It's "language variety" these days, not "dialect". Different connotations.
Printable View
It's "language variety" these days, not "dialect". Different connotations.
Is that not a political decision too?Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
Not really I think - the words have different connotations when it comes to the validity and independent identity of a language.
Words collocating with 'dialect' tend to be 'just', 'only', 'merely', which suggest a relationship to a parent language, and at worst, hint at the 'impurity' of the dialect itself. That is the politicalisation of languages - to suggest that one varity is merely a dialect of a parent language is often done to question the validity of the variety and the cultural identity linked to the language.
Solely from a linguistic* point of view, no language variety has any more intrinsic validity/merit/purity than any other.
*In contrast to sociolinguistics etc, which delve into the notions of language and culture, language and politics etc.
But is there not some value to having a hierarchy of classifications, like a taxonomy? Yeah, I see the problem with having a "parent" language and dialects, but I think you can also acknowledge that there are fairly narrow branches of an otherwise similar group, eg Serbo-Croat).
(For the record, my mother has a background in linguistics and would agree with you.)
But all different varieties of English (as an example we're all familiar with) are just that - varieties. There was no time when there was only one variety spoken, will all other varieties developing from that parent variety.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Given that this is the case, how is it decided which variety is at the top (or any other position) in a hierarchy? Which one deserves to be 'above' another, and why?
Narrow branches of a similar group - absolutely. But in the vast majority of cases, each variety deelop individually and has equal validity. It's when somebody says that "X is really just a variety of Y" that we see politics get involved, as the conscious or unconscious implication is that language X is a branch of the original language Y. Indeed, in the worst extremes, it often implies that "speakers of X are really just the same as speakers of Y" too.
Ahhh I see what you did. It's political!Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
I see what you mean, there is no definitive English except the one that's been politically decided. Maybe I have misunderstood, but it seems like you are still throwing out the idea of overarching categories though.Quote:
Narrow branches of a similar group - absolutely. But in the vast majority of cases, each variety deelop individually and has equal validity. It's when somebody says that "X is really just a variety of Y" that we see politics get involved, as the conscious or unconscious implication is that language X is a branch of the original language Y. Indeed, in the worst extremes, it often implies that "speakers of X are really just the same as speakers of Y" too.
What do you mean by 'overarching categories'?Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Surely categories aren't an issue, as long as one language is not deemed to be the 'origin' of a category. To say that Irish, Scottish and Manx Gaelic belong in the one category is fine, once none of the three is deemed higher than the other two.
No, unfortunately, otherwise it would be more easily solved. If one were to pursue such a theory then we would not have anglo-saxon languages, rather anglo-saxon language, or romance languages would become romance language. Serbian is quite distinct from Croatian, the same as from Slovenian and Macedonian, while in Kosovo it is more unusual for me. I worked and played with Janjevci (a large number were settled near where I lived) and while their cuture was very distinctly Albanian, they spoke a form of Serbian that was very different to local Croatian - with a lot of Albanian words.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
edit: Forgot the categories, this feeds back to language groups or families so CD would be correct to say that languages could be parts of categories or groups, like the examples above - a-s, romance etc. However within these there are variations, slavic for example - knowing Croatian doesn't mean you can understand Russian, but you can grasp it a little easier, like English and German, French and Spanish etc.
So, as Max Weinreich almost said, is "a language...a dialect with an Army, a Navy...and a UVF?" :o
Silly me, confusing the Irish Republic and its (self-styled) Army :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Whether people's collective memory is of State or Paramilitary violence, don't ye think both are equally valid?
Yes indeed, I had forgotten that comment. It's actually very insightful in terms of language and power (apart from the UVF bit, of course).Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
Aye, it's a medley of Maxi W feat. the Rangers Supporters Choir :)Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
Tut tut.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
I made up the word because I couldn't find any indication on the web for the "translation" for 'issue' and/or 'problem'.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
I just said 'problem' in an North Antrim accent and hoped for the best. :)
Check thon oot: http://www.dsl.ac.uk/dsl/Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
Quote:
Ischew, Ishue, Issue, v. Also: ishew, ishowe, ishw.
