300 likes | 420 Views
Sifting through the textual evidence: Linguistic variation in 17th century Amsterdam. Mike Olson University of Wisconsin-Madison. Introduction. Text types used for linguistic evidence can affect how we view language use in the past Formal texts: more standardized and less like spoken
E N D
Sifting through the textual evidence: Linguistic variation in 17th century Amsterdam Mike Olson University of Wisconsin-Madison
Introduction • Text types used for linguistic evidence can affect how we view language use in the past • Formal texts: more standardized and less like spoken • Informal texts (e.g. personal writings): more variation and closer to spoken • Traditional histories of Dutch focuses on standard language, especially for 17th century Amsterdam • Only tells part of the story - more informal texts can reveal language use in other domains • Corpus of personal writings from Amsterdam in 17th century • Establish criteria for text selection based on level of orality, or closeness to spoken language • Qualitative analysis of documents by Amsterdam natives in different registers
Working Hypothesis • More formal texts use more uniform spelling and grammar and are less characteristic of spoken language • Formal texts often composed with a standard language in mind • Standards tend to discourage variation and retain archaic features • More informal texts tend to contain more variation and represent spoken language more closely • Spoken language is naturally more variable than written • Personal writings often conform less to a standard • Thus, informal, personal writings should reveal changes in spoken language before they become apparent in the formal written standard
Personal Writings • Linguistic histories ‘from below’ (Elspass 2005; Elspass et al. 2007) • Writers that represent ‘normal’ people, not necessarily part of an elite social classes • Text types that reflect spoken language and variation as closely as possible • Search for patterns of variation in language change • Observe changes in progress
Language of Proximity • ‘Language of Proximity’ or ‘Conceptual Orality’ (Koch & Oesterreicher 1985) • Language is encoded graphemically in texts and phonically through spoken language • Both media can represent more or less ‘proximity’ or relative ‘orality’, e.g. • Texts: legal document vs. transcribed interview • Spoken: address before parliament vs. conversation with a close friend • Language that reflects more proximity or orality tends to • adhere less to linguistic norms and show more variation in spelling and punctuation • contain fewer complex grammatical constructions and less dense information structures
Variation and Change in Texts • Texts should represent spoken language as closely as possible (Schneider 2002) • “the surface appearance of a text, including criteria like the presence and frequency of dialectal forms, the presence of variation, and the overall impression of authenticity, plays a role in assessing a text” (2002:85) • Other factors include relationship between writer and reader and general fit of text with others from same speech community
Characteristics of Spoken Language • Texts more representative of spoken language • are written by an author in a close relationship with the reader • include more variation in spelling and punctuation • contain more dialectal forms • show less complex sentence/information structures
Dutch Language Histories • Histories of Dutch generally focus on standard language (e.g. Van Bree 1987; Van Loey 1970; De Vooys 1967; Van der Wal & Van Bree 2008) • Numerous personal documents in Dutch archives from Early Modern Period (e.g. Lindeman et al. 1993; Lindeman et al. 1994) • Diaries and Journals, travelogues, family histories, and personal letters • Archives have documentation about writers of texts • Primarily produced by members of higher social class • ‘Sailing Letters’ in British National Archives (Van Gelder 2006) • Thousands of personal letters captured by British starting in 1650s and lasting over several naval wars with the Netherlands • Represent a wider range of people than found in archives • Little is known about the writers • Letters dated only from the mid 17th century on • Personal documents can provide new sources for studying the development of spoken Dutch (see Goss 2002; Hendriks 1998)
