Scots

[Wee Willie]

The one-third split, for history at least, is only for the upper levels but most schools do focus on Scottish history in the BGE. There's a real debate around the Bruceification of history replacing the obsession with teaching the Nazi's.

 

I wonder what the take is, in Scottish schools, regarding Mrs Windsor?

She falsely proclaims she is Elisabeth II of the UK.

How dae Scottish teachers deal wi' that lie?

 

Edited for a missing comma.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Wee Willie

[Wee Willie]

I mean I, rightly or wrongly, see Gallus as a purely Glaswegian word and have never in my life heard anyone from Dundee or Perth use it.

I was highlighting the difficulty in a newspaper printing something and saying "here is your Scots" when it is nothing of the sort.

 

Gallus was certainly used in Leith so no way is it just a Glasgow word. 

 

I have a subscription tae a UK wide newspaper site.

I picked maist Counties in Scotland and searched for the word 'gallus'

I had 50 hits but maist were surnames.

I did find two.

The first article is too long so I've shortened it.

[Ad Lib]

Consistently no matter where they are and who they are speaking to, yes. Get away from East Renfrewshire into rural areas or fishing villages and the way the older generation speaks amongst themselves can be very broad. If you have never been in that sort of environment socially, it's easy to be completely unaware of just how broad that can be.

 

I lived in Aberdeen for more than a decade. I'm perfectly aware that old people speak gibberish.

 

Am I right in thinking the SNP have introduced more Scottiah history and literature into the curriculum and that there's supposed to be something like a 1/3 Scottish, 1/3 British, 1/3 European/international breakdown?

I agree with that policy. Kids must be getting some exposure to written Scots through that system, without it getting in the way of more important, practical skills.

 

This was introduced a few years ago, yes.

 

I don't support it. It vastly restricts the curriculum and has led, for example to the effective exclusion of a number of subjects of international importance. When I did Higher history I did a unit on the impact of the industrial revolution domestically, one unit on the Russian revolution, and one on the Cold War. Our teacher would no longer be able to choose that as a broad curriculum for Higher because of the mandatory Scottish unit. We should be encouraging more diversity in the curriculum not less, and shifting in effect from an obsession with World Wars I and II to doubling-up on domestic history to include a Scottish bit is counter-productive.

 

I think there is a case for a "humanities" course in Schools that draws together social history, art and literary output. That would be much more in-keeping with the spirit of CfE than these changes to Higher history and could be a useful way of bringing things like Scots into the curriculum without compromising the core curriculums of English and History.

 

The difference is Scots evolved distinctly from English, whilst American English etc did not. The new world English is English which has adapted. Scots is a language that developed itself, with a lot of influence from English.

Scots is as different to English as Norwegian is to Danish, but few would claim Norwegian and Danish are the same language. Doric is spoken by plenty of people under 40 in Aberdeenshire.

 

American English very clearly has evolved distinctly from English. It has substantial variance in vocabulary, pronunciation, sentence structure, idioms, standardisation of spelling etc.

 

I do not question for a minute that Scots is a distinct language. I question the claim that the overwhelming majority of Scottish people speak it, rather than allow it to influence the way they speak what is, fundamentally, English.

 

Good post but it's hardly the case that we can't do both its not one or the othr

 

It kind of is though. We already have difficulty ensuring that modern languages is an effective part of the curriculum. The fact that the new qualifications scheme has coincided with schools reducing the number of subjects kids are presented for at the equivalent of Standard Grade is only going to make this worse. When you've got finite resources and have to choose between running a Gaelic class and a Spanish class, the latter has to win every single time.

[Peppino Impastato]

I lived in Aberdeen for more than a decade. I'm perfectly aware that old people speak gibberish.

This was introduced a few years ago, yes.

I don't support it. It vastly restricts the curriculum and has led, for example to the effective exclusion of a number of subjects of international importance. When I did Higher history I did a unit on the impact of the industrial revolution domestically, one unit on the Russian revolution, and one on the Cold War. Our teacher would no longer be able to choose that as a broad curriculum for Higher because of the mandatory Scottish unit. We should be encouraging more diversity in the curriculum not less, and shifting in effect from an obsession with World Wars I and II to doubling-up on domestic history to include a Scottish bit is counter-productive.

I think there is a case for a "humanities" course in Schools that draws together social history, art and literary output. That would be much more in-keeping with the spirit of CfE than these changes to Higher history and could be a useful way of bringing things like Scots into the curriculum without compromising the core curriculums of English and History.

American English very clearly has evolved distinctly from English. It has substantial variance in vocabulary, pronunciation, sentence structure, idioms, standardisation of spelling etc.

I do not question for a minute that Scots is a distinct language. I question the claim that the overwhelming majority of Scottish people speak it, rather than allow it to influence the way they speak what is, fundamentally, English.

It kind of is though. We already have difficulty ensuring that modern languages is an effective part of the curriculum. The fact that the new qualifications scheme has coincided with schools reducing the number of subjects kids are presented for at the equivalent of Standard Grade is only going to make this worse. When you've got finite resources and have to choose between running a Gaelic class and a Spanish class, the latter has to win every single time.

No it's not, you have at least 12 years with kids in school, a little bit of basic gaelic woul be Easy to fit in same as Ireland do. I'm not surprised you oppose Scottish history being taught in Scottish schools, you think our national poet, capital city and language are shit. I think we should really just dismiss the pinions of self loathers on such matters though.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Peppino Impastato

[jmothecat]

No it's not, you have at least 12 years with kids in school, a little bit of basic gaelic woul be Easy to fit in same as Ireland do. I'm not surprised you oppose Scottish history being taught in Scottish schools, you think our national poet, capital city and language are shit. I think we should really just dismiss the pinions of self loathers on such matters though.

