<div style="text-align: center; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><font size="2">===============================================<br><b>L O W L A N D S - L - 16 March 2010 - Volume 04</b><br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">
<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><a href="mailto:lowlands.list@gmail.com">lowlands.list@gmail.com</a> - <a href="http://lowlands-l.net/">http://lowlands-l.net/</a></span><br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Posting: <a href="mailto:lowlands-l@listserv.linguistlist.org">lowlands-l@listserv.linguistlist.org</a></span><br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">
<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Archive: <a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html</a></span><br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">
<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Encoding: Unicode (UTF-08)</span><br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Language Codes: <a href="http://lowlands-l.net/codes.php">lowlands-l.net/codes.php</a></span><br>
===============================================<br></font></div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2"><br>From: <span class="gI"><span class="gD" style="color: rgb(121, 6, 25);">Michael Everson</span> <span class="go"><<a href="mailto:everson@evertype.com">everson@evertype.com</a>></span></span><br>
Subject: <span class="gI">LL-L "Language varieties" 2010.03.15 (06) [EN]<br><br></span></font><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2">> From: jmtait <<a href="mailto:jmtait@wirhoose.co.uk">jmtait@wirhoose.co.uk</a>><br>
<br></font>
</div><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2">> Actually “Shaetlan” is off bounds as well, in
my opinion! The entity, or rather non-entity, in question is not now
permitted to have a name at all!<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">"Permitted"? That's ... I can't think of a word ... absurd?<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> The reason I say that “Shetlandic” does not exist is because that
term is not accepted, and indeed is actively resented, by most people in
Shetland, including many of those who see themselves as proponents of
“dialect”.<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">The speech variety exists whether or not it has a name. And like
all speech varieties it has its own grammar, which may be the same or
differ from other related languages.<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> As both the term “Shetlandic” and its native term “Shaetlan”, have
fallen out of favour, being replaced by the unqualified term “dialect”, I
think it is fair to say that the concept they embodied (that is, a
concept of the Shetland tongue as a whole and in contradistinction to
other forms of speech) does not exist, because the loss of the terms
suggests that that concept no longer exists in the apprehension of
Shetlanders.<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">Seems to me that the apprehension of Shetlanders on this matter
may be something that a bit of education could expand.<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> A fairly typical comment by a well-known Scottish broadcaster
living in Shetland is as follows:<br>
><br>
>> “How much of a gesture is Shetlandic, to give the varying forms
of dialect a jarringly jargonistic name?<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">There is nothing "jarringly jargonistic" about it. Iceland.
Iceland-ic. Shetland. Shetland-ic.<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
>> It will never be a consistent set of grammatical rules and
pronunciation. It is not and never has been, though there have been
various attempts to control it, to render it in some kind of set form.”<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">The well-known Sottish broadcaster obviously knows little about
linguistics. He could do worse even than looking at this stub: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shetlandic" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shetlandic</a><br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> This clearly states the position of the established Shetland/Scots
Anglophone hegemony - that “dialect” is simply “varying forms”, and that
any suggestion that it might have a distinctive grammar or
pronunciation is the attempts of purists and prescriptionists - such as
myself - “ to control, and by implication, stifle it. (This is more or
less an echo of the views of the most prominent proponents of Scots,
although they continue to use the term “Scots.”) Linguistically this is,
of course, nonsense; but as mythology it serves the purpose of making
certain that the speech forms of Shetland can never rise to a level
which would threaten the total and absolute domination of standard
English - which, of course, is the area of competence of Scottish
broadcasters living in Shetland.<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">It sounds to me as though it is the myth that should be exploded,
rather than let spread unopposed.<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> And a comment from the Shetlink forum:<br>
><br>
> “I also despise people calling the dialect “Shetlandic”. I don”t
know why, I just don”t like that word. One of my flatmates is from
Turriff and told me she”d heard someplace that this was the “proper”
word for it - to which I replied that no one I know refers to the
dialect with this term.”<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">And so... what? So suddenly it shouldn't be recognized at all?
