Talk:Etymology of Scotland

Sgaothaich

Since this is discussing the etymology of "Scotland" and it is proposed that it is derived from the word "sgaothaich", perhaps it would be a very good idea to define what "sgaothaich" actually means. 71.196.135.148 (talk) 02:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Etymology of Lt Scotia

It has become a habit of English scholars to stop at the Latin root of an English word but do not go to the final root which is Greek. Scotia is derived from Greek Skotos/skotia meaning Darkness.

http://www.yourdictionary.com/scotia

You are confusing Scoti ("Scots") with the ordinary English architectural term "scotia", which is a deep concave molding found at the base of a column and which does come from the Greek "skotos". There is no connection.

The word Scoti is found in Latin, not Greek. The Romans were familiar with the peoples of Britain and Ireland. Why would the Romans invent a name for the tribe in question, and take it out of distant Greek? Even if they did, why would the climate of Caledonia give a name to an Irish people?

Howard Alexander (talk) 21:21, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Merge

I don't see why there is an article for such a small amount of information; I think it should be merged with Scotland, as its not really that big. Ross Rhodes (T C) ^Sign! 13:22, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

The Scotland article has enough material already, and enough arguments. This is a separate topic.

Howard Alexander (talk) 21:21, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, unless enough information is put into this article, there's really no purpose for this small amount of information to be on a separate page. Ross Rhodes (T C) ^Sign! 09:32, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, you're right. The main academic interest is on the origin of "Scoti", so that ought to be on that page.

Support, then.

Howard Alexander (talk) 13:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Strongly support. All information here could be easily merged with Scotland, and I agree with Howard Alexander. Ross Rhodes (T C) ^Sign! 13:53, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Shall we merge it? I don't think any others will vote, and out the current results, we all agree on supporting the idea. Ross Rhodes (T C) ^Sign! 19:54, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Erm, how actually does one go about merging an article into another? Is it just cutting and sticking the text and turning the original into a redirect? Is there a more technical way? I imagine a "cut and paste" would do the trick.

Howard Alexander (talk) 21:46, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Oppose. This article was created because it had become too large a section for the Scotland article and was subject to numerous revisions and reversions. This article is short, but it could be expanded, and is well cited. Can't see the problem myself. Ben MacDui 08:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC) PS It is I think discussed at Talk:Scotland/Archive 14, although I can't access this page at present due to "technical difficulties".

Too large a section? Its smaller than most of the sections on that article. I still think it should be merged. Ross Rhodes (T C) ^Sign! 15:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC)