LL-L "Orthography" 2002.03.26 (02) [S]

Tue Mar 26 18:30:37 UTC 2002

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 26.MAR.2002 (02) * 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: John M. Tait [jmtait at wirhoose.co.uk]
Subject: LL-L: "Orthography" LOWLANDS-L, 24.MAR.2002 (03) [S/E]

Sandy wrate:

>It's no that it wad hae nae orthography - it's that the'r nae
>raeson there should be juist ae staunart for aa airts. We div
>hae that in English an French an aa that, but whan ye think o
>aa the minority cultures that haed tae be strampit ower the tap
>o tae mak this possible, A think a body dis hae tae examine their
>conscience afore proposin the same thing aa ower again, espaecial
>wi the wey a lot o Aiberdeen-awa spaekers dis seem tae want tae
>spell Scots their ain wey, whatanever ony theories micht hae tae
>offer in the wey o unification.

A-ay, but than, some o the raesons fowk disna want a standard
orthography
is
the same anes at hauds doun the language as a hale. Maistly, fowk disna
want
a standard spellin cause thay dinna want nae spellin ava - thay juist
want
ti spell oot o thair heids (that's the verra few fowk at wants ti write
Scots ava.) Aften the regional objections ti standard spellin is juist a
'Aunt Sally' for objections ti Scots bein a written language. I bet ye
at,
gin thare wis a muve ti pit forrit a oweraa orthography for Scots, maist
o
the maist vehement objections frae the Nor Aest wad come frae fowk at
didna
write it, an mibbie even didna speak it. Ti thaim, the idea o 'Doric'
wad
juist be a weapon ti uise ti caa doun the idea o 'Scots'.

Ti pit it anither wey - for Doric ti hae its ain orthography wad be ae
thing - ye coudna threip fornenst that. But a mair likely ootcome is at
Doric objections ti Scots orthography wad lead ti naither haein onie
standard wey o spellin. In fact, ye coud say at that's whit's happenin
aa
the time.

Ae thing aboot a standard spellin is at it shoud theoretically be aesy
adaptit ti different airts. For example, for the NE:

wh - f
ui - ee
ane - een

etc. Ye shoud nearhaund can dae't wi a computer. Sae, gin ye can hae
regular
correspondences, wad it no be aesier juist ti lairn ti say <wh> as [f],
<ui>
as [i], etc? Maist objections ti this rins back ti the same auld fact -
at
the objectors disna want ti uise Scots, juist play wi't.

Mairatower - anither thing I'v aye said - juist cause the'r sic thing as
a
standard spellin shoudna mean at ye hiv ti uise it. The purpose o't is
ti
mak texts aesy readable. Juist the existence o a standard spellin disna
hinder naebodie ti write Doric as Doric, onie mair nor the existence o a
standard English spellin hinders me ti write Shetlandic.

Anither big problem wi different spellins is at the word 'Scots' micht
easily come ti mean juist ae kynd - wi the maist 'braid' kynds caa'd
somethin ither, like 'Doric'. Ye coud say at this is self-determination,
or
somethin; but ye coud threip the ither gait - at it taks a standard
spellin
ti mak fowk think on thair tongue as a language. Here's a interestin
link
aboot Faroese:

http://www.mundofree.com/islas_feroe/thefaroeselanguage.html

>Houanever, this disna chainge the fack that ae orthography will
>dae fine for a braid area - the important thing isna tae hae a
>national orthography, it's tae hae a teachable orthography.

In the richt circumstances, onie orthography wad be teachable. It's
true,
tho, at nae orthography thocht up yet haes been cleckit wi teachabielity
as
a priority.

Houaniver, some primary teachers wad nae dout hae a completely different
idea aboot whit teachabielity wis nor oorsels, at tends ti think first
aboot
things like phonology - I dout ane o the maist important things wad be
at
it
wad differ frae English as little as possible. The problem is - whit is
it
ye want ti teach? Readin or writin? Pronunciation or spellin? Maist
spellins
at's been cleckit - SNDA, RWS, Scotscrieve, etc - haes some differin
philosophy or ither ahint thaim, but the philosophy tends no ti be ti
the
fore - juist lyin unexamined ablo the surface, like maist
presupposietions.

