ScotsGate Scots Language Portal
|
|
Thread rating:  |
wabmaister@scotsgate.com - 29 Nov 2004 20:10 GMT ScotsGate is a new portal to the Scots language, spoken to varying extent by an estimated 1.6 million people throughout Lowland Scotland, Ulster, Orkney and the Shetland Islands. Easily find all the important Scots web sites and resources, discover news items about the controversial debate on the status of Scots and download ScotsGate's free guide to Scots Grammar. Visit www.scotsgate.com
Mike Lyle - 29 Nov 2004 21:09 GMT > ScotsGate is a new portal to the Scots language, spoken to varying > extent by an estimated 1.6 million people throughout Lowland Scotland, > Ulster, Orkney and the Shetland Islands. Easily find all the important > Scots web sites and resources, discover news items about the > controversial debate on the status of Scots and download ScotsGate's > free guide to Scots Grammar. Visit www.scotsgate.com Duly bookmarked: a valuable site. Thank you.
(By the way, it would be fine to see more Scots popping in and out of alt.usage.english: most contributors are American, so no great cross-border political compromise is necessary!)
Mike.
Jess Askin - 30 Nov 2004 01:50 GMT > > ScotsGate is a new portal to the Scots language, spoken to varying > > extent by an estimated 1.6 million people throughout Lowland [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > (By the way, it would be fine to see more Scots popping in and out of > alt.usage.english: most contributors are American, Only by a narrow margin. Probably more Brits per capita.
Maria Conlon - 30 Nov 2004 04:07 GMT > (By the way, it would be fine to see more Scots popping in and out of > alt.usage.english: most contributors are American, so no great > cross-border political compromise is necessary!) When we did an AUE survey in June (covering how old we are and where we're from), there were 27 US residents responding.
But there were also 4 Australians, 1 South African, 1 New Zealander, 1 from Japan, 3 from Germany, 2 from The Netherlands, 1 from Taiwan, 2 Canadians, and (ta-da!) 23 from the UK.
That's 27 Americans and 38 non-Americans.
True, more people responded from the US than from any other single country, but they were outnumbered by the total of non-Americans.
A bit more regarding the survey: Of the 65 responses, there were 55 from men and 10 from women. The average age was 49.56 years. (That was six months ago... are we averaging 50+ now?)
See http://tinyurl.com/6wrlx for the "Final Report" and http://tinyurl.com/6legt for a brief add-on.
All that aside, I think "more Scots popping in and out" would certainly be welcome. (But what did you mean about cross-border political compromise?)
Maria Conlon
Mike Lyle - 30 Nov 2004 13:20 GMT >> (By the way, it would be fine to see more Scots popping in and out of >> alt.usage.english: most contributors are American, so no great [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > True, more people responded from the US than from any other single > country, but they were outnumbered by the total of non-Americans. OK, I'm duly chastened. Let's compromise and say a majority of non-Brits. And of the Brits some aren't English.
> A bit more regarding the survey: Of the 65 responses, there were 55 > from men and 10 from women. The average age was 49.56 years. (That [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > certainly be welcome. (But what did you mean about cross-border > political compromise?) A frivolous throwaway, that's all: some Scots might perhaps, I pretended, have imagined that "English" here meant "English" rather than "English".
Mike.
Maria Conlon - 30 Nov 2004 15:53 GMT [newsgroups trimmed to aue]
>>> (By the way, it would be fine to see more Scots popping in and out >>> of alt.usage.english: most contributors are American, so no great [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > OK, I'm duly chastened. Let's compromise and say a majority of > non-Brits. And of the Brits some aren't English. The post wasn't meant to be chastening. I'm sorry it came off that way.
Actually, I was replying to your remark as a way of testing the waters -- to see if anyone is interested in another survey (maybe in January).
Maria Conlon Still testing
Angus Macdonald - 30 Nov 2004 18:44 GMT > [newsgroups trimmed to aue] > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Maria Conlon > Still testing You've got to be kidding! Why would someone like me, a Scot who finds himself unexpectedly at this stage in his life transported to the US, married to a USC and living in the cultureless (but nice and sunny!) state of Arizona, want to jump into this cockpit and put his life in danger? No, sirree! Better to watch from the sidelines :-)
Angus (What happened? Where am I?)
Harvey Van Sickle - 30 Nov 2004 18:50 GMT On 30 Nov 2004, Angus Macdonald wrote
-snip-
> You've got to be kidding! Why would someone like me, a Scot who > finds himself unexpectedly at this stage in his life transported > to the US, married to a USC and living in the cultureless (but > nice and sunny!) state of Arizona, -snip-
> Angus > (What happened? Where am I?) It's that sun, innit -- you need to build a "mist room" in the basement so you can recharge your Scottish batteries.
 Signature Cheers, Harvey
Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years; Southern England for the past 22 years. (for e-mail, change harvey.news to harvey.van)
Angus Macdonald - 30 Nov 2004 23:53 GMT > On 30 Nov 2004, Angus Macdonald wrote > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > It's that sun, innit -- you need to build a "mist room" in the basement > so you can recharge your Scottish batteries. Now there's an idea, I suppose, but where oh where am I supposed to buy some genuine Scotch mist in this place? It's bad enough trying to get hold of some real tea! :-)
Angus (and, oh, yes, rain. Gosh, I remember these days ....)
don groves - 01 Dec 2004 07:17 GMT > > On 30 Nov 2004, Angus Macdonald wrote > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > Angus > (and, oh, yes, rain. Gosh, I remember these days ....) What are you doing in Aridzona? You should be here in the Pacific Northwet where status is measured by the size of the webs between ones' toes. Oregon's state university sports mascots are the Ducks and the Beavers, with good reason.
 Signature dg (domain=ccwebster)
Chris Malcolm - 02 Dec 2004 15:04 GMT >> On 30 Nov 2004, Angus Macdonald wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >> It's that sun, innit -- you need to build a "mist room" in the basement >> so you can recharge your Scottish batteries.
> Now there's an idea, I suppose, but where oh where am I supposed to > buy some genuine Scotch mist in this place? You can get dehydrated Scotch mist quite cheaply, just add water and boil.
 Signature Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
Mike Lyle - 02 Dec 2004 19:46 GMT >>> On 30 Nov 2004, Angus Macdonald wrote >>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > You can get dehydrated Scotch mist quite cheaply, just add water and > boil. Except it goes up.
While we're at it, food warning : having been to the dentist for a distraction today, I've just discovered Sainsbury's tinned Scotch broth is absolutely disgusting. Cream of leek and potato OK, though, but too much salt.
Mike.
James Cameron - 30 Nov 2004 18:00 GMT >A frivolous throwaway, that's all: some Scots might perhaps, I >pretended, have imagined that "English" here meant "English" rather >than "English". An easy mistake to make.
 Signature Am fear a phosas bean posaidh e dragh
Michilín - 30 Nov 2004 23:52 GMT >Am fear a phosas bean posaidh e dragh (The man who marries a wife marries trouble)
Dána gach fear go túlaig every man is bold until the assembly (Irish proverb)
Bithidh i Caismeachd Chloinn Chamrain - glan as an taigh! It will be the March of the Cameron Men - right out of the house!
Michilín
Bob Cunningham - 30 Nov 2004 18:25 GMT [...]
> A frivolous throwaway, that's all: some Scots might perhaps, I > pretended, have imagined that "English" here meant "English" rather > than "English". "English" can certainly be ambiguous, and "British" is too often used when we don't intend to encompass such a large and diverse population. I suggest that we henceforth say "Englandish" when we want to refer to the people or the language of England.
Alan Smaill - 30 Nov 2004 18:39 GMT > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > "Englandish" when we want to refer to the people or the > language of England. That's "English English" for the language variant isn't it? As opposed to "British English", "American English" etc...
"English" is fine for the people, though ...
(or should I say *nglish)
 Signature Alan Smaill
Bob Cunningham - 30 Nov 2004 19:59 GMT
> > [...]
> >> A frivolous throwaway, that's all: some Scots might perhaps, I > >> pretended, have imagined that "English" here meant "English" rather > >> than "English".
> > "English" can certainly be ambiguous, and "British" is too > > often used when we don't intend to encompass such a large > > and diverse population. I suggest that we henceforth say > > "Englandish" when we want to refer to the people or the > > language of England.
> That's "English English" for the language variant isn't it? > As opposed to "British English", "American English" etc...
> "English" is fine for the people, though ...
> (or should I say *nglish) Years ago in alt.usage.english, I posted regarding the injustice to the people of England of having the name "English" applied to a wide variety of dialects of their language. I felt that the name "English" should be theirs alone.
For the many other languages that are now called English, I proposed the term "Angloid". The family of languages under that term would include, for example, American Angloid, Canadian Angloid, and Australian Angloid.
Unfortunately, many people have formed their impression of what the suffix "-oid" means from movies and television, so that they think it must connote something grotesque and misshapen. But all it means is, according to _Merriam-Webster's 11th Collegiate Dictionary_
Main Entry:1-oid Function:noun suffix
: something resembling a (specified) object or having a (specified) quality *globoid*
The many varieties of World English resemble the language of the English people but are not the same as it, so the suffix "-oid" applies very well.
I suppose "Engloid" would be another possibility.
Django Cat - 30 Nov 2004 21:19 GMT >> > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > >I suppose "Engloid" would be another possibility. It's an interesting concept, and though I don't have a suggestion for a name, divorcing the language from the nationality has a lot going for it.
DC
allan connochie - 30 Nov 2004 23:10 GMT > >> > [...] > > [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > a name, divorcing the language from the nationality has a lot going > for it. The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called "Scottish Standard English" so something like "English Standard English" could be used to describe the language of england rather than english in general.
cheers
Allan
> DC Bob Cunningham - 01 Dec 2004 00:22 GMT
> > >> > [...]
> > >> >> A frivolous throwaway, that's all: some Scots might perhaps, I > > >> >> pretended, have imagined that "English" here meant "English" rather > > >> >> than "English".
> > >> > "English" can certainly be ambiguous, and "British" is too > > >> > often used when we don't intend to encompass such a large > > >> > and diverse population. I suggest that we henceforth say > > >> > "Englandish" when we want to refer to the people or the > > >> > language of England.
> > >> That's "English English" for the language variant isn't it? > > >> As opposed to "British English", "American English" etc...
> > >> "English" is fine for the people, though ...
> > >> (or should I say *nglish)
> > >Years ago in alt.usage.english, I posted regarding the > > >injustice to the people of England of having the name > > >"English" applied to a wide variety of dialects of their > > >language. I felt that the name "English" should be theirs > > >alone.
> > >For the many other languages that are now called English, I > > >proposed the term "Angloid". The family of languages under > > >that term would include, for example, American Angloid, > > >Canadian Angloid, and Australian Angloid.
> > >Unfortunately, many people have formed their impression of > > >what the suffix "-oid" means from movies and television, so > > >that they think it must connote something grotesque and > > >misshapen. But all it means is, according to > > >_Merriam-Webster's 11th Collegiate Dictionary_
> > > Main Entry:1-oid > > > Function:noun suffix
> > > : something resembling a (specified) object or having > > > a (specified) quality *globoid*
> > >The many varieties of World English resemble the language of > > >the English people but are not the same as it, so the suffix > > >"-oid" applies very well.
> > >I suppose "Engloid" would be another possibility.
> > It's an interesting concept, and though I don't have a suggestion for > > a name, divorcing the language from the nationality has a lot going > > for it.
> The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called "Scottish Standard > English" so something like "English Standard English" could be used to > describe the language of england rather than english in general. But my point is that English was originally the language of the English people and they shouldn't have to be burdened with finding a more complicated name for it. It should be up to others who have borrowed the language to find unique names for their varieties. "English" should be simply the name of the language spoken in England.
"English English" is often used to specify the language of England, and that is probably the simplest way as things now stand.
By the way, I know it's an oversimplification to speak of *the* language of England, given that there are a variety of dialects called English in England itself. I'm sure there are dialects in England that differ from the speech of Southern England much more than Midwestern American English does.
I also know that the topic of this thread is nothing but an academic exercise, fun to play with but fairly certainly not likely to change anything.
Peter Moylan - 01 Dec 2004 02:35 GMT Bob Cunningham infrared:
>But my point is that English was originally the language of >the English people and they shouldn't have to be burdened [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >Southern England much more than Midwestern American English >does. It goes much further than that. I'd guess that there is more dialectal variation in that one little island than in the entire rest of the English-speaking world. (And that possibly remains true if you confine attention to the subset of the island that is England.) In that sense, there isn't really an "English English"; that phrase encompasses a huge bag of different Englishes.
 Signature Peter Moylan peter at ee dot newcastle dot edu dot au http://eepjm.newcastle.edu.au (OS/2 and eCS information and software)
Peter Moylan - 01 Dec 2004 03:05 GMT Bob Cunningham infrared:
>But my point is that English was originally the language of >the English people and they shouldn't have to be burdened [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >Southern England much more than Midwestern American English >does. It goes much further than that. I'd guess that there is more dialectal variation in that one little island than in the entire rest of the English-speaking world. (And that possibly remains true if you confine attention to the subset of the island that is England.) In that sense, there isn't really an "English English"; that phrase encompasses a huge bag of different Englishes.
 Signature Peter Moylan peter at ee dot newcastle dot edu dot au http://eepjm.newcastle.edu.au (OS/2 and eCS information and software)
Bob Cunningham - 01 Dec 2004 16:54 GMT > Bob Cunningham infrared:
> >But my point is that English was originally the language of > >the English people and they shouldn't have to be burdened > >with finding a more complicated name for it. It should be > >up to others who have borrowed the language to find unique > >names for their varieties. "English" should be simply the > >name of the language spoken in England.
> >"English English" is often used to specify the language of > >England, and that is probably the simplest way as things now > >stand.
> >By the way, I know it's an oversimplification to speak of > >*the* language of England, given that there are a variety of > >dialects called English in England itself. I'm sure there > >are dialects in England that differ from the speech of > >Southern England much more than Midwestern American English > >does.
> It goes much further than that. I'd guess that there is > more dialectal variation in that one little island than in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > really an "English English"; that phrase encompasses a huge > bag of different Englishes. I always take "English English" to mean the language of Southern England that gave rise to traditional Received Pronunciation and to the more modern version that's reported by the _New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary_.
