144 7 3MB
English Pages 192 [168] Year 2015
Spelling Scots e The Orthography of Literary Scots, 1700–2000
e
Jennifer Bann and John Corbett
© Jennifer Bann and John Corbett, 2015 Edinburgh University Press Ltd The Tun - Holyrood Road 12(2f) Jackson’s Entry Edinburgh EH8 8PJ www.euppublishing.com Typeset in Times by Servis Filmsetting Ltd, Stockport, Cheshire and printed and bound in Great Britain by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon CR0 4YY A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978 0 7486 4305 9 (hardback) ISBN 978 0 7486 9645 1 (webready PDF) ISBN 978 1 4744 0839 4 (epub) The right of Jennifer Bann and John Corbett to be identified as the authors of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, and the Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003 (SI No. 2498).
Contents
e
Acknowledgementsiv The IPA Chartv 1. Introduction 2. The Consonants of Older Scots 3. Older Scots Vowels 4. The Development of Modern Scots Orthography 5. From Orthoepy to Activism: Orthographic Interventions 6. Cluster Analysis and Scots Orthography 7. Applying Cluster Analysis to Scots Poetry 8. Applying Cluster Analysis to Scots Prose 9. Promoting Literacy in Scots
1 16 39 59 76 97 111 127 139
Appendix: Wordlists Used in Cluster Analyses147 References152 Index159
Acknowledgements
e
This volume began as part of the Corpus of Modern Scottish Writing (1700–1945) project, which was developed by the Department of English Language at the University of Glasgow between 2007 and 2010, and supported by the Arts and Humanities Research Council. We are grateful to our colleagues in the project team for their advice and patience, particularly Dr Wendy Anderson, Mrs Jean Anderson, Mr David Beavan, Professor Christian Kay and Professor Jeremy Smith. We are immensely grateful too for advice and detailed criticism given by long-suffering friends and by anonymous reviewers; they have saved us from a number of errors. Those that remain are, of course, entirely our responsibility. The team at EUP has also been unfailingly supportive through the long gestation of this project. Since leaving Glasgow, John Corbett has benefited from time given by the University of Macau to make progress with this research. He was also supported by a Start-Up Grant (SRG020-FSH11-JBC) that enabled him to make research trips to Glasgow. We are also, of course, indebted to our family for their continuing support and good humour, particularly Augusta Rodrigues Alves, and Gordon and Sarah Barr. The IPA Chart, , is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License. Copyright © 2005 International Phonetic Association.
The IPA Chart
1
e Introduction
e
This book is an account of the evolution of the spelling system, or orthography, of Scots, the language of lowland Scotland. Substantial written records in Scots survive from the fourteenth century and they are evidence of a distinctive language that was used in speech and as a language of written record in the Scottish kingdom until the end of the sixteenth century; thereafter broader written use of Scots declined. Written Scots was, however, revived, largely as a medium for literature, in the eighteenth century, and it has been used by a very large number of poets, novelists and dramatists ever since this ‘vernacular revival’ occurred. It thrives as a literary medium today. The way in which Scots has been fashioned in writing, however, has always been characterised by a wide range of variation and diversity in spelling. The present volume surveys the main reasons for this variation and diversity historically, and suggests ways of understanding and exploring it with a view to encouraging literacy practices in Scots. The topic of this book is complex, and debates on Scots spelling can quickly become heated. Our hope is to synthesise and extend the considerable scholarship on Scots orthography, to set the debates about Scots spelling in a historical context, as well as to suggest a means of tracking the distribution of particular Scots spellings through a small corpus of modern literary texts, with a view to considering approaches to the teaching of literacy in Scots. Previous detailed discussions of Scots orthography (e.g. Agutter 1987, Aitken 1971, Aitken and Macafee 2002, Kniezsa 1997, Macafee and Aitken 2002, Smith 2012) have focused on the Older Scots period, up until 1700, though Jones (1995, 1997, 2010) discusses the modern period, from 1700 on, and Eagle (2014) gives a lucid summary of Modern Scots spellings and contrasts in detail different proposed spelling reforms. In many respects, the orthography of Scots and English are similar, and the present study has drawn on some detailed discussions of English spelling, particularly Venezky (1967, 1970, 1999). Detailed d iscussions of English orthography have also been given by Scragg (1974), Salmon (1999), Upward and Davidson (2011) and, in a more popular vein, Crystal (2012).
