XPost: soc.culture.welsh, soc.culture.cornish, soc.culture.irish   
   XPost: soc.culture.scottish   
   From: allan@noemail.co.uk   
      
   "Westprog"  wrote in message   
   news:fa1qu8$fv2$1@news.datemas.de...   
   >   
   > "Alan Smaill"  wrote in message   
   > news:fwe8x8bpkv3.fsf@collins.inf.ed.ac.uk...   
   >> Féachadóir  writes:   
   > ...   
   >> >>I think the idea that there are two separate things, one of which is   
   >> >>the   
   >> >>language "Lowland Scots", and the other English spoken with an accent,   
   >> >>doesn't really bear close examination. There's a spectrum. There are   
   > plenty   
   >> >>of sub-dialects as well.   
   >   
   >> > Usenetters rush in, where linguists fear to tread.   
   >   
   >> > Defining the difference between language and dialect is notoriously   
   >> > difficult.   
   >   
   >> Indeed.   
   >   
   >> For the curious, here's what is said in the CEEL:   
   >   
   >> " The identity of English in Scotland has become much more than   
   >>   a distinctive regional accent and the occasional habitual feature   
   >>   of grammar and vocabulary.  It reflects an institutionalized social   
   >>   structure, at its most noticeable in the realms of law, local   
   > government,   
   >>    religion and education, and raises problems of intelligibility   
   >>   that have no parallel elsewhere in Britain.  However, despite   
   >>   these national underpinnings, and the extensive language loyalty,   
   >>   Scots so far has not been able to make inroads into the use of Standard   
   >>   English as the language of power and public prestige, and it has no   
   >>   official existence. Outside certain specialized publications, its   
   >> public   
   >>   use tends to be restricted to literature and folklore, to a few   
   > programmes   
   >>   on radio and television about local issues, and to jocular contexts,   
   > such   
   >>   as cartoons and comic strips.  At the same time there have been major   
   >>   publications, such as the translation of the New Testament into Scots.   
   >>   The situation, in short, is complex and unclear.  However, even those   
   >>   scholars who debated whether to call Scots a language or a dialect end   
   > up   
   >>   by recognizing its special status -- for they are faced with no such   
   >>   dilemma in considering the other regional varieties of English in   
   > Britain. "   
   >   
   > There are two aspects to the language - pronunciation and vocabulary.   
      
   You forget grammar!   
      
   > If a   
   > word is pronounced differently in "standard English" and Scots, then it   
   > isn't necessary for it to be written differently. English isn't spelled   
   > phonetically, so a written sentence might be considered as being Scots,   
   > Ulster-Scots or English simply depending on who is reading it. Vocabulary   
   > is   
   > a different matter.   
   >   
   > I can see why it is necessary for Burns' poetry, or Trainspotting, to be   
   > transcribed phonetically. I don't see the same as being necessary for the   
   > bus timetable. Sometimes the precise rhythms of the language are   
   > important,   
   > sometimes they aren't.   
      
   Most written Scots isn't written phonetically though. One well known poet   
   who does that is Tom Leonard. However though there is no single written   
   standard as such there is a spelling tradition, which in itself is less   
   idiosyncratic than standard English,  going back through the centuries which   
   most writers more or less work with.   
      
      
   Allan   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)