02 - 12:58 PM (#811183) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Nerd bbc, I had a prof at University who was a German, but the head of the department of Spanish and Portuguese at Columbia University. He was a magnificent scholar and a Quixote expert. He always said Quick-sot, because he claimed that one of the original resonances intended by the name Quixote, was to rhyme with "Lancelote," as Cervantes would have called him. The moral: there are all kinds of reasons for choosing a pronunciation, so we should not rush to judgment of anyone based on how they pronounce a word. I think your story IS related to the Celtic issue. The technically proper way to pronounce this word in English is Seltic. However, if you want to go down the pub and don't want to look a fool, say "Keltic." People who say "Keltic" look down on people who say "Seltic," while people who say "Seltic" generally don't care as much. So fewer people will look down on you if you say "Keltic." Unless you're talking sports teams. Then all bets are off. |
|
25 Oct 02 - 01:22 PM (#811202) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Naemanson Well, I have my answer and have enjoyed the discussion. Thanks to everyone. Both pronunciations are correct. I will relegate my analogy (Seltics play basketball and Celtic is a people) to the closet. |
|
25 Oct 02 - 11:58 PM (#811686) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Bill D .....and I was just asked last week how to pronounce the name of the river that runs through my home town of Wichita, Kansas... the answer is, it is the ArKANsas untill it crosses the southern border of the state, then it becomes the Ar-kan-saw. and, like Celtic-Keltic, you'd better KNOW where you are! |
|
26 Oct 02 - 08:12 AM (#811813) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Wilfried Schaum Manitas - good answer. Declan - The idea that the names of whole peoples, tribes or clans are given not by themselves was dscussed in another thread before; I was not convinced. Since the Kelts changed their tribal areas a lot by emigration over the centuries, their name is preserved in different countries as Galicia in Spain, Galizien in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Galata in Turkey (you know, Galatasaray, famous soccer club is from this region), and in Palestine Galilee, some say. Contemplating the names of Celtic countries we have two forms: Gallia, now France, and across the Channel Wales with the Welsh (or Welch, with Raquel and the Fusiliers). Here the closing t-sound was omissed sometimes B.C., the Kelts were referred to as Galli by the Romans. Whence the W instead of the K? Maybe the original form was a labiovelar sound, an explosive formed as a g at the velum (back from palate) and a w with both lips at the same time, of which sound two different forms were preserved incompletely. But that is not my turn to decide, I'm an orientalist. There the question arised sometimes, too. Nerd - I think your prof. is wrong; Quixote must be pronounced Kishote. In Old Spanish X was used for the sound sh. This usage is preserved in algebraic equations. In Spanish translations of Arabic mathematical texts the x stands for Arabic sh, an abbreviation for shay' = the thing, here: the unknown thing. Bagpuss - So you can be glad there are only skot-Scots and no ssot-Scots (except the guys who can't distinguish between soccer and rugger). A final remark to this phonetical discussion: As de Saussure has pointed out, languages must be also looked at from the viewpoint of time. A syntactical example: In Germany we see a change of certain adverbs of comparison going on in our times. What was utterly wrong some decades before is popular usage now, and will be right later on. The former correct form will be wrong, forms correct some centuries ago will be forgotten. So let it be with the pronounciation of the C of which I have given some diachronical examples in my former post. The Irish pronouncing it Keltic have my sympathy since they follow the same use like us Germans. In both countries the Celts/Kelts have or had their stay. But I also will respect the usual traditions of pronounciation of speakers thinking and pronouncing otherwise. Wilfried |
|
27 Oct 02 - 09:46 AM (#812425) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,steve Wales came from the old English 'wealas' - a word meaning 'aliens or foreigners' - a bit rich really! I have heard from another source that Welsch in Swiss German refers to the French-speaking Swiss. Welsh Cymru/Cymraeg (welsh language)/Cymréig (welsh people) preserves the hard 'c' sound, but has nothing to do with the word keltoi and its derivatives being akin to Cambria (Latin) c.f. Cornish "Kembri" and Breton "Kambre", both meaning Wales. |
|
