Re: Branch of English or a Separate Language?

From: Alan Edgey (AlanEdgey_at_aol.com)
Date: 10/22/04 

Date: 22 Oct 2004 07:08:36 -0700

"Séimí mac Liam" <gwyddon@arac.netNOSPAM> wrote in message news:<Xns9589C74E94DAFSim@216.196.97.136>...
> Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com> wrote in
> news:mzyhgv7u.fsf@hpl.hp.com:
>
> > "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> writes:
> >
> >> (not that a FAQ is legislation -- there's some other sort of
> >> foundational document that lays out the scope of a newsgroup)
> >
> > I'm not sure that sci.lang ever had a charter. It was a renaming
> of
> > the old net.nlang group, and I'm not sure there was ever anything
> more
> > than the "Natural languages, communication, etc." description.
> >
>
> That would explain why a charter is so hard to find for the group.
> According to my read of the faq(in the absence of a charter), the
> discussion is appropriate for both SCS and sci.lang. And to clarify
> the situation the first crosspost to SCS was on Sept 10th by some on
> from the Czech republic by the name Arpad. Here's the post:
>
> <quote>
> From: arpadia@centrum.cz (Arpad)
> Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,soc.culture.scottish,sci.lang
> Subject: Re: Branch of English or a Separate Language?
> Date: 10 Sep 2004 07:58:06 -0700
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Lines: 16
> Message-ID: <b062caa9.0409100658.421643a5@posting.google.com>
> References: <4bcc06c7.0409100139.3ab3aaf2@posting.google.com> <chru9q
> $i8d$1@ousrvr3.oulu.fi>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.186.76.253
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> X-Trace: posting.google.com 1094828286 3372 127.0.0.1 (10 Sep 2004
> 14:58:06 GMT)
> X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 14:58:06 +0000 (UTC)
>
>
> Jarmo Puolakanaho <jape@despammed.com> wrote in message news:<chru9q
> $i8d$1@ousrvr3.oulu.fi>...
> > In alt.usage.english semiretired@my-deja.com <semiretired@my-
> deja.com> wrote:
> > > Branch of English or a Separate Language?
> > > www.sottish.parliament.uk/vli/language/scots/index.htm
> >
> > A dialect. As far as I know, everyone who speaks Scots understands
> most
> > forms of English. I'm not sure if it works the other way around,
> though.
> >
> > Scots could be categorized as a separate language if Scotland was
> an
> > independent state and had an army. I don't know who originally
> stated
> > this idea of languages having armies, but it works here.
>
> I think the dialect/language borderline is as elusive as that between
> Russian and Ukrainian, or Bulgarian and Macedonian, right?
>
> Arpad
>
>
> </quote>
>
> So if anyone has a gripe, take it up with the Czech.

Thanks for czeching that.

Alan