Suddenly it should be ignored and denied a name? The commenter on
Shetlink should -- to be fair -- learn that terminology can be applied
even where there is a vacuum.<br><br>
Many of the world's languages have no "native" names, and their English
names would translate as "what we say" or the like. I think Inuktitut
means "like an Inuk does" and the same is the same for its sister
languages.<br><br>
I went to Shetlink, though, and I find <a href="http://www.shetlink.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=31" target="_blank">http://www.shetlink.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=31</a>
this forum which doesn't suggest to me that the myth is completely
widespread.<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> Because of comments such as these - and in case it was my website
which misled the flatmate in question - I have not only stopped using
the term, but have removed my website with this - and all its other -
offensive content.<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">I'm horrified. I've spent so many years working to help smaller
linguistic communities, that to hear you say that you're ...
capitulating to ignorance makes me want to weep.<br><br>
I visited your site the other day, John, at the behest of Sandy Fleming,
who is translating Alice's Adventures in Wonderland into Scots. I was
telling him that it looks as though an Ulster Scots translation will
also be going ahead, and he suggested that I ask you if you (or someone
you knew) might be interested in putting it into Shetlandic. I was sad
to see that your site was down (and didn't know why it was down) but I
did download it, and I have to say -- it's an excellent site!<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> I should explain that the late John J. Graham (regarded as the
“doyen” of Shetland dialect promotion) used both “Shetland dialect” and
“Shetlandic” in his writings on the subject. But public opinion has
clearly rejected the term Shetlandic, with its connotations of status
and identity, in favour of the umbrella term “dialect” (now often used
without any qualification such as “Shetland dialect” or even “the
dialect”.) So I often see or hear simply “talking dialect.” Of course,
you don”t hear anyone referring to the use of standard English as
“talking language.” English has a name and identity, “dialect” does not.<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">It's really hard to think anything but that this is an area where
public opinion has simply gone the wrong direction.<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> The term “dialect” has also taken over substantially in speech from
the native term “Shaetlan.” Interestingly, at a dialect conference I
attended in 2004, the only speaker I can recollect using the term
“Shaetlan”, apart from myself, was a young incomer from England who had
learned to speak it very well. She had obviously picked up the term as
used by native speakers, and had not picked up on the fact that it was
now (apparently) politically incorrect to refer to it as anything other
than “dialect”. I have even heard people say “Sh-dialect” - ie, starting
to say “Shaetlan” and then altering to “dialect” in mid-word.<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">Education!<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> With regard to the general apprehension of “dialect” as a written
medium, the following comments were made by a well-known public figure
(native “dialect” speaker and PhD in a literary subject) recently in the
Shetland Times, with regard to why Shetland has never produced a
prominent novelist (Orkney has produced two, and one prominent poet.)<br>
><br>
> “And it is not really suitable for writing, the Shetland
dialect....writers in dialect irritate. X can make it readable, by some
magic, but most add unjustifiable emphasis and archaisms, and in any
case, English is our written tongue, the one we are trained to read.”<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">Well, this is just wrong. There is a place for both. Look at
Switzerland. Standard German is used of course. But "dialect" (or
Schwyzertütsch) is also used. Same in mainland Scotland. There is room
for pluralism!<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> With this comment, the writer was dismissing by implication a
number of highly regarded (not only in Shetland) Shetland dialect
writers - unless, that is, they were also possessed of the “some sort of
magic” which enables dialect writing and which is out of the reach of
ordinary irritating mortals, or were exempted owing to being dead. The
fact that there were no replies to this in the letters page next week,
and the only article in reply concentrated only on the literary aspect
and scarcely mentioned “dialect”, demonstrates how widely this view of
written dialect is tacitly accepted in Shetland.<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">But surely something can be done to improve the situation. Surely
-- something must be done.<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> This illustrates the value of the unqualified term “dialect” to the
