Oor Vyce’s Vision for Scots.
It is the view of Oor Vyce that the Scots language is a central and defining part of contemporary Scottish culture and heritage, and that state recognition and support for the language has been lacking for too long. Scots has been the language of national government and the legal system, of artists and authors, in industry and in the home. In many parts of the country it thrives as the main community language, and across the whole country is at least partly known and used.
Historically, Scots has been ignored and disparaged in favour of its replacement with English, and pushed out of many of these domains. Any modern language policy based in cultural justice and linguistic rights must seek to counteract the prejudices and misinformation about Scots embedded in our society from that period in history, and to secure a diverse and multilingual Scotland, in which the futures of Scots and Gàidhlig are assured, and their speakers afforded equal opportunity and treated with equal respect alongside speakers of English.
To achieve this, work must be undertaken to improve the status and esteem of Scots in society, to begin its development for use in modern official, professional and scientific contexts, and to support the continued intergenerational transmission of Scots as a living language in the home and community, respecting and valuing its local dialectal variants. Care must be taken to ensure that any creation of new linguistic standards or elaboration of terminology is not conducted without the continuing and close involvement of the existing community, in order to avoid replicating a situation where a national standard becomes a means to ‘correct’ and stigmatise speakers of any regional variant, as is the case today across Britain with those who use English or Scots varieties which differ from standard English.
Scots, along with Gàidhlig, are Scotland’s to own, develop and cherish. We have a duty of care to ensure that the languages can thrive and be passed on to future generations - both of which are at risk of being lost in the communities if we are not bold in our vision for them.
Our thoughts on the Bill
Oor Vyce acknowledges the significance of the Scottish Languages Bill in establishing and driving forward the preservation and development of Scots in Scotland. It is a historic piece of legislation which for the first time acknowledges the official status of Scots within Scotland. We see it as an opportunity to lay the foundations for ambitious language policy and planning which will steer the action at the national and local levels in the next decades. For this reason it is crucial to approach the Scots provisions in the Bill with an aspirational vision. However, we must also acknowledge that this Bill only goes so far in achieving these goals and therefore more of a first legislative step for Scots - albeit a very welcome and important one.
At Oor Vyce, we very much look forward to working with the Scottish Government, other Scots organisations, academics, and the wider Scots speaking community to help shape the outcomes and strategies for Scots - and importantly the development of a roadmap that looks towards the short, medium and longer terms. We must arrive at a strategic path that meets the diverse needs of Scots speaking communities across Scotland and take care not only to look at this through, for example, an education lens. It is also desirable to draw on experiences and solutions from other similar minority language contexts, where a dominant standard language is closely related to a minority language. Examples of such linguistic context include Galician and Asturian vs Spanish, Flemish vs Dutch, Frisian vs Dutch, and others.
We were disappointed to read that the Bill will not deliver a new statutory body for Scots - a key element of Oor Vyce’s response to the initial consultation, echoed in the responses of many Scots-language stakeholders and communities. This very much remains a central aim for our organisation and we will work with the Scottish Government towards realising this, as a vital means for Scots language preservation and maintenance. We have previously voiced our support for existing Scots bodies, who are well-placed to engage with both individuals and bodies such as Education Scotland to develop Scots educational materials - the importance of which cannot be understated.
However, these existing bodies operate within the confines of their own sectors and remits, rather than feeding into a broader vision and direction for the future of the Scots language across Scotland. This in effect means the Scots language lacks a sense of long-term strategy for its development and preservation within communities. The Bill offers no direction around policy in areas such as broadcasting, creative arts, healthcare, and the job market in general, which have been identified as key areas by the Scots language community and stakeholders via the Future of Scots project (link to final symposium report in references).
Oor Vyce will continue to campaign that a new statutory body, such as a language board or a language commissioner, must be established as a matter of urgency - it is somewhat ironic that the devolved government of Northern Ireland has recognised the importance of a coherent long-term strategy for the support of Ulster Scots by setting up the Language Commissioner office, while the Scottish Government does not see the urgency of establishing such a provision. This body would be empowered to develop a long-term strategic approach and vision for Scots language policy across all its facets. This would bring the existing Scots bodies under its umbrella to work towards a common strategy, thus encouraging cross-sectoral cooperation and active outreach to the public.
The lack of any commitment to new funding may prevent this in the shorter term. However, we really must recognise that current Scots organisations are extremely stretched, both in terms of resource and funding, so it will challenge everyone involved to think creatively and innovatively around how we can start to realise our goals and vision for Scots.
As per our campaign with Misneachd in 2023, Oor Vyce continues to advocate for a named minister who has overall responsibility for Scots and Gàidhlig across the portfolios - all the more important with this being the year of the proposed Scottish Languages Bill. This does not necessarily have to be at Cabinet level and could be held by a junior minister within a bigger portfolio. We note that from 2011 to 2016, MSP Alasdair Allan held such a position in the Scottish Government. Both language communities would value and take comfort from there being such a named individual in post.
Initial consultation for the Scottish Languages Bill in relation to Scots
In June 2023 the Scottish Government published an external analysis of the initial consultation, which was welcome and provides an opportunity for the community to be able to scrutinise each stage of the Bill to ensure those needs are being met. Below are the sections of the analysis relating to Scots, and our thoughts on the inclusion or absence of these points in the Stage 1 bill.
Scots Language
Some respondents felt strongly about establishing a Scots Language Board like Bòrd na Gàidhlig to promote the Scots Language. Respondents also stressed the need for more vital legislation and statutory provisions to promote the language. There was a relative lack of awareness about the work of Scots bodies which, according to
respondents, required more visibility and influence.
Oor Vyce response
We feel this has not been given appropriate focus within the current provision of what the Bill will deliver. Our view is that a statutory body is essential in the longer term and we must arrive at a position whereby we can see a roadmap by which this goal can be achieved.
Recognition of Scots as an official language
There is a critical need for legal and official recognition of Scots as an official minority language in Scotland through the Scottish Languages Bill. Because there has been a degree of complacency about the Scots language, initiatives to give the language greater visibility should be encouraged. The form of linguistic colonisation that has so far denigrated the language in the social and legal sphere must be addressed through a legislative framework and information campaigns. The linguistic rights of Scots speakers must also be affirmed.
Oor Vyce response
The key part here concerns the linguistic rights of Scots speakers. We’d like to bring the committee’s attention to The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ECRML), which has been ratified by the UK Government in relation to Scots in Scotland. The responsibility for this falls on the Scottish Government to ensure that the general principles and objectives are met. At the moment, Scots is covered by Part II of the Charter - with Gàidhlig having Part III recognition. It is the view of Oor Vyce that the Scottish Government must lobby the UK Government to include Scots in Part III of the Charter.
The Scots bodies and authorities must standardise the Scots language. Any standardised spelling, grammar and dictionary should follow recognisable conventions and historic precedents whilst accommodating all dialects. A standard orthography of the Scots language is essential for raising its status and improving its practicality of communication and education.
Oor Vyce response
There are many views on standardisation within the Scots Community and while Oor Vyce views this as something that needs to be addressed for the reasons stated in the analysis above, this cannot be done without the creation of a body to oversee this type of activity. This also cannot be done without representation and involvement from across the communities who use Scots day-to-day. There is not currently an organisation that would be well-placed to task experts with the ongoing work that language standardisation requires, nor to facilitate the ongoing community involvement vital to having any standard be accepted by existing speakers. The current shape of the Bill has no provision for this and we can only assume that this aim has been dropped, perhaps due to its more complex nature.
The Scottish Government should establish a language planning board of experts to research, discuss and implement an agreed standardised orthography and grammar for the Scots language.
Oor Vyce response
Oor Vyce are in solid agreement here - such work is a significant undertaking and must be conducted with care and expertise, with appropriate organisational structures established first. Due to the careful nature by which this aim must be approached, we recognise that standardisation is not within the immediate scope of the Bill, but should be part of the discussion on strategies for Scots with a view to securing it in the medium-to-long-term
future.
Scots language must be integrated into the education system of Scotland. Immediate work on the Scots language and accessibility through education would include recognising and certifying fluent Scots speakers and supporting the retention of Scots-speaking teachers at primary and secondary levels throughout Scotland, but especially in the Scots-speaking heartlands. Besides Scots being in Scotland’s mainstream education, new programmes should be developed to reach wider audiences. Scottish universities should be supported to ensure that learners can pursue the study of Scots in-depth and at a tertiary level.
Oor Vyce response
Oor Vyce recognise the recent support and establishment of Scots in the curriculum - we find this an extremely positive step and applaud those who have been instrumental in driving it forward. However, this should be viewed as the start. More is needed to drive forwarded the agenda for Scots in education and we’d highlight the following areas from the analysis to the Committee:
Recognising and certifying fluent Scots speakers in our schools - especially relevant in the Scots-speaking heartlands
New programmes should be developed to reach wider audiences
Scottish universities should be supported to ensure that learners can pursue the study of Scots in-depth and at a tertiary level.
Funding and investments for the promotion of Scots
A consistent cycle of funding is required to develop and promote any projects or policies about promoting Scots language. Any commitment towards the Scots language must be legally supported and adequately funded. The Scottish Government should provide funding for cultural aspects of Scots, including funding for films, opera, broadcasting, media, and other art forms.
Oor Vyce response
Here we are disappointed that the need for further funding commitments has been acknowledged as a core outcome from consultation, yet has not been realised in the stage 1 Bill. Oor Vyce therefore questions how a bold new agenda can be achieved over and above what we have today. We recognise the amazing work that is done by organisations such as the Scots Language Centre and the Doric Board (to name but two), however, organisations are currently stretched in terms of resource and funding. We question how we can go beyond the current level of activity without extra funds - we sincerely hope that this would not be by cutting funds in one area of Scots to fund another.
Any promotion of Scots must ensure that it is inclusive and does not entrench negative and exclusionary stereotypes. The approach towards the Scots language must be apolitical.
Oor Vyce response
A key part of the strategy, which the Government must strive to have, is cross-party support in the Parliament - we have seen some great advocates across the chamber. The strategy for Scots must seek to normalise Scots across society by giving the language more prominence in our media and broadcasting - we must move from talking about Scots to talking in Scots, especially in broadcasting. This also must go beyond the usual classism that we’re used to seeing on our screens when Scots is used. Materials promoting Scots should support its status as a language belonging to all those who wish to speak it, existing speakers and learners alike.
Community engagement
There should be more opportunities for engagement within local communities to ensure stakeholder involvement. These opportunities can include introducing community-based projects.
Oor Vyce response
Our communities are where Scots continues to thrive, especially in the Scots-speaking heartlands but community action is dependent on the existence and availability of passionate individual volunteers. Groups such as Shetland Forwirds play an instrumental part in the development and promotion of their Scots dialect but this is not the picture everywhere - Orkney and Caithness being two areas that lack the same community-led Scots initiatives. The strategy for Scots must address these inconsistencies and, at the very least, give the communities the tools to set these up. However, without some form of central support inconsistencies will remain that could be detrimental to a particular area. Oor Vyce are keen to explore the creation of designated Scots “heartland” areas to support the diversity of the Scots language across Scotland.
Provisions Contained within the Bill
The below is a list of our thoughts regarding specific sections of the Bill, setting out how they might be improved.
Chapter 1. Support for the Scots language
26. Status of the Scots language
The Bill gives Scots “official status”. We support this as a significant step for the
public status of the language, but think it could go further, perhaps declaring Scots to be deserving of equal respect and status to English. We refer to our above comments on the ECRML and the mention in the consultation analysis of “linguistic rights”.
27. Scots language strategy
1. Oor Vyce strongly believes that the initial strategy should be detailed in its short term plan and timetable, while being bold in its vision for the future. Aims/objectives should be mapped against a timetable, with a mechanism for measurement so that all stakeholders can assess whether each item therein has been achieved.
2. Within the timetable of the first 5 years, Scottish Ministers should establish a voluntary group that represents the Scots speaking world - representative of different Scots dialect regions, heritage and artistic organisations, and other key actors. This is an important step in the absence of the formation of a statutory body - which the Government absolutely should be aiming to establish in years 5 to 10. Oor Vyce will continue to work in good faith with the Scottish Government and work as collaboratively as we can to achieve the best outcomes for Scots.
3. The strategy, as a minimum, must cover the following broad themes:
a. Community
b. Education
i.Both new & existing speakers
ii.Primary, secondary & tertiary levels
c. Broadcasting & media
d. Governance framework
4. We should explore the definition for the Scots version of areas of linguistic significance (Scots “heartlands”) - areas such as Aberdeenshire, Shetland, East Ayrshire, and others. These can provide a framework for community engagement and delivery of funding and services, but will require further research to be commissioned (of greater detail than the census provides) in order to establish how they can best be geographically defined.
5. Scottish Ministers should seek to establish formal ties with the Ulster Scots Agency and consider a joint voice for Scots in the British Irish Council, where as noted by the Agency, Scots does not have a strong voice when compared to the Celtic languages. The Ulster Scots Agency has already stated a willingness to collaborate with a Scottish partner - indeed we would like this to be an equal partnership in the longer term. In their submitted written evidence, relating to the effectiveness of the institutions of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement inquiry, they point out that with the necessary political commitment and a suitable Scottish partner, East-West collaboration could easily be achieved, and lead to academic, community and cultural exchanges and programmes.
6. For subsection (3), we would view the voluntary group mentioned above as being the principal party who should be consulted on the strategy, including many of those who might be consulted under the present (3)(a) and (3)(b) parts. We note that there is no mention of the academic expert community which exists across Scotland’s universities, and we recommend its inclusion as an explicit subsection to (3).
28. Reporting on Scots language strategy
Oor Vyce considers a 5-year schedule for reviewing the aims of the strategy to be sufficient, but inadequate for the reporting on the progress of the delivery of the strategy’s aims. We believe it would be more appropriate for there to be an annual formal report on the progress made against the timetable set out in the strategy. However, we would also expect more informal updates on progress to be delivered via a forum such as the Scots Cross Party Working Group as a regular agenda point, or to the voluntary group we propose in our comments on Section 27.
30. Power for Scottish Ministers to give guidance
As with our comments on Section 27, for subsection (3), we would view the voluntary group mentioned in our comment on Section 27 as being of principal relevance in the preparation of guidance for public authorities, including many of those who might be consulted under the present (3)(a) and (3)(b) parts. There is no mention of the academic expert community which exists across Scotland’s universities, and we recommend its inclusion as an explicit subsection to (3).
Chapter 2. School education
32. Guidance to education authorities relating to Scots language education
As with our comments on Sections 27 and 30, for subsection (3), we would view the voluntary group mentioned in our comment on Section 27 as being of principal relevance in the preparation of guidance for education authorities, including many of those who might be consulted under the present (3)(a) and (3)(b) parts. There is no mention of the academic expert community which exists across Scotland’s universities, and we recommend its inclusion as an explicit subsection to (3).
33. Standards relating to Scots language education
As with our comments on Sections 27, 30, and 32, for subsection (4), we would view the voluntary group mentioned in our comment on Section 27 as being of principal relevance in the preparation of guidance for education authorities, including many of those who might be consulted under the present (4)(b) and (4)(c) parts. There is no mention of the academic expert community which exists across Scotland’s universities, and we recommend its inclusion as an explicit subsection to (3).
Appendix
Excerpt from “Written evidence submitted by the Ulster-Scots Agency, relating to the effectiveness of the institutions of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement inquiry” submitted to the House of Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee (GFA0051)
a. The development of a meaningful East West structure to promote collaboration between Scottish and Ulster-Scots organisations and communities could easily be achieved with the necessary political commitment, led by the Ulster-Scots Agency in conjunction with a suitable Scottish partner, similar to the Columcille Initiative. This could support academic, community and cultural exchanges and programmes across the North Channel and significantly enhance the cultural connectedness and confidence of the Ulster-Scots community.
b. The Ulster-Scots Agency, which has a clear and obvious interest in East West matters, has had to fight down the years to be allowed to undertake work outside of the island of Ireland and while that is now accepted, we receive no specific resourcing for that work. In contrast, our colleagues in Foras na Gaeilge, the Irish language agency of the North South Language Body, which already has a budget and staffing level five times larger than the Ulster-Scots Agency, has a stand-alone structural arrangement with Scotland to promote collaboration between Irish and Scots Gaelic which has its own additional, ringfenced resources, called the Columcille Initiative, funded through Belfast, Dublin and Edinburgh. The British-Irish Council has a strand that works on Indigenous Minority Languages (IML) but that work is dominated by the needs of Irish, Welsh and Scots Gaelic, those with the greatest level of resources, to the detriment of languages like Ulster-Scots, Scots and Cornish that are less well provided for. In contrast to the North South dimension, where there are numerous and regular opportunities for interaction and collaboration, the opportunities for collaboration around BIC are minimal.
References
Kopaczyk, J, et al. (2023) ‘Language policy and planning for Scots: A community-driven approach’, https://scotslanguagepolicy.ac.uk/en/final-symposium/.
McDermott, P. (2019) ‘From ridicule to legitimacy? “Contested languages” and devolved language planning’, Current Issues in Language Planning, 20(2), pp. 121–139.
Mercator Research Centre on Multilingualism and Language Learning (2017) The Scots language in education in Scotland. Regional dossiers series. Mercator Research Centre on Multilingualism and Language Learning.
Sallabank, J. and King, J. (2021) ‘What Do We Revitalise?’, in J. Olko and J. Sallabank (eds) Revitalizing Endangered Languages: A Practical Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 33–48
Scottish Government (2010) Public Attitudes Towards the Scots Language. Scottish Government Social Research. Available at: https://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/3000/https://www.gov.scot/Resource/Doc
/298037/0092859.pdf (Accessed: 26 November 2021).
Scottish Government (2015) Scots language policy: English version. Available at: http://www.gov.scot/publications/scots-language-policy-english/ (Accessed: 26 November 2021).
Ulster-Scots Agency (2023) ‘Written evidence submitted by the Ulster-Scots Agency’, https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/115802/pdf/.
Unger, J.W. (2010) ‘Legitimating inaction: Differing identity constructions of the Scots language’, European Journal of Cultural Studies, 13(1), pp. 99–117.
