DOCSLIB.ORG

The University of Chicago Library

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The University of Chicago Library THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LIBRARY ELECTRONIC COURSE RESERVE THE FOLLOWING FILE IS PROTECTED BY SECTION 17 OF THE UNITED STATES COPYRIGHT CODE. CZWPTER THIRTEEN Linguistics, Nationalism, and Literary Languages: A Balkan Perspective Victor A. Friedman Nake: ‘I?$ ma&id may bc protea by yF Ho %Hght fmw CTkJa I 7 U.S. Code). I ” 1. Introduction 6’ The processes which led to and continue to affect the formations of the modem literary languages of the Balkan peninsula have their parallels in Western Europe and elsewhere in the world, and yet the Balkans constitute a unique ‘living laboratory,’ because of both the great diversity of languages and ethnic groups and the fact that these processes are well documented, relatively recent, and ongoing. The relationship of linguistics to the developments in these languages has undergone a number of changes. In this article, I wish to document some of these and comment on their significance. 2. Historical Background I will begin with a few remarks on the historical background of the linguistic composition of the Balkans. The Albanians speak a language which is often claimed to be descended from Illyrian, which may have been the language spoken on the territory of present-day Albania (and western Yugoslavia) in ancient times. Recent studies of the evidence of toponymy and vocabulary, however, indicate that Albanian may be descended from a Dacian or Thracian dialect which was being spoken in what is now eastern Serbia up to the time the Slavs crossed the Danube and invaded the Balkans (ca. A.D. 550-630). At that time, the linguistic ancestors of the Albanians would have been pushed south- west into present-day Albania (cf., e.g., Fine 1983:10-l 1). The Greeks came to the Balkans some time around the second millenium B.C., displacing or absorbing other Indo-European and/or non-Indo-European peoples (cf. Gindin 1967, Neroznak 1978). From the third or second century B.C. through the first century A.D., the Romans gradually annexed most of what is now the Balkans south of the Danube, and the second century A.D. saw their relatively brief (107-271) oc- cupation of Dacia (roughly, modem Transylvania and western Wallachia). Stud- ies of the language of inscriptions indicate that Roman linguistic influence ex- tended to the so-called JireEek line, running from the coast of central Albania, 287 288 VICTOR A. FRIEDMAN across Macedonia south of Skopje to Sofia and across the Balkan mountains in significant I central Bulgaria (cf. Rosetti 1938). South of this line, the dominant language was well as a c( Greek. Romanian in its various forms (e.g., Daco-Romanian and Aromanian, other langu see below) is descended from the language of Roman colonists and Romanized which is rel peoples north of the JireEek line and east of Dalmatia. A hotly contested issue the Indic s between the Romanians and Hungarians, however, is the question of whether the millenium Romanian of present-day Romania, especially Transylvania, is descended from in the Balk the language of Romanized Dacians (and hence ‘autochthonous’), or whether it ing from Ii is descended from the language of Romans and Romanized peoples living south tion-whil of the Danube who did not cross over the Danube (or at least into Transylvania) the Balkan until after the arrival of the Magyars in the late ninth century (cf. Fine 1983:lO). As was mentioned earlier, the Slavs came to the Balkans south of the Danube during the sixth and seventh centuries A.D. They did so in two main groups. One group-the East South Slavs-settled in what is now Bulgaria and Macedonia I will thus and penetrated all the way to the tips of the Peloponnesian peninsula. Those Romance, Slavs on the territory of modem Greece have been gradually Hellenized, a one or mor process which continues into the present day. The second group (leaving to one these lang side the Slovenes) consisted of a single tribe, probably the Slaveni, who were Greek, Oh divided and ruled by two Iranian military aristocracies, the Serbs and the Croats, ry into the who were Slavicized but whose names have remained as ethnonyms to this day 1914:29), (cf. Fine 1983:53,56-57). These West South Slavs eventually occupied the rest preserving of what is now Yugoslavia (Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia-Hercegovina, Montenegro). action of i The Ottoman Turks spent the second half of the fourteenth century conquering