mouthpieces of the prevailing Anglophone hegemony. Because it is
“dialect” and not “language” it can be exempted from all the
characteristics of “language”. Not only does it have no grammar, but if a
writer in it is found to be irritating, this is attributed to the
medium rather than the writer, because “dialect” is per se unsuitable
for writing. And if someone is found who does not irritate, then, as
this cannot be attributed to competence because written competence in a
medium which is not suitable for writing would be a contradiction in
terms, it must be attributed to “magic.”<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">Now, I **really** want to ask you if you or someone you know would
consider a version of Alice....<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> As, then, the terms “Shetlandic” and “Shaetlan” are offensive to
the perception of Shetland society, as reflected in the unchallenged
comments of its intelligentsia, I take the view that these terms, and
the offensive concepts they embody, can fairly be said not to exist.<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">I wouldn't agree. Its intelligentsia need to be challenged.<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> However, I made this off the cuff and deliberately have not offered
it to Lowlands-L for the same reason that I have removed my website. As
an expatriate Shetlander, I have no right to misrepresent the views of
resident (or other) Shetlanders by presenting material on the internet
which appears to give “dialect” written status, and which Shetland
society as a whole is therefore likely to find offensive.<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">I'm sorry, and hope I do not offend... but I have to criticize
this approach. Ex-patriate or not, if you love the language, haven't you
a right AND duty to help dispel the myth? No "intelligentsia" has the
right to tell people that their dialect/language/speech-form ought not
to be written. I'm going to spend some more time reading that ShetLink
forum, but already just in the thread titles I see the word "Shetlandic"
appear alongside other forms, and<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> At the dialect conference I attended, the first speaker (the
Shetland archivist, himself a Shetlander) used some of my writing as a
bad example, describing it as a “horrible abortion” because of its use
of the term “lay up” (make, establish) outside of the fossilised phrases
he (probably as an archivist) had encountered it in, as referring to
(1) socks, and (2) riddles. More recently, a clergyman who has
translated parts of the Bible into “dialect” from English has commented
that “translating Greek and Hebrew into Shetland dialect doesn”t really
work.” As the owner of a former website using the jarringly jargonistic
term “Shetlandic”, and contained irritating writing in that unwriteable
medium including unworkable translation from Greek and the odd abortion
here and there, I have taken the hint.<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">All I can think to say is that I (yes, I know: who am I that you
should listen to me?) hope that you will re-think what you're doing.
Seems to me that the hint that you've taken is related to a pernicious
form of "political correctness". Oh my! Heaven forfend that someone be
"offended"! Well, you know what? It's OK to offend people, especially
when they hold mistaken views due to ignorance. It may jog them out of
their current abstractions. It may be just collateral "damage" caused by
your expression of your love of the language -- which is more important
than whether somebody likes the word or not. If they don't want to read
Shetlandic, they don't have to. That shouldn't be a reason to pretend
it doesn't exist, to pretend that the word is offensive just because
some wag put the words "jarring" and "jargonistic" together in a
sentence.<br><br>
Some words are offensive, in a way that matters. Lappish is offensive to
Samis because it means something they really don't like: an oppressive
denigration from their Germanic neighbours. Shetlandic isn't anything
like that. OK maybe the road back to language-pride is via a phrase like
"Shetland dialect" > "Shetlandic dialect" > "Shetlandic" but,
John, as a minority language activist for nearly two decades I just have
to say that your current approach is, in my view, not the right one.<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> As to how the dialects of Shetland should now be labelled on
Lowlands-L, I am afraid I have no idea. The only safe avenue, it seems
to me, is not to mention them at all.<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">I can't agree.<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> From: R. F. Hahn <<a href="mailto:sassisch@yahoo.com">sassisch@yahoo.com</a>><br>
><br></font>
</div><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2">> My head is still reeling. I'm not yet sure
which is to blame for me having a very hard time wrapping my head around
the goings-on: my aging mind or the apparent bizarreness of the story.