Amsterdam in the 17th century • The studies of Dutch spoken in Amsterdam during the 17th cent. largely based on more formal texts • Vangassen (1965) uses texts from governmental, civic, and religious institutes in Amsterdam, but only focuses on a couple sound changes • Weijnen’s (1975) Zeventiende-eeuwse Taal includes data from several Amsterdam authors: • more orality: Bredero and Coster’s Kluchten and Vondel’s Hekeldichten • less orality: Hooft, Vondel, Vos (Jan), Luyken, Brandt • Comparison of personal writings with more formal texts sheds light on different linguistic data available for 17th century Amsterdam
Selection of Texts [1] The digitized version in the DBNL: http://www.dbnl.nl/tekst/hoof001nede01_01/ [2] Letter numbers: 5, 17, 44, 46, 47, 48, 49, 51
Qualitative Analysis of the Texts • Texts that are more representative of spoken language • Context: Relationship between author and intended audience • Spelling & Punctuation: variation in orthographic conventions • Dialectal Forms: non-standard forms that reveal dialectal traits • Sentence Structures: complexity and density • Morphological variation • Pronouns: mij vs. mijn • Verb forms: Subject-Verb Agreement and helping verb with geweest • Case markers: Determiners, Adjectives, Nouns
Formal Prose: P.C. Hooft, Nederlandsche Historien 1642-47 • Recounts history of young Republic starting in mid 16th century • Early influence on standardization of Dutch (Van der Wal & Van Bree 2008:221)
Formal Prose: Characteristics of Spoken Language • Context: published text, edited to standardize spelling and punctuation • Spelling & Punctuation: very little variation, standard punctuation • Mainly z in onset and s in clusters, but small var. versierdt vs. verziert • Small variation in g and gh: teegens vs. teeghens; kreeg vs. kreegh • Dialectal forms: one example • Unrounding: ten algemeenen Landbestier • Sentence structures: complex and compact with numerous embedded clauses and extended participial phrases • Al 't welk gâa geslaaghen en ooverwooghen by de geenen, die, in zoodaanighe stoffe wel 't zuiverste gezicht hadden, genoomen werd voor teeken van 't genaaken eenigher groote en zwaarlyk stilbaare ontsteltenis; rollende dit werk op 't zelve spoor, waar langs de tweedraght en beroerten van Vrankryk waaren aangeheeven.
Formal Prose: Morphological Variation • Pronouns: relatively infrequent, always mij (never mijn) • Verb Forms: • Subject-Verb Agreement: Primarily conforms to modern standard with small variation in 1st sg. forms; no apocope of -n in other forms • dat ik zyn'af koomst, aardt en fortuyn in 't kort ten toon stelle • dien ik zelf gezien heb • zou~zoude variation: singular zou-forms are fairly infrequent, while plurals forms are always zouden • en ondertussen zou men arbeiden • dat hy zich, anders, luttel met haar bekreunen zouw • dat hy zeekere plaatzen, t'onderpandt inhouden zoude • Helping Verb with geweest : always form of zyn • dien 't doch, ... , te min mooghelyk geweest was • Case-Marking: • Archaic genitives: not in spoken Dutch varieties (Weijnen 1975:43) • Des Konings breedstrekkende maght; in 't groenste zijner jeught • Regular use of inflection: Sing. objects often end with -e and plurals show no apocope of -n • in bekooring van koninglyken naame; als een welverknocht, en gevolghzaam Ryk; veele voeten in der aarde; gedreeven tot de waapenen • but also with some reduced forms: van de maate zyner maght • Graphemic abbreviated forms: zyn' armen van zelf jookende
Official Document: Schout en Schepenen, Justitieboek 1650 • Justitieboek contains descriptions of crimes in Amsterdam • Formulaic language in many short, self-contained texts
Official Document:Characteristics of Spoken Language • Context: Written by different authors for public record • Spelling & Punctuation: formulaic comma use / regular spelling with small variation in and between different writers: s vs. z;g vs. gh • Dialectal forms: • ar~er variation: dartigh; dartien • ft~cht variation: verkoft for ‘verkocht’ • Sentence structures: complex and compact clauses, embedded subclauses and extended participial phrases (typical legal speech) • Jannitge gerrits van Vlaenderen oud omtrent 21 jaeren, hebbende haer la{ten} misbruijcken van een jode, sijnde een getrouwt man, bij wien sij {is} beswangert en sij wel drij jaeren bij geslaepen heeft, is bij schepenen gebannen uijt dese stede, hare vrijheijd, een mijl int ronde den tijd van twee jaeren, ...
