In the early modern period (1500-1700) Scottish writers wrote
both in Scots and English. It was in this era - particularly after 1603 -- that
Scots became gradually associated with popular language, and English with
learned language. Reasons for this can be found in religious reforms and
bookprinting. Scots and English are closely related, they share a common
ancestor (Anglo-Saxon) and today there is some discussion as to whether Scots is
a dialect of English or a language in its own right (McArthur 1998:138-142).
Indeed, often the distinction between Scots and English is blurred. In the early
modern period this was already the case written texts. We will see this in the
In the spoken language there are many varieties of Scots, each
with its own (social) function; today most Scottish speakers use a variety of
English with a broad Scots accent, coloured by some Scottish words. In the
Scottish Lowlands here are pockets and communities of Scots speakers who use the
basilect of a Scots dialect (an estimated 1,5 million people). A basilect is the
variety of the dialect which is closest to the original -- Scots -- language or
dialect and farthest from RP or the standard language (Trudgill & Hannah
2002: 110, 111, 120).
Most Scots speakers have a range of registers of Scots,
Scottish English and Standard English at their disposal, which they mix as a
means of code-switching in various social situations. Speakers of a Scots
basilect will tend to use the variety of Scottish English that is closest to RP
(also known as the 'acrolect') in educated circles or areas outside the Scottish
language area, whereas in situations with peers -- in pubs or other leisurely
situations - the 'truly Scots' basilect will prevail. In written texts Standard
English will prevail too, unless if one consciously attempts to write in Scots,
as poets and writers of the present-day Scots revival do, inspired as they are
by Robert Burns and Hugh McDiarmid (Crystal 1995: 333). My use of both the words
'Scots' and 'Scottish English' to specify the Germanic language of Scotland
here, already indicates that there is a continuum in language use in Scotland
where Standard English is on the one end and Scots on the other.
Throughout history Scots has gradually been replaced in
educated usage by English (Trudgill & Hannah 2002: 91); the demise of the
written national language can be followed by studying texts written as early the
16th century. In the early modern texts we can not only trace the anglicization
of Scottish vocabulary, but also of Scottish spelling. I will attempt to
demonstrate the character and the use of the Scottish spelling system throughout
the early modern period, as described by Manfred Görlach (Görlach 1991: 59).
Different than today, Scots was the dominant language in the early modern
period. Before the Treaty of Union in 1707 Scots (or Scottis) was
generally accepted to be a language in its own right. In 1707 English
(Englis) became the language of government and polite society in
Scotland. But the demise of Scots as a book language had already begun in the
latter half of the 16th century (Görlach 1991: 19). About the gradual demise of
Scots and switching from Scots to English and vice versa in the early modern
period, Görlach mentions:
Since in EModE times competence in written English was not as
common as it is today, and the need to switch from the spoken to the written
language and back again was less frequent, it may be assumed that the two
subsystems were further apart then than they are in modern speech communities.
(Quoted from Görlach 1991: 12)
From this I can safely assume that Scots was losing prestige,
while English filled in the gaps. That this had -- and continues to have -- an
effect on the command of the Scots language, orally and in writing, is a logical
The flag of Scotland
2. The Scots spelling
This section will focus on the Scots spelling system of the
early modern period. In this period, Scots was a full-fledged language with a
distinctive spelling of its own that dated back to Middle Scots (Barber 2000:
172). It was the spelling already used by the Middle Scots 'Chaucerians' such as
Robert Henryson (c. 1430-c. 1506). By the time the early modern period begun
(around 1500), the spelling system had already undergone its first vowelshift
(Barber 2000: 172): the Middle Scots and Northern Anglo Saxon (i.e.
Northumbrian) monophthong [a:] (=long, open a), spelled as ai/ay, oi/oy and
ei/ey, had undergone a shift to a raised, open [E:] (long, open e as
in Thames). South of the Humber
[a:] was rounded to an open [o:]. Consequently, Old English [ha:m] became [hE:m]
in the North (Scotland) and [ho:m] in the South (England). The spelling
continued to be used at least until the latter half of the 19th century (The
Görlach presents the early modern Scottish system as
- Word-initial /xw/ was preserved in Scots (conventional spelling
- Most i-diphthongs merged with long monophthongs in
fourteenth-/fifteenth-century Scots; hence, i/y could be used as an
indication of vowel length.
- OE /a:/ developed into southern English lengthened lot-vowel . but into
Scots open /E:/.
