Shetland Dialect

[DePooperit]

Official status is a bit too much I think, even if the dialect was spoken by everybody, official documents would still be issued in standard English. But encouraging the dialect by radio broadcasts and local newspapers written in it would be a good compromise and a good measure to maintain the dialect at no cost. But there's no even a page in the dialect except Wirhoose.

 

I'm afraid that what I mean by 'official status' is a lot more modest than producing official documents in Shetland. Radio broadcasts and newspapers written even partially in Shetland would be well on the way towards what I meant. Some facts, however, are:

 

- there is no Shetlandic orthography, and Shetland thought is opposed to the idea of orthography. (The often-repeated assertion that Shetland orthography is 'impossible' is a sort of sociostructural myth which lends verisimilitude to this perception.) Language can be read fluently only when spellings are familiar (as the sounds of spoken language are familiar.) Expecting people in general to read idiosyncratic dialect-type spellings is a bit like expecting them to listen to speech through a distortion circuit, and therefore printing news items in Shetland - as long as it is perceived and written as dialect' - is impractical.

 

- I once wrote a review for the New Shetlander in Shetland. That was the only one I ever wrote.

 

- I once wrote a review for the Shetland Times in Shetland. The editor, though concerned that it would be difficult to read, printed it 'for a change'. That was the last one I ever wrote.

 

- Shetland is spoken on the radio. But, because there is no definition or reference for the Shetland tongue, and radio announcers must be understood by everyone, this means that the Shetland spoken by radio presenters is necessarily of the most reduced kind, and from what I hear when I am in Shetland, becoming more reduced annually.

 

- I am told that the independent radio station, SIBC, has a no dialect policy. The fact that no one in Shetland complains about this, but many people complained when Mary Blance first started to speak Shetland on BBC Radio Shetland, is a fair index of Shetland attitudes.

 

- Most conversations on this forum on this topic are held by people from the Nordic countries.

[Dagfinn]

I'm afraid that what I mean by 'official status' is a lot more modest than producing official documents in Shetland.

That´s also how I understood it. I wasn´t exactly thinking about Shetland as the legal language of court, if you know what I mean.

By 'official status' I thought more of pupils writing essays in Shetland, to prove some basic knowledge of it. Well I don´t know if that´s the case already.

If there are some 'official' requirements to prove that you have the knowledge of a certain language or dialect, it already has a 'status'.

[MJ]

It'd be nice if it was taught more in the schools, but then there comes to be which version of Shetland would be taught? Know that's part of the problem with Gaelic.

I can just about read most of what's written in these threads, but could never write confidently in Shetland. Automatically write the English down when given words in Shetland (not good when writing addresses). But a standard written form taught in schools could help keep the Shetland dialect alive and make it more accessible to children who have no/v.little Shetland spoken at home.

Isn't Frances Tait doing something about encouraging Shetland dialect in schools?

[DePooperit]

There is a move, as you say, about 'encouraging Shetland dialect in schools.' My view has always been that this is impossible.

 

For one thing, what do you mean by 'Shetland dialect'? With no reference point - ie, written form as such - then it can really only mean 'anything that is not standard English.'

 

Someone who had lived away for Shetland for some time returned to hear young people using phrases like 'youse wans'. His immediate reaction was 'dat's no richt'. But in a general dialect perception, it's just as right as anything else.

 

An example I've often given is variations on the following phrase:

 

1. I've booked all those who were wrongly parked

2. I'm bookit aa dem at wis wrang parkit

3. I've booked all them that was wrong parked

4. I've booked all those wha wir wrongly parked

5. I've booked aa dem wha wir wrong parkit

 

I could come up with a lot of other variations. As far as I can see, in popular usage, all except the first could be called 'Shetland dialect'. Only the first - standard English - has a reference point for spelling, grammar and vocabulary. The others could be anything.

 

You could also take the view that none of these are Shetland dialect, because none of the sentences has any words that are peculiar to Shetland. This is another common view that has been expressed on these forums.

 

Version 3 introduces another view you come across - that dialect should be spelt using standard English spellings, leaving it up to the writer to know how to pronounce it. Version 4 - which I can imagine you could easily hear in Lerwick - is simply English with one or two Shetland pronunciations. So which are Shetland dialect and which aren't? Presumably they should all be encouraged equally. So you might just as well say 'you can speak and write any way you like.'

