Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræði - 01.01.2004, Blaðsíða 73

Norn
71
leaves open the possibility that his “antient Danish” and “Norse” are
one and the same after all.
The conclusion that use of Scots was widespread in Orkney by
the fifteenth century, and in Shetland by the sixteenth, brings atten-
tion back to the fate of Norn. That bilingualism was common by this
period seems assured. What is less clear is what happened there-
after.
Literary references to Orkney Nom (the principal of which are col-
lected in Marwick 1929:224-7) combine to suggest it was the, or at
least a, common language throughout the sixteenth century, but that
by the end of the seventeenth its use had declined to the point where
it was no more than a language of the home in a few parishes — espe-
cially on the Mainland. Several sources mention the inland parish of
Harray as a place where Nom could still occasionally be heard in the
middle of the eighteenth century.
References to Shetland Nom are a little more extensive (various
may be found in Stewart 1964:163-6). Taken as a whole these
accounts imply widespread use of the language as late as the seven-
teenth century, though they also seem to confirm a high degree of
bilingualism. They further suggest that loss of Norn began in the south
and spread northwards. Only after c.1800 is the language referred to
exclusively as a thing of the past.
Individually reports on the state of both Orkney and Shetland Norn
can be unclear or ambiguous. One possible reason is the distance of
the writers from their subject matter. Very few were natives of the
islands and their information may often have been obtained second-
hand (cf. Rendboe 1984:57). We can hardly say that of George Low,
however. During his 1774 tour of Shetland he came into direct contact
with locals who knew something of Nom, and while in Foula, at least,
enquired diligently about it. Yet in spite of his curiosity and zeal, Low
can only offer the most uncertain description of the linguistic situation
he encountered. “There are some”, he writes, “who know a few words
of [Norn]”, and that is indeed what his meagre word list and the
accompanying commentary seem to bear out (cf. pp. 59-61 above).
However, he also informs us (1879:105):