Talk:Scottish Gaelic/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Proliferation of listed dialects

There has been a recent proliferation of listed dialects. I'm not sure where one draws the line as to which and how many but many of those now listed do not have articles or sections of articles to link them to, which might be some kind of guide. One at least is linked to a possibly poorly-named article with rather meagre and poorly-sourced content. Yes, Lewis and various other islands or parts thereof have distinctive features to their dialects but if "Hebridean" doesn't yet have an article, should any or all the island dialects be listed in the infobox? The existing listed categories could potentially be broken down further and there are additional historical dialects one could add, depending on how far back you go (Fife gaelic?). Thoughts? Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:10, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

There seems to be no consistent approach regarding dialects in infoboxes. French language and Spanish language list none, German language lists loads but in the Language codes section. A bit closer to Scotland Welsh language lists 5 including 3 redlinks. Danish language, the only place near-ish I can think of which also has a lot of islands, lists a lot, 10, including extinct ones.

The main problem is that I don't think anyone has ever attempted to linguistically group Gaelic dialects by regions, we have the macro view of central vs peripheral dialects at one end and the one-description-per-island approach to publishing stuff about dialects at the other. My personal red line would be dialects for which we have next to no data, so roughly nothing down the eastern seabord or central/southern Scotland, with the possible exception of Deeside which did survive into living memory and has had some work done on it. But not, for example, Fife, which we can only tentatively reconstruct based on place name data and such. I'd also like to avoid redlinks but beyond that, if someone does a reasonably sized stub, I see no reason why to refuse that until someone does a regional analysis. Though I would prefer regions, i.e. Argyll Gaelic rather than Islay, Kintyre, Cowal etc separately. Akerbeltz (talk) 11:14, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm of a similar viewpoint and my concern is that many of the current, largely most recent, inclusions are or would be redlinked, including at least one that I had removed (its parent also redlinked). Mutt Lunker (talk) 13:16, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Gaelic oppression under law

Around ten such Acts were raised between 1494 and 1698, passed by the Scots Parliament to make English the first language.

-

Gaelic oppression historically began within the southern Church, labeled as a language of Barbarians amongst other labels.

Naturally, the use of Gaelic became an issue within English leadership's idea of the perfect Saxon Britain, again with legacy slander & campaigns to demonize Gaelic.

However, history as a fact, shared within UK education provides that it was indeed;

- Lowland Scots, - Anglo-Scots, - Ex-Anglo-Saxons, - Ex-Angles,

who ultimately opposed Gaelic & aimed to close down Gaelic under various laws & rules.

What is evident within historical data & literature is that it was not just kings, but lowland scots nobles, writers, and educators then who indeed had somewhat of a superiority complex.

The idea that lowlands Scots are the Scottish & all other parts of Scotland is a social & cultural aspect they exposed then & exists still today.

What is worrying is that in today's inclusive, fair & equal Scotland, nobody speaks about the social oppression stemming from communities.

This article for example portrays the image that it was King James who made all the choices, when in fact it was a large group of individuals making up a full whole.

Anti-Gael rhetoric is not new & still exists today.

As the very word "Scot" means a Gael, & Scotland translated to Gael-Land, my question is:

Why do so many wiki pages call-put, identify who committed hate & slender, but when it comes down to the UK, the identification is a king, or queen & not a social, cultural or racial community? 2A02:C7F:C7A:4A00:98C7:25FF:BC8:4A7 (talk) 09:11, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Per WP:NOTFORUM "article talk pages exist solely to discuss how to improve articles". Do you have a proposition for improving the article? Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:11, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Also per WP:RGW this really isn't the place to do this. And "Ex-Anglo-Saxons"? "Ex-Angles"? Is there a more common word you're searching for there? Catfish Jim and the soapdish 20:02, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Moravians in 12th-century Scotland?

In the map of the tribal and linguistic division of Scotland in early 12th century, the label "Moravians" is surprising.--Ulamm (talk) 21:57, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Don't get carried away, it's from Old Gaelic Moreb (/moɾʲev/), from the root mor 'sea' and treb 'settlement', which was Latinised as Morauia. Akerbeltz (talk) 22:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Undeniable usage of term "Scots Gaelic"

If you have a source to back up your assertion that the usage of the term "Scots Gaelic" is "wrong, quite wrong", by all means include this in the body of the article but, even if you can support this, seeking to erase that the term is manifestly in significant usage is untenable. Google Translate (Scots Gaelic) and particularly Encyclopædia Britannica (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Scots-Gaelic-language) are "ignorant" and that they are "respectable" or otherwise "authoritative" is in credible question? Seriously? You having a personal dislike for that usage is no justification for erasing the fact of it. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:05, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

...Collins English Dictionary (https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/scots-gaelic), Cambridge Dictionary (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/gaelic?q=scots+gaelic), Duolingo (https://duolingo.fandom.com/wiki/Scottish_Gaelic)... Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:21, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Eilthireach, it's right there in your edit summaries: "Yes, some people ... might use that term when talking about the language" and "other sites that use the term Scots Gaelic". In other words, it's a name that people use for the language. Your assessment that people who use that name "do not know any better" is immaterial, as that tells us only that this name that people use doesn't please you. When you write that sources that use the phrase are "normally ignorant of the actual usage", you contradict yourself, because their use of it is actual usage. You see the usage, right there, in front of you; you acknowledge it to us; and then you immediately deny that that usage is actual usage that exists.

