The Contemporary
Perception of Scots as a
Language or Dialect:
Attitudes & Intelligibility
THEODORE P. JONES
S2541432
MA in Multilingualism
Faculty of Liberal Arts
University of Groningen
Supervisors:
Dr. Charlotte Gooskens
Prof. Dr. Goffe Jensma (Second Reader)
10
thMarch 2014
-Acknowledgements-
My sincere thanks go to Dr. Dauvit Horsbroch and his colleagues at the
Scots Language Centre in Perth, without whom my research would have
been significantly more difficult. After initially and briefly visiting their
website for the first time several months ago, I realised that it could be of
relevance with regards to my thesis. Their website is one of the most
comprehensive sources for anyone seeking clarity and information on
Scots and was one of the starting points of my research. Dr Horsbroch’s
academic articles also provided valuable information about the history of
Scots and its usage and development.Furthermore, an integral part of my
project involved finding spoken extracts of Scots for the mutual
intelligibility task, which at the time seemed very challenging and
unlikely given my position in the Netherlands. The SLC was able to
provide me with all of the extracts I required and did so gladly and with
great interest in my research. Once again, I am very grateful for their
assistance.
Table of Contents
1. Abstract………p4
2. Introduction………..p5
3. Literature Review……….p7
4. A brief history of Scots………..p14
5. Linguistic differences between Scots and English……….p20
6. Study………...p23
7. Method………...p26
7.1 Subjects & Procedures: Survey 1……p26
7.2 Subjects & Procedures: Survey 2…..p28
8. Results………p33
9. Discussion………p40
9.1 Expanded discussion on lowest/highest scoring
questions………..p43
10.
Conclusion………..p45
11.
Appendices………p48
1. Abstract
After reading a 2010 survey on perceptions and usage of Scots conducted by the Scottish Government, I became interested in conducting my own study to determine the contemporary perception of Scots as either a language or dialect by both Scottish residents (and Scots speakers), as well as English speakers from the rest of the UK. Therefore, the main research question of the thesis was established as Do Scottish
and other UK residents perceive Scots as a language or dialect? The thesis itself was
entitled The Contemporary Perception of Scots as a Language or Dialect: Attitudes
& Intelligibility.
In order to provide a satisfactory answer to the research question, the study took the form of two online surveys/questionnaires.
The first survey was targeted at Scottish residents and was based on the structure of the Scottish Government’s 2010 survey, including questions on the perception of Scots as a language or dialect as well as questions about the frequency of Scots usage, ending with questions designed to determine the participants’ attitude towards Scots (either positive or negative).
The second survey was targeted at UK English speakers (excluding Scotland), and comprised translation tasks involving the translation of written and spoken Scots into English. Participants were also asked about their perception of Scots both before and after completion of the translation tasks.
The two surveys showed a different outcome as far as the perception of Scots as a language or dialect is concerned. Scottish participants from the first survey (76%) tended to regard Scots as a separate language and held positive attitudes towards it, whereas the majority of participants from the second survey ended up perceiving Scots as a dialect of English- perhaps due to the high overall scores obtained by participants (mean score 86.4%). Whether Scots is a dialect or language is still open for debate and political reasons may play a role in its classification as either a
2.
Introduction
When I began to study a language BA (French & German) in the UK five years ago, I developed a particular interest in Germanic languages, and even more so in the history and development of the English language (most likely as a result of learning two languages, which created more curiosity about my native tongue) . As I read and learned more about the origins and development of English, I touched briefly on the subject of Scots and my interest was further sparked. Like many people, I was
unaware of the very existence of Scots before reading about the history of English. Whilst linguistic classifications of Scots are somewhat controversial and
inconclusive, the relationship and differences between Scots and English are
fascinating and for the most part under-appreciated. Scots has a rich and interesting history which both parallels and contrasts to that of English and it is a shame to see that the current status of Scots does not reflect its true history (this will be further explained in the history section).
However, the status of Scots may well find itself in a position of change with the upcoming Referendum on Scottish Independence later this year. Hypothetically, the status and prominence of Scots could well increase in an independent Scotland, possibly even to the level of official language. Whatever the outcome of the
referendum, it will be interesting to keep track of the situation of Scots, especially when considering that the Scottish Government’s 2010 survey on the usage of Scots and attitudes towards it revealed a positive outlook from the majority of those interviewed (this will be elaborated on in the following sections).i
Indeed, after reading the 2010 survey earlier this year, it provided inspiration to conduct my own study on Scots. The chief aim of my study would roughly follow that of the 2010 survey, i.e. to determine the attitudes of members of the Scottish
population towards Scots. However, I am also very interested in mutual intelligibility studies and being unable to find any academic studies of intelligibility between English and Scots, I decided to create my own study to find out how well speakers of British English (including Irish) varieties can understand both written and spoken Scots.
The main link between the two surveys is the perception of Scots as either a language or dialect by those who are most familiar with it, and by those whose first experience of written and spoken Scots may be the intelligibility survey. Overall, the two surveys constitute one study whose chief aim is to examine Scots within the context of the UK; from the perspectives of those who use it and are familiar with it and from those who do not use or have any/less familiarity with Scots.
As such, I aimed to investigate whether attitudes towards Scots have further changed in the four years since the Government survey. My research took the form of two online surveys. The first of these was aimed at Scottish residents and incorporated some questions borrowed from the 2010 survey, as well as other questions of my own design. The main research questions (research questions and hypotheses can be found in more detail in the Study section) for this study were roughly the following:
- What are the attitudes of members of the Scottish population towards
Scots- are they chiefly negative or positive?
- How frequently do participants use Scots (speaking/reading/writing)? - Do participants consider Scots to be a dialect of English or a separate
language?
For the intelligibility task, the main areas for study were as follows:
- How well can speakers of British (and Irish) English understand both
spoken and written Scots?
- Do the participants of the intelligibility task consider Scots to be a dialect
of English or a separate language?
- How do participants perceive Scots (as either a language or dialect) both
before and after the completion of intelligibility tasks?
These two studies formed the basis of my research. The results of both will be explored and analysed in this paper. However, in order to provide some context for my research, it is important to gain an awareness of the history of Scots and also of some of the linguistic factors which differentiate it from English, since not all aspects of Scots’ development run parallel with that of English. Therefore the first two
3.
Literature Review
Overview
The literature review focuses mainly on the material used for background and historical research. The most important piece of background literature is of course the 2010 Scottish Government’s Scots survey. The rest of the sources are presented roughly in the order that they were used according to the requirements of the research for the thesis. Whilst it was not possible to find material on any existing intelligibility studies between Scots and English, other intelligibility surveys such as Tamburelli’s (reviewed below), were an influence in how my own study was prepared and operationalised.