 

Fundamentally, the attitude towards 'dialect' in Shetland is, vaguely, that you can encourage it to persist in the role it always has had, without it impinging on the traditional roles of standard English. I am encouraged to write poetry and children's stories in it, but discouraged from writing articles, for example. But it is precisely that traditional dominant role of standard English which has eroded the traditional 'haemaboot' role of 'dialect. So to try to revive the traditional roles of 'dialect' and standard English is to try to revive the situation which causes the demise of dialect.

[Njugle]

I understand what you are saying DePooperit, but surely your own argument could be turned upside down and say that so long as proficient wordsmiths with a grasp of real 'Shetland' cannot be persuaded to write accessible examples of it, like children's stories, then we all may as well give up to the authority that English language has exercised upon them.

 

As an extreme example, the universal language of aviation is English, but this does not mean there are no foreign pilots.

 

As to the school system, we had one teacher at primary school who taught us 'Shetland' . We each had our own little jotter full of dialect names for the flora and fauna and she read us stories in Shetland. I idolise her to this day for doing so, it was a truly honourable task. Of course this was one 'project' amongst many lessons but i think it sits better than an all-or-nothing attitude to language at this stage in it's demise. There are differences between the language used in one end of the isles to the other but there is definitely a core element of words and phrases that are used by all. If nothing else that should/could be encouraged, even if only used informally or socially.

[deardron]

I'm afraid that what I mean by 'official status' is a lot more modest than producing official documents in Shetland.

OK, the word 'official' confused me a bit Just like if we say "Swedish has an official status in Finland"...

- Most conversations on this forum on this topic are held by people from the Nordic countries.

I think it's a bit exagerated, there's plenty natives here who post on it. But even if you were right, it's not something extraordinary. The author of the Icelandic linguistic purism of the early XIX century was the famous Dane Rasmus Rask, and the inventor of the Faroese orthography Hammershaimb borrowed his ideas from the Copenhagen-based Icelander Jón Sigurðsson. Let alone all those missionaires etc.

 

And is a strictly unified orthography so important for the purpose of writing childrens fairytales and other easy-reading stuff? People here on the board write some words in different ways (in the dialect), so somehow they must have been taught to do it their own way?

[DePooperit]

I understand what you are saying DePooperit, but surely your own argument could be turned upside down and say that so long as proficient wordsmiths with a grasp of real 'Shetland' cannot be persuaded to write accessible examples of it, like children's stories, then we all may as well give up to the authority that English language has exercised upon them.

 

 

I would argue that this illustrates the basic difference between the situation in Shetland, and that in, say, Faroe, Wales or the Gaelic speaking areas.

 

In these areas, those who write in order to provide an example write using a standard. This doesn't mean that everyone must use a standard - in Faroese literature there are more and less 'purist' styles. Nor does it mean that the children themselves should have to follow such a standard. But a standard provides a reference point as a counterbalance to the reference point of standard English, which can exercise an influence - whereas, at the moment, the influence is almost entirely one way.

 

Those few who are already writing children's stories already use a much more standardised form of spelling than, for example, most of the posts on this forum. My attitude towards standardisation of spelling - which is not the same thing as standardisation of grammar, for example - is that it wouldn't be a big step further than what already exists. This is why my spelling, although based on scientific principles, sticks as closely to the Graham model as it can while still fulfilling my objectives - unlike the idiosyncratic spellings of 'ex-isle', for example, or those who follow a 'doon toon' Tom Leonard model.

 

In Faroese, Welsh or Gaelic, these writers would use the standard without any difficulty. The reason they don't take the final step in Shetland, I think, is first - obviously - that no teachable standard exists (the Graham spelling, though good as far as it goes, is very difficult to learn because of inconsistencies) and secondly, the influence of the mainland Scots philosophy - created mostly by people who may themselves neither speak nor write Scots - which is opposed to standards on principle.

 

Now, of course, I'm not going to argue that the efforts which are already taking place are wrong, and certainly not that people - including children - should be inhibited from writing Shetland by spelling paranoia. But then, I'd say the same about writing English.

 

What I am saying is that the position is so serious that nothing other than a full-on attack has even the slightest hope of stemming the decline of the Shetland tongue. The argument - favoured by the Scottish literati - that Scots should be kept free from the trammels of standardisation for reasons of self-expression might be all very well if it were thriving. But neither Scots nor Shetland can afford such a peely-wally approach.

 

As an extreme example, the universal language of aviation is English, but this does not mean there are no foreign pilots.

 

I don't really need to point out that this is a completely different situation, do I?

 

 

As to the school system, we had one teacher at primary school who taught us 'Shetland' . We each had our own little jotter full of dialect names for the flora and fauna and she read us stories in Shetland. I idolise her to this day for doing so, it was a truly honourable task. Of course this was one 'project' amongst many lessons but i think it sits better than an all-or-nothing attitude to language at this stage in it's demise. There are differences between the language used in one end of the isles to the other but there is definitely a core element of words and phrases that are used by all. If nothing else that should/could be encouraged, even if only used informally or socially.

 

Perhaps the nub of the problem is summed up in your phrase 'at this stage in its demise'. It seems to me that everyone (including myself) accepts that the Shetland tongue will die out. I remember John Graham writing that all that could be done would be to slow down its demise, and one of the members of Shetland for Wirds told me that she didn't believe they had a 'hope in hell.' It seems to me to be very odd to do something that you think isn't going to succeed. Why bother? It's true that we try to avert our own deaths all the time, even though we know we're not going to ultimately succeed. And it's also true that all language forms ultimately die or change beyond recognition. But I think the analogy falls down on time scale. We typically live for less than a century. Languages (and that includes dialects) typically exist for many centuries, and change very slowly unless there are major upheavals such as the influence of Norman French on English, or of standard English on practically everything else. I would argue that, in timescale, the present stage in the demise of the Shetland tongue doesn't represent an ageing process, but its 'dee-traa'. In which case, I don't see the point in half measures - largely because those half measures embody rather than try to reverse the general attitude towards dialect in Shetland which is a major factor in its demise.

[DePooperit]

I'm afraid that what I mean by 'official status' is a lot more modest than producing official documents in Shetland.

 

OK, the word 'official' confused me a bit Just like if we say "Swedish has an official status in Finland"...

 

- Most conversations on this forum on this topic are held by people from the Nordic countries.

 

I think it's a bit exagerated, there's plenty natives here who post on it. But even if you were right, it's not something extraordinary. The author of the Icelandic linguistic purism of the early XIX century was the famous Dane Rasmus Rask, and the inventor of the Faroese orthography Hammershaimb borrowed his ideas from the Copenhagen-based Icelander Jón Sigurðsson. Let alone all those missionaires etc.

 

There are plenty who post in Shetland, but Shetlanders - apart from Njuggle so far - don't usually get involved in discussions of the type we're having here. Those who do tend to be from the Nordic countries where the establishment of orthographies for native tongues is a fair accompli. In Shetland, as in Scotland, these examples are not considered to be relevant to the Shetland and Scottish situation.

 

 

And is a strictly unified orthography so important for the purpose of writing childrens fairytales and other easy-reading stuff? People here on the board write some words in different ways (in the dialect), so somehow they must have been taught to do it their own way?

 

I would argue that inconsistent spelling is a major inhibition to reading, which is in turn a major inhibition to writing. Our familiarity with English is because we see it written every day, as well as hearing it on the media (including the SIBC channel). Only a minority of people will bother to either read or write 'dialect', and the influence of the language which is read and written is bound to increase. In short, the problem with easy-reading stuff is that it isn't easy to read.

[MJ]

I would argue that inconsistent spelling is a major inhibition to reading, which is in turn a major inhibition to writing. Our familiarity with English is because we see it written every day, as well as hearing it on the media (including the SIBC channel). Only a minority of people will bother to either read or write 'dialect', and the influence of the language which is read and written is bound to increase. In short, the problem with easy-reading stuff is that it isn't easy to read.

That's why I say have it taught it schools. Sooth they inflict the likes of rabbie burns on kids in schools, why not local poets here.

Rhoda Bulter for example, remember her doing readings in the old gruting school at community events. Apt for us out west as she grew up round here and so the dialect to us is local. Usage in school is key to trying to encourage the language to stay alive, but like all living things languages do change so it shouldn't be to die hard.

Even encouragement to learn the place names. In Aberdeen all the school kids know the difference between Culter (coot-er) and Cults or how to pronounce Footdee (fit-ee), but here most school kids will pronounce the names as read on a sheet of paper, Aith and Walls being the most apparent here.

Another one would be teaching shetland songs, (would help if the school had a music teacher,) but song is a great way of introducing the different sounds of a language to children.

