English Variable focusing in English spelling between 1400 and 1600 Terttu Nevalainen 1. Overview Processes of linguistic standardization can be described in terms of degrees of focusing, and the standardization of spelling is no exception. Focusing here refers to a high level of agreement in a language community as to what does, and what does not, constitute “the language” at a given time (Trudgill 1986: 86). Language communities differ with respect to how much varia- tion is tolerated in a given domain of language use and, conversely, how fixed the norms are to which speakers or writers are expected to adhere. In late medieval England the norms concerning the vernacular were quite diffuse. In this paper I will discuss the marked increase in focusing that took place in the formative years of the standardization of English spelling between 1400 and 1600.1 In order to provide a basis for comparing the processes of spelling stan- dardization over time and across language communities, I will relate them to some general models of standardization applicable across European lan- guages. One such model is proposed by Peter Auer (2005: 8), who for this purpose defines a standard variety as one used supralocally, looked upon as a high-prestige variety, and used in writing; it is also to some extent codi- fied or shows some measure of conscious development, Ausbau. Auer sug- gests that prior to the rise of a vernacular endoglossic standard, there is usually an exoglossic one, such as Latin in medieval Europe. Exoglossic norms were also adopted in medieval England. After the Norman Conquest in 1066, England was in fact triglossic as three lan- guages assumed different functions in the language community. Latin and French served as the high-prestige varieties in which the country was ruled, while English, used locally and at home, had the status of a low-prestige language. Predictably, the three languages occupied different positions on DOI 10.1515/9783110288179.127, ©2017 Terttu Nevalainen, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative CommonsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs3.0 License. 128 Terttu Nevalainen the scale of fixity, with English, when committed to writing at all, showing the highest degree of spelling variation. However, English spelling, too, began to show a degree of focusing from the mid-14th century on, as the vernacular started to replace French, in particular, in various written-language functions. In his classic paper, Michael Samuels (1963) identifies four incipient standards of English, all except one originating in London. The latest, referred to as Chancery Stan- dard, consists of documents produced by the central administration in the 15th century. Although their spelling is far from fixed, these texts may be regarded as a major development towards a written supralocal standard before the era of movable type (Fisher 1996). William Caxton set up the first English printing press in London in 1476. However, during its early years the innovation in fact created more spelling variation than could be found in the best manuscripts of the time, although they had the same reference variety. To use the terms proposed by Einar Haugen (1997 [1966]), the incipient standards, notably the King’s writing offices, had selected the variety, southern rather than northern, that was to undergo standardization and, despite the diffuseness of their norms, the first printers had, for their part, accepted it.2 Even in the 16th century, spelling standardization was not solely the business of the printers, but lively debates arose about a need of spelling reform. Both reformers and conservatives highlighted the practical con- cerns of the teaching profession. One of the arguments in favour of a re- form was that spelling conventions no longer corresponded to the pronun- ciation of the language at the time. By contrast, the proponents of the emerging standard were intent on codifying it; many of them also saw the need of elaborating it by etymologizing the orthography of words with classical origins. Incipient standards and early printed books illustrate another aspect associated with linguistic focusing, i.e., its domain-specificity. I will apply the term broadly both to norms that arise from regional focusing and to those that evolve in and are mediated by certain registers, such as those produced by the central administration. The early history of English spelling norms is discussed in section 2 in the light of Auer’s (2005) model of standardization. Section 3 looks at the rise and entrenchment in the community of the first, incipient endoglossic spelling standards in England in the late 14th and 15th centuries. Section 4 traces the continuity of the transmission of English spelling norms in the first half of the 16th century, and compares spelling variation in public and private registers using the methodology developed for the study of Late English 129 Middle English regional variation in McIntosh, Samuels and Benskin (1986). This study, based on the Helsinki Corpus of English Texts, illus- trates the focusing of the selected reference variety, and its dialectal origins. The growing part played by the printing press in the standardization process is the topic of section 5. Finally, the 16th-century orthoepic debates and their outcome are detailed in section 6. 2. Modelling spelling standardization Various relations may hold between standard and vernacular varieties in a language community over time. Analyzing these changing relations on the linguistic map of Europe, Auer (2005) proposes a typology of five basic sociolinguistic repertoires to account for the various relations between dia- lects and standards. In multilingual communities both exoglossic and vari- ous endoglossic standards can emerge, and the typology only takes note of exoglossic varieties used as standards. Auer observes that in medieval Europe the rise of an endoglossic indigenous standard is typically preceded by an exoglossic one, such as Latin, Old Church Slavonic or Arabic. The shift from an exoglossic standard to an endoglossic one could be a pro- longed process with coexisting exoglossic and endoglossic norms; the be- ginning and end points of this process are presented in figure 1 (Auer 2005: 12). The outcome makes a distinction between a mainly written endoglossic standard and spoken local dialects. Figure 1. From exoglossic to endoglossic standards (based on Auer 2005: 12) 130 Terttu Nevalainen Exoglossic norms also applied in medieval England. However, the history of English spelling is not one of direct continuity but several endoglossic norms emerged at different times. Although Latin, the medieval lingua franca, was used in administration and as the language of the Catholic Church and higher education throughout the Middle Ages, focused endo- glossic norms arose in the Old English period (prior to 1100). By 800, a distinct Mercian literary language was taking shape and, from the late 9th to the 10th century, late West Saxon provided a dominant model in many areas of writing, including legal and religious texts. In many respects, in- cluding spelling, it was quite focused and has therefore often been referred to as “standard Old English” (Toon 1992: 426–428). For various reasons, the late West Saxon dialect did not, however, con- stitute a national standard. First and foremost, England did not form a sin- gle nation with shared linguistic norms in the Old English period. Even if this had been the case, the changes that the language underwent during and after that time especially due to Scandinavian and Norman influence had altered it almost beyond recognition by the 15th century. Moreover, late West Saxon and modern Standard English are based on different reference varieties, as West Saxon was spoken in what is now the South and South- West of England, whereas the rise of the modern standard is associated with the East Midland area and the capital region.3 The continuity of the West Saxon tradition was interrupted by the Nor- man Conquest in 1066, which replaced English with Anglo-Norman French as the medium of administrative, literary and religious writings. England became in fact trilingual as the administration, church and higher education continued to use Latin throughout the Middle Ages. But the use of French, and to some extent of Latin, gradually declined towards the end of the pe- riod, and the vernacular began to gain ground supralocally as a written me- dium. In the latter half of the 14th century, major literary works appeared in English, including the Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer, and in the first half of the 15th century, the vernacular gained a foothold in the written communication of the central administration. The English that spread to the rest of the country on a nationwide scale was the written language of the government documents issued by the King’s writing offices, the largest of which was the Chancery. However, as detailed in section 3, other focused varieties also emerged around the same time. The rise of the national standard from relatively focused endoglossic norms is pictured in figure 2. It suggests that, in England, domain-specific diaglossic focusing preceded the emergence of the fixed spelling standard English 131 as we know it today. Auer’s five-stage model does not include this alterna- tive but, as discussed below, views the emergence of regional standards as later developments, intermediate between an existing endoglossic standard and (base) dialects. In the case of English, shown in figure 2, we can speak of virtual diglossia as far as the resulting spelling standard is concerned: there is no phonemic correspondence between pronunciation and spelling, which rather follows the logographic principle of distinguishing lexical units. Figure 2. From focused diaglossic norms to a diglossic standard The history of spelling norms does not always stop at the codification of an endoglossic standard. The standard can break up yielding new regional norms, as happened with British and American English in the 19th century.