The Scottish Government’s 2010 Survey on Scots
The survey is entitled Public Attitudes towards the Scots Language and dates from 2010, and was commissioned by the Scottish Government’s Department of Social Research. Broadly, the objective of this survey was “to promote awareness and usage of the Scots language in a variety of settings”iii. It is interesting to note that the survey itself acknowledges “that there is little other relevant research in this field”iv, which along with my own feelings suggests that in official contexts, Scots is
under-represented in modern Scotland.
The survey was distributed and carried out via the Scottish Opinion Survey (SOS), which is the official Scottish website for a wide variety of polls and research surveys. A total of 1,020 responses were obtained. These responses were then weighted according to census data so that they would accurately represent the Scottish population on the whole.
The main findings of the study were illuminating; 85% of participants claimed to be able to speak Scots, with 43% doing so regularlyv. However, the figures for reading and writing Scots were lower, with only half of the participants indicating that they ever read in Scots and only a third indicating that they ever wrote Scotsvi.
Interestingly, 64% of participants indicated that they “do not really think of Scots as
a language- it’s more just a way of speaking”vii, which would suggest that this
proportion does not consider Scots to be a separate language. However, despite this there would seem to be fewer negative perceptions of Scots, since 63% of participants disagreed that Scots “doesn’t sound nice- it’s just slang”viii, the majority of whom
disagreed strongly with this statement.
Furthermore, 67% of participants regarded it as important “that Scots is used in Scotland these days”, with just under a third regarding the usage of Scots as
unimportantix. Additionally, the vast majority of participants (some 87%) considered Scots as an important part of the history, heritage and culture of Scotland. This would suggest rather conclusively that Scots has an important role in Scottish national identity and culture.
survey, especially in the formation of the key research question of the perception of Scots as a language or dialect. Further comparisons and references to this survey will be made and elaborated upon in later sections of this thesis.
The Adventure of English
Originally aired in 2003, The Adventure of English was a documentary series focusing on the history of the English language, from its Anglo-Saxon origins to its modern-day usage. It was produced by ITV and written and presented by Melvyn Bragg, who also wrote a book to accompany the series.
Although the Scots language itself is not a central subject within any of the episodes, the first episode of the series proved useful for my background historical research on Old English and the West Germanic origins of Scots, since the first episode covers the history of English from around 500 AD to the Norman Invasion of 1066. Some of the examples given in this episode, such as listings of Norman terms which entered into English in the 11th century, such as castel for “castle” and governer for “govern”x were useful for the history of Scots section and allowed for the clear illustration of the point that English within England received an enormous French influence, whereas the Old English varieties spoken in Scotland at the time received less of this instant influence. This led to some of the differences in vocabulary that exist between modern English and Scots.
The episode also features interviews with specialists on the subject of Old English, including explanations behind the reconstruction of the language’s phonetics and examples of spoken OE. These sections were also of use to my research since Scots in many ways preserves some of the phonetic features of OE and Middle English that were lost from most forms of English English. These linguistic difference will be explained in greater detail in section 4 of the thesis.
Overall this documentary was an unconventional source which nonetheless provided some useful insights and examples of particular relevance to my historical
background research, especially as far as examples of Old English and Norman French words were concerned.
The Mother Tongue
The Mother Tongue, written by Bill Bryson and published in 1990, was used as one
of the sources for background historical research.
development of Old and Middle English, an interesting example of communication difficulties is given whereby two men travelling from London encounter a Kentish woman from whom they wish to purchase food. After asking for “mete” and “eggys”, the woman responds that she “could speke no frenshe”xi.
Since Scots descends primarily from Northern Old/Middle English, its differences from Standard English can be viewed in terms of this history. The book provided useful examples of Old English terminology as well as the anecdotal historical example of communication problems between neighbouring dialects, all of which were used to illustrate points in the Scots history section of the thesis.
What’s Scots?
Written by J. Derrick McClure and published in a 1993 supplement of Fortnight dealing with Scots, the article entitled What’s Scots? provided a focused and in-depth insight into the origins of Scots as well as its changing status in more recent years. The article highlights the point that Scots had been “relegated to the status of a low-prestige dialect”xii, which links to my own historical section due to the fact that Scots was increasingly influenced as well as marginalised by the growing presence and power of English, a process which began with the unification of the English and Scottish crowns in 1603 and continued well into the 20th century.
Crucially, the article mentions that by the final decade of the 20th century, Scots was beginning to be re-acknowledged. Several of the organisations involved with the promotion and maintenance of Scots are mentioned, such as the Scots Language Society and the Committee for the Advancement of Scottish Literature in Schools. The current activities of the Scots Language Centre are no doubt influenced by these organisations.
Furthermore, McClure identifies the point that “the chronic dilemma of what is, or should be, receiving promotion as ‘Scots’ remains troublesome. The problems of definition, on which political decisions have to rest, are very real”xiii. In essence, the perception of Scots as either a language or dialect was one of the key areas for attention in my own study, since Scots must attain official, political recognition as a language if its status is to truly be raised.
Overall this article was very informative for both historical research and served as inspiration for one of the most important research questions in my own study.
Nostra Vulgari Lingua: Scots as a European Language 1500-1700
The article deals specifically with Scots in the period 1500-1700, at a time when commerce between European states was rapidly expanding. The article’s most
important point is that Scots was used as a medium for trade and diplomacy and was held in equally high regard as contemporary English. As a result of this commerce (particularly involving trade between Scotland and cities of the Hanseatic League), Scots received some influence from Low German and Dutch (chiefly nautical terms such as keel and boom). Indeed, the article provides examples of 16th century royal letters between the English and Scottish courts which were written in both Scots and English, showing the importance of Scots at that time.
Furthermore, the article provides examples of contemporary English observers
perceiving Scots as a separate language from English- following is an extract from the article which contains a 16th century quote from a contemporary observer regarding Scots. “The Teutonick or German, which is distinguished into two notable dialects The Saxon (dialect), from which much of the English and Scotch are derived, and also the Frizian language, and those languages on the north of the Elve; which of all the modern German dialects come the nearest to the ancient German, and in this work are called L.G.”xv
The article was particularly valuable for the section on the history of Scots, and also provided a very interesting contrast between the historical and current statuses and perceptions of Scots, since during the Early Modern period Scots occupied an equal position to that of English.
