Preview only show first 10 pages with watermark. For full document please download
Hyperlink-spelling (aka Orthography) Spoken Vs. Written Language: Word Form And Spelling
-
Rating
-
Date
January 2018 -
Size
922.1KB -
Views
9,615 -
Categories
Transcript
Hyperlink-Spelling (aka orthography) Spoken vs. written language: word form and spelling Word form Spelling (orthography) Principles of writing Syllabary Ideograms Alphabet Runes, runic alphabet, aka the futhorc IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet) English spelling OE spelling Caedmon‟s Hymn Middle English spelling French influence Ormulum Chancery English Caxton and the advent of printing EModE spelling The Great Vowel Shift (GVS) Standardization of spelling ModE spelling Spelling reform; reform movements and reforms Simplification Regularization Derivational uniformity Reflection of pronunciation Indication of stress Pronunciation spellings Hyphenation Individual words The New Spelling Language planning and policy Authorities (dictionaries, manuals of usage) Spellers Dictionaries Manuals of usage Spelling pronunciations Scottish English Non-standard spelling Archaisms Nonce and advertising spellings Literary practices Dialect spellings Eye dialect Literary comedians Texting literature Informal spellings Word formation, borrowing, and spelling Acronyms Borrowings Clippings Hyperlink-Spelling (aka orthography) Spoken vs. written language Word form Spelling (orthography) (Principles of writing) (Rules of English spelling) (Historical practice) (Present-Day practice) Spoken vs. written language is a contrast which reflects two aspects of the same phenomenon. The spoken language is primary in the sense that it is learned before the written language is. Indeed, speakers of a language can be fluent and creative users of the language without necessarily being literate at all. Furthermore, numerous languages spoken in today‟s world do not have a writing system. The written language is, in the sense just mentioned, secondary, but it is not just a reflection of the spoken language from which is somehow abstracted. It relies on different ways of expressing the distinctions which speech makes by means of tempo, pitch, intonation, and stress, but it cannot replicate them fully, just as it cannot reflect the voice quality of the individual speaker. On the other hand, handwriting, too, in very individual and cannot be copied by speech style or voice quality. Furthermore, the written language can make use of symbols (e.g. @, , , ), tables, diagrams and other figures – all of which cannot be reproduced in the spoken language or at least not easily. The spoken language is more immediate (usually restricted to people close by), generally more short-lived (bar a recording), more spontaneous, and more individual while the written language is more independent of the circumstances of its production, accessible over a longer period of time, often carefully planned and even edited, and subject to conventions of standardization, including spelling in particular. Written grammar tends to be fussier and more complex than spoken grammar, but also more generally free of the lexical vagaries like and stuff, fillers such as like or y’know, false starts (well, I, I … she finally said yes), hesitiation signals (uh), and redundancies (I liked it – it was really good, absolutely tops) of speech. Perhaps because of these differences many speakers of the language consider the written language to be the “real” language and miss the point that the two forms of the language fulfill different functions, each appropriate and legitimate in its own right. As far as English is concerned, there are probably quite a few speakers of the language besides young children who are not (functionally) literate. On the other hand, as English spreads across the world as a global language there are probably very many users of the language who are more comfortable with the written than the spoken language, esp. since spelling is highly fixed while accent varies enormously. Word form is the shape of a lexeme on a particular occasion, including an identical sequence of letters or sounds. Example: Herkneth to me, gode men - Wives, maydnes, and alle men - Of a tale that ich you wile telle (Text 4.6) has eighteen different word forms; in other words, both occurrences of men count separately as do me and ich, which are two forms of one single lexeme (the 1st person singular personal pronoun). A word form is the concrete, physical occurrence of a word and may be graphic or phonetic in nature; indeed, it may be tactile (e.g. in the braille alphabet) or visually signed in sign language. In contrast, a lexeme is abstract, which means that the repeated occurrence of the “same” word form can only be interpreted as the occurrence of same lexeme more than once. Spelling (orthography) is the conventional means of representing language in the written medium. English uses the