A Probe into the Status of Scots as a Language

【Abstract】In this paper， the author probes into the status of Scots as whether being a Scottish dialect or an independent language. Various perspectives have been touched down to gain a much comprehensive look into this controversial issue， including linguistic， historical and political etc. Based on the research discussion， Scots is superior to other dialects while inferior to any other independent languages in terms of linguistic features. Therefore， Scots shall be appropriately defined as a minority language.

【Key words】Scots； dialect； minority language； language status

1. Introduction

Previous to the ‘Brexit from the EU， Scotland held its referendum in 2014 to seek independence from the UK. Though failed finally， a strong Scottish nationalism could still be felt merely through the media coverage. After the Brexit， Scottish first prime minister and many people still plea for the second referendum. It is because of the mounting attention put on Scotland， what also attracts people is the way Scottish people speak. It is similar to English but rather different in various aspects.

2. Definition： language and dialect

In order to see which category Scots falls into， a fine line must be drawn between language and dialect. However， it is not always easy to define what a ‘language is and what is merely one ‘dialect among others of a particular language. The distinction is not always based merely on strictly ‘linguistic criteria， on， for example， the degree of mutual intelligibility or otherwise of two ‘linguistic varieties， or on a comparison of phonetic， grammatical or lexical features （Price 1984：186）. According to A Glossary of Sociolinguistics （Trudgill， 2003）， Language is not only a linguistic， but also a political， cultural， social and historical term. Taking a clichéd example of Norwegian and Swedish， though a high degree of mutual intelligibility exists， they remain to be separate languages due to political considerations. As opposed to that， Mandarin and Cantonese varieties， though mutually unintelligible， are still simply classified as Chinese. This is also a case in point to indicate the political influences on languages classification. From the above examples， we can see there lies much truth in the saying that language is a dialect with navy and army. Therefore， in this respect， Scots could only be regarded as a dialect rather than a language in the sociologists eyes for the mere fact that Scotland is now included in the larger entity of United Kingdom.endprint

3. A Historical perspective

It seems to be a plausible answer if we just stop here. But having a closer look at the historical development of Scots， a much more complex scenario is unfolded before us. The autonomy of Scots has regularly been argued on historical grounds， since prior to the Union of the Crowns in 1603， when James VI of Scotland acceded to the throne of England upon the death of the childless Elizabeth I， Scots had been the language of the Scottish court， and of the literature which flourished under court patronage； and it had been known latterly as ‘Scottis in contradistinction to ‘Inglis （Macafee）. From the Act of Union of 1707 onwards， the official language of Scotland ceased to be Scots but Standard English， pushing Scots into a even faster track of anglicising process. This involves not only a reduction in the social and literary range of Scots， but also a gradual loss of differentiation from Standard English （Macafee）. In the course of over three hundred years till now， a multitude of distinctive features of Scots have been gradually lost. This tendency of becoming less ‘pure partly explains the current thought held by many people as to its disqualification as a language. By reviewing the history， we are now in a good position to claim that Scots， being mistakenly seen as a corrupt form of standard variety， used to serve as a national tongue of Kingdom of Scotland.

4. A Sociolinguistic perspective

So far， not a single definition of Scots has been offered since the split remains among scholars concerning the nature of Scots as a language or a dialect. But what is beyond doubt is Scots is a generic continuum along which many varieties lie. In other words， the linguistic manifestations of Scots should be seen as type of scale or cline， encompassing a very broad range of usage and formal characteristics （Jones 2002：10）. In this sense， Scots is more likely to be a language rather than a dialect since it incorporates a range of diversified dialects in itself. To further complicate the situation， not all these dialects are completely mutually intelligible though under the common umbrella term ‘Scots. Taking into account the salient linguistic differences between Standard English and Scots， its own distinctive literary tradition and history， all these defining features of Scots lead us to conclude that Scots is more than a dialect despite a lack of the attributes of a full language. Standard， or national languages， according to Haugen （1966） show elaboration and codification on the language level and selection and acceptance on part of the society. Sadly， Scots now has almost become a synonym for a vulgar form of speech solely preserved by rural and uneducated working class people. On the road to revive its language status， Scots has to fight against these overt prejudices and negative labels attached to it. To sum up， on the one hand， for Scots， a high degree of differentiation from English， a well-preserved distinct literary tradition and identification with certain speech communities in Scotland can add to its credits as a language； on the other hands， it is evident that Scots is devoid of a codified standard system of grammar and orthography. Whats more， its degree of use for utilitarian writing is extremely low as opposed to its flourishment in literary writing. From this perspective， Scots goes somewhere in between a dialect and language， being not well-qualified as a fully-fledged language while more elaborate and systemic compared with many other dialects.endprint

5. Political perspective

We are about to lapse into the enduring dispute concerning the status of Scots since no conclusion can be reached at this stage. What adds to our confusion is the hard fact that Scots was recognized as a minority language proper by the European Bureau for Lesser Used Languages （Mini-Guide to the Lesser-Used Languages 1993， see Bergs）. According to the definition from A Dictionary of Sociolinguistics， minority language is a language which is spoken by a numerical minority or by a politically subordinate group （Swann et al. 2004：206）. More specific details are provided by Liz Niven （2002）—languages which differ from the official language of the state where they are spoken and which are traditionally used within a given territory by nationals of the state who form a group numerically smaller than the rest of the population. So it is justifiable for Scots to be classified as a minority language in this way.

6. Conclusion

In conclusion， Scots， used to serve as a national language， is now popularly perceived as a non-standard form of English for socio-political reasons. However， due to its linguistic and historical distinctiveness， it can by no means be put on the same level with other dialects. The recognition of Scots as a minority language may seem to me the most suitable answer to the question， though against common beliefs.

References：

[1]Price，Glanville.The languages of Britain.London：Edward Arnold.

[2]Trudgill，Peter.A Glossary of Sociolinguistics.Edinburgh： Edinburgh University Press.

[3]Macafee，Caroline.‘Nationalism and the Scots Renaissance now in：Manfred G?rlach（ed.）Focus on：Scotland，pp.10-11.Amsterdam：Benjamins.

[4]Jones，Charles.The English language in Scotland：an introduction to Scots.East Linton：Tuckwell Press.

[5]Haugen，E.‘Dialect，Language，Nation，American Antropologist 68：922-935.Bergs，Alexander.Modern Scots.München：Lincom Europa.

[6]Swann，Joan et al.A Dictionary of Sociolingustics.Edinburgh： Edinburgh University Press.

[7]Niven，Liz ‘Nae Chiels：Scots Language in Scotland，in：John M.Kirk and Donall P.O Baoill（eds）Language Planning and Education：Linguistic Issues in Nortern Ireland，the Republic of Ireland，and Scotland Belfast：Cló Ollscoil na Banríona pp.186.

作者簡介：李美，女，陜西西安人，西安醫(yī)學院英語系教師，雙碩士：英國愛丁堡大學語言學碩士；西安外國語大學口譯碩士，研究方向：英語語言學與英語教學法。endprint