Do you think Scots is a language or dialect?

Russian, "Ukrainian is a dialect", can you understand it well? "Not really." Spanish, "Portuagese is a language", can you understand it well? "A fair bit." Chinese, "Cantonese is just a dialect of Mandarin:", can you understand it spoken? "Not at all." Danish, "Swedish is another language", can you understand it? "Almost completely.". Language has a lot to do with identify.

As a native speaker of the Scots language, I think the biggest problem with the numbers of speakers is that many simply do not know about it, at school, we’re taught that it’s slang and rude to speak Scots, which is completely wrong, and speaking Scots to an employer can lower your chances of getting the job since it ‘makes you look unprofessional.’ I’d estimate that there are at least four million speakers of Scots, but many simply do not know about it, so when the census happens and they fill out the form, they don’t know what the language is and therefore do not tick it. I’m in S2 (S2 is 13-14 years old) and we only just started learning that it’s a language, but only the very rarely used words or the ones you’d find in old Scots poems, not the words we use on a daily basis and don’t know is a language. When I was in Primary (5-12 years old) we were actually given into trouble for speaking Scots. I don’t know if it’s the same for schools across Scotland, but from the part of Glasgow I come from, that’s what they taught us. It’s ridiculous that it’s a recognised language of the country but at the same time, we’re taught that it’s slang and that it’s wrong to speak it.

A lot of the confusion comes from the fact that when we talk about Scots, a lot of people think we are talking about Scottish English. Which is indeed a dialect of English and most of us speak it. but Scots is not. There are even a disappointing amount of Scottish people who are confused by this and think that Scots is not a language.

My father tells me about how when he was around 20, having only been exposed to american English up to that point, went to Scotland and couldn't understand a word of what people said, and that he would insist that they weren't speaking english but something else, but they would say that they were in fact speaking English.

PhD in linguistics here. The problem with using intelligibility as a criterion is that some languages (such as Portuguese, Galician and Spanish, or Swedish and Norwegian) are mutually intelligible (at least to a certain degree), while speakers of different varieties of the same language often have trouble understanding each other (as a Brazilian Portuguese speaker, I know many fellow Brazilians can barely understand some varieties from Portugal). It all boils down to a) dialect not being a scientifically accurate term, and b) telling a dialect from a language is a political question, not a linguistic one. 😉

1:06 When referring to Scottish Gaelic, it's pronounced Gah-lick. Gay-lick is the Irish pronunciation.

I have a BA in linguistics. To linguists, every dialect is considered (equal to) a language (in its worthyness of research). The difference between a language and a dualect is cultural and political. As you mentioned: if it's acknowledged by (a) government(s) as a language, then it's a language; if not, it's a dialect.

I love that video of the guy explaining Scots in Scots. There are some parts that are completely understandable and then others that are completely unintelligible with completely different vocabulary

Perhaps Scots is a language that happens to be mutually intelligible with English, rather than a proper dialect, as both evolved from Old English, just as Spanish and Italian both evolved from Vulgar Latin, and have some degree of mutual intelligibility.

The word 'bairn' also appears in many dialects in North England, along with other similarities with Scots. One might even say that North England dialects have more in common with Scotland than with South England.

The claim that Scots is just English with an accent is hilarious because there was a kid at my primary school who moved here from South Africa and learned to speak Scots but still kept his South African accent. My dad told me about French exchange students at his high school speaking Scots with a French accent as well, (unfortunately they were supposed to be here to learn better English, and probably thought they had learned to communicate perfectly with English speakers because most people here use both languages simultaneously)

The thing with "intelligible" = "dialect" and "unintelligible" = "language" is flawed because it a continuum. In the past, each village in Northern Germany had its own version of German. They could understand the speaking of those from the villages around very well. But when there is one from a few villages apart, they couldn't understand him. Did he speak another language? When you take the chain of villages with this on one end and the village, he came from on the other end, then each one could understand the people of the next village. So, it is a dialect? As another example, there is to say, that in Austria you speak German. But Vienna, the capital of Austria, has its own dialect. I (from Northern Germany) have spoken with someone from Vienna. I understood next to nothing.