>>> At least that's hittin the tairget (says I, pullin the
>>> Spellin Comattee airae oot the gress)!
>
>> Exactly ma pynt! The Spellin Comatee wis aimed at the gowd an hit the
>gress, sae gin ye aim at the aidge ye'll
>> be lucky ti hit the park!
>
>Ye hinna seen me on the range - A hinna missed the "custart"
>in ma life, no even ance! On the ither haun, A canna say A'v
>ever seen a airae fired bi a comatee!

I hiv - for uisual, thay hit three-humpit camels i the dowp (bet nae
filter
filters that oot.)
>
>In this case houanever, it leuks like the auld "aft ettle,
>whiles hit" his turned oot as "aft ettle, aye miss". A'm oot
>o ideas for a orthography that ye wadna lowp oot in front o
>the prap for tae stop!

I'v arraes stickin oot o me pyntin aa airts!
>
>A appreciate that ye'r sayin it's the academic atmosphere that's
>the problem, A still dinna see hou this maks it no worth daein,
>tho.

It disna. It juist means at a bodie haes ti be awaur o this, sae's ye
ken
whit ye micht git awa wi an whit ye canna. Bi 'git awa wi' I think I
mean,
somethin at inhauds eneuch consistency ti mak it teachable, wi'oot the
difference frae the existin tradietions bein ower noticeable. Aesier
said
nor duin, o coorse.

The academic atmosphere is no the only problem - it's juist the first
ane
-
or at onie rate, the maist obvious ane. But it is important, cause it
means
at thaim at's fleetchin at the government aboot Scots disna e'en hae a
orthography on thair agenda, an sae Scots at that level is spelled
maistly
bi fowk at disna haud wi spellin.

Horses for coorses is anither issue. For Scotstext, it wad mak sense ti
uise
a raidical orthography - but than, ye'r the texts thare in a
English-like
spellin areddies. Gin I wis ti pit up a Scots wabsteid, I wad be thinkin
on
things like, is it best ti haud wi tradietional maks, mair English-like
anes
for readabielity, or mair phonological anes for teachabielity? Cause
whaurbyes it micht be aesier ti teach Scots uisin a mair phonological
spellin, is it onie uiss ti lairn fowk ti spell some wey at ither fowk
winna
read sae aesy?

For example - I mynd ye mentionin at Andy, Colin an masel seems ti like
-ie
endins. In my case, I'm juist haudin wi thaim cause o the Spellin Report
-
I
dinna like thaim, speecially no whan thay'r whiles uised an whiles no.
Gin
I
wis ti think aboot a Scots-teachin wabsteid, I wad hae ti  decide ti
haud
wi
the inconsistent wey recommendit bi the Comatee (the SNDA dis the same);
normalise -y (wi -ie juist for diminutives) efter the popular wey o
spellin,
or normalise -ie, efter the enthusiasts wey. It's no aesy ti ken.

Anither case-study is ay/aye. The popular spellin uises <aye> for baith;
enthusiasts spellin uises ay=yes, aye=always; an Lorimer - follaein the
pronunciation - uises ey=always (canna finnd a instance o 'yes' i the
NT).
The deciesions at wad hae ti be made aboot this - popular,
recommendit/enthusiasts or phonological - raxes ti the hale orthography.
My smaa alterations ti Shetlandic haes convinced me at, onie rate, e'en
the
slightest personal innovation - like 'tui/dui' or <ie> for laitin <i> -
is
a waste o time - it wad hae ti be 'dae/tae' an i/ee/ie, orra tho thay
be! I micht get awa wi <ey> on Lorimer's authority; I wadna git awa wi
naething on my ain.
>
>> (Apologies if this e-mail has come through with broken lines,
apparently
>incorporating carriage return codes. I'm
>> experimenting to try to overcome this problem, but nothing seems to
work.)
>
>I gave up on this a long time ago - I've been inserting line
>breaks manually when mailing this list for years now.

Having said that, my last posting seems to have come through perfectly -
at least, it has at my end.

John M. Tait.

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