In reply to Peter's crucial questions:

>> From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of John
>> Clews
>> Indeed I know all this. But the situation is rather like the Bosanski
>> language at the beginning, and it has official status, and it will
>> continue to have oficial status.
> I knew that Ullans had been given status as a recognized minority
> language under the terms of the relevant EU policy (I forget the details
> at the moment). But is it contrasted with Lallans either linguistictly
> or in terms of official status?

Both Ullans and Lallans have official status in Northern Ireland and
Scotland respectively, but I have seen no indication that they are

In fact Ulster Scots (Ullans) has more official status, I believe,
following the Northern Ireland Agreement.

>> could be equally applied to Scots (Lowland Scots, or Lallans) which
> does
>> have a code in ISO 639-1 and ISO 639-2.
> Well, this is the question: does "sco" denote just Lallans, or both
> Lallans and Ullans? For purposes of development of 639-3, I have thus
> far assumed "sco" encompasses both -- that this is a dialect
> distinction, not a language distinction. (That's the current analysis in
> Ethnologue and Linguasphere.)

The code "sco" has always been interpreted just to mean Scots in Scotland.

Ukster Scots has definitely not been included in that.

>> NB - JAC: Please give consideration to this for an ISO 639-2 tag.
>> NB - JAC: Please also give consideration to this for an ISO 639-3 tag.
> I think I would need further information demonstrating a need for
> contrast between Ullans and other Scots varieties.

Try googling, also the ULLANS-L list archives, and I assume there is
probably an equivalent list or lists for Lallans.

There are certainly numerous sites for each.


> Peter Constable