languages, the Balkans, a process which continued into the fifteenth century and reached its the natiom peak during the sixteenth. i It can be argued that it was the Turkish conquest twentieth which created the Balkans as the geopolitical and sociocultural entity we know ‘refrigerat today. From the Turkish conquest to the nineteenth century, the region was opments I generally known as Turkey in Europe. As the Ottoman Empire disintegrated Before during the nineteenth century, this term became increasingly inapplicable to the linguistic area and distasteful for much of the rest of it, and ultimately the term Balkan, day thinki based on the Turkish name of the mountain chain running through central Bul- minants c garia (Slavic Star-a Planina, Greek Haimos, Latin Hdemus) came to replace it.2 however, Nonetheless, it is the common heritage of the so-called ‘Turkish Yoke’ which Ottoman : gives a background to the various Balkan national consciousness.3 church he There are many other peoples living in the Balkans, e.g., Armenians, who ‘Greek,’ were first brought there by the Byzantines in the ninth century, Ladino-speaking Islam, we Jews who fled the Spanish Inquisition for the relative tolerance of the Ottoman privileged Empire in the fifteenth century, Circassians transplanted by the Turks, Hun- and Serbi, garians, Saxon Germans, Ruthenians, etc. The literary languages of these and all c groups, however, are based outside of the Balkans, and they have not, for the ‘Greeks’ most part, participated in the intense multilingualism which resulted in the for- Albanoph mation of the Balkan Spl-achbund, i.e., the linguistic league comprising the Moslem / Albanian, Greek, Balkan Slavic, and Balkan Romance languages, which show it can be .an mountains in .mt language was well as a common background of Turkish influence (cf. Sandfeld 1930). These and Aromanian, other languages will therefore not be discussed here.4 One other ethnic group and Romanized which is relevant to the present discussion, however, is the Roms (Gypsies), i.e., : contested issue the Indic speakers who entered the Balkans at the beginning of the second rn of whether the millenium A.D. (Ventcel’ and Cerenkov 1976283). Many Roms have remained descended from in the Balkans to this day, their dialects show significant Balkan features result- :‘), or whether it ing from linguistic contact, and the process of Romani literary linguistic forma- ples living south tion-while also taking place elsewhere in Europe-has a very strong center in to Transylvania) the Balkans. Fine 1983:lO). th of the Danube 3. Literazy Language and Ethnicity lain groups. One i and Macedonia I will thus be considering six language groups in the Balkans: Greek, Turkic, jeninsula. Those Romance, Albanian, Slavic, and Indic. Each of these groups is represented by y Hellenized, a one or more literary languages ranging from well established to nascent. Some of 3 (leaving to one these languages have claims to older written traditions, e.g., that of ancient I\,eni, who were Greek, Old Church Slavonic, etc., but as the International Commission of Inqui- ; and the Croats, ry into the causes of the Balkan Wars wrote (d’Estoumelles de Constant et al. nyms to this day 1914:29), ‘I. the Turkish conquest came, leveling all the nationalities and occupied the rest preserving them all alike in a condition of torpor, in a manner comparable to the a, Montenegro). action of a vast refrigerator.” In terms of the study of the formation of literary ~tury conquering languages, this leveling resulted in a break of continuous development, so that as J and reached its the nationalities came out of their ‘torpor’ during the course of the nineteenth and -urkish conquest twentieth centuries, they found that their literary languages had likewise been entity we know ‘refrigerated.’ It is the process of ‘thawing’ which resulted in the diverse devel- the region was opments I am about to discuss. ire disintegrated Before doing so, however, I should note here that the additional extra- applicabie to the linguistic factor of ethnicity must be taken into account. According to present- ie term Balkan, day thinking, language, i.e., mother tongue, is one of the most important deter- .igh central Bul- minants of ethnicity. An important factor in the leveling alluded to above, le to replace it.2 however, was the use of religion as the definer of.millet ‘nationality’ in the sh Yoke’ which Ottoman Empire. Under this system, all adherents of the Orthodox Christian S3 church headed by the Patriarch of Constantinople (i.e., Greek Orthodox) were \rmenians, who ‘Greek,’ while all adherents of the State religion of-the Turkish Empire, i.e., ,adino-speaking Islam, were ‘Turks.’ The Greek Orthodox church gradually took advantage of its of the Ottoman privileged position in Constantinople to eliminate the autocephalous Bulgarian :je Turks, Hun- and Serbian churches (in 1765 and 1767, respectively). Thus Bulgarians, Serbs, uages of these and all other orthodox peoples in European Turkey were treated as ethnic ave not, for the ‘Greeks’ who happened to speak some other language, e.g., Slavophone Greeks, Jlted in the for- Albanophone Greeks, as opposed to Hellenophone Greeks. Likewise, the comprising the Moslem Albanians, Bosnians, Pomaks, TorbeS, etc. were all ‘Turks.‘5 From this es, which show it can be seen that while mother tongue is generally taken as the primary deter- 290 VICTOR A.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • J33. Journal of the Simplified Spelling
    the simplified Founded 1908 in London, England Working for planned change in English spelling for spelling society the benefit of learners and users everywhere Spelcon 2005 Conference Report International English for Global Literacy University of Mannheim – First International Conference, 29th–31st July 2005 Report compiled by Bernadette Hughes, SSS Business Secretary This report was intended to be Journal 33, but was not published at the time. Contents 1. List of Attendees 2. Speaker abstracts 3. Opening of the conference 4. Papers presented 4.1 ‘The worst aspects of English Spelling’ Mrs. Masha Bell 4.2 'Why the Internet age will not accept simplified English spelling’ Dr. Christopher Rollason 4.3 ‘How to prepare for, select and implement a reformed spelling scheme for global English’ Mr. Niall Waldman 4.4 ‘The German spelling reform – An example for the Simplified Spelling Society’ Prof. Gerhard Augst 4.5 ‘Report on the Spelling Bee Contest in Washington Challenges with English spelling while teaching English in Germany’ Mr. Adrian Alphohziel 4.6 ‘Spelling in Indian English – English spelling simplification activity in ‘my’ country: The classroom experience’ Dr. Jenny Bayer 4.7 ‘Strategies for implementing spelling reforms’ Mr. Christopher Jolly 4.8 ‘Centre of power in educational change’ Mrs.Isobel Raven 5. Final announcement by the Chairman 6. De-Briefing session 7. Additional papers 7.1 ‘An alphabet for English – XVIII’ Dr. J Conrad Crown 7.2 ‘Strategies for English spelling reforms’ Dr. L. Devaki 7.3 ‘A practical plan for achieving spelling reform’ Mr. J.Carter 7.4 ‘How systematic repair is possible’ Dr. Valerie Yule, SSS Vice-President 7.5 ‘The case for an International Commission on English Spelling Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • WRITTEN DIALECTS N Spelling Reforms: History N Alternatives by Kenneth H
    WRITTEN DIALECTS N Spelling Reforms: History N Alternatives by Kenneth H. Ives © 1979 PROGRESIV PUBLISHR, Chicago IL [112pp. A5 in the printed version] Library of Congress Catalog Card # 78-54745 ISBN 0-89670-004-6 Kenneth Ives is a sociologist and social worker, currently director of research and statistics for a family counseling agency. For the past 10 years he has been studying various aspects of spelling and spelling reform - history, phonetics, readability, writeability, acceptability, and problems of adoption. [Words originally underlined are now in italics. The spellings are as in the original.] Preface In recent years the variety of spoken dialects in English has become a subject for study and appreciation, replacing the former scorn and depreciation for "non-standard English." (Shuy, 1967; Labov, 1970, Butler, 1974) Similarly, differing but consistent ways of writing standard (or even non-standard) English may be viewed as differing written dialects. These include the standard "traditional orthography," (TO), accepted alternate spellings found in dictionaries (Emery, 1973) such as "altho, thru, dropt, fixt, catalog," Pitman's Initial Teaching Alphabet (ITA), and the 50 or more proposals for spelling reform. They also include earlier spellings such as Chaucer used, with the Anglo-Saxon thorn symbol for "th" (still used in Icelandic), and the alphabetic shorthand systems. Our traditional spelling became largely frozen with the rise of printing four centuries ago, and dictionaries and grammars two centuries ago, but our spoken language has had a "great vowel shift" and other changes. Hence the correspondence between our spoken and written dialects has become more complex, irregular, and confusing.