2
Spelling Scots
Sources of Information The major resource for those studying Scots orthography remains the two great dictionary projects, the Dictionary of the Older Scottish Tongue, which covers the Older Scots period, and the Scottish National Dictionary and its supplements, which cover the period from 1700 to 2005. Although the two dictionaries were informed by differing editorial principles, they were combined in the online Dictionary of the Scots Language (DSL, ), completed in 2004 and upgraded in 2014. This electronic edition is the major source of information for this volume, though Chapters 6 to 8 also draw upon the online Corpus of Modern Scottish Writing (CMSW, ).
Studying Orthography At the outset, it is necessary to establish what orthography is, what it does, and to introduce some key technical terms that appear throughout this volume. A naïve view of a spelling system is that it serves solely to map sounds onto written characters, or letters; this view is forcefully challenged with respect to English by Venezky (1967: 77): For centuries philologists have approached the study of English orthography with the purblind attitude that writing serves only to mirror speech, and that deviations from a perfect letter-sound relationship are irregularities. The study of orthography, Venezky (1967, 1970, 1999: 5–10) argues, involves understanding a number of issues. The two main goals of orthography are to identify and classify the written characters used in a spelling system and to account for their combination. As Abercrombie (1949) observes, ancient accounts of Greek and Latin spelling considered litera (the letter) to have three characteristics: the figura, or written form of the letter; the potestas (‘power’ or ‘force’) that refers to possible pronunciations of the letter; and the nomen or ‘name’, by which certain letters can be identified. Thus has a written form, or figura; its potestas can be accounted for by the various ways in which is pronounced in context; and in discussions we identify the letter by its nomen, which can be represented by the phonemic symbol /i/. The distinction is still a useful way of thinking about the relationships between spellings and sounds: the relationship between figurae and their potestas remains the main issue in orthographic study. The written characters, or figurae, used in a spelling system are now usually referred to as ‘graphemes’; they are indicated by angled brackets, for example . Sometimes a combination of two or more characters maps onto a single sound, in which case we refer to them as ‘digraphs’, for example
The grapheme
occurred in initial, medial and final positions, e.g. partan, ‘crab’, superne, ‘heavenly’, graip, ‘grope’. In final position, the grapheme was often doubled when a morpheme was then added: ‘Our bishops [. . .] whose infameis are seene and graipped of you all’. The grapheme also occurred in a number of clusters, e.g. initial and final , as in procur, ‘bring about’, pleisure, ‘pleasure’, sparkish, ‘witty, smart’ and skelp, ‘smack’, cairp, ‘talk, converse’, and clasp. Examples of ‘silent
’ are rare expressions like psallerare (a variant of cellarare, ‘cellar man’), pseudoprophet and pnewmaticks. The phoneme would also be assimilated or elided in particular bilabial contexts like the name Campbell, where the /p/ was followed by /b/.
30
Spelling Scots
In Latin and Old English writing, the digraph was used to transliterate the Greek character phi, , which represented /f/. The digraph then fell into disuse, and was favoured. However, the digraph was reintroduced between the fifteenth and seventeenth centuries to identify a number of words of Latin, Greek, Hebrew or Arabic (via mediaeval Latin) origin, e.g. phair, ‘a lighthouse’ (from Greek via Latin), and seraphin, ‘seraphim, the highest order of angels’ (from Hebrew via Greek and Latin). These terms were often of a learned or technical character, like nephritick, ‘affecting the kidneys’. The and spellings alternated in forms like fantastik/phantastik (from Greek via Latin), and the spelling was also sometimes used in some expressions like phary, ‘fairy’ (from Old French faerie, but originally deriving from Latin fata, ‘fate’), and golph, ‘deep pool, abyss’, and even in native words like phische, ‘fish’. In the north-east of Scotland, where historically corresponded to /f/, there are a few examples of the grapheme in words like phip, a regional variant of quhip, ‘whip’: ‘Thatt quhatsumeuir persoun beis [. . .] found to haif spoikin filthie and abhominable langage [. . .] salbe [. . .] convoyit [. . .] to the skameles and thair be phippit.’