Scots Online Dictionary: articles on Scots history
The Scots Online Dictionary (Dictionar o the Scots Leid) (www.dsl.ac.uk), is an online academic institution providing a number of articles on the linguistic history and development of Scots, as well as an English-Scots dictionary. The site is an excellent resource for those seeking an in-depth linguistic perspective on Scots. One of the site’s articles, entitled A History of Scots to 1700, proved a valuable resource in my background research on the linguistic history and development of Scots. The article presents a series of sub-chapters which provide information on the origins of Scots (from the Northumbrian dialect of Old English), some of the
characteristics of Scots (including a list of false friends between Scots and English), as well as sections on the vocabulary, orthography and phonology of Scots.
The article’s language family tree diagram was used for the history of Scots section to illustrate the linguistic origins of Scots, and the information within the
Marco Tamburelli: Uncovering the ‘hidden’ multilingualism of Europe: an Italian case study
The aforementioned article, written by Dr. Marco Tamburelli of the University of Bangor and published in the Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development in 2013, was a useful source both for inspiring the concept of my own study and also for comparisons between the method that he employed and the eventual method used for my study.
Tamburelli provides context for his experiment by citing the concept of Ausbau languages, i.e. “Dominant notions of what constitutes a ‘language’ and what a ‘dialect’ within a continuum are entirely based on socio-political factors, totally disregarding structural and communicative aspects”xvi. Tamburelli challenges the
Ausbau-centric (or socio-political linguistic) approach by conducting a mutual
intelligibility study between standard Italian and Lombard, which is officially considered a “dialect” of Italian.
As a point of comparison in his study, Tamburelli also references the official
intelligibility standards required by the US Military (set at a minimum level of 75% for spoken language)xvii. The study itself consisted of standard Italian speakers listening to sentences in Lombard and then having to write down the Italian equivalent of the final word of the sentence (target word). A mean percentage of 44.3% was obtained, which falls far below of the US Military standard used as a comparison. I did not, however, decide to use a similar criteria for measuring
intelligibility in my study due to the opinion that a mutual intelligibility index (such as that of the US Military, is too arbitrary, and does not provide a reliable measure of overall intelligibility.
The study demonstrates the difficulties that can be encountered in classifying a
variety as either a language or a dialect, and shows that in many cases classification is purely political rather than linguistically based. As far as my own study is concerned, the work of Tamburelli provided a reference point for my work since one of the key objectives of my own study is the perception of Scots as either a language or dialect and like Tamburelli, I also consider the approach of mutual intelligibility studies a more reliable indicator of what constitutes a language or dialect rather than the socio-political approach.
Legitimating inaction: differing identity constructions of the Scots language
The aforementioned article, written by Johann W. Unger of the University of Vienna and published in the European Journal of Cultural Studies in 2010, provided an alternative perspective on attitudes towards Scots.
focus group concentrating on a discourse-historical perspective on Scots i.e. looking at perceptions of Scots in both historical and contemporary contexts) concluded with the focus group “rejecting the notion of Scots as a viable, contemporary language that can be used across a wide range of registers”xix.
Such an opinion would seem contradictory in nature, since it is reasonable to assume that if Scots were really so important then it would be acceptable for it to be used in a range of contexts. The fact that the focus group in the study was small only reflects a small range of opinions and, whilst interesting, convinced me to create a survey for a broader range of participants.
As a result, the study described in this article was very useful for providing me with ideas and impetus for conducting my own study on attitudes towards Scots, even though my own research took a different form from the study described above due to the fact that I required a broader group of participants and not a focus group (since a larger group of participants may more adequately reflect a larger range of opinions).
Languages of Scotland: Culture and the Classroom
Written by Catherine and David Matheson and published in Volume 36 of
Comparative Education in 2000, this article deals with examining “the
socio-historical problems which are linked to the multilingual nature of Scottish society”xx. The essay examines the contemporary language situation in Scotland (such as the revival of Gaelic), to see where the trends may lead in the future.
The article provided useful information about the encroachment of English on Scots, which may have had an influence on Scots being perceived as a dialect of English rather than a language in its own right. The article also makes the very interesting point that “none of its (Scotland’s) native languages (Scots/Gaelic) have ever been both national and official”xxi. Whilst the tone of the article is somewhat melancholy, an important point is made when the similarities between Scots and English are mentioned as a factor that can work against Scots when its status is being considered. Such similarities may prove to be an important factor in the perception of Scots as either a language or dialect in my own study’s mutual intelligibility survey, so it is useful that other literature on Scots, such as this article, have also highlighted this point.
The return of the Scots language
Several of the new MSPs took the oath in Scots: "I depone aat I wull be leal and bear aefauld alleadgance tae her majesty, her airs an ony fa come aifter her anent the laa"xxii. This statement is visible evidence of the recent resurgence of Scots that has also been described in some of the other literature such as What’s Scots?.
The article then goes on to mention a second, smaller scale 2010 survey revealing positive attitudes towards Scots amongst the Scottish population (similar to the 2010 Government survey), and also the aims of the Scottish National Party to increase the presence and status of Scots in public and official contexts, such as education.
Furthermore, the article mentions the link between emphasising “linguistic
separateness as a precursor to independence”. Since Scottish independence is now a very current issue, this article provides confirmation of the importance of Scots in a potentially independent Scotland.
4.
A brief history of Scots
This section will give a brief history on the origins of Scots and its development, in order that the current situation and status of Scots may be better understood.
Scots Family Tree
The figure below (figure 1) of the Scots family tree, taken from the Scots Online Dictionary, shows the divergence of Scots from the other Germanic varieties spoken in England, and its roots in the Northumbrian dialect of Old English. It is worth bearing this diagram in mind at all times when considering some of the differences between Scots and English (these differences will be further explained in the
following section). Furthermore, this family tree does not take into account the influence of other languages upon the West Germanic languages of England and Scotland. Again, such points will be explained in greater detail in the following sections.
Germanic Origins
What is now known as Scots is a member of the Anglo-Frisian group within the West Germanic family of languages. More specifically, it is categorised in the Anglic
subgroup (the Frisian languages also have their own subgroup), which also includes the various forms and dialects of English as it is spoken throughout the world. Both UK English and Scots trace their ancestry back to the West Germanic varieties (which later became known as Old English or Anglo-Saxon) spoken by the Germanic tribes who began settling in Britain around 1500 years ago. Whilst modern English has diverged considerably from its ancestral form, Old English nevertheless provided most of the structure and core vocabulary that is still the backbone of modern
English.