    [Show full text]
  • Orthographies in Early Modern Europe
    Orthographies in Early Modern Europe Orthographies in Early Modern Europe Edited by Susan Baddeley Anja Voeste De Gruyter Mouton An electronic version of this book is freely available, thanks to the support of libra- ries working with Knowledge Unlatched. KU is a collaborative initiative designed to make high quality books Open Access. More information about the initiative can be found at www.knowledgeunlatched.org An electronic version of this book is freely available, thanks to the support of libra- ries working with Knowledge Unlatched. KU is a collaborative initiative designed to make high quality books Open Access. More information about the initiative can be found at www.knowledgeunlatched.org ISBN 978-3-11-021808-4 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-021809-1 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-021806-2 ISSN 0179-0986 e-ISSN 0179-3256 ThisISBN work 978-3-11-021808-4 is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License, ase-ISBN of February (PDF) 978-3-11-021809-1 23, 2017. For details go to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/. e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-021806-2 LibraryISSN 0179-0986 of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Ae-ISSN CIP catalog 0179-3256 record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. ISBN 978-3-11-028812-4 e-ISBNBibliografische 978-3-11-028817-9 Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliogra- fie;This detaillierte work is licensed bibliografische under the DatenCreative sind Commons im Internet Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs über 3.0 License, Libraryhttp://dnb.dnb.deas of February of Congress 23, 2017.abrufbar.
    [Show full text]
  • A.40. GERMAN1 A.40A. Nouns A.40A1. Capitalize All Nouns And
    CC:DA/Croissant/2003/1 February 12, 2003 page 1 To: American Library Association ALCTS/CCS Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access From: Charles R. Croissant, Saint Louis University John Hostage, Harvard Law School Library Subject: Revision of AACR2 Appendix A, Capitalization, A.40. German. Background: After several decades of work by an international commission of representatives from the German-speaking nations, a new set of rules for German orthography, including capitalization, was officially accepted by the governments of these countries at a meeting in Vienna on July 1, 1996. The rules were officially introduced on August 1, 1998. A period of transition, during which both the old and the new orthography are valid, is scheduled to end on August 1, 2005. Although the new orthography cannot, of course, be imposed on private persons, it becomes the de facto standard for German orthography, since it must now be taught to all schoolchildren in German-speaking countries and must be adhered to in all government publications. The intent of the new rules is to make German orthography more consistent and reduce the number of exceptions to the rules, so as to make German orthography easier to learn. With regard to capitalization, the intent of the rules is to apply as consistently as possible the principle that nouns and words that function as nouns are capitalized, and to make the remaining exceptions to this principle easier to understand. One consequence of the spelling reform is that the guidelines for German capitalization given in Appendix A, rule A.40, no longer accurately reflect correct German capitalization according to the new rules.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of English Spelling
    9781405190237_1_pre.qxd 6/15/11 9:00 Page iii The History of English Spelling Christopher Upward and George Davidson A John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Publication 9781405190237_1_pre.qxd 6/15/11 9:00 Page vi 9781405190237_1_pre.qxd 6/15/11 9:00 Page i The History of English Spelling 9781405190237_1_pre.qxd 6/15/11 9:00 Page ii THE LANGUAGE LIBRARY Series editor: David Crystal The Language Library was created in 1952 by Eric Partridge, the great etymologist and lexicographer, who from 1966 to 1976 was assisted by his co-editor Simeon Potter. Together they commissioned volumes on the traditional themes of language study, with particular emphasis on the history of the English