27 Oct 02 - 08:34 PM (#812812) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Coyote Breath I call the Boston Celtics the Boston Seltics and them folks who migrated all over the map of Europe, the Kelts. Now here is another thing: Most people say erb for herb. But that is French as in "La Petite Dejuner sur la Herbe" But my girl friend says Herb (like Herbert) and I go along with that since we aren't French and erb for herb seems wrong when the French word is herbe (for lawn or grass) Most people don't say erbivore, or erbaceous or erbacide, so why erb? Gotta go take my herb tea now, ta! CB |
|
28 Oct 02 - 02:55 AM (#812925) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Wilfried Schaum Steve - "Welsch" refers in all German languages and dialects to the French speaking. In the battle of Kortrijk (Battle of the Spurs) where the cities of Flanders fought King of France's army their battle cry was: "What's Welsh that's wrong! Kill them all!" (Rhymes better in the original language.) Coyote - That is no problem of the English alone; substituting a laryngal sound by the glottal stop you may find in Arabic dialects and even with the old Romans: they never were sure wether to say "harena" (sand) or "arena". Wilfried |
|
02 Nov 02 - 02:26 PM (#816977) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Eire32 As the many responses show, there are two ways to pronounce the word. Having said this I do not have an accepted rule with which you can determine when to use "K" Celtic and when to use "S" Celtic. Every one of my Irish friends (both Irish speakers and non) use "S" Celtic for the football team and "K" Celtic for everything else. So the closest I can come to a rule is that if it is a sports team's name it is pronounced with a soft c. If it is everything else (inlcuding music and art) it is with a hard c. I, too, took Irish language classes and my teacher also told me there were no soft c's in the language. It is true, however, that pronunciation varies wildly from region to region on the island, but I have never heard any Irish Gaelic speaker say anything but "K" Celtic unless they are rooting for the green and white boys on the pitch. |
|
03 Nov 02 - 04:16 AM (#817293) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Terry K Ascribed to Richard Burton - at a party in the USA, Burton was approached by a loud and objectionable person who said "Say Richard, you and I have something in common - we are both Selts". To which Burton replied "No sir, you are wrong - for I am a Kelt, while you are a Sunt". cheers, Terry |
|
11 May 09 - 10:52 AM (#2629003) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: maple_leaf_boy Naemanson's original post in this thread mentioned the group was from the Canadian Maritimes. The singer said that it IS a soft c, which surprised me; because many of us pronounce it with a hard c. That's one of the signs some of us point out that someone is likely from outside the area, because the hard "c" is rarely heard by locals. When somebody does pronounce it with a soft c; we find that they're usually from away. That's more so in Nova Scotia, at least. |
|
11 May 09 - 11:22 AM (#2629023) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Bryn Pugh As far as I am aware, "Proto-Celtic" (for want of better term) split two ways, not several as alleged above. The split was into Goidelic (Irish, Manx, Gaelic) and Brythonic (Cymraeg, Kernewek and Brezhoneg). Now watch the fun . . . |
|
11 May 09 - 11:37 AM (#2629031) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Tug the Cox Which, Bryn, as we have already heard , is irrelevant, as the word Celtic of greek, not gaelic/celtic origin. |
|
11 May 09 - 02:40 PM (#2629166) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: meself Re: the original post. I'm a little hestitant to say this, but - unless the woman were at least "of a certain age", I would be skeptical of her claim that Gaelic is her primary language, if she is originally from the Maritimes ... |
|
11 May 09 - 03:01 PM (#2629178) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Terry McDonald Just read all the entries for this one and it reminded me that here in Dorset we have a town called 'Gillingham.'(Hard 'G') In Kent, for some strange reason, they pronounce their town whose name has the same spelling as ours, as 'Jillingham.' |
|
11 May 09 - 06:15 PM (#2629315) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: McGrath of Harlow "I would be skeptical of her claim that Gaelic is her primary language, if she is originally from the Maritimes" Why so, meself? A person's primary language is the one used in their home when they were a child, it doesn't require that they grew up in a wider community that generally used the language. |
|
11 May 09 - 07:10 PM (#2629360) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: RobbieWilson So here's a question from a Celt and a lifelong Celtic fc supporter; How would you pronounce either ( you say either but I say either)of these places, both of which are just outside Glasgow, Milngavie and Strathaven? Let's call the whole thing off |
|
