Talk:Auld Lang Syne

OR

Original research? Running proquest to make a perfunctory determination of when song entered popular culture? Lotsofissues 15:56, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

In Catalonia it is also used as a farewell song, and the translation to Catalan language is "L'hora dels adéus" ("Time to say Goodbye")

Yet, it is sometimes referred to jokingly as "the song that nobody knows", since many people can recall the melody easily but know only a fraction of the words, perhaps because it is written in the Scots language. Who refers to it in this way? No source, methinks. --84.68.200.235 02:39, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Well if you put "the song that nobody knows" into google, a lot of the hits seem to be Auld Lang Syne. Admittedly, there aren't many hits in total but I've heard this song refered to as such by people so not completely unfounded. - JVG 06:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Gies

Gies is indeed a Scots word (pronounced "geeze") and means gives as in "He gies a bane tae the dug" meaning "He gives a bone to the dog" in English. However gie's in the line "gie's a haund" is pronounced "geese" and is a contraction of "gie us a haund", meaning "give me a hand" in English. That is why it should have an apostrophe. It's a similar case to "I'll" which also has a different pronunciation and meaning depending on whether the apostrophe is present or absent. -- Derek Ross | Talk 16:39, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Gude

Gude is also a mispelling. It should be spelt guid (pronounced gid or gweed depending on dialect). -- Derek Ross | Talk 17:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Correct Lyrics

It's also interesting to note that my two volumes of Burns poetry, an early 20th century Collins one and a late 19th century Nelson one each have different versions of this poem. Not only do the words differ but the verses are in a different order in each book. The Nelson edition spells "guid" and "gie's" properly; uses "days of auld lang syne" for the first verse but nowhere else; and puts the "pint-stoup" verse at the end of the poem. The Collins edition doesn't use the phrase "for days of auld lang syne" at all and puts the "pint-stoup" verse in second place. The Wikipedia currently has a third version based on the Collins but with "days of" added to several of the verses. It looks like we need to do more research in order to find out what Burns intended the lyrics to be. -- Derek Ross | Talk 17:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Right, a quick check indicates that the Collins order is the one that Burns used [1], so that's a part answer to the question. -- Derek Ross | Talk 18:05, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Double right. I think the interpretation (and the punctuation ascribed to Burns) in this article is completely wrong. Why would anybody suggest that old acquaintance be forgot? The lyrics mean "should" in the sense of "lest": should memories begin to grow dim, let this cup (this toast) serve as a remembrance, i.e., a thing to freshen the memory. The interpretation in this article is somebody's personal interpretation, and should be reported as such — or, preferably, removed altogether. rowley (talk) 18:30, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I have proposed a solution, with a slight change of wording that leaves the meaning open to interpretation. rowley (talk) 18:57, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

One of these things is not like the other

SAMPA: [s@in] or IPA: [saɪn] Uh... what? I'm pretty sure that SAMPA translates as [səin]. I think that it should be [saIn]; anyone who can actually be arsed to look up the lax high front vowel in SAMPA is welcome to correct me. But actually, the best thing to do would probably be to just write [sajn], which is more accurate (since there's no non-syllabic diacritic in the current version) and doesn't require a SAMPA transliteration. 69.140.12.199 02:09, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Drinking Song

The lyrics below were added recently. If this version was written recently enough, it would still be under copyright, unless the writer released them. That may even be the case, I have not looked myself. If they are in the public domain, then they could be put back (either as a link, or at the end of the article as an alternate version) If they are not public domain, a link could be added to a site that includes them. —MJBurrage 01:03, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Auld Lang Syne As A Drinking Song:
Should old acquaintance be forgot,
and never brought to mind ?
Should old acquaintance be forgot,
in the days of auld lang syne ?

CHORUS:

For auld lang syne, my dear,

for auld lang syne,

we'll take a cup o’ kindness yet,

for the sake of auld lang syne.

Let's have a drink or maybe two !
Or maybe three or four !
Or five or six or seven or eight,
and maybe even more !

CHORUS ×2

When it gets to closing time,
And you still want more,
I know a pub in Invemess
That never shuts its door!

