Scots Dialect : Where is it spoken ?

[Kern]

Originally Posted by Scottish_Republican

Gaelic culture HAD penetrated Northumbria, Andy. One of its kings was a Gaelic language poet.

Who - what was his name? What is the text that says he was a Gaelic poet?

[ANDY-J3]

Kern,
On that point Scottish Republican is correct- his name was Aldfrith and he ruled in the eighth century but it was because he was raised in Dalriada or Ireland not because Gaelic culture had penetrated Northumbria.

[Kern]

So he was Anglisch who spoke some Gaelic. Because it was the Irish monks who were the learned ones, and he learned from them. Just like in Scotland.

Which proves the point that Gaelic only comes in when you see a smattering of academic influence. Not some invasion.

There were two types of people. The Scots and the Picts. Some learned Gaelic and some had Gaelic monks and writers who naturally influenced place names when they were written (in gaelic by them.) But the actual people were not Gaelic.

Problem is that no one wrote down some of our more ancient tongues. Nor history. So it allows for this Irish republican mob to come along and try it on.

[Scottish_Republican]

The word you're looking for is "Anglian".

"So it allows for this Irish republican mob to come along and try it on."

I'm a SCOTTISH Republican, not an Irish one. My interest is in Scottish politics. If you've got a magnifying glass, you can just about read "I am a citizen of Scotland" in my avatar. We have our own independent republican tradition in this country. Perhaps you might want to read up on it one day.

Anybody who thinks that "Republican = Irish" is a simplistic fool. Welsh Republicanism has little connection with the Irish variety and nor does English Republicanism or French Republicanism. You're almost as bad as the American who sent me a PM telling me that I voted for George Bush!!! I wouldn't vote for GWB in a million years, and I've spent more time in England, the Isle of Man and Wales apiece than I have in Ireland. I wish people would get a clue sometimes.

"Admit it Scottish Republican. You are an IRISH troll."

I would be, if I'd ever lived in Ireland, or had Irish parents. I don't think he who says " Most of you Anglisch talk shyte." should really be complaining about trolling, it's a double standard. I went off and looked up your other posts - most of them are trolls themselves, and you seem to have a fixation on me.

I'm off to discuss with Andy, who at least has two braincells to rub together.

"The only thing that's rubbish is your knowledge of geography-Cumbria isn't Northumbria. The area of modern Cumbria was a Brythonic kingdom called Rheged so what language do you expect they would have spoken?"

Yes, and Deira (Deifr) and Bernicia (Bryneich) are both names of old Brythonic kingdoms. Right next door to Cumbria.

"Your grasp of history isn't much better"

I'm afraid it's much better. Hence I'm able to rip each of your points to shreds. There were far more Anglo-Norman scribes in Scotland, yet French names are thin on the ground, and Latin ones even rarer.

"I'm one step ahead of you"

You're coming out with threadbare arguments, I've read on a thousand internet threads. I've heard it all before.

The usual argument starts with saying "there was never any Gaelic X/Y in Z", and later is forced to concede - "Well, there was Gaelic X/Y in Z, but it was only spoken by the nobles/landowners/churchmen/scribes/jewellery sellers." At all points, the Gaelic influence has to be minimal, revealing a prejudice not usually reserved for Norse or Brythonic influence. (Northumbria was a good part Norse as well, and not purely Danish Norse either.)

The so called Anglo-Saxon art of Lindisfarne has more in common with the Book of Kells, than it does with proper Anglo-Saxon culture. Anglo-Saxons may have produced it, but its ultimate origins lay elsewhere.

"you're cobbling together tiny scraps of circumstantial evidence from place names"

Placenames are amongst the best evidence we have, since written sources are thin on the ground at this time.

How good is your knowledge of the Celtic languages anyway? I know Gaelic, and can read a good deal of Welsh. I can read some Norse and Anglo-Saxon with a crib beside me. Which of these are you conversant with?

[ANDY-J3]

Scottish Republican,
Rheged was a Brythonic kingdom that remained under Brythonic control until the ninth or tenth century. Bernicia and Deira were formerly Brythonic kingdoms within territory annexed by the Anglian kingdom of Northumbria so there's really no comparison. That's not ripping my argument to shreds that's bringing total irrelevancies into the discussion rather than just concede that your point has been proven invalid. What you need to do is forget the ad hominem and conceit and start providing some valid arguments based on relevant evidence.


There were far more Anglo-Norman scribes in Scotland, yet French names are thin on the ground, and Latin ones even rarer.


That's an attempt to deflect the argument onto on a completely unrelated subject. You made a statement that "Gaelic culture HAD penetrated Northumbria, Andy. One of its kings was a Gaelic language poet." I've stated that the only reason he (Aldfrith) was a Gaelic poet was because he had been brought up in either Dalriada or Ireland. So you understand why that is a problem for you- saying an entire culture had established itself in north east England on the basis that a Northumbrian King happened to speak Gaelic just isn't credible.


