|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Early Scots vs. Middle Scots
While the original introduction made sense,edit, already at the beginning of the article history, turned the beginning sentences into an illogical mess:
- Middle Scots was the Anglic language of Lowland Scotland in the period from 1450 to 1700. By the end of the 13th century its phonology, orthography, accidence, syntax and vocabulary had diverged markedly from Early Scots, which was virtually indistinguishable from early Northumbrian Middle English. Subsequently its orthography differed from that of the emerging Early Modern English standard.
"By the end of the 13th century" there was no "Middle Scots" yet. The language of the 14th century, according to this and other articles, is called Early Scots (and contemporary with Middle English, while Middle Scots was contemporary with Early Modern English). According to this phrasing, Early and Middle Scots existed side-by-side in the 14th century – I don't think that is the intended meaning. I'll try to repair that. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:59, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
Checking out our "Erse"
The previous, deleted, IP sock post was transparently an attempt to make show of discussing one change while slipping in another. What's more, the simplest of checks would show that the supposed contention discussed in that post, the questionability of the use of the term "Erse" in Scots, is baseless, see e.g. Chambers. Mutt Lunker (talk) 18:43, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Act of 1616?
Not sure where "This was followed in 1616 by an act establishing parish schools in the Highlands with the aim of extirpating the Gaelic language. " comes from.
The only two Acts I can find are as follows:
23 July 1644 Act declareing vacand stipendes should be imployed upon pious uses trayning wp of youthes that have the Irishe tongue in schooles and colledges
12th July 1695 Scottish parliament ...bishoprics of Argyll and the Isles, which now his majesty has been graciously pleased to bestow upon erecting of English schools for rooting out of the Irish language, and other pious uses ...
Perhaps 1695 was meant? If so it should read "This was followed in 1695 by an act establishing parish schools in the Highlands with the aim of 'rooting out' the Gaelic language and replacing it with English". Cassandra — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 19:04, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you Mutt. Took a little time to track down the original text. The text includes as it aims : "...that the vulgar English tongue ('Inglish toung' orig.) be universally planted... and that the Irish language may be removed and abolished". Whether 'extirpated' is the correct word to use given the very pious reasoning also contained in the Act I leave to others. Cassandra. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:42, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
- As you are aware "Inglis" and "Scottis" (or variants thereof) were then used synonymously for the tongue in question (from the same document "the vulgar toung in Inglis or Scottis"). By the same token, the celtic language being referred to in the Act is not referred to as Irish today but distinguished as Scottish Gaelic. Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:07, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Ah. You confused me briefly there by referring to 'the same document'. You mean the same source book, not the same Act. The 1616 Act makes no refence to Scottis. 'Inglis' and 'Scottis' were of course used synonymously in the period. But in the earlier period on those rare ocassions the words appear together (e.g. Scots Parliament 12 March 1543) , this seems to be 'Scottis' being used in its original sense of meaning Gaelic. Cassandra — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 10:18, 9 January 2014 (UTC)