CHORUS ×2

This version is an actual drinking song sung in pubs in Ireland, Scotland and England. The Celtic Punk band, the Dropkick Murphys, did a verison of the song with those lyrics. —User:68.158.253.245, 25 March 2006 (UTC) THE DROpkick version is on LIMEWIRE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.37.30.33 (talk) 19:55, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I think if you research this, you'll find that the question marks were added by someone who understood neither the sense of the song nor punctuation. It changes the meaning considerably. rowley (talk) 18:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Thailand

In Thailand, there's a song named "สามัคคีชุมนุม" (Sa-mak-kee-choom-noom, litterally, "harmony assemble") with a tune of Auld Lang Syne. The similarily goes further also when Thai people sing this song, they crossed-hold their hands together, just the way people do it during singing Auld Lang Syne in Hogmanay night. -- 172.173.110.5 21:48, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

---

Who wrote the melody? Bastie 16:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Dropkick Murphys?

I'm a fan of Dropkick Murphys, and I've never heard of them recording a drinking song version of "Auld Lang Syne". If someone can't prove otherwise, I'm gonna delete the reference in a few days. Joltman 18:09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I dunno about the Murphys, but Real MacKenzies did in Clash of the Tartans. 82.93.133.130 16:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Under usage, where it has a list of bands that have covered "Auld Lang Syne", I again added the Dropkick Murphys, as well as a clip of them performing the chorus.

University of Virginia

There have been repeated references in this article to the "Good Old Song" (a/k/a "Good Ole Song") as the University of Virginia's "fight song." It's not the fight song; it's the alma mater. The tune of this song hardly fits a fight song. UVA's actual fight song is the "Cavalier Song," although I'd wager that 95% of our fans don't know the words. Either way, please stop changing the article to refer to it as a fight song. 1995hoo 15:54, 13 October 2006 (UTC) Theres a copy on limeWire its really good —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.37.30.33 (talk) 19:45, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Could someone give here the pronuncation of all the scottish words in the song?

80.95.109.155 15:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC) Prokop, Czech R.

I'll try but there is some variation according to which dialect of Scots you speak. IPA tends to be a bit too specific in these cases. Plus my IPA is a bit vague. -- Derek Ross | Talk 17:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The above is a very valid concern, IPA isn't really going to work for this -- I started trying to translate it to IPA, but stumbled as soon as I came across the word "auld". I (fae Dundee/Fife) say (and sing) something like "awld" (IPA [ɒld]), but Derek (fae Aiberdeen) obviously says something like "aald" (IPA [ald]). Similar problems come up with words like "tae" and "surely", which get different pronunciations depending on where you come from. Also there are a lot of words like "acquaintance" and "be" which don't differ in pronunciation from English. Might it be better, rather than having the pronunciation guide, to put in a link to Scots_language#Pronunciation there and let the reader work it out? Or maybe someone could do a recording of a recital (rather than a sung version, for clarity) and put it up? I'd do it, but I a) don't know how to record OGG b) don't have a microphone. Mendor 02:09, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Yup. That's the problem with IPA alright. -- Derek Ross | Talk 04:27, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Could someone replace the pronunciation guide that used to be here. What's here now is not a guide for English pronunciation, it's a foreign language. (asked someone who didn't sign).

Your wish ... -- Derek Ross | Talk 16:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I would like to mention a bugbear of mine where residents of the United States (and some in the UK. pme pf whom just appeared on TV) appear to have the total inability to pronounce the word "Syne" with an "S" as opposed to a "Z". Please stop it, as most of my fillings have now fallen out...82.6.1.85 (talk) 19:01, 31 December 2009 (UTC)Lance Tyrell

For old time's sake

Could "for old time's sake" work as an appropriation of the original meaning? If it would work, it would be a little clearer than what we have there already. IMFromKathlene 07:25, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Not really. "Sake" doesn't come into it. The simplest translation of the phrase "Auld lang syne is "Long ago". That seems clear enough to me. -- Derek Ross | Talk 04:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay. I've addressed this by translating the phrase as days of long ago which is idiomatically correct but fits the metre of the lyrics better than long ago. -- Derek Ross | Talk

My original intention with the minimal Anglicized translation was to present a version that an English speaker could understand, with out actually changing what the song sounds like, hence keeping Auld Lang Syne, which everyone sings without translation – even if they do mangle it :-) I.E. these were the lyrics I gave to some friends when they wanted the "correct" version of the song, but also wanted to know what they were singing. The title's meaning had been pretty well covered in the text, so I left it as we would sing it, and it certainly sounded better than everybody trying to sing in Scots, especially when none of us knew what the words are supposed to sound like. :-) —MJBurrage • TALK • 16:43, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Well if you want to put it back the way it was, that's fine. I only changed it because you seemed unhappy with what was there already. -- Derek Ross | Talk 16:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Removal of Isaiah 65:17 comment

The first two lines of the lyrics seem to be an allusion (although perhaps not consciously intended) to Isaiah 65:17, which reads:

Behold, I will create

new heavens and a new earth.

