| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
RadgeJougal
I really have nothing else to do!!!
Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 977
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:16 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| inga wrote: |
The original question was -- to what extent is the "language" label maintained by nationalism? |
To the extent of the length of a piece of string...
Boring...
| Quote: | | The connecting theme of all my posts is to remind readers that, obviously, if Scottish nationalism didn't exist, the language notion wouldn't exist either, however beloved Scots speech might be. |
The language notion can be found back in the middle ages...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
RadgeJougal
I really have nothing else to do!!!
Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 977
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| inga wrote: | | Spanish is dominant is Spain, but videos in the Basque language still say "Basque" on the spine, do they not? |
Partly because Basque is so distinct that it is not even an Indo-European tongue. However, just to annoy you, can I point out that there are some people who consider Basque to be more than one language.
The position of Catalan is even more bizarre. Some have treated it as a mere dialect, others (nationalists!!!) claim that Valenciano and Balearic vernaculars are part of the Catalan language, and the central government has shifted between these two positions, and also maintaining that Valenciano is a separate language.
Which all goes to show that the piece of string is cut to preference. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
inga
Nationalist
Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RadgeJougal wrote: | | inga wrote: |
The original question was -- to what extent is the "language" label maintained by nationalism?
|
To the extent of the length of a piece of string...
|
The answer is: completely.
~Inga |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RadgeJougal
I really have nothing else to do!!!
Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 977
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The linguistic situation is more like a patchwork quilt or a spectrum. Not an archipelago of completely distinct speeches. It's a myth to claim that there is such a thing.
| Quote: | | The answer is: completely. |
Sorry, you've just flunked as the Americans say.
Some nationalists do not consider Lallans a language. Some unionists do.
You may get to resit the test some time! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
agentmancuso
Getting on a bit!
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1812
Location: Darkest Lanarkshire
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| William_Cleland wrote: | | Have you really never heard of Hugh McDairmid? |
Hugh McDairmid was making it up as he went along.
_________________
Liberty does not mean all good things, or the absence of all evils
Hayek |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
agentmancuso
Getting on a bit!
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1812
Location: Darkest Lanarkshire
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RadgeJougal wrote: | | 3) A dialect is not necessarily a localised variant, as I pointed out. I suppose you forgot that. I mentioned India as a case in point, and Jewish folk. Or did you ignore that? (Talk about projection...) |
If it's not a localised variant it isn't a dialect.
_________________
Liberty does not mean all good things, or the absence of all evils
Hayek |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
William_Cleland
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 773
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 2:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| agentmancuso wrote: | | William_Cleland wrote: | | Have you really never heard of Hugh McDairmid? |
Hugh McDairmid was making it up as he went along. |
I tend agree that the quality of McDairmid's literary Scots was not that high and am of the opinion that he probably did more harm than good but my point was that the idea of Scots as a language didn't start with the devolution campaign of the 90s. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
William_Cleland
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 773
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 5:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| inga wrote: | | inga wrote: |
The original question was -- to what extent is the "language" label maintained by nationalism?
|
The answer is: completely.
~Inga |
I really don't see that as necessarily being the case. There are plenty of examples of countries with multiple languages after all. Frisian is close to Dutch but despite being recognized as a separate language back in the 1950s and having co-official status with Dutch in the province of Friesland there is no significant Frisian independence movement. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
inga
Nationalist
Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| William_Cleland wrote: | | inga wrote: | | inga wrote: |
The original question was -- to what extent is the "language" label maintained by nationalism?
|
The answer is: completely.
~Inga |
I really don't see that as necessarily being the case. There are plenty of examples of countries with multiple languages after all. Frisian is close to Dutch but despite being recognized as a separate language back in the 1950s and having co-official status with Dutch in the province of Friesland there is no significant Frisian independence movement. |
Ah, but you are reaching for the wrong analogy, by looking to Dutch -- for they have their own different standard of subclassification.
The truly relevant analogy would be other dialects of English(e.g. Jamaican) that are equally distinguished as Scots, but yet are nonetheless considered dialects. The reason they are glad to call it a dialect is because they are secure in their idenitity and aren't involve in a power struggle with the UK.
I doubt Scots would earn itself the "language" label merely for its own distinctiveness. There has to be another motivation for it, and it seems to me to be nationalism -- mixed in with a vague PC sentiment that the Scots are a bit "ethnic" and so normal standards don't apply.
