History of Dutch orthography

This article is about the history of the Dutch spelling. The spelling of the Netherlands is officially used in the Netherlands, Flanders and Suriname. The use of the official spelling is mandatory for the state and the educational institutions. It is in modified form to the so-called spelling of De Vries and Te angle. Previously, the spelling had been repeatedly controlled.

Spelling in the Middle Ages

9th century to 1150

The Spelling Rules from the middle ages are not known, as very few texts written in Old Dutch are present. Only by concise text as Hebban olla vogala one can determine the most important language features.

1150 to 14th century

Diversity of the Middle Dutch

The Middle Dutch, or Dutch, which consisted 1150-1500, yet knew no fixed grammar. The spelling was not fixed; there was no set spelling rules, as it is known today. In the traditional material, there are big variations, because it was written in the dialect of the author. Based on the language of the manuscript can so often determine whether the text from Limburg, the Brabant, Flanders and Holland came.

Nevertheless, it can not be of mess the speech; an author used in a text is always the same case. For example, used the recorder in Amsterdam in the 14th century mostly lant, but country in Utrecht. The modern system of sound extension time was also known, such as tel -tion and sla groups in Karel ende Elegast.

Spelling to pronunciation

The spelling of this period was phonetically, the spoken form specific example, the sound of the word. Words were so often written as they were pronounced. You wrote thus, for example, on the one hand lant and Coninc, but on the other hand, land and coninghe. The fact that two forms of one and the same word have different sounds, is related to the so-called devoicing. The principle of analogy was not important. One writes in modern Dutch hij wordt and hij brandt analogous to the d been in and t- ending for the third person singular, as with hij loop- t. In the Middle Dutch word it was just hi and hi brant.

It is well established that the Middle Dutch Graphemkombination ij was spoken in song by Mr. Halewijn not as a diphthong, but as long monophthong. It is certain, moreover, that the word niet no he was. The Middle Dutch grapheme oe presented the sounds [ ø ], [ u], but also a [ o] According dar.

Alphabet

The Dutch spelling was based initially on the Latin alphabet. The Dutch variant known originally 23 letters: a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, k, l, m, n, o, p, q, r, s, t, v, x, y and z Later came the letters j, u and w are added.

However, there was a problem with the Latin alphabet, which concerned the distinction between long and short vowels (a / aa). This has been solved in various ways. Playback of the long i in años for example, they wrote in the 13th century was often talking to jar, soon after you wrote jaer or jair, later also años. The variants yaer and iaer were also used.

Proklise / enclisis

Another feature of the spelling was that you Klisis or articles and prepositions often wrote to each other, eg tjaer and dlant, and in all probability pronounced that way. A negative minor point was that certain forms had multiple interpretations. For example hoordi can both Hoort ghi, ghi hoordet and go back to Hoorde hi. These forms are in fact the result of the different possible contractions of finitiven verb form with different pronouns such as hi ( Dutch: hij ), ghi (Dutch: u / jullie ) or di ( Dutch: jij ).

15th to 16th century

More unity came in the middle of the 15th century in the spelling, as the printing press was used, through which a large audience could be reached. However, the first Dutch spelling treatise was written only in 1550 from Ghent printer and teacher Joos Lambrecht, in which he encouraged both pronunciation and morphology.

The association of spelling and pronunciation was strongly in 1581 driven by Pontus de Heuiter; He has represented spellings such as mens instead of human and wil instead wants. 1584 formulated Hendrik Laurenszoon mirror a number of spelling rules of In Liefde Bloeiende, such as writing a vowel in open syllables and the use of accents to represent sound differences.

17th Century

The Statenvertaling of 1618 was the first serious attempt to define the Dutch spelling. The attempt, however, remained unsuccessful, probably because the translators among themselves could not always certain and sometimes different spellings of the same word were allowed. Similarity played little or no role; as these words were also written hant and goet on-the example next to the inflected forms.

1624 published his translation of Hubert de Antonis Psalms of the Prophet David, in which he used morphologically consistent spellings as duegd (because of the majority with a d), full and Veele. De Hubert's friend Samuel Ampzing was largely agree with him, but also called for a more economical use of characters, for example by a consonant in final position.

Spelling of Siegenbeek (1804, Netherlands)

The first official Dutch spelling dated to the year 1804. Through the French Revolution in the Batavian Republic saw an opportunity to come to a uniform spelling and grammar. The Leyden pastor and high school teacher Matthijs Siegenbeek in 1801 commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Education to draft a uniform spelling; the preacher Peter Weiland was asked to define a grammar.

A few years later published his Siegenbeek spelling in Verhandeling over de Nederduitsche spelling ter Bevordering van de eenparigheid in dezelve (1804 ) and a Woordenboek voor de spelling Nederduitsche (1805 ). The Staatsbewind the Batavian Republic introduced the spelling of Siegenbeek already on 18 December 1804 officially. Siegenbeek was of the opinion that the spelling should be the cultivated Dutch pronunciation of the word. But this should respect the principles of uniformity, the etymology and analogy are taken into account. At this spelling today's Dutch owes the spelling of the ij as in ijzer, rather also often written as Yser. Designating these spellings spelling are eg berigt, blaauw, Dingsdag, Gooijen, magt, kagchel, Koningrijk, muzijk and Zamen.