Görlach continues with a few common characteristics of Scots
quh corresponds to EModE wh;
w/u/v are largely interchangeable;
þ, 3 are often found in
manuscripts, but in printed books <3> is
replaced by ;
ch represents /x/ (a sound more commonly preserved in
Scots), and corresponds to EModE gh;
sch is widespread for /S/, EModE sh;
i, y can indicate vowel length.
Based on the guideline given by this spelling system I studied
seven manuscripts in early modern Scots, provided and edited by Bridget Cusack
(Cusack 1998). Whenever the purpose of a certain way of spelling was unclear to
me, I consulted the exhaustive Dictionary of the Scots Language on
http://www.dsl.ac.uk/dsl/, and the 1858
Scots dictionary Handbook of the Scottish Language by Clieshbotham the
Younger (which uses the same spelling system, with the exception of þ and
3) to see whether an instance of unexpected
spelling reflected a deviation in orthography or whether it reflected a true
Scots morphological or phonetical difference with English. For example,
fand as a past tense of to find is indeed Scots and does denote
found in English, according to the dictionary. To find English-related
etymological and other language historical explanations I consulted the Online
Oxford English Dictionary (henceforth OED).
In the 16th and 17th centuries these manuscripts served a
practical purpose (journals, wills, accounts, depositions) and they had been
written not by poets or literary writers, but by ordinary yet literate citizens.
The authors had no pretension to be artists or scholars while they wrote. These
"naïve documents" (Cusack 1998: x) written in everyday language should reflect
unrestrained Scots spelling or at least another spelling that was generally in
use in those days. My aim was to see if the Scots spelling system matches the
spelling of the manuscripts. From this we can determine whether or not, and how,
the gradual demise or anglicization of Scots in written texts also included the
spelling used by the authors. Starting with the oldest text, from 1540, and
finishing with the most recent text, from 1684, will we be able to see a
development of phasing out of the aforementioned Scots spelling
The 'Rampant Lion' or Royal flag of Scotland
3. The manuscripts and their analysis
3.1. A deposition from 1540. Here I find Scots spelling:
- quh- for word-initial /xw/: quhen, quhidde,
quhill (Eng. until, cf. Eng. while), vmquhill
- w/u/v used interchangeably: lauder, devly (Eng. duly),
vnderstud; evyll vs. deliuerand
- 3: 3eid (went), 3eiris, 3ow; but also yeiris;
þ: yaim (Eng. them), ye (Eng. the)
- ch representing /x/: aycht, worcht, coucht (Eng.
bought; cf. cheap/to cope)
- sch for /S/, corresponding to early modern English sh:
schew, scho (Eng. she) (3)
- i, y indicating vowel length: aigis (Eng. ages), gaif
(Eng. gave), geif (Eng. give), guid (Eng. good); but I also
fid also gud
- OE /a:/ developed into Scots /E:/: hayme, straikis (Eng.
strokes), aycht (Eng. oath); but also banis instead of expected
The above would need the following comments: discrepancies
consist of the lengthening, e.g. guid/gud, banis instead of
bainis/baynis. Is this a case of anglicization of lengthening the pronoun
or did the author consider this Scots phoneme to be an /a/? A double lengthening
form such as hayme could represent English-inspired hypercorrection.
I often found pairt (Eng. part), which is a Scots
lexical peculiarity of lengthening without an expected English equivalent
*poart (cf. traist instead of Eng. trust). Geif also
represents a Scots lexical peculiarity. Note also incidental 'innovative'
yeiris alongside 3eiris in this
manuscript. By this time Þ and y had merged into one grapheme, hence yaime,
ye, etc. Scho denotes she and the use of o is not
related to spelling.
3.2. A text from 1560-61.
- quh- : quhome, quhen, quhare
3 and þ: 3e, 3or; ye, yis
ch: this sound had not been found in the text.
i and y for vowel length: smayk/smaik (Eng. rogue),
chais, gayt, cayre; but quhome, quhare and
OE /a:/ > Scots /E:/ (ai): maist; but na thing, na
man, fra and ony (Eng. any). Note also traist
- w/u/v: (texts from 1650) wordes, wald, devill,
vicar, Blude, cumin. In a text from 1561: vpon,
I see here that there may have been at least two different
scribes at work: the former was capable of alphabetically distinguishing /v/,
/u/ and /w/ from each other (texts from 1650), whereas the latter was not (text
from 1651), as Görlach's Scots spelling system predicts.