Probably the most pleasing "English English" I've heard lately is that spoken by Diana Rigg in her introductions to the "Mystery" episodes on KCET, the local Public Broadcasting System channel, and also in the leading role she plays in the "Mrs Bradley" episodes. It's worth watching the shows just to hear her speak.
I see (at http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001671/ ) she was born in Doncaster, Yorkshire. I suspect she put lotsa work early on into losing her native regional accent.
MacHamish - 01 Dec 2004 17:54 GMT >> Bob Cunningham infrared: > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >she plays in the "Mrs Bradley" episodes. It's worth >watching the shows just to hear her speak. I agree with you about Diana Rigg, I loved those old episodes of The Avengers. Oh, those sexy outfits she wore! She has aged well, too. Melvyn Bragg has a good English English voice. I sometimes listen to his "In Our Time" program over the Internet on BBC 4. He's so bloody erudite, that guy.
>I see (at http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001671/ ) she was born >in Doncaster, Yorkshire. I suspect she put lotsa work early >on into losing her native regional accent. For a wonderful example Scottish Standard English, have a listen to Fiona Ritchie, hostess of the Celtic music program "The Thistle and Shamrock" on National Public Radio. I'd as soon listen to her speak as to the music.
MacHamish Mór
Wood Avens - 01 Dec 2004 18:07 GMT >>I always take "English English" to mean the language of >>Southern England that gave rise to traditional Received >>Pronunciation and to the more modern version that's reported >>by the _New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary_.
>Melvyn Bragg has a good English English voice. I sometimes listen to his >"In Our Time" program over the Internet on BBC 4. If English English is the language of Southern England, then Melvyn isn't a good example. He's from Cumbria. And it's still apparent.
 Signature Katy Jennison
spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @
MacHamish - 01 Dec 2004 20:10 GMT >>>I always take "English English" to mean the language of >>>Southern England that gave rise to traditional Received [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >If English English is the language of Southern England, then Melvyn >isn't a good example. He's from Cumbria. And it's still apparent. I'm a Yank. What would I know? He sounds English English to me. :-)
MacHamish Mór
Mike Lyle - 01 Dec 2004 19:25 GMT [...]
> For a wonderful example Scottish Standard English, have a listen to > Fiona Ritchie, hostess of the Celtic music program "The Thistle and > Shamrock" on National Public Radio. I'd as soon listen to her speak
> as to the music. On SSE, don't forget Eddie Mair, who presents Radio 4's _P.M._ at five o'clock; though he's toned down a bit over the years. And Helen March, of the _Open Country_ programme, stirs longings in me which come straight from the primeval swamp.
Mike.
MacHamish - 02 Dec 2004 13:55 GMT >[...] >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >March, of the _Open Country_ programme, stirs longings in me which >come straight from the primeval swamp. I'll try to find those program(mes). I think they are streamed on the Internet, which is a really nice feature of BBC Radio. I'm especially intrigued by you comment about Helen March. I assume those primeval swamp longings have something to do with our innate biological urge to perpetuate the species.
MacHamish Mór
the Omrud - 02 Dec 2004 14:08 GMT MacHamish typed thus:
> >[...] > >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > longings have something to do with our innate biological urge to perpetuate > the species. You can get most of them from Listen Again, where they are available for 7 days from transmission: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/progs/listenagain.shtml
I've never particularly noticed Helen Marsh although I must have heard her, but you should check out Charlotte Green, who can be heard reading the news, the shipping forecast, and (more excitingly) reading naughty clips on The News Quiz and giggling at them endearingly.
 Signature David ===== replace the first component of address with the definite article.
Matti Lamprhey - 02 Dec 2004 15:08 GMT "the Omrud" <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> wrote...
> I've never particularly noticed Helen Marsh although I must have > heard her, but you should check out Charlotte Green, who can be heard > reading the news, the shipping forecast, and (more excitingly) > reading naughty clips on The News Quiz and giggling at them > endearingly. CG has been on sick leave for some months, but your post is timely because she was back at work yesterday.
Matti
the Omrud - 02 Dec 2004 17:01 GMT Matti Lamprhey typed thus:
> "the Omrud" <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> wrote... > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > CG has been on sick leave for some months, but your post is timely > because she was back at work yesterday. At least - I think I heard her last weekend. I believe she had to be removed from around a burst appendix.
 Signature David ===== replace the first component of address with the definite article.
MacHamish - 02 Dec 2004 16:02 GMT >MacHamish typed thus: > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >reading naughty clips on The News Quiz and giggling at them >endearingly. Alas, there seems to be a problem with the transmissions, or perhaps with my computer. When RealPlayer comes up, I get about 5 seconds of sound, and then it stops. I'll have to get this problem sorted before I can listen to these mellifluous lassies.
MacHamish Mór
the Omrud - 02 Dec 2004 17:06 GMT MacHamish typed thus:
> >MacHamish typed thus: > > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > then it stops. I'll have to get this problem sorted before I can listen to > these mellifluous lassies. Two answers to that: either: the Real Alternative plays Real streams without all that appalling rubbish which the er, real Real insists on leaving all over your PC: http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/1054136293/1 or: Net Transport will download the data from the stream so that you can listen again, later, without any jerks. http://www.xi-soft.com/default.htm, although be very careful to stop it running completely when you are not using it as it loves to take over all downloads from the Internet.
 Signature David ===== replace the first component of address with the definite article.
MacHamish - 02 Dec 2004 17:50 GMT >MacHamish typed thus: > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >it running completely when you are not using it as it loves to take >over all downloads from the Internet. Thanks for the tip. I'm considering adding Real Alternative to my media plug-ins. I've got RealPlayer, Microsoft Media Player, Quick Time Player, DivX Player, and Music Match Jukebox. What's one more?
MacHamish Mór
the Omrud - 02 Dec 2004 18:19 GMT MacHamish typed thus:
> >Two answers to that: > >either: the Real Alternative plays Real streams without all that [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > plug-ins. I've got RealPlayer, Microsoft Media Player, Quick Time Player, > DivX Player, and Music Match Jukebox. What's one more? Ah, but there's no need for one more. You can expunge every trace of the ghastly RealPlayer if you install Real Alternative. I have.
 Signature David ===== replace the first component of address with the definite article.
MacHamish - 02 Dec 2004 18:52 GMT >> Thanks for the tip. I'm considering adding Real Alternative to my media >> plug-ins. I've got RealPlayer, Microsoft Media Player, Quick Time Player, >> DivX Player, and Music Match Jukebox. What's one more? > >Ah, but there's no need for one more. You can expunge every trace of >the ghastly RealPlayer if you install Real Alternative. I have. Very well then. You've convinced me. I'm off to d'load Real Alernative and delete RealPlayer. I never liked it except when it occasionally worked.
:-) MacHamish Mór
MacHamish - 02 Dec 2004 19:52 GMT >>Ah, but there's no need for one more. You can expunge every trace of >>the ghastly RealPlayer if you install Real Alternative. I have. > >Very well then. You've convinced me. I'm off to d'load Real Alernative and >delete RealPlayer. I never liked it except when it occasionally worked. >:-) Done, and it works very well. Thanks again, David.
MacHamish Mór
Django Cat - 01 Dec 2004 01:02 GMT >> >> > [...] >> > [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] >The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called "Scottish Standard >English" Not 'Scots' then?
S Viemeister - 01 Dec 2004 01:13 GMT > >The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called "Scottish Standard > >English" > > Not 'Scots' then? No. That's quite different.
Sheila
Django Cat - 01 Dec 2004 01:29 GMT >> >The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called "Scottish Standard >> >English" [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Sheila Ah right. Thanks. Now we know. [Whistles, shakes head, stares at boots, wanders away into middle distance].
S Viemeister - 01 Dec 2004 02:47 GMT > >> >The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called "Scottish Standard > >> >English" [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Ah right. Thanks. Now we know. [Whistles, shakes head, stares at > boots, wanders away into middle distance]. Two different things. Scottish Standard English is English as spoken in Scotland. Scots is a language (or dialect) related to English.
Sheila
James Cameron - 01 Dec 2004 10:30 GMT >> >> >The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called "Scottish Standard >> >> >English" [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Two different things. >Scottish Standard English is English as spoken in Scotland. Only in theory. Most Scots don't speak SSE and few could.
It's just the same in England, where RP is the theoretical standard but is seldom used in practice.
>Scots is a language (or dialect) related to English. To claim that Scots is a dialect is to beg the question: a dialect of which language?
Obviously Scots isn't a dialect of English, since it pre-dates English. It could be a dialect of the Germanic language that gave birth to both Scots and English but that Germanic language was itself a mere dialect.
Where's that girl with my bloody coffee? (If she doesn't come soon, I'll move the adjective.)
 Signature Am fear a phosas bean posaidh e dragh
allan connochie - 01 Dec 2004 06:18 GMT > >> >The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called "Scottish Standard > >> >English" [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Ah right. Thanks. Now we know. [Whistles, shakes head, stares at > boots, wanders away into middle distance]. Sheila is right. What is known as "Scottish Standard English" is simply Standard English as spoken in Scotland. It's pretty similar to Standard English but uses a few Scotticisms borrowed from Scots. Scots is a closely related language which according to government figures is spoken, at least to some extent, by around 1.5 million people.
Allan
flink - 06 Dec 2004 23:11 GMT The loonies in these Celtic groups think that English is the same as German. They are abosolutely stupid[id] Cat" <nospam@please.com> wrote in message news:ff7qq01h6741n2cmkpdntdrvlbkud8ep8v@4ax.com...
> >> >The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called "Scottish Standard > >> >English" [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Ah right. Thanks. Now we know. [Whistles, shakes head, stares at > boots, wanders away into middle distance]. Daniel Mac an Toisich - 06 Dec 2004 23:29 GMT See ones own google group - Anglo-Saxon. Who's Stooopid now?
Bob Cunningham - 01 Dec 2004 01:55 GMT
> > >The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called "Scottish Standard > > >English"
> > Not 'Scots' then?
> No. That's quite different. My paternal grandfather was conceived in Scotland and born in America. He learned from his family to call himself a Scotchman and he occasionally liked to tell me how to say things in Scotch. (I was never able to repeat them to his satisfaction.)
I wonder to what extent the insistence on "Scottish" and "Scots" is supported by the Scottish man-in-the-street.
S Viemeister - 01 Dec 2004 02:44 GMT > > > >The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called "Scottish Standard > > > >English" [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I wonder to what extent the insistence on "Scottish" and > "Scots" is supported by the Scottish man-in-the-street. Most Scots today, say 'Scots' and 'Scottish' rather than Scotch.
Sheila
allan connochie - 01 Dec 2004 06:28 GMT > > > >The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called "Scottish Standard > > > >English" [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I wonder to what extent the insistence on "Scottish" and > "Scots" is supported by the Scottish man-in-the-street. People in Scotland don't exactly lose sleep over it though most prefer Scots or Scottish. You do get some who'll jump on it straight away. Scotch was originally a contracted form of the word Scottish imported from England which became very common in Scotland itself at one time. At least it was better than the term North Briton which some were using at that time. The word "Scotch" has been regarded as old fashioned for a long time now and generally fell out of use in favour of the indiginous terms (for want of a better expression) except when used to describe certain objects (ie whisky, eggs, mist).
Allan
Django Cat - 01 Dec 2004 11:27 GMT >> > > >The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called "Scottish >Standard [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >which became very common in Scotland itself at one time. At least it was >better than the term North Briton which some were using at that time. And indeed the landmark hotel in Edinburgh, now the Balmoral, was until fairly recently 'The North British Hotel'. - http://www.viaggiaresempre.it/Edimburgo10.jpg
DC
Mike Lyle - 01 Dec 2004 16:16 GMT >>>>>> The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called >>>>>> "Scottish Standard English" [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >> prefer Scots or Scottish. You do get some who'll jump on it >> straight away. Scotch was originally a contracted form of the word
>> Scottish imported from England which became very common in Scotland
>> itself at one time. At least it was better than the term North >> Briton which some were using at that time. > > And indeed the landmark hotel in Edinburgh, now the Balmoral, was > until fairly recently 'The North British Hotel'. - > http://www.viaggiaresempre.it/Edimburgo10.jpg WHAT? They changed the name of the "NB"? To "BALMORAL"? F me sideways!
Mike.
Django Cat - 01 Dec 2004 17:33 GMT >>>>>>> The form of Standard English used in Scotland is called >>>>>>> "Scottish Standard English" [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > >Mike. Yeah, pissed me off too - Balmoral is so totally unmemorable. Must have happened within the past ten years I think - I've spent the last three summers working in Edinburgh and it's been the Balmoral all that time.
DC
Bob Cunningham - 01 Dec 2004 16:43 GMT [...]
> > My paternal grandfather was conceived in Scotland and born > > in America. He learned from his family to call himself a > > Scotchman and he occasionally liked to tell me how to say > > things in Scotch. (I was never able to repeat them to his > > satisfaction.)
> > I wonder to what extent the insistence on "Scottish" and > > "Scots" is supported by the Scottish man-in-the-street.
> People in Scotland don't exactly lose sleep over it though > most prefer Scots or Scottish. You do get some who'll jump > on it straight away. The first such jump I experienced was at a bar in a hotel in Edinburgh. The jumper was probably the most charming bartender I've ever encountered. When I said "Scotch" she said "Scottish" with an enchanting smile that would have melted a heart of stone.
> Scotch was originally a contracted form of the word > Scottish imported from England which became very common in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > long time now and generally fell out of use in favour of > the indiginous terms (for want of a better expression) My Cunningham ancestors (great-greatgrandparents and their numerous children and grandchildren) left Scotland in about 1860. I suppose "Scotch" and "Scotchman" may not yet have fallen so out of favor then as they did later.
> except when used to describe certain objects (ie whisky, > eggs, mist). The last time I drank any Scotch whisky was in about 1940. I occasionally joined an acquaintance who liked to drink Scotch and listen to Strauss waltzes. I don't know the quality of the Scotch he drank, but I remember it as being not bad.
Lately, in watching "Mash" reruns, I've been impressed by the esteem the actors hold for "12-year-old Scotch". ("Not enough 'o's in 'smooth' to describe it.") So one of these days I'm going to splurge and get a bottle of Johnny Walker Black Label to see if it's really that good.