Really popular spelling of Siegenbeek was not ultimately. Siegenbeeks spelling had to fight from the beginning with criticism, especially the poet Willem Bilderdijk resisted the spelling, partly out of personal intrigue. The proposal Bilderdijk should the more modern words tile, plicht and gooien, but also andwoord, hair, ontfangen, thands and wareld that are written today different again, use. The writing system of Bilderdijk was with some authors very popular in the thirties and forties of the 19th century.

Spelling of Willems (1844, Flanders)

In the southern Netherlands spelling of Siegenbeek was in the short period of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands. She was seen as a sort of loyalty expression against the government. However, this spelling was never very popular. At the founding of the Kingdom of Belgium in 1830, the spelling of Siegenbeek than was " Dutch " and " Protestant " rejected. The spelling situation was pretty messed up and was also much discussed: on a or ae, oo or oo, ee or ee, ei or ey, or ui uy, ambt or ampt, u or ue and about the spelling of the verbs.

1836 a project funded by the Belgian Government contests for a new official spelling was organized. The jury, chaired by Jan Frans Willems was in 1839 came with its own proposal. This proposal was very close to the leaning of Siegenbeek, but you still wrote Kaes, ryden and vuerig. This alternative spelling - as the spelling of Willems or also known Commissiespelling - 1841 definitely established. On January 9, 1844 finally it was officially introduced by a royal decree.

Spelling of De Vries and Te angle (1864, Flanders, 1883, The Netherlands)

The spelling that is used to this day in modified form in the Netherlands and Flanders, was originally only intended as use in a dictionary. In 1851, we launched during the Taal -en Letter skilled Congres in Brussels, where both the Netherlands and Flanders were represented, a major project: the assembly of the Woordenboek Nederlandsche Taal, a large dictionary in which the Dutch vocabulary of past centuries are described should.

However, this overall project came to a problem: It had to be found one based on the spellings Siegenbeeks, Willems ' and the proposals of Bilderdijk compromise. The uncontrolled use of these notations would have brought great hardship for manufacturers and users. In addition, the writing system of Siegenbeek not suitable for disciplines such as separate or together writing compound words and sounds in the joint compounds. It was also decided to submit a special dictionary spelling.

This spelling was written te angle of the linguist Matthias de Vries and LA. 1863 published Te angle results in De grond begin selenium Nederlandsche spelling. Ontwerp the spelling voor het Nederlandsch aanstaande Woordenboek. This spelling combined elements of three popular at this time spelling systems. She laid the requirement: after some research from Spellingscommissie she was introduced in Belgium, but on 21 November by a royal decree for the state and the educational institutions. For the normal speech partnership the Woordenlijst voor de spelling Nederlandsche published in 1866 by De Vries and Te angle the forerunner of today Groene Boekje, taal.

De Vries and Te angle included the opinion that if someone found that a word should be written differently than it is in the dictionary, he should be able to simply rewrite it, if he was able to discuss his transformation.

In the Netherlands, the adoption of the spelling of De Vries and Te angle was slower. 1870 for schools the duty to inform the spelling of Siegenbeek, abolished, which paved the way for the spelling of De Vries and Te angle. The state followed a few years later, in December 1882, he decided to use the spelling from 1 January 1883 in its documents. The Criminal Code of the Netherlands from 1886 was reviewed by De Vries himself on language and spelling. By the decision of the State it was a fact in the Netherlands, even if one even longer used the spelling of Siegenbeek in some areas. The spelling of De Vries and Te angle led to a substantial unification of the Dutch spelling in the Netherlands and Belgium.

Spelling of Marchant (1934, Netherlands)

Although the spelling of De Vries and Te angle turned out to be better than the previous spelling systems, it was thought that the spelling need a simplification. Teachers and language scholars were of the opinion that the principle of etymology was to strict. Although the difference between lezen and Heeten was etymologically justifiable, but hard to teach, because it did not reflect the pronunciation of the majority of the speech partner. One of the main opponents was Roeland Anthonie Kollewijn which in 1891 the article Onze -heavy spelling. Een voor position vereenvoudiging dead. published. He urged a simplification of the spelling and the abolition of rules that are not in accordance with the real spoken language. Man and Nederlandsch should be mens and Dutch, Russian should his opinion as Russies are written and moeilijk as moeilik.

1916 was a Dutch Commission to work to see if they would come to a compromise between the spelling of De Vries and Te angle and the spelling of Marchant. This led slowly to adjust: On September 1, 1934 this was introduced in the Dutch schools by the Education Minister Henri Marchant. Thereby, the spellings of the Netherlands and Belgium parted again.

