Dis ony o youse ken the Scots leid?

[beloitpiper]

Ulster-Scots should be a dead give away, but if not.. they are trying to promote the use of the Ulster-Scots language (Ireland). It may be close to Scots, but I imagine it well be still quite different.

Frank

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Scotsdialects.png

[sathor]

Ulster-Scots should be a dead give away, but if not.. they are trying to promote the use of the Ulster-Scots language (Ireland). It may be close to Scots, but I imagine it well be still quite different.

Frank

Noah Webster Lives!

[slohairt]

Going with what McMillan said, for a long time Scots didn't have standardized spelling. In fact, most of the time it's wasn't written at all. Except on a few occasions (Robert Burns) it was exclusively spoken language. That is what makes it so difficult to write. Nowadays, the Ulster-Scots Agency (Tha Boord O' Ulster-Scots) is working to standardize the spelling, but it's still a good ways away.

Scots has been written since the mediaeval times. (There are many legal documents written in it.) Therefore it obviously had an orthography. It was probably about as good as English - though that's not saying much! Unfortunately, written Scots was not completely standardised and interest in that waned considerably after 1707. (I wonder why?)

[O'Callaghan]

Scots developped separately and in parallel to English, which is enough to make it a language. However, much of what is spoken today is a hybrid of Scots and English, so it is hard to tell where one begins and the other leaves off.

In some examples it is nothing more than English with an accent and a few Scots words thrown in. OTOH, broad Scots refers to something more like Old Scots, or sometimes it just means a broad accent, depending on who is doing the defining. The large amount of similarity makes definition difficult,and I also suspect that it began to blur around 1707.

I have an anecdote about Scots that I'd like to share. Here's a nonsense phrase often quoted (rightly or wrongly) as an example of Scots:

'It's a braw bricht moonlicht nicht tonicht'!

Just for a laugh, I recited this to an American colleague (co-worker) once, when we were discussing all the languages spoken in the British Isles, and she couldn't work out what I had said. She turned around and asked our (Scottish) boss if she had understood me, who of course said yes and translated it as:

'It's a brave bright moonlit night tonight'

The American was incredulous that we both knew what it meant, but of course it's just a silly stock phrase, and with the exception of one word (braw for brave) it just relies upon one systematic difference, and historically 'gh' in English was originally pronounced as a guttural the same as 'ch' is in Scots (and in German).

You would also think that she might expect that a Scot would be able to understand it, and yet she seemed surprised by that. I assumed the Scottish boss would understand it when I said it, and thought that was a safe assumption. I am English (of Irish descent , obviously), and AFAIK I have no Scots blood atall, although I have some Scots relations and have been to Scotland many times.

I think the real reason our hapless victim was so stunned was that she didn't even realise a priori that any languages other than English were actually spoken in the British Isles. There are probably a lot of Americans that don't. Possibly more than a few English people don't either, sad to say, although one only has to drive across the Welsh border to be confronted with bilingual English/Welsh signs, but some people don't get out much.

[Carolina Kiltman]

I just want to throw this into the pot. Whenever any group is isolated from a larger group, they will develop a distinct way of speaking the "parent" or original group language. If they happen to have had a distinct one of their own, before becoming part of the larger group, that will often result in a "meld" of the two languages. Much in the way a family will, to a certain extent, develop its own unique "language".

Spanish and Portuguese are two different languages that are very close to each other, so much so, that a speaker of one can generally understand what a speaker of the other is saying.

Different areas of the US have distinct variations. After over 40 years living in the South, I still occasionally have ask a "native" to spell a word. (I blame it on my deteriorating hearing. )

[hospitaller]

So, in order to make MacMillan of Rathdown happy, I will write my posts in my 'educated spanish', what with us being a varied rabble.

And I also have no problem at all reading Pour1Malt's posts, as a matter of fact I enjoy reading out loud so I can pronounce as I go.