What's the best way to drink 12-year-old Scotch? I've heard of Scotch and water and Scotch and soda, but I suspect the best way might be to sip it straight but slowly. Especially at about US$30 for 0.75 liter, slowly sounds like it has a lot going for it.
Django Cat - 01 Dec 2004 18:16 GMT >[...] > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >said "Scottish" with an enchanting smile that would have >melted a heart of stone. So you weren't ordering a drink then.
[snip]
>The last time I drank any Scotch whisky was in about 1940. >I occasionally joined an acquaintance who liked to drink [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >days I'm going to splurge and get a bottle of Johnny Walker >Black Label to see if it's really that good. If you're going to splurge out, for not much more than the price of an anonymous blend like Johnnie Walker you could get a proper drink, a single malt.
There are more than 200 individual malts to sample; working your way through each of them is an arduous task, but something I've set my mind to and just have to get on with.
Different regions have their fans; I go for the heavily peated and sea-scented Islay South-Coasters - Laphroaig http://www.laphroaig.com/ , Lagavulin http://www.islaywhiskysociety.com/lagavulin/ and Ardbeg http://www.ardbeg.com/ , though since someone said recently that the taste is reminiscent of kippers I've not felt quite the same about them. I also discovered the Orkney malts this summer - Scarpa - no longer produced, but given the time scale still in the shops - and the really superior Highland Park. Other folk like the classic Speysiders such as The Macallan, Glenfiddich, and Glenlivet. BTW, I believe the product can't actually be called Whiskey unless it's double-distilled and at least 8 years old.
We had a bottle of Laphraoig on my birthday (not all of it, but you know what I mean) which cost 17.50GBP - hardly more than a bottle of a blend and I'm sure even cheaper in the US.
>What's the best way to drink 12-year-old Scotch? 12 is a decent age, but 18 or 21 year old impressions aren't too hard to find. Older than that and it's silly money. I've never had the chance to judge, but my understanding is that there's a maximum period beyond which the actual quality doesn't improve, you're just paying for the rarity value. This is probably true of the drams available at the http://www.lochsidehotel.co.uk/ on Islay, where the whiskey list includes a couple at four figure prices a shot (I make that around $1900). Last time I was there the barmaid told me they don't sell these that rarely either, but it's always to yuppie kids showing off or to Japanese tourists.
>I've heard >of Scotch and water and Scotch and soda, but I suspect the >best way might be to sip it straight but slowly. Especially >at about US$30 for 0.75 liter, slowly sounds like it has a >lot going for it. Now, connoisseurs say just with plain water. They frown heavily on ice, but that's what I like - for my taste the ice (not tons, but a couple of cubes in a single shot) brings out the flavour and I like the way the drink starts strong and slowly dilutes. The cognoscenti say ice chills the essential flavour vapours, while water dilutes the alcohol kick allowing the full taste to come through (so not straight and slowly, either). Please don't put soda in a decent Scotch - you might as well drink 5 year old, single-distilled Bourbon.
DC, posting from alt.usage.english - apologies to people on soc.culture.scots whose grannies are busily sucking eggs.
James Cameron - 01 Dec 2004 20:01 GMT > BTW, I believe the >product can't actually be called Whiskey unless it's double-distilled >and at least 8 years old. In Scotland, there's no 'e' in whisky. In England, there's no 'f' in whisky. (Scottish joke.)
>DC, posting from alt.usage.english - apologies to people on >soc.culture.scots whose grannies are busily sucking eggs. You carry on, you're a treat to read.
 Signature Am fear a phosas bean posaidh e dragh
Don Aitken - 01 Dec 2004 21:40 GMT >> BTW, I believe the >>product can't actually be called Whiskey unless it's double-distilled [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >You carry on, you're a treat to read. Let me add a recommendation for "Raw Spirit" by Iain Banks - a sort of travelogue of Scottish distilleries.
 Signature Don Aitken
Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com".
Django Cat - 02 Dec 2004 00:05 GMT >>> BTW, I believe the >>>product can't actually be called Whiskey unless it's double-distilled [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Let me add a recommendation for "Raw Spirit" by Iain Banks - a sort of >travelogue of Scottish distilleries. Read it a few months ago, and a source of some of the pearls of wisdom above. Enjoyed it, and it inspired me to tear up to John O'Groats on a weekend trip that involved sampling some new malts, but it was a bit "I'm rich and have lots of nice cars, and here's a bit about whisky".
I've managed to read four of Bank's books somehow this year. I couldn't put down his first Sci Fi novel. 'Consider Phlebas', though I was less keen on 'Canal Dreams' Then I read 'Raw Spirit' (factual, lots of anecdotes and stuff about his friends) at the same time as 'The Bridge', and boy is 'The Bridge' autobiographical (and very good).
DC
Django Cat - 02 Dec 2004 00:13 GMT >> BTW, I believe the >>product can't actually be called Whiskey unless it's double-distilled >>and at least 8 years old. > >In Scotland, there's no 'e' in whisky. In England, there's no 'f' in >whisky. (Scottish joke.) Oops. I know Scotch whisky is spelt differently from Irish whiskey, but can never remember which is witch.
>>DC, posting from alt.usage.english - apologies to people on >>soc.culture.scots whose grannies are busily sucking eggs. > >You carry on, you're a treat to read. Thanks...
Cheers DC
jerry_friedman@yahoo.com - 01 Dec 2004 20:21 GMT ...
> >Lately, in watching "Mash" reruns, I've been impressed by > >the esteem the actors hold for "12-year-old Scotch". ("Not [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > anonymous blend like Johnnie Walker you could get a proper drink, a > single malt. ...
He's right, Bob. I have a poor sense of smell and can't tell a Merlot from a Cabernet, but the first time I tasted a single malt, I could tell I liked it better than a blend. (For some reason it was a direct comparison.) And the single malt was Glenfiddich, which some connoisseurs consider the McDonald's of whisky. (In fact, somebody probably refers to it as "the McDonald".)
Obaue: I was going to say "McWhisky", but using "Mc" as a depreciative prefix may not work when the subject is a Scottish one.
Obaue2: Usually we see the British complaining that Americans unnecessarily make verbs phrasal--"start off" or "start out" instead of just "start"--but I think we Americans use "splurge", as Bob did, not "splurge out".
 Signature Jerry Friedman is lucky he hardly drinks.
Django Cat - 02 Dec 2004 00:38 GMT >... > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >comparison.) And the single malt was Glenfiddich, which some >connoisseurs consider the McDonald's of whisky. That's not strictly fair, as Glenfiddich is a very acceptable dram; http://www.glenfiddich.com/. If I was looking for the 'McDonald's of whisky' I'd be thinking of generic blends such as Bells (by no means actively unpleasant, and fine in a cocktail).
The reason people turn their noses up at Glenfiddich is that it's the malt everybody knows, and the one most likely to be behind the bar where there's only one malt kept. Surprisingly, this is the case in the Edinburgh Hilton.
> (In fact, somebody >probably refers to it as "the McDonald".) Well, in Scotland that's just going to make people think you're referring to someone called Mc or MacDonald.
>Obaue2: Usually we see the British complaining that Americans >unnecessarily make verbs phrasal--"start off" or "start out" instead of >just "start"--but I think we Americans use "splurge", as Bob did, not >"splurge out". Really? I've never thought of that as an especially pondial thing, just part of creative language-making. But if you want to see dynamic phrasal verb creation watch BrTV cookery programmes featuring professional chefs:-
"So first you sauté off the broccoli while the pac choi is boiling down... fry up some mushrooms and steam away some carrots while you deglaze off the sauce..."
DC
Mike Lyle - 01 Dec 2004 19:00 GMT [...]
> Lately, in watching "Mash" reruns, I've been impressed by > the esteem the actors hold for "12-year-old Scotch". ("Not [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > at about US$30 for 0.75 liter, slowly sounds like it has a > lot going for it. With just enough very good water to release the flavours: no more than fifty-fifty. For a nice easy quiet malt, try Glenmorangie or Glenlivet. For a startlingly eccentric experience, brace yourself for Laphroiag.
The word "Scotch" does seem to have been an English contraction -- the Scottis(h) one was "Scots", of course -- but it was good enough for Burns and Walter Scott. I wonder if it was originally local or regional, and even maybe more genuinely Scottish than written records suggest. Canadian Scots, last time I noticed, use "Scotch", as I think we usually did in Australia, often in "Scotch-Irish"-- my own thrawn stock.
Mike.
allan connochie - 02 Dec 2004 09:39 GMT > What's the best way to drink 12-year-old Scotch? I've heard > of Scotch and water and Scotch and soda, but I suspect the > best way might be to sip it straight but slowly. Especially > at about US$30 for 0.75 liter, slowly sounds like it has a > lot going for it. Depends on the individual I suppose. You do hear people saying that the best way is the slightest tiny drop of water which supposedly opens up the aroma etc. I tend to have mine straight.
Allan
Daniel Mac an Toisich - 06 Dec 2004 23:35 GMT Either an indirect way of referring to Gaidhlig (insofar as that is not referrable outside of Gaidhlig without harming Gaidhlig - i.e. such a usage is never used though it is valid) Or a purely mediatory immediacy whose purpose is to remove english speakers from english and called the english removed from 'standard english' thus objectifying it to their fellow "us" -ed dialect speakers disadvantage. Deliberately. Professional losers for the spitting upon. Westministrers Anti-saxon Pluralist diaspora enforcers. Wasp's.
Tony Cooper - 07 Dec 2004 00:31 GMT >Either an indirect way of referring to Gaidhlig (insofar as that is not >referrable outside of Gaidhlig without harming Gaidhlig - i.e. such a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Professional losers for the spitting upon. Westministrers Anti-saxon >Pluralist diaspora enforcers. Wasp's. Here you go, Charles. Your imaginative poster is back to amaze and delight you.
Since you were so defensive of his style the last time he wandered in here, perhaps you'll be kind enough to give us your take on what he is saying.
I'll provide a clue: Ghàidhlig is Scottish Gaelic. What I'll be looking for from you is the meaning of "mediatory immediacy", "Westministers Anti-Saxon Pluralist diaspora enforcers", and "Wasp's" (sic) in this context. Have at it.
Paul Wolff - 07 Dec 2004 00:58 GMT >>Either an indirect way of referring to Gaidhlig (insofar as that is not >>referrable outside of Gaidhlig without harming Gaidhlig - i.e. such a [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >"Westministers Anti-Saxon Pluralist diaspora enforcers", and "Wasp's" >(sic) in this context. Have at it. Here's another: no main verb in a whole posting. Cue Alfred Jingle, Esq., of No Hall, Nowhere.
 Signature Paul In bocca al Lupo!
Séimí mac Liam - 07 Dec 2004 01:11 GMT >>Either an indirect way of referring to Gaidhlig (insofar as that is not >>referrable outside of Gaidhlig without harming Gaidhlig - i.e. such a [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > "Westministers Anti-Saxon Pluralist diaspora enforcers", and "Wasp's" > (sic) in this context. Have at it. You forgot to add, "stir, stir", Coach. Clearly a violation under Section IV, para 2b, SCIRR. Wall will be along anytime now to remove two of your fingers.
 Signature Saint Séimí mac Liam Carriagemaker to the court of Queen Maeve Prophet of The Great Tagger Canonized December '99
Tony Cooper - 07 Dec 2004 02:21 GMT >>>Either an indirect way of referring to Gaidhlig (insofar as that is not >>>referrable outside of Gaidhlig without harming Gaidhlig - i.e. such a [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >Section IV, para 2b, SCIRR. Wall will be along anytime now to remove two >of your fingers. I keep telling these kilted kooks to send over Auld Bob. He can be as unintelligible as anyone, but at least he's interestingly unintelligible.
I dunno where you got that Section IV stuff, Jim. There's no one in SCI that ever read anything as far as Section II in anything except the Caine Report without losing interest and going off to join a "it's the fault of the Nordies" thread.
allan connochie - 07 Dec 2004 07:18 GMT > >>>Either an indirect way of referring to Gaidhlig (insofar as that is not > >>>referrable outside of Gaidhlig without harming Gaidhlig - i.e. such a [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > unintelligible as anyone, but at least he's interestingly > unintelligible. The difference being Bob wrote in his Fife dialect. It was perfectly intelligable to anyone who knew that said dialect or an alternative dialect of Scots. As far as I can see this poster is just deliberately trying to confuse people and gain attention.
Allan
Tony Cooper - 07 Dec 2004 13:09 GMT >> >>>Either an indirect way of referring to Gaidhlig (insofar as that is not >> >>>referrable outside of Gaidhlig without harming Gaidhlig - i.e. such a [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >of Scots. As far as I can see this poster is just deliberately trying to >confuse people and gain attention. I understand that. I thoroughly enjoy all of Auld Bob's posts and like poking through his website.
I am somewhat alarmed that you say "It was perfectly....". I hope the past tense is indicative of nothing more than a reference to what was posted in the past, and not to anything more serious. I don't "read" soc.culture.scottish, but sometimes go over for a look.
allan connochie - 07 Dec 2004 14:55 GMT > I understand that. I thoroughly enjoy all of Auld Bob's posts and > like poking through his website. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > posted in the past, and not to anything more serious. I don't "read" > soc.culture.scottish, but sometimes go over for a look. I was just referring to his posts as being in the past tense. I haven't seen any for months. Hopefully all is well.
Allan
Charles Riggs - 07 Dec 2004 19:04 GMT >>Either an indirect way of referring to Gaidhlig (insofar as that is not >>referrable outside of Gaidhlig without harming Gaidhlig - i.e. such a [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Here you go, Charles. Your imaginative poster is back to amaze and >delight you. And, once again, he didn't fail me. It was a delightful paragraph; I want more.
>Since you were so defensive of his style the last time he wandered in >here, perhaps you'll be kind enough to give us your take on what he is >saying. You reckon his style needs defending? I was only trying to express my humble (as always) opinion on the picture his words evoked.
>I'll provide a clue: Ghàidhlig is Scottish Gaelic. What I'll be >looking for from you is the meaning of "mediatory immediacy", Being current only for the sake of being current, but to interpret it for you takes the fun out of it, doesn't it?
>"Westministers Anti-Saxon Pluralist diaspora enforcers", and "Wasp's" >(sic) in this context. Have at it. His "Wasp's" was a nice touch, although I think the apostrophe was, strictly speaking for those who care about minuscule details, probably a mistake. As for the other, it doesn't make much sense to me, but I like the music in it. That is often enough.