Latin alphabet for this, but once also used runes. The principle of English spelling is – despite its bad reputation, which itself is due largely to a lack of serious spelling reform – phonetic. Many of the exceptions are due to borrowing or to sound changes (see also archaisms) which have occurred since spelling was fixed. Examples:, which occurs exclusively before in native words is completely redundant for /k/. Indeed, the combinationwas an innovation taken from French after the Conquest, when it eventually displaced OE as in cwic „”quick.” The use of digraphs (two graphs in a fixed combination) is one way of expanding potential of the alphabet. The most commonly used graph in English digraphs is , as in for // (shin), for // (initially in lexical words such as thin) and // (initially in grammatical words like then), and for /d/ (chin). The combination is not quite so simple: In native words it represents /d/ as just illustrated (also: cherry, church, bench). In words borrowed from Greek stands for /k/. Examples: character, trachea. More recent borrowing from French with are pronounced as //. Examples: chandelier, Chicago. Other digraphs with : Some accents such as ScE regularly distinguish for /hw/ (where) as opposed to for /w/ (wear). is a relic of /x/ or /ç/ (once pronounced in right, but now lost except in a few traditional dialects, esp. in Scotland); it is also used in borrowed words to differentiate hard // (Italian ghetto) from soft /d/ (gentle). Greek borrowings contain for /f/ (photo) and /r/ (rhotic), but neither is really necessary for any purpose other than signaling the Greek source of the words. Sometimes is used in transliterations of Russian /x/ (Khrushchev, but pronounced as /k/ in English), and of for Russian // (Zhukov). Other combinations with include (/b/in Hindi bhang) and (/d/in Hindi dhoti or Arabic dhow). Historically justified spelling such as for /kn/. Example: ME knyght /kniçt/ retains the initial in ModE, where it distinguishes now homophonous (identical in sound) knight from night in spelling only. The vowels of English are much more complex. Here a repertoire of 16 (GenAm) to 20 (RP) vowels have to be represented by a mere six vowel-letters (). The solutions which have evolved include (1) using digraphs such as and many others and (2) indicating length or diphthongization with a following single consonant + a vowel letter as opposed to shortness by a following single consonant and nothing or a double consonant. The first of these strategies has the distinct disadvantage of involving a large number of exceptions. Examples: the major pattern /i/ as in breathe, lead (verb), appease, ease, release, etc. the minor pattern /e/ as in breath, bread, lead (noun), dead, death, etc. incidental cases // as in earth, earn, learn, search /e/ as in great, steak Table: Spelling-to-sound variation: the digraph The second of the two strategies is more systematic, but still involves numerous exceptions as the following tables reveal. All the tables revolve around the pronunciation associated with the individual occurrence of the simple graphemes . Note that C stands for any consonant-letter; V for any vowel-letter; and for no following sound in the same word. Spelling Pronunciation Examples Some exceptions + C + V // rate, rating have, garage + C + V /i/ mete, scheming, extreme allege, metal + C + V /a/ ripe, rhyme, divine machine, river,divinity1 joke, joking, verbose come, lose, gone,verbosity1 cute, renewal - + C + V + C + V 1 RP //; GenAm /o/ /(j)u/ Words which end in <-ity>, <-ic>, <-ion> (divinity, mimic, collision) have a short vowel realization of as a result of historical processes (cf. Venezky 1970: 108f). Table a: The “long” vowels, spelling and pronunciation Spelling Pronunciation Examples 1 Some exceptions + C + C/ // rat, rattle mamma + C + C/ /e/ set, settler, - / / rip, ripping, system - RP // comma gross GenAm // // cut, cutter butte //2 bush, put, butcher + C + C/ + C + C/ + C + C/ 1 In RP and RP-like BrE numerous words follow a special rule for , which is frequently pronounced as / / when followed by (after, ask, bath) plus C (sample, dance), or (calf, half). 2 “Short” continued to be pronounced as // if it occurred next to a “labial,” that is a consonant produce with lip-rounding, viz. /b, p, , t/. All the same, there are a few exceptions such as putt /pt/ or bus /bs/. See FOOTSTRUT split. Table b: The “short” vowels, spelling and pronunciation Tables c-d give the rules for vowel + in three different graphological contexts: Spelling RP GenAm Examples Some exceptions + V + (V/ ) /e(r)/ /er/ ware, wary, warier are, aria, safari + V + (V/ ) /(r)/ /r/ here, cereal very + V + (V/ ) /a(r)/ /ar/ fire, inquiry, tyre - + V + (V/ ) /(r)/ /r/ lore, glorious - + V + (V/ ) /r/ /r/ bureau, spurious bury, burial Table c: Vowels before + one letter-vowel and zero or two letter-vowels (cf. Venezky 1970: chap. 7) Spelling RP and GenAm Examples Some exceptions + VC // arid, marriage catarrh, harem /e/ peril, errand err / / empiric, irrigate, lyric GenAm squirrel RP //; GenAm // foreign, oriole, borrow worry, horrid // burr, purring urine // RP hurry, turret Table d: Vowels before or + letter-vowel + consonant (cf. Venezky 1970: chap. 7) Spelling Examples Some exceptions // par, part scarce // her, herb concerto, sergeant // for, bird, Byrd - // for, fort attorney // cur, curd - + RP and GenAm /C Table e:Vowels before + zero or + consonant (cf. Venezky 1970: chap. 7) Venezky, R.L. (1970) The Structure of English Orthography. The Hague: Mouton. Spelling reform has been called for over and over despite the widespread acceptance of an essentially unified norm in orthography. Yet, we should not forget that standard English spelling – be it British or American – continues to give general preference to etymological spellings, which help to increase interlinguistic intelligibility, and it retains “silent” letters such as the in words like or thus allowing a more universal acceptance of spelling, in this case between rhotic and non-rhotic accents. The usual basis for reform suggestions emphasizes a different principle, viz. to come as close as possible to a one-to-one relationship between each phoneme of the language and the letter or combination of letters employed to represent it. In other words, with the exception of a few shorthand systems of writing such as Pitman shorthand, the alphabetic principle has been maintained. And in most cases the Latin alphabet has been used, but again there have been exceptions such as Lodwick‟s universal alphabet (Abercrombie 1972: 51; see also 8.2.6). Attempts at reform include any one of numerous projects to bring spelling into a closer relation to pronunciation. Some modest changes have been successful, but the abstractness of the present system and distance from actual pronunciation allows it to more easily represent many accents. Standard English spelling – be it British or American – continues to give general preference to etymological spellings, which help to increase inter-linguistic intelligibility, and it retains “silent” letters such as the in words like or thus allowing a more universal acceptance of spelling, in this case between rhotic and non-rhotic accents. Spelling reforms are not merely haphazard and unsystematic. The reforms initiated by Noah Webster in the United States are the one aspect of the standard language which he is especially closely associated with. He ardently supported his changes, which he understood step by step in his spelling book (which with sales of over 60,000,000 by the 1960s; Color plate no. 10.4 Webster’s American Spelling Book). Slowly, he changed the spelling of words from one edition to the next so that they became “Americanized.” He chose s over c in words like defense, he changed the -re to -er in words like center, he dropped one of the ‟s in traveler, and at first he kept the u in words like colour or favour but dropped it in later editions. He also changed "tongue" to "tung." Much, but not all, of what he proposed was accepted and is now normal AmE usage. The effects of his major changes can be seen in connection with the principles of simplification, regularization, derivational unity, reflection of pronunciation, indication of stress, and pronunciation spellings. As we will see they are not haphazard, nor are they restricted exclusively to AmE. Further spelling reforms are not merely haphazard and unsystematic. Instead, we find the principles of simplification, regularization, derivational uniformity, reflection of pronunciation, including stress indication, and spelling pronunciations. There are in addition a number of individual, unsystematic individual differences and nonce spellings, esp. in advertising. Much of the variation lies in the greater willingness on the part of AmE users to accept the few modest reforms that have been suggested. Simplification is a principle common to both the British and the American traditions, but is sometimes realized differently. It concerns doubling of letters, Latin spellings, and word endings such as in vs. . Double letters are more radically simplified in AmE, which has program instead of programme, also measurement words ending in <-gram(me)> such as kilogram(me) etc., where the form with the final is the preferred, but not the exclusive BrE form. Other examples: BrE waggon and AmE wagon; AmE counselor, woolen, fagot and AmE/BrE counsellor, woollen and faggot. On occasion BrE has the simplified form as is the case with skilful and wilful for AmE skillful and willful. BrE fulfil, instil, appal may be interpreted as simplification, but AmE double <-ll-> in fulfill, instill, appall may have to do with where the stress lies (see indication of stress). Latin spellings are simplified from and to in words taken from Latin and Greek (heresy, federal etc.) in all varieties of English, but this rule is carried out