The West Saxon variety of Old English tends to prevail since it was the language used to write the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle from around the 9th to 12th centuries as well as the epic poem Beowulf around the beginning of the 11th century. These works form two of the most significant examples of written Old English.
Whilst we describe the language of these invaders as Old English, it was certainly not one fixed or standardised language and there were indeed many forms and dialects such as Kentish, Anglian and Saxonxxiii. These dialectal differences persisted long into the medieval period of Middle English. An example of this variation can be seen in the London term eggys and its Kentish counterpart eyrenxxiv, meaning “eggs”. Such
differences occasionally led to problems in communication between speakers of these different varieties, as a Kentish-dialect speaker encountered two men from London and upon hearing their requests for food informed them that she “could speke no
Frenshe”xxv.
Vocabulary differences such as those above are important to bear in mind when considering the history and development of Scots and also the vocabulary differences between English and Scots. The roots of Scots lie not in a standardised form of Old English but in the Northumbrian dialect, which was brought to Scotland by settlers from England in the 7th centuryxxvi. This language was then influenced by Old Norse around two centuries later with the establishment of Viking kingdoms in the
northern territories of Britain.
The spread of Pre-Scots
The Norman invasion and subsequent conquest of England in 1066 brought
fundamental changes not only to the country’s system of government, but also to its language. The langue d’oïl of the Normans became the language of authority in England and enriched the existing English vocabulary with thousands of new terms. Many of these new words had to do with matters of law, governance and military, such as “castle” from the Norman castel, “enemy” from enemi, “crown” from corune and indeed “govern” from governerxxviii.
Norman French was not, however, as prominent in Scotland as it was in England, and as a result the Germanic varieties in Scotland received less of a direct French influence. Latin, which had already been present in Scotland for several centuries continued to be used in Scotland for administrative matters and in the Church. In the meantime, the majority of noblemen continued to speak Old English, or Pre-Scots as it is termed during this periodxxix, and not Norman French. This was very significant, since this ruling class “eventually brought about a linguistic shift from Gaelic to Scots throughout the Lowlands, as the native population was assimilated into the new social system”xxx, thus laying the foundations of the majority Germanic-speaking regions of modern Scotland.
Middle English and Early Scots
From the 12th century onwards, the northern variants of Middle English began to spread upwards into Scotland. It was from these dialects that what is now classified as Early Scots began to develop. There are also several literary examples of this language, such as the 1375 poem The Brus by John Barbourxxxi, establishing written literature in Scots.
Also of significance were the Wars of Independence fought between the Kingdoms of Scotland and England in the late 13th and early 14th centuries, during which Scotland successfully retained independence from the interests of the English crown. A
consequence of these conflicts was the forced assimilation of the English-speaking population of the region of Lothian to accept a Scottish identity. With the decline of French in Scotland in the 14th century, the status and prestige of the Germanic vernacular increased and the variants spoken in Scotland received further influence from Middle English, other Germanic languages such as Dutch and Low German from trading, and ecclesiastical Latin. It is also interesting to note that these developments in Scots ran more or less parallel alongside the development of
Middle Scots
Scots continued to develop throughout the late middle ages and by the end of this period (around 1450) it was a significantly different language than the old
Northumbrian dialect from which it had its roots. In much the same way, English in England had also changed enormously from its Anglo-Saxon origins in terms of both vocabulary and grammar, which had expanded and simplified over time.
Scots became the language of the ruling Stewart dynasty and was acknowledged as an important European language during the Renaissance period. In his essay on Scots as a European Language 1500-1700, Dr. Dauvit Horsbroch highlights the interesting point that “The common misconception today is in thinking that the people of this period considered the language of England to be the standard and Scots the
variant.”xxxii. Letters of correspondence between the Scottish and English crowns would be sent in Scots and English respectivelyxxxiii, which suggests that both languages were held in equally high regard at the time.
Furthermore, some contemporary scholars acknowledged Scots as a tongue separate from English. The Italian scholar Florio, tutor to the Earl of Southampton, wrote in 1578 that Elizabeth I “speaketh Greeke, Latine, Italian, French, Spanish, Scottish [Scozese], Flemish and English; Al these tongues shee speaketh very wel, and eloquent."xxxiv
Indeed, some Englishmen even thought of Scots as a less corrupt version of English. Henry Saville presented an argument for the unification of England and Scotland in 1604 and wrote “...both nations using the one and almost the same dialect, to wit the Saxon language. And the Scots and north people of England speak more incorruptly than the south, which by reason of the Conquest and greater Commerce with foreign nations, is become more mingled and degenerate from the ancient tongue”xxxv. Whilst his view of English as a “corrupt” language is subjective and questionable, there can be no doubt that during the Renaissance period Scots was recognised as distinct from English and not necessarily in a negative manner.
From the beginning of the 17th century onwards, large numbers of settlers from the Scottish lowlands began moving to the province of Ulster in Northern Ireland. As a consequence, Scots was introduced into Ulster and continues to be spoken there today, now a distinct variety separate from Scots in Scotland. There is evidence of literature written in Ulster Scots from the 18th century onwardsxxxvi, showing its importance in that region
The emergence of Modern Scots and its current status
Due to the fact that England was the centre of power within the Kingdom of Great Britain at this time, English became the language of law and government and the usage of Scots began to be discouraged as a result of thisxxxviii. Between 1640 and 1700, the written records of the Scottish parliament began to adapt “a more English style…English spellings and vocabulary”, and the publication of literature in Scots also declinedxxxix.
However, some figures, such as Robert Burns, took a stance against the increasing English influence and continued to use Scots to produce literary material, such as the famous poems “Tam o’ Shanter” and “Ae Fond Kiss”. Whilst there were no written standards established for Scots at this time, its usage by literary figures such as Burns suggests that Scots was still an important part of Scottish culture at the time, despite the encroachment of English.
With the Industrial Revolution sweeping across Britain during the late 18th and 19th centuries, the population became more mobile and also more concentrated in large cities. This coming together of people who had previously lived in different regions began a process of dialect levelling which is still continuing today, and in Scotland the same happened with Scots. As the influence of the English language and class system continued to grow, Scots began to be perceived as an inferior form of speaking and something that should start to be purged from Scottish societyxl.
The turn of the 20th century saw Scots in a relatively difficult position. Since the days of Burns (the mid-18th century), Scots had been banned from education, with
corporal punishment being administered to any pupils who broke the rules and spoke in Scotsxli. However, the last three decades or so have seen somewhat of a resurgence of Scots and the language is once again beginning to be recognised as an integral part of Scottish culture and history. Whilst Scots is not currently used in official contexts, the founding of organisations such as the Scots Language Centre and the Scots Online Dictionary have helped to raise the awareness of Scots and attempt to bring about a change in perceptions of the language.