You're coming out with threadbare arguments, I've read on a thousand internet threads. I've heard it all before.

The usual argument starts with saying "there was never any Gaelic X/Y in Z", and later is forced to concede - "Well, there was Gaelic X/Y in Z, but it was only spoken by the nobles/landowners/churchmen/scribes/jewellery sellers." At all points, the Gaelic influence has to be minimal, revealing a prejudice not usually reserved for Norse or Brythonic influence. (Northumbria was a good part Norse as well, and not purely Danish Norse either.)

And you're coming out with the irrelevant ad hominem accusations rather than actually trying to address the points I'm making. What fantasies you have in your mind about my motivations are an issue for you- I'm only concerned about establishing the historical facts and challenging what I see as your contempt for Scottish history.



Placenames are amongst the best evidence we have, since written sources are thin on the ground at this time.

But if you accept that why is there a problem accepting that the predominance of Anglo-Saxon placenames in Lothian reflects the fact that it never came under effective Gaelic control for any length of time and hence Gaelic was never widespread there. You've went even further and stated that it had penetrated into Northumbria which just isn't supported by any evidence.



How good is your knowledge of the Celtic languages anyway? I know Gaelic, and can read a good deal of Welsh. I can read some Norse and Anglo-Saxon with a crib beside me. Which of these are you conversant with?

I don't speak Gaelic at all but I don't see why that's relevant.

[Scottish_Republican]

"I don't speak Gaelic at all but I don't see why that's relevant."

Because lack of knowledge of the languages mentioned, hinders your ability to go to primary sources, quotations and place names. You have to rely on other people.

That makes your arguments extremely weak on an academic basis.

"You've went even further and stated that it had penetrated into Northumbria which just isn't supported by any evidence."

Depends what you mean by penetrated. No, it was never a community language south of the Tweed, but yes, it had considerable unacknowledged influence, which comes out in various ways.

Like I said, this discussion is conforming to a fairly standard pattern. You've got to the stage of saying, "well, it was there, but it was only the watch menders/fashion models/pub owners/postmen that used it."

"Bernicia and Deira were formerly Brythonic kingdoms within territory annexed by the Anglian kingdom of Northumbria so there's really no comparison."

Parts of the Welsh Marches and Cornwall were Brythonic speaking into modern times, yet were annexed by England at an early stage.

"That's an attempt to deflect the argument onto on a completely unrelated subject. "

No, just comparing like with like.

Andy, your arguments aren't as original as you'd like to think, and that's because, as you admit, you are ignorant of certain languages involved.

[ANDY-J3]

Scottish Republican,
So does your lack of knowledge of Old English not similarly hinder your ability to determine the origin of place names in Lothian? In fact it doesn't hinder me at all because I use sources that are specifically dedicated to determining the origins of place names. For obvious reasons it's for you to promote the idea that my lack of knowledge of Gaelic makes my arguments extremely weak on an academic basis but in reality it isn't a point of any particular significance given that the reference sources I'm using are from professional linguists and historians.

Depends what you mean by penetrated. No, it was never a community language south of the Tweed, but yes, it had considerable unacknowledged influence, which comes out in various ways.

I don't have any problem with a statement like that but I would argue that it also had the same status in Lothian. I'm not disputing that for a short period of a few decades Gaelic must have been familiar to people throughout the whole of Scotland but I don't believe it ever became the majority language south of the Forth.

Like I said, this discussion is conforming to a fairly standard pattern. You've got to the stage of saying, "well, it was there, but it was only the watch menders/fashion models/pub owners/postmen that used it."

But I believe you are being deliberately ambiguous in your choice of words to convey an image that reflects your own agenda rather than the historical reality. You're giving undue weight to the existence of a very few place names of Gaelic origin and ignoring the fact that there may be valid reasons for their existence other than being the result of a period of Gaelic habitation.


Parts of the Welsh Marches and Cornwall were Brythonic speaking into modern times, yet were annexed by England at an early stage.

But again you're trying to compare like with unlike. Bernicia and Deira were annexed and absorbed into the kingdom of Northumbria- they disappear from the pages of history by the late dark ages as did Rheged disappear with the expansion of Mercia. Cornwall and the Welsh marches only became the feudal domain of the English crown and there was no widespread settlement of those territories as there was in the north of England.


Andy, your arguments aren't as original as you'd like to think, and that's because, as you admit, you are ignorant of certain languages involved.

And as I've stated you equally are ignorant of Old English so when it comes to the origin of placenames which may have become corrupted over time you are no better informed than me. I'm using sources from professional linguists which really makes my my ignorance of Gaelic an irrelevance. Some of the Gaelic placenames I cited in Northumbria were in fact unrecognisable from their original Gaelic form so being a Gaelic speaker would not have helped in any case.