LL-L: "Language politics" LOWLANDS-L, 15.JAN.2000 (01) [E]
Lowlands-L Administrator
sassisch at yahoo.com
Sat Jan 15 21:24:49 UTC 2000
========================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 15.JAN.2000 (01) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/~sassisch/rhahn//lowlands/>
User's Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
=========================================================================
A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic
=========================================================================
You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
as message text from the same account to
<listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
<http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
=========================================================================
From: Braw1 at aol.com
Subject: LL-L: "Language politics" LOWLANDS-L, 14.JAN.2000 (02) [E]
In a message dated 1/14/00 7:16:03 PM Eastern Standard Time,
sassisch at yahoo.com writes:
<< At 16:52 13/01/00 -0800, R. F. Hahn wrote:
>
>I am wondering, for example, why there has not been more of a united
activist
>front of the Scots and Gaelic movements in Scotland.
I think history is mostly to blame for the status of Scots. However, there
is an inferiority complex associated with Scots speakers. Most, still
consider Scots to be just poor English.
As for Gaelic, most parts of Scotland haven't heard it in few hundred of
years and some areas never spoke it. I feel that most Scots people feel
Gaelic is foreign. Again, history tells us that the Scots speakers (mostly
lowland Scots) luiked doon on the highland Gaelic speakers as Chouchters <--sp
elt right?-meaning hill billy. And most Scots speakers regard them as foreign
as Irish, though kin. Chouchters wid call the lowlander a saussanch <--spelt
right? -literally a Saxon, meaning an Englishman. One can even think of
religion as well, most chouchters wid be Gaelic speaking Catholics as maist
saussanachs wid be Protestant.
We can adhere to these generalizations and suffer for it, as history has
taught us that the English are crafty merchants that economically subjugated
cultures, peoples and nations by 'divide and conquer.' Now the world language
is English, and the mercantile economics is in the hands of Pop Culture USA.
What's a minority language speaker with quasi-socialist tendencies to do?
:-)
-Mark
Braw1
----------
From: R. F. Hahn [sassisch at yahoo.com]
Subject: Language politics
Mark wrote (above):
In a message dated 1/14/00 7:16:03 PM Eastern Standard Time,
sassisch at yahoo.com writes:
> << At 16:52 13/01/00 -0800, R. F. Hahn wrote:
> >
> >I am wondering, for example, why there has not been more of a united
> activist
>
> >front of the Scots and Gaelic movements in Scotland. [etc.]
Just to set the record straight, you quoted and responded to Colin Wilson's
response to what I had written, not to what I had written, though Colin had
quoted me. Automatic quote labeling needs to be changed as appropriate,
because I am the originator of the LL-L issues and don't want to be credited
with or accused of (whatever the case may be) writing other people's stuff.
This is a technical reminder to everyone.
best regards,
Reinhard/Ron
----------
From: Andrew Eagle [K27 at compuserve.com]
Subject: Language politics [E]
Ron Hahn wrote:
Subject: Language politics
<snip>
>I am wondering, for example, why there has not been more of a united
activist
>front of the Scots and Gaelic movements in Scotland. After all, both of
them
>struggle under the domination of English. Or is it that, while no one
would
>dream of doubting that Gaelic is a separate language, the separate status
of
>"English-like" Scots is still widely questioned and Scots is considered
the
>Jonny-come-lately in the minority language movement? Might there be an
>element of territorialism and perceived threat as well, given also the
>relatively large number of Scots speakers in comparison with Gaelic
speakers?
>I hope this is not so. I understand that the Commun na Gàidhlig is not
>opposed to Scots emancipation.
<snip>
Gaels have traditionally called both Scots and English 'beurla' oh! - I
just looked in my Gaelic dictionary to make sure I spelled that right and
also found the following:
beurla Albannach - The Anglo-Scottish
a' bheurla leathan, a' bheurla mhór - the broad Scotch
a' bheurla Shassunnach - pure English.
I would assume Anglo-Scottish refers to something akin to Scottish Standard
English. (literal trans of the Gael. Scottish Language)
The broad Scotch is obviously Scots. (literal trans of the Gael. the broad
Language, the great (or big?) language )
I assume pure english would be something akin to RP. (literal trans of the
Gael. the English language)
My litereral translations of the Gaelic may be wanting . Corrections are
welcome.
Well. That shows that the Gaels are aware of the linguistic difference
between Scots and English. I was, until two minutes ago, unaware that this
was in the dictionary. You learn something every day through Lowland-L.
Many contacts now exist between Gaelic and scots language activists - some
are activists for both.
There is a minority of fanatics who think Gaelic is Scotland's only true
language. They meet fortnightly in a telephone box in Aberfeldy and I bet
none of them are native speakers.
The 'separate language status' of Scots is in many quarters a contested
point. Social prejudice against Scots is still rife.
These opinions range from 'there's no such thing' to its 'just bad English
and slang'. Examples of this frequently occur in Scottish newspaper's
letters pages and opinion columns.
Although the British government has shown its willingness to sign the
Europen Charter for Minority Languages thay seem not to be enthusiastic
about making this known to the general public. Similarly the Scottish
executive has issued a policy statement on the Scots language and they seem
equally unenthusiastic about making this known to the general public.
