|
|
 | | From: | AlanEdgey at aol.com | | Subject: | Re:_Feeding_the_needy/lonely(_was_Scottish_quake_donations_hit_£8m) | | Date: | 17 Jan 2005 04:52:53 -0800 |
|
|
 | >So it seems you cannot spell in The Lallans either.
Help my Bob Bob!
Since when has the man who writes 'diz' (does), yone (yon), hiz (his),
Yir (you're) been an an authority on spelling - in any language?
If his pronunciation of 'man' just happens to be 'maun' what's wrong
with writing 'maun', you find no difficulty writing 'hiz' for his just
because it sounds like 'his'.
Alan
|
|
| | From: | Robert Peffers | | Subject: | Re: Feeding the needy/lonely( was Scottish quake donations hit £8m) | | Date: | Mon, 17 Jan 2005 17:04:20 -0000 |
|
|
|
wrote in message
news:1105966373.316726.165320@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >So it seems you cannot spell in The Lallans either.
>
> Help my Bob Bob!
>
> Since when has the man who writes 'diz' (does), yone (yon), hiz (his),
> Yir (you're) been an an authority on spelling - in any language?
> If his pronunciation of 'man' just happens to be 'maun' what's wrong
> with writing 'maun', you find no difficulty writing 'hiz' for his just
> because it sounds like 'his'.
>
> Alan
>
Frae Auld Bob Peffers:
You miss the point. The debate is not about the actual spelling of the
words, (for example my use of, "yone", to distinguish my East of Scotland
pronunciation while the West of Scotland uses, "Yon"), but about the
translation of, "MY USE", of Scots from something , "I", posted on this
newsgroup. I only pointed out the translation was slightly different from my
actual meaning. I did not claim it as a translation in acceptable form from
a, "Standardised", Scottish Dictionary Association publication:-
http://www.charitiesdirect.com/charity6/ch003376.htm
In case you have not noticed the Scottish language became a just a spoken
language after being proscribed in Scottish schools. This in spite of the
efforts of such as Christopher Grieve and the semi-standardisation of what
they called, "The Lallans". The SND is a fairly new initiative and this is a
really good attempt to once more establish a standardised Scottish Lowland
spelling and grammatical language. So- you are quite right- I do use several
spellings that do not comply with the SND's version, (for example EOS folk
probably pronounce, "borders", differently from folks from the WOS with one
pronouncing it, "bawrders", and the other, "boarders". How does the Scots
speaker get such differences over in print?
Anyway, the point is that the debate was MY shades of meaning as written in
the dialect of Scots that I actually speak and not the standardised version
of Scots used in more literary usage.
--
Aefauldlie, (Scots word for Honestly),
Robert, (Auld Bob), Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).
Web Site, "The Eck's Files":- http://www.peffers50.freeserve.co.uk
|
|
| | From: | Richard Tobin | | Subject: | Re: Feeding the needy/lonely( was Scottish quake donations hit £8m) | | Date: | 17 Jan 2005 17:58:08 GMT |
|
|
| In article ,
Robert Peffers wrote:
>How does the Scots
>speaker get such differences over in print?
Why would you want to?
Using spelling to indicate the pronunciation used by the writer just
make it harder to read and obscures what you're trying to say. And
it's not as if spelling makes pronunciation clear for non-Scots
English. I don't see people from London and Birmingham spelling
differently.
If you're in the (exceptional) situation of writing about
pronunciation itself, linguists long ago solved that problem.
-- Richard
|
|
| | From: | Robert Peffers | | Subject: | Re: Feeding the needy/lonely( was Scottish quake donations hit £8m) | | Date: | Tue, 18 Jan 2005 00:40:01 -0000 |
|
|
|
"Richard Tobin" wrote in message
news:csgubg$2o26$1@pc-news.cogsci.ed.ac.uk...
> In article ,
> Robert Peffers wrote:
>>How does the Scots
>>speaker get such differences over in print?
>
> Why would you want to?
>
> Using spelling to indicate the pronunciation used by the writer just
> make it harder to read and obscures what you're trying to say. And
> it's not as if spelling makes pronunciation clear for non-Scots
> English. I don't see people from London and Birmingham spelling
> differently.
Oh yes you do!
>
> If you're in the (exceptional) situation of writing about
> pronunciation itself, linguists long ago solved that problem.
>
> -- Richard
That's fine when they have sorted it all out and things have settled down.
The unfortunate thing is that the suppression the Scots written language has
suffered for several hundred years has had the effect that much of it has
had to be dug out, guessed at and, in some cases, the spellings reinvented.
As for the linguists it has been my experience that these tend to be
somewhat biased and have preconceived ideas that really do not hold water.As
to the phonetics I am not a trained linguist and I have no intention of
learning that phonetic language that is really no better than any other
jargon as used by almost every other lot who cannot use basic language to
describe what they mean.
Doctors and computer people are masters of the jargon art, they are not
alone. Furthermore my own experience of most things Scottish is that Glasgow
and the West tend to grab hold of everything and then inflict an undue
influence upon it. Just note the pronunciations on the Scottish TV channels.
The newsreaders use the WOS pronunciations more often than not. Now
considering that there are now more EOS Scots speakers, (except perhaps in
Edinburgh), with more Gaelic speakers and weegie speakers in the WOS it
means the WOS pronunciations are taking over. That is not to say they are
not also valid Scots - only that they tend to overtake the EOS
pronunciations due to the TV and, to a lesser extent, radio centres being
mainly in the West.
--
Aefauldlie, (Scots word for Honestly),
Robert, (Auld Bob), Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).
Web Site, "The Eck's Files":- http://www.peffers50.freeserve.co.uk
|
|
| | From: | Richard Caley | | Subject: | Re: Feeding the needy/lonely( was Scottish quake donations hit | | Date: | Mon, 17 Jan 2005 17:31:19 GMT |
|
|
| In article , Robert Peffers (rp) writes:
rp> (for example EOS folk probably pronounce, "borders", differently
rp> from folks from the WOS with one pronouncing it, "bawrders", and
rp> the other, "boarders". How does the Scots speaker get such
rp> differences over in print?
If you care, use IPA.
If you are writing Scots, rather than transcribing someone's speech,
you don't need to, any more than you need to decide whether or not to
put in the r in farm.
--
Mail me as MYFIRSTNAME@MYLASTNAME.org.uk _O_
|<
|
|
|
