New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-10-08
Swift and the Irish Language.


in his reflections on the Irish language
and that he could not help being i'm
pressed with its liquid sounds, which make
music to the ear" has favored us with a
further elaboration of his opinion. His
letter, with few unimportant omissions, is
printed in another column; the curious
who desire fuller statement Of this un-
tenable thesis are referred to O'Donoghue
in "The Irish Review apparently his
chief authority, and an untrustworthy one
The notion that Swift's little people
were borrowed from the old Irish tale o.
the Death of Fergus mac Leide may be dis
missed at once as too fantastic for serious
discussion. There is not the faintest re-
semblance either in detail or in spirit be-
tween the two narratives, though it is not
incredible that likeness might be fancied
by a critic who holds the names CULVER
and Glomar to be "strikingly similar" As
well say the name Lilliputian is merely
another form of Leprechaun.
1t is greatly to be regretted that his
considerable research did not lead Mr..
O'Reilly to original sources. He trusts so
implicitly in the ingenious misrepresenta-
tons of Mr.. O'Donoghue that he is even
betrayed into a false quotation. Swift
says nothing, either ironically or other
wise, about replacing the preiixes Bally,
Kill and Clon, by BOBBY, Fool and Ounce.
What he does say is that though he would
Anglicize the names of country habita:ions
in Ireland he 'would by no means trust
these alterations to the owners themselves"
who have neither imagination nor learning
enough for the task. As an instance of
stupid remaining he mentions Bessborough,
the seat of one whose wife's name was
Elizabeth; likewise Whigborough, the sim
pie conceit of an ardent party man. 1t is
to such as these that he offers Mount Log
gerhead, Ounce Hill and the like as
proper TO express the talents Of the
owners" Bally, Kill and Clon are never
once mentioned, and were apparently intro
duced by the irresponsible Mr.. O'Donoghue
in desperate effort to establish a case
hopeless on the face Of it.
Swift's remarks on marlborough may
serve to explain the passage from another
tract relating to the national religion.
Touching the risk of choosing names that
may not always be in favor, he observes
that the Presbyterian squires, in spite OF
manifest encouragement, had not begun to
call their country abodes Mount Regicide,
Canting Brook, Covenant Hall and the like,
adding that there may probably come a
time when those kind of sounds may not be
so grateful to the ears Of the kingdom" He
is clearly CHANGING at the same old enemies
in the ironical passage our correspondent
italicizes in imitation of Mr.. O'Donoghue.
Surely, no one who knows anything Of
Swift could possibly suppose that he was
not at all times an uncompromising up
holder of the Established Church.
But these are not the only occasions on
which Swift dwelt on the necessity Of
teaching English to those he called "the
poor popish natives" He returns to the
subject in one of his sermons, recommend
ing the foundation Of schools in every
parish. This" he says, would, in time
abolish that part Of barbarity and igno-
rance for which our natives are so de-
spised by all foreigners" If this was
meant ironically then we are forced TO the
conclusion that he was not serious when
bo ha rrncQaAaA 10
mend the incubation of cleanliness, hon
esty, thrift. industry and religion.
There is no reason in the world 10 be
lieve that he did not mean exactly what
he said about the opinion of foreigners.
In the "Barbarous Denominations" he COM
plains particularly that "the bad conse-
Guence of this opinion affects those among
us who are not the least liable TO such re
proaches, farther than the misfortune Of
being born in Ireland, although Of English
parents, and whose education has been
chiefly in that kingdom" 1t is just 50 he
speaks of himself in a private letter to
Lord Oxford: 81 happened, indeed, by a
perfect accident, to be born here &.
and thus am a league, or an IriShman,
or what people please, although the bes'
part of my life was in England" We find
the same thought expressed many times ir
his writings. AS TO his knowledge Of the
language, the supposed translation descriL-
ing an Irish feast is no evidence at all.
On the other hand, in comparing the Irish
and English cottagers in a letter to Wogan
he confines his observations on the former
expressly to those who could speak our
language" thus plainly implying that he
could not speak theirs.
There is nothing, in short. in any of