Some of this may have to do with what they percieve as 'promoting
nationalism'. Maybe they fear being criticised for promoting 'bad English
and slang' when it is generally perceived that education standards are
slipping. By showing willingness to sign charters, and by issuing policy
statements they show the 'Scots language lobby' that they are doing
something. By keeping quite about it they avoid having to argue the case
for signing charters and issuing policy statements in public. Thus avoiding
the wrath of those who see promoting 'bad English and slang' as something
completely daft - an opinion based on prejudice. The government spends
money fighting sexual, racial and religious prejudice but keeps quiet about
linguistic prejudice the cynical may think that politicians still see some
votes in pandering to linguistic prejudice - 'oor bairns haes tae lairn hou
tae speak richt for tae git on in the warld' - bilingualism seems to be a
non existant concept. i.e. in order to teach good English Scots has to be -
at the least - avoided, preferably exterminated.
The Scottish executive has also refused to include a question about Scots
in the 2001 census.
Firstly they justify this on the grounds that it would be difficult to
phrase a question that would ellicit a useful answer. There is some truth
in this, though with suitable publicity or instruction / information this
shouldn't be a problem. Where there's a will there's a way! But then again
the executive is not enthusiastic about publicising Scots for the reasons
given above. Need I say more?
Secondly they question the necessity for such a question. In1996 Dr C I
Macafee wrote "The Case for Scots in the 2001 Census"
(http://www.abdn.ac.uk/scots/whatson/case.htm) on behalf of the SLS and
eight other associations and language groups. The following also showed an
interest in having a question about Scots on the census.
The Scottish Consultative Council on the Curriculum (schools)
the Scottish Arts Council
the Scottish Tourist Board
the Ayrshire and Arran Tourist Board
Perthshire Tourist Board
Glasgow Development Agency
Highlands and Islands Enterprise
the National Library of Scotland
Twenty-one named individual academic researchers
The following local authorities:
Dumfries & Galloway
East Dunbartonshire
West Lothian
Argyll & Bute
Midlothian
Western Isles
Fife
Perth & Kinross
Dundee
Angus
Moray
Orkney
Borders
North Lanarkshire
East Ayrshire
East Renfrewshire
West Dunbartonshire.
The issue of language is not at the top of the list of most people's
priorities. It's not the subject of discussion in pubs. No votes are to be
lost by ingnoring or avoiding it. On the other hand votes may be lost
(labour votes that is) by promoting Scots. GRO (Government Registry Office)
research showed there to be upwards of 1.5 million speakers. I have the
impression that the Scottish executive doesn't want to promote Scots,
because by letting the 1.5 million plus know that their langugae isn't 'bad
English or slang' might promote 'nationalist sentiment', or incur the wrath
of those who think that the government is deliberately lowering education
standards by proposing to teach children 'bad English and slang'. This may
have an effect at the ballot box - increased 'nationalist sentiment'
causing people not to vote for the (London run) Scottish labour party.
Those worried about education standards may go and vote for the Tories, who
are basically against anything Scottish unless it's in a museum or should
have long since been condemned to one.
The (in comparrison) miniscule number of Gaelic speakers pose no such
threat.
The problem in Scotland isn't really 'competition' between Gaelic and Scots
but the establishment's reluctance to question the linguistic situation in
Scotland.
There is a perception that Gaelic needs help so using tax payer's money to
finance it seems to be generally accepted, though even here there are those
who question the point and need. They are quite happy to live in a monoglot
'English' society and have no inclination to respect or appreciate the
value of anyone else's culture. The executive may be feared of the
critiscisms of spending a few million pounds on something as 'irrellevant'
as Scots when money is needed for schools, hospitals and pensioners etc. Of
course the 'few million pounds' is 'peanuts' compared to the overall
national budget and would have no effect on spending priorities.
Andy
----------
From: R. F. Hahn [sassisch at yahoo.com]
Subject: Language politics
Andy, Colin, Mark, Ian, and other Lowlanders,
Don't you also think that, despite their relatively small numbers of speakers,
Gaelic in Scotland (Gàidhlig) and Ireland (Gaeilge) also play important roles
symbolically and that this helps them to attract more support? I am referring
here to the fact that they are perceived as emblems of Celtic ethnicity that
distinguish Scotland and Ireland from the "Saxon conquerors" (= English).
Certainly, this is how many outsiders have been conditioned to view these
countries (as well as Wales, Cornwall and the Isle of Man): as Celtic, vs
Germanic England. Languages make good flags.
What I am wondering is if Gaelic is seen as a more convenient symbolic asset
than Germanic _beurla_, "quasi-English" Scots to set Scotland and Northern
Ireland apart from England and from perceived English (= Germanic) cultural
and linguistic infiltration. Most certainly, it is predominantly Highland
culture that is shown as "Scottish" to the world outside the British Isles,
and I would be surprised to hear that Scotland herself did not have a hand in
this also.
Best regards,
Reinhard/Ron
==================================END======================================
* Please submit contributions to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
* Contributions will be displayed unedited in digest form.
* Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
* Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
<http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
* Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
type of format, in your submissions
=========================================================================
More information about the LOWLANDS-L
mailing list