The former things will not be remembered,

nor will they come to mind.

This comment about Isaiah 65:17 is based on a quote that appears to be taken from the New International Versionof the Bible published in 1978. The Author of this comment has not quoted his source so we can't Verify it.

Nor could I find a version Isaiah of 65:17 that Robert Burns (1759-96) would have had access too, that matched the text quoted. (The King James versionis different).

Also "seem to be an allusion" is a theory. According to Wikipedia policy a source for a theory should be cited.

For these two reasons I felt that immediate removal was justified.

JollyTom 13:59, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

What does "imitate removal" even mean? rowley (talk) 18:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

A pretty obvious typo for "immediate" - and it's been gone for four years now! --Soundofmusicals (talk) 23:24, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Not all that obvious; and it's still there. rowley (talk) 00:11, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Oops - spell checker gone awry. Soundofmusicals was correct. It's fixed now. --JollyTom 08:51, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

New Year's Day

Yesterday, I added the tidbit about it being sung at midnight in the introduction, as this is what the song is most popularly known for. I noticed someone changed New Year's Day to New Year's Eve, and wanted to point out that it is sung at the stroke of midnight on New Year's Day, not eve, as the day has changed. That's the whole point. Herr Lip 20:00, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I have corrected this. It is the stroke of midnight on hogmanay, new years'eve. After that stroke is new years day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.171.127 (talk) 14:49, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

But are you sure your correction is correct? By definition, the stroke of midnight signifies not the last of the evening, but the first of the morning. If you doubt this, check your watch. Herr Lip's version is the correct one. rowley (talk) 18:44, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Great Performances

Someone added the following as a seperate page. It can be merged with this page but it doesnt seem reasonable to add every parody of lyrics. Removing link to new page

Should old acquaintance be forgot, and never brought to mind? Should old acquaintance be forgot, and auld lang syne ?

CHORUS:

For auld lang syne, my dear,

for auld lang syne,

we'll take a cup o’ kindness yet,

for auld lang syne.

We two have waded in the brook, in days of bright sunshine, but oceans now beteween us lie; since auld lang syne.

CHORUS

Now here’s a hand my trusty friend, And give a cup of thine! We’ll take a take a cup of kindness yet, for auld lang syne.

CHORUS

I think of all the great high hopes, I had when I was young; and now who are these sad old farts, I find myself among?

CHORUS

Dmanning 07:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Parenthetical Content In "Melody"

The whole latter section of "Melody" discusses convergent melodies, using examples that are irrelevant to the main article, though interesting in themselves. Although this holds up the main article, the material is valuable. Could this part of the text be footnoted, or even transposed to another Wikipedia article?

-- Actually, the irrelevant material takes up less than a paragraph. Pittsburgh Poet (talk) 17:18, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Auld/Old, Land/Lang Syne? Old Land Time.

It seems to me that lands and language were often tightly connected. One spoke the language of the land in which one inhabited and rarely lived in a land (for long) that did not speak the same language. "Lang" in the song could perhaps mean both (land and language) fondly in a way our language has no match for. Auld, I would guess means old. Syne... it is time or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.193.240.173 (talk) 02:40, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

No it really, really doesn't. The words "Auld Lang Syne" are cognate to "Old Long Since" and the entire phrase means "Long, Long Ago" -- Derek Ross | Talk 19:19, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

So what is it actually about?

It's been around for a couple of hundred years now, surely someones come up with a meaning? 81.77.136.231 (talk) 03:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Propose to add one of the explanatory pages to the external links. Perhaps:

http://www.factmonster.com/spot/newyearcelebrations.html

Carlos_X (talk) 08:50, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

No need. We've already got a complete translation in the article. -- Derek Ross | Talk 19:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Indeed; however, the translation in the article is wrong. rowley (talk) 18:46, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Unsourced material

The following is unsourced information:

• The melody to "Auld Lang Syne" is thought to be a strong candidate for the solution to Sir Edward Elgar's "Enigma"; that is, he said that the theme of his Op. 36 Variations was actually a countermelody to some other well-known tune, but he never revealed what the popular tune was.
• American guitarist Jimi Hendrix played "Auld Lang Syne" as the opening of his second set at the Fillmore East, December 31, 1969-January 1, 1970.
• Irish rock group A.E.R use "Auld Lang Syne" as the intro and hook of their song "Time Goes By". The songwriter had the idea of using it while thinking, "What can we do that Jimi Hendrix didn't?" He only found out that Jimi Hendrix actually had performed the song, three days after recording it.
• This is the last song sung at every commencement for Fairleigh Dickinson University.
• Friedrich Silcher, a German songwriter born at the time when Robert Burns died, translated "Auld Lang Syne" into German ("Soll's alte Herz vergessen sein"), which is probably the best translation of this song into a foreign language.
• The poem is also sung/covered by Great Big Sea.
• Satirical singer Allan Sherman included his own version in one of his "Schticks and Stones" medleys, in which the meaning is changed to refer to an old man named Lang who has a neon sign.
• The University Of Virginia's alma mater, "The Good Old Song", is sung to the tune of "Auld Lang Syne".
• A variation on the melody of the song is heard in the John Phillip Sousa march "Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company".
• The German band Die Toten Hosen made a cover of this song in 1999.

While this is interesting, we can't use it unless you provide a source. Also, none of this is really trivia, as trivia by its definition is "unimportant information" - it therefore shouldn't be in a trivia section but instead the information should be incorporated into the main article. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 06:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Hotaru no Hikari

I really wish they kept the separete page for this song, since it has almost nothing to do with "Auld Lang Syne". However since they decided the page needed to be merged, I didn't want this lyric table to be lost, because it really doesn't belong on the main page. Meanwhile, I think I might try to figure something out on how to put the page for this song back up on Wiki. -Caryn (talk) 03:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

The Japanese song "Hotaru no Hikari", "Light of Fireflies", is a song sang to the tune of "Auld Lang Syne". The lyrics, however, are quite different. "Hotaru no Hikari" is often sung on New Years Eve, though more commonly sung at graduations and funerals, as signifying an end, or saying goodbye. Stores and restaurants also play it at the end of a business day. The Japanese have embraced the song into their culture, and do not realize that it has the tune of another song. If heard outside of Japan to a native, they would believe that they were listening to a Japanese song.

Complete Lyrics to Hotaru no Hikari

Verse	Japanese text	Romanized Japanese	English translation
1	蛍の光　窓の雪 書よむ月日　重ねつつ いつしか年も　すぎの戸を あけてぞ今朝は　別れゆく	Hotaru no hikari, mado no yuki, Fumi yomu tsukihi, kasane tsutsu Itsushika toshi mo, sugi no to wo, Aketezo kesa wa, wakare yuku.	Light of fireflies, snow by the window, Many suns and moons spent reading Years have gone by without notice Day has dawned; this morning, we part.
2	とまるも行くも　限りとて かたみに思う　ちよろずの 心のはしを　ひとことに さきくとばかり　歌うなり	Tomaru mo yuku mo, kagiri tote, Katami ni omou, chiyorozu no, Kokoro no hashi wo, hitokoto ni, Sakiku to bakari, utau nari.	Stay or leave, either an end Think as mementos; so many Corners of my heart, in one word Sing for peace
3	筑紫のきわみ　陸の奥 海山遠く　へだつとも その真心は　へだてなく ひとえにつくせ　国のため	Tsukushi no kiwami, michi no oku, Umi yama tooku, hedatsu tomo, Sono magokoro wa, hedate naku, Hitoe ni tsukuse, kuni no tame	Far reaches of Kyushu and Tōhoku Though separated by seas and mountains Their sincere hearts are not. Serve single-mindedly for our country.
4	千島のおくも　おきなわも やしまのうちの　まもりなり いたらんくにに　いさおしく つとめよわがせ　つつがなく	Chishima no oku mo, Okinawa mo Yashima no uchi no, mamori nari Itaran kuni ni, isaoshiku Tsutome yo waga se, tsutsuganaku	From the ends of Chishima to Okinawa, All part of Japan. Contribute to our great country. I'll faithfully devote my life.

"The sake of" corruption

"The last line of the chorus is frequently mis-sung by crowds and untrained groups as "for the sake of Auld Lang Syne". This is partly because the words themselves are not understood, but also because it has become common practice."

This doesn't seem to make sense. Firstly, millions of people aren't going to corrupt the song identically and independently of each other, just out of not understanding the words. Somebody must have been first to bungle the song by inserting the words "the sake of" there. The question is of who this somebody was.

Secondly, "it has become common practice" isn't an explanation at all. It's just saying the same thing as the first sentence.