language and on the individual linguistic styles of major English authors. In 1977 David Crystal took over as editor, and The Language Library now includes titles in many areas of linguistic enquiry. The most recently published titles in the series include: Christopher Upward and The History of English Spelling George Davidson Geoffrey Hughes Political Correctness: A History of Semantics and Culture Nicholas Evans Dying Words: Endangered Languages and What They Have to Tell Us Amalia E. Gnanadesikan The Writing Revolution: Cuneiform to the Internet David Crystal A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, Sixth Edition Viv Edwards Multilingualism in the English- speaking World Ronald Wardhaugh Proper English: Myths and Misunderstandings about Language Gunnel Tottie An Introduction to American English Geoffrey Hughes A History of English Words Walter Nash Jargon Roger Shuy Language
    [Show full text]
  • Written Text
    1 Swimming against the current Text of a “keynote address” for video delivery at the first World Congress of Korean Language, October 2020 신사 숙녀 여러분: 만나서 반갑습니다 ! I want to talk today (in English, I’m afraid) about what I believe is a consistent tendency in the historical evolution of scripts around the world. I shan’t call it a “linguistic universal”, because I don’t believe in Chomskyan biological universals of language. Languages are purely cultural products, and like other cultural products their development isn’t controlled by scientific laws. But the tendency I have in mind does seem to hold quite widely, and it can be explained, in terms of the demographic changes we associate with modernity. The reason why this topic may make a suitable opening for your conference is that the one unexplained exception to the tendency which I know of is in fact Korean script. But I’ll come to the case of Korean after I’ve spent some time discussing the tendency more generally. What I believe to be generally true, as I discuss in my book The Linguistics Delusion, is that in newly literate societies writing tends to be a matter of phonetic transcription – if the script is alphabetic, a newly-devised orthography will conform pretty closely to the principle “one sound, one symbol”; while as the script matures and the society modernizes, the orthography tends to evolve in the direction of what I’ll call “contrastiveness”, in the sense that the meaningful units of the language have consistent written shapes which are well-differentiated from the written forms of other meaningful units.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rechtschreibreform – a Lesson in Linguistic Purism
    The Rechtschreibreform – A Lesson in Linguistic Purism Nils Langer, University of Bristol The Rechtschreibreform – A Lesson in Linguistic Purism 15 The Rechtschreibreform – A Lesson in Linguistic Purism1 Nils Langer The German spelling reform of 1998 generated an amazing amount of (mostly negative) reaction from the German public. Starting with a general overview of the nature of linguistic purism and the history of German orthography, this article presents a wide range of opinions of the spelling reform. The data is mostly taken from the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, either in the form of newspaper articles or letters to the editor, showing that the reform is rejected by untrained linguists (folk) for various political and pseudo-linguistic reasons, which, however, have in common a fundamenal misconception of the nature and status of both orthography in general and the 1998 spelling reform in particular. This articles argues, therefore, that the vast majority of objections to the spelling reform is not based on linguistic issues but rather based on a broadly politically defined conservative view of the world. On 1 August 2000 one of the leading German broadsheets, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), returned to using the old ‘bewährten’ spelling rules after one year of working with the new rules, arguing that the new rules had not achieved what they set out to do. The FAZ is on its own in this assessment, no other German newspaper followed its lead, and only two intellectual societies, the Hochschullehrerverband and the Deutsche Akademie für Sprache und Dichtung, returned to the old spelling after the FAZ’s decision.