With the results of the Scottish Government’s 2010 survey showing that 85% of participants were able to speak Scotsxlii, it would appear that the language still maintains a considerable level of vitality and may yet become more important with the results of Scotland’s independence referendum later this year. Indeed, an online article from The Guardian, dating from 16th May 2011, offers another interesting insight into the recent resurgence of Scots. The article reports on new members of the Scottish Parliament being sworn into office and taking their oath of office in Scots, as well as the concept of a potentially independent Scotland “in which Scots is as different from English as Swiss German from German, and English tourists pack phrasebooks alongside the midge spray and cagoules”xliii.
5.
Linguistic differences between Scots and English
Now that the history of Scots has been outlined in brief, this section will give an overview of some of the main linguistic factors that differentiate Scots from English, since the two varieties (as well as standard Scottish English) have some notable differences in their phonology, vocabulary and orthography. Regarding my research questions, these linguistic differences may present some problems for the
participants of the mutual intelligibility tasks, which may have an influence on their scores. It is therefore important to be aware of these differences.
At a glance, the orthography and syntax of Scots is noticeably different from that of English, and Scots employs a number of different spellings for cognate words. The following is an extract from The New Testament in Scots, with my own approximate English translation below it:
“Whan he hed waukit frae his sleep, Joseph did as the angel hed bidden him”
“When he had awakened from his sleep, Joseph did what the angel had requested of him”
It would have been possible to translate word-for-word and to have written “Joseph
did as/what the angel had bidden him” in English, but this would look and sound
somewhat archaic. It was therefore necessary to alter my English translation by using
“had requested of him” instead of “had bidden” to make the translation read better.
As can be seen in the Scots sentence, the spelling of many similar words differs between Scots and English, such as waukit for woken/awoken, frae for from and
hed for had.
Phonological Differences
The phonology of Scots also differs considerably from that of English. This is most noticeable in the pronunciation of words such as “loch” and “might”. In the vast majority of UK English varieties, “loch” is pronounced as /lɒk/ with a hard “k”. In Scots, the same word is pronounced as /lɔx/, with a far more guttural ending similar to the Dutch and German “ch”. The same also is true for the Scottish pronunciation of “might/micht”.
This pronunciation is a feature that was prevalent in Middle English but which has been lost from modern English due to various phonological shifts, whilst it is preserved in Scots.
Furthermore, varieties of Scots and Scottish English are generally rhotic, unlike Standard English (Received Pronunciation). Rhotic accents preserve the
pronunciation of “r” in any position in a word, whereas non-rhotic accents
pronounce the “r” only if it is followed by a vowel in the word. The alveolar trill or “rolled r” [r] is also common in Scots and is found very rarely, if at all, in British English varieties.
between Scots and English, using Old English (here abbreviated as O.E.) as a tool for historical comparison:
Example 1:
When O.E. ā was followed by w, ā becomes in Mod. Sc. either [ɑ:] or [o̜:]. The spelling for either is au or, when final, aw, but for [ɑ:] aa is found in some of the dialects.xliv
O.E. Mod.Sc. Mod.Eng.
blāwan blaw blow
crāwan, v. craw crow crāwe, n. craw crow
maāwan maw mow
sāwan saw sow
sāwol saul, sal soul slāw slaw (obs.) slow
snāwan snaw snow
This first example shows how Scots has maintained a spelling and pronunciation of ā more similar to Old English than Modern English. Spellings such as maw and saw for mow and sow could also be confusing to an English speaker who may mistake them for the English nouns maw, meaning mouth and saw, as in the tool used for cutting.
Example 2:
The O.E. ū. In Older Sc. it is written u, w, ou, ow. This vowel has remained unchanged in quality, but is generally fully long only before [r, z, ð, v,] or in final accented position. In Mod.Eng. ū has developed into a diphthong [au] spelled ou and ow. xlv
O.E. Mod.Sc. Mod.Eng.
brūn broon brown
clūd (a rounded mass) clood + clud cloud
dūfe doo dove
hūs hoose house
mūð moo mouth
mūs moose mouse
scūr scoor scour
sūr soor sour
sūtere souter [shoemaker]
ðūma thoom thumb
brū broo brow
cū coo cow
hū hoo how
nū noo now
Once again, we can see how Scots has remained closer to its ancestral roots than modern English with the phonology of ū. Furthermore, some of the orthography here would also be confusing or even unintelligible to an English speaker without the proper context, such as moo for mouth and noo for now.
These examples give a useful insight into Scots phonology and orthography and underline some of the chief linguistic differences between Scots and English. It is particularly interesting to note that in many cases Scots has preserved certain words and sounds that are more faithful to the original Old English than modern English, which surely provides further evidence of the historical and linguistic differences between Scots and English and the fact that it is not simply a “corrupted” form of English. Since some of these spellings and pronunciations would be unfamiliar to an English speaker, they could potentially pose problems for an English speaker
attempting to read or listen to Scots.
Linking back to my own study and following research questions in the next section, an awareness of the linguistic differences between Scots and English (particularly the vowels of Scots), may help to explain and highlight the areas of difficulty
6
.Study
Part 1: Attitudes of members of the Scottish population towards Scots
As has already been mentioned in the introduction, I decided to make the Scots language the subject of my thesis research after reading the Scottish Government’s 2010 survey, which acted as the foundation for the first half of my research.
Specifically, the core research question was identified as the perception of Scots as a language or dialect by both Scottish and other UK residents.
The 2010 survey’s main objectives were “to provide a broad overview of perceptions of the Scots language and attitudes towards it, and to measure behaviours and expectations of its use in Scotland today”xlvi. Some of the key questions from the survey itself included the regularity of Scots usage by participants and the
perceptions of Scots as either language or a dialect, as well as whether participants would be motivated to use Scots if they first heard somebody else using it.
Taking these concepts from the 2010 survey as the framework of my own study, the process of creating an online questionnaire on attitudes towards Scots was begun, with the following questions forming the expanded part of my research goals alongside the core question of the perception of Scots as a language or dialect:
1. What are the attitudes of members of the Scottish population towards Scots- are they chiefly negative or positive?
2. How frequently do participants use Scots (speaking/reading/writing)? 3. Do participants consider their native language to be English or Scots? 4. Do participants perceive Scots to be a dialect of English or a separate
language?