Somebody ought to be able to find some information somewhere about the origin of this all-too-common error. -- Smjg (talk) 22:11, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Temporary Lock

Around UK new year midnight there was a 'personalisation' of the lyrics of Auld Lang Syne, that was followed by a number of re-attributions of authorship, etc. I note that most of these were corrected within a few minutes.

However, might it be worth locking the page over the new year period next year? I'm not sure if there is a policy for this sort of thing, as I guess there are a number of pages that are at risk of this sort of 'cyclic vandalism'.

RichardRothwell (talk) 07:36, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Lyrics: Last line of first verse.

For Burns' version, the WP page (as of 2009-01-10) had "And days o' lang syne." without the "auld". worlburnsclub (.com) and digi-trad (mudcat.org) use "And days of auld lang syne".

However, the pronunciation guides (and the minimalist English translation) seem to have worked from "And auld lang syne." This is the version in wikisource and at burnscountry (robertburns.org).

For the sake of consistency on the page and between WP and WS, I have changed the line to "And auld lang syne" Cathalwoods (talk) 00:22, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Pronunciation

How about instead of having a guide to how Scot's spekaers would pronouce it, we have a modern Scot's translation? This ouwld be more useful than the Scottish pronunication thing we have now. Jimjom (talk) 15:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I definitely agree because the pronunciation guide describes one dialect of Scots. For example, in my dialect Auld is pronounced "ald" rather than "awld" like in other dialects. I found this on a Scots fan site after a quick google search:

Auld Lang Syne

Shoud auld acquentance be forgot, An niver brocht tae mynd? Shoud auld acquentance be forgot, An auld lang syne!

Owerwird:

For auld lang syne, ma dear, For auld lang syne, We'll tak a cup o kyndness yit, For auld lang syne.

An shuirly ye'll be your pint stowp! An shuirly A'll be mine! An we'll tak a cup o kyndness yit, For auld lang syne.

We twa hae rin aboot the braes, An pou'd the gowans fine; But we'v wandert mony a weary fit Sin auld lang syne.

We twa hae paidelt in the burn, Frae mornin sun till dine; But seas atween us braid haes raired Sin auld lang syne.

An thare's a haund, ma trusty fere! An gie's a haund o thine! An we'll tak a richt guid-willy waucht, For auld lang syne.

Is this good enough? Doing this would treat Scots a bit more like we would other languages, rather than having a pronunciation guide. Scroggie (talk) 08:32, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Well you've just identified the problem. Your dialect pronounces it one way, another pronounces it another way. And there'll be a third and fourth pronunciation on different words in different dialects. We can't have them all. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 11:36, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Which is why we shouldn't have a pronunciation guide. That is why we are suggesting having the lyrics written in modern Scots instead, which is more standardised in spelling than pronunciation. for instance the example I used above of "ald" and "awld" are both spelt "auld". Using the pan-dialect spellings (PDF) means we don't have to make the arbitrary choice of dialect in the pronunciation section. Scroggie (talk) 13:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Ye i think we should scrap a speculative pronunciation guide we should just use modern Scots. As for dialects, although there isn't an absolute standard Scots as far as i know, on Scots Wikipedia we manage to write plenty of articles without too many problems, so I'm sure English Wikipedia could use that form of Scots. Jimjom (talk) 17:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

As difficult as this all is for an American to digest, it could be worse. Just imagine if the Scots had invented rhyming slang. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 18:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, thank goodness the Cockneys invented it, and we have sensible rhymes like "Rabbit & Pork" = "Talk", "Babble Bath" = "Laugh" and "Round The Houses" = "Trousers". Left to the Scots these wouldn't rhyme at all! --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 11:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

"...off with one terrible roar...nothing can stop the U.S. Air Force..." Sometimes rhymes don't really rhyme. Hence the term "poetic license". :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 13:59, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Rhyming slang relies on the rhyme being spot on, otherwise it would never work. "Rabbit & Pork" does rhyme with "talk", but only if you're cockney. Same applies to Scots rhyming slang; "Corned Beef" = "deaf", so Scots rhyming slang is no different or worse than any other. But we're getting off the point.

