LL-L "Names" 2004.05.01 (03) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 01.MAY.2004 (03) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/index.php?page=rules
Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Server Manual: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
Archives: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-8) [Please switch your view mode to it.]
=======================================================================
You have received this because you have 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.
=======================================================================
A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) N=Northumbrian
S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: sam s claire <gamlhs at juno.com>
Subject: LL-L "Names" 2004.05.01 (01) [E]

Sandy:  As I understand, --scot-free-- has nothing to do with the Scots
but does derive from the Old French 'escot,' a payment.  Hence, getting
off scot-free means that one has contributed his part of a common debt
and is free of the obligation.

Sid

----------

From: Tom Maguire <jmaguire at pie.xtec.es>
Subject: LL-L "Names" 2004.05.01 (01) [E]

Hello All,

In spite of admitting an unusual reverence for Sandy's opinion on
Lowland Scots linguistic questions, I have a couple of comments on the
use of "Scotch".

Lowlands-L wrote:

> From: Sandy Fleming <sandy at scotstext.org>
> Subject: "Language varieties" [E]
>
> *Why* is "Scotch" acceptable for a few things (eg whisky and tomatoes) but
> not for anything else?
>
> Also why is "Scottish" acceptable, since just as "Scotch" is the English
> form of "Scots", "Scottish" is the English form of "Scottis". But both
> "Scottish" and "Scotch" are now used by Scots speakers, the latter only
> becoming unpopular due to being "educated out" of people. But then again
the
> whole Scots language is being educated out of people so that's not a point
> against the word.

"Scottish" or "Scots" is more acceptable than "Scotch" when referring to
  people because that is how many of the people involved want it. (Don't
call for a referendum, please.)

The people who are involved by the word probably don't give a .... what
others want to call them in their own particular dialect. Why should
they? However, they don't want to be called "Scotch" just because
someone at the BBC or CNN is ignorant.

> I suppose it's part of the human condition that if you're taught something
> young enough, no matter how idiotic, it's hard to shake it off for the
rest
> of your days.

It's hard to shake off only if you are not educated to question your own
beliefs.

> "Scotch" is used by many Scots speakers in Scots, and Scots speeking
> children are often taught the rules about "Scotch" when the teacher
attempts
> to "correct" their usage of the word, in spite of the fact that the
children
> are bringing the word from their Scots-speaking families.

Scots-speaking families? Referendum, again?

> I never say "Scotch" in Scots, not even for whisky or tomatoes (well, I do
> say "butterscotch"), but I don't see anything wrong with using it for
> anything when speaking English - it is, after all a well established usage
> with a respectable etymology in English. You could also say that
"Scottish"
> is unacceptable because it's the English form of "Scottis".

Let me get this right, Sandy. Are you saying that the Lowland dialect(s)
of English should not impinge on other dialects?

> The only problem I see with the word is that whenever it's used a lot of
> Scottish sheep start to bleat.

Is that a nasty reference to the plebs who might have the right to vote
in a referendum on the matter?

> Here's some interesting translations:
>
> English -          Scots
> =======            =====
> Scotch  -          Scots (sometimes "Scotch")
> Scottish -         Scottis (but now usually "Scottish")
> hopscotch -        pickies, peevers
> butterscotch -     butterscotch
> scot-free -        scart-free (literally, "scratch-free")

It would be interesting to have more info. on the 'Sometimes "Scotch"'
section.

Regards,

Tom
--
Carpe Diem.
-Visit Nlp in Education  http://www.xtec.es/~jmaguire
-Join Nlp-Education  mailto:nlp-education-subscribe at yahoogroups.com

----------

From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Names" 2004.05.01 (01) [E]

Randy wrote:
> *Why* is "Scotch" acceptable for a few things (eg whisky and tomatoes) but
> not for anything else?

What are Scotch tomatoes? Are they cooked in whisky? Or do they grow in
tartan patterns?

Gabriele Kahn

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