Quote:
Problem(e, Problewm, n. Also: probleam(e, problam(e, probleume, problowme.
Weird development in how the latest antics up north are playing out around the world. If you watch www.rt.com they are absolutely loving giving Westminster a kick and while the station is funnier than the Comedy Channel (though they don't seem to realise how absolutely hilarious they are at times) they have gotten in with some of the "loyalists" and one big hefty numpty began about the flag, then segwayed into "and we don't get the same benefits as them, and they're taking over the place". The reporter (a big of a headcase from England) pointed out that anybody she spoke to from the "loyalist" side all came back with anger at how they feel power is slipping away from them. In Croatia they've covered it purely from the "republican" view point and HRT have a tv crew in Belfast.
Interesting stuff. Given Croatia's recent history I'd imagine their coverage might be a bit more sensitive than some of the sneering from more peaceful Western European countries?
There are other similarities. During the Yugoslav divorce war(s) I remember watching a BBC report from a Serbian border village, the crew arriving shortly after a Croat militia had passed through. My understanding of the local language is limited but clearly the first woman they spoke to was screaming "The fcuking Catholics just torched my house!"...
All of that just looks like someone didn't use their dialling wand.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...s_2_Episode_6/
Panel show last night featuring a representative of SF/DUP/SDLP/Alliance with what can only be described as a heavily loyalist dominated audience discussing the flag issue/ongoing trouble. Was absolutely embarrassing to watch, NI still has quite a bit to go to really ditch the sectarian bigoted attitudes, and I couldn't help but think that IF there ever was the possibility of a united Ireland, recent scenes of violence would be nothing in comparison to what would happen then!
Croatia is a strange little country with strange people. Nothing surprises me with them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
The depth of fear/hatred that runs between the two religions is shocking, though in fairness the Orthodox church (especially in Croatia) have made great strides in reconciliation, though the Catholic church is massively corrupt, though after losing their buddies HDZ they're not as cocksure. A big gripe is that during/after the war the Catholic church controlled aid into the country and basically led the people (especially refugees) on a merry dance.
The Catholic Church would never be so underhanded. How very dare you sir.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spudulika
Just curious how far those apologies went, since what they did during WW1 was pretty horrific.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spudulika
Aye. I almost felt sorry for Fat Boy Nolan trying to get a word in as compere. At one point I thought he was going to sit on the little bloke with the lisp to shut him up:(Quote:
Originally Posted by horton
Well, you had two wars last time the border changed...there's more chance of a united Yugoslavia at this point.Quote:
and I couldn't help but think that IF there ever was the possibility of a united Ireland, recent scenes of violence would be nothing in comparison to what would happen then!
Parachute Regiment flags have appeared near the Fountain in Derry in the run-up to the anniversary of Bloody Sunday: http://www.u.tv/news/Parachute-Regim...7-eaaebe76d7bb
Quote:
SDLP Foyle MP Mark Durkan told UTV the flags which were overlooking the Fountain area have now been removed, but said there may still be more in other areas.
"Whatever justification people might feel about flying other flags, displaying the flag of the parachute regiment in this city is deliberately offensive," he said,
"A provocative display like this can only cause distress and anxiety to the people of the Fountain as well as upset in the wider community. I hope that wiser community counsel will prevail and these emblems will be removed to avert the obvious dangers."
Sinn Féin MLA Raymond McCartney called for Unionist leaders to help have the flags removed.
He said: "Given the history of the Parachute Regiment in this city and the upcoming anniversary of Bloody Sunday the erection of Parachute Regiment flags is being seen as provocation in an effort to raise tensions in the Derry area.
"We now need to see leadership from within Unionism to ensure that these flags are taken down as those who have erected them obviously did so to create a reaction from within the Nationalist community."
Cretins.
The two flags in the Fountain were removed just before 7pm last night, there was a third erected in Drumahoe which presumably was also removed. What started as a protest against a democratic decision over the flag, has morphed into a protest about Sinn Fein having elected representatives, protests against inquiries into state involvement in Finucanes murder/Bloody Sunday, the Alliance party not being prod enough, the Parades Commission, the Historical Enquiries Team, the PSNIRA(love that name!), GAA grounds named after deceased republicans, unionist poverty(despite research proving over 30 of the 40 most deprived areas in NI are Nationalist/Republican areas.
