Talk:Northumbrian language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Languages, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, and easy-to-use resource about languages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
language Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Middle Ages Icon
Middle Ages Portal
Northumbrian language is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
WikiProject Middle Ages To do:

Forget it - this is an English related article, the forerunner of the Geordie, Mackem etc dialects of England (and according to the Northumbian language Association are dialects of a separate Nothumbian language (!)). I see no reason why one of the most well known English dialects should be nabbed by the Scots and declared a "Scotland related article", it is relevant to both England and Scotland. Izehar 18:22, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Please calm down: Wikipedia:No personal attacks. I am not your "darling" (sic).
The two things are not mutually exclusive. Northumbrian Anglo-Saxon is both an English and a Scottish topic. The sad fact is that there is no such thing as an {{England-stub}}. Why?--Mais oui! 18:44, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

I could start speculating why there is no England-stub, but I'll refrain. The main fact is that Northumbrian Anglo-Saxon is related to both England and Scotland - like I told you above. The article with the Scotland-stub is misleading, as it implies a relationship with Scotland alone, while leaving out the fact that the Kingdom of Northumbria where this dialect was spoken was in the are which is now England and has left a distinctive mark on the speech of the people living there ever since. I know that stub categories are a rather petty thing to be arguing over, but they cannot be misleading. How about using {{Template:UK-stub}}? That's better that Scotland-stub alone or even worse: the Scotland-stub and the hypothetical England-stub - that would clutter the page. The UK-stub includes both. Izehar 19:01, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

I just made the change. Izehar 19:14, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Ynglis language was redirecting to Middle English which seemed less relevant, so I've changed it to redirect here. It might be worthwhile moving this article to the "Ynglis language" title. From other pages it seems that the invaders in this area were Angles, and the idea of Anglo-Saxon is a later construct implying a unity with the language of Saxon areas which seems unsupported by the differences still preserved in Geordie and Lallans. ....dave souza 15:21, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Ynglis just means "English"; if it were to be moved, it would be to Northumbrian language, which would actually be pretty convenient for editors writing in links. - Calgacus 23:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't a language, it was a dialect of the Old English language. Izehar 23:14, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah yeah and "Gaidhlig" just means "Gaeilge". Latina means Italiano and Dutch/Deutsch are all one thing. Give us a break and stop your double standards regarding language definitions80.192.59.202 03:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think David is disputing that, he was thinking of the Mercian Language parallel (which ought to be moved in any case, as the "L" should not be capitalized). Certainly, these matters should be kept consistent. The Mercian language article was moved in November without explanation; maybe it ought to be reverted or something. - Calgacus 23:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

(edit conflict) That's true about Mercian language, the guidelines at Wikipedia:WikiProject Languages mandate the form XXX language. Perhaps Ynglis should have its own page (a disambiguation page) and direct readers to Mercian, Northumbrian, Old English, Anglic etc. Izehar 23:27, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

The problem was simply caused by the move:

In my view, the article Ynglis is worthless, even as a redirect. It was produced mainly because well intentioned, but misguided, supporters of "Scots" on wikipedia consistently wish to antedate the separate existence of the "Scots" dialect/language to as early a date as possible; although I'm sure that is not always the case. A link to Middle English would probably suffice. - Calgacus 23:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

You talk elsewhere of "spurious modern condstructs" yet use the modern construct "Middle English" and show disdain for the earlier "Ynglis"!?!? Please enlighten us as to why in the case of Scots (and not Gaelic rather than the term Middle Irish where you take the opposite stance without explanation for this reversed position seeing Gaelic as a non spurious term for the Goidelic language spoken at the same time as Ynglis, rather than the more modern "Middle Irish" its always spurious, despite your clear personal bias and lack of evidence for such "expert" analysis. The Gaelic language written in Scotland in the Middle Ages (another "spurious modern term" I take it?) was the same one as in Ireland at that time (as you you know very well despite remaining silent on this in comparison to your a historical attacks on Scots.) If modern terms are spurious because there modern, then please support the article "Ynglis" rather than "Middle English" and thus stay consistent in your criticisms. Otherwise, you are guilty of continued negative propoganda against a particular linguistic group and twisting "evidence" ("all but proven??? give us a break please!) to suit your apparently vindictive campaign.82.41.4.66 10:30, 12 January 2007 (UTC)


Well, I suppose we could get Mercian Language moved back to Mercian (Anglo-Saxon) if we had a poll on WP:RM. I am concerned about the fact that we have two redirects: Ynglis and Ynglis language, which both redirect to different articles now. Izehar 23:48, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, we could save ourselves the bother by just renaming all three. Say, Northumbrian Old English, Old English language, Northumbrian, Northumbrian Old English language, etc. - Calgacus 23:58, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

As Mercian (Anglo-Saxon) was not moved by a poll, then it does not need a poll to be moved back. I just moved it back :-) Izehar 00:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC)


In any case, the articles should be moved to Northumbrian (Old English), Mercian (Old English), West Saxon (Old English) and Kentish (Old English) as the name as 'Old English' is generally prefered to Old English, is more commonly used and the Wikipedia article is Old English language. Sigurd Dragon Slayer (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 01:40, 18 March 2008 (UTC)