Great video! It's nice to have people outside the country and native speaking groups acknowledge and represent Scots Language. Because its really really shit when people who don't live here or speak the language think they get to have an uninformed opinion over the language I speak and write in every day. You may remember when you launched your book with a fan art competition, I wrote a mandolin tune called "Muckle Pat". Which is Scots for "Big Pat"...so to think some people would have us believe that the word "muckle" is just the word "big" with *An AcCeNt* is kinda hilarious

Another thing to remember is Scots maybe be more understandable to UK English speakers but less do to American or South African or Australian English speakers. So maybe UK speakers might see Scots as a dialect, because of mutual understanding, but not the others

That's like Finnish and Kven that is spoken in northern Norway. A native Finnish speaker understands Kven language without a problem and it is quite similar to the dialects of Finnish that are spoken in the northern parts of Finland. Kven has quite many loan words from Norwegian, but because it's mandatory to study Swedish at school in Finland and Norwegian and Swedish have so many (quite) similar words, those words are usually easy to understand or guess their meanings. Kven is officially defined as a different language, not a dialect of Finnish.

If people say it's a language, the people who speak it especially, then it's a language There is NO actual definition of language, or ethnicity, or nationality that actually works. It is all decided upon through mutual agreement. Denial of language or community is only ever used to try and keep a minority community down, see the current debate around Ukrainian and Belrussian

As a Scottish person, thank you

Scots cannot be a dialect of "modern" English. They both come from the same source. They are sibling languages IMO.

'Paddock' or 'Puddock' for toad was still to some extent in use in Early Modern English. One of the witches in Macbeth has a familiar called Paddock. (The other witch had a familar called Greymalkin another archaic word for an animal, a cat in this case.)

4:36 I personally think that a language is a summary of dialects. However, dialects often develop out of a former form of a language. They develop idiosyncracies themselves while the "synthesized" parent (the language, the dialects belong to) can develop by itself in form of a Standardization and the application of this standardization in practice. So I would argue for a bidirectional arrows, as both dialects affect the "synthesized" parent language and the standardization of this parent language does influence the dialect. However, the side of the arrow pointing from the dialects to language I would sketch a little bit stronger as they are the base of a standardized language.

Was the census question written in Scots to prove it could be understood ?

English People: Scots is not a language - it's a dialect. Swedish People: Danish is not a language - it's a throat condition.

As a fun addendum, there is also debate as to whether Gaelic is a distinct language related to Irish, or if it's a dialect of Irish. When I was in Scotland last year, I was perfectly able to read the signs in Gaelic because I happen to speak Irish. The orthography is rather different, but the sounds and words are almost identical. The languages themselves outright refer to each other as dialects. In Irish, Irish is called Gaeilge and Gaelic is called Gaeilge na hAlbainn - literally Scottish Irish. In Gaelic, meanwhile, Gaelic is called Gàidhlig and Irish is Gàidhlig na hÈireann, or Irish Gaelic.

'a language is a dialect with an army and a navy'

It is definitely towing the line between langhage and dialect, i think someone who speaks Scottish English or is closer to that area would understand it more but as an American wow its very difficult to translate lol. As someone whos a bit familiar with old english though I can definitely tell the strong influence it had, its almost like seeing an alternate timeline of how old english mightve turned out

I feel like Scots is in a similar position to a lot of post-colonial languages in the Americas, where they're only just barely mutually intelligible with their ancestor language, and often have influences from other languages, but they get treated as dialects to create more unity between the culture using this language and a colonial culture. Of course, this "unity" usually means the cultural erasure of the other group, which is why i think these debates tend to get so fierce. This type of debate happens to dialects as well, with people just treating it as "incorrect English" rather than a distinct dialect with its own rules (a great example is AAVE). While this is definitely a linguistic debate, I think it is very much a cultural and national one as well, which is why these arguments are so important. Often, the subtext of asking "is X really a language" is "do this group of people deserve the ability to self-identify". I think the most important thing that separates a language from a dialect is whether the people who use it choose to identify it as such. If they choose to believe that it's a separate language, then that probably means they view themselves as separate from a larger culture, whereas the reverse is true if they see it as a dialect.