~Inga |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
William_Cleland
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 773
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| And on and on it goes. In reality you are probably opposed to the concept of Scots as a language for purely political reasons not because of any concern over "linguistic classification", which looks to me very much like a case of making it up as you go along. I doubt you actually know much about the Netherlands. If you did you would know that Frisian is highly comparable to Scots in that Friesland was independent in the medieval era and Frisian developed separately from Dutch at that point and continued to be used as a spoken language long after it had been superceded in literary terms by Hollandic Dutch. Afrikaans or Sranan Tongo would provide obvious parallels with Jamaican Patois not Scots. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RadgeJougal
I really have nothing else to do!!!
Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 977
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| agentmancuso wrote: | | William_Cleland wrote: | | Have you really never heard of Hugh McDairmid? |
Hugh McDairmid was making it up as he went along. |
Yes, he was a creative writer, and that's what all creative writers do. Except when he was plagiarising, which he did once or twice. 
| agentmancuso wrote: | | RadgeJougal wrote: | | 3) A dialect is not necessarily a localised variant, as I pointed out. I suppose you forgot that. I mentioned India as a case in point, and Jewish folk. Or did you ignore that? (Talk about projection...) |
If it's not a localised variant it isn't a dialect. |
Wrong again. Judaeo-Arabic is not localised, but it is a dialect. Shelta is not localised, but it is also a dialect. Numerous Indian dialects are also related to caste, religion and trade. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RadgeJougal
I really have nothing else to do!!!
Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 977
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| William_Cleland wrote: | | my point was that the idea of Scots as a language didn't start with the devolution campaign of the 90s. |
It's far older than that.
I hope you can work out the abbrevations and the dates on these. None of these is 20th century, let alone 21st or 19th.
So me behufyt quhilum...Sum b****rd Latyn, French or Inglys oys Quhar scant was Scottis; Doug. i Prol. 118.
Ane instructioun for bairnis to be lernit in Scotis and Latene; 1559 Reg. Privy S. V i 144.
Gif 3e, throw curiositie of nouationis, hes for3et our auld plane Scottis quhilk 3our mother lerit 3ou,...I sall wryte to 3ou...in Latin; Win3et I 138/9. [This is John Knox being criticised for writing in "Southron", as England's English was known]
I haue causit him...subscryue his awin depositioune, vpoun the quhilk 3our lo[rdship] will get mater eneuche to gar him speak Scottis; 1614 Crim. Trials III 289.
In respek of the great number of Scotsmen that is ther [sc. Bourges]...it was impossible to us not to speake Scotis; 1617 Mar & Kellie MSS Suppl. 81.
[At Newbattle the Kirk-Session ordained] everie scholar to pay 10 s. for lairning to reid and write Scottis; 1626 Edgar Old Church Life II 119 n.
Teach the scholeris to read and wreat Scottis; 1627 Statutes for Heriot's Hospital in A. Law Educ. Edinb. 18th c. (Edinb. Ph.D., 1959) 342.
That they speik Latine...and that none be fund speiking Scottes; 1628 Edinb. Univ. Chart. 124.
Mr. Adame...takis...vpone him the charge of ane scoolemaister...for learning of Scottis and Latine; 1646 Kirkcudbr. B. Rec. II 787.
Sum thocht thay [sc. the English] war now begining to lichtlie oure Scottis, tending to ane nationall querrell; Spalding II 384.
The small penalties...in this and uther colledgis...For speaking Scotis toties quoties 2 d.; 1659 Edinb. B. Rec. IX 145.
Everie one that learnis Scots, everie Latiner [etc.]...[to pay]...ane xij d. mo ilk ane; 1680 Rothesay Par. Rec. 53.
An instrument called in Scottish a Turkas; 1590-1 Crim. Trials I ii 222.
All schoole-masters shall teach in Scotish or Latine...the Catechisme; Canons Eccles. Ch. Scotl. 27.
Cause Angous and Rothus...to speik plaine Scottish to my Lord Duke of Lennox; 1637 Baillie I 14.
All the childrein learning Scottish; 1640 Dundonald Par. Rec. 466.
For the language, it is my mother-tongue, that is, Scottish, and why not to Scottish-men?; Hume Douglas To Reader.
