A sign of the times...

[Jamez]

No, not particularly. The place just depresses me.

My mistake. The "hoping it had been nuked" must have thrown me.

[Mr Q]

Whether it wins elections, or simply provides jobs, the economic arguments seems to be persuasive enough for justifying tax payers' money to be used for it.

Well, that's kind of my argument. I don't think there is a strong economic rationale at all. However I can see why it might be politically opportune from a special interests point of view. It has obviously created substantial demand for translators, for one thing.

[Alexia]

Oooh there's some cynics on here! A language perpetuated for political reasons only? Shurely shome mishtake? See Plaid Cymru, Cymuned etc....

Mr Q... I guess it's different in Australia and New Zealand, where the indigenous populations were subjugated by the colonial invaders, and many traces of their culture were eradicated by the Europeans. Isn't there a similar movement for Aboriginal and Maori minority culture and language to be protected / nourished / promoted? Of course I know nothing about this, not having been born in Australia or New Zealand, so wouldn't presume to pass judgement upon things I know little about.

Oh ... and this passage shows just how idiotic your argument is:

So I don't accept there is a fundamental 'right', as such, for them to live their lives in Welsh. They have the freedom to make a choice, yes, but that choice is subject to the constraints imposed by the real world - chiefly, that the English language actually exists and is more widely used.

In the real world, the Chinese language actually exists and is more widely used. So I expect you all to begin your courses in Mandarin as soon as possible.

I'm sure your view would be different if your language was in the minority and you were the one forced to live your life in a language that doesn't come naturally to you. The same arguments are heard in Quebec. Only there's a few more French Canadiens than Welsh Britons. How many of us must there be before the argument ceases to be as trivial as your sweeping statements seem to suggest?

[Nini]

Demand secession! Gets the francophone Quebecois heard on occasion.

[timgraham]

New Zealand promotes their native language - Maori - quite heavily, although I'm not sure if it's on road signs. Most of their place names have Maori origins. Government departments all have translations of their names and there is a TV channel devoted to Maori-language programming.

It's very different in Australia, which I'd put down to historical differences and also the fact that there are dozens, if not hundreds, of Aboriginal languages (some of which are spoken by only a few hundred people). A lot of communities are taking steps to have their language - which are usually spoken - transcribed in order to preserve it and its significance. There's no particular government iniaitive AFAIK.

[Mr Q]

Oh ... and this passage shows just how idiotic your argument is:

So I don't accept there is a fundamental 'right', as such, for them to live their lives in Welsh. They have the freedom to make a choice, yes, but that choice is subject to the constraints imposed by the real world - chiefly, that the English language actually exists and is more widely used.

In the real world, the Chinese language actually exists and is more widely used. So I expect you all to begin your courses in Mandarin as soon as possible.

Not at all Alexia. Unless Mandarin happens to be spoken far more widely in Wales than I had expected, then it's not exactly relevant in this context. The issue is not which language has the most speakers in the world. The question here is, what language are people in a given area able to communicate in with the least difficulty? The answer here is surely English, because there are more English speakers than Welsh speakers, and all Welsh speakers can apparently speak English.

I am not saying that all Welsh speakers should be forced to converse in English. Indeed, I have little problem with important government material being printed in both English and Welsh, and frankly any number of other languages that people might speak. I am simply questioning the merit of sticking Welsh on road signs when anybody who could understand the Welsh on those signs would already know what the sign says from the English written above it!

I'm sure your view would be different if your language was in the minority and you were the one forced to live your life in a language that doesn't come naturally to you. The same arguments are heard in Quebec. Only there's a few more French Canadiens than Welsh Britons. How many of us must there be before the argument ceases to be as trivial as your sweeping statements seem to suggest?

Every Welsh person could speak Welsh, and it might not make sense to stick Welsh on road signs if everyone speaks English as well. By contrast, if there were even small pockets of the Welsh countryside where people spoke Welsh only, then it would make sense to have bilingual road signs (in those areas at least).

New Zealand promotes their native language - Maori - quite heavily, although I'm not sure if it's on road signs. Most of their place names have Maori origins. Government departments all have translations of their names and there is a TV channel devoted to Maori-language programming.

To my knowledge, there are no Maori road signs, but yes there's a lot of Maori-language material.

[Ant]

Nobody actually speaks the thing and in Dundee (which is fairly northern) its mainly referred to by people laughing at Postman Pat being in gaelic when they were young.

I grew up singing Pàdraig bloody Post.

Hated it.

[Alexia]

I am simply questioning the merit of sticking Welsh on road signs when anybody who could understand the Welsh on those signs would already know what the sign says from the English written above it!

And this is where you're missing the fundamental point. In your mind, it is easy to look at the English and understand immediately what it says. In fact, polepe say taht no mtaetr waht odrer the ltreetrs in the wrdos are in, you can siltl udrsannted waht tehy maen. In the minds of a person who has grown up using Welsh as their FIRST language - in the home, in school, in general life - it will be easier for them to glance at the Welsh and immediately know what it means, rather than take that extra time to translate it in their mind should it be written in English only?

Of course, again one should note that most signs can be transliterated in iconography and symbols, so that sign should have looked like this

[ashley b]

Or indeed the correct one for the UK:



(Obviously without the weight restriction bit)

[Mr Q]

And this is where you're missing the fundamental point. In your mind, it is easy to look at the English and understand immediately what it says. In fact, polepe say taht no mtaetr waht odrer the ltreetrs in the wrdos are in, you can siltl udrsannted waht tehy maen. In the minds of a person who has grown up using Welsh as their FIRST language - in the home, in school, in general life - it will be easier for them to glance at the Welsh and immediately know what it means, rather than take that extra time to translate it in their mind should it be written in English only?

As I say, I'm not sure how much of a difference it makes. My impression is that Welsh-speakers would be functionally bilingual, and wouldn't face any great difficulty reading an English-language road sign. But let's assume for sake of argument that there is a difference, and that it takes them marginally longer to read a sign in English than one with a Welsh language translation. The question then becomes, what sort of cost does that impose? Does it cause more accidents, for instance? By the same token though, if signs are required to be bilingual, we should acknowledge that imposes a cost as well: they're obviously going to be more expensive to produce than smaller signs with just one language on them. So you have to weigh the costs against the benefits. Even if there are some benefits from bilingual signs - and I'm absolutely prepared to accept there might be - again, I'm not convinced that immediately justifies them given the costs.

Of course, again one should note that most signs can be transliterated in iconography and symbols, so that sign should have looked like this

And again, I absolutely agree with what you're saying - clear icons and symbols are indeed preferable to lengthy passages of text on signs in any language.

[Alexia]

Going slightly off the point - I'd wager that if the council are putting up signs like the one posted by the OP, where large prints of text are preferred to small symbols and icons, they have no qualms about the budget they have to spend on road signs.

Given that up and down the country, these perfectly acceptable and long-serving distance markers


are being replaced with these oversized and needlessly complicated distance markers


one could argue that road signage costs are not in danger of breaking any banks any time soon.


I'll round this discussion off with the following quote. My second cousin came up to Wales with my uncle from Kent to watch AFC Wimbledon play Newport County. As they got off the Severn Bridge my (English) cousin said "What are all those funny words on the signs?" My uncle (born in Wales) said "Ah - that's Welsh." My cousin said "Blimey - it's like we're in a whole different country!"

Go figure!