Encyclopedia Britannica is not exactly a trivial source. Nor, presumably, is Celtic Life International's magazine or The Guardian, or The Scotsman and is there really any reason not to credit the propriety of the usage of enthusiasts such as those at the Fresno Scottish Society? Or an invitation to speak the language with others posted to the Aberdeen government's website by actual speakers of the language? If you dismiss all these sources as unreliable simply because their usage is contrary to your preferences, you will ironically be engaging in an instance of the no true Scotsman fallacy. Largoplazo (talk) 21:25, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

IPA and pronunciation

@Kwamikagami

I speak Gàidhlig at a beginners' level (I can get through an episode of Peppa Pig) and, yes, it's pronounced /ˈɡælɪk/ in that language. My interest in gaelic is only recent though, since I was an adult. I was brought up in North East Scotland and it was deeply unfashionable to be interested in the language... the whole Scottish Cringe thing. I was exposed to the language through television though and I'm fairly sure it was pronounced /ˈɡeɪlɪk/ when referred to in English language continuity. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 21:17, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

I believe it is in the US, but I just saw a British linguist make the claim that the two are different, and beside pronouncing them he had the IPA on the screen. (And it was English rather than Gaelic IPA.) I checked Wiktionary and they make the same distinction. — kwami (talk) 21:40, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

If we're talking BBC continuity, I have to say that my memory is of the overwhelming employment of the former pronunciation. Mutt Lunker (talk) 21:54, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Grampian TV for the most part, 1970s to 1990s. I was surprised that it wasn't "gay-lik" when I started learning the language in the 2000s. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 22:15, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm well past the Peppa Pig level and I have been heavily involved in Scottish Gaelic since the late 90s and yes, there are a few people in Scotland who pronounce the first syllable /geɪ/ but most don't. Can we *please* stop flogging that one? Akerbeltz (talk) 17:25, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

An Leabhar Mòr

The article An Leabhar Mòr has been proposed for deletion. I can't decide whether this is important or not. Maybe Gaelic enthusiasts would like to look in there? Doric Loon (talk) 15:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I'm not actually sure what the criteria are for pages regarding pages on individual books/art projects aimed at a fairly small community? Any thoughts? Akerbeltz (talk) 18:00, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

What official language Scottish Gaelic is not

Wikipedia generally does not discuss what topics are not, for the simple reason that this is could be taken as offering the opinion that it should be. Exceptions are, of course, if it is significant and discussed in reliable sources. Otherwise, it's far better to keep articles focussed on what the subject is, especially in the lead. What it is not is rarely as important or relevant.

So I can't see much reason why the lead of this article should concern itself with Scottish Gaelic not being an official language of the UK, when it is far, far more significant that it is an official language of Scotland, which is only mentioned in the infobox. It is also what the source cited (a Scottish Government document) actually says. This source does not discuss UK official languages at all. In fact, I don't think there is any source cited in the article that does.

I also don't think that preventative "heading off" erroneous additions is much of an argument for determining what appears in an article lead. If incorrect or unsourced information is added it should simply be reverted, or an editor note added. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 21:09, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

These discussions arise in the context of - and to an extent due to confusion with - the impact of the Welsh Language Act 1993, which confers much broader rights to Welsh at a national i.e. UK level as it was - predating the Welsh Assembly - passed at Westminster. Coupled with the legal odditiy of English not being an official language either, stating that ScG is NOT an official language is neither irrelevant nor expressing an opinion on whether it should or shouldn't.

This is not hugely dissimilar to the United States article which in the infobox states "Official languages : None at the federal level" Akerbeltz (talk) 21:17, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Akerbeltz Stating what it is not, however, is unsourced. As would be any comparison with Welsh. How is the reader to verify this? Whether the intention is to state an opinion or not, that's how it can appear. Otherwise, why is it there, in the lead? There are thousands of things Scottish Gaelic is not.

I would suggest that what is there is changed to begin with what it is, and what the existing source actually verifies. Anything about its UK status can follow, supported by a source that actually discusses its UK status. If good sources can be found, and it's absolutely necessary, this can be expanded on to include a contrast with the status of Welsh, later in the article in an appropriate section. This would actually address the confusion in a far more informative way, than an unsupported claim, as present. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 22:06, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

And your comparison with the United States article is not similar at all. This would be more similar if the English Language article lead with "English is not an official language of the United States". I haven't checked, but I doubt it does. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 22:15, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

I'll try and respond a bit more later but I'd like to point out that this page doesn't "lead with what it is not", you're making it sound like it's the opening sentence. It's a clarification on the legal status of a minority language, which is information commonly found in or near the top of such pages. It's in the 3rd paragraph of Welsh language, the 1st paragraph of Galician language; also in 1st for Catalan language and Hungarian language which contrast "official" with "spoken" (i.e. not official). Maybe for speakers of big languages who are used to the luxury of having everything at their disposal in their own language it's no big deal whether their language is official or not, but for smaller languages it IS a big deal whether your language is official or not. Akerbeltz (talk) 13:34, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

All the examples you gave are supported by a source, and start with what the language is. If this article is to take them as an example, it should do the same; Scottish Gaelic is an official language of Scotland, (cite) but not an official language of the United Kingdom (cite). I've no issue with the lead clarifying its UK status, but do not think this should be totally unsourced (there is no source for this claim in the lead, or anywhere in the article), and should take precedence over its Scottish status. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 12:53, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

@Escape Orbit If I understand you correctly, you don't mind this info being there in principle, you just want it sourced? If that is all you are saying, then you are quite right: everything needs to be sourced. But if that's all you want, you don't need to start a discussion on talk page. Simply add the tag {{citation needed|date=May 2024}} at the place where you think a footnote should be added. Then hopefully someone will try to find an RS. If none is added after a year, you can delete the unsourced information without seeking consensus. Doric Loon (talk) 09:15, 20 May 2024 (UTC)