LL-L: "Administrativa" LOWLANDS-L, 28.JUL.2000 (03) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

 ======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 28.JUL.2000 (03) * 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>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
 =======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic
 =======================================================================

From: Colin Wilson [lcwilson at iee.org]
Subject: LL-L: "Language conflicts" LOWLANDS-L, 28.JUL.2000 (01) [E]

At 08:23 28/07/00 -0700, Criostoir O Ciardha wrote:
>In 1984 a Nationalist
>majority on the City Council changed the name
>officially to "Derry" but on most maps and documents
>it is referred to as "Londonderry".

I hesitate to take issue with someone who in other ways seems
very well informed, but... as I understand it, in 1984 the local
authority changed *its own name* to "Derry City Council". To go so
far as to change the name of the city itself, would have been
beyond its authority. As far as I know, authority to do that
is the preserve of the British government.

When I motored through in 1990, the signs at the city limits didn't
say "Welcome to Derry", but rather "Welcome to the Derry City Council
area."

Colin Wilson.

*********************************************************************
                               the graip wis tint, the besom wis duin
Colin Wilson                   the barra wadna row its lane
writin fae Aiberdein           an sicna soss it nivver wis seen
                               lik the muckin o Geordie's byre
**********************************************************************

----------

From: Sandy Fleming [sandy at scotstext.org]
Subject: "Language maintenance"

> From: John M. Tait [jmtait at altavista.net]
> Subject: LL-L: "Language conflicts" (was "Loanguage politics",
> "Language maintenance", "Language planning") LOWLANDS-L,
> 24.JUL.2000 (04) [E]

> Sounds sound enough to me. The description of the Faroese situation
may,
> however, be rather idyllic - I understand that Faroe has repeatedly
got
> into financial difficulties and had to be baled out by Denmark.

This has a parallel in Wales, I think, as far as S4C (the Welsh
language channel) goes. They don't have the resources to make
all their own programmes, so the BBC make many of them, which of
course they charge for. One of the biggest triumphs of Welsh
language programmes is said to be the fact that the BBC started
showing "Pobol-y-Cwm" (the most popular Welsh-language soap opera)
on UK-wide television. However, Welsh speakers have told me that
the S4C is always running into cash problems, and offered
Pobol-y-Cwm to the BBC in lieu of payment.

> As far as Scots is concerned, this raises the question of how far
Scots is
> tied up with Scottish Nationalism. On the one hand, almost
> everyone engaged in
> active support of Scots is also an active Scottish Nationalist (I
> am one of
> the few exceptions)

I'd like to point out that I'm another of the exceptions. I once
unthinkingly assumed that the Scots language and Scotland as a
nation existed in symbiosis, but that was a long time ago. It
does seem to me (as I think John may also be implying, though
I don't want to go putting words into his mouth) that many
Scottish nationalists have an agenda in which the Scots language
is an expendable force.

(I couldn't decide whether the following was too off-topic for
the list - I've been avoiding going into the mechanics of surveys
for the duration of these recent threads, but since the idea keeps
coming up in one form or another I decided to put it in and be done
with it).

> Colin wrote:
>
>  From social contacts I
> >know that there is a good deal of resentment here in the north-east
> >that people can receive programmes in Scottish Gaelic, but not in
> >their own tongue.
> >
> >The resentment is misdirected, of course, but it does tend to show
> >that that the battle for public opinion isn't won entirely.

John Magnus replied to him:

> Is this owing to the fact that complaints are always expressed louder
than
> support? Those who are in favour of Gaelic programs probably don't
say so.
> Similarly, if there were programs in Scots (setting aside the
> fact that only
> local Scots - i.e. Doric - would likely be favoured by most in
> the NE) would
> those in favour not be likely to say nothing, and those against to
shout?

This is one of the dangers of doing a survey: certain "views"
tend to push themselves forward more than others (if you'll
forgive the anthropomorphisation of an abstraction!).

In (for example) a mailed survey where those surveyed perceive
that the survey is about "Whether the status of the Scots language
should be raised", people will divide at a high level into "For",
"Against" and "Indifferent". Normally, indifference is the most
powerful of the three forces, and "For" the weakest. There are
also certain aspects of human nature that influence the survey
without having anything to do with the subject matter (eg many
people feel threatened by change - this tends to be is a one-
way thing in a law-abiding populace).

To take an example and refine the model, we might divide people
into the following groups (with possible overlap, and note that
it's just one possible model - in particular, you could draw these
as areas on paper to show possible overlaps):

    Those who are indifferent to the survey
    Those who are indifferent to the Scots language
    Those who feel threatened by the Scots language
    Those who feel threatened by change
    Those who are for raising the status of Scots

As you see, this divides into five groups, of which only _one_
gives what a language enthusiast would call a positive response.
Moreover, the responses of three of the "negative" groups have
nothing to do with the subject matter of the survey.  Again,
those who feel threatened by the survey are more likely to
respond than those who agree with the perceived consequences.

Also, one of the most common mistakes made in surveys is to ignore
the "indifferent" (those who in a postal survey fail to respond).
Unfortunately the "indifferent" often constitute the majority, and
the sample space is those who were asked, not those who replied,
so they do matter!

Describing this sort of thing in terms of a postal survey can, I
think, clarify some of the problems in forming a personal estimate
of how many may be "for" or "against" amongst people you know
socially. There's a _strong_ tendency to hear the negative opinions
simply because they're more likely to be expressed, as John pointed
out, and also to completely miss the fact that the vast majority
probably couldn't care less!

In summary: I would suggest that it Colin's social situation the
impression received may be that the populace is strongly against
"programmes not being shown in Scots when there are some in Gaelic",
but in a survey where the topic is different ("the status of Scots
should be raised") the results could seem powerfully biased against
Scots, even with the same population, because of the same sort of
data-capture errors.

Sandy
http://scotstext.org
  Things in this subloonary warld bein far frae
perfeck, 'No that bad' is the maist that mortal
man can venture tae say while here ablo.
             - Catherine P. Slater, 'Marget Pow'

==================================END===================================
 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>.
 =======================================================================
 * 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
 =======================================================================