Old English DOES have another name, Anglo-Saxon. As a Swede i can easily follow a news broadcast in Norwiegian or Danish. I think most people would call those three different languages.

Thanks for a great explanation of language and dialect. I think Scots split from English during the period of Middle English, with Early Scots being a dialect of Middle English. The number of French words in Scots shows the Norman influence that characterized Middle English was already part of English when Scots split. My favorite Scots word of French origin is gardyloo. I've shared on another channel my thoughts on the parallel between Scots and Ukrainian and how dominant cultures (English and Russian) want to view them as dialects while the speakers of Scots and Ukrainian see them as languages. Scots has survived in part because of its literature and I compared Robert Burns and Taras Schevchenko (who is considered the father of Modern Ukrainian).

Id like to mention the concept of dialect levelling as well. This happens when two dialects, or languages for that matter, spend enough time in close proximity and/or interaction with each other, they will start to converge.

The question is actually the same problem as whether Karelian is an independent language or a dialect of Finnish. This is because the transition and line between language and dialect is very vague and unclear. And it has not been made any easier by the fact that the local dialect spoken in the city of Rauma differs more from the rest of the Finnish language than the Karelian language differs from Finnish. And sometimes the question touches on whether Finland is independent enough to be a language or whether the dialects of Finland should be seen as the northern dialects of Estonia, but that has been a much rarer topic and has not sparked futher debate.

I love the fact that I'm from a country where most people don't realise that they're speaking another language. My favourite right now is 'aye am ur'. Which is sort of like yes I am but not really.

Consider Swedish, Norwegian and Danish. Written Norwegian and Danish are extremely similar, Swedes can understand spoken Norwegian. There's a degree of mutual mutual intelligibility between the 3. All 3 can understand each other to an extend, depending on the regional dialect. Yet all 3 are different languages. So for Scots... it's no different. "a language is a dialect with an army and a navy"

The problem with your definition --- most Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, and French speakers understand each other on the basic levels.

What about Ulster Scott's? Could you do a video on that?

Can you do low saxon?

Both Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, Faroese and Icelandic all came from the same language too: Old Norse.

If scots isn't a language, then swedish and norwegian are the same language, and chilean isn't spanish.

I say we need more than language & dialect so I created media lingua which is Latin for middle language do to it being in between being a language & a dialect

When I was young and stayed in England for six months as a child, we went up to visit Scotland. I was amazed that the accent in Scotland was so thick that I could not understand them. Now I understand...they weren't speaking English...just a language close enough to think they were!

"If it's different but you can understand it then it's a dialect" Swedish and Danish: Wha..

It's like how the common perception is that humans evolved from chimps but in truth we have a common ancestor and chimps are as modern as we are in their own way.

Well, I'm roundly convinced! Scots is a language, and a fine one at that.

If English and Scots are dialects then Turkish and Azerbaijani, Bulgarian and Macedonian, Serbian and Bosniak etc. are also dialects👀

I consider it a language rather than a dialect when the original language has no more native speakers. ie Italian would be a dialect of Latin until Latin became a dead language. so as soon as Old English ran out of Native speakers, Scots became a language ( like children inheriting titles.

There's another problem with the "mutual intelligibility" definition; there's inherent prejudice in what gets called a 'language' and what gets called a 'dialect.' All Nordic language speakers can understand each other pretty well to very well, but they speak different languages; but people speaking one "dialect" of Arabic might be almost entirely unable to understand someone speaking another unless they happen to be able to communicate in Quranic Arabic the way Liturgical Latin was used in Christendom and, pre-revival, Classical Hebrew was used in among the Jewish diaspora.