This Roman character was used in early Old English in the combination to represent the sound /kw/; however, it was replaced by in later Old English in words like cwene, ‘queen’. Anglo- Norman scribes reintroduced the grapheme, and in the north, again became a regular representation of the sound /kw/. It was used initially and medially: quackery, ‘trickery’, conqueist, ‘acquired’. In some borrowings from French, the ending was retained, giving the forms musique, reliquies, etc.; in such cases, the corresponded to a /k/ pronunciation, and so it would be more economical to say that here the is silent. Since interchange, there are a few instances of variant spellings where following corresponds to a vowel, rather than the semi- vowel /w/, for example qwth, a variant of couth, ‘could’, and qwneing, a variant of cuning, ‘rabbit’. The grapheme appears in clusters such as , as in squyar, ‘escort’. Considerable ambiguity arose in Older Scots between the use of for the Old English /kw/ and the use of in different combinations – including to correspond to the Old English /hw/. This issue is considered next, in the discussion of .
As Kniezsa (1997: 31) observes, the most common means of representing the /hw/ sound in Old English was , a reversal of the earlier form that prevailed up until the beginning of the twelfth century. However, from the end of the thirteenth century, the variant forms appeared
The Consonants of Older Scots
31
in manuscripts written in northern English areas such as Northumberland, Durham and Lancashire. Kniezsa (1997: 38) notes a wide number of digraphs or trigraphs that were used in Early Scots, e.g. in quilk, qwilk, quhilk, qvhilk, qwhilk, qhilk, qhuilk, qhwilk, ‘which’. Kniezsa found that the two forms that dominated early manuscripts were and , the others being fairly rare. The in the trigraph and digraph later became more commonly ; the headword quhyte, ‘white’, in DOST gives a sense of the full range of possible spellings. Thus there was ambiguity between, for example, quite, ‘quite’, and quite, ‘white’. The trigraph and its variants are found only in morpheme- initial position, e.g. quhaill, ‘whale’, na-quhare, ‘nowhere’.
The grapheme occurred in initial, medial and final position and represented /r/, which would always have been pronounced, as Scots was and is rhotic. It was sometimes doubled in medial positions before a vowel and in final positions, thus horibille, horribill, ‘causing terror’, and scar, scarr, ‘provoke, scare’. The grapheme occurred in many consonant clusters; for example: Initial clusters
was doubled if another morpheme was added, e.g. lip, lippis. ● was doubled in word-final position, particularly in monosyllables, and tended to indicate unvoiced pronunciation, e.g. houss, ‘house’, and haff, ‘have’. Doubling was common for at the end of morphemes as well as words, thus giffand, ‘giving’. Intervocalically, alternated with spellings, thus the form just mentioned varied with givand, ‘giving’. According to Kniezsa, was often doubled before , as in affter, at least in some texts, and doubled was sometimes used in plural or possessive morphemes, e.g. storiss, ‘stories’, and androwss, ‘Andrew’s’. Unlike Present-Day English, initial doubling was possible, particularly, as noted earlier, in manuscripts to indicate a proper noun, e.g. ffyfe, ‘Fife’. ● was doubled in final position in words of two or more syllables, e.g. heritabill, ‘capable of being inherited’.
38
Spelling Scots
Given the wide degree of spelling variation to be found in Older Scots texts, some of these patterns are more easily verifiable than others. However, this chapter has given and illustrated an inventory of the consonant graphemes generally available in Older Scots, an inventory that formed the basis of the Modern Scots consonantal spelling system. The next chapter considers the Older Scots vowels.
Note 1. See (last accessed 10 February 2015).
3
e Older Scots Vowels
e
If the consonants of Older Scots present us with a relatively uncomplicated orthographic system, the Older Scots vowels are a different matter. The geographical and chronological variations we find among different accents of Scots are largely a matter of differing vowel sounds: vowels change more than consonants do, over space and time. In this chapter, we consider why vowels are generally less stable than consonants, sketch out the major systemic changes in the vowel system over the Older Scots period, and explore how the variable and changing systems of pronunciation mapped onto the Older Scots vowel graphemes. The most thorough discussion of this topic is in Aitken and Macafee (2002), and this chapter largely offers a synopsis of the much more extensive descriptions found there. A briefer account is given in Smith (2012: 29–33). Other relevant studies that have informed the content of this chapter include Aitken (1977), Johnston (1997a), Lass (1999) and Macafee and Aitken (2002).