Is Gaelic our national language? It's spoken in small pockets of the country. What relevance does the language have to people in Aberdeen, Edinburgh or the Borders who haven't spoken the language for centuries? I see no reason for my children to learn Gaelic, other than if they decide they wish to. Nobody in my family speaks it, nobody in the community I grew up in spoke it. It has zero relevance to the majority of Scots bar cultural nationalists and the few to have grown up in the small communities where it is still relevant.

[Peppino Impastato]

Is Gaelic our national language? It's spoken in small pockets of the country. What relevance does the language have to people in Aberdeen, Edinburgh or the Borders who haven't spoken the language for centuries? I see no reason for my children to learn Gaelic, other than if they decide they wish to. Nobody in my family speaks it, nobody in the community I grew up in spoke it. It has zero relevance to the majority of Scots bar cultural nationalists and the few to have grown up in the small communities where it is still relevant.

I was speaking about scots not gaelic

[invergowrie arab]

Should Gaelic education be restricted to where Gaelic is strong now, where it was strong 40 years ago or where it was well used per war and every natural feature has a Gaelic name and the poets and writers and songs of that community are in Gaelic?

I don't necessarily have an answer but I don't think it is quite as simple as no one in Aberdeen speaks it so it's irrelevant to aberdeen ( a better example might be Fort William.)

[Ad Lib]

I was speaking about scots not gaelic

No it's not, you have at least 12 years with kids in school, a little bit of basic gaelic woul be Easy to fit in same as Ireland do.

[Ad Lib]

Should Gaelic education be restricted to where Gaelic is strong now, where it was strong 40 years ago or where it was well used per war and every natural feature has a Gaelic name and the poets and writers and songs of that community are in Gaelic?

I don't necessarily have an answer but I don't think it is quite as simple as no one in Aberdeen speaks it so it's irrelevant to aberdeen ( a better example might be Fort William.)

It's irrelevant to every square inch of the globe. It's less utile than Latin or Ancient Greek, which at least have the virtue of being the root of other languages and a common device for communicating in specialist fields like science and law.

[Peppino Impastato]

You must find reading difficult. I'm referring to your dismissal of Scots not gaelic, that's whi said you think our language is shit and that's what he's replying to, try and keep up.

[jmothecat]

I was speaking about scots not gaelic

Ah sorry.

[invergowrie arab]

It's irrelevant to every square inch of the globe. It's less utile than Latin or Ancient Greek, which at least have the virtue of being the root of other languages and a common device for communicating in specialist fields like science and law.

Tha thu lan dhen cac.0

Depends on whether or not you believe the sole function of language is to stand as a lingua franca between peoples or if you think that how people think and feel about the lives they lived or the places they inhabited in their own tongue has any value.

[Hillonearth]

The Lallans Scots promoted by the likes of the Scots Language Society is a merely a literary construct – a synthesis of various old dialects from all over the country. No-one’s ever actually spoken like that ever -  I’d love to think there’s some wee town in mid-Scotland where they do, but it’s not the case.

 

The difference between something being a distinct language and merely a dialect of another is much more of a continuum than many people think – in the case of Scots even many linguists are in disagreement as to whether it constitutes a distinct language or not. Within the country, there’s such a huge difference between the way people speak – say someone from Banff and someone from rural Galloway - that there can be mutual intelligibility issues to the extent there’s no way you could class what they’re speaking as a homogenous thing  called Scots. As a result most people have become used to code-switching to a more standard dialect according to who we’re talking to; you’re not going to speak in a job interview the way you speak to your pal on the street.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Hillonearth

[strichener]

It's irrelevant to every square inch of the globe. It's less utile than Latin or Ancient Greek, which at least have the virtue of being the root of other languages and a common device for communicating in specialist fields like science and law.

That is just complete hyperbole.

[AUFC90]

I'd have to say that Scots is a language in its own right. My college class is a Hodge podge of people from up north to down in the borders and we can all understand each other because we all know Scots. Someone from say, Newcastle wouldn't have a hope in hell.

[Ad Lib]

Tha thu lan dhen cac.0

Depends on whether or not you believe the sole function of language is to stand as a lingua franca between peoples or if you think that how people think and feel about the lives they lived or the places they inhabited in their own tongue has any value.

Language is overwhelmingly functional. Everything else is just a hobby.

[Ad Lib]

That is just complete hyperbole.

No shit, Sherlock.

[invergowrie arab]

Language is overwhelmingly functional. Everything else is just a hobby.

Of course it is. One of those functions is being able to investigate history and place. Every bit as valuable as a language of commerce or whatever other nonsensical reason people are using to justify teaching mandarin.

History is filled with useless languages being taught. I think ours was the last year higher Russian was offered. After there was a huge push on German as it would be the "language of business" in the new Europe. Since then we have had Spanish to capture emerging south American markets as well as Chinese and Arabic.

IMO any language that is not English is pretty much a hobby.

We should bring back Latin too.

[NotThePars]

I wonder what the take is, in Scottish schools, regarding Mrs Windsor?

She falsely proclaims she is Elisabeth II of the UK.

How dae Scottish teachers deal wi' that lie?

Edited for a missing comma.

From my limited experience nobody gives a shit tbh.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

It's my own view that Scots as a language is like Latin - a dead language that is not spoken day to day - certainly not in terms that Scots 200+ years ago might understand. There seems to be a confusion between what is Scots language and what is no more than regionalised variations of Scots English.

Edited March 17, 2016 by DeeTillEhDeh