You Scots Sure Are A Contentious Lot
| This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
- You Scots Sure Are A Contentious Lotto
- You Scots Sure Are A Contentious Lottery
- You Scots Sure Are A Contentious Lotus
Duplicative content in Scottish Gaelic phonology#Orthography[edit]
I've marked this as a merge, but actually I'm not sure if there's anything in that page that isn't completely superfluous with this one. Perhaps it can just be gotten rid of by someone more confident. 4pq1injbok (talk) 02:52, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
- Make sure you have saved your chosen picture on your computer before you begin the process so that you can find it easily. When you are sure that is the image you want, click on the instruction to change your picture. Next time you post a comment, your avatar will appear. It is a very simple process, so you can change the image if you decide it.
- What Sir Keir fails to grasp is that Scots didn’t abandon the Labour Party, it was the party which left us. I believe Scots are predominantly a socialist breed and what the UK Labour Party has.
- While I oppose a merger, I agree that there's duplication across the pages at the same time it's no worse than English phonology and English orthography. Both articles of course could be improved a lot. Akerbeltz (talk) 09:50, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
It largely fell to hair and makeup designer Jenny Shircore to make sure the queens (and the scheming men who surrounded them) in Mary Queen of Scots looked period perfect. For Robbie's Queen Elizabeth, that meant presenting her both before, during and after her bout with a disfiguring disease. It basically means “What’s for you will not go by you”, as in “What is meant for you by fate won’t pass you by”. It’s a nice wee Scots expression which probably takes a lot of practise for a non Scot to get right. Haud Yer Wheesht. This is a Scottish way of asking someone to be quiet.
You Scots Sure Are A Contentious Lotto
- Erk, that was totally unclear, sorry. I didn't mean to propose merging the entirety of those two pages, just the 'Orthography' section in Scottish Gaelic phonology with this one. It looks like the tables in Scottish Gaelic phonology#Orthography are redundant with and less careful than the ones here, but they're not perspicuous and I'm not familiar enough to see at a glance. 4pq1injbok (talk) 00:12, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
By the way, an idea I think would be more perspicuous, i.e. giving a better view of the system as a whole, would be a two-dimensional table with spellings on one axis and environments on the other, to bring out the patterns like '(subject to other adjustments,) single V in a syllable closed by an unlenited resonant gets an extra mora; this is /ː/ before /r̴/ and otherwise /i̯/ or /u̯/ depending on slenderness of the resonant'.
You Scots Sure Are A Contentious Lottery
I'm deterred from sitting down and just doing it though because (1) I don't know which special-case environments have been left out of the current tables 'cause they don't occur in any word and which ones are actually exceptionally non-special; (2) the synthesis police would yell at me; (3) people looking for quick and easy usability rather than systemics would probably also yell at me. 4pq1injbok (talk) 00:22, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
- Well, this is hardly a contentious topic so OR isn't that much of an issue plus I can probably most things if needed but I'm not sure I get what you're driving at. Could you give me an example here? Akerbeltz (talk) 00:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)