At the same time as the Bloody Sunday march later this month, they are also planning a "British Civil Rights" countermarch, there is talk of a demo at the opening concert of the City of Culture shindig this weekend, and pickets being planned at GAA grounds. To me, it looked like this would all die down before New Years Eve, but by getting a reaction from nationalists in the Short Strand in Belfast, and deliberately planning roadblocks/protests throughout NI that would likely raise tensions/provoke a reaction from nationalist youths they've been able to sustain their media attention and keep the momentum going.
It appears the Union flag was flown from government buildings on 15 designated days during the 1950s: https://twitter.com/SteveDonnan/stat...10168798797824
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BA4jma-CYAAAPrW.jpg:large
Perhaps that also applied to Belfast City Hall?
Another interesting photo here with what appears to be an Irish triclour flying above Belfast City Hall:
https://o.twimg.com/1/proxy.jpg?t=FQ...QU_8qJ09O1GBD4
Not sure of the history behind that or in which year it was taken.
I enjoyed Pure Derry's status update on Facebook earlier:Quote:
Originally Posted by horton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pure Derry
Misguided and intentionally-provocative. Bloody Sunday wasn't an "Irish/Republican/Nationalist/Catholic Civil Rights" march; civil rights for all was the goal. Catholics just so happened to be the ones who found themselves in a "cold house" of discrimination; of course they would get behind the civil rights movement in significant numbers. It didn't mean the rights of impoverished working-class Protestants were excluded at the expense of solely Catholic interests. Ivan Cooper, one of the major figures in the NICRA who led the march on Bloody Sunday, was a Protestant, for example. Of course, many Protestants disowned him as a result.Quote:
Originally Posted by horton
Worth a read: http://garethrussellcidevant.blogspo...thing.html?m=1
Quote:
Part of the reason why I'm still a unionist is because I'm convinced it must be right in some way, because how else could it have survived for so long given its leaders? It has been Irish unionism's fate to be led, and controlled, by a combination of people who are either unpleasant, incompetent or both. No other political creed in history has enjoyed such longevity, whilst also being led by such a gallery of grotesques. Its survival is also all the more remarkable when one considers that, unlike Irish nationalism, Irish unionism has no real links to its past; only vague, and often confusing, messages, almost all of which resort to defining itself in opposition to nationalism. In a nutshell, what nationalism is, unionism is not. It has, moreover, no real heroes - again, unlike nationalism, most unionists know next-to-nothing about the great "heroes" of the unionist past. While figures like William III and Sir Edward Carson may gaze out haughtily from the banners of the Orange Orders or from six-foot-tall murals, the details of these men's biographies are practically unknown. Devoid of political folklore, unionism therefore resorts to putting much of its cultural identity into symbols, rather than people - the monarchy, the army, the RUC, the Poppy, the parades and, above all else, so it would seem, the flag. Once you understand that, you begin to understand why they're so protective of things that seem trivial to outsiders.
...
Had a quick scan. Beer calls. But it seems like a good read.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
I think the lack of detailed biographical knowledge of say, King Billy or Ned Carson might have a more obvious explanation: they're just two of the numerous icons of British and Empire history we learned about by rote at school. And in Billy's case, their importance is more symbolic than real, apart from being centuries old.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Anyway, such knowledge may be over-rated: Eddie Coll got himself elected to 21 years as Taoiseach and another 14 as Pres despite a back story that was largely of his own imagination.
That's disgusting DI.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Some "Loyalists" forget that the first victims of the Paras in Northern Ireland were Loyalists killed on the Shankill Road.
