How do you say Happy Birthday?

[BoltonBoy]

i speak english or else you wouldn't be able to read this post nor my fellow Englishmen. Scots is English, but it's a dialect of English. it isn't a separate language like the languages of the Celtic countries. that's why an English speaker is able to read Scots. it's similar to the way Americans say COLOR instead of COLOUR, HONOR instead of HONOUR etc. Scots is English. just cos i don't understand some of it doesn't mean it's a separate language. i can't understand Geordies (people from Newcastle, England) sometimes but they still speak English.

[ANDY-J2]

It isn't strictly true that Scots is a dialect of English.It evolved from the dialect spoken by the Angles of Northumbria and by the late middle ages was a seperate and distinct language.It incorporated words from Flemish,Gaelic and the Brythonic language spoken by the Picts while English was influenced mostly by Norman French.In recent years it has become more Anglicised but one only has to read Scots poetry from before the seventeenth century to realise that it was at that time a seperate language from English.The above Scots verse is written in an archaic form of Scots and much of it would be unintelligible to a modern Scots speaker.

[Monco]

Originally posted by ANDY-J2
In recent years it has become more Anglicised but one only has to read Scots poetry from before the seventeenth century to realise that it was at that time a seperate language from English.

Here is a extract from the Scots Makar Robert Henryson 1430? - 1506?. Anyone reading this - which will doubtless not be many - can make up their own minds as to whether it is in English or not.

The ressoning betuix deth and man
Mors
1: O mortall man behald tak tent to me
2: Quhilk sall thi myrrour be baith day and nycht
3: All erdly thing that evir tuke lyfe mon de
4: Paip empriour king barroun and knycht
5: Thocht thai be in thair ryell estait and hicht
6: May nocht ganestand quhen i pleis schote this derte
7: Waltownis castellis towiris neuir so wicht
8: May nocht resist quhill it be at his hart

The whole thing can be found here:
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/mideng.browse.html

And just for comparison, here is a bit of William Langland 1330? - 1400?, an English writer.

The vision of Piers Plowman

P.1: In a somer seson, whan softe was the sonne,
P.2: I shoop me into shroudes as I a sheep were,
P.3: In habite as an heremite unholy of werkes,
P.4: Wente wide in this world wondres to here.
P.5: Ac on a May morwenynge on Malverne hilles
P.6: Me bifel a ferly, of Fairye me thoghte.
P.7: I was wery forwandred and wente me to reste
P.8: Under a brood bank by a bourne syde;
P.9: And as I lay and lenede and loked on the watres,
P.10: I slombred into a slepyng, it sweyed so murye.

[Monco]

Originally posted by Fear_nam_Beanntan
frae 'The New Testament in Scots' - William L Lorimer. This extract is from St Matthews, chapter 5, verses 1 to 16. Lorimer's translation of the New Testment, from the original Greek, intil Scots was published in 1983.

Some reckon Lorimers translation was several centuries too late to be of much use. It was William Tyndale's unquestionably brilliant translation of the Bible - arguably the greatest work in English - which may have helped prevent the development of a distinct Scots language. After the Reformation in the middle of the 16th century Tyndale's Bible became the standard issue throughout Britain. Here is a link to the publishers site which gives a few details of how Lorimer created his translation:

http://www.cannongate.net/classics/clp.taf?_p=5938

I believe Lorimer was a Professor of Greek at St Andrews, and he would have been familiar with the different dialects of Ancient Greek (Attic, Doric, Ionic, Aeolic). And I also recall reading that he studied the various dialects of European languages as research for his translation of the New Testament. Its a shame he didn't know Hebrew as he could have done the Old Testament too. Scots people are well suited to the Old Testament.

[Steaphan]

The discussion about whether Scots is a dialect of English is quite interesting. When "Scots" arrived in Scotland however, we all know that it was known as "Inglis", and that Gaelic was known as "Scottis" (when speaking in English of course), until its own speakers started referring to it as "Scottis" and Gaelic as "Erse".
In Gaelic, Inglis or "Scots" was known as "a' Bheurla Ghallda." which essentially translates as Lowland English. English from England is known in Gaelic as "Beurla".

Gaelic itself recognises Scots English as distinct from English. As Scots, Irish and Manx Gaelic stem from Old Gaelic, likewise the various dialects of Inglis(Scots), and the various dialects of England stem from Old English.

Be interested to read your views on this.

[Monco]

My knowledge of the Gaelic language is limited to a few words, and really I can't say much more about it than that. However you are correct that it (Gaelic) was once called 'Scots' before it became known as Erse, and is it the case that the word 'Erse' is connected to the word 'Eire'? I remember reading that it was, but cannot be certain.

As for 'Scots', well the term dates from the 16th century, and before that it was called English even if spelt with an 'I'. But between the acceptance of Tyndales Bible and the Union of the Crowns, standard English became the written language of Scotland.

Most people speak some variety of Scots-English, and there is a good deal of variation in this, but its not very different from standard English, not enough for it to be a separate language. Consider the following:

The dog ran about the house
The dug ran aboot the hoose

Two different languages? Not in my opinion. Both determine the subject and object of the sentence by the particular words position within it. Other languages depend on the inflection of the noun to give the sentence its meaning. If you discount house/hoose being different words, then there is very little in the way of distinctive vocabulary. And different vocabulary and grammar are what make languages different from one another.

By all means celebrate the diversity of language, but its another matter to succumb to linguistic self delusion. I was in Ireland (Eire) recently, and I found their speech quite difficult to understand, but nobody claims there is a language called Irish-English.

Originally posted by Monco
Consider the following:

The dog ran about the house
The dug ran aboot the hoose

Two different languages? Not in my opinion. Both determine the subject and object of the sentence by the particular words position within it.

Now consider these sentences:

The horse jumped over the wall.
The cuddy loupet oer the dyke.

Two different languages? Both sentences have identical meanings. The subject and object of the sentences are clear but the vocabulary is quite different. Just because you can find similarities is no reason to dismiss the differences.