5. Are participants more likely to use Scots themselves if they hear another person using it?
6. Do participants want the Scottish government to do more to promote/raise awareness of Scots?
7. How many feel that Scots may sometimes be perceived as “slang” or otherwise inferior to English?
8. How many feel that Scots is an important part of Scottish national identity? 9. How many feel that Scots should be more prominent in Scottish society? 10. How many feel that there should be more media available in Scots? 11. How many feel that Scots should feature more in the Scottish education
system?
12. How varied are the situations in which Scots speakers use Scots?
Part 2: Scots intelligibility task for British English speakers
The second part of my research comprised an intelligibility task which was targeted at English speakers from the rest of the UK (excluding Scotland). Whilst some intelligibility experiments make sole use of tests relating to spoken language and others focus on written language, I wanted to combine both of these elements into one task in order to get a clearer picture of how well my participants could
understand Scots and whether they perceived it as a language or dialect. The structure involving spoken and written language allowed for detailed comparisons between the two parts to be made.
The main research questions and key areas for analysis of the second part of the study were as follows:
13. How well can speakers of British (and Irish) English understand both spoken and written Scots?
14. Do the participants of this task consider Scots to be a dialect of English or a separate language?
15. Do bi- or multilingual participants perform any better than monolingual participants?
16. Do participants generally perform better at translating written or spoken Scots?
17. After finishing the intelligibility tasks, do the participants’ perceptions of Scots as either a language or a dialect change?
18. Do participants’ confidence levels (for whether or not they can understand all varieties of English spoken in the UK and Ireland) affect their scores? Is there any sort of relationship between confidence level and overall score? 19. Do participants score higher at translating written sentences or spoken
extracts?
20. Which questions (for both parts of the survey) have the lowest and highest mean scores?
As mentioned in the introduction, the main linking question between the two surveys was the perception of Scots as either a language or dialect by Scottish participants and by participants from other parts of the UK.
Once these questions had been established, it then became possible to move onto the creation of the surveys and then the subsequent sharing and promotion of them to find participants. Some of these questions also formed the basis for the survey’s variables, which are listed below.
Aside from the participants’ perception of Scots, I was interested to determine whether the following variables had an influence on their performance in the intelligibility tasks. The key variables were therefore:
21. The linguistic status of the participants i.e. monolingual or bi/multilingual.
22. The confidence levels of the participants (confident/not confident/unsure).
Since the survey incorporated a scale of confidence levels, it would be interesting to examine whether self-recorded confidence levels would have any effect on the overall score.
23. The level of difficulty perceived by the participants after completing the survey
tasks. Due to the survey incorporating a scale of difficulty, it would be important to see whether any significant relationships existed between perceived difficulty and final score.
24. The participants’ level of education.
25. The scores and means obtained for each part of the survey (translating written
sentences and spoken extracts respectively). Highest and lowest mean scores from both sections of the survey. The most difficult and easiest question for each section could then be identified and analysed to find out what made it easy or difficult for the participants (with references back to the linguistic differences section).
For the later analysis of the data obtained from this survey, and in order to see if any statistically significant relationships exist between the variables, a series of alpha-level null hypotheses were formulated according to the questions and variables that have just been set out, corresponding to the proficiency variables of the participants (language ability, confidence levels, perceived difficulty and level of education).
26. Hypothesis 1: There is no relationship between being monolingual or bi/multilingual and the scores obtained in the tasks.
27. Hypothesis 2: There is no relationship between the confidence levels of the participants and the scores obtained in the tasks.
28. Hypothesis 3: There is no relationship between the participants’ perception of the difficulty of the tasks and the score obtained.
7.
Method
Subjects & Procedure: Survey 1
For the first survey on attitudes towards Scots, the target group for participants was members of the Scottish population. In order to find suitable participants, I joined several online forums dedicated to topics on Scotlandxlvii, as well as the Scots Language Centre’s Facebook group pagexlviii. It was on these pages that I promoted my survey and was able to achieve around 50% of participants. Since the SLC’s Facebook page features many posts made in Scots, the majority of the Scots-using participants came from this site.
Whilst the data in the Scottish Government’s survey were weighted in order to ensure an accurate cross-sectional representation of the Scottish population on the whole, this was not possible in my case due to a lower number of participants. As such, there is a larger proportion of Scots speakers in my own survey than that of the 2010
survey, which may lead to more positive responses towards Scots and its status. This is something that will be examined in the conclusion section where comparisons to the original survey can be made. If the possibility existed for a future, more in-depth study, and the resources were available to take a larger sample and weight it
accurately, then an accurate cross-sectional weighting method could be employed.
Table 1: Essential statistics of participants for Scots attitudes survey
Total
participants Age range No. of female participants No. of male participants No. of bi- or multilingual
participants No. of participants with English as L1 No. Scots L1 63 49 (67-18) 23 40 59 22 34
This group included two Scottish expatriates and seven individuals who were resident in Scotland but whose native language was not Scots or English. However, due to the fact that these participants did report on familiarity and experience of Scots as an L2, they were considered valid. The high figure of 59 bi-or multilingual participants is based on the criterion that listing both English and Scots (as many participants did), was considered bilingual for the purposes of the survey
Procedure: Scots attitudes survey
The language attitudes questionnaire was created online using the software of Survey Gizmo and comprised 22 questions in total (see Appendix I). A combination of set answer options, (yes, no, not sure/no opinion etc.) as well as open questions, was used where appropriate.
The first section (questions 1-6), was designed to gauge the general background of the participants and featured standard questions on age, sex, level of education, languages spoken and whether the participants considered their native language to be English or Scots. The final key question of the background section was whether participants considered Scots to be a separate language or a dialect of English. It was of the utmost importance to obtain this response from both Scottish participants and the other British participants of the second survey to find out whether they differed in their opinion of Scots as a language or dialect.
The background section was then followed by questions 7-22 for gauging the
participants’ attitudes towards Scots. These questions were formulated according to the key research questions specified above in section 5. Some of these questions contained large textboxes allowing for open answers, such as Please list the
situations in which you use Scots, but the majority of answer options were limited to
either yes, no or no opinion. Whilst I received some feedback from certain
participants who made the point that they would have preferred a broader range of answer types for certain questions, I had a need for clarity and concrete answers (in order to conduct statistical analysis), hence the prevalent usage of a 3-option answer model.
