XPost: soc.culture.welsh, soc.culture.cornish, soc.culture.irish
XPost: soc.culture.scottish
From: Féach@d.óir
Scríobh "Westprog" :
>allan connochie wrote:
>...
>>> There are two aspects to the language - pronunciation and vocabulary.
>
>> You forget grammar!
>
>I didn't forget it, but I forgot to write it down. I'd assumed that Scots
>was grammatically similar to English, but I've no strong basis for that.
It is. But then again, Spanish is grammatically similar to Italian.
>>> 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.
>
>I can see it being useful if it's necessary to represent how people are
>speaking, but I don't see it as important when processing a planning
>application for a gazebo.
Of course not. You speak a majority language, you take it for granted.
--
'Donegal: Up Here It's Different'
© Féachadóir
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
