Jump to content

Talk:Milngavie

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pronunciation, Gaelic and otherwise

[edit]

Could I suggest we use sound files rather than making up approximations to the pronunciation? They tend not to work, especially once outside your own dialect are. A sound file would be ideal.

The bit about that /w/ I deleted because as it was, it makes no sense, at least not from a Gaelic point of view. There is no /w/, neither in Gaelic nor the modern Scottish pronunciation. I'll dig up the refs - I remember Iain Mac an Tàilleir writing about it potentially being Muilleann Gaoithe "Mill of the Wind" rather than Dai's Mill. Akerbeltz (talk) 23:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What you want is rule B07 for vowel + slender bh, that gives you /aiv/ over /aːi/ which is not generally an accepted sound sequence in Gaelic though there is some debate about whether some di/trigraphs contain long vowels but for now the model is that long vowels are only indicated in single vowel sequences. One could argue over full vowel vs glide but ultimately, that debate doesn't really make a massive difference and I think it's better sticking to one paradigm for now. Akerbeltz (talk) 12:31, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Sorry. Copy-paste from the source:
B09 (-)VbhˈV(-) [ j ]
When a slender bh is between vowels, normally the outcome is a
[ j ]. Common exceptions are the name Dàibhidh [daːivɪ], recent
loanwords like cleabhar [klɛvər] and draibhear [draivɛr] and high
register words like sléibhe [ ʃ Lʲeːvə].
So while I've added the glide sign, the two other changes were simply copied typos (or a result of a convention mismatch?). I may be too lazy to check if my old wikiaccount still exists, too absent-minded to remember what I read where, and inattentive enough to refer the authors of the article to the source by one of them, but fortunately I still manage to use the Clipboard correctly :-) 46.186.37.98 (talk) 03:10, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Urk, well spotted. I need to correct that in the book for the next edition. Another one of those annoying little errors. Daibhidh has short /aiv/ but the reduced form Dàidh has /da:j/, the disappearing /v/ leaving a trace of length. Mea culpa. Akerbeltz (talk) 11:20, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Older Scots miln in Milngaivie became simplified to mill. The i often being pronounced with a sound between Standard English hill and hull. Hence the pronunciation mul. The meaning is of course a mill for grinding grain.
The second element gaivie, perhaps a personal name, was likely pronounced as spelt. In Middle Scots v-deletion occurred intervocalically and between a nasal/liquid consonant and a vowel in some words. The resulting gai'ie became pronounced gay. Through a subsequent phonological change the pronunciation became gey (rhymes with guy). Hence spellings like Mulguy reflecting the Modern Scots pronunciation. 91.5.55.118 (talk) 22:49, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Very interesting. I agree that the pronunciation in the area (I live there) has not drifted so far from "mill" that the first consonant rhymes with "hull". A schwa "ə" rhyming with the "e" in "roses" is about right. I appreciate that the schwa isn't in the English alphabet, so some writers like Billy Kay have used a "u" to spell phonetically, hence the debate and controversy. A schwa is allowable in the WP:Pronunciation_respelling_key template, so for the sake of accuracy, I've changed it to suit in the first line of the article. Wikiwayman (talk) 11:50, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Milngavie. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:02, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Milngavie. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pruning

[edit]

My bad; only meant to remove the first individual. Mutt Lunker (talk) 17:52, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's ok. We all make mistakes sometimes. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 12:11, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Milngavie. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:42, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Milngavie BID

[edit]

Just reverted (as someone else already had) an edit to add a malformed external link to Milngavie Business Improvement District web site, and an internal link to a non-existent page about Milngavie BID. Agree completely with the original reason for removing those; namely that the page should be written first, rather than an empty link added. — pmcm 23:34, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree See WP:Red. The idea that the Milngavie Business Improvement District merits an article of its own (i.e. separate from the town) is unrealistic. The aims of the BID company are to promote Milngavie businesses and attract visitors to the town, so this clearly fits into the scope of the existing article.
Disagree Regarding WP:External links, I think that an external link to milngavie.co.uk is appropriate in this case, primarily because the way that the BID company is structured, with ultimate support from the Scottish government via Scotland’s Improvement Districts, making it a de facto official link, just as valid as a link to EDC council. Wikiwayman (talk) 11:50, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comment. I would have left the external link, had someone actually added it as a proper external link, rather than just sticking square brackets around the link, like this: Milngavie.co.uk. Personally don't have any concerns issue with the link being reinstated properly, and suspect it'd be more useful than a link to EDC. — pmcm 12:57, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would concur with Wikiwayman; it isn't very plausible that MBID will get is own article here, but a link in "External links" seems reasonable, for essentially the same reasons that editor gave. In a US town article, we might link to their Chamber of Commerce website, since local business development is of encyclopedic interest to a significant subset of our readers.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  05:38, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Milngavie / Mulguy confusions across two Wikipedias

[edit]

Here at en.wikipedia, we have this article Milngavie. I claims that the Gaelic for this is Muileann-Ghaidh. We have no article at Mulguy. At sco.wikipedia.org, there is an article at sco:Mulguy, which claims that the Gaelic for it is Muileann Dhaibhidh. The maps show these two towns (if they are not actually the same town) very, very close to each other. Given Scottish Gaelic pronunciation of dh generally as if gh (and bh most often as /v/), this strongly suggests that Muileann Dhaibhidh is actually the source of Milngavie, while Muileann[-]Ghaidh (which perhaps should not have a hyphen in it, or perhaps both should) is the source of Milguy. The Scots article (to which sco:Milngavie redirects, whether it should or not) seems to suggest they are really the same town, but is poorly sourced. Meanwhile, the English article here never mentions the Mulguy name (has also been attested as Mulgye, Mulgay, etc.), and seems to pooh-pooh the Gaelic Muileann Dhaibhidh which actually seems a more plausible origin of the longer name Milngavie (also attested as Mullingavie in at least one early-modern source). I notice some alternative claims in there. An issue with one is that the existence of another place-name derived from Muileann Dhàibhidh but having a slightly different anglicisation is completely meaningless; anglicisation was pretty much random both in Scotland and in England, and there are multiple cases of divergent anglicised names from the same Gaelic originals (as well as vice versa instances of the same anglicisation resulting from different Gaelic originals).

Anyway, at least some sort of cleanup and "consistent-ising" appears to be needed, at both sites. PS: I have not checked gd.wikipedia.org for corresponding pages.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  05:36, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mulguy is simply a phonetic respelling of Milngavie. I'm not sure what gave you the idea that they are two different towns. Both of the Gaelic names you have listed are hypothetical, since Milngavie lies in a part of Scotland that has not been Gaelic-speaking for some time. Muileann-Ghaidh is the name used for the town by Ainmean-Àite na h-Alba, while Muileann Dhàibhidh is one of several etymologies offered by Iain Taylor in his book Place-Names of Scotland. Zacwill (talk) 20:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Milngavie&oldid=1256637733"