7.2
Subjects & procedure: Survey 2
For the second survey, the target group needed to comprise native English speakers from the UK and Ireland, excluding Scotland. As this is a far broader group (based on numbers of English speakers vs Scots speakers) than that of the first survey, the intelligibility survey was promoted amongst acquaintances on Facebook, and also on UK-based forums where people throughout the UK post, such as a football discussion forum. I was only interested in the responses from native speakers of English. It was made explicitly clear that the survey was intended only for native speakers of English and consequently none of the completed data needed to be discarded.
Table 2: Essential statistics of participants for intelligibility survey
No. of
participants Age range Female Male Bi-or multilingual No. of participants
confident at understanding all UK English varieties 15 47 (68-21) 6 9 11 11
One of the participants was an expatriate in the United States, but listed both US and UK English in the language ability question, so the responses in this case were
considered valid.
Identifying suitable material for the intelligibility tasks
Finding material that could be used for the translation tasks (Scots sentences and extracts of spoken Scots) proved challenging, due to the fact that there is no officially established written standard of Scots. After a period of searching, the Scots Language Wikipedia was identified as a source, since it is about as close as any source may come at providing articles written in a uniform variety of Scots. Sentences were chosen at random, with the only criteria being that each sentence must not be too long and must still make sense when taken out of the larger body of text. The sentences are presented below and translations of these can be found in the Appendix I:
30. Scots is a Wast Germanic leid that's spak in the Lawlands an Northren Isles o Scotland an in the stewartrie o Ulster in Ireland.
31. In maist airts, it's spak anent the Scots Gaelic an Inglis leids.
32. Scotland haes til its sooth the laund o Ingland, an is bund bi the German Ocean til the eist an the Atlantic Ocean til the north an wast.
33. Scotland aforetyms wis a free kinrik, but than it gaed intil a personal union wi Ingland in 1603.
35. Glesga is Scotland's maist muckle ceety, on the river Clyde in wast-central Scotland. 36. It haes a population o 1,700,000 doun frae its 1960s heichness o 2.1 million that's
maist due tae owerskail o fowks intae new touns sic as East Kilbride an Cumbernauld. 37. Lunnon is the caipital an the muckle maist ceity o the Unitit Kinrick, wi mair nor 7
million indwallers.
38. The Hielands is the muntainous northren an wastren airts o Scotland whaur the Scots Gaelic leid haes tradeetionally been spak.
39. The Kirk o Scotland is the naitional kirk in Scotland. It is Presbyterian, an asinder frae the Anglican Kirk o Ingland.
Having added the sentences into the online survey, it was then necessary to identify examples of spoken Scots for use in the second half of the intelligibility task.
Initially, searches were made on YouTube to look for examples of spoken Scots, although it was then discovered that there are a number of extracts of spoken Scots on the website of the Scots Language Centre, an organisation which promotes the usage and awareness of Scots. Upon request, downloadable versions of these extracts were made available.
The original versions of these sound files were too long to use as single units, so it was necessary to use audio editing software to cut each extract and break them up into individual sentences of between 10-20 words. Each sentence then comprised one question in the finished survey.
Transcripts of these sound files in Standard English were produced, and the transcripts for each question are shown below:
40. I do enjoy writing in dialect, and I mostly write for children
41. I’ve written a children’s novel and a couple of children’s picture books 42. If it says in the census paper, asking if I speak Scots, I just speak normal
43. I had to speak different(ly) when I was at school, it was down the road, over the bridge and into the town
44. The other day at home I was taking in the turnips and potatoes for mum but she gave me a look for crashing around (about), and making a mess on the floor.
45. What do I speak? I speak Caithness, that’s Scots, for your census form 46. The history of the town of Selkirk, where I come from, is that it had a lot of
shoemakers in it.
47. And so the word “Souter” with a capital S has come to mean a native of Selkirk like myself.
48. One of the more interesting things was that we were strongly discouraged from speaking in dialect on the phone (at work).
49. And I, on more than one occasion, got into trouble for phoning up folk and speaking
in dialect.
Procedure: Intelligibility study
Again, this study took the form of an online questionnaire (see Appendix II) and like the first study, it was created online using the tools of Survey Gizmo. The survey began with some general background questions such on sex, age, level of education and number of languages spoken, as well as the key question “Are you reasonably
confident that you can understand most varieties of English spoken in the UK and Republic of Ireland?” Answer options for this question comprised Yes, No, Not sure
and it depends on the location. This question was especially important within the study since it will later be analysed whether there is a relationship between the confidence level given and the score achieved.
Participants were then asked whether they were aware of the classification of Scots as a Regional or Minority Language under the European Charter, and the final question of this section was “Do you think that Scots is a dialect of English or a separate
language?”, with the answer options being yes, no and not sure. In order to
determine whether or not the participants’ perceptions of Scots as either a dialect or language had changed due to perceived difficulty, this question was repeated at the end of the survey, after the final questions of the translation tasks.
The intelligibility task itself was divided into two sections of 10 questions each. The first section presented the participants with the 10 sentences shown above. The participants were then required to translate the sentences into English.
Following this, participants were then able to move on to the second part of the intelligibility task. Since this section required audio output, participants were advised to either use headphones or check to make sure that their speakers were working correctly before proceeding.
Participants were then presented with the 10 sound clips which could be played by clicking on a small “play” icon next to each question. Participants were able to play/replay each clip as many times as they needed. As with the first section, a text box for each answer was provided and participants were required to attempt an English translation of each sentence. The answer fields were all mandatory which ensured that a response was obtained for every question.
Upon finishing the two tasks, participants were presented with a question that required them to rate the difficulty level on a 5-point scale with the options very
difficult, fairly difficult, average; neither difficult nor easy, fairly easy and very easy. Participants were once again presented with the question “Do you consider Scots to be a separate language or a dialect of English?” in order to determine
Procedure: response analysis and marking scheme
For the intelligibility tasks of the second survey, a key area of concern in the design process was the development of an effective method of marking the responses of both sections of the survey.
After some consultation with my thesis supervisor, the following method was created and applied for the analysis and marking of the responses:
Scots and English are structurally very similar and it is often possible to translate word-for-word between the two varieties. Therefore, every word in each Scots sentence was treated as one unit, with one point obtainable for correctly translating it into English. As a result, in the Scots sentences and sound files the number of points was equal to the number of words in the sentence. This could then be used to mark the English translations, with points being awarded for each correct word. There were one or two cases where the number of words was not the same between Scots and English, for example: Glesga is Scotland's maist muckle ceety, on the river
Clyde in wast-central Scotland. In Scots, the above sentence consists of 14 words. A
correct English translation would be: Glasgow is Scotland’s largest city, on the river
Clyde in west-central Scotland.