Vowels and Vowel Systems Consonants and vowels differ in their means of articulation. Consonants, as we saw in Chapter 2, involve some kind of stoppage or obstruction to the airflow in the vocal tract. To reiterate, the lips might come together to stop the airflow completely, before releasing it in /p/ or /b/; or the little membrane towards the back of the palate, known as the velum, might descend to stop the airflow in /k/, or it might let some air through with a ‘fricative’ sound in /x/, the sound that corresponds to the digraph in words like nicht. These obstructions to the airflow allow us to classify consonants according to (i) where the obstruction occurs (lips, teeth, velum, etc.), (ii) how the air finally passes through the vocal tract (plosive, fricative, lateral, etc.) and (iii) whether there is voicing; that is, whether or not the vocal cords vibrate during the articulation. These three factors account for some of the variation in consonant spellings discussed in Chapter 2. For example, the variant spellings of the medial consonant in father, fader suggest that the means of articulation varied from a fricative sound /ð/ in the former to a plosive sound /d/ in the latter. Although the means of articulation might have varied, the place of articulation and the voicing of the medial consonant
40
Spelling Scots
in these words were probably similar or identical. Sometimes the means of articulation and the voicing remained similar but the place of articulation changed: we saw this with the mouillé consonants used in French loanwords, like menȝe, many, ‘company of men’. The in the former variant indicates that the corresponded to a nasal consonant, as in the French, which was articulated with the tongue raised towards the hard palate. The loss of the in variant spellings suggests a nasal articulation closer to the alveolar ridge, behind the teeth, as in modern pronunciation. Finally, there were differences in voicing. The double in verbs like haiff, ‘have’, suggests unvoiced articulation of the consonant; in many Scots accents this consonant was later voiced (though in some cases it was lost or elided, as in hae), and the graphemes came to be used to r epresent the voiced variants. Consonants, then, can be described and classified with reference to the place where the airflow is obstructed, how the airflow is obstructed, and whether or not there is voicing. The articulation of vowels, however, does not involve obstruction of the airflow through the vocal tract. Rather, the shape of the vocal tract itself is changed during the production of vowels; for example, the front, middle or back of the tongue is raised or lowered, and the lips are rounded or spread. If you pronounce the vowel /ɑ/ as aah and then /i/ as eeh, you should feel your tongue rising to the front part of the vocal space, closer to the roof of the mouth and nearer the teeth. Depending on your accent, the movement will be more or less extreme, but there will be some movement. The very nature of their articulation makes vowels more changeable than consonants from individual to individual and over space and time. However, identifiable systems of vowels characterise different periods of the Older Scots language, and these systems changed in a regular fashion over time. One factor that adds to the complexity of the spelling of vowels is that the graphemes used to represent the Older Scots vowels were established when the pronunciation system was quite different from that of today. In Early Scots (1375–1450), there was a system of long and short vowels; that is, vowels were distinguished from each other by the duration of their articulation as well as by differences in their ‘quality’, or the shape of the vocal tract during their articulation. The vowel system then evolved through a series of changes known as the Great Vowel Shift, which affected both English and Scots, though in different ways, in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. As its name suggests, the Great Vowel Shift resulted in a systematic series of changes whereby certain long vowels changed in quality and, in some cases, in length. After the Great Vowel Shift, owing to another set of changes that produced the Scottish Vowel Length Rule (SVLR), the distinction in vowel length became less salient; that is, vowel duration was no longer used to distinguish words of different meanings. For our purposes, the most obvious outcome of these changes was that by the end of the Middle Scots period (1450–1700) the graphemes that corresponded to the vowels of Older Scots had become less reliable markers of either their quality or their quantity. The following sections trace the major changes in Older Scots orthography, in relation to the vowels, by tracing the major changes in the Early Scots and Middle Scots periods. The purpose of these sections is to explain why the vowel graphemes are what they are, and to indicate how their correspondence to vowel phonemes changed in Older Scots.