 Signature Charles Riggs
They are no accented letters in my email address
Tony Cooper - 07 Dec 2004 21:58 GMT >>>Either an indirect way of referring to Gaidhlig (insofar as that is not >>>referrable outside of Gaidhlig without harming Gaidhlig - i.e. such a [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >Being current only for the sake of being current, but to interpret it >for you takes the fun out of it, doesn't it? Really? But what of the "mediated"? Who is the other party involved that acts as intermediary?
>>"Westministers Anti-Saxon Pluralist diaspora enforcers", and "Wasp's" >>(sic) in this context. Have at it. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >a mistake. As for the other, it doesn't make much sense to me, but I >like the music in it. That is often enough. Wouldn't you shift that apostrophe to the left to make it "Westminister's"? Isn't that where he's saying the Pluralists are hanging out?
How does one enforce diaspora? I suppose the diaspora was enforced when they packed all those brigands off to Van Dieman's Land, but did that edict come out of Westminister? Where, in fact, is "Westminister? Is it near Westminster?
Are they WASPs or not? Are they anti-Saxon or Anglo-Saxon?
There's much lacking in your translation. Much.
Charles Riggs - 08 Dec 2004 14:12 GMT ...
>There's much lacking in your translation. Much. Exactly. It is up to you do interpret his passages as you like. You're even free to embellish them: you know how to do that, Shirley. See how much fun awaits you? Imagination is all that is required.
 Signature Charles Riggs
They are no accented letters in my email address
Daniel Mac an Toisich - 30 Nov 2004 21:50 GMT > > [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > > I suppose "Engloid" would be another possibility. The original posting chinless wasp diasporist twit should go away and play with it
Mike Lyle - 30 Nov 2004 23:13 GMT >>>> [...] >> [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > The original posting chinless wasp diasporist twit should go away and > play with it ?
Mike.
Theodore de Bere - 01 Dec 2004 00:30 GMT [...]
> > The original posting chinless wasp diasporist twit should go > > away and play with it When I see idiotic comments like that in Usenet, I'm reminded that there's no lower age limit for posters. I would guess that Daniel <Whatever> is probably about 14.
> ? Well said.
Django Cat - 01 Dec 2004 01:01 GMT >[...] > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >reminded that there's no lower age limit for posters. I >would guess that Daniel <Whatever> Mackintosh.
Django Cat - 01 Dec 2004 01:03 GMT >[...] > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >reminded that there's no lower age limit for posters. I >would guess that Daniel <Whatever> is probably about 14. Too old.
don groves - 01 Dec 2004 07:21 GMT > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > reminded that there's no lower age limit for posters. I > would guess that Daniel <Whatever> is probably about 14. No lower IQ limit either.
 Signature dg (domain=ccwebster)
Daniel Mac an Toisich - 01 Dec 2004 11:48 GMT One has already commented on ones lamentable IQ (ask claire) but if the above posters are taking the original posting as serious fine but one has just realized that it was probably a joke and for one response one apologizes (and apologizes for the language though not the sentiment anyway even if it were not) however having experience with wasp diaspora enforcing moreons one would also ask the poster to not be so reckless with humoure ones fellow iq-ers on the other side wuill take the poster seriously as one has AND apply it (imagine one then crying into ones ribena "Stupid F****G AR*****S!") Behind ones response is at least a sincere (is that teh correct spelling) concern for people who are being railroaded by every tony blair wannabee venus groped piece of "Stupid F****G AR*****S!
Tony Cooper - 01 Dec 2004 13:07 GMT >One has already commented on ones lamentable IQ (ask claire) but if >the above posters are taking the original posting as serious fine but [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >for people who are being railroaded by every tony blair wannabee venus >groped piece of "Stupid F****G AR*****S! Can anyone translate this? Babelfish doesn't help.
Mike Lyle - 01 Dec 2004 16:21 GMT >> One has already commented on ones lamentable IQ (ask claire) but if
>> the above posters are taking the original posting as serious fine but
>> one has just realized that it was probably a joke and for one >> response >> one apologizes (and apologizes for the language though not the >> sentiment anyway even if it were not) however having experience with
>> wasp diaspora enforcing moreons one would also ask the poster to not
>> be so reckless with humoure ones fellow iq-ers on the other side >> wuill >> take the poster seriously as one has AND apply it (imagine one then
>> crying into ones ribena "Stupid F****G AR*****S!") Behind ones >> response is at least a sincere (is that teh correct spelling) concern
>> for people who are being railroaded by every tony blair wannabee >> venus >> groped piece of "Stupid F****G AR*****S! > > Can anyone translate this? Babelfish doesn't help. I still don't even know which of us he called the "OP", as this is now one of those "Was: ... Was:..." threads. At least then I'd have an idea of what upset him.
You'll have to tell us, I'm afraid, Daniel.
Mike.
Bob Cunningham - 01 Dec 2004 16:58 GMT [empty attributions omitted]
> >One has already commented on ones lamentable IQ (ask claire) but if > >the above posters are taking the original posting as serious fine but [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >for people who are being railroaded by every tony blair wannabee venus > >groped piece of "Stupid F****G AR*****S!
> Can anyone translate this? Does anyone want to?
> Babelfish doesn't help. Charles Riggs - 01 Dec 2004 17:18 GMT >>One has already commented on ones lamentable IQ (ask claire) but if >>the above posters are taking the original posting as serious fine but [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >Can anyone translate this? Babelfish doesn't help. Can anyone provide Coop with the imagination, sense of adventure, and appreciation for things novel, that he so clearly lacks?
 Signature Charles Riggs
They are no accented letters in my email address
Charles Riggs - 02 Dec 2004 15:20 GMT >Can anyone provide Coop with the imagination, sense of adventure, and >appreciation for things novel, that he so clearly lacks? It is ironic that whereas Coop announced soon after arriving in the group that writing style most interested him, as opposed to English usage per se, he views styles that differ from his own, or ones he is used to, in the most rigid of ways. Give him a non-Dick-and-Jane sentence, or a sentence that is longer than he thinks it should be, or one that is punctuated in an unusual manner, or any paragraph structure out of the ordinary, and he balks. I find this odd in someone claiming an interest in creative writing.
 Signature Charles Riggs
They are no accented letters in my email address
Tony Cooper - 02 Dec 2004 16:09 GMT >>Can anyone provide Coop with the imagination, sense of adventure, and >>appreciation for things novel, that he so clearly lacks? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >structure out of the ordinary, and he balks. I find this odd in >someone claiming an interest in creative writing. Ah, poor Charles. Reduced to following up on his own posts. I do appreciate creativity in writing, but prefer the creativity to be expressed in sentences with understandable meaning. It's a matter of allowances in how you arrive at the destination, but demands on knowing what destination you aimed for.
Dickless and Janeless sentences confuse me not. A sentence is a journey that starts with a single word. Long journeys do not faze me as long as I can follow the footsteps of the author. The author in question didn't leave a trail that even a bloodhound of a reader could follow.
Charles Riggs - 03 Dec 2004 13:21 GMT >>>Can anyone provide Coop with the imagination, sense of adventure, and >>>appreciation for things novel, that he so clearly lacks? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Ah, poor Charles. Reduced to following up on his own posts. I respond to those posts which interest me the most. I couldn't care less who wrote them.
> I do >appreciate creativity in writing, but prefer the creativity to be >expressed in sentences with understandable meaning. It's a matter of >allowances in how you arrive at the destination, but demands on >knowing what destination you aimed for. You want your creativity bounded.
>Dickless and Janeless sentences confuse me not. A sentence is a >journey that starts with a single word. Long journeys do not faze me >as long as I can follow the footsteps of the author. The author in >question didn't leave a trail that even a bloodhound of a reader could >follow. Some hounds are more imaginative than others.
 Signature Charles Riggs
They are no accented letters in my email address
Charles Riggs - 01 Dec 2004 17:18 GMT >One has already commented on ones lamentable IQ (ask claire) but if >the above posters are taking the original posting as serious fine but [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >for people who are being railroaded by every tony blair wannabee venus >groped piece of "Stupid F****G AR*****S! You gotta like this guy. He's different, to put it mildly, which is refreshing.
 Signature Charles Riggs
They are no accented letters in my email address
Daniel Mac an Toisich - 30 Nov 2004 22:57 GMT
What wrong with Enghuman Subenghuman? Saxon can be Enghuman and the poster can be subenghuman. Get all the leather gear and everything!
Daniel Mac an Toisich - 02 Dec 2004 20:13 GMT > > > What wrong with Enghuman Subenghuman? Saxon can be Enghuman and the > poster can be subenghuman. Get all the leather gear and everything! One still awaits an answer to ones perfectly fair question. What IS wrong with Enghuman Subenghuman?
Raymond S. Wise - 02 Dec 2004 21:02 GMT > > What wrong with Enghuman Subenghuman? Saxon can be Enghuman and the > > poster can be subenghuman. Get all the leather gear and everything! > > One still awaits an answer to ones perfectly fair question. > What IS wrong with Enghuman Subenghuman? I, for one, don't understand what it means. It's hardly a fair question if the terms used are obscure. And if the purpose is to propose a replacement for a language name currently in use, then an argument should be made for the new term, as Bob Cunningham did for his proposal.
 Signature Raymond S. Wise Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
Mike Lyle - 02 Dec 2004 21:19 GMT >> gnenian@hotmail.com (Daniel Mac an Toisich) wrote in message > news:<65c13b5d.0411301457.5fe8b675@posting.google.com>... [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > argument should be made for the new term, as Bob Cunningham did for > his proposal. Pretty obvious, really. "English" implies very strongly that the term belongs par excellence to members of the lish community. And probably male ones, at that. Since this is clearly discriminatory under United Kingdom, United States, and European Union law, our water-resistant colleague has devised a logical and politically inclusive alternative more in line with today's sensitivities. These lishes have enjoyed their unchallenged position of power too long.
Mike.
Carmen L. Abruzzi - 02 Dec 2004 22:25 GMT >>What wrong with Enghuman Subenghuman? Saxon can be Enghuman and the >>poster can be subenghuman. Get all the leather gear and everything! > > One still awaits an answer to ones perfectly fair question. > What IS wrong with Enghuman Subenghuman? No one knows what it means.
Alan Smaill - 02 Dec 2004 22:56 GMT ..
>>>What wrong with Enghuman Subenghuman? Saxon can be Enghuman and the >>>poster can be subenghuman. Get all the leather gear and everything! >> One still awaits an answer to ones perfectly fair question. What IS >> wrong with Enghuman Subenghuman? > > No one knows what it means. Surely the coincidence between the English "tosh" and the Mackintosh/Mac an Tòisich designation of the poster is no accident ...
 Signature Alan Smaill
Michilín - 03 Dec 2004 01:40 GMT >.. >>>>What wrong with Enghuman Subenghuman? Saxon can be Enghuman and the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Surely the coincidence between the English "tosh" and the >Mackintosh/Mac an Tòisich designation of the poster is no accident ... I believe "tosh" may be a deliberate homonym invented to rhyme with the Turkish word "bosh", meaning rubbish or nonsense; an apt summary of your remark above.
. Mac an Tòisich means son of the chief; any resemblance to an English word being coincidental.
Should you peer beyond the provincially rarified atmosphere of Edinburgh, you may note that the Irish Prime Minister is always known as the Taoiseach (Chief); the variant spelling hinting at the differences between the two languages.
To his credit, Mr. Mac an Toisich writes in excellent Gaelic, something that most Lowlanders are thankfully not qualified to pronounce on, although that does not seem to have created any reluctance to do so to date.
Michilín
allan connochie - 03 Dec 2004 10:06 GMT > >.. > >>>>What wrong with Enghuman Subenghuman? Saxon can be Enghuman and the [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > pronounce on, although that does not seem to have created any > reluctance to do so to date. I don't think Alan was talking about his Gaelic posts though. He made a joke concerning the word tosh and it must be admitted that 90% of Daniel's posts written in English are totally incomprehensible and once deciphered tend to be tosh anyway. He's either the worst writer of English I've ever come across for a literate person native to this country, or he's trolling. I suspect the latter.
Allan
> Michilín Michilín - 03 Dec 2004 15:45 GMT >> >.. >> >>>>What wrong with Enghuman Subenghuman? Saxon can be Enghuman and the [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] >> >> Michilín I don't think Mr. Smaill was talking about his Gaelic posts either. However, Mr. Smaill has seen fit to be roundly offensive to me without provocation on my part in the past year, so I see no reason to waste good manners on one who so clearly has not yet found a use for them.
I don't know why Mr. Mac an Toisich either chooses to or is unable to prevent himself from writing in a convoluted style, but I presume he has his reasons. I think your assumption that he does so deliberately may not be accurate, and as someone perhaps a little older than you and with a little more experience of the world, I am more than willing to give him elbow room to express himself.
I must say I deplore the habit of assuming that everyone is "wrong" if they don't fit into the smug mould of self-righteousness and self-importance that characterises so many who post in this group. A willingness to look beyond one's narrow viewpoint was ever considered a characteristic of the "enlightened" Scot; most of whom have fled.
Michilín
allan connochie - 03 Dec 2004 23:14 GMT > >> >.. > >> >>>>What wrong with Enghuman Subenghuman? Saxon can be Enghuman and the [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > willingness to look beyond one's narrow viewpoint was ever considered > a characteristic of the "enlightened" Scot; most of whom have fled. How can we tell if he's wrong or not if we can't even figure out what he's writing? It's not only in this newsgroup either. I've seen totally incomprehensible posts in other forums. The only time I have figured out what he was saying he seemed to be writing in a derogatory manner over the nationality of my wife. I don't agree with everything Alan writes but I don't believe I've ever seen him express such narrow views. There are four possibilities as far as I can see
1. One is that he has an intellect far above any other group member and we simply haven't tuned into his thinking yet. Pretty long odds on that one though.
2. Another is that he's virtually illiterate, though you say his Gaelic posts are well written so that seems to count that out.
3. There is a possibility that he has very little knowledge of English though the words he uses tends to discount that. People with little knowledge of a language tend to use simpler words.
