Talk:Etymology of Scotland

This article is written in Scottish English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Scotland High‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Linguistics: Etymology

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Etymology Task Force.

A summary of this article appears in Scotland.

Sgaothaich

Since this is discussing the etymology of "Scotland" and it is proposed that it is derived from the word "sgaothaich", perhaps it would be a very good idea to define what "sgaothaich" actually means. 71.196.135.148 (talk) 02:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I'd actually remove that. He's a source alright but he was no etymologist or linguist, he was just someone who happened to have an interest in Scottish history and wrote a book on it in Gaelic. It looks suspiciously like a "dictionary etymology" to me. Sgaothaich isn't in any Gaelic dictionary (and I have most); looking at the word, it's either a verb (unlikely) or a plural noun in which case the root is Sgaothach and therefore most likely based on sgaoth "swarm". Conjecture m' lord.

The other problem is that while it looks like having a root similar to Scot- (sgaotha(i)ch) and while the pronunciation is /skɯː.ɪç/ in modern Gaelic, it would have been closer to /skiːθɪç/ back then. Why the Romans would turn an long /iː/ into a short /o/ is left unexplained.

My recommendation is that unless we can find another source that deal specifically with place-names, we take him out of there or mark it as fringe or something. Akerbeltz (talk) 11:27, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just found the passage where he claims that. It is indeed a tribal name according to him. Translated we have "...all the tribes came to fall under the rule of the Northern Pictish prince through the assistence of supporters from the West of Scotland who were referred to as the sgaothaich". Further on we have "Sgaothaich is the true Gaelic name meaning the tradition of that populous tribe who closely followed their leader as a swarm (sgaoth) of bees does..." He then claims the Romans dropped the -aich ending, turned "ao" into "u" and came up with "Scuti". Akerbeltz (talk) 11:34, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology of Lt Scotia

It has become a habit of English scholars to stop at the Latin root of an English word but do not go to the final root which is Greek. Scotia is derived from Greek Skotos/skotia meaning Darkness.

http://www.yourdictionary.com/scotia

You are confusing Scoti ("Scots") with the ordinary English architectural term "scotia", which is a deep concave molding found at the base of a column and which does come from the Greek "skotos". There is no connection.

The word Scoti is found in Latin, not Greek. The Romans were familiar with the peoples of Britain and Ireland. Why would the Romans invent a name for the tribe in question, and take it out of distant Greek? Even if they did, why would the climate of Caledonia give a name to an Irish people?

Howard Alexander (talk) 21:21, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No confusion at all about that, in fact the roman Scoti, among many other things borrowed from the Greek culture, is from the Greek word "Σκότος" (Scotos),plural "Σκότη" (Scoti) which means Darkness, as when Greek sailors traveling to the North of Britain, exploring or even trading, they found that, that land was very dark (low clouds and very thick fog quite the opposite to what they knew from the Mediterranean Sea they came from). See also Egypt, from the merging of the words "Αιγαίου Υπτίως" (Aigeou Yptios) Costas Aslanis, not yet a member. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.72.111.238 (talk) 01:44, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is so ludicrous I'm not even going to bother debating it. Find a reliable reference which supports this, and we can talk about it. Otherwise, it's a waste of everyone's time. Akerbeltz (talk) 08:40, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

I don't see why there is an article for such a small amount of information; I think it should be merged with Scotland, as its not really that big. Ross Rhodes (T C) ^Sign! 13:22, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Scotland article has enough material already, and enough arguments. This is a separate topic.

Howard Alexander (talk) 21:21, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, unless enough information is put into this article, there's really no purpose for this small amount of information to be on a separate page. Ross Rhodes (T C) ^Sign! 09:32, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you're right. The main academic interest is on the origin of "Scoti", so that ought to be on that page.

Support, then.

Howard Alexander (talk) 13:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly support. All information here could be easily merged with Scotland, and I agree with Howard Alexander. Ross Rhodes (T C) ^Sign! 13:53, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shall we merge it? I don't think any others will vote, and out the current results, we all agree on supporting the idea. Ross Rhodes (T C) ^Sign! 19:54, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, how actually does one go about merging an article into another? Is it just cutting and sticking the text and turning the original into a redirect? Is there a more technical way? I imagine a "cut and paste" would do the trick.

Howard Alexander (talk) 21:46, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. This article was created because it had become too large a section for the Scotland article and was subject to numerous revisions and reversions. This article is short, but it could be expanded, and is well cited. Can't see the problem myself. Ben Mac Dui 08:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC) PS It is I think discussed at Talk:Scotland/Archive 14, although I can't access this page at present due to "technical difficulties".[reply]

Too large a section? Its smaller than most of the sections on that article. I still think it should be merged. Ross Rhodes (T C) ^Sign! 15:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Etymology of Scotland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071031013935/http://www.coe.int/t/e/legal_affairs/local_and_regional_democracy/regional_or_minority_languages/2_monitoring/2.2_States_Reports/UK_report1.pdf to http://www.coe.int/t/e/legal_affairs/local_and_regional_democracy/regional_or_minority_languages/2_monitoring/2.2_States_Reports/UK_report1.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:57, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Etymology of Scotland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:34, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]