This translation consists of 13 words so in this instance, 2 points were awarded for the word largest, which is the correct rendering of maist muckle. The total mark for this sentence was 14 points. The same criteria applied for the listening task, and the transcripts were used to provide a benchmark translation with which the responses could be compared.
Overall, points were awarded for each correct word in the English translations. An Excel spreadsheet was created in order to input the data and marks for the
responses.
In instances where the majority of words were correct but the meaning of the English translation was different from the Scots original (such as most mucky for maist
muckle), an asterisk was used to highlight the error and no points were awarded for
the incorrect words.
From both the sentences and the listening tasks, a total of 387 points were
obtainable, with the first section having a total of 205 points and the second section 182. Each question was marked individually so that the questions with the highest and lowest mean scores could be efficiently identified in the analysis section. At one point during the design phase, it was considered whether or not to use a benchmark system for grading the minimum acceptable standards of mutual
8.
Results
Survey 1: Scots Attitudes
Following are the results obtained from the first survey on attitudes towards Scots. The data are split between several tables in order to maintain the portrait format of the pages. The figures are also expressed in rounded percentages as well as integers.
Table 1: Participants
Total
participants Age range No. of female
participants
No. of male
participants No. of bi- or multilingual
participants No. of participants with English as L1 No. who consider Scots separate language No. Scots L1 63 49 23 (36.5%) 40 (63.5%) 59 (93.6%) 22 (35%) 48 (76%) 34 (54%) Table 2: Responses No. responded in
Scots (%) Daily Scots Users Occasional (weekly) users Rare users (fortnightly,
monthly)
Able to
read/write Scots
5 (8%) 43 (68%) 10 (16%) 1 (1.5%) 53 (84%)
Table 3: Responses continued
No. who read/write Scots daily No. who read/write occasionally (weekly) Rare readers/writers
(fortnightly/monthly) No. who are more likely to
speak Scots upon hearing others using it
No. who feel that Scots is sometimes perceived as slang/inferior to English 19 (30%) 16 (25.3%) 15 (24%) 50 (79%) 4 (6%)
Table 4: Responses continued
No. who consider Scots important part of national identity
No. who consider it important that Scots is used today
No. who feel that Scots should be more prominent
No. who feel that there should be more Scots media
No. who feel Scots should feature more in education
Table 5: Final responses
No. who feel that pupils should be encouraged
to speak Scots No. who feel that government should take more responsibility for maintenance and promotion
of Scots
56 (88.8%) 58 (92%)
Survey 2: Scots intelligibility tasks
Below are tables, charts and statistical analyses of the data obtained from the mutual intelligibility survey. In order that any differences or relationships between the data might be better observed, separate statistical tests for each variable were conducted for the scores obtained for the writing (translating sentences) and speaking
(translating spoken extracts) parts of the survey respectively. From this point
onwards, part one of the survey is described as “Writing” and part two as “Speaking”, until the end of this section.
Table 1: Participant Scores
Mean Score 334.5 Mean Percentage 86.4% Range 100 Highest Score 375 Lowest Score 275 Std. Deviation 28.42
Figure 2: Percentage scores of each participant expressed in a bar chart
Figure 3: Distribution of scores
The frequency histogram shows that the data do not completely follow the normal distribution, due to the large range (100) between the highest and lowest scores and the considerable standard deviation (28.428).
Table 4: Significance results of variables for writing task
The following table describes the outcomes of the statistical tests for determining significant relationships between the variables (in the first column), and the scores obtained in the writing task (part one of the survey). For each variable, an
Analysis
variables T Degrees of Freedom Significance (2-tailed)
Language ability (monolingual vs bi/multinlingual) -1.827 13 0.091 Confidence level (confident vs unconfident/unsure) 1.487 13 0.161 Perceived difficulty level (very hard-very
easy) 0.063 13 0.951 Level of education (higher education vs non-higher education 1.023 13 0.325
A series of t-tests revealed no significant alpha-level relationships between any of the variables and the means obtained in the writing task, with significance levels of 0.091, 0.161, 0.951 & 0.325 for language ability, confidence levels, perceived difficulty and level of education respectively (p<0.05).
Table 5: Significance results of variables for speaking task
Similar to the table above, this table describes the statistical outcomes of the t-test used for determining the level of significance between the means obtained in the speaking task and the test variables. Once again, only equal variances are assumed.
Analysis
variables T Degrees of Freedom Significance (2-tailed)
Language ability (monolingual vs bi/multinlingual) 0.514 13 0.616 Confidence level (confident vs unconfident/unsure) 0.576 13 0.575 Perceived difficulty level (very hard-very
easy) 1.026 13 0.323 Level of education (higher education vs non-higher education 0.411 13 0.688
Table 6: Perceptions of Scots as a language or dialect both before and after intelligibility tasks
This table illustrates participants’ perceptions of Scots as a language or dialect both before and after the completion of the intelligibility tasks.
Participant Perception before
tasks
Perception after tasks
1 Dialect Dialect
2 Dialect Dialect
3 Separate language Separate language
4 Dialect Dialect
5 Not sure Dialect
6 Dialect Dialect
7 Dialect Dialect
8 Dialect Dialect
9 Not sure Dialect
10 Not sure Dialect
11 Not sure Dialect
12 Dialect Dialect
13 Dialect Dialect
14 Not sure Dialect
15 Dialect Dialect
Table 7: Overall means comparison between part 1 (translating sentences) and part 2 (translating spoken extracts) of survey
The table below shows the scores obtained by each participant for each part of the survey, expressed as both figures and percentages.
Participant Score Section 1 /205 Score section 2 /182
1 158 139 2 194 124 3 202 143 4 190 149 5 173 165 6 172 131 7 200 131 8 201 174 9 187 155 10 198 77 11 198 171 12 184 133 13 200 148 14 199 151 15 199 172 Means 190.33 (92.8%) 144.2 (79.2%)
Table 8: Lowest and highest scoring questions.
The following tables show the questions with the lowest and highest means for both the writing and speaking tasks. In other words, they depict the “easiest” and
“hardest” question from each section based on the mean score obtained. The
sentences and extracts for which the lowest and highest scores were achieved will be examined in detail in the following discussion section.
Mean lowest & highest scores: Writing task
Lowest scoring question (12 points obtainable in total) Highest scoring question (30 points obtainable in total) 7.8 (65%) 29.1 (97%)
Mean lowest & highest scores: Speaking task
Lowest scoring question (30 points obtainable in total)
Highest scoring question (19 points obtainable in total)
18 (60%) 18.3 (96%)
