Get th' Scots doon!

Ah, the Scots language. To anyone unfamiliar with the dialect, it is a mangling of vowels, a slurring of consonants, and an almost French ability to leave the end off words, all said whilst lowering your voice and sounding as aggressive as possible. To the average American, it is incomprehensible. Or near enough. Remember Mike Myer's character "Fat Bastard"? And his caricatures in "My Wife is an Axe Murderer"? Compare that to the character on "Rab C Nesbitt", an unemployed ex-alcoholic from the back estates of Glasgow (or "Glasgae" as it's sometimes called).

But what is it that makes a language? A language, famously is "a dialect with an army". Ha ha. True, but these days, with linguists advocating for the recognition of different Englishes, for example, Hong Kong English, there is an ever-growing cry to recognise Scots as an actual variety of English, that than a mere local quirk.

The Scotsman newspaper often hosts letters and articles about Scots (the language), but today an article about an author releasing a book in Scots for a whole year before the book is released in English. A quote from the book, as given in the article:

WHIT wid ye dae if ye fund yersel face tae face wi a muckle lion? Staund as still as a stookie? Mak yer feet yer freens and rin? Creep awa quiet-like? Mibbe ye wid jist steek yer een and hope that ye were haein a dream – which is whit Obed did at first when he saw the frichtsome lion starin strecht at him.

Translation (of my best guess):

What would you do if you found yourself face to face with a "muckle" lion? Stand as still as a "stookie"? Make your feet your friends and run? Creep away quietly? Maybe you would just "steek yer een" (rub your eyes?) and hope that you were having a dream -- which is what Obed did at first when he saw the fightsome lion staring straight at him.

 Want some more Scots fun?

The Bible in Scots:

  7. Than, Herod, convenin the Wyss Men privately, faund oot mair strickly o' the comin o' the starn ;

    8. And bad them gang to Bethlehem ; and quo' he, "Gang, and seek ye oot the wee bairn ; and whan ye ken, fesh me word again, that I as weel may come and worship."

(Mathew Chaipter Twa, verses 7 til 8 frae 'The Four Gospels in Braid Scots' - Rev William W Smith)

 Or perhaps a translator:

Your translation (from woohoo) is:
Ah, th' scots leid. tae anyain unfamiliar wi' th' dialect, it is a manglin' ay vowels, a slurrin' ay consonants, an' an almost french ability tae lae th' end aff words, aw said whilst lowerin' yer voice an' soondin' as aggressife as possible. tae th' average american, it is incomprehensible. ur near enaw.

Or read Scots straight from the source (the horse's mouth as it were), on Bebo, the social networking site popular among the working and underclasses of Scotland. Some excellent samples are found on the Glasgow Rangers page:

 Boyd is SHITE......you wee deluded hun......
King of scoring wee SHITTY goals you mean.....

Nae bother greg. goodnyt n godbless yous fuckin huns go on

Or the rival Glasgow Celtics Page:

YOUS HUV WON MARE TITLES THIN US COS YEESE WUR MADE ABOOT 16 YER BEFORE US UR SUM FUKIN HING YA DIRTY WEE HUN BASTERD

Or a comment on the somewhat satirical Glasgow Neds page:

haha loveittt neds are the fuckin best , hilarous m8 ! specially glesga wans but i think yeez are a bunch ae goons fur makin a group boot it ?

Is there a cohesiveness to it? Does the use reflect the academic dictionaries? Or is the bulk of it the random phonetic scrawlings of a half-educated ape sitting at a computer? And is my knee-jerk reaction that this is primarily a class issue correct?

Language and Media Bias

An excellent discussion of language use and media racism as displayed by the difference between "looters" and "finders/gatherers" post-earthquake in Haiti. White = finder/gatherer... Black = looter...?

My New Favourite Toy

Possibly one of the most useful toys I've seen: the free demo at Textwise Semantic Signatures. Apparently, this blog currently talks about:

Society/Issues/Race-Ethnic-Religious Relations
Society/Issues/Human Rights and Liberties
Society/Issues/Violence and Abuse
Society/Issues/Territorial Disputes
Regional/Europe/United Kingdom/Scotland

Neat, eh? Go ahead, try it with any article, it's pretty accurate (for the most part).

Reality, virtual or otherwise

"Cyberbullying". There have been campaigns against it in both the UK and the US. Both are aimed at young people. The UK government's website is through the Need to Know young people site. The US website is more explicit, stating: "Once adults become involved, it is plain and simple cyber-harassment or cyberstalking. Adult cyber-harassment or cyberstalking is NEVER called cyberbullying." The strict minor-only definition of cyberbullying does not appear stand in the UK, as model Liskula Cohen used the phrase to the Independent that she was cyberbullied by a blog.

The tagline from one of my favourite websites is: "It's just a website!" meaning that people shouldn't take what is said on the forums so seriously all the time. Och, people just take things so seriously online. And yet at the same time, seem to forget that at the other end of the computer connection is another human being. Selfish selfish selfish.

But the line between libel and bullying is thin. Both the US and the UK are strongly against libel (I'm not sure which one more so). I suppose that's one upside to all this cyberbullying stuff:

The case has helped to clarify which terms of insult are libellous, such as "ho", which are merely wounding, like "skank"....
The court sided with Cohen, citing defamation "concerning her appearance, hygiene and sexual conduct".

Ever wanted to know the difference between a skank and a ho? Well, thanks to the New York courts, we now know.

Racism - Differences in "race" in the US and UK

It always perplexed me, that most census forms here in the UK, or Equal Opportunity forms given as part of a job application, list not just "White", "Black", "Asian" etc, but go right deep into the ethnic background of the applicant. Asian include Indian, Pakistani, but sometimes Chinese is its own group. Black include Afro-Caribbean. White includes English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh. I always choose "White: other" and handwrite "American". This is most likely because the definition of "race" in the UK includes "ethnic origin".

The law defines racial grounds as including race, colour, nationality or ethnic or national origins. (Equality and Human Rights Commission)

In fact, this sample form doesn't even use the word "race", it uses "ethnic background". Why is it that only Blacks are "British" here? This other form also uses the term "ethnic origin", but noteably combines all white people into either "British" or not-British. All of the other categories are broken down by country. Yet the form says that "Ethnic origin questions are not about nationality, place of birth or citizenship. They are about colour and
broad ethnic group. UK citizens can belong to any of the groups listed." What does that mean? Aren't all UK citizens just "UK"? (or whatever British term they choose.) I've even seen the word racism to apply to discrimination against "gingers" (people with red/ginger hair).

Part of my confusion stems from the American look at racism. Ask most Americans what the different races are in the US, and you'll hear White, Black, Hispanic, Asian and (in some places) Native American. This can be seen in the list of references on the Wikipedia article on racism: "A poll on black, hispanic and asian americans on race relations", "red, white and black", "where black and brown collide", "both white and red". Ask people for an example of racism and they'll mention black people. Ask what defines race and they'll say the colour of your skin.

It isn't strictly true that race in the US is only colour. The US Constitution's 15th Ammendment (1870) reads:

Amendment XV
(Ratified February 3, 1870)

Section 1

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Section 2

The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Race and color are separate items! Yet you'll often hear the phrase "racial and ethnic minorities" such as over here are the Racism Review blog. (In the same blog, the author uses the phrase "colorblind" as an opposite to racism.) In their recording of Hate Crimes (here, 2005), the FBI distinguishes between race crimes (black, white, native, asian) and ethnicity crimes (hispanic). Technically speaking, hispanic is not a race in the US. Yet crimes against hispanics can still be called racist.

Here's my conundrum: Race is biological. I am white because my parents were white, and there is nothing I can do to change that. I am American, though, because I was raised in America. While it was not a choice offered to me at birth, I do now have to choice whether or not to join another white ethnic group, such a converting to a different religion, or changing my citizenship. If I changed my religion or citizenship, I would still check same US census box. Would my British census box change? Would I call myself English, as I'm marrying an Englishman? Or would I be Scottish because I live in Scotland? Or would I still be American as I speak with an American accent?

In a sense, I suppose I'm not the only one. This blog asks people from Taiwan to write in TAIWANESE on the census forms instead of checking the Chinese box. The difference between "race", "colour" and "ethnic group" varies in other countries as well.

Irritating Name Mash-ups

They're not acronyms, and they're not abbreviations. Apparently it's called a Portmanteau, more of a mash-up, or an odd nickname given to celebrities by the media. (Not real people, mind you, but the media. These are cold, calculated misuses of language.) We've seen it with Brangelina, Bennifer, J-Lo, and a whole mess of other "celebs" (Ed: SHOOT ME NOW!!).


The latest victim to dicocide (murder of names) is Susan Boyle, or, as she's more familiarly known: SuBo. I noticed this in today's Metro newspaper. The on-line article uses Susan's full name in the headline, while the printed newspaper read: "SuBo wows 25m in US".

A quick look on google showed that the use of SuBo as a term peaked in roughly June 2009.

Susan Boyle debuted in April 2009, and has over 1000 articles from April, Mary and June. The number dropped significantly in July, for whatever reason. Google only lists 96 articles mentioning SuBo, but over 4000 for Susan Boyle.

Poor woman. I feel bad that the only reason she's famous is because she's old, fat and ugly. Really, that's it. She's unattractive, and the fact that she can sing shocks people so much that she is given freak-show status as an artist. I've never heard her, myself, but I know they do occasionally get some real singers on these shows, so I don't doubt her talent. It's kinda like those kids who can do math really well: FREAK!! Not that Britain isn't known for its modern-day freak shows.

But now Susan's made the rank of pet celebrities. She is no longer her own person, Susan Boyle, she is a two-syllable title given to sub-humans who are hunted by the paparazzi and then displayed in magazines as a trophy. She is no longer part of the race of human, she is an object, like so many have been before her, and like so many will be after her.