LL-L: "Language planning" LOWLANDS-L, 27.FEB.2001 (03) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

 ======================================================================
  L O W L A N D S - L * 27.FEB.2001 (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, Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
 =======================================================================

From: Colin Wilson [lcwilson at starmail.com]
Subject: LL-L: "Language planning" LOWLANDS-L, 27.FEB.2001 (01) [E]

At 08:42 27/02/01 -0800, Ian James Parsley wrote:

>Well, I wonder if we're not already down-playing the
>achievements made so far by Scots. We have the
>'Grammar Broonie', 'Doadie's Bodie' and a whole Scots
>course (written by Sheila Douglas) which would be
>ideal for schools, as well as 'the Kist' of course.

I wasn't seeking to downplay these achievements and, if it seemed
as if I was, then I'm glad that there's been the chance to clarify
matters.

>The real problem is not that the products don't exist,
>but that they are not marketed properly (no criticism
>meant here - marketing takes initial capital as well).

Yes, agreed.

>The issue is that there is little benefit in having
>all these things available, if there is not some
>agreement on a 'General Scots'. As you suggest, this
>would be nothing like as rigid a standard as 'BBC
>English' or the French of the Academie Francaise,
>merely a set of agreed orthographic guidelines which
>could be reviewed after 20 years.

Personally, I'd be all for this, but it's surprising how much
opposition even this suggestion attracts. Some of it comes from creative
writers who think (maybe "imagine" would be a better word) that their
work will be judged negatively if it doesn't conform to the guidelines.
I don't think that's especially likely myself, but if it does then
(as far as I'm concerned) that's just hard luck, as there are more
important issues at stake.

On the other hand, there is also opposition from other quarters, and
there's a good example from the academic, C. I. Macafee, in her
article "Leave the Leid Alane" is the most recent edition of "Lallans"
magazine.

>Of course, agreement on these issues is rare - usually
>it simply takes one major work (such as a Bible
>Translation - although even that wasn't enough in our
>case!) whose spellings become widely adopted.

I can think of a number of reasons why Lorimer's orthography hasn't
passed into general acceptance, some of them circumstancial and some
of them practical. First, Lorimer's translation of the New Testament
doesn't see a great deal of use in churches, even in the most densely
Scots-speaking areas, possibly because it is just that - the New
Testament, rather than the entire Bible. Also, the churches simply
don't have the influence that they used to, in an age when church-
going is the exception rather than the norm. Finally there is the
practical matter, that Lorimer's orthography uses diacritic marks,
which very few keyboards in Scotland have.

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

==================================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
=======================================================================