Quote Originally Posted by Zardoz View Post
. . . But I have never had a problem understanding the posts in question. Maybe it's because I'm from the South, or watch too much BBC!
One of the roles I continually have found myself in over the years is that of a cultural translator with foreign students studying in the American South and immigrants. I have become interested in the many "cultural idioms" that most take for granted, which includes linguistic verbal idioms and spoken pronounciation characteristics.
When I look at "Scots," both present and as far back as the mid-16th century (reading John Knox), I see MANY of the same linguistic idioms, both in vocabulary and pronounciation (as can be seen through the spelling differences from "standard" English).

I have no "problem" with the Scots inclusion, nor with any other idiomatic linguistic content, as long as the author provides "translation" for the more obviously unusual and has no problem explaining the meaning behind any and all idioms. In fact, idiomatic verbage is so embedded within one's own vocabulary and thinking that we often don't even realize we are using idioms when we use them, as the meaning means so obvious we don't think of them as idioms. Think about how much ANY of us says that is either illogical or even non-sensical.
When we start trying to divide "acceptable" form "unacceptable" idiomatic writing, we head down a dangerous path that makes us all worse for it.
(Cursing/cussing/potty-mouth writing is a WHOLE DIFFERENT matter.)