John Fleming insists Gaelic was at one time spoken in almost all of the Scottish mainland (Scotching a myth about Gaelic, Letters, October 2). However it was stated by WFH Nicolaisen in Scottish Place-names that “Gaelic was never at any time the language of everybody south of the Forth-Clyde line, and that as far as ‘Lothian’ is concerned, there is at most evidence of a temporary occupation and of the presence of a landowning Gaelic-speaking aristocracy and their followers for something like 150-200 years”.
The status of Gaelic in southeast Scotland at that time (11th-12th centuries) was therefore similar to that of French in southern Britain in the same period, spoken only by the tiny but influential minority which held power after the Norman Conquest. In both countries the language of the common people was English, in Scotland the Anglian dialect of Old English which had gradually supplanted Cumbric from the 7th century onward and from which stems the language now known as Scots.
With Paul Brownsey (Gaelic in the Lowlands, Letters, October 9), I deplore any desire, apparently supported by Douglas Turner (Let’s celebrate Gaelic culture, October 16), to erect a cultural hard border between Scotland and England. Scotland has plenty of points of difference, some of them linguistic such as the presence in Scottish standard English of borrowings like loch and glen from Gaelic, ashet and vennel from French, and the archaic letter written but not pronounced as z in names like Culzean and Menzies. There are also plenty of non-linguistic markers of Scottishness such as haggis and the kilt. There is no need to add to outsiders’ perception of our Scottishness by promoting Gaelic where it was never the everyday language, and no danger of our becoming part of Turner’s "grey homogeneous mass".
Martin Allen
Thornhill
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel