Surely language is the one thing we can discuss in respectful language?

This might be controversial: is Scots a language? It is recognised as such by the Scottish Government and UNESCO, the UN’s Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

I offer an opinion.

To start, I will attempt to define what Scots is. I think there are two versions.

The way Scottish people speak in normal day-to-day business is one. Then there is another Scots, with older roots, that would use “leid” to mean language, “screive” for write, “skinklin” for sparkling.

To nail my colours to the mast, I think English and the older Scots are different languages.

But I believe there isn’t enough variation between modern English and modern Scots for them to be considered separate.

Consistently, I think old, middle and modern English should count as distinct languages.

Right, when you enter the Scots/English debate you quickly encounter a political minefield. To some, the language and what we call it is influenced by their opinion on independence.

The problem is, I think, that English is called English with the same root as the word “England”. That’s merely an accident of nomenclature.

English people don’t own the English language. No one owns it. And there’s no such thing as “correct” English. No accent or area-specific version is any better than any other.

I get bored by juvenile bickering so please don’t tell me a person must believe Scots is a separate language if they are a supporter of independence. Or must think every Scot speaks English if they are a supporter of the union.

It is a much more nuanced argument.

I believe communication stands above politics. Our opinion on language doesn’t depend on where we think a border should be drawn.

When considering what is or isn’t a language we examine usage. If we do that, we find there is common understanding throughout the Anglosphere. You could speak with a Canadian, American, Australian or New Zealander without problem.

There will be local terms (an Australian might offer snags to put on an Aberdonian’s rowie) but we’d easily conduct a conversation.

I think that shows, not just with Scots and English but with Australian, Canadian – all the Englishes –there are so many similarities this is one language with many vocabularies.

But I fully accept others believe there are too many differences, so these are separate languages: and modern Scots and English are separate too. Or would pick holes in my initial definitions of Scots.

That’s good, an interesting discussion. But, I hope, a discussion that doesn’t involve the puerile aggression the nationalist v unionist schism too often attracts.

Surely language is the one thing we can discuss in respectful language?