41
Older Scots Vowels
The Vowel Chart and Aitken’s Numbering System Since vowels cannot be categorised according to obstruction in the airflow through the vocal tract, another means must be found of classifying them. Conventionally, vowels are classified according to the highest point of the tongue in the vocal tract, with additional information given, where relevant, about lip- rounding. Table 3.1 shows the International Phonetic Association’s vowel chart: it can be understood as an abstraction of the vocal tract, with the front of the mouth to the left. The vowel /ɑ/ (aah), therefore, can be seen as an open back vowel, while /i/ (eeh) is a close front vowel. The other vowels are plotted in the vocal space, with further information given about lip-rounding. For example, if you say /i/ (eeh) and then round your lips, you articulate /y/. The Modern Scots pronunciation of the vowel in oor, depending on the individual accent, is usually somewhere between /y/ and the slightly lower /ø/, as shown in Table 3.1. The vowel chart in Table 3.1 represents monophthongs. Some vowels, however, are articulated as diphthongs, that is, during the articulation of the vowel, the tongue ‘glides’ from one position to another. One example is the vowel in the Modern Scots articulation of tide, /əi/, in some accents, where the highest point of the tongue is raised during articulation from a mid-central position to a near-close or close front position. The vowel system, then, in any period, is an inventory of long and short monophthongs, and also possibly some diphthongs, which are used to distinguish between words of different meaning. Because the quality of many long vowels changed during the Older Scots period, it is difficult to characterise individual vowels by phonetic symbol alone. The long vowel /i:/, for example, underwent changes over the centuries. In Early Scots, it was the vowel used in tym, ‘time’, but then, owing to changes in the vowel system, this vowel became a diphthong in Middle Scots, and then a different diphthong in Modern Scots: /tim/ > /teɪm/ > /təim/. Meanwhile, a vowel pronounced differently in Early Scots had become /i:/ by the Middle Scots period, TABLE 3.1: The IPA vowel chart: monophthongs
i
y
Near close Close mid
Central
e
Near open Open
Back
ɯ
u
γ
o
ɔ ɒ
υ ɘ
ø
θ ə
Mid Open mid
Near back
ɒ
Close
Near front
ε
a
a
a
Front
Vowels at right & left of bullets are rounded & unrounded.
42
Spelling Scots
before the vowel shortened in Modern Scots, e.g. keip, ‘keep’: /ke:p/ > /ki:p/ > / kip/. It will be noticed already that the graphemes we still use are, in fact, closer indications of the earlier pronunciations than the later ones. In order to keep track of the changes in vowel quality and duration over time, Aitken devised a numbering system (see Aitken 1977, Aitken and Macafee 2002). For example, the vowel that changed from /i:/ to /əi/ is Aitken’s Vowel 1; and the vowel that changed from /e:/ to /i/ is Vowel 2. Aitken identified a system of nineteen vowels in all, and though modifications to some details have been suggested (e.g. Smith 2012: 30), his is the system largely adopted in the present volume, and illustrated in some detail in the following sections. Since there were only a limited number of graphemes available to represent these nineteen vowel phonemes, and since the quality of the long vowels changed over time, this chapter is organised in the following way: the vowel phonemes of the Early and Middle Scots periods, before and after the Great Vowel Shift, are separately introduced and discussed, alongside the graphemes normally used to represent the sounds in each period.