4. He's a troll taking the piss.
I think number four is by far the most likely. The reason I've come to that conclusion has nothing to do with my age either. I probably read folk as well now as I'm ever likely to and don't buy into the old wise man thingy. One suspects that perhaps you're a wee bit impressed by the fact he writes Gaelic. Trolls come in all shapes and sizes and no doubt speak all kinds of languages.
Allan
Michilín - 04 Dec 2004 04:13 GMT >> >"Michilín" <micheil@shaw.ca> wrote in message >news:41afbf44.6774150@news... [quoted text clipped - 90 lines] > >Allan It's not that I'm impressed, it's that being a native Gaelic speaker and a troll just don't seem to go together.
Michilín
allan connochie - 04 Dec 2004 08:51 GMT > >I think number four is by far the most likely. The reason I've come to that > >conclusion has nothing to do with my age either. I probably read folk as [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > It's not that I'm impressed, it's that being a native Gaelic speaker > and a troll just don't seem to go together. Well the original word I was going to use was 'blinded' but I thought I'd soften it to the word 'impressed' instead. By your sentence above I think the first choice was more appropriate.
Michilín
Michilín - 04 Dec 2004 17:57 GMT >> >I think number four is by far the most likely. The reason I've come to >that [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >soften it to the word 'impressed' instead. By your sentence above I think >the first choice was more appropriate. I guess I failed to get my point across. I had forgotten that sensitivity in Lowland Scotland means wiping your child's birthday cake with your sleeve after you've thrown up all over it.
Why don't you just ask the poster flat out if he is a raving loonie intead of mumbling around the edges? Is there no longer that robust tradition in Lowland Scotland of kicking people off their crutches while screaming with laughter or putting out poisoned liver for the blind man's dog to teach the old fool to stay indoors and not affrront decent folk with his problem?
As for not heeding older people, I think that's very clever of you. It'll be hats off and forelocks tugged when the nouveau gentry struts through Yetholm.
Michilín
allan connochie - 04 Dec 2004 21:32 GMT > >> >I think number four is by far the most likely. The reason I've come to > >that [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > Why don't you just ask the poster flat out if he is a raving loonie > intead of mumbling around the edges? I have pointed out the inanity of his posts to him on several occassions.
> Is there no longer that robust > tradition in Lowland Scotland of kicking people off their crutches > while screaming with laughter or putting out poisoned liver for the > blind man's dog to teach the old fool to stay indoors and not affrront > decent folk with his problem? Careful you're starting to sound like Daniel. Well maybe not. I was exaggerating a wee bit.
> As for not heeding older people, I think that's very clever of you. > It'll be hats off and forelocks tugged when the nouveau gentry struts > through Yetholm. Now I never said I took no heed of older people. Age doesn't automatically bring wisdom though. As your last sentence shows!
Allan
Alan Smaill - 03 Dec 2004 15:16 GMT ...
>>Surely the coincidence between the English "tosh" and the >>Mackintosh/Mac an Tòisich designation of the poster is no accident ... [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > . Mac an Tòisich means son of the chief; any resemblance to an English > word being coincidental. Well, obviously; I refer the auld dumb Mick to Mack's habit of claiming fantasist Gaelic etymologies himself.
Perhaps I should provide footnotes for the auld and dumb among us?
> Michilín
 Signature Alan Smaill
Bob Cunningham - 03 Dec 2004 01:58 GMT [...]
> > What IS wrong with Enghuman Subenghuman?
> No one knows what it means. Does anyone care?
Charles Riggs - 03 Dec 2004 13:21 GMT >[...] > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Does anyone care? I'd care if I though no-one knew what it means, since its meaning is readily decipherable. A philistine of the Coop variety, who never reads Joyce, wouldn't get it, but I'd hope most of the rest of us would.
 Signature Charles Riggs
They are no accented letters in my email address
mplsray@my-deja.com - 07 Dec 2004 08:15 GMT > >[...] > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > reads Joyce, wouldn't get it, but I'd hope most of the rest of us > would. The meaning of "Enghuman Subenghuman" is not readily decipherable to me. A Google search shows that "enghuman," by itself, has been used in reference to the English language plus the humanities and in reference to engineering humans. My guess is that neither of those uses is what the poster who first used "Enghuman Subenghuman" had in mind. But it is only a guess. "Subenghuman" is found only in Web pages which are showing the contents of this thread.
So, what the heck does "Enghuman Subenghuman" mean?
-- Raymond S. Wise Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
Charles Riggs - 07 Dec 2004 19:04 GMT >> >[...] >> > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >to engineering humans. My guess is that neither of those uses is what >the poster who first used "Enghuman Subenghuman" had in mind. I have little idea what the poster had in mind.
> But it is >only a guess. "Subenghuman" is found only in Web pages which are >showing the contents of this thread. > >So, what the heck does "Enghuman Subenghuman" mean? I said it could be readily decipherable, not that I thought my results were the only possible ones. I think your question has many answers: the reason I was amused by the words, although admittedly bemused at the same time. As I meant to imply earlier, Joyce often has the same effect on me. I enjoy Finnegans Wake and portions of Ulysses because of the puzzles they contain, that not being the only reason to read them, of course.
The combination first conjured up an image of a person skilled in the English language, as contrasted to a more lowly -- in the writer's mind -- individual who is not. I like that interpretation, even if it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, since I generally prefer being around people who speak English well over being around those who do not. If Finnish, say, were my native language, I'd undoubtedly put a different spin on the words.
 Signature Charles Riggs
They are no accented letters in my email address
Sean O'Leathlobhair - 02 Dec 2004 16:21 GMT > > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > language. I felt that the name "English" should be theirs > alone. I was born here in England and have lived most of my life here. I don't feel any such injustice nor do I recall anyone else here ever expressing any feeling of injustice. On the contrary, I think we rather like the idea that many other countries use our language in the same way that we like having Greenwich as the definition of 0 East / West.
Is there any English person out there who feels this injustice?
I am sometimes irritated by the use of British English to refer to things that which would better be called English English. If a feature is shared by the English, Scottish and Welsh varieties then it can be reasonably called British. But if it is restricted to England then I would prefer English English. I sense a reluctance among many non-British English speakers to use this term.
> For the many other languages that are now called English, I > proposed the term "Angloid". The family of languages under > that term would include, for example, American Angloid, > Canadian Angloid, and Australian Angloid. How many people regard American English or Canadian English as separate languages? In fact if anyone did then there would be no problem, they could use simply: American or Canadian. The problem, if there is one, is because these are not separate languages.
> Unfortunately, many people have formed their impression of > what the suffix "-oid" means from movies and television, so [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > : something resembling a (specified) object or having > a (specified) quality *globoid* I am familiar with the suffix -oid in mathematics e.g. spheroid and cuboid. I am not aware of any standard meaning. Different authors may define an Xoid as they wish. But frequently it will be something that is nearly but not quite an X. The -oids are usually inferior versions of their oidless relatives. You do not need to watch sci-fi to regard -oid as a negative suffix.
I find it an ugly name and I would not like it.
> The many varieties of World English resemble the language of > the English people but are not the same as it, so the suffix > "-oid" applies very well. > > I suppose "Engloid" would be another possibility. No better.
I vote for calling the language English and my variety English English. Further qualifiers e.g. Southern English English could be added when required. I don't even see a problem with the phrase non-English English when there is a need to address all other varieties. Maybe it is not perfect but there are more important problems to solve.
A similar issue applies to Spanish. I have not met any Spaniards who object to Latin Americans calling their language Spanish.
Ditto Chinese or French.
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
Bob Cunningham - 02 Dec 2004 17:07 GMT [...]
> But if it is restricted to England then I would prefer > English English. I sense a reluctance among many > non-British English speakers to use this term. Five years or so ago when I wrote "English English" in alt.usage.english there were some highly indignant responses from Englandish posters. They thought it was ridiculous. Apparently to them "English" was the language of England and was the one variety of English that didn't need a qualifier.
I referred them to David Crystal's _Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language_, in which a long list of varieties of English is given, one of which is "English English".
He has (on page 111) a category British English, under which are BBC English, English English, Scottish English, Scots, Norn, Welsh English, Ulster Scots, Hiberno-English etc.
My understanding is that his inclusion of Norn under British English is an error, since Norn is more closely related to Scandinavian languages than to English. (See http://www.orkneyjar.com/orkney/norn.htm .)
About his "etc": He has it following every one of the subcategory lists. It seems to indicate that in every main category there are other, lesser subcategories that could be mentioned but have not been.
allan connochie - 03 Dec 2004 10:10 GMT > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Scandinavian languages than to English. (See > http://www.orkneyjar.com/orkney/norn.htm .) Norn isn't spoken anymore and hasn't been for several centuries AFAIK. What is spoken in the Northern Isles is regarded as a dialect of Scots heavily influenced by Norn.
Allan
Sean O'Leathlobhair - 03 Dec 2004 11:33 GMT > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Apparently to them "English" was the language of England and > was the one variety of English that didn't need a qualifier. I was not around here five years ago so I missed that. It surprises me. So far Alan also fails to feel this injustice and no one has said that they do. Any more English out there with opinions either way?
I think that overusing the phrase English English may cause confusion or irritation. For example I would never say: "I speak English English", I simply say: "I speak English". If someone unfamiliar with English English comments on my accent or usage then I add: "I am from England".
But in a linguistic context while discussing varieties of English, it certainly would be the term I would prefer. I think that British English is overused. Use both terms but use the appropriate one for the feature you are discussing.
> I referred them to David Crystal's _Cambridge Encyclopedia > of the English Language_, in which a long list of varieties [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > are BBC English, English English, Scottish English, Scots, > Norn, Welsh English, Ulster Scots, Hiberno-English etc. I failed to find that list in my copy. Certainly it is not on page 111 or nearby but I may have a different edition. In which chapter is the list? The problem with that book is that once I open it, I get distracted by lots of other interesting articles.
But if he classes British English as a category of English and English English as a sub-category of that, then I am happy with that. As I said before, I don't object to either term, just to their inappropriate use.
> My understanding is that his inclusion of Norn under British > English is an error, since Norn is more closely related to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > category there are other, lesser subcategories that could be > mentioned but have not been. That seems reasonable. It would be rash to claim that any such list was exhaustive.
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
Alan Smaill - 03 Dec 2004 15:07 GMT >> [...] >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > me. So far Alan also fails to feel this injustice and no one has said > that they do. Any more English out there with opinions either way? I should say that I am not English, in case anyone gets the wrong impression; but some of my best friends etc. etc.
 Signature Alan Smaill
Sean O'Leathlobhair - 04 Dec 2004 10:43 GMT > >> [...] > >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > I should say that I am not English, in case anyone gets > the wrong impression; but some of my best friends etc. etc. I understand. I am only English when I chose to be. Other times I am Irish. I have tried being Filipino but I am not very convincing. One reason for choosing a nationality is in order to take offence. So when anti-Irish sentiments are expressed I am Irish but when there are anti-English remarks I am English.
This is just in jest; part of the purpose of my flip-flopping between nationalities is to mock racism.
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
the Omrud - 03 Dec 2004 15:15 GMT Sean O'Leathlobhair typed thus:
> > [...] > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > me. So far Alan also fails to feel this injustice and no one has said > that they do. Any more English out there with opinions either way? I am English even unto the sixth generation (or possibly more - I haven't researched enough yet) and have used the term "English English" recently myself. It holds no offence for me.
 Signature David ===== replace the first component of address with the definite article.
Bob Cunningham - 03 Dec 2004 17:06 GMT [...]
> > I referred them to David Crystal's _Cambridge Encyclopedia > > of the English Language_, in which a long list of varieties > > of English is given, one of which is "English English".
> > He has (on page 111) a category British English, under which > > are BBC English, English English, Scottish English, Scots, > > Norn, Welsh English, Ulster Scots, Hiberno-English etc.
> I failed to find that list in my copy. There has been at least one incident in the past where someone was unaware that David Crystal has two books with similar titles: _Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language_ and _Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language_. The one I referred to is the latter.
I see now that Amazon has a _Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language Canadian Edition_. I'm curious to know how that differs from the original book. Amazon doesn't provide any publisher's comments or reader reviews for that edition.
> Certainly it is not on page 111 or nearby but I may have > a different edition. In which chapter is the list? It's in Chapter 7, entitled "World English" (pages 93-115). The list on page 111 I mentioned is entitled "The Circle of World English". I would find it quite surprising if it had been omitted from later editions.
Incidentally, to see if you have a later edition than mine look on page 138, in a block labeled "Cowboy", for the phrase
a factory worker who does more than the peace-work norms set by his union or fellow workers
Also, see http://www.exw6sxq.com/sparky/cowboy/cowboy.gif . I put that GIF on my Web site at a time when some alt.usage.english posters seemed unwilling to believe that David Crystal had written the phrase.
I would expect the lapse to have been corrected in later editions, if there have been any later editions. I bought my copy soon after the book was released in 1995, so it's presumably a first edition.
John Lawler - 04 Dec 2004 01:11 GMT >jwlawler@yahoo.com (Sean O'Leathlobhair) says: >> Bob Cunningham <exw6sxq@earthlink.net> writes
>[...]
>> > I referred them to David Crystal's _Cambridge Encyclopedia >> > of the English Language_, in which a long list of varieties >> > of English is given, one of which is "English English".
>> > He has (on page 111) a category British English, under which >> > are BBC English, English English, Scottish English, Scots, >> > Norn, Welsh English, Ulster Scots, Hiberno-English etc.
>> I failed to find that list in my copy.
>There has been at least one incident in the past where >someone was unaware that David Crystal has two books with >similar titles: _Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language_ and >_Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language_. The one I >referred to is the latter.
>I see now that Amazon has a _Cambridge Encyclopedia of the >English Language Canadian Edition_. I'm curious to know how >that differs from the original book. Amazon doesn't provide >any publisher's comments or reader reviews for that edition.
>> Certainly it is not on page 111 or nearby but I may have >> a different edition. In which chapter is the list?
>It's in Chapter 7, entitled "World English" (pages 93-115). >The list on page 111 I mentioned is entitled "The Circle of >World English". I would find it quite surprising if it had >been omitted from later editions. It's on page 111 in the 2nd Edition (Copyright 2003).
