Analysis of Language Use in Hugh MacDiarmid's "Water Gaw" and Gerard Manley Hopkins "The Windhover".

Authors Avatar by feebee31 (student)


Louis Althusser’s thesis that, ‘Ideology represents the imaginary relationship of individuals to their real conditions of existence’ means that reality is always subjected to the system beliefs of the dominant culture. Born in Scotland, Christopher Murray Grieve strived to go against the dominant language system of English instigating a revival of the Scots language in literature. Reinventing himself in what Laura O’Donnell defines as: the ‘Anglicised Gaelic pseudonym Hugh MacDiarmid’, he reconstructs himself as a Bard, in a hyperbolic attempt to define his nationalism. He wrote in Scots from 1922, when he published The Watergaw, until 1929, when the limitations of the Scots language and the lack of monetary viability saw him move back to writing in the dominant English language. Roderick Watson highlights that, MacDiarmid, when advised to write in his old lyric style by the Scots Observer, wrote a ‘furious letter which resolutely refused to consider the tastes of the Scottish reading public ‘in any way’’. This essay will compare The Watergaw with MacDiarmid’s English translation, to consider the stylistic and ideological implications of the translation.  I will argue that MacDiarmid’s sabotage of the English language was deliberate and that despite his antisyzygy he anglicised some of his words unnecessarily, conforming to the dominant English language system.

MacDiarmid claims that the Scots ‘vernacular has a wider range and infinitely richer resources than English’ (RW, p.17). MacDiarmid’s deviant English translation of The Watergaw compounds this concept. By translating meaning rather than giving a literal translation, MacDiarmid denies the reader artistic expression and interpretation. The Scots idiom: ‘Yow-trummle’  translates as ‘ewe-tremble’ (RW, p.17). However, MacDiarmid translates this as ‘sheep-shearing season’ which is a phrase that functions as deixis, denying the poeticness of the line. Despite the alliterative effect of the ‘sh’ and the rhyming vowel repetition of the ‘ee’ and the ‘ea’, the line resembles prose. Syntactical deviation occurs when additional syllables of the English translation increase the line length by two extra feet, making it seem clumsy, negating the usual succinctness or finesse of poetry. Semantic deviation occurs since the translation loses the poetic connotations and powerful imagery of ‘ewe-tremble’.

Similarly, the Scots’ idiom: ‘there was nae reek i’ the laverock’s hoose’ (HM) has a literal translation of ‘there’s no smoke in the lark’s house’. MacDiarmid however, translates it as: ‘The skylark’s nest was dark and desolate’ (HM). Again there is a vast distance between the poetic natures of both, with his English translation feeling more like prose. Although similar in length, the phonological superiority of the rich rolling ‘r’ sound in the Scottish version intensifies the dreariness of the English translation. The alliterative plosive ‘d’ harshness of ‘dark’ and ‘desolate’ also connotes the dreariness of the poem. MacDiarmid deviates semantically by denying the translations poeticness, insinuating the impossibility of abstract expression and the incapability of meaning transference between the two languages.  This seems to be a deliberate attempt to destabilise the English language and add power to MacDiarmid’s fight against the dominant culture.

In denying the original abstract meaning of The Watergaw, MacDiarmid loses some of the overall metaphorical impact and linguistic connections of the poem. The ‘yow-trummle’, the trembling of the ewes, epitomises the indecisive Scottish weather and its refusal to give way to summer making the newly shorn sheep cold.  This is paralleled with the ‘chitterin’ licht’ of the ‘watergaw’ (HM) that acknowledges the poets refusal to let go of a loved one who has died. The words ‘chitterin’’ and ‘trummle’ (meaning tremble) are synonymous, allowing for a semantic repetition that is lost in translation. The poet’s description of the ‘yon antrin thing’ (HM), with the consonance on the ‘n’ and the combination of the plosive ‘t’ accentuating the rolling alveolar  trill of the  ‘r’ phoneme in ‘trin’,   reinforces the image of rare beauty that is the indefinable ‘watergaw’. In stark contrast to this, ‘the occasional, rare thing’ has no phonological rhyme lacking the fluidity of the Scottish version. The word ‘occasional’ connoting now and then, deflates the beautiful rarity of the ‘watergaw’. The ‘watergaw’ is translated as a ‘broken shaft of rainbow’ (HM), deviating semantically from defining the beauty and delicateness of a glimpse or whisper of a rainbow. The harsh ‘broken’  with its plosive ‘b’ phoneme, connoting negativity , is reinforced by ‘shaft’ which takes on a harsher denotation due to the close proximity to ‘broken’; seems to be a deliberate ploy by MacDiarmid to sabotage the beauty of the original meaning. MacDiarmid’s English translation then, seems anti-poetic; as to deny expression, MacDiarmid is going against the enigma and awe that most poets strive for. It would have been possible to keep the beauty for example: ‘the half whisper of a rainbow’ which, though I am not a poet, sounds much gentler than the harsh lexicon used by MacDiarmid.

Join now!

Despite his claim of antisyzygy, determining his anti-synthesisation of the Scots vernacular and Standard English (AB, p.53), MacDiarmid’s lexical choices include a synergy of both languages. MacDiarmid frequently uses an apostrophe in place of dropped consonants. For example in Scots, MacDiarmid uses: ‘i’’ instead of in; ‘wi’’ instead of with; ‘o’’ instead of of; ‘chitterin’’ instead of chittering, ‘an’’ instead of and, and ‘sin’’ instead of since. He has also written ‘sin’ syne’ (HM), where he could have written syne then, to mean since then, as both words were in the Jamieson dictionary he consulted. Some dictionaries list sinsyne as ...

This is a preview of the whole essay