Caoimhin O Donnaile caoimhin at
Tue Aug 21 16:58:56 CEST 2007

> >      Type: variant
> >      Subtag: scottish
> >      Description: Scottish
> >      Prefix: en

As someone living in Scotland, I would support this.  Certainly the
boundaries are blurred between "English", Scottish English and Scots,
and certainly "Scottish English" varies regionally throughout
Scotland.  But Scottish English is clear and well-defined enough as
a variety to be worth registering.  The term "Scottish English" is
one often used by linguists to denote the variety of standard English
used in Scotland, as opposed to Scots (Ethnologue code SCO).

The most extreme form of Scottish English is the English spoken in
Glasgow.  Look up "John Smeaton" on Youtube for good examples of
an ordinary everyday Glaswegian who thinks he is speaking ordinary
everyday English but who would be difficult for a lot of English
speakers to understand. e.g.:

(This would not be regarded as Scots.)

> Certainly if it uses "I doubt it will rain" to mean "I fear it will
> rain," as the Wikipedia article says, that would be the smoking gun of
> mutual non-intelligibility for me.

"I doubt it will rain" would certainly be understood to mean "I fear
it will rain" in Scotland.

> Two years ago I floated a semi-private proposal for "en-england" and
> "en-scotland"  and "en-wales" and "en-nireland", and the response was
> swift and fiercely negative.  I believe the word "bollocks" was
> involved.

I expect the biggest negative reaction would come from England - lumping
Newcastle English, Yorkshire English, West Country English, Cockney and
the Queen's English together doesn't seem sensible to me.  But in
Scotland I think nearly everybody would accept "Scottish English" as a
useful concept, while being aware of the blurring and complications.

I think using the M.49 regional code might be a good idea if this is 
possible.  Otherwise "en-scottish" would be fine.


More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list