Post by Kiwi Frontline on Jan 8, 2018 6:34:29 GMT 12
New Zealand Herald 8/1/18
COASTAL CLAIMS A THREAT
The Herald has done a great job of recording Kiwis’ cultural affiliation with the coast over the summer break. So it’s unfortunate that the media ignores the massive threat to public control of our beaches, harbours, marinas and favourite fishing spots. Approximately 580 coastal claims were lodged in 2017, covering every centimetre of our beloved coastline, and 22kms out to sea.
This situation is so different to that described by PM Key in 2011 when he pushed through the relevant legislation, saying there’d only ever be a handful of claims.
Kiwis need to formally register their “interest” in their special parts of the coast with the High Court (by February 2018) or with the Attorney General if they don’t want to risk losing any public rights of free access or use.
In the one case already ruled on by the High Court, the judge disregarded the Crown’s public interest because no individuals or groups had registered their private interest in opposing the claim.
FIONA MACKENZIE, Whangaparaoa.
Nelson Mail 8/1/18
LET TREATY REST
Gary Clover is at it again (January 1) with his distortion of Hobson’s simple and noble message: ‘‘He iwi tahi tatou’’ - ‘‘We are one people now’’.
He also continues to twist the Treaty with the spurious but oftrepeated nonsense that there is a ‘‘partnership’’ between the Crown and any Maori.
Oddly enough it is his ‘‘elderly white male curmudgeons’’ who respect the truth and state what the Treaty really said.
In brief, the chiefs ceded sovereignty completely and for ever to the Queen, all Maoris including their many slaves were granted the rights of the people of England and the property rights of all (repeat all) the people of New Zealand were guaranteed.
When Hobson, assured by the backing of more than 500 chiefs, declared the Queen’s sovereignty over the islands of New Zealand in May 1840, the Treaty had done its work.
Instead of being subjected to Clover’s ‘‘wilful blindness to the Treaty’s full meaning’’ it is high time it was returned to 1840 where it belongs and allowed to rest there.
BRUCE MOON, Nelson
Bay of Plenty Times 8/1/18
TREAT ALL CITIZENS THE SAME
In regard to Alan Armstrong’s letter about minorities like Maori missing out (Letters, January 3).
As I said in a previous letter (Letters, December 29), Maori are New Zealanders and have the rights and representation as such, so they are not a minority unless they choose to be, which is separatism.
Democracy is based on the simple principle that all citizens must be treated the same under the law.
Every individual has the same rights and indeed has the same responsibilities under the law. Within society, people may share common views and interests with others, be those cultural, religious, ethnic, social or perhaps sporting. All such groupings are basically tribal in nature.
But forming such groupings, call them what you may, does not give the members collectively any special rights under the law.
Democracy is based on giving equal rights to individuals. If you start treating one group of people either better or worse than others, it will end in tears.
GEOFF PARKER, Whangarei
Otago Daily Times 8/1/18
WHAT IS THE AUTHENTIC MAORI PRONUNCIATION?
I FULLY endorse Bruce Moon’s letter (ODT, 4.1.18) and his assertion there was no ‘‘f’’ in precolonial Maori language. Nor should there be now.
In association with Hongi Hika during the early 19th century, Prof Samuel Lee established a definitive orthography of written Maori, based on the then normal spoken usage by northern Maori.
To best capture the most authentic pronunciation of the time he used only 13 of the 26 letters available from the English alphabet. They were A, E, H, I, K, M, N, O, P, R, T, U and W, together with the two compound consonants NG and WH. He did not include an ‘‘f’’, so it can reasonably be concluded that early Maori did not have an ‘‘f’’ sound in their vocabulary.
Further, during one of his regular radio broadcasts during the 1950’60s, Maori language commissioner, historian and broadcaster Kingi Ihaka stated quite categorically there was no ‘‘f’’ in Maori.
Under hints on pronunciation in Maori Place Names, published by A. H. and A. W. Reed (1951), the author stated that the two compound consonants NG and WH were the two stumbling blocks in correct pronunciation. He wrote that WH is usually pronounced as ‘‘F’’, which is not the correct sound.
It is an aspirated sound. That means Maori words containing WH should be pronounced with the H first, followed by the W, as in ‘‘when’’, ‘‘why’’ and ‘‘which’’ etc if spoken correctly, but in lazy New Zealandspeak reduced to ‘‘wen’’, ‘‘wy’’ and ‘‘witch’’.
Try it sometime; you’ll be amazed how rich the words sound pronounced as Lee interpreted them.
BRIAN TAYLOR, Alexandra
A VERY big thankyou to Bruce Moon for his letter (ODT, 4.1.18). He has managed to put so concisely my muddled thoughts asking why written Maori has to be uniform when it had such a chequered history.
As children in Nelson in the ’40s we learnt about the differences in various parts of the country. The one I remember best was kowhai, pronounced with straight ‘‘w’’, where cousins from further north used an ‘‘f’’.
We appreciate that many countries have a great number of dialects that cause no grief. Surely as New Zealanders we can be as adaptable.