There could have been confusion about whether ai could
be used both for /E:/ and for /a:/: I see that quhare had been written
with a vowel lengthening that I recognise from English (final -e). I also
see the hybrid forms cayre and quhome. Fra and na
both derive from OE frá and ná, if these words are indeed the
Scots cognates of English fro and no. In Scots there are more
words that lack the predicted vowel shift OE á > Sc. ai (cf.
quha in 3.3 herebelow). But both a's are in final position,
which could explain the exception. Ony should be any; ony
is the Middle Scots and the early modern Scots equivalent of modern English
any (OED). It is a "variety with an unexplained change of vowel"
(Dictionary of the Scots Language).
3.3. A deposition from 1567. Here I also find Scots
spelling as described by Görlach:
- quh-: quh, qlkis (= quhylkis Eng.
which [plural]), quhen, quha (Eng. who)
- w/u/v: vponn, vter (Eng. outer), suffer, twa,
- 3 and þ: 3et
(Eng. gate; 3 indicates palatalisation
under influence of e, hence 'yet'), 3oung; yat, yai
- ch: licht, heich (what was coucht (Eng.
bought) in the previous manuscript is coft in this one) (4)
- sch: no words with this sound could be found
- i and y for vowel length: befoir, cariit (Eng.
carried), cloik, haif, saim, treis; but also
yame; tuik, but also tuke. (1)
- OE /a:/ > Scots /E:/ (ai): laird, but also lord; Quha,
This manuscript shows consistent Scots spelling without much
English influences, except for a few lengthened vowels, such as the rare
yame instead of more the frequent yaim, and tuik
followed by tuke in the next clause. At first sight this looks like
English spelling, unless the final -e had indeed been pronounced. This is
unlikely, since Scots phased out final e sooner than English: cf. Early
Modern Scots mak, tak, etc. (Barber 2002: 172).
I also found that lord was written interchangeably with
laird and I found the interesting yet consistent use of ane and
quha. All these cases are, however, not due to spelling but due to Scots
Lord should be laird in Scots: OE hláford
(e.g. 'loaf-keeper') > lárd > laird. This is, again, not a
matter of spelling but of the entry of an English word which, of course, was
pronounced differently. And ane, quha both derive from words with
OE /a:/ (án and hwá), but they show an 'a' in Scots. These are clearly matters
of lexis and phonology, and not of spelling. In other words, people did say
/a:n/ and /xwa:/ and not */E:n/ and */xwE:/. Compare English indefinite articles
a and an as opposed to one, which does display the Southern
3.4. A deposition from 1576. The spelling system is
- quh-: quhat, quhyte, Quhy
- w/u/v: vyer (Eng. other), ansuerit, followit,
hevye, husband, vp
- 3 and þ: 3ard;
- ch: wychtis
- sch: sche (Eng. she)
- i and y for vowel length: heid, foir (Eng. four),
bairdit; seik (Eng. ill)
- OE /a:/ > Scots /E:/ (ai): bairnis (but elsewhere barne),
A lexical difference is found in sche, which seems
English. Scho is not used at all in this manuscript. The use of ai
as /E:/ is unclear.
3.5. A memoir from 1601. This displays Scots and English spelling.
3 and þ: yield, yit
(3 is phased out); yt, yrfra;
but elsewhere the, ther, thre
sch: schipper, schoure/shoure
i and y for vowel length: scheit, seiking; but
also: frie, heavin, thrie
OE /a:/ > Scots /E:/ (ai): almaist; but also: steanes,
nane, bathe (Eng. both)
- quh-: quhilk; but also wher
- w/u/v: vpe (Eng. up), tuk, continewed, ws
Here I find ea replacing ei in heavin and
elsewhere extream, and the lengthening i is often placed
before lengthened vowel. Furthermore, sch and sh are used
interchangeably, as are ai and a in the OE /a:/-derivants. The letter
3 has been replaced by
y and þ by th, which also happened in English around that
time (OED). Only the shortened forms yt and the like have retained
thorn. Sch is often replaced by sh, which also happened in England
around 60 years before (OED).
3.6. A legal report from 1619: this text has retained all
the Scots features.
- quh-: quhan
- w/u/v: leawe, Vitness, wp
- 3 and þ: phased out by y and th
- ch: slicht, micht
- sch: scho
- i and y for vowel length: teith, baik; but also:
- OE /a:/ > Scots /E:/ (ai): almaist
3.7. A journal from 1682-4 displays very little Scots
spelling. We find retension of þ, phasing out of 3 and a nearly completely English spelling system. The use of u
in uitnes and and ues could point to Scots, as could a single
instance of ane, and fand instead of found. In the South
fand was already no longer in use in the sixteenth century (OED).
3.8. A letter by a man in 1684 shows scarce use of the
Scots spelling system:
- quh-: qch, gch (=quhich, guhich), grfor;
- w/u/v: trowths, you, upon, powr,
- 3 and þ: 3 phased out by y and þ retained in yt,
elsewhere phased out by th.
- ch: phased out by gh
- sch: this sound could not be found
- i and y for vowel length: sies, swiet,
dier; but great, keped, befor, sam,
felien (Eng. failing).
- OE /a:/ > Scots /E:/ (ai): I could not find examples
Besides unusual spelling I see English morphology: gch
is a hybridization of Scots quhilk with English which; who
should be quha in Scots. Lengthened e has an i , but i
follows e in this manuscript. Could this be a rendering of the
English pronunciation /i:/ of ee? Other instances of vowel lengthening
are not given or they lack the conventional Scots fashion: knon,
sowr, they, meay, seay.
Edinburgh in the Scottish Lowlands, which are the home of Scots
Throughout the manuscripts I have found a relatively stable use
of the Scots spelling system. As from 1600 I notice that the Scots spelling is
slowly being replaced by English or otherwise non-Scots spelling systems. The
text in 1619 shows a conservative spelling, but after this text Scots is rapidly
being phased out. That this is coupled with English words and pronunciations
need not be coincidence: according to Görlach (Görlach 1991: 19) Scots lost
prestige as a book language as from the latter half of the sixteenth century,
when English was the language of spiritual reform and bookprinters.
The authors of the texts can be compared with the various ways
in which one could write (and speak) use Scots; sometimes the Scots spelling was
used in a conservative way (3.6), and sometimes without clear rules (3.8).
Hypercorrections could occur where people are no longer sure about how they
should spell correctly. Hence we see double lengthenings such as hayme.
I can conclude from the studied manuscripts that as the Scots
spelling system was gradually dismissed, the number of English morphological and
lexical increased: sche, what, who, continewed, where Scots
would have scho, quhat, quha, continuit. Anglicization lead to
diminishing of Scots spelling and lexis, and to confusion in some cases (3.8).
Many inconsistencies are not necessarily related to English: swiet,
sien (but the writer uses dielien and biely
whereas the bold printed syllable had short /i/. The English bookprinter
Caxton preferred gh as /x/, which must have lead to the phasing out of
ch in the writing of some authors.
Nevertheless, in today's Scots spelling system ch is
still in use (sch- is not); as are i-lengthening in ui and
ai as derivative of OE /a:/. Scots can still be written and its basilect
is still is a full-fledged language; only the number of people who can write it
well is scarce if we compare it with the command of English.
(1) Certain features are similar to spelling conventions
in early modern Dutch. One of them is i and y which indicate vowel
length in Dutch too; Dutch place-names like Oirschot and Helvoirt
draw our attention, and Dutch words like huis and luid (house, loud)
indicated yet older, lengthened, Dutch pronunciation /u:/. Many Dutch
printers worked in Scotland. That Dutch printers have introduced spelling
innovations in the South is nothing new, if we remember Caxton's
collaboration with Dutch colleagues and the influence they had on his
spelling. One of these colleagues was his journeyman, Wynkyn de Worde
from the Netherlands. He probably came from the town of Woerden.
(2) Clieshbotham the Younger (1858), Handbook of the Scottish
Language, 10,000 Scottish Words and their meanings, Richard Griffin
and Company: Glasgow & London
(3) Scho interestingly shows a variety of the much
debated transformation of OE seo into Modern English
she: seo < scho is easier to imagine than seo <
(4) This is a difference in speech,
common in Germanic languages: cf. Eng. shaft vs. Du.
schacht; Eng. draught, pronounced with an 'f', as [drα:ft]
Barber, Charles (2002), The English Language,
Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
Clieshbotham the Younger (1858), Handbook of the Scottish
Language, 10,000 Scottish Words and their meanings, Richard Griffin and
Company: Glasgow & London
Crystal, David (1995), The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of the
Engli,sh Language, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
Dictionary of the Scots Language,
McArthur, Tom (1998), The English Languages? English
Oxford English Dictionary, online version:
Trudgill, Peter and Jean Hannah (2002), International
English, 4th edn, London: Arnold.
This essay was published on Friday 2 June