    [Show full text]
  • The English Spelling Reform in the Light of the Works of Richard Mulcaster and John Hart
    The English Spelling Reform in the Light of the Works of Richard Mulcaster and John Hart Susana Doval Suárez UNIVERSITY OF SANTIAGO DE COMPOSTELA 1. INTRODUCTION This study is an approach to the works of Richard Mulcaster and John Hart, who can be con- sidered as the best representatives of the English Renaissance spelling debate. Since the controversy over the adequacy or inadequacy of English orthography is still alive, a comparison between present and past reform proposals is suggested. The starting point of the discussion is the assumption that many of the so-called “modern” linguistic disciplines can be traced back to the Renaissance, as is the case with Language Planning. In fact, the English Renaissance meant the emergence of an intensive Language Planning activity entailing both standardization and normalization processes. Thus, using Haugen’s 1984 terms, both Corpus and Status Planning were developed at this stage of the history of the English language. However, the extent to which past and present activities can be compared has to do with the pre- scriptive character of the former as opposed to the more “social” character of the latter (cf. Fernández Pérez, 1994). In the case of Spelling Reform the difference is assumed to lie in the interdisciplinary approach of modern script reformers in contrast with the more unidirectional proposals made in the past. 2. THE RENAISSANCE SPELLING DEBATE 2.1. THE EMERGENCE OF SPELLING REFORM By the middle of the 16thc the inconsistency perceived in the English Orthography gives rise to the first spelling reform treatises based on phonological principles. The English reform movement is vinculated to the French orthographic reform, carried out by Meigret1 and to the controversy over the pronunciation of Classical Greek confronting Sir John Cheke and Sir Thomas Smith on the one hand, and Bishop Gardiner on the other.
    [Show full text]
  • J32. Journal of the Simplified Spelling
    Journal of the Simplified Spelling Society J32, 2003/1. Editor: Steve Bett. Contents. 1. Editorial. Articles. 2. The Two Stage Approach to Spelling Reform. Steve Bett. 3. English Accents and their Implications for Spelling Reform. John C. Wells. 4. How Phonemic is English Spelling? Godfrey Dewey. 5. Could English spelling be made regular without drastic change? Valerie Yule. 6. Orthographic Goals. Steve Bett. 7. Comparing Spelling Schemes. Roy W. Blain. 8. Reform of Chemical Language as a Model for Spelling Reform. Hans-Richard Sliwka. 9. The End of the Reading Wars? Isobel Raven. 10. Review of Jean Meron's Orthotypographie. John M. Gledhill. 11. Letters & Summaries of On-Line Discussions. 12. A Message from the new president: John Wells. 13. Tribute to Don Scragg on his retirement as the Society's president. 14. Inside front cover. We spell a spoken sound in as many as 20 different ways. [Journal of the Simplified Spelling Society, J32, 2003/1, pp2,3 in the printed version.] [Steve Bett: see Journals, Newsletters] 1. Editorial. Steve Bett. Moving from logographic lexical spelling to phonemic spelling. The proposals of the Simplified Spelling Board of 1906 and the Simplified Spelling Society of 1908 were attempts to seek out the lines of least resistance to spelling change. Earlier phonemic spelling associations were thought to advocate reform proposals that were too radical for any popular acceptance. The first compromise, suggested by Alexander Ellis, was to retain the shifted long vowels. In England, this led to the endorsement of New Spelling which became the house style for most internal publications of the society until around 1920.