Saludos a todos y sigamos escribiendo sobre nuestra pasion, el kilt.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

So, in order to make MacMillan of Rathdown happy, I will write my posts in my 'educated spanish', what with us being a varied rabble.

Saludos a todos y sigamos escribiendo sobre nuestra pasion, el kilt.

My Dear Hector,

For the benefit of those who may not have any fluency in Spanish, I hope you will please forgive me for replying in English.

First, let me say that I am happy to read, or speak, "educated Spanish" as it makes a pleasant change from the Mexican-Spanish patois that I speak on an almost daily basis.

I am sure there are a number of ladies and gentlemen on this forum who speak any number of languages-- Hebrew, Japanese, Italian, Russian, Amharic, German, French, the list is undoubtedly longer-- I'm sure several members speak Native American languages as well; Ron probably has more than a smattering of Navaho.

The point is, whatever intellectual linguistic achievements we may have, we communicate in English. Clear, precise, written English is the tried and true best way to communicate with other English speakers & writers.

If anyone doubts this, try writing a letter in broad Scots to your bank manager asking for a loan (even in Edinburgh) and see how far you get, or how seriously your request is taken.

You see, Hector, just as "clothes make the man"-- look at how little effect naked people have had on the course of history-- so does the written word. No mater how fine or noble the intent or idea, if not clearly presented it will be overlooked, or dismissed. Worse, it could be ridiculed.

My original comment was merely a request for clear communications, nothing more.

[Phil]

This topic comes up from time to time and always there is the same confusion between a Scottish accent and the distinct nature of the Scots language. Anyone who has tried to read Burns' poetry will quickly realise that there is a great deal more to the language than simply representing the phonetics of speech - the "braw bricht moonlit nicht" sort of thing. That merely indicates how a Scots person might say the English words "brave bright moonlit night and has no more linguistic meaning than would the difference between a southern drawl from Alabama and the long vowels of a Bostonian. Scots as a language is mostly spoken as a mixture of words along with English and, as a matter of courtesy, most would refrain from using purely Scots words when conversing with a non-native to avoid misunderstanding. Scots and English actually share the same Anglo-Saxon dialects originating around the northern half of England and this northern English language spread north into Scotland after the Norman conquest, replacing the native Gaelic south of the Highlands. There have, of course, been many developments since then including the influence of other languages such as French. Ashet is a Scots word meaning a dish and is derived from the French assiette (a plate). Over the years English speakers in the south of England have modified their speech and words such as "stane" in Scots and "stone" in English are simple examples of this where Scots has retained the earlier "a" pronunciation whereas English has modified this to "o". Where differences still exist is in the grammar of the two languages. Even although Scots may speak perfect English they will construct sentences slightly differently. "I have went to the shop" is correct in Scots but in English would be "I have gone ....". Another glaring difference is the "ch" in loch which no Englishman seems capable of pronouncing other than as "ck" in lock although I have never found them to have the same difficulty when pronouncing the composer Bach which never comes out as "Back".

[sathor]

You see, Hector, just as "clothes make the man"-- look at how little effect naked people have had on the course of history-- so does the written word. No mater how fine or noble the intent or idea, if not clearly presented it will be overlooked, or dismissed. Worse, it could be ridiculed.

uh, what about Caligula? (shudder)

[highlander_Daz]

As Ive mentioned before, the way people speak in Scotland, varies a great deal, Burns (brilliant) Lowland writings bear little relation to how folk in Aberdeen or Perth, speak or spoke, so its hard to pin down a "Scottish accent" which is why so many filmakers get it so wrong. Johnny Depp did an admirable job in "finding neverland" he only strays on a couple of occasions. Burns' writings are so unique as they have trapped forever the lowland / western way of speaking, the powerful Glasgow accent has crept further and further outwards and affected how many people speak, iving many people the impression that the Glasgow accent (despite having significant variations in itself) is how people across the whole of Scotland speak.