In his letter (December 18), Henry Frendo concluded that I “made an argument for writing English words in Maltese”. This is far from the truth. Whoever got that impression did not read the last two paragraphs and is unfamiliar with my writings.

My position has been consistent in the last chapter of the three editions of the linguistic history of Malta (in Maltese, Italian and English) and full page articles in the Times of Malta and The Malta Independent.

I have always striven to explain that it is not a matter of ugliness or beauty (terms that are scientifically meaningless) but a question of structural rules.

I am averse to writing televixin and baġit not because they look ugly but because they violate the patterns of Maltese spelling, as they would be pronounced as “televisheen” and “budgeet” because between two vowels x is always “sh” and the ending in is accented (compare mixi, maħmuġin, ħallelin, tapit, ħadid, etc.). Slipshod transcription and translation (like deputat for deputy) are to be avoided.

Of course, in the MED, Aquilina entered skond, but in small letters, and explained that it is an “etymological variant of skont”. This shows his preference for its spelling with a t, in conformity with his blanket adoption of phonetic transcription.

Aquilina distinguishes between main entries (lemmas) in capital letters and variants (cross-references) in small letters. The many variants in the MED give rise to many problems (pointed out by teachers and journalists) which the Kunsill aimed to solve by the Innaqqsu l-inċertezzi exercise.

As things stand, following Aquilina’s example in MED, professional users of Maltese (journalists, teachers and administrators) are justified in writing all English words the Maltese way. The Kunsill is taking a softer stance, trying to distinguish between English words that should be transcribed in the Maltese alphabet and others that should be left in the original spelling.

Guidance is urgently needed. I do not know what criteria the members of the Kunsill who were preparing the document on this matter had in mind. I simply recommended the only criterion I know of, the one applied by the Oxford English Dictionary team (where thousands of foreign words are written in the original spelling) and by Tullio De Mauro, whose Grande Dizionario della Lingua Italiana includes 6,292 English entries, of which only 1,989 are modified in spelling.

Between the extremes of “everything” or “nothing”, there is a continuum which needs tact and discretion. The task is not easy and solutions will never please everyone.