He planted ministers who understood not Irish into paroshines wher ther was not a word Scottish; J. Gordon Hist. II 145. [sic - "Irish", i.e. Gaelic is Scottish. What a joke!]
Ilk chyld within the parish...being taught...in the vulgar and Scottisch in reiding and wryteing; 1668 Kirkcudbr. Sheriff Ct. Deeds I 178. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RadgeJougal
I really have nothing else to do!!!
Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 977
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| inga wrote: | | The truly relevant analogy would be other dialects of English(e.g. Jamaican) that are equally distinguished as Scots, but yet are nonetheless considered dialects. |
Erm, some people do consider Jamaican (creole?) to be a language in its own right. But this is the length of string argument. About as exciting as discussing whether Greenland or Australia is the biggest island.
Look up Ebonics too.
Two things that Lowland Scots (please use the underlined word!) has over Jamaican are 1) far greater age, and 2) former governmental use and higher register. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
inga
Nationalist
Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| William_Cleland wrote: | | my point was that the idea of Scots as a language didn't start with the devolution campaign of the 90s. |
A point you made to contradict a point I didn't make.
Let the strawman die.
I never claimed the Scots language idea is only as old as the devolution campaign. The orthodoxy that it is a language, is.
~Inga |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RadgeJougal
I really have nothing else to do!!!
Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 977
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
" The orthodoxy that it is a language, is." [sic]
The Mither Tongue by Billy Kay was broadcast and published in 1986, probably went a long way to popularise the notion.
The book and the series are full of howlers and contradictions. However, neither came out during the 1990s. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
agentmancuso
Getting on a bit!
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1812
Location: Darkest Lanarkshire
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RadgeJougal wrote: | | Yes, he was a creative writer, and that's what all creative writers do. Except when he was plagiarising, which he did once or twice. |
He was also deliberately attempting to recreate a dead language.
| Quote: | | Judaeo-Arabic is not localised, but it is a dialect. |
Of what?
| Quote: | | Shelta is not localised, but it is also a dialect. |
Of what? I'd say Shelta is a creole.
| Quote: | | Numerous Indian dialects are also related to caste, religion and trade. |
I don't know much about Hindu. But even if we extend the definition to cover these cases we still have colloquial social or local variants of a written standard which changes things not a jot.
_________________
Liberty does not mean all good things, or the absence of all evils
Hayek |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
agentmancuso
Getting on a bit!
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1812
Location: Darkest Lanarkshire
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RadgeJougal wrote: | The Mither Tongue by Billy Kay was broadcast and published in 1986, probably went a long way to popularise the notion.
|
Indeed. 'Popularising the notion' is all it amounts too.
_________________
Liberty does not mean all good things, or the absence of all evils
Hayek |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
William_Cleland
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 773
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| agentmancuso wrote: | | RadgeJougal wrote: | The Mither Tongue by Billy Kay was broadcast and published in 1986, probably went a long way to popularise the notion.
|
Indeed. 'Popularising the notion' is all it amounts too. |
Excellent series but I was well aware that Scots was a language prior to that and so were a lot of people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
William_Cleland
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 773
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 12:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| inga wrote: |
I never claimed the Scots language idea is only as old as the devolution campaign. The orthodoxy that it is a language, is.
~Inga |
Up to the Victorian era nobody would have batted an eyelid at the suggestion. It was the propaganda that went with the 19th century era style of nationalism of the British state at the height of empire that changed the situation for a few generations. The last couple of decades have simply been a case of returning to normal as the wave of British nationalism based on the botched effort to create a unitary British nation state recedes as memories of the Empire fade. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RadgeJougal
I really have nothing else to do!!!
Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 977
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"He was also deliberately attempting to recreate a dead language."
Scientific English? (Sorry, MacDiarmid joke, see "On a Raised Beach" etc)
Judaeo-Arabic, is unsurprisingly a dialect of Arabic. Amazed you couldn't work that one out. It's written in Hebrew letters though.
"Of what? I'd say Shelta is a creole."
Creole is closer, but it's mainly a dialect of English.
"I don't know much about Hindu. But even if we extend the definition to cover these cases we still have colloquial social or local variants of a written standard which changes things not a jot."
I'm afraid it does, because you've still not taken anything in, in this particular case... because they're not all from a "written standards", since not all languages have one.
Unfortunately, when it comes to linguistics, I can run rings around you... I studied and read up on it, long ago! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Join! (free) 
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
