LL-L "Orthography" 2002.03.06 (01) [E/S]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 06.MAR.2002 (01) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
 Rules: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/rules.html>
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Server Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
=======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German) S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================

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

> From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Orthography
>
> While reading Scots in English-based orthographies I "fudge" in my mind: I
> read a type of "weird English," even though intellectually I
> fully support the
> separate language status of Scots.  My guess is that this is how
> most or all
> speakers of English do it that understand Scots to certain degrees.  The
> English-type orthography helps recognize most words fairly quickly, but it
> also makes non-Scots speakers *think* English and making merely
> allowances for
> Scots "distortions" while reading.

It was interesting to receive this email because when I
received it I was just reading over the story and fairly
enjoying it, almost not noticing that it was in an unusual
orthography any more. I would suggest that with a bit of
familiarisation, Scots speakers would find it easier to
read and write than the more traditional orthographies.
At first it's necessary to "hear" the sounds in your head,
but that disappears with practice.

Of course, what you're saying about distorted English is
certainly a problem with traditional orthographies. Even
though it might not cause a native to mispronounce, even
internally, we do have problems in Scotland with actors
mispronouncing because of the mixed spellings, as well
as writers never being able to achieve any consistency.

I've been writing a few macros to transliterate the
diacritical spelling to digraph spellings and to the sort
of "traditionalised" orthography Andy was suggesting.
Here's a short piece of prose (from Alexander Hislop's
"Book of Scottish Anecdote" - I think it's a quote from
Professor Wilson's "Noctes Ambrosiana") to serve as an
example of how the orthographies compare.

Note that I've made another tweak - now I write <ô> for
/Vu/ (traditionally, <ow>), since dropping the diactritic
to give <o> is useful in words like folk/fowk or in Ullans.

I'm also building a fairly sensible dictionary of conventional
spellings for frequent words, using for example, <é>
conventionally for indicatives as opposed to <e> for 3rd
person plural pronouns:

Ðé   thae
Ðér  there

Ðe   they
Ðer  their

Ði    the
Ðis   this
Ðir   thir (plural of this)

These follow the pronuncation quite well while making some
useful homographic distinctions.

Anyway, here's the original text:

"Ye may just as weel tell me that a little siller's a dangerous
thing. Sae doubtless it is, in a puir hard-working chiel's pouch,
in a change-house, on a Saturday nicht--but no sae dangerous
either as mair o't. A guinea's mair dangerous than a shilling,
gin you reason in that gate. It's just perfect sophistry a'thegither.
In like manner, you micht say a little licht's a dangerous thing, and
therefore shut up the only bit wunnock in a puir man's hoose, because
the room wis ower sma' for a Venetian! Havers! havers! God's belssings
are aye God's blessings, though they come in sma's and dribblets."

This is rather higher quality Scots orthography than one normally sees
- there are no "dialect" apostrophes apart from with "a'", and /x/ is
spelled distinctively, but on the other hand the present participle
ending is written "-ing" and English spellings have been used for many
words that have distinctive Scots pronunciations, eg may, just,
doubtless, pouch, house, Saturday, either, reason &c (though <ou>
could be argued as being Scots, many would forget the correct
pronunciation in reading this).

Obviously none of these problems arise in the diacritical orthography:

"Yi mei jüst az wíl tel mí ðat u litil silir'z u dénjiris þiñ. Sé
dútlis it iz, in u pür hard-wirkin cíl'z púc, in u ceinj-hús, on u
Setirdé nixt--but no sé dénjiris éðir az mér o't. U gini'z mér
dénjiris ðan u šulin, gin yi räzin in ðat gét. It's jüst perfit
sofistri åðigiðir. In leik méner, yi mixt sé u litil lixt's u
dénjiris þiñ, an ðerfir šut up ði onli bit wunik in u pür man'z
hús, bikåz ði rúm wiz ôr små fir u Viníšiin! Hévirz! hévirz! God'z
blesinz iz ei God'z blesinz, ðo ðe kum in småz an driblits."