>Incidentally, to see if you have a later edition than mine >look on page 138, in a block labeled "Cowboy", for the >phrase
> a factory worker who does more than the peace-work > norms set by his union or fellow workers
>Also, see http://www.exw6sxq.com/sparky/cowboy/cowboy.gif . >I put that GIF on my Web site at a time when some >alt.usage.english posters seemed unwilling to believe that >David Crystal had written the phrase.
>I would expect the lapse to have been corrected in later >editions, if there have been any later editions. I bought >my copy soon after the book was released in 1995, so it's >presumably a first edition. It's been corrected to 'piece-work' in the 2nd edition.
-John Lawler http://www.umich.edu/~jlawler U Michigan Linguistics Dept ------------------------------------------------------------------------- "It is a wise crow that knows which way the camel points" -Terry Pratchett
Sean O'Leathlobhair - 04 Dec 2004 10:55 GMT > >jwlawler@yahoo.com (Sean O'Leathlobhair) says: > >> Bob Cunningham <exw6sxq@earthlink.net> writes [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > "It is a wise crow that knows which way the camel points" -Terry Pratchett Is Crystal well regarded by professional linguists? If so his books are a remarkable achievement since they are also easy and enjoyable to read for the amateur.
This seems to be in contrast to Bryson whose books are also fun and easy to read but do not seem to be well regarded. I have learnt to take Bryson's remarks as an indication of something worth looking into but not strong evidence by themselves.
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
John Lawler - 04 Dec 2004 13:13 GMT >Is Crystal well regarded by professional linguists? If so his books >are a remarkable achievement since they are also easy and enjoyable to >read for the amateur. Absolutely. He *is* a professional linguist, and he's won a prize from the Linguistic Society of America for best linguistics book. And I agree about his books.
>This seems to be in contrast to Bryson whose books are also fun and >easy to read but do not seem to be well regarded. I have learnt to >take Bryson's remarks as an indication of something worth looking into >but not strong evidence by themselves. I'm very fond of (and respect) Bryson's recent work, especially "A Short History of Practically Everything". But his earlier works on English are not up to the standard of Crystal's, and betray a certain ignorance of facts, and confusion between fact and opinion about language. Though he *is* a fine writer.
-John Lawler http://www.umich.edu/~jlawler U Michigan Linguistics Dept ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "But do we know how to welcome into our mother tongue the distant echoes that reverberate in the hollow centers of words? When reading words, we see them and no longer hear them." -- Gaston Bachelard
Sean O'Leathlobhair - 05 Dec 2004 10:00 GMT > >Is Crystal well regarded by professional linguists? If so his books > >are a remarkable achievement since they are also easy and enjoyable to [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > betray a certain ignorance of facts, and confusion between > fact and opinion about language. Though he *is* a fine writer. I am also very fond of Bryson. His books are some of the funniest that I have ever read. I particularly like his observations on the British. They can be exaggerated but I don't know anyone that has been offended by them. It is quite an art to write a humorous account of a country which is well received within as well as outside the country.
But it is this group that has taught me to be cautious of his linguistic claims. If I read something by Crystal, I believe it until there is good evidence not to do so. With Bryson, I wait for some independent confirmation.
> -John Lawler http://www.umich.edu/~jlawler U Michigan Linguistics Dept > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > "But do we know how to welcome into our mother tongue the distant echoes > that reverberate in the hollow centers of words? When reading words, > we see them and no longer hear them." -- Gaston Bachelard Seán O'Leathlóbhair
flink - 13 Dec 2004 23:56 GMT Cumbric Place-Names
> A > Adam a Cove: nr. Upha Fell, Cu., this place-name contains a late Cumbric [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Aberruthven: nr. Auchterrarder, Scot., cf. W. aber rudd faen & Corn. Aber > ruth ven (conflux red stone). The spelling of Aber-ruth-ven is identical to
> Cornish. > Arthuret: Cu., Armterid c.573 (Annals Cambrica), Arturet c. 1190. > Ashton-in-Makerfield: La., Ashton c.1225, cf. Ince-in-Makerfield; cf. W. > magwyr & Corn. Magor (a wall or ancient ruin). Maker is archaic, see > Egglesfield for reconstruction as *mager. > Aspatria: Cu., Aspatric c.1230, a Norse-Cumbric hybrid, askr Patric (Patrick
> 's ash tree). This is a place-name that has preserved an instance of Cumbric
> grammar. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > diphthong ai corresponded to the Welsh diphthong oe, hence RC* caith for > Welsh coed. This is verified by the Scottish place-name Caithness. Cf. coed,
> cos, and caith in Welsh, Cornish, and Cumbric, which indicates that the > Prythinic final T became D in Welsh, S in Cornish, and Th in Cumbric. > Birdoswald: Cu., Borddoswald c.1200, cf. W. buarth (cow fold or dairy), cf.
> Burtholm. Note the dd, which is negated in the place-name Burtholm. > Birkby: Cu., Brethesco c.1203, Breta skogr, Briton's wood, cf. Briscow > Blawith: Cu., Blawit c.1276, cf. .W. blaedd wydd & Corn. blyth with (wolf > wood). The morpheme "bla" follows Welsh blaedd whereas the morpheme "with" > follows Cornish. This would reconstruct as *blaiwith from *blai and with. It
> is becoming increasingly obvious that Cumbric shares features common to both
> Welsh and Cornish. > Blencarn: Cu., Blencarne c.1159, Blenecarn c.1210, Blencarn c.1211, cf. W. > blaen y carn & Corn. blyn an carn (summit of the burial mound), et alia W. > blaen carn & Corn. blyn carn (burial mound's summit). > Blencathra: Cu., Blenkarthure c.1589, cf. W. blaen cader (chair summit). The
> alternative name for this mountain is Saddleback. The morpheme "blen" > corresponds to Welsh blen and Cornish blyn, The Reconsctructed Cumbric (RC)
> spelling is *blain. Note the spelling of the morpheme *cathra > Blencogo: Cu.: Blenecogou c.1292, cf. W. blaen y cogau & Corn. blyn an [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > the Welsh diphthong ou, hence *cogow. > Blencow: Cu., Blenkhaw c.1254, a hybrid Cumbric and Norse place-name, *blain
> haugr (hill top). > Blennerhasset: Cu., Blennerhaiseta c. 1188, a hybrid Cumbric and Norse > place-name, *blain yr haisetr (crest of the hay field). Not only does this > place-name preserve an element of Cumbric grammar, but it also demonstrates
> the ease with which Cumbric was able to adopt words from other languages. > Blindcrake: Cu., Blenecrayc c.1268, cf.W. blaen y craig (summit of the > rock). Note the spelling of the morpheme crayc, which reconstructs as > *craic. > Brant Fell: York., a hybrid Cumbric and Norse place-name meaning steep hill.
> The word brant, var. brent, has survived in Yorkshire dialect. Cf. W. braint
> (noble). Note that the Welsh diphthong ai is replaced by a in brant. The > dialect word brant, together with its variant brent, is an example of the [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > stream). N.B. note the lenition of glais in the Cumbric place-name. > Camerton: Cu., Camerton c.1150, cf. W. cymmer (conflux). N.B. lack of umlaut
> in the Cumbric place-name. > Capledre: Lochere in Linlithgow, cf. W. ceffyl dre (horse town). N.B. > cappel is also a dialect word. > Capplerigg: Cu., see Capledre above. > Caraverick: Cu., Caraverick c.1150, it is the name of a lost settlement in
> the Leath Ward of Cumberland, cf.W. caer efrog (farmhouse surrounded by > cowslips): N.B. *efric, but note the change of initial short e to short a, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Donatus) also Dintsmere in Chs. (boundary of Donatus). Dinting: Chs. > Duntinge c.1226 (place of Donatus): Dinthill: Shrews Dunthull c. 1299 (hill
> of Donatus). > Cardurnock: Cu., Cardrunnoke c.1386, cf. W. caer *durenog (pebbly > farmhouse), W. duren (pebble, flint, steel). N.B. the disappearance of short
> E between the consonants R and D, hence early Cumbric *cair durenoc and late
> Cumbric cair durnoc. > Carfrae: Lauderdale in Berwickshire, cf. W. caer fre. N.B. lenition of bre,
> also F is pronounced as FF, hence early Cumbric *cair fre and late Cumbric > *cair ffre. > Cargo: Cu., cf. W. and Nor., careg haugr, cf. W. careg (stone) and Nor. > haugr (hill). N.B. the disappearance of short E between the consonants R and
> G, note also the spelling of late Combric*carc and *carg before the > consonant H of haugr. > Cark: Yorks., Karke c. 1491, cf. W. careg (stone). N.B. the disappearance of
> short E between the consonants R and C, hence early Cumbric *carec and late
> Cumbric *carc. > Carekin: Yorks., Karrecan c. 1200, Kercan c. 1200, cf.W. careg can (white > stone). N.B. note the disappearance of short E between the consonants R and
> C in the second version, hence *carec can and *car-can. > Carletton: Cu., Carlatun c.1186 (Latton's farmhouse)., *cair Latton. > Carnetley: Cu., Carnthelaue c.1230 (burial mound of Teilo). Teilo was an > early British saint, cf. W. Llandeilo. N.B. aspirate mutation of Teilo. > Carnwath: Lanarkshire, Karnewid c. 1179, Carnewithe c. 1315, Carnewith > c.1451, cf.W. carn y gwydd (burial mound of trees), cf. Corn., carn y gwyth.
> Carrick: Wst., dial., currock and currick meaning a cairn or heap of stones,
> also Carrick in Scotland. > Carrock Fell: Cu., Carroc c.1208, cf. W. caerog (fenced, walled, or [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > castel cairoc, cf. W. castell caerog (fortified castle). > Castle Hewin: Cu., Castelewyne c.1272, Castle Hewin c.1794, cf. medieval W.
> castell Eugein, cf. W. Castell Owain. This refers to the castle of Eugenius
> Caesarius, who was a king of Cumbria who drove out the English and restored
> Romano-British rule in the North West of England. Early Cumbric *Castel > Euwein. [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > 1. The Gender of Nouns > Nouns and adjectives in modern P-Celtic languages are not declined. All that
> remains is gender. There were originally three genders, masculine, feminine,
> and neuter. Nouns belonging to the neuter gender passed either into the masc
> uline or the feminine genders according to the similarity of neuter endings.
> Consequentially a word may be masculine in Cymraeg and feminine in Kernewek.
> The general rule is to follow the usage of Cumraeg. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > iii. By vowel mutation and the addition of suffixes. > iv. By aggregate plurals from which singulars are formed by the addition of
> diminutive suffixes. > > A number of Cumbric plurals have survived, for example the plural suffix -ow
> has survived in the place-name Blencogo and the suffix -eth or -ydd has > survived in the place name Werneth Low in Cheshire and in Warren Burn. > (which was Warnet circa 1157). There is also an example of vowel mutation in
> the place-name Tranant, which was earlier transcribed as Trevernent, which > is to say *tref yr nent, meaning Village of the Narrow Valleys. Also in > Cheshire the dialect word moghin, meaning a pig, represents an aggregate > containing a diminutive plural, i.e. mochyn from *moch. From this it may be
> surmised that the plurals of Cumbric nouns and adjectives were the same, if
> not similar, to those found in Cymraeg. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Cumbric place-name Tarnmonath contains the element "monath", which means a > mountain or heath. The cognate Welsh word is mynydd, the Cornish is meneth.
> Prythonic Long O: Prythonic long O remained unchanged in Cumbric but in > Welsh, Cornish, and Breton became the diphthong OU (spelt O)
> > >Is Crystal well regarded by professional linguists? If so his books > > >are a remarkable achievement since they are also easy and enjoyable to [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > Seán O'Leathlóbhair Michilín - 04 Dec 2004 18:08 GMT >> >jwlawler@yahoo.com (Sean O'Leathlobhair) says: >> >> Bob Cunningham <exw6sxq@earthlink.net> writes [quoted text clipped - 65 lines] > >Seán O'Leathlóbhair Great surname!
Michilín
Sean O'Leathlobhair - 05 Dec 2004 09:47 GMT <snip>
> >Seán O'Leathlóbhair > > Great surname! > > Michilín I am glad that you like it. Outside the groups, I am normally called John Lawler but this is liable to cause confusion in the groups since there is another John Lawler. After some debate and experimentation, I settled on the original Irish form of my name as my nom-de-clavier. Some confusion occasionally arises despite this due to my e-mail address. Every now and then I have to say: "I am not John Lawler".
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
Not exw6sxq2 - 05 Dec 2004 14:13 GMT [...]
> Outside the groups, I am normally called John Lawler > but this is liable to cause confusion in the groups [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > address. Every now and then I have to say: "I am not > John Lawler". The first time I saw your "From:" line I thought you *were* Professor Lawler, using a playful Gaelic translation of *his* name. You could make the disclaimer automatic by changing your default "From:" line to
jwlawler@yahoo.com (Not Professor John Lawler)
(like I've changed mine for this message) and still sign your messages "Sean O'Leathlobhair". If you're also a professor you could think of a different automatic disclaimer on the "From:" line.
By the way, I mentally pronounce your nom de clavier as [o'li:TlA:b,hEr] ("owe LEETH lahb Hair"). I probably wouldn't be able to say the correct Gaelic pronunciation, but what would be close?
 Signature Bob Cunningham, Southern California, USofA
Down with Miss Thistlebottom: Let's hear it for "like" as a conjunction!
Michilín - 05 Dec 2004 17:27 GMT >[...] > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >wouldn't be able to say the correct Gaelic pronunciation, >but what would be close? Earlier I wrote that I was amused by your name. The reason was that in Scots Gaelic it translates as "semi-leper" and as Scots and Irish Gaelic are for all intents and purposes mutually intelligible, I assumed it was an Irish witticism.
Michilín
jwlawler@yahoo.com - 06 Dec 2004 09:18 GMT <snip>
> Earlier I wrote that I was amused by your name. The reason was that in > Scots Gaelic it translates as "semi-leper" and as Scots and Irish > Gaelic are for all intents and purposes mutually intelligible, I > assumed it was an Irish witticism. I normally translate it as "half a leper". I can imagine myself in a Monty Python film: "Alms for half a leper".
It may have originally been a witticism but if so, my distant ancestors deserve the credit rather than me. I don't know what the half signifies: was one of my ancestors the child of a leper or was he suspected of leprosy?
The name is most commonly anglicised as Lawlor but Lawler and Lalor are used by some.
> Michilín Seán O'Leathlóbhair (One of at least two John Lawlers in the group)
Michilín - 15 Dec 2004 15:43 GMT >Michil=EDn wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >I normally translate it as "half a leper". I can imagine myself in a >Monty Python film: "Alms for half a leper". Halfpennies?
>It may have originally been a witticism but if so, my distant ancestors >deserve the credit rather than me. I don't know what the half [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >The name is most commonly anglicised as Lawlor but Lawler and Lalor are >used by some. It almost looks like a variant of lawyer.
>> Michil=EDn >Se=E1n O'Leathl=F3bhair >(One of at least two John Lawlers in the group) Michilín
jwlawler@yahoo.com - 16 Dec 2004 10:34 GMT > >Michil=EDn wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Halfpennies? I expect that with a half-baked begging line, I can only expect half-pennies.
> >It may have originally been a witticism but if so, my distant ancestors > >deserve the credit rather than me. I don't know what the half [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > It almost looks like a variant of lawyer. When I was a kid and I was asked about the origin of my name, I would sometimes be embarrassed to give the leper story and would say that it was a corruption of lawyer. These days, I don't get embarrassed so easily and give the real story. Sometimes I translate the O as "son of" to get the even more silly sounding "son of half a leper".
An interesting thing about this name is that Sassenachs never realise that it is an Irish name (no O') but other Irish usually do. In Irish, the O prefix is almost universal for men (unless they are Mac) but it seems arbitrary whether it is retained in the anglicised forms. Some names (almost) always do e.g. O'Hara, some are common both ways e.g. Riley but I have never met an O'Lawler.
> >> Michil=EDn > >Se=E1n O'Leathl=F3bhair > >(One of at least two John Lawlers in the group) Something, maybe the new Google groups, is doing odd things to the accented characters in our names. Also I gave it Sean O'Leathlobhair as my nickname but it does not consistently use it. I left the accents out of the nickname since they have always caused problems. I leave them in the signature since they usually work there. I know that I could get a proper newsreader and specify character sets in my messages but I can't be bothered.
> Michilín Seán O'Leathlóbhair
Michilín - 16 Dec 2004 14:58 GMT >Michil=EDn wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > >Se=E1n O'Leathl=F3bhair I post in Gaelic and French as well as in English and many people speakers do not bother with accents as native speakers know how to pronounce the appropriate words anyway or can choose the correct one from personal knowledge. Gaelic has a few words where the accent changes the meaning, like bata - a stick; bàta (ba\ta) pronounced with a long vowel - a boat.
Gaelic is one of the most ingenious languages around in terms of its orthography as there are some 60 sounds to be covered by 18 letters and with a few rare exceptions, mostly because of the abolition of the acute accent is phonetic. English, with 40 sounds and 26 letters is a complete dog's breakfast by comparison.
Indeed English is the only non-phonetic language I can think of, although I now hesitate to describe it as a language, concluding that it is really a jargon or pidgin language like the Pidgin languages in south east Asia or the North American trade languages like Chinook.
Inuktituk (Eskimo), being agglutinative like Turkish, is a bit frightening at first glance and most native North American languages with the exception of Lakota and related languages have been made phonetic with the help of some very daunting-looking phonetics.
For example, Squamish, a Salishan language is spoken in Vancouver where I live and taught in native schools. Here are the pronunciation directions for a beginner.
Notes: Because of the fact that the Squamish language is a spoken language, several different written forms have been used to record and express the language on paper. The orthography used in this dictionary is based on the following rules.
1) There are 42 distinct and meaningful sounds
2) Sixteen of these can be represented by characters from the English alphabet
3) The character <7> (number seven) is used to indicate a glottal stop, which literally means a momentary closing of the glottis at the back of the throat (ex. say the letter <k>... the very first part of that action is a glottal stop)
4) an apostrophe represents an audible emphasis (or 'exploded' emphasis according to the dictionary's author); if it appears above a character, it is weakly emphasized; if it appears after the character, it is strongly emphasized; for the purposes of displaying this through Google Answers, I will use an apostrophe character, <'>, where it means strongly exploded; and, I will use a doublequote character <"> where it means weakly exploded (ex. if the character is the letter <a> with an apostrophe above it, I will show it here as <a">)
5) an underscore appearing under a character represents a guttural sound; for the purposes of displaying this through Google Answers, I will use an underscore character immediately following the underlined character (ex. if the underlined character is the letter <c>, I will show it here as <c_>, which you should read as 'an underlined c')
6) The letter <w> appearing after a <k> or an <x> means that the preceding character is sounded using rounded lips.
In addition to these stated rules in the dictionary, I also noted the use of a comma diacritical over some 'consonants' (as in, consonants from the English alphabet). I believe that this denotes a shortened sound. I will use a comma character <,> immediately following the character to denote this (ex. if the comma diacritical appears about the letter <w> it will appear here as <w,>).
Here is a wordlist:
outside - ats'k_ earth - temi"xw world - k_"ek_"si"n ti siya"t-shen small - etsi"m (used when referring to an object only) big - hiyi" rock - smant rocks - smenma"nt island - skwetsa"s
Many Squamish have Hawai'ian last names like Nahanni as in the 19th century many Hawai'ians worked as seamen (and were called Kanakas) and in the Vancouver of those days, were prohibited from cohabitating with white women, so married natives.
The Squamish Indian you would most likely have heard of is Chief Dan George of "Big Little Man" fame. He was a lovely man and much respected here by both whites and natives - we went to his funeral and the police estimated that over 10,000 people turned out.
He was talking to my wife once, accompanied by a chief called Ernie Philip from the Shushwap, an upcountry tribe. Dan George asked her if she knew how the word "confusion" was interpreted by natives. She said she didn't, and the old chief was overcome with laughter but finally managed to gasp, "Father's Day on Ernie's reserve!" at which we all burst into laughter, led by Ernie!
Michilín
jwlawler@yahoo.com - 16 Dec 2004 18:25 GMT In the context, a pseudonym for the groups, the accents in my name are not very important. I retain them for the perverse reason that they make the name even more exotic.
I am reasonably used to French without accents. I sometimes e-mail a French friend in French and it is not easy to type the accents so I just omit them. Usually she replies in proper French since she is normally in France with a French keyboard but she does the same when she does not have a French keyboard. If I must type proper French on an English keyboard, I use Word and run the French spelling and grammar checker which inserts most (but not all) accents correctly.
I am not familiar with Scots Gaelic but I don't find Irish spelling easy. Ingenious possibly but not easy.
English is a mess but I don't think that it is as bad as often portrayed. There are more spelling rules then most people realise and most of the really silly spellings are among common words. How often can you not pronounce an unfamiliar English word? If the answer is seldom or never, then English must be reasonably phonetic.
I am not an expert but I expect that English could be described as a creole (*) since its modern form is a blend of the original Anglo-Saxon, French and various other things.
(*) I say creole rather than pidgin since some speakers have grown up with it as their native tongue.
Anyway, are creoles and pidgins necessarily bad? The same could be said of other languages and some may only escape because records don't go far enough back to answer the question. Which languages are pure and why does it matter?
Another language which should have accents but rarely does is Tagalog. The official spelling has three accents which look like the French acute, grave and circumflex except any of them may appear on any vowel and their meanings are quite different. Acute indicates stress (in Spanish style, only where it is not standard), grave indicates a following glottal stop (if it is not automatic for other reasons), and circumflex means both of these. However they are rarely used. There are some ambiguities as a result but they don't cause significant problems to natives.
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
Raymond S. Wise - 16 Dec 2004 22:13 GMT > In the context, a pseudonym for the groups, the accents in my name are > not very important. I retain them for the perverse reason that they [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > go far enough back to answer the question. Which languages are pure > and why does it matter? Pidgins are bad only in the sense that they are not complete languages, able to accomplish everything their speakers need to accomplish, as creoles are. Of course, a pidgin is a better lingua franca than no lingua franca at all.
The idea that English is a creole language is an intriguing one, as is the idea that modern Hebrew (Ivrit) is a creole. However, from what I have read, most linguists have concluded that neither is a creole language.
Michilín referred to Chinook as a jargon, but Chinook is an American Indian language. There is a pidgin based upon it which Ethnologue.com identifies as "Chinook Wawa," also known as "Chinook Jargon" and "Chinook Pidgin."
See http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=CRW
This use of "jargon" is one which is now almost completely unknown in English (well, American English, anyway). It's one of the older meanings of the term. The following is from *The Century Dictionary,* an American Dictionary of 1895:
[quote]
*1.* Confused, unintelligible talk ; irregular, formless speech or language ; gabble ; gibberish ; babble.
[...]
Specifically*--2.* A barbarous mixed speech, without literary monuments ; a rude language resulting from the mixture of two or more dis- cordant languages, especially of a cultivated language with a barbarous one : as, the Chinook _jargon ;_ the _jargon_ called Pidgin-English.
[end quote]
I expect that "jargon" was used at the time when speaking of both pidgins and creoles, the concept that a creole was a fully-formed, grammatical language, much different from a pidgin, having not yet been understood. As you indicated, English would be a creole, not a pidgin, if it was considered to be a mixed language in the same sense that a creole language is. The "without literary monuments" would not apply to it, of course, but the same is probably true of some of the languages which we know to be creole languages, such as the creole version of Tok Pisin (which is said to exist in both a pidgin and a creole form).
> Another language which should have accents but rarely does is Tagalog. > The official spelling has three accents which look like the French [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Seán O'Leathlóbhair
 Signature Raymond S. Wise Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
jwlawler@yahoo.com - 17 Dec 2004 09:59 GMT <snip>
> > I am not an expert but I expect that English could be described as a > > creole (*) since its modern form is a blend of the original [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > to accomplish everything their speakers need to accomplish, as creoles are. > Of course, a pidgin is a better lingua franca than no lingua franca at all. Are pidgins necessarily incomplete or is it just that they may be? Are there any lingua francas which are no one's native language which are complete? Would they fail to qualify as pidgins just because of that? Or is it just inconceivable that a pidgin could become complete without becoming a creole first?
> The idea that English is a creole language is an intriguing one, as is the > idea that modern Hebrew (Ivrit) is a creole. However, from what I have read, > most linguists have concluded that neither is a creole language. I have not looked into this before but I may do so now. Do you remember some of the reasons that English is not regarded as a creole? It has had tremendous influence from other languages. Is it that the grammar is basically Germanic and there is still a substantial stock of Germanic vocabulary? Is it that the other influences were mostly also Indo-European? Is it just that it has been stable for quite a long time and has shaken off its creole status. Or is it the literature (see below)?
> Michilín referred to Chinook as a jargon, but Chinook is an American Indian > language. There is a pidgin based upon it which Ethnologue.com identifies as [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > languages, such as the creole version of Tok Pisin (which is said to exist > in both a pidgin and a creole form). Jargon has a new meaning that is so well established that care would be needed to use it with the old sense. The modern use of jargon seems quite appropriate to me.
I did not realise that "without literary monuments" was a feature of a creole. If we dropped this requirement might English qualify as a creole? If Tok Pisin developed a substantial literature, would it cease to be a creole?
Another way of asking my question above is: how could Tok Pisin shake off its creole status? Develop a substantial literature, just wait a few hundred years, develop mass amnesia with regard to its origins?
<snip>
> > Seán O'Leathlóbhair > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com P.S. Do you go to Rochester often? I have been to Minneapolis just once but I have been to Rochester many times.
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
Raymond S. Wise - 17 Dec 2004 11:09 GMT > <snip> > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > that? Or is it just inconceivable that a pidgin could become complete > without becoming a creole first? It looks like it must be a matter of definition to me: If it isn't a complete language, it's not a creole language. John McWhorter, in *The Power of Babel,* identifies Tok Pisin as a pidgin which became a creole as the result of changes made by adults (unlike the case with most creoles, which are created by children). However, Steven Pinker (on page 33 of *The Language Instinct*) doesn't identify Tok Pisin as a creole language, but he does say that it increased in complexity over many decades, and followed that statement by contrasting that situation with the creation of a creole by children "in one fell swoop." He says "The language that results when children make a pidgin their native tongue is called a creole." So on the definition of "creole," those two linguists disagree, and it looks as if Pinker would not consider Tok Pisin to be a creole. I wonder if Pinker considers Tok Pisin to be a pidgin but nevertheless a complete language.
>> The idea that English is a creole language is an intriguing one, as >> is the idea that modern Hebrew (Ivrit) is a creole. However, from [quoted text clipped - 63 lines] > off its creole status? Develop a substantial literature, just wait a > few hundred years, develop mass amnesia with regard to its origins? The business about literature is no part of linguists' definition of a creole language, which depends instead upon how the language originated. Linguists usually don't consider writing to be a part of a language anyway: It's a sort of code for representing a language, rather than a language in its own right. It was people prior to the time of modern linguistics who identified a "jargon" or a "patois" as a language which did not have a literature, and I have some French friends who still hold what I consider to be some rather curious beliefs about, and who make what I consider to be some curious distinctions between, minority dialects and languages in France, based upon this old-fashioned distinction.
Of course, "standard dialects," the prestige dialects used in government and by the media and taught in schools, do have written forms, and that makes me question whether the sign languages of the world (which can be considered "visual creoles") can be said to have any standard dialects, since they do not yet have any written forms which are used by native speakers, but only some sorts of transcription of interest only to linguists studying those languages.
> <snip> > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Seán O'Leathlóbhair I doubt that I've ever been there. I don't believe I've been there as an adult, and when I was a kid and my family drove up here from Illinois on vacation we usually avoided anything but the smallest towns, so I doubt we visited Rochester then.
 Signature Raymond S. Wise Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
Michilín - 17 Dec 2004 16:55 GMT ><snip> > [quoted text clipped - 99 lines] >creole? If Tok Pisin developed a substantial literature, would it >cease to be a creole? Does "without literary monuments" mean "unwritten cultural momuments"? I come form an oral tradtion and here in Western Canada I live among another oral tradition (native Canadian)
Both are recognised by the legal systems of their respective countries (Scotland and Canada) as complete and accurate records, as both cultures adhere to the principle that any deviation from the original invalidates the whole.
(Like Hindu prayers, which are invalid unless perfectly pronounced, which is why Sanskrit is the only ancient language for which we have a complete record of how to pronounce it exactly as it was pronounced 5,000 years ago.)