Finally got round to watching The Nolan Show from the other evening. The incessant clapping and hollering of the overzealous rent-a-mob made decent discussion virtually impossible. It grew very irritating. One audience member even demanded that Gerry Kelly remove his glasses! :confused:
Anyway, if Jeffrey Donaldson and the DUP are primarily about "consensus politics", what would their gripe be with flying the tricolour beside the Union flag? Besides, the current compromise solution is a concession to an essentially unionist position in that the Union flag is still the only flag that will fly above Belfast City Hall, albeit on those designated days. It hasn't been replaced by a tricolour, so to suggest the unionist position has been ignored is simply dishonest, never mind the alarmist accusations that the unionist tradition has been trampled upon by Sinn Féin/nationalism/Alliance/Tom, Dick and Harry!
Politics red in tooth and claw, eh? I hear the Jeremy Kyle show on daytime is pretty similar :)Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Ignoring SF's end of partition fantasy in smaller Councils up-country is one thing, allowing it in Belfast City Hall entirely different. Just too embarrassing. Of course, a possibly imminent problem for the Dupes is that if/ when Nationalists swing two more seats and thus an overall majority, they might well suggest flying the tric on its own...Quote:
Anyway, if Jeffrey Donaldson and the DUP are primarily about "consensus politics", what would their gripe be with flying the tricolour beside the Union flag?
Tomas, Risteard agus Araild, please. Mo chara Mowlam etc. etc.Quote:
Tom, Dick and Harry!
How is "allowing SF's end-of-partition fantasy" any better or worse than allowing the fantasy seemingly held by some loyalists that Ulster is some monolithic protestant utopia where catholics should shut up and welcome their unionist overlords.
There are two communities in Northern Ireland. Both are equally valid, both deserve equal treatment. And the sooner everyone on both sides realises this, the better.
People certainly have a right to protest/express themselves and all that, but the point of a talk show is to, y'know, provide a forum for debate and discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
Embarrassing is one way to look at compromise, I guess... But if "consensus politics" is your game, then you have to be prepared to lose some element of face, surely.Quote:
Ignoring SF's end of partition fantasy in smaller Councils up-country is one thing, allowing it in Belfast City Hall entirely different. Just too embarrassing.
On Sinn Féin's "end of partition fantasy", Gerry Adams launched the party's border referendum campaign today: http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0119/sin...onference.html
Quote:
Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams has called for a border poll on partition and Irish unity during the lifetime of the next Northern Ireland Assembly.
Launching his party's campaign on the issue, Mr Adams insisted a single economy would be good for prosperity jobs and investment
The Good Friday Agreement allows for a referendum within the North on unity - the so-called Border Poll.
Sinn Féin has now stepped up its campaign for the plebiscite.
Speaking at a special conference in Dublin Mr Adams told delegates that the Northern state had been gerrymandered to allow for a permanent Unionist majority.
However, he said the latest census figures showed only 40% of people there claimed an exclusively British identity.
He maintained that was evidence that the political and demographic landscape was changing.
Mr Adams also said that the real cost of the British government’s subvention was much less that the gross figure of £17bn, and insisted that a single all-Ireland economy would be good for jobs and prosperity and would transform the political as well as the economic landscape.
Sinn Féin wants the poll over the lifetime of the next Assembly.
Sinn Fein's fantasists are running local government. Nolan's p*ssed-up audience aren't, or ever likely to. That said, the DUP were foolish to encourage them before Xmas and cleary lost any real influence over them very quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by peadar1987
Couldn't agree more. The thing is, there's only one actual country in Northern Ireland. That isn't going to change, there isn't going to be a united Ireland, joint authority, UN protected status or anything else in the foreseeable future. Given that, the Shinners' exaggerated hostility to most institutions in the country where they'll continue to live means that the equal treatment they'll get in response isn't likely to be particularly positive.Quote:
There are two communities in Northern Ireland. Both are equally valid, both deserve equal treatment. And the sooner everyone on both sides realises this, the better
Do you watch (or listen to) Nolan regularly? His style of aggressive shock-jockery is clearly to self-promote, not encourage reasoned argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny Invincible
Of course. The Unionist parties on BCC would have been better off supporting Alliance's flag compromise. But they would probably argue some losses of face are just too far. As would the Nationalists.Quote:
But if "consensus politics" is your game, then you have to be prepared to lose some element of face, surely
The DUP are just as bad as Sinn Féin. Both want something that the other half of the community completely reject. The fact that the status quo is with them (due to centuries of invasion and ethnic cleansing) does not make their opinion any more or less valid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
So you're saying that Northern Ireland shouldn't be treated as a special case on account of the deep divisions between the two communities, and should just fly the flag of the "actual country" in spite of the fact that this is against the wishes of almost half the population? I wonder would you have the same opinion if there was a United Ireland, and your unionist heritage wasn't being represented on civic buildings.Quote:
Couldn't agree more. The thing is, there's only one actual country in Northern Ireland. That isn't going to change, there isn't going to be a united Ireland, joint authority, UN protected status or anything else in the foreseeable future. Given that, the Shinners' exaggerated hostility to most institutions in the country where they'll continue to live means that the equal treatment they'll get in response isn't likely to be particularly positive.
