Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The 2019 General Election

Indeed. It’s not the birthplace of the PM that’s the issue (indeed the current incumbent was born outside the U.K. altogether), but the location of the constituency they represent.

This is because in Scotland, many functions of government are handled at Holyrood, where MSPs are the representatives not MPs. Therefore in the event Swinson became PM, she’d have a say on Education, Health, law and order and so on in England but not in Scotland. This might, for example, lead to a PM privatising the NHS in England, while knowing that the hospital serving her own constituency remains in public hands. For example.

Devolved versus reserved powers: What are the powers of the Scottish Parliament? - Visit & Learn : Scottish Parliament

This asymmetry to differing degrees also applies to the other devolved institutions, depending on which powers are devolved. So that’s Wales, Northern Ireland, and yes London, although the mayor and assembly are seldom mentioned in this context, but of course the same argument holds: an MP in London represents a constituency where certain (albeit limited) matters are devolved whereas an MP in Devon, or County Durham or the West Midlands does not.
Given that it also applies to London, I'm amazed that no one has used it as a way of arguing that Corbyn can't be PM either.

But even if we can suspend disbelief enough to imagine PM Swinson (very difficult) wanting to privatise the NHS (not so difficult) she couldn't do it on her own, it would still need a majority of English MPs to actually vote for it.
 
I like that, but you'll get into arguments if you call Norwegian a dialect of Danish on that basis. Also, it's not always symmetrical - a speaker of one dialect/language may understand another dialect/language, but not vice versa.
I have often heard Italian and Spanish people converse, each speaking their own language, so, no, it doesn't entirely work. But it's neat. And illustrates the unclear line between the two.
 
Given that it also applies to London, I'm amazed that no one has used it as a way of arguing that Corbyn can't be PM either.

But even if we can suspend disbelief enough to imagine PM Swinson (very difficult) wanting to privatise the NHS (not so difficult) she couldn't do it on her own, it would still need a majority of English MPs to actually vote for it.
if swinson became pm we can only assume the country would already be facing an utterly unprecedented emergency, like some sort of real life designated survivor
 
Given that it also applies to London, I'm amazed that no one has used it as a way of arguing that Corbyn can't be PM either.

But even if we can suspend disbelief enough to imagine PM Swinson (very difficult) wanting to privatise the NHS (not so difficult) she couldn't do it on her own, it would still need a majority of English MPs to actually vote for it.
Yeah, it’s more of a “what if” kind of a scenario. I submit that it’s worth pondering.

But of course there is no explicit rule, law or convention stating that the MP for a Scottish constituency cannot be PM. It’s more about what the implications of EVOL amount to. And those who say if it comes to it it’ll be fudged are of course correct. The U.K. constitution is created from fudge.
 
The old saying is that a 'language is a dialect with an army and a navy'. Doesn't have to be taken too literally. Having its own ISO-639 2 and Linguasphere observatory codes make it official though.
Serbo-Croat would be a good example, imo. 'Dialects' brought together as part of one political project until new political projects (and armies) prised them apart into 'languages'. It's a process that happens everywhere of course. Here in the UK, English has been forged as one language with regional dialects as part of a political project.
 
Scots is a language with its own dialects. Dialect would be considered a slightly pejorative term even for a smallish language like Scots.

And a native Scots speaker (rather than a Scottish English speaker who would be speaking English with a Scottish accent) trying to speak proper English but with Scots sounds could easily be considered L1 interference rather than a 'Scottish accent' so a 'hint of Scots' could be correct.

What's the level above uberpedant?

I intended to be pejorative, as supported by my statements in my post no.940. Therefore, my use of 'dialect' rather than 'language' was not a result of a deficiency in pedantry. Some might call this a post-rationalisation, but they wouldn't be able to prove it.

Regarding the question of whether a 'hint of Scots' could be correct - we were talking about Tony Blair. As you yourself said:

Went to school in Edinburgh though. A really really posh school (Fettes, the one that James Bond was supposed to have gone to after having been expelled from Eton) but definitely in Edinburgh. And there's a hint of posh Scottish in his accent.

So, if we are talking about Tony Blair, and as already established by you, an "accent", involving "posh Scottish" I don't think a 'hint of Scots' could be correct. Whether you call it a language or a dialect, what would be being spoken at Fettes would not be Scots. Posh Scots don't speak Scots, they speak English with a posh Scottish accent.

You will take the pedantry trophy from my cold dead hands.
 
So, if we are talking about Tony Blair, and as already established by you, an "accent", involving "posh Scottish" I don't think a 'hint of Scots' could be correct. Whether you call it a language or a dialect, what would be being spoken at Fettes would not be Scots. Posh Scots don't speak Scots, they speak English with a posh Scottish accent.

But you were replying to LBJ's post which didn't specifically reference Blair.

You will take the pedantry trophy from my cold dead hands.

Works for me.
 
But you were replying to LBJ's post which didn't specifically reference Blair.

It was clearly part of the following conversation about Blair, with each of the posts quoting the one preceding it. If LBJ's post was in fact an outrageous non sequitur then that's not my responsibility.

Went to school in Edinburgh though. A really really posh school (Fettes, the one that James Bond was supposed to have gone to after having been expelled from Eton) but definitely in Edinburgh. And there's a hint of posh Scottish in his accent.

Is there? I can’t hear it, but you’re the expert there.

I can hear it.

Jings. And indeed crivvens.

Maybe a hint of scots is easier to hear if you're not Scottish. It won't stand out as much for you - you'll notice the Englishness more.
 
It was clearly part of the following conversation about Blair, with each of the posts quoting the one preceding it. If LBJ's post was in fact an outrageous non sequitur then that's not my responsibility.
Both your initial statements were wrong. Scots is a language not a dialect and it is perfectly possible to hear a 'hint of Scots' in an accent (though not Blair's). Have a look at your trophy cabinet mate. It's empty already.

Slow day is it?
Yes, thank fuck. First time I've had a few hours with nothing to do in months.
 
it is perfectly possible to hear a 'hint of Scots' in an accent (though not Blair's).

I have not claimed otherwise. And I have already dealt with your objection to the first of my statements. My cabinet is secure and has not been breached.
 
apropos of nothing

"The pedant is he who finds it impossible to read criticism of himself without immediately reaching for his pen and replying to the effect that the accusation is a gross insult to his person. He is, in effect, a man unable to laugh at himself." ― Sigmund Freud, The Ego and the Id
 
Back
Top Bottom