less completely in BrE, where we find mediaeval next to medieval, foetus next to fetus and paediatrician next to pediatrician. In contrast, AmE has simple compared to the non-simplified forms of BrE in words like esophagus / oesophagus; esthetics / aesthetics (also AmE); maneuver / manoeuvre; anapest / anapaest; estrogen / oestrogen; anemia / anaemia; egis / aegis (also AmE); ameba / amoeba. Note that some words have only and in AmE, e.g. aerial and Oedipus. Word endings in AmE may drop of the -ue of -logue in words like catolog, dialog, monolog (but not in words like Prague, vague, vogue, or rogue). Note also the simplification of words like (BrE) judgement vs. (AmE) judgment; abridg(e)ment and acknowledg(e)ment. Simplification vs. derivational uniformity: BrE simplifies <-ection> to <-exion> in connexion, inflexion, retroflexion etc. AmE uses connection etc. thus following the principle of derivational unity: connect > connection, connective; reflect > reflection, reflective. Regularization is evident in AmE, which regularizes <-our> to <-or> and <-re> to <-er> as in honor, neighbor or in center, theater. This seems justified since there are no systematic criteria for distinguishing between the two sets in BrE: neighbour and saviour, but donor and professor; honour and valour, but metaphor, anterior and posterior; savour and flavour, but languor and manor; etc. Within BrE there are special rules to note: the endings <-ation> and <-ious> usually lead to a form with <-or-> as in coloration and laborious, but the endings <-al> and <-ful>, as in behavioural and colourful, have no such effect. Even AmE may keep <-our> in such words as glamour (next to glamor) and Saviour (next to Savior), perhaps because there is something "better" about these spellings for many people. Words like contour, tour, four, or amour, where the vowel of the <-our> carries stress, are never simplified. BrE goitre, centre and metre become AmE goiter, center (but the adjective form is central). BrE has metre "39.37 inches,” but meter “instrument for measuring.” The <-er> rule applies everywhere is AmE except where the letter preceding the ending is a or a . In these cases <-re> is retained as in acre, mediocre and ogre in order to prevent misinterpretation as as "soft" /s/ or as /d/. AmE spellings fire (but note: fiery), wire, tire etc. are used to insure interpretation of these sequences as monosyllabic. The fairly widespread use of the form theatre in AmE runs parallel to glamour and Saviour, as mentioned above: it is supposed to suggest superior quality or a more distinguished tradition for many people. Derivational uniformity can be from noun adjective, as in BrE defence, offence, pretence, but AmE defense, offense, pretense. AmE follows the principle of derivational uniformity: defense > defensive, offense > offensive, pretense > pretension, practice > practical. (Cf. BrE connexion vs. AmE connection above). Note, however, AmE analyze and paralyze despite analysis and paralysis. Reflection of pronunciation. The forms analyze and paralyze, which end in <-ze>, may violate derivational uniformity, but they do reflect the pronunciation of the final fricative, which is clearly a lenis or voiced /z/. This principle has been widely adopted in spelling on both sides of the Atlantic for verbs ending in <-ize> and the corresponding nouns ending in <-ization>. The older spellings with and <-isation> are also found in both AmE and BrE. AmE Advertise, for example, is far more common than advertize (also advise, compromise, revise, televise). The decisive factor here seems to be publishers' style sheets, with increasing preference for . One special case is that of the alternation between voiceless consonants in nouns (teeth /-/, half /-f/, use /-s/) vs. the corresponding verbs with a voiced consonant (teethe /-/, halve /-v/, use /-z/). BrE spelling respects this distinction in the pair practice (n.) vs. practice (v.) despite the lack of a voicing difference. AmE usually spells both with , which indicates voicelessness. Indication of Stress determines the doubling or not of final consonants (esp. of ) in AmE when an ending beginning with a vowel (<-ing>, <-ed> follows. If <-er>) is added to a multisyllabic word ending in , the is doubled if the final syllable of the root carries the stress and is spelled with a single letter-vowel ( as opposed to a digraph). If the stress does not lie on the final syllable, the is not doubled, cf. re'bel > re'belling 'revel > 'reveling re'pel > re'pelled 'travel > 'traveler com'pel > com'pelling 'marvel > 'marveling con'trol > con'trolling 'trammel > 'trammeled pa'trol > pa'troller 'yodel > 'yodeled BrE uniformly follows the principle of regularization and doubles the (revelling, traveler, etc.). AmE spelling reflects pronunciation (cf. AmE fulfill, distill etc. or AmE installment, skillful and willful, where the occurs in the stressed syllable). Pronunciation spellings are best-known in the case of <-gh->. AmE tends to use a phonetic spelling so that BrE plough appears as AmE plow and BrE draught ("flow of air, swallow or movement of liquid, depth of a vessel in water"), as AmE draft. The spellings thru for through and tho' for though are not uncommon in AmE, but are generally restricted to informal writing (but with official use in the designation of some limited access expressways as thruways). Spellings such as lite for light, hi for high, or nite for night are employed in very informal writing and in advertising language. But from there they can enter more formal use, as is the case lite, which is the recognized spelling in the sense of low-sugar and low-fat foods and drinks. In other words, an originally advertisement-driven spelling ( ) has gained independent status in its new spelling guise. Hyphenation varies in the way it is used in the spelling of compounds – be it as two words, as a hyphenated word, or as a single unhyphenated word varies. In general, AmE avoids hyphenation, cf. BrE writes make-up ("cosmetics") and AmE make up and BrE neo-colonialism, but AmE neocolonialism. No hard and fast rules exist, however; and usage varies considerably, even from dictionary to dictionary within both AmE and BrE. Individual words have different spellings without there being any further consequences. The following list includes a few of the most common differences in spelling, always with the BrE form listed first: aluminium / aluminum (bank) cheque / check gaol (also jail) / jail jewellery / jewelry (street) kerb / curb pyjamas / pajamas storey (of a building) / story sulphur / sulfur tyre / tire whisky / whiskey Finally, it should be noted that AmE usage is not completely consistent; for example, we find with and many people write(a reference to Jesus, with a capital) with and with <-re> as if the BrE spelling lent the word more standing. Much of the variation in AmE lies in the greater willingness on the part of its users to accept the few modest reforms that have been suggested. Canadians seem to be of two minds about this with the consequence that we find far more variation – Canadians may, in fact, see the variation as Canadian. The New Spelling of the Simplified Spelling Society of Great Britain uses the Latin alphabet, which has, however, been modified to insure greater consistency. It is illustrated in the following rendering of the beginning of Lincoln “Gettysburg Address” (Text 8.4): But in a larjer sens, we kanot dedikaet – we kanot konsekraet – we kanot haloe – dhis ground. Dhe braev men, living and ded, huu strugld heer, hav konsekraeted it far abuv our puur pouer to ad or detrakt. (MacCarthy 1972: 71) Conventional spelling: But in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. Text: Lincoln‟s Gettysburg Address (excerpt) in the New Spelling What has been undertaken in the example is the use of only for /k/: kanot, konsekraet, detrakt. /d/ is always as in larjer. // remains (not shown), but // is spelled as , as in dhis “this”; final silent is dropped as in sens. The is sufficient to render /e/ and is consequently also used in for standard . In konsekraet the use of for /e/ insures the proper vowel quality, as do for /i/, for /u/, or for /a/. In other words the basic phonetic principle of English orthography is extended. Language planning and policy (7.2) Throughout the history of English both the geographic spread of its speakers and the role of the government or other powerful institutions on the shaping and the status of the language has become evident again and again. Before its extension beyond England and the Scottish Lowlands, the use of the language as an everyday medium of communication depended very much on the settlement patterns of the Saxons. With the introduction of literacy and learning, centers of cultural power and prestige began to develop, and they tended to exert relatively great influence on language attitudes among the more educated. In principle, the founding of monasteries and the program of translation into and writing in English initiated by King Alfred is an early, important example of language policy in regard to English, one which effectively established the West Saxon variety and system of spelling as the OE written standard (cf. 3.4-5). In addition, this move effectively distanced it from Old Norse, which was restricted almost exclusively in the spoken medium. In the ME period the central question was Which language? Over a period of several hundred years French and Latin proved to be insufficiently anchored to serve as the daily spoken language. As fewer and fewer among the powerful nobility could use French with ease, the move to English was a sure fact. The adoption of English as a written language was a more difficult process since English had little or no association with the traditions of learning or state authority and administration. A number of important legal decisions opened English to