GA sounded even vaguer than usual in his BBC interviews- maybe he should have stayed in America to convalesce from recent illness. The Shinners would be better putting up an economist who can plausibly explain away that supposed 17bn shortfall. Gerry must still think he can blow a few bank heists out of his arse.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Absurd exaggeration doesn't make your opinion any less 'valid', but does make it less likely to be taken seriously. Any invasions were centuries ago, for all the Dupes' faults they haven't ethnically cleansed. Spare us the mopery, eh?Quote:
Originally Posted by Peadar 1987
Er, no. I suggested pretty much thre exact opposite, referring to a) Nationalist Councils up-country displaying the tricolor, and b) the possibility of BCC doing similarly if they get two more Nationalist seats for an overall majority. Merely pointing out that SF's aggressive anti-Britishness within Britain, is almost inevitably going to get a similar response from British people. Equal treatment, you might say.Quote:
So you're saying that Northern Ireland should just fly the flag of the "actual country" in spite of the fact that this is against the wishes of almost half the population?
Indeed, as per my reply above. I respect SF's aspiration to a united Ireland, but would prefer they- and commentators liked you- stopped gurning about centuries of invasion. Haven't they got some local services to worry about? And who knows, a slightly gentler approach might even get them some floasting voters?Quote:
shouldn't NI be treated as a special case on account of the deep divisions between the two communities
Dunno, too hypothetical. Mind you, if my Granny had had balls she'd be my Grandad.Quote:
I wonder would you have the same opinion if there was a United Ireland, and your unionist heritage wasn't being represented on civic buildings
I've watched/listened from time to time but can't say I'm a regular.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
Irrespective of whether or not you perceive Sinn Féin to be explicitly anti-British, they're not quite operating "within Britain". Sinn Féin abstain from Westminster, operating, rather, across the whole island of Ireland, including within what is a contested jurisdiction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
Did I give a time frame? Northern Ireland has a slim protestant minority now because of invasion and ethnic cleansing from the 1100s to the 1700s. So saying "there's only one actual country in Northern Ireland" like that gives some sort of moral authority over those who have a different ethnic identity is just plain ignorant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
So you think the status quo should be maintained, without compromise, until the nationalists have an overall majority? Sinn Féin are very anti-British, and I don't agree with that, I don't think that I've ever indicated that I do.Quote:
Er, no. I suggested pretty much thre exact opposite, referring to a) Nationalist Councils up-country displaying the tricolor, and b) the possibility of BCC doing similarly if they get two more Nationalist seats for an overall majority. Merely pointing out that SF's aggressive anti-Britishness within Britain, is almost inevitably going to get a similar response from British people. Equal treatment, you might say.
So would I. Acknowledging the reality of the history of Northern Ireland in terms of invasion and colonisation is something both sides need to do. The fact that your ancestors displaced the native population through force in what was indisputably an act of ethnic cleansing doesn't give you supreme right over the country, just as the fact that their ancestors were there first doesn't give that right to the nationalists.Quote:
Indeed, as per my reply above. I respect SF's aspiration to a united Ireland, but would prefer they- and commentators liked you- stopped gurning about centuries of invasion. Haven't they got some local services to worry about? And who knows, a slightly gentler approach might even get them some floasting voters?