>Another way of asking my question above is: how could Tok Pisin shake >off its creole status? Develop a substantial literature, just wait a >few hundred years, develop mass amnesia with regard to its origins? By Tok Pisin, I assume we are discussing NiuGini TokTok? My favourite was the phrase for the plumes attached to the Governor-General's tricorne hat - "himpela grass bilonga cockatoo's arse". Himpela mixmaster was a pretty neat description of a helicopter, I thought.
Chinook wawa would be very like NiuGini TokTok if you understood the native and French elements.
>> -- >> Raymond S. Wise [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Se=E1n O'Leathl=F3bhair Michilín
Michilín - 17 Dec 2004 16:34 GMT >> In the context, a pseudonym for the groups, the accents in my name are >> not very important. I retain them for the perverse reason that they [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] >language. There is a pidgin based upon it which Ethnologue.com identifies as >"Chinook Wawa," also known as "Chinook Jargon" and "Chinook Pidgin." Yeah, sorry about being careless with the phraseology - many older people here still understand and can speak Chinook Wawa, probably more than can speak the Chinook language on which the jargon is based.
Here are a couple of examples using the numerals, 1-10:
Chinook Jargon:
ikt mokst klone sapolill kwinnum toghum sinamoxt stotekin kwaist tahtlelum
Lower Chinook Language:
e:xt môkct Lo:n la'kit qui'nEm tE'xEm si'namôkct kstô'xkin kui'tst ta:'-Le:lam
Upper Chinook Language:
iht moht thlun lakit kwinum tuhum sinimoht kwilh kweist yath-luli-hum
The jargon itself is a mix of mostly Chinook, a little English, a lot of French. Many place names from Oregon to British Columbia are Chinook and many older white people on both sides of the US/Canada border still use jargon words in ordinary speech.
For example, skookum chuck means waterfall or fast river (lit. strong water), while salt chuck means sea. Thus, skookum house (jail).
Cultus means worthless. I live about 60 miles form Cultus Lake which had nio fish, thus the name until stocked recently with salmon fry.
Tum means heartbeat, leading to tumtum; friend. Mika nika kloashe tumtum = you are my good (close) friend. Tillicum means "a people" and is a place name. Klahowya - Hi there!
You can fill your boots here!
http://www.fortlangley.ca/Chinook%20Jargon/lord.html
>See >http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=CRW [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] >> >> Seán O'Leathlóbhair Michilín
Michilín - 17 Dec 2004 16:16 GMT >In the context, a pseudonym for the groups, the accents in my name are >not very important. I retain them for the perverse reason that they >make the name even more exotic. I was raised in a different society and I was taught to regard a missing accent as a misspelling or the sign of an illiterate. I think most cultures feel that way, as witness your French friend who uses them meticulously. However, I notice that in the French groups, some French people use them, some don't and the same is true for the Quebec groups where accents are used even less. Again, this seems to indicate a lower level (or lack of) education.
>I am reasonably used to French without accents. I sometimes e-mail a >French friend in French and it is not easy to type the accents so I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >I am not familiar with Scots Gaelic but I don't find Irish spelling >easy. Ingenious possibly but not easy. It really isn't difficult; like English it looks more daunting than it actually is. My God, if culchies can learn it, surely you can!
>English is a mess but I don't think that it is as bad as often >portrayed. There are more spelling rules then most people realise and >most of the really silly spellings are among common words. How often >can you not pronounce an unfamiliar English word? If the answer is >seldom or never, then English must be reasonably phonetic. Hmm. I remember sitting one day with a man who was reading an English newspaper but who was not a native English speaker. Suddenly he said, "There's been a murder of a girl in Epping Forest." (a wooded area outside London, England). A moment later he said, "She was naykt!"
I tore the paper from his hands - a new vice I had not yet tried!
It said "naked".
I must confess that I used to say "pee-lot" for pilot and pewmonia for pneumonia and mispronounced many other English words I learned from newspapers, so I don't persoinally think that English is very phonetic.
In fact I didn't think it was phonetic at all after being laughed at in Anglistan for pronouncing Slough, as Sluff. (By the way, it's pronounced "Slew" here in Western Canada.)
>I am not an expert but I expect that English could be described as a >creole (*) since its modern form is a blend of the original [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >go far enough back to answer the question. Which languages are pure >and why does it matter? No, of course it doesn't matter - in my case, any anti-English statements stem from my upbringing - the Highland attitude towards England and all its works.
>Another language which should have accents but rarely does is Tagalog. >The official spelling has three accents which look like the French [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Se=E1n O'Leathl=F3bhair Michilín
Sean O'Leathlobhair - 05 Dec 2004 19:21 GMT > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > jwlawler@yahoo.com (Not Professor John Lawler)
> (like I've changed mine for this message) and still sign > your messages "Sean O'Leathlobhair". If you're also a > professor you could think of a different automatic > disclaimer on the "From:" line. We have had this debate before but let's have it one last time.
There are many ways that I could address this problem if I felt that it needed addressing. For example, I could apply to have my name legally changed. But I don't feel a strong need to do so.
John Lawler is my legal name and has been so since I was born. I am not attempting to impersonate Professor John Lawler.
The professor has never expressed any concern over the name clash. If he ever did then I would make any reasonable changes that he requested.
If a large number of regular posters expressed concern then I may also do something.
But, I don't plan to do anything at the request of a single person other than the professor himself.
Occssionally a newcomer is confused and I post an explanation. I believe that this is sufficient.
You may wonder why I have no spam trap on my e-mail address. The Yahoo address was once my normal e-mail address but long ago got polluted by spam. I now use another completely different address for normal mail. I retain the Yahoo address as an identifier in the groups. Very occasionally I check it and if a note stands out from the junk, I will read it. But I don't check carefully so some notes may get lost together with the spam.
However I have given my normal e-mail address to the professor so he could easily contact me if he wished.
> By the way, I mentally pronounce your nom de clavier as > [o'li:TlA:b,hEr] ("owe LEETH lahb Hair"). I probably > wouldn't be able to say the correct Gaelic pronunciation, > but what would be close? If you are interested in a more authentic pronunciation, you can find in the Google archive. I forget whether it is in this group or sci.lang but it is in one or the other. I don't expect that you will be surprised to learn that it is quite different from the one that you are using.
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
Sean O'Leathlobhair - 04 Dec 2004 10:49 GMT > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > _Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language_. The one I > referred to is the latter. Unfortunately, this is another such incident. Despite knowing of both books, I managed to take the wrong one of the shelf. My copy of the correct book appears to be hiding at the moment. I may have leant it so I will have to try to remember who has it.
> I see now that Amazon has a _Cambridge Encyclopedia of the > English Language Canadian Edition_. I'm curious to know how [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > World English". I would find it quite surprising if it had > been omitted from later editions. Now I remember it but I still have to find the book.
> Incidentally, to see if you have a later edition than mine > look on page 138, in a block labeled "Cowboy", for the [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > my copy soon after the book was released in 1995, so it's > presumably a first edition. Even with the correction, that does not seem to match the current use of the term "Cowboy" here. I would expect a "Cowboy builder" to do a poor job for a high price and then disappear. Seán O'Leathlóbhair
Bob Cunningham - 05 Dec 2004 00:05 GMT [...]
> > Incidentally, to see if you have a later edition than mine > > look on page 138, in a block labeled "Cowboy", for the > > phrase
> > a factory worker who does more than the peace-work > > norms set by his union or fellow workers
> > Also, see http://www.exw6sxq.com/sparky/cowboy/cowboy.gif . > > I put that GIF on my Web site at a time when some > > alt.usage.english posters seemed unwilling to believe that > > David Crystal had written the phrase.
> > I would expect the lapse to have been corrected in later > > editions, if there have been any later editions. I should have said "later printings". Errors are often corrected in later printings that are not new editions.
> > I bought > > my copy soon after the book was released in 1995, so it's > > presumably a first edition.
> Even with the correction, that does not seem to match the current use > of the term "Cowboy" here. I would expect a "Cowboy builder" to do a > poor job for a high price and then disappear. This brings to mind the amusing course a thread took when I first commented here -- in 1996 or thereabouts -- about David Crystal's inadvertent misspelling. I said only that there was a lapse; I didn't say the lapse was a misspelling. A few people assumed the lapse had to do with a mistaken idea of what a cowboy was, so we had a lively discussion of that point. Along the way, a couple of people said incidentally that I should look again at David Crystal's book, where it was pretty certain I would find that he had written "piece" rather than "peace". (One of those people is still with us from time to time.)
In truly Donovan style, Truly Donovan posted to say the lapse didn't have "diddly to do with cowboys".
Bob Cunningham - 03 Dec 2004 17:50 GMT [...]
> I think that overusing the phrase English English may > cause confusion or irritation. For example I would never > say: "I speak English English", I simply say: "I speak > English". If someone unfamiliar with English English > comments on my accent or usage then I add: "I am from > England". Some people attempt to be more specific by saying "Southern English". But Cornwall is in Southern England, and the speech of the Cornish speaker in the speech archive at the alt.usage.english Web site ( http://www.alt-usage-english.org/archive/both_cs.wav ) certainly sounds different from the "RP 1" speaker in that archive ( http://www.alt-usage-english.org/archive/bother8.wav ).
Whatever happened to "Queen's English"? Is the Queen's speech a good exemplar of the best English English?
Sean O'Leathlobhair - 04 Dec 2004 11:14 GMT > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > archive ( > http://www.alt-usage-english.org/archive/bother8.wav ). I mentioned Southern English English myself but you snipped it.
Indeed the term is not perfect but I don't think that it is possible to find a term that is perfect and simple. The Southern / Northern distinction is useful. There is a tight bunch of isoglosses running approximately east / west through the middle of the country dividing the southern and the northern dialects. The vowels in "bath" and "but" are examples.
What is usually described here as a southern accent covers a large part of the south of the country. But, as you say, there are exceptions such as Cornish. So southern English is the English of the south of England that does not have any other name.
There are plenty of worse uses of "north" and "south". The part of Ireland that is still controlled by the British is called "Northern Ireland" and the Republic is commonly called "Southern Ireland". Yet the northernmost point of the island is in Southern Ireland. Your country is commonly called "America" yet it is a proper subset of North America.
> Whatever happened to "Queen's English"? Is the Queen's speech a good exemplar of the best English English?
At one time many would have said yes. I expect that some still do but very few. I think that few people today would wish to sound like the Queen. The phrase "The Queen's English" is mostly used in jest today. The Queen's dialect does not extend much beyond Buckingham Palace.
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
Michilín - 03 Dec 2004 15:57 GMT >[...] > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >category there are other, lesser subcategories that could be >mentioned but have not been. Highland English, omitted in the list above, also has two distinctive forms; English spoken by native Gaelic speakers (or who live in Gaelic-speaking areas) and English spoken by those whose ancestors were native Gaelic speakers but are now monoglot English speakers..
Michilín
Alan Smaill - 02 Dec 2004 17:26 GMT >> Years ago in alt.usage.english, I posted regarding the >> injustice to the people of England of having the name [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Is there any English person out there who feels this injustice? I can't say I've noticed it; I've certainly never heard anyone French complain about "français" referring to more than just "le français de France" -- in fact they are more likely to insist that this is only right and proper.
> I am sometimes irritated by the use of British English to refer to > things that which would better be called English English. If a > feature is shared by the English, Scottish and Welsh varieties then it > can be reasonably called British. But if it is restricted to England > then I would prefer English English. That is the sensible way to use the terms, I agree.
> I sense a reluctance among many > non-British English speakers to use this term. ...
> A similar issue applies to Spanish. I have not met any Spaniards who > object to Latin Americans calling their language Spanish. > > Ditto Chinese or French. > > Seán O'Leathlóbhair
 Signature Alan Smaill
Daniel Mac an Toisich - 30 Nov 2004 19:09 GMT > >> (By the way, it would be fine to see more Scots popping in and out > of [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > Mike. If himself is not invited is oneself at least?
Mike Lyle - 30 Nov 2004 20:33 GMT >>>> (By the way, it would be fine to see more Scots popping in and out >> of [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > If himself is not invited is oneself at least? Onie time! (In a nice sense, of course: we're not affstaunin.)
Mike.
Michilín - 30 Nov 2004 06:23 GMT >> ScotsGate is a new portal to the Scots language, spoken to varying >> extent by an estimated 1.6 million people throughout Lowland [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Mike. You're very politically savvy!
You must work for the State Department...
Michilín
Tony Cooper - 30 Nov 2004 06:33 GMT >>> ScotsGate is a new portal to the Scots language, spoken to varying >>> extent by an estimated 1.6 million people throughout Lowland [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >You must work for the State Department... Send Auld Bob over from soc.culture.scottish. He's one of the most interesting posters on Usenet.
wonderNOT_REALwarthog@yowza.net - 12 May 2009 05:25 GMT Ahem...
I went to www.scotsgate.com, and all I found was an full-page advert portal for automobile/bicycle/taxi insurance.
Am I missing something?
Slainte...
Emil Tiades - 12 May 2009 10:39 GMT >Ahem... > >I went to www.scotsgate.com, and all I found was an full-page advert portal >for automobile/bicycle/taxi insurance. > >Am I missing something? A boat?
Country_Chiel - 18 Dec 2004 07:24 GMT > ScotsGate is a new portal to the Scots language, spoken to varying > extent by an estimated 1.6 million people throughout Lowland Scotland, > Ulster, Orkney and the Shetland Islands. Easily find all the important > Scots web sites and resources, discover news items about the > controversial debate on the status of Scots and download ScotsGate's > free guide to Scots Grammar. Visit www.scotsgate.com I see they have missed Doric off their list of Scottish languages as usual - we don't all talk like Rabbie Burns any more min - ken.
Country Chiel
allan connochie - 18 Dec 2004 08:51 GMT > > ScotsGate is a new portal to the Scots language, spoken to varying > > extent by an estimated 1.6 million people throughout Lowland Scotland, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I see they have missed Doric off their list of Scottish languages as usual - > we don't all talk like Rabbie Burns any more min - ken. The term 'Scots' covers all the dialects of Scots including the Doric. 'Throughout Lowland Scotland' includes the North-East Lowlands as well as the Southern Uplands and Central Lowlands and the east coast burghs.
Allan
|
|
|