4 ms·

Including the nasty political side-show that is Ulster Scots - literally only brought in as a chilling effect 'whataboutism' to diminish support when Irish spea

Including the nasty political side-show that is Ulster Scots - literally only brought in as a chilling effect 'whataboutism' to diminish support when Irish speakers ask for language rights in Northern Ireland. https://www.reddit.com/r/northernireland/comments/1fivtob/nothing_will_convince_me_ulster_scots_is_a/ https://www.reddit.com/r/northernireland/comments/1fivtob/no...

pqtyw 1y ago
Well Scots is a real language. As much as English or any other. Whether enough people speak it especially in NI to justify it having an official status and such is another matter.
AlecSchueler 1y ago
This completely ignores the history of published writing in Ulster Scots going back centuries.
- wizzwizz4 1y ago
  This is one of those topics where the Hacker News take is unlikely to be correct. There's a lot of strong feeling here, and an outsider would need at least three books to understand the historical context (one of which, afaict, has not been written yet: it's oral tradition only). People closer to the issue are better-placed to gather the necessary information, but again: strong feeling. Most people find it hard to get past that. The most informed person I know is so biased that I don't at all trust their conclusions.
  - AlecSchueler 1y ago
    What do you think is the Hacker News take?
- rgblambda 1y ago
  Part of the issue some people take with Ulster-Scots is that the current official 21st century literature doesn't read anything like the historic literature, which English speakers can easily read and understand. It's often made up of slang terms and archaic spelling, in an attempt to be as different as possible to English. Native speakers have complained that official documents and signage in Ulster-Scots are incomprehensible to them.
  - AlecSchueler 1y ago
    > the current official 21st century literature doesn't read anything like the historic literature Does modern English read like historical English? > Native speakers have complained that official documents and signage in Ulster-Scots are incomprehensible to them. Sure, there are tonnes of issues with the "officialisation" of any language but the fact that there are "native speakers" involved in the debate strongly suggests it wasn't all just made up for political reasons, which was the point I was responding to.
    - rgblambda 1y ago
      >Does modern English read like historical English? If you can read and understand text from the 18th century, then yes. We're not talking about Middle English or Old English. >but the fact that there are "native speakers" involved in the debate I should have put native speakers in quotes as well. What counts as a native Ulster Scots speaker is someone who speaks English with an NI accent with some localisms thrown in. Nobody speaks the official Ulster Scots that was invented because the Irish language was getting support and political leaders on the other side of the community felt they deserved something as well. The Protestant community in NI see it as a bit of an embarrassment.
      - AlecSchueler 1y ago
        > If you can read and understand text from the 18th century, then yes. Yes, and I can read and understand historical Ulster Scots as well, but you were making a different point about codification/drift, no? The English I would find in those historical writings is quite different from what is being taught in schools today or recommended in style guides. > What counts as a native Ulster Scots speaker is someone who speaks English with an NI accent with some localisms thrown in. Then by your definition I am a native speaker. So how can we square it that you're telling me native speakers feel one way while I feel another way? > Nobody speaks the official Ulster Scots That's the nature of any newly codified minority language. > The Protestant community in NI see it as a bit of an embarrassment. There is no "protestant community" in Northern Ireland. A Dungannon farmer, an East Belfast loyalist and a BT9 lecturer will all give you very different views despite being of protestant background.

pqtyw 1y ago

Well Scots is a real language. As much as English or any other. Whether enough people speak it especially in NI to justify it having an official status and such is another matter.

AlecSchueler 1y ago

This completely ignores the history of published writing in Ulster Scots going back centuries.

wizzwizz4 1y ago
This is one of those topics where the Hacker News take is unlikely to be correct. There's a lot of strong feeling here, and an outsider would need at least three books to understand the historical context (one of which, afaict, has not been written yet: it's oral tradition only). People closer to the issue are better-placed to gather the necessary information, but again: strong feeling. Most people find it hard to get past that. The most informed person I know is so biased that I don't at all trust their conclusions.
- AlecSchueler 1y ago
  What do you think is the Hacker News take?
rgblambda 1y ago
Part of the issue some people take with Ulster-Scots is that the current official 21st century literature doesn't read anything like the historic literature, which English speakers can easily read and understand. It's often made up of slang terms and archaic spelling, in an attempt to be as different as possible to English. Native speakers have complained that official documents and signage in Ulster-Scots are incomprehensible to them.
- AlecSchueler 1y ago
  > the current official 21st century literature doesn't read anything like the historic literature Does modern English read like historical English? > Native speakers have complained that official documents and signage in Ulster-Scots are incomprehensible to them. Sure, there are tonnes of issues with the "officialisation" of any language but the fact that there are "native speakers" involved in the debate strongly suggests it wasn't all just made up for political reasons, which was the point I was responding to.
  - rgblambda 1y ago
    >Does modern English read like historical English? If you can read and understand text from the 18th century, then yes. We're not talking about Middle English or Old English. >but the fact that there are "native speakers" involved in the debate I should have put native speakers in quotes as well. What counts as a native Ulster Scots speaker is someone who speaks English with an NI accent with some localisms thrown in. Nobody speaks the official Ulster Scots that was invented because the Irish language was getting support and political leaders on the other side of the community felt they deserved something as well. The Protestant community in NI see it as a bit of an embarrassment.
    - AlecSchueler 1y ago
      > If you can read and understand text from the 18th century, then yes. Yes, and I can read and understand historical Ulster Scots as well, but you were making a different point about codification/drift, no? The English I would find in those historical writings is quite different from what is being taught in schools today or recommended in style guides. > What counts as a native Ulster Scots speaker is someone who speaks English with an NI accent with some localisms thrown in. Then by your definition I am a native speaker. So how can we square it that you're telling me native speakers feel one way while I feel another way? > Nobody speaks the official Ulster Scots That's the nature of any newly codified minority language. > The Protestant community in NI see it as a bit of an embarrassment. There is no "protestant community" in Northern Ireland. A Dungannon farmer, an East Belfast loyalist and a BT9 lecturer will all give you very different views despite being of protestant background.