From: cwilson@gssec.bt.co.uk (Colin Wilson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Accent and Dialect, the politics there
Date: 23 Nov 92 16:33:38 GMT
Organization: BT

In article <1992Nov20.183808.23517@maths.nott.ac.uk>, anw@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) writes:

|> All I am claiming is that lists of words
|> that Colin knows and I don't [or vice versa] prove nothing, as very similar
|> lists can be, and have been, given for all sorts of pairs of languages *and*
|> pairs of dialects.

I will say it again (for the THIRD time): the list of words that I
posted was not an attempt to defend the proposition that Scots should
be considered as a language different from English. It was an attempt
to persuade a sceptical Matthew Huntbach that Scots was still widely
used, which is a _completely_ different issue. Is this a hard
distinction to grasp, or am I splitting hairs?

|> Nor does the existence of a literature prove anything,
|> because of the very different cultural backgrounds in which various dialects
|> or languages have flourished or languished over the past few hundred years.

It proves that Scots ought not to be bracketed with regional dialects of
English, which have no comparable literature. (I will stand corrected if
anyone knows better than I do on that point).

|> 	What's more, I don't think it matters, *operationally*, whether
|> Scots is a separate language from English or not.  If some committee sits
|> and delivers some weighty judgement -- what difference will it make to
|> the way *you* speak, the way *I* speak, or the way we communicate?  I
|> suggest none at all.  It *may* make a difference to the way Scots is
|> handled in schools, or to the awareness among non-Scots of the existence
|> of a distinctive Scottish way of speech;  but those are political matters
|> that could just as well be handled by parental pressure groups, or by
|> advertising campaigns, or in various other ways.

I'm afraid that it does matter. The schools are not as bad as they used
to be, but whenever that anyone tries to suggest that there should be a
greater variety of programmes using Scots on radio and TV - for
instance, to have news and current affairs in Scots as well as the
comedy to which its use is almost totally confined at present - the
answer from the establishment is that its use is inappropriate because
it is "dialect". If a committee delivered the "weighty judgement" that
you describe, the establishment would have no answer left to the
growing (albeit still limited) demand for serious material to be
broadcast in Scots. 

|> >Let's see then: if the dialects of Scotland and those of England
|> >(including standard English) really are all dialects of one language,
|> >then it follows from this that the name "English" is a misnomer, as the
|> >language belongs equally to Scotland and England, having an equally long
|> >history in both nations.
|> 
|> 	It also has a long history in Australia, New Zealand, Canada,
|> the USofA, Jamaica, India, ....  Some of the English used elsewhere in
|> the world diverges even more from BBC English than does Scots.  We're
|> stuck with the name English, no matter how inappropriate it may be to
|> describe the totality of English-like modes of speech and writing.

Modern (post-Tudor) English was brought to all of the countries that
you mention, where it is in use among a greater or lesser section of
the population, and influenced to a greater or lesser extent by the
other languages with which it has come into contact there. However,
Scots has a distinct history going back hundreds of years before modern
English, and in that respect it is not comparable to English as used in
those other countries. 

|> >	    In regarding our national language as Scots, my and other
|> >Scots' position is no more and no less political than English people's
|> >in regarding theirs as English.
|> 
|> 	What the Scots choose to call their own national language is a
|> matter for the Scots.  But if that language is what the rest of the world
|> calls English, and if the Americans and the Canadians and the Jamaicans,
|> and so on, are happy to call their versions English, then calling it Scots
|> is more political than logical.

Yes, but that's rather a large "if". I've maintained throughout that
it's not the same language, for reasons which I'll not take up space
repeating. Incidentally, have you noticed that some people in Australia
have started to use the term "Strine" to describe their language? For the
moment, though, it's mostly done as a joke. For the moment, that is...

|> 	I'm *not* saying you shouldn't do it.  Go ahead, provided that
|> enough of your compatriots agree with you.  But recognise that it's a
|> political decision, based on sentiment, national pride and other emotions
|> [which I do not in any way denigrate or despise], and don't claim that
|> it's based on some words that I don't understand and some books that I
|> would find hard to read.

What makes you think that I would attach such importance to what you in
particular would or wouldn't understand? I'm glad that you seem willing
to accept, though, that what people in Scotland consider to be their
national language(s) is, ultimately, a matter for us to decide.
National pride ought not to be a political issue, and if the
relationship between Scotland and England had been one of equality, it
might not have become one: who knows? I'm certain of one thing, though,
and that is that it is a humiliation, affecting our whole national
self-esteem, for Scottish people to live with the belief that our
native tongue is an inferior version of England's. 

********************************************************************************
*  Colin Wilson,                           E-mail:  cwilson@gssec.bt.co.uk     *
*  Glasgow Engineering Centre,             POTS:    (041) 220 5340             *
*  British Telecommunications plc.                  (+ 44 41) 220 5340         *
*  7 Caledon Street,                                                           *
*  Glesca / Glaschu G12 9BY,             Scotland a Twa-Leidit Fowkrick        *
*  Scotland / Alba.                      Biodh Alba 'na Poblachd Dha-Chananach *  ********************************************************************************
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,uk.politics