As a native Spanish speaker who can understand Portuguese to a 98% in its formal form and to a 80% in a normal conversation, Scots is a language because if it weren't I'd have to say that Portuguese is not a language. There is a huge difference between Yucatec Spanish dialect, Center Chilean Spanish Dialect and Cubans Spanish Dialect to the point that sometimes it is easier to understand a person speaking in formal Portugues than someone speaking in one of those informal forms (dialects) of Spanish.

7:44 You know that Old English is also called Anglo-Saxon, right?

It’s a language the spelling, gramma, pronunciations and most importantly lexicon are just too different to be a dialect in my opinion.

Written down, Spanish and Portuguese are also very similar.

The description of dialects and languages honestly does not work, I know a couple dialects in my parents languages that are not mutually intelligible; shit you just covered it again but yeah it’s very hard to determine

So someone from Hamburg could argue that when Im speaking with a fanconian dialect Im speaking a different language just because they don't understand it? Swiss German would be it's own lamguage as well as anything other than Standard Austrian German. Hell I don't understand much of Dutch, but people from North Western Germany do, even though we both speak German not Dutch. Still Dutch is it's own language. It's way to complicated but Id say as it's more of a sister language for me personally but as there are no fixed boundaries it's a matter of personal opinion I guess.

7:44 you could call Old English Anglo-Saxon

As said Scots is indeed officially recognised as a Language now. Kids in Scotland are even allowed to write using Scots in schools if they wish. Something that's worth mentioning is how most Scottish people are able to very easily switch between broad Scots and perfect English depending on the situation and who they're speaking to.

Tbf saying Scots is just a dialect is like saying Portuguese is just a dialect of spanish

Or maybe it’s actually a creole combining features of the “regular” English language (particularly the varieties from Northern England) and those of the Scottish Gaelic language (pronounced Gallic, FYI; “Gaylick” is the Irish pronunciation)?

Also doesnt Old English have another name? Couldnt it also be referred to as Anglo Saxon as well?

It's so interesting cause like. If you hear someone speak proper scots. You'd say "that's not English that's another language" even as a person who knows a lot of scots and uses it in my everyday speech, some times I've got no clue what they are saying

That explanation of I you can understand it’s a dialect isn’t true because Norwegian, Swedish and danish are all very similar and speakers can some what understand each other but they are considered different languages.

"Ah" sound in scottish Gaelic not "ay" sound

So is the narrator's pronunciation of "language" as "language-uh" part of a dialect?

We need to make an Entirely New Language for America. How do you say “Hello” in American (not even the same as English, but Different from ALL Languages)?

To further argue against the notion it just being a dialect- just look to Scandinavia as an example. Norwegian, Swedish and Danish are their own languages. A Norwegian could very well understand written Danish, spoken Swedish and still have issues understanding Norwegian spoken in a regional dialect he’s not too familiar with. To me, it comes down to the cultural significance of the tongue in question, and whether it’s distinguishing nationalities or counties.

I mean...as others have said language vs dialect is really more sociopolitical than anything else. However, I also think that linguistics should be able to accommodate this kind of situation. Two dialects of a dead language which arose and developed independently, went on to survive the death of the standard form their parent language, changing from it in the process. However, through sheer coincidence remain largely the same as one another.

If you say that if you understand it it is a dialect but if you don’t it is a language, what about Norwegian, Swedish and danish?

Damn, no more Hiku?

Unfortunately the answer to these questions inevitably involve politics rather than "can I understand what that drunk Glaswegian is saying or not?". Maybe we need more descriptive layers to add to just the two 'language or dialect'. In certain situations and a bit of patience of coaxing, Italian and Spanish are mutually comprehensible, but I wouldn't call them dialects of the same language. More like dialects of dialects of a dialect of a language. :S

Ngl I feel like it's the same thing as dutch and Flemish. Both are made from each other and can be argued as a lialect but at the end of the day they are different languages

So does Ulster Scots count as a dialect of Scots?