wider governmental use, for example, the Provisions of Oxford (1258), which was the first proclamation after the Norman Conquest to be issued not only in French and Latin but in English as well, and it was the only proclamation in English under Henry III (see 4.1.2). The translation of the Bible into English was a second major indication of a change in the status of the language (see 5.2.1.2). The adoption of English for use in the governmental chancery together with the introduction of printing in England opened the gates, and English became a wellestablished and ever more standardized medium. The fact that there never was a language academy like the Académie française in France or the Italian Accademici della Crusca was of little import: the weight of public opinion and the direction of public usage of the language was already well established and the authorities of language arbitration were clear. Authorities (dictionaries, manuals of usage) need not be state institutions or language academies. In effect the printers and publishers working in a largely competitive market – but regionally concentrated in London – set the standards for the written language. In the end the educational systems of the various English-speaking countries had little choice but to accept what has de facto become StE. The instruments of dissemination were the masses of books, pamphlets, broadsides, and newpapers which employed the new standard spelling (and vocabulary and grammar). For those who were uncertain, the publishers produced spelling books, dictionaries, and manuals of usage . Spellers were highly influential and several of them were economically extremely successful. Webster‟s American Spelling Book, originally titled The First Part of the Grammatical Institute of the English Language. is one of the best known of these. It went through 385 editions while Webster was still living, and the income from it supported him well. Yet he constantly endeavored to make improvements in it. The actual title was changed first to The American Spelling Book (1786) and then to The Elementary Spelling Book (1829). Most popularly it was called the "Blue-Backed Speller" (see Color plate no. 10.4) because of its appearance. The main task of Webster's speller was to clarify how words were to be sounded out and spelled. The idea of reforming and Americanizing English spelling was very much a subsidiary goal. The Speller was arranged to provide an orderly presentation of words and the rules of their spelling and pronunciation. Dictionaries are resources for retrieving information about vocabulary such as spelling, pronunciation, etymology, style, and meaning. Printed dictionaries are most commonly organized alphabetically. Because of the numerous exceptions in English spelling, English-users depend far more on dictionaries than do users of languages with more consistent spelling systems. Especially notable is Samuel Johnson‟s Dictionary of the English Language (1755; Color plate no. 8.1 Johnson’ Dictionary), which stands at the beginning of a long tradition of lexicography that would include the incomparable twelvevolume historical Oxford English Dictionary (1928; plus supplements; now in an internet edition) as well as hundreds and hundreds of further general and specialized dictionaries. Manuals of usage are resources which set standards for formal written English. They include information about vocabulary, spelling and punctuation, style, and meaning. Example: The King’s English by H.W. and F.G. Fowler originally published in 1906. Spelling pronunciations show the relative prestige and influence of spelling on speech habits. A spelling like for a word traditionally pronounced /fn/ (GenAm) or /fn/ (RP) is frequently heard with a medial /t/, a pronunciation which originally went out of fashion in the 16th century. A second example is , which frequently takes on a pronunciation reflecting the two morphemes out of which it is composed: {fore} + {head} thus ceasing to be /frId/ (RP) or /frId/ (GenAm) and becoming /fhed/ (RP) or /frhed/ (GenAm). Of this tendency Potter writes: “Of all the influences affecting present-day English that of spelling upon sounds is probably the hardest to resist” (1976: 77). There are, in other words, tendencies for people to write the way they speak, but also to speak the way they write. Nevertheless, the present system of English spelling has certain advantages: Paradoxically, one of the advantages of our illogical spelling is that...it provides a fixed standard for spelling throughout the English-speaking world and, once learnt, we encounter none of the difficulties in reading which we encounter in understanding strange accents. (Stringer 1973: 27) A further advantage (vis-à-vis the spelling reform propagated so often) is that etymologically related words often resemble each despite the differences in their vowel quality changes. For example, sonar and sonic are both spelled with