11 May 09 - 07:23 PM (#2629368) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Tug the Cox Terry, them 'Darsetshire' people make their own rules. Of course it's Jillingham. Unless there is a good reason or an alternative etymology, English orthography normally has both G and C soft if followed by E or I(y) but hard if followwed by A, O , or U. |
|
11 May 09 - 11:40 PM (#2629569) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: meself "Why so, meself?" Well, I've kicked around the Maritimes quite a bit, although I'm not living there now, and, sadly, I don't think I've met anyone born much later than the end of WWII who had the Gaelic as a first or primary language. I'm not saying that it's impossible there are some instances of such, but if I met someone who made that claim of themselves (themself?), I would if possible engage them in conversation with the aim of trying to establish to my own satisfaction the likelihood of that claim. That's what I mean by being skeptical. |
|
12 May 09 - 12:37 AM (#2629582) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Gweltas Being a fluent Irish speaker, I agree that there are no soft C's in Irish. I grew up in Ireland hearing Celtic consistently pronounced as Keltic, the only exception being when people referred to Glasgow Celtic, or Boston Celtic football teams, when the soft C was used. I have been involved in the Pan Celtic movement since the early 1970's and attend at least three Celtic Festivals each year, mixing over the years with thousands of my fellow Celts from Cornwall (where I now live), Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Isle of Man and Brittany and I have never heard the soft C pronounciation being used by any of the attendees, except in the context of football. I also did 5 years of Latin in school where our Latin teachers always insisted that we used hard C's ......... so words like Caesar were pronounced Kaesar ! I am impressed by the level of linguistic and historical erudition in the previous posts on this question of pronounciation, but I would remind people that what is actually relevant NOW is that those of us, who are keenly aware of the importance of our Celtic identity and heritage, actually refer to OURSELVES as Celts (with a K!) and it is irrelevant as to what other non-Celts choose to call us. I accept that the rules of English language pronounciation would indicate that the soft C should be used, as has been trumpeted here by the pedants, but us Celts (with a K!) have historically been a "rebellious lot" and in my opinion COMMON USAGE will always triumph over linguistic pronounciation rules. |
|
12 May 09 - 01:20 AM (#2629593) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: GUEST,leeneia It's not a smart idea to use 'Celtic' in the name of a band, album, or other venture. Instead of paying attention to the music or the musicians, people will start arguing about how to pronounce Celtic. Starting an argument over how to pronounce Celtic is just a way for the average joe to focus attention on himself. Or herself. |
|
12 May 09 - 07:47 AM (#2629743) Subject: RE: Celtic vs Celtic: Which is Correct? From: Gweltas Dear Leeneia, Please note that I merely contributed to the lively discussion in this thread. Having neither started the pronounciation "argument", nor having any particular desire/need to have attention focussed on me, I am succumbing to the temptation of now beginning to wonder if you consider that all "average Joe" posters on Mudcat, who either start discussion threads, or contribute to to those threads, to be attention seekers ? Surely not !! Designating us as "attention seekers" is such a regrettably negative response to all the varying opinions expressed by all of the preceeding contributers to this thread. As for admonishing us that use of the adjective "Celtic" on CD's, band names, or other ventures, will have a resulting detrimental effect of promoting mere argument rather than people paying appropriate attention to the content ......... it has been my experience that any lively discussion, or controversy, is in effect, positive and beneficial FREE publicity for the people, product, or endeavour, concerned !! Celtic is an accepted international definition which anyone (Celt or non-Celt) is free to use to define either a language, cultural identity, heritage, geographical region, or artistic activity. How many more words should be similarly "proscribed" in order to eliminate possible sources of argument from this world of ours ? Stating that using the term Celtic is "not a smart idea" is in effect a sweeping generalisation on the presumed lack of intellectual capabilities of those who are proud to use this definition of either themselves, or their activities. I have no idea what your racial/cultural background is, but I am absolutely sure that you are just as staunchly proud of your origins and heritage as us Celts are of ours, so please lighten up a wee bit and accept that we have the right (smart or otherwise!) to proudly define ourselves and our appropriate endeavours as Celtic, should we choose to do so. Kindest regards, Anne XX |