The point of having a Scots translation, is that this is how Burns himself would have said it. The spelling he used is not necessarily an accurate guide to the pronunciation. While other Scots dialects and modern accents may have it differently, that isn't the point. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 14:13, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Lacking recording devices, how can we ever be certain how Burns really said it? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 14:15, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

exactly why we should just scrap pronunciation guides, and treat Scots like other languages and have a modern spelling of the poem as opposed to pronunciation —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimjom (talk • contribs) 14:42, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Not really. It would be just as difficult to get agreement on a modern Scots translation as it would be to get agreement on modern Scots pronunciation or spelling. The approach we have taken so far is to cite a particular published edition of the poem. It's the right approach and we should continue to use it. As for pronunciation, modern Ayrshire rural accent is much the same as it was in the 18th century (although the dialect is much weaker) so if people are being really pedantic about pronunciation, that's the one they should pick. However any Scots dialect pronunciation is better than none. At the moment we have a Northeast Scots one because that's the one I know. If a Southeast Scots speaker wants to replace it with an SE Scots version that's fine but I would suggest that a non-native speaker should leave it alone as they are more likely to make a hash of it than improve it. -- Derek Ross | Talk 15:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

So-called "Pronunciation guides" suck anyway - quite apart from dialect differences the "phonetic" spelling used in such guides is ambiguous and inexact (why we have IPA!!). Why not just present the poem in "standard" Scots spelling, which is at least much closer to being phonetic than English (or Irish!!) and gives a reasonable idea of what it sounds like in Scots. If you really want to get it right, there's no substitute for coaching by a Scots friend anyway! --Soundofmusicals (talk) 23:10, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Pronunciation of syne

Somebody has added the IPA pronunciation of the title with "syne" pronounced as "zyne" instead of like the English word "sign". Though "zyne" may be a common pronunciation in the USA etc, the only correct way to pronounce it (per the Oxford English Dictionary) is "sign". I don't know IPA so could somebody who has the skills change it. Scroggie (talk) 21:31, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

As it seems to be relevant to a disagreement at the moment I thought I'd draw attention to my post above. The OED only supplies the "sign" pronunciation therefore pointing out that that is how it is pronounced in English (not just in Scots or just in Scotland) is surely what we should be doing. Scroggie (talk) 15:57, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

It is often (whatever that means) pronounced like a "z" in English. Check out the ending of It's a Wonderful Life, for example. It's like they're making a possessive of it, like "Old Lang's Yne". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 19:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

A lot of the pronunciation in It's a Wonderful Life is unusual, to my ear. That's because they have American accents. But it's not this article's place to decide the pronunciation is incorrect. If a cite can be found we could perhaps discuss the differences, but until then all we really have is a note of how it is pronounced in Burns' native tongue. We can't start noting what differences may be evident in every place on the planet. Particularly as original research. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 20:01, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Possessives, or even plurals (like "possessives") often pronounce the trailing "s" like a "z", and I think that's what happens with "Auld Lang Syne" - it gets run together as if it were "Auld Lang's 'yne", i.e. "Auld langz yne". There is no question that sometimes it's pronounced this way. The clip of It's a Wonderful Life demonstrates that. The slippery part is where the one editor said "often". How much is "often"? 25 percent? 49 percent? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 20:13, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Lots of mispronunciations and misspellings are common. In principle "zyne" for "syne" is no different from "nucular" for "nuclear" or "aks" for "ask": common but wrong. And "often" is a time-based adverb so percentages don't come into it. If something happens every five minutes it happens "often" whether it constitutes 0.1% of utterances or 99.9% -- Derek Ross | Talk 21:20, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I've tried to get the (valid) point across that "syne" is Scots and therefore (in what after all remains a Scots song) correct - while eliminating any unnecessary quibble over the self evident fact that most non-Scots people insist on "Zyne". --Soundofmusicals (talk) 23:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

University of Virginia

Should this comment even be in there? Since Auld Lang Syne is based on the tune of a traditional folk song, Virginia's music isn't really based on the tune of Auld Lang Syne, but the tune of that folk song. 12.152.207.4 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:34, 10 April 2009 (UTC).

Correct tune?

Many scottish traditional musicians claim that the tune Burns used was not the one now sung. the tune they favour is within the range of one octave and much smoother, but while listening to it, I'd say it's also pentatonic..--Ginness (talk) 23:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Does anybody have a link to a reliable source quoting these musicians? Or perhaps a link to a recording of the supposed original melody? It's not God Save the Queen, is it? 216.174.213.195 (talk) 22:52, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

worthwhile cover versions mentioning

i think we should add the beach boys version of the song, because they're the number one rock group when it goes to harmony singing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.196.227.79 (talk) 08:50, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Those "extra" words in the last line

Burns wrote the last lines of verse and chorus as "And auld lang syne" and "For auld lang syne" - but as we all know the extra words "the sake of" and "the days of" are typically added when a group of inebriates (even Scots ones) are singing it. They are of course "incorrect", in so far as we "should" be singing Burns' original words - although as it is after all a folk song (albeit one with a literary background and known "authorship") then the "correct" way is neither more nor less that the way it is actually being sung by a particular singer at a particular moment, surely?

