LL-L "Language varieties" 2009.04.08 (06) [E]

[Lowlands-L List]

===========================================
L O W L A N D S - L - 08 April 2009 - Volume 06
===========================================


From: bsu295 at bangor.ac.uk
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2009.04.08 (01) [E]

Indeed it seams to be you. I only just joined this group, but I remember
reading your website, that later got closed down, not to long ago. And I
wanted to just discuss about the Shetland Dialect with you, or where I would
go about learning it. etc etc, or who I would contact if I really wanted to
learn the more traditional version, such as the one of the older folk. Sorry
abit strange I know, But I was just really interested by your email site
when I first read itand I was thinking about bye a book that I think you had
wriyten

Nice to eventually meet you.

I hope you are well
Gregg Ashcroft
Lancashire

 ----------

From: jmtait <jmtait at wirhoose.co.uk>

Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2009.04.08 (01) [E]



Andy wrote:

If one wishes to postulate that Shetlandic (that word again :-), or
*Shetlands*, should be considered a a separate language rather than a
variety of Scots perhaps the following questions need answering first. How
does *Shetlands* differ structurally from other varieties of Scots in terms
of syntax and morphology? How predictable or unpredictable is the
pronunciation of underlying phonemes when compared to other varieties of
Scots? Subjective impressions of difference may have more to do with
unfamiliarity than any, if I may say, linguistic criteria. The same of
course can be applied to Ulter Scots in regards to other varieties of Scots.



Aye Andy, hou ye daein?

For the sake of argument, I'll use the term 'Shaetlan' - which is what it
used to be called in it's native region, or 'bonhoaga' - rather than
'Shetlandic.' I used to avoid this term when writing English because it
seemed like using, let's say, 'Deutsch' rather than 'German' or 'Cymraeg'
rather than 'Welsh', but owing to the opprobrium attached to the word
'Shetlandic' in Shetland, 'Shaetlan' will do until the opprobrium is
transferred to it as well.

I think the main point is - what do the people who speak it think it is?

I've commented elsewhere that the nomenclature has largely changed in my
lifetime, from 'Shaetlan' - which suggests its identity with the Shetland
islands - to 'dialect', which is how it is described by Shetland For Wirds,
the group which has been set up to promote it. Their mission statement is
"to foster and promote the use of written and spoken dialect as a valued and
essential element of Shetland's distinctive heritage and culture." Notice
that they do not consider it necessary to specify what it is a dialect of.
The term 'dialect', taking over from the term 'Shaetlan' shifts the emphasis
from regional identity to 'dialect' identity - in other words, the Shetland
tongue is seen as belonging to that category which is known as 'dialect'
with all the connotations which go along with that, the primary connotation
being its non-standard nature, and implying that it can be promoted without
any of the baggage of a 'language' such as Catalan or Faroese - eg:
orthography or official status. The main emphasis is on encouraging people
to speak it.

This makes no sense to me. When I was young, perhaps 98% of Shetlanders
spoke Shaetlan. Recent guesstimates suggest that only a sixth of children in
country schools speak it - in the town, where about half the population
lives, it may be nearer to zero. It seems to me that the mission of Shetland
for Wirds is to re-create the exact situation - unofficial oralism - from
which the tongue fell in the first place. It's a bit like trying to rebuild
a building without correcting the fault that made it collapse.

There is no doubt that this attitude stems from the Scottish situation. One
of the severest criticisms I have had from Shetland is for criticising the
statement of James Robertson that the value of Scots lies in its
unrespectability. It was apparently not acceptable for me to criticise such
an eminent figure in the Scottish literary establishment. The idea that you
can promote a dialect of a language which is characterised primarily for
being unrespectable says more about the necessity of not offending certain
Scottish literary figures than it does about elementary processes of logic.
Apparently, when my name was mentioned to a visiting Scottish promoter of
Scots, I was immediately identified as 'the man who disagrees with James.'
This implies that, in order to be acceptable to the Scots-promoting
establishment, or its Shetland tributary, it is necessary not to disagree
that these forms of speech are, and are valued for being, intrinsically
unrespectable.

John M. Tait.

•

==============================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.

*********************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20090408/933e0211/attachment.htm>