It seems even more bizarre than people under French-speaking hegemony
having been conditioned to call patois every indigenous non-French
language variety under French-speaking hegemony, but at least there you
get away with specifying them as things like patois normand or patois
alsacien when you are in a different location.<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">Not only that. The French establishment have nearly succeeded in
killing of Breton by labelling it as a "patois" even though it's not
even a dialect of French.<br></font>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="im"><font size="2"><br>
> So it seems to me that Shetland's popular concensus is that what
people like you and I used to call "Shetlandic" does not officially
exist, and that it is verboten to specify "dialect" even in terms of
location so as to deprive it of any modicum of legitimacy. I assume that
as a result "dialect" will cease to exist (apprently this being the
intent). As they say, "that's one for the record." (Might this be how
the Norn language became extinct?) Will Shelanders in, say, a hundred
years ask (in English of course), "Why, oh, why did our ancestral
language disappear?" and the answer will be "People decided it didn't
exist."<br><br></font>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2">Sounds to me as though Shetlandic needs our help.<br></font>
<font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" color="#888888" size="2"><br>
Michael Everson * <a href="http://www.evertype.com/" target="_blank">http://www.evertype.com/</a></font><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2"><br><br>----------<br><br>From: R. F. Hahn <<a href="mailto:sassisch@yahoo.com">sassisch@yahoo.com</a>><br>
Subject: Language varieties<br><br>Thanks, Michael.<br><br>By and large, and certainly in principle, I agree with your take and sentiment. However, although I certainly wish that this thing could be turned around, I also respect John's position and have compassion. I base this on the assumption that there's a long, tedious, frustrating and tiring history behind it.<br>
<br>At the moment, my head is still spinning and busy trying to find logic in the seeming bizarreness of it all.<br><br>As you alluded to, Michael, it is quite common for people to refer to minority languages in terms of <i>patois</i>, <i>idioma</i>, <i>Mundart</i>, "dialect", and so forth. In most cases this requires no qualification when the ethnic and geographical context is clear. So, for instance, when people that live in or come from Southern France refer to <i>patois</i> it is usually implied that they are talking about Occitan and not to, say, Alsatian, Gallo, Norman or Breton. However, when they talk to outsiders they will specify it at least in terms of locality, even if they do not use the name Occitan. Similarly, people in, say, Drenthe, The Netherlands, might refer to Drenthe Low Saxon as <i>dialect</i> when the context is clear. Outside the context they are likely to specify by town (e.g. <i>Hoogeveens</i>), if not more general <i>Drents</i>, even if they do not use the name <i>Nedersaksisch</i> (or don't have any concept of the language as a whole).<br>
<br>I assume that all of this is based on the view that "dialect" (even if it's a language in its own right) is inferior to whatever is the dominant and therefore "good" language. Yes, and all too often "dialect" speakers themselves come to internalize this view, even come to despise their own language. In most cases this is the result of the old opinion that diversity is detrimental, that loyalty to a state must be expressed by using only the national standard language -- the old "one country = one ethnicity = one language" ideal.<br>
<br>The question is if people in Shetland have thought things through. If they prefer to call Shetlandic "dialect" within a back-home context, what do they call it when talking to outsiders outside the Islands? It seems to me that some sort of specification would be in order, such as "dialect of Shetland" or "Shetland dialect". If I didn't know someone came from the Shetland Islands and I asked him, "What do you speak with your family?", then just "dialect" wouldn't do. Or is it more likely that he answers "English," considering Shetland dialect a sub-category of English, and also considering the specifics not my business? Which begs the second question: Is Shetlandic being made into some sort of <i>lingua specialis</i>, a secret type of language?<br>
<br>Regards,<br>Reinhard/Ron<br>Seattle, USA<br><br></font> <div style="text-align: center; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><font size="2">===================================================<br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">
<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Send posting submissions to <a href="mailto:lowlands-l@listserv.linguistlist.org">lowlands-l@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>.</span><br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.</span><br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">
<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Send commands (including "signoff lowlands-l") to</span><br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><a href="mailto:listserv@listserv.linguistlist.org">listserv@listserv.linguistlist.org</a> or <a href="mailto:lowlands.list@gmail.com">lowlands.list@gmail.com</a></span><br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">
<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><a href="http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html">http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html</a>.</span><br>===================================================<br>
</font>
</div>