ANYWAY - the idea that the extra words are tautology, or based on an incorrect idea of what the words actually mean is definitely not correct. "Syne" means "since", not "sake" - and "For the sake of auld lang syne" makes perfectly good sense, and incidentally is good Scots. The only reason for not singing it that way is that it's not what Burns wrote (sufficient reason perhaps, but getting the typical New Year's crowd to agree might be hard).

But if the extra words were NOT added by some dopey Sassenach who had no idea what "auld lang syne" meant anyway, where do they come from? In setting words to a tune we in fact quite often slur some of the words over several notes - but in folk song this is relatively rare, and mostly we expect each word (or each syllable - in folk song usually the same thing) to have its own note. It is a discernible part of the "folk process" that melodies sometime lose notes and lyrics gain words, in an unconscious effort to get a song to comply with the "one word one note" pattern. In this sense any group of singers (even Scots) especially "merry" ones, are liable to trip a little over the need to sing "for", "auld" and "lang" over two notes - and add the extra words their unsophisticated ears tell them really should be there.

I honestly don't thing we need look further than this for the source of those "extra words"!! --Soundofmusicals (talk) 23:11, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

That makes sense. -- Derek Ross | Talk 00:09, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Not Pentatonic????

I think the edit to this effect might be just a "tease" to prove how unmusical most Wiki editors are? Just for the record, it IS pentatonic, of course. At least the melody itself is. Set to conventional four-part harmony some of the other parts may well use "extra-pentatonic" notes (IVs and VIIs). This happens if you use diatonic harmony on a pentatonic melody - but it doesn't alter the nature of the melody itself. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 14:13, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Uses

We seem to be getting an escalation of "uses" of very minor notability or interest. Why not replace all but a small core of these with a general summary (something like - "the song is nowadays used in many and varied "farewell" settings - ranging from funerals and graduations to retail stores' announcement of their closing times - in both English speaking and non-English speaking countries). --Soundofmusicals (talk) 09:04, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

DONE!! A good deal of redundant, non-notable, and repeated matter had crept into the article through multiple edits - I have tried to tidy it up a bit. The article still needs a lot more references! I have not attempted to tag the places where these should go. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 11:34, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Based on folk song

Burns didn't write it, he wrote it down, according to the latest QI —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.156.213 (talk) 05:23, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

The article addresses this in the first paragraph of the History section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.151.49.67 (talk) 14:58, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Burns always claimed the words to be those of a folk song - and at least for the first verse and chorus this is generally accepted and has always been clearly pointed out in this article. The current "new discovery" of the fact does not need covering by changes in the article (please). --Soundofmusicals (talk) 03:04, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

The origins of the poem are unclear, but it is not disputed that Burns 'borrowed' words and phrases from older sources, as was common practice throughout most of history. What is clear, however, is that what we now call "Auld Lang Syne" was written by Burns. There is no need to confuse its origins by changing the lead when this is all discussed in the article, particularly without any new solid cite. QI, and the great Stephen Fry, doesn't count as one. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 01:23, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes Syne does so mean "Sake" ?????

Here's the deal: The other day someone asked me what the words to that song meant, because the song didn't make any sense. I looked up the wikipedia article and it still didn't make any sense. Then I remembered how people used to translate it, "For old times' sake". At that point, it made sense. No, it's not a "literal" translation, but it's how it's used in the song, and makes the most sense - a poetic translation, and if you read the reference you'll see the same argument being made. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:29, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Makes sense, I would advise both sides to discuss it here on the talk page, rather than edit warring. Both sides are at 3RR right now, so let's continue it here. Dayewalker (talk) 01:17, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

You are only right in that the 'sake' is taken as read when the 'for' is added. But not only does 'sake' not appear in the lyric or the title, the meaning of the poem's title only becomes apparent with the addition of 'for' in the lyric. While the lyric says "for old times", (meaning the same as "for old times' sake", i.e. in memory of old times) the title itself merely translates as "old times"; no "for", no "sake".