The spelling of Marchant contained:

• Case -declension ( as op den stoel ) was abolished, except for words that indicate only a man or a male animal (such aan den heer van and the bull ).
• Oo and ee at the end of open syllables ( zoo, Heeten ) he changed in o or e, ee except at the end of a word ( zee ).
• Since the period of the Middle Dutch resolved from the vernacular postalveolare sound at the end of many words disappeared in-s (eg in visch and human, a word equation from the German and the English fish fish).
• The th (without pronounced h) sometimes remained ( thans, theater, thee, Katholiek ) and sometimes disappeared ( atleet, auteur, retoriek, panter ).

The endings -ish ( as in logic ) and lijk ( mogelijk ) remained unchanged.

The spelling change from 1946 (Flanders) and 1947 (Netherlands)

Even during the Second World War reached the governments of Belgium and the Netherlands, a consensus on a customized version and a simplification of the spelling of Marchant. In Belgium, it was founded in 1946 and reaffirmed by law adopted in the Netherlands in 1947. The corresponding Woordenlijst Nederlandse Taal was made ​​until 1954. In the vernacular, the word list is often called the Groene Boekje because of the color of its cover. This word list has been compiled by a joint Dutch-Flemish Commission. The incorporation of the linking was n (intermediate s) completely released in compound words. Therefore, many loan words had a double spelling.

The spelling change from 1955

In 1955, as previously announced 1946/1947, the spelling changes are made, but the spirit of these were new. The contents of the Groene Boekje was the result of a commission previously used and has nothing to do with the imported in 1946/1947 changes.

The spelling change from 1996 (the Netherlands and Flanders)

After years of discussion and different spelling commissions was 1994, the Committee of Ministers of the Dutch Language Union, founded in 1980, a new spelling to. This also led to a new edition of the Groene Boekje.

A striking contrast to the Groene Boekje 1954 was a new rule in relation to the letter of the intermediate -n compounds. Introduced in 1954, rule of " required plural " accounted for, one should pay attention only to the plural form in determining the correct spelling instead. So very traditional Dutch spellings such as ruggegraat and pannekoek were abruptly changed to ruggengraat and Pannenkoek. This change was generally regarded as desirable, since the word as in English ( shows in fact the German - pans, however, the old ending of the genitive singular, not the plural ) as a composite of span and looks koek. Since the -n is not spoken in the plural span, it made ​​sense to write Pannenkoek. However, the spelling of some botanical names remained unchanged - the so-called paardebloemregel. The real reason this reform was never explained; it led to confusion.

They wanted desperately away from the double spelling, which was applicable to certain words since 1946/1947: the so-called voorkeurspelling. Many words had, in fact, an alternative, but one of them had precedence.

The third major modification was the replacement of the Trema for vocal separation in compound words by a hyphen. So it was written zee - eend instead zeeëend.

The proposed changes occurred in the Netherlands on 1 August and in Flanders on 1 September 1996.

The spelling change from 2006 (the Netherlands and Flanders)

In 1994 it was decided to revise the list of words of the Groene Boekje every ten years, the rules should remain. The first revision of the Groene Boekje appeared on 15 October 2005. Spelling officially entered into force on 1 August 2006.

In this revision was the paardebloemregel abolished: paardebloem and vliegezwam were paardenbloem and Vliegenzwam, so that the spelling of these words better adjoins eg paardenstaart and vliegenmepper. Shortly after the publication of these changes developed some Dutch newspapers and magazines, the Witte spelling they used along with the Onze Taal Genootschap for an alternative spelling. This still corresponds to the motion platform de Witte Spelling rather the feeling for the language of the Dutch language partner.

Furthermore, there were mainly individual adjustments: the spelling of words has been adapted without rules were changed. A brief overview about this:

• Names of the population get a majuscule, even if they are not connected by land or line name with the word from which they are derived, for example: Kelt, Azteek and Eskimo. A term for an ethnic minority to write a minuscule: indiaan and gypsy.
• Jood / jood is a special case: it is a follower of Judaism, then one writes jood. Does it have to do with someone who belongs to the Jewish people, then one writes Jood, with a majuscule. So joden, Christenen and Moslems; BUT: Joden, Amerikanen and Europeanen.
• There are changes in the spelling of compound English word groups, such as online rather than on line, full color instead of full color, would- beschrijver instead of would-be - schrijver.
• Some hyphen rules were changed: extreem right is extreemrechts, [A 2] continue ik -roman is written (formerly together).
• Some fossilized compound words are " entsteinert " as paddenstoel, dronkenman and dronkenlap (formerly without intermediate -n).
• Some inconsistent words that were "false " is specified in the Groene Boekje 1995, have been corrected: Appel Appel, and the accent was accented with an acute accent ( eg consistency with kartel ), ideeënloos was ideeëloos (consistency with such B. besluiteloos ).

Suriname has an associate member of the Language Union ( the Association Agreement signed in December 2004) made ​​it known that he followed the Language Union decisions in the field of spelling.