This is quite easy to write once you've mastered the formation of
diacritics and the Old English/Scots characters. I think a native
speaker will find that there's no more stopping to ponder how a
thing needs to be written, except for the diaphonemics, which have
to be learned - or one's own dialect pronunciation could be used in
an emergency!

Here it is with the diacritical characters replaced on a one-to-one
basis with distinctive digraphs. Although there are no diacritics
you still have to go back and cross your t's and dot your i's, so
you don't gain much for all the extra characters you have to write.
This has been produced from the above diacritical text using a
simple macro, and so could be provided automatically on a site
like ScotsteXt if the diactritic version were present (it doesn't
work quite perfectly in the opposite direction, but almost):

"Yi mey juist az weel tel mee dhat u litil silir'z u dainjiris thing.
Sai doutlis it iz, in u puir hard-wirkin cheel'z pouch, in u cheynj-hous,
on u Setirdai nikht—but no sai dainjiris aidhir az mair o't. U gini'z
mair dainjiris dhan u shulin, gin yi raezin in dhat gait. It's juist
perfit sofistri audhigidhir. In leyk mainer, yi mikht sai u litil
likht's u dainjiris thing, an dherfir shut up dhi onli bit wunik in u
puir man'z hous, bikauz dhi roum wiz owr smau fir u Vineeshiin! Haivirz!
haivirz! God'z blesinz iz ey God'z blesinz, dho dhe kum in smauz an
driblits."

The main thing to remember about both these orthographies is that
they're absolutely regular - good for children, learners and computers,
and really quite easy for adult speakers, if they're willing to mend  :)

Finally, here's a version that attempts to get closer to "familiar"
orthography. It's still produced automatically from the diacritical
text by use of a simple macro, or could again be generated automatically
on a website, tho because of grapheme merging the process is irreversible:

"Ye mey juist as weel tel me that a litil silir's a dainjiris thing.
Say doutlis it is, in a puir hard-wirkin cheel's poutch, in a cheynj-
hous, on a Setirday nicht--but no say dainjiris aithir as mair o't. A
gini's mair dainjiris than a shulin, gin ye raezin in that gait. It's
juist perfit sofistrie authigithir. In leyk mainer, ye micht say a
litil licht's a dainjiris thing, an therfir shut up the onlie bit
wunik in a puir man's hous, bikaus the roum wis ower smaw fir a
Vineeshian! Haivirs! haivirs! God's blesins is aye God's blesins, tho
they kum in smaus an driblits."

Although this is no longer quite regular, and still unfamiliar at
places, it's actually much easier to write than traditional spellings.
Not only does it follow actual pronunciation much better, there are
far fewer graphemes to master than in traditional spellings. There
are also certain other princliples that aid consistency of spelling:
for example, double consonants are never used, nor are silent letters
(other than a very few that are silent in some dialects and pronounced
in others).

The macro that produces this version actually uses a very small
dictionary to replace some of my regular spellings with traditional
regular ones - for example, "me", "the" and "ower", and this could
be extended as far as necessary to bring the spellings as close as
possible to the traditional spellings. But it seems rather silly to
achieve a perfectly regular orthography then set about making it
highly irregular again! Surely it's better just to wait until you're
used to the regular forms. It's also worth pondering the fact that
even this watered-down orthography is purely Scots - there's no
English influence at all (well, I put spellings like "they" in the
dictionary, but I could have put "thai" or whatever instead).

So, as I think you can tell, I feel that the diacritical version is
much superior, and even much easier, provided people can be persuaded
to give it a chance. The main non-imaginary problem is keyboarding,
but even that can be overcome.

> and discovery.  Novices that are less linguistically inclined may find it
> difficult and annoying rather than pleasurable.  I wonder how my
> experience compares with that of others.

Remember we had a discussion on Lowlands-L where (I think) John
Magnus and Colin were talking about the problem of getting people
to discard English and learn Scots from the basics? It may be that
this orthography would make it necessary to concentrate on Scots
and forget English while learning - so what seems to be a difficulty
may actually be a blessing!

Sandy
http://scotstext.org
A dinna dout him, for he says that he
On nae accoont wad ever tell a lee.
                          - C.W.Wade,
                    'The Adventures o McNab'

==================================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 postings to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Postings 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
=======================================================================