DIANE ISAACS, Musselburgh
sites.google.com/site/kiwifrontline/letters-submitted-to-newspapers
COASTAL CLAIMS A THREAT
The Herald has done a great job of recording Kiwis’ cultural affiliation with the coast over the summer break. So it’s unfortunate that the media ignores the massive threat to public control of our beaches, harbours, marinas and favourite fishing spots. Approximately 580 coastal claims were lodged in 2017, covering every centimetre of our beloved coastline, and 22kms out to sea.
This situation is so different to that described by PM Key in 2011 when he pushed through the relevant legislation, saying there’d only ever be a handful of claims.
Kiwis need to formally register their “interest” in their special parts of the coast with the High Court (by February 2018) or with the Attorney General if they don’t want to risk losing any public rights of free access or use.
In the one case already ruled on by the High Court, the judge disregarded the Crown’s public interest because no individuals or groups had registered their private interest in opposing the claim.
FIONA MACKENZIE, Whangaparaoa.
Nelson Mail 8/1/18
LET TREATY REST
Gary Clover is at it again (January 1) with his distortion of Hobson’s simple and noble message: ‘‘He iwi tahi tatou’’ - ‘‘We are one people now’’.
He also continues to twist the Treaty with the spurious but oftrepeated nonsense that there is a ‘‘partnership’’ between the Crown and any Maori.
Oddly enough it is his ‘‘elderly white male curmudgeons’’ who respect the truth and state what the Treaty really said.
In brief, the chiefs ceded sovereignty completely and for ever to the Queen, all Maoris including their many slaves were granted the rights of the people of England and the property rights of all (repeat all) the people of New Zealand were guaranteed.
When Hobson, assured by the backing of more than 500 chiefs, declared the Queen’s sovereignty over the islands of New Zealand in May 1840, the Treaty had done its work.
Instead of being subjected to Clover’s ‘‘wilful blindness to the Treaty’s full meaning’’ it is high time it was returned to 1840 where it belongs and allowed to rest there.
BRUCE MOON, Nelson
Bay of Plenty Times 8/1/18
TREAT ALL CITIZENS THE SAME
In regard to Alan Armstrong’s letter about minorities like Maori missing out (Letters, January 3).
As I said in a previous letter (Letters, December 29), Maori are New Zealanders and have the rights and representation as such, so they are not a minority unless they choose to be, which is separatism.
Democracy is based on the simple principle that all citizens must be treated the same under the law.
Every individual has the same rights and indeed has the same responsibilities under the law. Within society, people may share common views and interests with others, be those cultural, religious, ethnic, social or perhaps sporting. All such groupings are basically tribal in nature.
But forming such groupings, call them what you may, does not give the members collectively any special rights under the law.
Democracy is based on giving equal rights to individuals. If you start treating one group of people either better or worse than others, it will end in tears.
GEOFF PARKER, Whangarei
Otago Daily Times 8/1/18
WHAT IS THE AUTHENTIC MAORI PRONUNCIATION?
I FULLY endorse Bruce Moon’s letter (ODT, 4.1.18) and his assertion there was no ‘‘f’’ in precolonial Maori language. Nor should there be now.
In association with Hongi Hika during the early 19th century, Prof Samuel Lee established a definitive orthography of written Maori, based on the then normal spoken usage by northern Maori.
To best capture the most authentic pronunciation of the time he used only 13 of the 26 letters available from the English alphabet. They were A, E, H, I, K, M, N, O, P, R, T, U and W, together with the two compound consonants NG and WH. He did not include an ‘‘f’’, so it can reasonably be concluded that early Maori did not have an ‘‘f’’ sound in their vocabulary.
Further, during one of his regular radio broadcasts during the 1950’60s, Maori language commissioner, historian and broadcaster Kingi Ihaka stated quite categorically there was no ‘‘f’’ in Maori.
Under hints on pronunciation in Maori Place Names, published by A. H. and A. W. Reed (1951), the author stated that the two compound consonants NG and WH were the two stumbling blocks in correct pronunciation. He wrote that WH is usually pronounced as ‘‘F’’, which is not the correct sound.
It is an aspirated sound. That means Maori words containing WH should be pronounced with the H first, followed by the W, as in ‘‘when’’, ‘‘why’’ and ‘‘which’’ etc if spoken correctly, but in lazy New Zealandspeak reduced to ‘‘wen’’, ‘‘wy’’ and ‘‘witch’’.
Try it sometime; you’ll be amazed how rich the words sound pronounced as Lee interpreted them.
BRIAN TAYLOR, Alexandra
A VERY big thankyou to Bruce Moon for his letter (ODT, 4.1.18). He has managed to put so concisely my muddled thoughts asking why written Maori has to be uniform when it had such a chequered history.
As children in Nelson in the ’40s we learnt about the differences in various parts of the country. The one I remember best was kowhai, pronounced with straight ‘‘w’’, where cousins from further north used an ‘‘f’’.
We appreciate that many countries have a great number of dialects that cause no grief. Surely as New Zealanders we can be as adaptable.
DIANE ISAACS, Musselburgh
sites.google.com/site/kiwifrontline/letters-submitted-to-newspapers