[DePooperit]

I would argue that inconsistent spelling is a major inhibition to reading, which is in turn a major inhibition to writing. Our familiarity with English is because we see it written every day, as well as hearing it on the media (including the SIBC channel). Only a minority of people will bother to either read or write 'dialect', and the influence of the language which is read and written is bound to increase. In short, the problem with easy-reading stuff is that it isn't easy to read.

That's why I say have it taught it schools. Sooth they inflict the likes of rabbie burns on kids in schools, why not local poets here.

Rhoda Bulter for example, remember her doing readings in the old gruting school at community events. Apt for us out west as she grew up round here and so the dialect to us is local. Usage in school is key to trying to encourage the language to stay alive, but like all living things languages do change so it shouldn't be to die hard.

Even encouragement to learn the place names. In Aberdeen all the school kids know the difference between Culter (coot-er) and Cults or how to pronounce Footdee (fit-ee), but here most school kids will pronounce the names as read on a sheet of paper, Aith and Walls being the most apparent here.

Another one would be teaching shetland songs, (would help if the school had a music teacher,) but song is a great way of introducing the different sounds of a language to children.

 

I don't think Scottish children are taught Burns any more. Poetry is a good way to teach language at an early age, but later on most children lose interest in it, and it would be counter-productive. I remember my brother saying that they hid all the copies they could find in school of the Shetland school poetry book Nordern Lichts - that would be about thirty years ago.

 

Song is, again, a good way of teaching at an early age. But there are very few Shetland songs, at any level - little tradition of songwriting in Shetland. And if you did, you'd get stick for it - I remember a reviewer of a Shoormal album commenting that he didn't like 'dialect songs'. As soon as you use 'dialect' anywhere that it hasn't been common before, all the influential organs of mainstream Scottish and Shetland society, artistic, intellectual and bureaucratic, lose no time in pointing out that it is an insufferable faux pas to introduce Hickspeak into echelons outwith the level of the midden and runnick, don't you know.

 

The bottom line is that language is a medium, and if it isn't used as a medium then it is useless. There seems to be a view in Shetland that 'dialect' can be taught as a sort of cultural hobby, like fiddle music. But fiddle music can be practiced by a few specialists - everybody else can listen. But if most people in a locality don't speak the local language, it dies. A language which education presents as having relevance only in 'the arts' isn't going to seem relevant to most people.

 

It's exactly when you try to use 'dialect' as a written medium that you start to get slagged off. When Solotti's became Faerdimaet this was ridiculed in the Spike column by, I think, Tom Morton. My attempts to use Shetland as a written medium in places where English would be more usual have been called 'trite' (Morgan Goodlad) and 'an abortion' (Brian Smith.) Calling it 'Shetlandic' has been called 'jarringly jargonistic' by Tom Morton again - a view which most Shetlanders seem to agree with.

 

In Shetland, most even of those who are in favour of 'dialect' either agree with or are influenced by the above viewpoints. They tacitly accept that 'dialect' should be taught in, more or less, the place it has always occupied (speech, and occasional informal or literary writing) without intruding on the everyday practicalities where we are accustomed to standard English. But if dialect could have survived under those circumstances, it wouldn't be in danger today. Only a wind-change of perception in how the local speech is perceived could have any impact, and, as I have explained in the above paragraph, the first sign of the sort of changes in perception which have gained some success in other places (Faroe, Catalonia, Friesland) are greeted only with ridicule in Shetland, as in Scotland as a whole.

 

The story of Sheltie Prattle on my website was written many years ago, but I still think it sums up the prevalent attitudes towards the native tongue in Shetland, and their inevitable conclusion.

[deardron]

Does this pessimism towards 'Shaetlan' have anything to do with the fact that it is considered to be a dialect of English and people hence think the dialect and the normative English are the same language, just in different ways of uttering?

 

Some time ago I visited some multi-language forum. I was astonished to see that the Manx section was more active than f.ex. the Gaelic one, contrary to the fact that there's only few dozens of Manx speakers existing. In fact there's plenty of Manx stuff on the web, which can be considered as an indicator of the interest in the (or a) language. As long as no technical obstacle prevents Shetlanders to create webpages in their dialect broading thus its scope, doesn't the comparison with Manx confirm my supposal that it's the "language vs. dialect" thing that has the final say?