Official Document: Morphological Variation • Pronouns: no use of mij due to nature of the text • Verb Forms: • Subject-Verb Agreement: Relatively few inflected verb forms due to the nature of the text, but standard norms of agreement • zou~zoude variation: rarely used, but a couple soude • Helping Verb with geweest : always form of zyn • Case-Marking: • Archaic genitives: a few in common phrases • int’ spinhuijs deser stad • van de dood haers mans • Determiners: some in common phrases, often just de, dese, ... • Except for time adverbials: den tijd van twee jaeren; den 10e feburarij • And common phrases: t’ sijnen huijse • Nouns: • sing. objects with/without -e: uijt de hechtenisse / hechtenis • uijt deser stad vs. uijt dese stad vs. uijt deser stede vs. uijt dese stede • plurals usually with -n but sometimes not: op aenclachte
Diary/Travelogue: Joan Huydecoper, Sr., 1635 • Composed during a trip to Poland and Sweden in 1635 as member of a diplomatic mission from the Netherlands
Diary/Travelogue: Characteristics of Spoken Language • Context: may represent more formal speech, ‘official’ context • Written with entries for each day in ‘diary’ style, omitting first element: 19. ditto sijn wij omtrent Dansick verder gecoomen • Spelling: shows little variation except in few specific words • No use of letter z, instead all words have s • Punctuation: fairly sparse, lacking periods, but with some commas for subclauses and lists • Dialectal forms: in only a few words • reflex of WGmc *î : always we sijn but once we sien • Unrounding: stijcken vs. sticken vs. stijck for ‘stuk’ • Always uses doen for ‘toen’ • Loss of -d(en)/-d- : Edelluijden vs. Edelluij vs. Edellij vs. Edelly • usually wederom, but a couple times weerom • gereeden but one time gereen • soo wij naer marien[burch] reeden doch de Secretaris ree voorts • Sentence structures: not as complex with fewer embedded clauses and fewer extended participial phrases • logeerden jnt gulde vlies alwaer Monsieur vanden honert ende jck de burgemeester Bicker, die met het Jacht van hoochcamer quam, opden middach te gemoet gingen • was hij daer ouer soo gestoort dat hij gegeten hebbende van tafel gingent daer naer sijn vader klaechde
Diary/Travelogue: Morphological variation • Pronouns: standard use - only mij • Verb Forms: • Subject-Verb Agreement: • Very regular forms like Hooft (no -n apocope) • sou~soude Variation: none, sou is singular and souden is plural • Helping Verb with geweest : usually form of sijn but once • wij hadden hier weijnich vreijheijt soo dat jck niet eens jnde staet of door geweest heb om se te sien • Other non-standard verb forms: • Instead of ligt : fredrix[burch] leijt omtrent 3 mijl van Elseneur • Loss of -n- : dat men naeulijckx aende Carossen kost coomen • Case-Marking: • No use of genitive beyond time references: des smiddags, smorgens • No apocope of -n in plurals • Fairly regular usage of (d)en before masc. objects • met den brandenb[urger]; wt den naem • But with ‘leakage’ to • Neuter: naerden Eeten • Nominative: denDuijtsen Cancelier antwoorde voor sijn Magesteijt • Time adverbials: • voorden middach, but naerde middach • But with ‘leakage’ to Feminine: ende logeerden daer dien nacht
Personal Letters: Joan Huydecoper, Jr., Kopieboek 1648 • Copies of personal letters during a trip to France, Switzerland and Italy when he was still fairly young, around age 23
Personal Letters: Characteristics of Spoken Language • Context: Written to close family members and personal friends • Spelling: very regular spelling not differing much from standard • Sparse use of the letter z, instead most words have s • Punctuation: fairly regular, but lacking periods as in the travelogue • Dialectal forms: • ar~er variation: varstaen, vartreck, varkeerken, parsuaderende, but versoeke, vertrock, vereijste • Loss of -d(en)/-d- : koopluij; weer vs. weder; bestemoer; groote kou • ft~cht variation: gekoft for‘gekocht’ • Always uses doen for ‘toen’ • Sentence structures: similar complexity to travelogue but with slightly more parataxis • Omission of subordinating conjunction: • ick geef U Ed[ele] te considereren 500 mijn swager mijn had betaelt
