![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
Scotland fails the definition of country on many counts: it doesn't produce its own money, regulate its trade, etc. At the very least, there should be a section discussing the countryness of Scotland. — the previous unsigned comments by User:207.81.169.16
I have removed this from the intro:
Although this is true, it is not why Scotland (and England, and Wales, and other non-sovereign entities) is referred to as a country. The reason is that the word country is primarily a geographical descriptor, not a political one. Although nation, country and state are often used as synonyms, they do in fact all have different meanings: nation is a cultural designation; country is geographical; and state is political (and not necessarily a fully sovereign entity either, eg Idaho or Baden-Württemberg).
To be crystal clear, as we must be in an encyclopedia, you must refer to a fully independent state by the designation sovereign state or independent state. Nowhere does Wikipedia refer to Scotland as either of those things after 1 May 1707.-- Mais oui! 09:48, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
A dated map is more useful because it helps readers who do not have any prior knowledge of Scottish history in the Dark Ages to understand where the various warring kingdoms were located. Benarty 11:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Part of Orkney (a Norn speaking part of Norway rather than Scotland in 1400) is clearly visible on the Scottis-Inglis map off the coast off Caithness. At no point have I suggested that Shepperd's map is an aid to understanding Scotland in the Norman period. Benarty 16:13, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
The Scottis-Inglis map is alleged to be based on some sort of analysis of placename evidence. Even in modern times almost 550 years after the Scottish takeover, Norn rather than Scots based placenames predominate in Orkney. Worth noting that if placenames are the main citerion that also holds true for the coastal regions of Caithness. Benarty 16:37, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
I think it is clear from the use of "English" and "Scottish" rather than "Scots" and "Gaelic" that Calgacus is trying to promote a particular viewpoint. Benarty 16:46, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Norman French was the language of the English aristocratic elite at this point in history. Totally different environment from the modern day situation because the modern nation had not emerged yet. Benarty 17:01, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Anglian is the literal translation of "Inglis" into modern terminology. Benarty 17:08, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Modern notions of nationhood are being projected back to the feudal era when people did not have that sort of identity yet and multilingualism was normal. Ireland was Scotia major while Scotland was Scotia minor. It wasn't just "Inglis" that could apply in more than one kingdom. Scottis translating literally in modern terms as Gaelic could as well. Benarty 17:22, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
National identity (or in reality which dude with a crown was at the top of the pile in feudal terms) and ethnocultural identity were not necessarily one and the same as they later became with the devlopment of the 19th century nation state. In England the dude with a crown was Norman French in ethnocultural terms and still held lands in what is now modern France as well. Benarty 17:42, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
One of the quirks of history is that "Inglis" speech which I would translate as being "Anglian" in an ethnocultural rather than a rigidly national sense arguably had a higher status in Scotland than it did in England in that era. The change in terminology to a more rigidly national from an ethnocultural sort of basis came when Norman French ceased to be the elite language in the Kingdom of England. Over and out for me for now. Benarty 17:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
Scotland fails the definition of country on many counts: it doesn't produce its own money, regulate its trade, etc. At the very least, there should be a section discussing the countryness of Scotland. — the previous unsigned comments by User:207.81.169.16
I have removed this from the intro:
Although this is true, it is not why Scotland (and England, and Wales, and other non-sovereign entities) is referred to as a country. The reason is that the word country is primarily a geographical descriptor, not a political one. Although nation, country and state are often used as synonyms, they do in fact all have different meanings: nation is a cultural designation; country is geographical; and state is political (and not necessarily a fully sovereign entity either, eg Idaho or Baden-Württemberg).
To be crystal clear, as we must be in an encyclopedia, you must refer to a fully independent state by the designation sovereign state or independent state. Nowhere does Wikipedia refer to Scotland as either of those things after 1 May 1707.-- Mais oui! 09:48, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
A dated map is more useful because it helps readers who do not have any prior knowledge of Scottish history in the Dark Ages to understand where the various warring kingdoms were located. Benarty 11:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Part of Orkney (a Norn speaking part of Norway rather than Scotland in 1400) is clearly visible on the Scottis-Inglis map off the coast off Caithness. At no point have I suggested that Shepperd's map is an aid to understanding Scotland in the Norman period. Benarty 16:13, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
The Scottis-Inglis map is alleged to be based on some sort of analysis of placename evidence. Even in modern times almost 550 years after the Scottish takeover, Norn rather than Scots based placenames predominate in Orkney. Worth noting that if placenames are the main citerion that also holds true for the coastal regions of Caithness. Benarty 16:37, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
I think it is clear from the use of "English" and "Scottish" rather than "Scots" and "Gaelic" that Calgacus is trying to promote a particular viewpoint. Benarty 16:46, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Norman French was the language of the English aristocratic elite at this point in history. Totally different environment from the modern day situation because the modern nation had not emerged yet. Benarty 17:01, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Anglian is the literal translation of "Inglis" into modern terminology. Benarty 17:08, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Modern notions of nationhood are being projected back to the feudal era when people did not have that sort of identity yet and multilingualism was normal. Ireland was Scotia major while Scotland was Scotia minor. It wasn't just "Inglis" that could apply in more than one kingdom. Scottis translating literally in modern terms as Gaelic could as well. Benarty 17:22, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
National identity (or in reality which dude with a crown was at the top of the pile in feudal terms) and ethnocultural identity were not necessarily one and the same as they later became with the devlopment of the 19th century nation state. In England the dude with a crown was Norman French in ethnocultural terms and still held lands in what is now modern France as well. Benarty 17:42, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
One of the quirks of history is that "Inglis" speech which I would translate as being "Anglian" in an ethnocultural rather than a rigidly national sense arguably had a higher status in Scotland than it did in England in that era. The change in terminology to a more rigidly national from an ethnocultural sort of basis came when Norman French ceased to be the elite language in the Kingdom of England. Over and out for me for now. Benarty 17:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)