LL-L "Language varieties" 2010.03.28 (01) [EN]

Sun Mar 28 23:00:17 UTC 2010

===============================================
L O W L A N D S - L - 28 March 2010 - Volume 01
lowlands.list at gmail.com - http://lowlands-l.net/
Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org
Archive: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-08)
Language Codes: lowlands-l.net/codes.php
===============================================

From: Sandy Fleming <sandy at fleimin.demon.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2010.03.26 (01) [DE]

> From: jmtait <jmtait at wirhoose.co.uk>
>
> Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2010.03.23 (03) [EN]
>
> The first is the real aversion to the word Shetlandic among many
> ordinary Shetlanders. This can probably be put down to simple lack of
> familiarity, owing to it not being used in print, and ridiculed when
> it is (see below.)

Which doesn't stop us from using it, at least until Shetlanders make up
their minds. You were originally talking in terms of not calling
Shetlandic anything at all on this list.

> >>When I was learning Icelandic and Czech, the usual remark from
> people
> was, "What? Is there such a language?" (this was back in the 1980's).
> It
> just means it's time to educate them about it. I would have no trouble
> with using "Shetlandic" and then discussing it with whoever inquires.
> If
> they didn't accept the term then I would put the onus on them to
> suggest
> a better one, because it's something I want to be able to talk
> about.<<
>
> That's not really the same situation, though, because there were large
> amounts of Icelanders and Czechs in Iceland and the Czech republic who
> recognised these.

I'm beginning to wonder if you aren't doing Shetland attitudes an
injustice here. Are these highly vocal book, magazine and letter writers
really representative of the native Shetland-speaking populace?

> Well, yes - but to use a term outside Shetland which is disowned by
> Shetlanders is self-defeating.

Why? We need a term for the language here, we can use it whether
Shetlanders acknowledge it or not. Perhaps we can put them to shame :)

> >>I'd put it to you that this is a problem created by people who don't
> want a solution. There's no actual problem.<<
>
> Well, yes and no. Firstly yes, it is a problem created by people who
> don't want a solution. I would put it more strongly - if clumsily -
> and say that it is a problem created by people who want there to be no
> solution. That is because they are happy with the status quo (token
> gestures towards a dying speech form which has no application for
> serious purposes) and therefore don't see a problem as long as said
> speech form doesn't intrude into any area reserved for serious
> language. However, as these people are decisively influential in
> Shetland, and both reflect and influence popular opinion, there is
> therefore a problem.

Yes, well, history will remember them for what they did, and others for
what they didn't.

> "Please note all the underlined words are the ones my computer
> underlined in red as it didn't know them - maybe a new _Shetlandic_
> version of Microsoft Office could be comisioned by the SIC allowing us
> to write our letters to The Shetland Times in local dialect.
>
> "Instead of defragging our hard drive we could have a _Muckle Redd Up_
> icon. I'm sure that would make for an interesting meeting for all the
> local councillors. Maybe a trip to Microsoft head office in Seattle on
> expenses is required?"
>
> The tone suggests that the writer can assume a readership that will
> share his view that the 'reductio ad absurdum' which he is attempting
> proves the use of the term to be ridiculous, derisable and
> objectionable. The fact that this 'non-local, local' (sic) felt the
> urge to write such a comment on the appearance of a single letter
> containing the word 'Shetlandic' in the press demonstrates the
> aversion - one might almost say, fear - which it engenders, and
> suggests why it is not more widely used.

Did he sign it "Sarcastic of Tunbridge Wells"?  :)

Just very typical newspaper letter-writing, as sure as the discussion
cut-off is very typical internet dialogue.

I think these are simply psychological phenomena and that the real
problem here is in the science, or lack thereof. Psychology and
linguistics are sciences, and all this sort of thing is governed by
their laws, which although they're now crawling out of their dark ages
are still not widely understood by those not actually working in these
fields.

How do you get to a point where people understand things well enough to
do the right thing for a language instead of clinging to destructive
beliefs? Language change is pretty much inevitable because that's how
things work. If we want to have more control we need better science but
the relevant sciences are still poorly understood outside of the
disciplines themselves.

In the future I think people will say that we destroyed many languages
because we didn't have the necessary scientific understanding of
language change and psychological attitudes to language, or how to
snapshot a language, or what the consequences were of losing a language,
and other such technology and understanding.

Sandy Fleming
http://scotstext.org/

 ===================================================
Send posting submissions to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
Send commands (including "signoff lowlands-l") to
listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands.list at gmail.com
http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
===================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20100328/51a63d4e/attachment.htm>