Re:Firefox 91
by orra on Tuesday August 10, 2021 @11:16AM
(#28129856)
> well, maybe, I must admit I didn't know of a canonical written form of modern Scots.
Modren Scots, unfortunately, disna hae ae orthography, altho it haes a wheen o credible an similar yins. We'd probably hae a mair official orthography gin Scots hidna been surpressed for hunners o year, an insteid we lairnt it proper in the scuil.
> It still looks an awful lot like sco.wikipedia.org, which is a grotesque parody written from the US. You'll forgive some suspicion.
This is a pish opinion. Firefox wis owerset intil Scots by twa talentit fowk.
Unfortunately, the Scots tongue haes ower monie gowks that leuk doun upo it. Either they cry that Scots is ‘no a real language’ or somehou that Scots spikkars are no spikkin ‘real’ Scots.
Modren Scots, unfortunately, disna hae ae orthography, altho it haes a wheen o credible an similar yins. We'd probably hae a mair official orthography gin Scots hidna been surpressed for hunners o year, an insteid we lairnt it proper in the scuil.
> It still looks an awful lot like sco.wikipedia.org, which is a grotesque parody written from the US. You'll forgive some suspicion.
This is a pish opinion. Firefox wis owerset intil Scots by twa talentit fowk.
Unfortunately, the Scots tongue haes ower monie gowks that leuk doun upo it. Either they cry that Scots is ‘no a real language’ or somehou that Scots spikkars are no spikkin ‘real’ Scots.