    [Show full text]
  • Spelling Reform Anthology Edited by Newell W. Tune §6. Which Way To
    Spelling Reform Anthology edited by Newell W. Tune §6. Which way to go in Spelling Reform This section presents various ideas for the kind and extent of reform, from the most modest to the more extreme and suggests criteria for deciding on reform. Contents 1. Cook, Walter F. A Practical Approach to Spelling Reform. 2. Yule, Valerie, Let Us be Practical About Spelling Reform. 3. Pitman, Sir Jas. Some Principles Governing Imp. of the Visible Lang. 4. Tune, Newell, The Real Problem of Spelling Reform. 5. Ives, Kenneth H. Acceptability of Proposed Spelling Reforms. 6. Bisgard, Helen, Reaction to Ives' Acceptability. 7. Smoker, Barbara, G.B.S. & the ABC's. 8. Yule, Valerie, A Transitional Spelling Reform. 9. du Feu, Frank. On Devising a Minimal Change System of Reform. 10. Pei, Mario, Preface to: Better English Thru Simplified Spelling 11. Read, Kingsley, Quo Vadis? 12. Hildreth, Gertrude, Which Way to Go in Spelling Reform? 13. Tune, Newell, Introspection or Retrospection? [Spelling Reform Anthology §6.1 pp86,87 in the printed version] [Spelling Progress Bulletin Spring 1980 pp19,20 in the printed version] 1. A Practical Approach to Spelling Reform by Walter F. Cook * * Phoenix, Az.. I appreciate the opportunity to contribute some new ideas for implementation of a spelling reform. As a businessman running a small computer company, I am undoubtedly in a very small minority among a group of educators. Yet I have been irritated by the difficulty of English spelling and have been interested in spelling reform for many years. I had actually started an independent development of a set of rationalized rules for spelling reform before I became aware of the large amount of work done by this group and other groups.
    [Show full text]
  • The Historical Development of the English Spelling System
    Sveučilište J.J. Strossmayera u Osijeku Filozofski fakultet Diplomski studij engleskoga jezika i književnosti i njemačkoga jezika i književnosti Dragana Jurić The historical development of the English spelling system Diplomski rad doc.dr.sc. Tanja Gradečak-Erdeljić Osijek, 2013. Summary The English language is a complex system and it is difficult to know what to expect, when a language develops a worldwide presence to the extent that English has. The history of English is a fascinating system of its own. The sound, spelling, grammar, and vocabulary – every aspect of the language has a rich history of development, influenced by other languages during its journey towards standardization. This paper focuses on one aspect – the spelling. Its development will be traced through all the important periods of the English language (Old English, Middle English, Early Modern English, and Modern English) in section two (The English language). The Early Modern English period was the period of the English Renaissance and the spelling reforms. The wish for standardization was at its highest state. In section three, some of the changes that occured in the spelling system, will be taken from some of the most important works of English literature (Beowulf, The Peterborough Chronicles, The Ormulum, The Canterbury Tales) and language development (A Guide to the English Tongue, The Universal Spelling-Book or, A New and Easy Guide to the English Language, The American Spelling Book: Containing the Rudiments of the English Language, for the Use of Schools in the United States), as well as named and compared. In the conclusion, all the important facts connected with the history of the English language and the historical development of its spelling system, will be briefly summarized.
    [Show full text]
  • The Deseret Alphabet and Other American Spelling Reform Movements
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU Undergraduate Honors Capstone Projects Honors Program 1980 The Deseret Alphabet and Other American Spelling Reform Movements Paula Goodfellow Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/honors Part of the English Language and Literature Commons Recommended Citation Goodfellow, Paula, "The Deseret Alphabet and Other American Spelling Reform Movements" (1980). Undergraduate Honors Capstone Projects. 250. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/honors/250 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors Program at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Undergraduate Honors Capstone Projects by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE DESERET ALPHABET AND OTHER AMERICAN SPELLING REFORM MOVEMENTS by Paula Goodfellow 1 Everyone that uses the English language has trouble with spelling at one time or another; most people have trouble with it all the time. They may complain about the inconsistencies of English orthography (orthography is a fancy word for the art of spelling) as they reach for the dictionary, but not many people do anything about it. However, a few do try to do something. With some it may become an obsession. This paper is about the various attempts of some of these people to reform spelling. It is traditional in papers about spelling reform to stop at this point and prove to the reader just how incon­ sistent English orthography really is, usually through some device such as listing all the sounds that the letter "a" can represent or all the ways there are to represent the sound/s/.
    [Show full text]