[DePooperit]

Does this pessimism towards 'Shaetlan' have anything to do with the fact that it is considered to be a dialect of English and people hence think the dialect and the normative English are the same language, just in different ways of uttering?

 

Some time ago I visited some multi-language forum. I was astonished to see that the Manx section was more active than f.ex. the Gaelic one, contrary to the fact that there's only few dozens of Manx speakers existing. In fact there's plenty of Manx stuff on the web, which can be considered as an indicator of the interest in the (or a) language. As long as no technical obstacle prevents Shetlanders to create webpages in their dialect broading thus its scope, doesn't the comparison with Manx confirm my supposal that it's the "language vs. dialect" thing that has the final say?

 

It depends what you mean by pessimism. Most people in Shetland accept that the tongue will die out, because there plenty of evidence that it is doing so at an alarming rate. Most people - including what might be called 'dialect activists' - accept the dialect definition. My pessimism, in addition, stems from the fact that I see such efforts as are being made as ineffectual.

 

I don't quite follow the Manx analogy. I think that Manx is perceived as being (or having been) a language, although it could equally well have been perceived as a dialect of Gaelic in general. It would be interesting to know how it was perceived before it died out, and whether the fact that it was written with an English-based rather than Gaelic based orthography was a statement that it was a different language from the other Gaelic tongues, or whether this was a denial of its Gaelic heritage, reflecting a tacit acceptance of the superiority of English.

 

The Shetland tongue has traditionally been regarded as a dialect of English. Shetland for Wirds, however, now apparently regard it as a dialect of Scots. This has had some interesting side effects. For example, at a recent cross-party of the Scots parliament regarding Scots, the Shetland MSP, Tavish Scott, proposed that a standard Scots should be avoided in order to give validity to dialects such as the Shetland dialect. As Shetland for Wirds had said that Scott was willing to ask question on their behalf, it is probable that this originated from them. It would seem, therefore, that the perception of the Shetland dialect as a dialect of Scots - rather than of English - is being used as a reason for Scots not to have a standard form. Curiously, when it was regarded as a dialect of English, I do not recall anyone tabling a motion in the Westminster parliament proposing that standard English should be abandoned in order to protect its dialects.

 

More generally, it is important to understand that only a minority of Shetlanders are concerned enough about the dialect even to attempt to protect its status as a dialect by denying a standard form to Scots. In all the time I have been interested in it, almost all the comments I have received from fellow Shetlanders have been negative.

[Dagfinn]

I don't quite follow the Manx analogy. I think that Manx is perceived as being (or having been) a language, although it could equally well have been perceived as a dialect of Gaelic in general.

I was told that spoken Manx might be an indicator of how the extinct Leinster (Dublin area) Irish Dialect sounded like, when it was still spoken. But I don´t know if there is any truth in this.

Spoken Manx also shared similarities with the recently extinct East Ulster Irish; (there were still native Irish speakers in Omeath (halfway between Dublin and Belfast) in county Louth, in the 1920´s).

 

This was regarding Manx and not Shetland, sorry

[OriginalUsername]

I don't think it would be at all usesless to teach dialect - if it was taught in a useful way

 

By that I mean, maybe comparisons of grammar and linguistic composition could be made between dialect and English as a way of highlighting how language is structured.

 

For example:

 

"Come du tae wirras" or "You can aa come tae wirras"

VS.

"You should come to my house" or "You can all come to my house"

 

The change in respects to the singular and the plural in dialect (du/you) could be compared and explained.

 

Likewise, the word "wirras" could be contrasted. Maybe it comes from "wir hoose" and you could try to analyse "wir" and explain how words become conflated as a natural element of language change (like the Australian "g'day").

 

Then there's the word order (come du/you should come to) - the verb placement might be interesting to discuss.

 

Generally, what I think I'm trying to argue here is that, if taught correctly, the dialect could be a way for bairns to develop general skills. Skills such as problem solving and analysis as well as a grasp of how grammar, morphology, syntax and semantics work throughout language as a whole.

 

Considering that, before I went to uni, I could barely identify the elements of a sentence - this could be a fun way to teach youngsters how to do a fundamental task like that but without the old school "this is a noun, this is an intransitive verb" boring style of teaching.

[OriginalUsername]

^ I'm not talking about teaching really young bairns here by the way - more junior high/high school age.

 

I'll leave da young eens tae da folk dat keyn onything aboot dem - cause I definitely dunna!