Personal Letters: Morphological variation • Pronouns: constant use of mijn instead of mij • het sou mijn seer aengenaem sijn • Verb Forms: • Subject-Verb Agreement: more variation than travelogue, apocope of -e & Hypercorrections in sing. but with little apocope of -n in plural forms • ick heb; versoeke vs. versoek; • But dat staenick toe vs. die ick ten naesten bij varsta • doen ick te Leijden studeerden • mijn swager, ... , 300 guld. beloofden • but oock spreekmen hier al eenen tael • sou~soude Variation: Both forms occur with soude better represented • het sou mijn seer aengenaem sijn • het geen hier soude mogen passeren • Helping Verb with geweest : usually form of sijn • Loss of -n- : dat ick geen progres koste doen • Case-Marking: • No real use of genitive but with analytic construction: • wensende dik mael U E[dele] en, neef tol sijn compani • Rarely apocope of -n in plurals • Some use of (d)en before objects but often not masc. : • een eerlijken penninck; bij desen versoeck; inden tijt • But vande beste taback
Sailing Letters: Amsterdammers, 1664 • Personal letters among sailors in De Ruyter’s fleet and their family • Follow a popular model and at times were written by professional letter writers, so authenticity is difficult (Brouwer 2007)
Sailing Letters: Characteristics of Spoken Language • Context: Written to close family members and personal friends • Spelling: high variation with different spellings for individual words in and among speakers • Punctuation: relatively little with a few commas and periods • Dialectal forms: Some of many examples • ar~er variation: herte vs. harten vs. haert; starken vs. sterft • ie~ee variation: breef vs. brief; neit vs. niet; heir vs. hier • o~u variation: untvangen vs. ontvangen; gesturven vs. gestorven • o~eu variation: mocht vs. meucht • g~k variation: keen vs. geen • Loss of -d- : verminert vs. vermyndert, • Always doen for ‘toen’ • Reduction: min/men vs. mijn; wet vs. weet; heft vs. heeft • Sentence structures: a lot of parataxis, some subclasses but no extended participial phrases • Common parataxis: • En Susanna en Fransyntje dye bennen peeten van ons kynt.
Sailing Letters: Morphological variation • Pronouns: mostly mijn with mij in one speaker • Verb Forms: • Subj-Verb Agreement: variation within and across writers • als dat ick u l[ieder] breefe untvangen heeft • verleden week is heir maer gestorven 445 dooden • Wij kan Godt neyt genoch voor bedancken • Paulus Somer met sijnen huysvroue noch kloeck ende gesondt ben • wij noch altemael noch reedelick cloek ende gesont bennen • sou~soude variation: Both forms occur with slightly more soude • soude vs. sout vs. sou • Helping Verb with geweest : often hebben with some sijn • En de swaricheijt dye heeft hyer al vrij groot geweest • Case-Marking: • Genitives: some analytic constructions • En Yan sijn vrijster Jannetjen ys noch gesont. • Some synthetic from scriptures: in de handt des Heeren • Determiners / Adjectives: variation with/without endings • mijn seer eerwardigh ende beminde man; mijn seer eerwardige man; mijne seer beminde man; voor sijne genade; voor sijnen genadigh • Some apocope of -n in plurals: • als dat ick u l[ieder] breefe untvangen heeft
Implications of Text Types from Amsterdam • Formal, standard, published texts can serve as baselines for non-spoken • Institutional texts offer slight variation but with formulaic text intended to preserve information for a public audience • Ego-documents and personal letters from educated writers reveal some variation • Personal letters written by more ‘normal’ people with less education and from a lower social class such as the Sailing Letters provide probably represent the spoken language in Amsterdam in the 17th century
Workging Hypothesis • Personal writings should reveal changes in spoken language before they become apparent in the formal written standard
Future Plans / Discussion • Construct more quantitative tests for assessing orality of texts/comparing them with more formal texts • Where do the Kluchten fit in?