I can see that adding "sake" to the translation may make the overall meaning of the poem clearer. But particular care needs to be taken that the reader doesn't think 'syne' means 'sake', which is a common mistake. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 01:39, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

That (avoiding the "syne = sake" trap) is basically what I was upset by too. I can't see why "sake" has to come into it all - "for old times" (what the lyrics say) is not notably unclear - with or without "sake". More to the point - what the text of the article at the point where Baseball Bugs originally chimed in is talking about is NOT the "overall meaning of the poem", but the meaning of the actual Scots phrase "Auld lang syne". Translating it (poetically or otherwise) as "old time's sake" makes no sense at all in the verse (if it did, we would need a "sake" after "auld acquaintance", too!), and in the chorus the meaning (because of the "for") is plain enough anyway. Exactly what "doesn't make any sense"? Given that we sing the bloody thing every year without thinking much about the meaning - and perhaps the morning after some of us might be in a state where nothing makes much sense... :) Sorry if I was getting grumpy - I'm allowed to at my age. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 02:22, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

I removed a cite to this page here; http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2008/12/30143236, for the simple reason that what it said makes no sense. It states;

the song's title literally means 'old long since', but is the equivalent of such sayings as 'for old time's sake'

In which case, what it is suggesting is that Burns wrote in the chorus; "For for old time's sake". (Two "for"s). Similarly, James Watson's version says "On Old long syne my Jo", which according to this translation would mean "On for old time's sake", which is equally meaningless.

The simple fact is that The poem's title is "Auld Lang Syne", and the first line of the chorus is "For auld lang syne". So any translation of the title cannot include "for", unless we think that Burns and Watson meant to say it twice. I can't image why they would. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 14:07, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Syne does not mean 'sake', and neither does it mean 'since' really (although undoubtably of the same root). In speech it means 'then'. E.G "I hae thocht o that foolish licht/ Ever sin' syne." (I have thought of that foolish light/ ever since then) to quote Hugh MacDiarmid. The "literal" translation then would be "old long then" which obviously doesn't really make sense in English, but since it is idiomatic and not even in English, this shouldn't cause any problems. AGW —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.71.141 (talk) 14:13, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

QI

QI 7x05 Groovy says this was not written by burns... 86.68.122.40 (talk) 22:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Please - QI is not a reference. Read the article - where the degree and nature of Burns' authorship is fully discussed. For that matter, look at the history. This kind of rubbish comes up every year.--Soundofmusicals (talk) 00:00, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for deleting...

... the reference to Friedrich Silcher, a German songwriter of those times, and his translation of this wonderful song. Thanks for removing the whole 'Trivia' chapter, thanks probably sometimes for removing the whole article about this wonderful song Auld Lang Syne - thanks to Deletionmaster General, the most unwanted person in universe. And don't ask me to support your Deletioncypedia with money, or with articles (which obviously might be removed!)... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.106.95.168 (talk) 23:48, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

more deletings

Thanks as well, Deletion Master of Deletioncyclopedia, for removing the lyrics of Hotaru no hikari (fortunately it was reposted here in the discussions), the notable transforming of this song into the Japanese world. Thanks for all of these deletings, and thanks in advance for probably having to await the deletion of this article as well...

And we'll have to do some more weeding too, soon!

Regardless of our disgruntled friend above - some more lines will have to go soon - having said (as we do) that it has been translated into many other languages, for example, we don't really need to list every version in every other language. Having mentioned (as we have) that it has become a common custom all over the world to sing it at graduation, passing out and "end of function" ceremonies, as well as at the new year - there seems to be little value in mentioning this over and over for every country concerned.

This is an article about Auld Lang Syne - not a "we sing(ed) it too" competition. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 23:34, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Sheet music

This is great - and in theory there should be no copyright problems? I mean whether we count it as written by Burns or as a folk song it's still in the common domain, isn't it?

Alas, I fear that a page of sheet music pulled straight from a book like this is almost certainly a great big copyright NO NO. The harmonisation, transcription, text (erroneous anyway) apart from the (wrong) lyrics, are all someone's "intellectual property".

Copyright is something that NEEDS to be addressed every time we upload any kind of graphic file.

Having said all this - any musically literate person with a steady hand or suitable computer software want to do something similar and make a present of it to Wikipedia? Probably best to keep to a single melody line in case someone has the rights to a particular harmonisation though. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 10:10, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

That would probably be best stored at the Commons but it is a good idea. This song has been in print for nearly two hundred years. Surely we can find at least one public domain copy of the sheet music for it. -- Derek Ross | Talk 16:57, 22 April 2010 (UTC)