On Ilkley Moor Baht 'at

Discussion in 'French-English Vocabulary / Vocabulaire Français-Anglais' started by whatchama, May 16, 2010.

  1. whatchama Senior Member

    Paris
    french
    rebonjour,

    wikipédia m'a renseignée : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Ilkla_Moor_Baht_'at.

    .Coalition cabinet: By 'eck! Flat vowels abound as Yorkshire mafia takes over
    County is well represented in new batch of ministers, which could produce a rousing chorus of Ilkla Moor Baht 'At.

    est-ce que cela veut dire qu'il vont tous finir par "se bouffer les un les autres" ?

    merci de votre aide.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 16, 2010
  2. The Prof

    The Prof Senior Member

    L'ecrivain fait référence au fait qu'il y a tant de ministères du Yorkshire.
    'On Ilkley Moor Baht 'At' est une chanson traditionnelle de ce comté, donc il existe la possibilité que tous ces ministères se mettent a la chanter!!!
     
  3. Keith Bradford

    Keith Bradford Senior Member

    Brittany, NW France
    English (Midlands UK)
    Wheer 'ast tha bin sin Ah saw thee?
    On Ilkla Moor baht 'at!

    = Where hast thou been since I saw thee?
    On Ilkley Moor without a hat!

    C'est une vieille chanson adaptée d'une cantique par des choristes, un jour où ils faisaient une pique-nique sur la lande près d'Ilkley. La morale : Si tu oublies de mettre ton chapeau quand fais la cour à ta petite amie sur la lande, tu risques d'attraper froid. Tu mourras, les vers te boufferont, les canards avaleront les vers et nous mangerons les canards. "Then we shall all have etten thee, etten thee..." Très écolo !

    Ma version: Ou as-tu été aujourd'hui ? Sur la Lande de Landerneau, sur la Lande sans chapeau ! ...etc. à capella.
     
  4. Keith Bradford

    Keith Bradford Senior Member

    Brittany, NW France
    English (Midlands UK)
    J'ai déjà fait. On en trouve des exemples dans cette chanson :
    been => bin
    Ilkley => Ilkla (un Français aurait sans doute écrit Ilklè).
     
  5. The Prof

    The Prof Senior Member

    Just as a matter of interest, I have heard another interpretation of the title of the song, based on a very small spelling/pronunciation change: ... 'baht 'aat', meaning without anything. In other words, the courting couple were being teased about removing much more than just their hats.
    And knowing how bawdy such groups can be on outings (even in those more distant times), that lyric would not surprise me!
     
  6. orlando09 Senior Member

    France, PACA
    English (England)
    you mean "ministres" - ministères is ministries. That would mean "there are so many ministries of Yorkshire" - which I doubt unless I have not been following the news enough to have heard about this new policy ;-)

    Effectivement, la phrase dans le post originel veut juste dire qu'il y a beaucoup de ministres qui sont d'origine Yorkshiraise (je ne sais pas si ce mot existe, mais sinon je l'invente..), et donc ils sont assez nombreux pour faire une bonne interprétation en choeur de cette chanson associée avec ce comté

    -----

    I'm from Yorkshire, and I've always understood it is the "without a hat" explanation - without anything sounds a bit far-fetched, and in any case, you would expect it in that case to be "owt" not "aat" - and also it's not sung "aaht", it is definitely with a hard, short "a". This is an old traditional song about someone going "courting Mary Jane" - I wouldn't have thought there is enough evidence that it was meant to be so risqué as to involve a kind of "courting" which involved removing all the clothes...
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2010
  7. SteveD

    SteveD Senior Member

    Braine-l'Alleud, Belgium
    British English

    If we go back to the original post, is is not in fact "bar t'at", "bar" meaning "without" as in "all bar one"?
     
  8. orlando09 Senior Member

    France, PACA
    English (England)
    I think it's more likely that baht is just a dialect form of "without" as opposed to being connected to bar, which is a variant of "barring", meaning "leaving out of consideration" (Chambers).

    It does seem also that On Ilkla Mooar baht 'at is the official spelling, so I guess it means "without hat" as opposed to "without the hat", which you would expect to make baht t'at.

    Either way it is just pronounced "bar tat".
     
  9. The Prof

    The Prof Senior Member

    Oops - put that down to a senior moment there with the ministers who turned into ministries!

    As regards the pronunciation of 'owt', I can promise you that in many parts of Yorkshire this becomes 'aaht'. I don't dispute for one moment that the hat version is the accepted version, and the one you will always hear sung, but that doesn't necessarily make it correct!
    But I had better say no more on the subject, as it is straying rather too far from the original question and I don't want to get a ticking-off! :D
     
  10. orlando09 Senior Member

    France, PACA
    English (England)
    And at the risk of continuing the straying, as I said, if that was the case though it would be sung with a long-sounding "aah", I would have thought, whereas it's always sung as if written bar tat, to rhyme with "cat". Though your version of the song does give a different slant on the song!

    Edit: oh, I see you agreed you always hear this ('at ) version sung... so you think maybe the correct version got forgotten early on? Well I guess we'll never know eh? Unless some original manuscript turns up clearly saying "aaht" , or some early phonograph version of it is posted on Youtube or something...
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2010
  11. Uncle Bob Senior Member

    Hungary
    British English
    I'm straying further with a few points.
    1. I think the problem is that the transcription of the words of this song has been done/printed/published by effete southerners (Londoners) who have absolutely no idea of (the) correct pronunciation. (At least, as it was before the Normans arrived:)). For example "Ilkla" is transcribed based on an accent from the wrong side of the Lancashire/Yorkshire isogloss(es). As far as I know it should be [ilk] (not "Ilklè", sorry K.B.).
    2. As for the "baht 'at", I suggest it should be written "bah t'at", bar thy hat ("sans ta chapeau").
    3. With respect to "owt" versus "aat", I have only known the former. Could the saying that one doesn't get "owt for nowt" be pronounced "aat for naat"? ("Quelquechose pour rien"). That doesn't sound right but perhaps it varies from Riding to Riding.
    I'd better stop now!
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2010
  12. orlando09 Senior Member

    France, PACA
    English (England)
    As I said, the baht 'at spelling seems to be official: for example in the title of a book by Arnold Kellet, who is an authority on Yorkshire history and folklore and dialect:

    On Ilkla Mooar Baht 'At The first-ever book about Yorkshire's world-famous anthem. The story of the song is presented in the context of Ilkley Moor itself, the hymn-singing Methodists and the dialect speakers of the industrial West Riding. (Dalesman Publishing)

    So it looks like it means literally "without hat"

    In any case I don't think "thy hat" would be abbreviated to t'at, would it? t' is usually short for "the"

    You say the correct pronuniciation should be without the second [l] - or was that a typo?
     
  13. Uncle Bob Senior Member

    Hungary
    British English
    Sorry, yes it was a typo. I was so busy tying to find a schwa! I've corrected it.
     

Share This Page

Loading...