Gascon is language that many say is a dialect of Occitan, despite Old Gascon being older than Old Occitan. Linguists really need to figure out a way to define what makes a language and what makes a dialect.

As both the Magna Carta and the Declaration of Arbroath, the Scots and English Charters were both written in Latin as the origin of the language. Scots is only a different pronunciation. The English like to own everything, from the Bank of England, formed by a Scotsman to even bacon and eggs as an English breakfast so, the issue is not the language, it's the English need to posses anything they can.

Scots is definitely a different language when it is used in it purest sense. But you dont really hear people speaking in pure Scots, very often these days. People in the lowlands tend to use a mixture of Scottish English, and some words in Scots. Well thats my personal observation. Other people may have different experiences. But I m sure its very rare to hear folk blethering using 100% auld Scots, the auld Lallan's Leid, at all. I wish we did.

Cockney isn't a dialect it's an atrocity

It's not a dialect nor a separate language. It's a third in between category.

LaNgUaGeUH

The Greek government considers Tsakonian a divergent dialect even though it's not mutually intelligible with Modern Greek and is descended from Doric Greek not Attic Greek.

The mutually understandable argument is kinda bad as it would mean that Portuguese and Spanish are the same languange

Oh boy, Scots Wikipedia shenanigans… what a rabbit hole that is

This is funny because that's the same relationship Cantonese has with Mandarin, and it's been a huge debate whether Cantonese is considered a dialect or it's own language as well.

It's not like I like you or anything, eegit. Have you ever done a video on why the language spoken by Anglo-Saxons is named after just the Angles even though it was ultimately a Saxon kingdom who unified them?

Then Norwegian is a dialect of Danish, or Swedish...

It started as a dialect, then became a language reaching its most distinct form around the 16th centuary, then due to concerted efforts to anglicize Scots by self hating Scottish academics it became a dialect once again. Even Burns isn't the true Scots leid that was used in the Kingdom of Scotland. There's a Scots synonym for most words, though many haven't been used for a long time.

I could hardly understand that writing as an american english speaker. Scotts seems like another language to me.

I think we are still waiting for the spelling of modern Scots to be standardised, right?

Old English DOES have another name: Anglo-Saxon. By your definition of dialect, Modern English is not a dialect of Old English, since they are mutually unintelligible. 5:48 "If it's different and you can understand it, it's a dialect. If you can't understand it at all, it's a language." What about strong accents? There are native English speakers who can read something that you understand perfectly in print, but you wouldn't understand a word, because of their accent.

Puddock is a Frog. I don't need to learn anything more today, I'm stuffed.

SiMiLahh

I question anyone who thinks most English speakers can understand Scots, seeing as how I've literally used Scots as a secret language in front of multiple English speakers. The written form is arguably easier to understand.

As one meme says: (Scottish) gay-lick. We had here the funny argumemt whether Ukrainian is a dialect of Polish or russian. It itself got born from a fusion of Galych-Podillean and Polissean dialects of the proto-slavic language and its interpretation from Kharkiv and Poltava. And, funnily enough, we all understand russian by default, russians, in return, don't :)

Old English is also called Anglo-Saxon. Of course neither name was actually used by the people who spoke the language.

Let’s see what Groundskeeper Willie has to say about this

Scots is a language. Just like not every Langue d'Oil is French and not every Langue d'Oc is Catalan.

Modern English and Scots are cousins, but they haven't diverged enough to be classed as different languages. Maybe it would bemore useful to develop different terminology? That I leave to others

I live in Newfoundland, in Canada...our people's history is strongly tied to Ireland and Scotland...as yes, we call people eejit's lol

Scots is more similar to modern English than old English

Scots is to English what Low Saxon is to German.

We could use Anglo-Saxon as a name for Old English.

Sounds more like a pidgin to me

NoRvErN

Seems to me this has as much, if not more, to do with politics than it does to do with linguistics. Of course when it comes to many person relevant forms of categorization politics are as, if not more, important than whatever field of study is also relevant.