Malta has survived as one of the world’s smallest minorities with its own distinct language and culture. The survival of our language is probably our biggest claim to a distinctly Maltese identity.

Our history shows that, with the passage of time after the end of the Arab period and after their expulsion around 1245, Maltese began to evolve into a separate language with classical Arabic increasingly influenced by Romance words and expressions.

Maltese, which is written in the Latin alphabet but having special characters to accommodate semitic sounds, has distanced itself structurally so profoundly from the rules of spoken or written Arabic that it can be regarded today as a separate language.

Although until the 1930s Maltese had no standard orthography and barely any literature, it emerged from the spoils of the political so-called ‘language question’ as our national language in administration, education and the law courts. That simplistic potted history might serve to explain some of the difficulties that occasionally arise over the introduction of new words – borrowed from other languages, primarily English – into the Maltese language. A case in point has recently arisen over a new list of official Maltese translations for “countries, nationalities and currencies” issued by the National Council for the Maltese Language for use by Maltese translators in European institutions.

Maltese translators have criticised the new guidelines as “inconsistent” and “counter-intuitive”. Among changes that have raised eyebrows are Netherlands and Netherlandiż for il-Pajjiżi il-Baxxi and Nederlandiż, using the English phoneme “th” although this does not exist in Maltese. As one correspondent to this paper pointed out, calling the Netherlands il-Pajjiżi il-Baxxi might be considered tactless since the term baxx in Maltese is often considered derogatory.

Maltese, as the National Council knows only too well, can be a minefield of double entendres and other pitfalls.

Another example of inconsistency lay in the use of English letters where China, for example, is rendered as iċ-Ċina while Chad retains its English spelling and Kenja adopts Maltese phonetics but Myanmar does not. The explanation given is that Maltese spelling has been adopted in cases where Maltese people could be expected to be familiar with the country in question, which seems a rather patronising approach that could lead to rule changes at regular intervals.

The National Council said the guidelines were only for legal and political texts and did not exclude the use of other variants in spoken or written language. The implicit understanding among translators, however, is that where no special name for a country exits, it should be written according to Maltese phonetics, which seems a sensible rule of thumb.

The National Council for the Maltese Language is responsible for regulating new words introduced into Maltese and promoting the standard Maltese language in education and other fields. Its aim is to improve the language by modernising its structures.

The Minister for Education and Employment has just published a consultation document that calls for a re-evaluation of the existence, role and composition of the council. The minister, who is not averse to confronting sacred cows in the educational field, is treading in a minefield. He has already indicated – rightly – that it is crucial for Malta to raise its standards of written and spoken English to succeed in the modern world.

To do the same with the Maltese language is also long overdue but he will be well aware that tackling improvements in this field tends often to engender more emotional heat than light and upsets many vested interests.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.