Early Scots Vowels (1375–1450) The vowels that changed least over the Older and Modern Scots periods were the short vowels, which Aitken numbered 15–19. These are shown in Table 3.2, alongside the graphemes that corresponded to them: The variant spellings and have a similar explanation (see, for example, Smith 2012: 29), one that has already been touched upon in the discussion of consonants in Chapter 2. Mediaeval scribes wrote the letters as strokes called minims, and so sequences that combined these letters were often difficult to read. Therefore, in the context of , was often preferred to ; for example, compare dissifer, ‘decipher’, and dissymulacioun, ‘dissimulation’. Similarly, in the context of other minims, was sometimes preferred to the interchangeable , which gave rise to the variants somir, sumir, swmir, ‘summer’. Short vowels were often marked by a doubling of the following consonant, e.g. begg, ‘beg’, and crumm, cromm, ‘crumb’ (see Chapter 2). It may be noted that the short open-mid back vowel /ʌ/ was not part of the Early Scots short vowel system, and so words with the short vowel , like crumm, cromm, would have been pronounced /krum/, rhyming with Modern Scots room. Long vowel duration could be marked in two main ways: (i)
adding an to the following consonant (+Ce), e.g. buke, ‘book’ TABLE 3.2: Short vowels in Older Scots
Vowel Number
Phoneme
Graphemes
Examples
Vowel 15 Vowel 16 Vowel 17 Vowel 18 Vowel 19
/ɪ/ /ɛ/ /a/ /ɔ/ /u/
tig, tyg, ‘touch, tap’ begg, ‘beg’ crakk, ‘crack’ cok, ‘cock’ crumm, cromm, ‘crumb’
Older Scots Vowels
43
(ii) making the vowel into a digraph by combining it with another vowel, often , e.g. buik, ‘book’, gloir, ‘glory’; or, on occasion, doubling it, e.g. ryim, ‘hoar frost’. As the examples show, the ways of marking a long vowel vary for the same word. The Scots dictionaries record the range of ways of marking long vowels: the entry for buke (n.) in DOST, for example, records a range of variant spellings beyond buke and buik that either do not mark the vowel as long or indicate it as long by using the marker or another digraph: boke, buk, bwk, bwck; bvik, buick, buyk, bwik(e); beuk, bevk, bewk; bouk, bouck, bowyk.
The Great Vowel Shift in Scotland: Middle Scots Long Vowels As noted above, the two main periodic divisions in Older Scots are Early Scots and Middle Scots, with 1450 as the conventional watershed. Over the space of two centuries, both in England and in Scotland, albeit with some differences, the articulation of the long vowels and diphthongs changed. This change is the main reason why later orthography in English and Scots is not closely aligned with pronunciation. Although historians of language refer to the ‘Great Vowel Shift’, Lass (1999: 77) reminds us that the processes involved in what became a systematic set of sound changes were complex: Even though from the macroperspective change might look like linear transition, it is multidimensional: the essential mechanisms are cumulatively weighted variation and diffusion through the lexicon. In other words, although we may conveniently represent the Great Vowel Shift as a chronological set of changes whereby one set of vowels transformed into another, the reality at any point over the two centuries must have been messier. Over several generations of speakers, the long vowels began to be articulated in different ways, first in some words and then, eventually, through most of the vocabulary system. Adoption of the changed pronunciations must have varied from individual to individual and from community to community, and, indeed, there was a marked difference in the outcomes of the Great Vowel Shift north and south of the River Humber. In the north of England and in Scotland, some older vowel sounds were retained; south of the Humber, the changes were more radical. Lass (1999) describes the Great Vowel Shift in considerable detail with respect to the south; Johnston (1997a), Aitken and Macafee (2002: 108–23), and Macafee and Aitken (2002) give an equally detailed account of Older Scots sound changes. Simplifying these accounts somewhat, insofar as the different phases of change are elided, the principal overall outcomes of the GVS can be seen in Table 3.3. The table shows that the patterns of change, north and south, are similar in some respects and different in others. The main similarities are in the treatment of the front vowels; the northern and southern systems differ mainly in the changes to the back vowels. In the north and the south, the close-mid front vowel /e:/ was raised to /i:/,
44
Spelling Scots TABLE 3.3: The Great Vowel Shift in (a) the south and (b) Scotland
and the north
GVS in the south
ei
i:
u:
e:
o:
ɛ:
ɔ:
a:
GVS in Scotland and the north i: ou
ei
e:
y:
u: o:
ɛ: a:
and /i:/ was diphthongised to /ei/, which later became /ɘi/ and, in Present-Day English, /aɪ/. This process seems to have caused a chain reaction, so that the more open vowels were then also gradually raised to occupy those spaces vacated by the closer vowels, and so /ɛ:/ was raised to /e:/ (then merging with /i:/), and /a:/ to /ɛ:/ (then merging with /e:/). The differences are apparent in the treatment of the back vowels. In the south, a similar process of raising and diphthongisation occurred, as /o:/ was raised to /u:/, and /u:/ became /ou/, which became, in Present-Day English, /ʌu/. The change in the close vowels then initiated a change in the open vowels so that /ɔ:/ became /o:/. However, earlier sound changes prevented a parallel pattern unfolding in the north, which retained much more conservative pronunciations, with /u:/ subsequently shortened to /u/ in words like moose, ‘mouse’, hoose, ‘house’, and so on. The close-mid vowel /o:/ had already fronted to /y:/, an unrounded close vowel, and this later became close-mid /ø/. The Middle English phoneme /ɔ:/ had no parallel in pre-Scots, since the OE/ON front vowel had remained as /a:/ (thus the difference, after the GVS, between today’s realisations of home/hame in English and Scots respectively). As Aitken and Macafee (2002: 109) put it, the lack of back vowels in Early Scots in places where there was movement south of the border meant that: There was thus ample space for minor movements of the points of articulation of the Sc back vowels, without setting up any ‘push-chain’ overall shift in the back vowel system. Table 3.3, then, shows the outcomes of the Great Vowel Shift until around 1450. Changes between Older and Modern Scots are considered in Chapter 4; and, of course, southern English pronunciation changed further too. Tables 3.4 and 3.5 below indicate in more detail the shifts in the long vowel phonemes between the Early Scots and Middle Scots periods. Again, the tables represent a simplification of a complex series of processes, which Aitken and Macafee (2002) cover in much more exhaustive detail. The long monophthong vowels of Early Scots (pre- GVS) are shown in Table 3.4, alongside the Middle Scots vowels (post-GVS) they developed into,
Older Scots Vowels
45
with Aitken’s numbering, and the main Older Scots graphemes that corresponded to each vowel. The symbol # indicates a word-final position. Where the examples of words that contain the graphemes are not glossed, they are variant spellings of the foregoing word. The long vowels are marked by digraphs, , which, as Kniezsa (1997) has shown, were originally used in Middle English to represent the new diphthongs that had resulted from the changes to the open vowels as a consequence of the Great Vowel Shift. In Middle Scots, these digraphs came to be used mainly to indicate long vowels (see Macafee and Aitken 2002, in particular the section ‘The Origins of OSc Orthography’). There are several points to note about the vowels shown in Table 3.4. First, the notation follows Smith (2012: 30) in giving a broader notation for Vowel 5 in Early Scots than Aitken does. However, the table retains Aitken’s notation for Vowel 7, a close /y:/ where Smith suggests a lower /ø:/, on the basis of the distribution of /ø/ in Present-Day Scots pronunciations. It is impossible to be exact about the vowel used in Early Scots; indeed, given the instability of vowel sounds, it is likely that there was variation in articulation, which is the reason why the broader transcription is preferred for Vowel 5. Aitken and Macafee (2002: 87) acknowledge that ‘the principal realisations of vowels 5, 18 and 19 are specially open to speculation’. Looking at Tables 3.2, 3.4 and 3.5 from the perspective of the graphemes, it is clear that certain graphemes and digraphs corresponded to different sounds in Early Scots. The most obvious example, perhaps, is Vowels 2 and 3, which in Early Scots largely shared a set of corresponding graphemes. The evidence for different graphemic-phonemic correspondences comes from the painstaking scrutiny of rhymes (for references, see Aitken and Macafee 2002). As the DSL entry for nede, ‘need’, (Vowel 2) notes, in Early Scots nede rhymed with words like bede, ‘prayer’, dede, deid, ‘deed’, drede, ‘dread’, med, ‘reward’, seide, ‘seed’, spede, ‘speed’, and wede, ‘garment’, but in later verse (e.g. by the poets Maitland and Montgomery) it also rhymed with words containing Vowel 3, e.g. dede, deid (‘dead’), fede, feid n., procede, remede and leede n. (‘lead’). The fact that the words did not rhyme in Early Scots suggests different vowel articulations in this period. Similarly, Vowel 7 shares one set of graphemes with Vowel 5 (so gloir and goid would have had different vowel correspondences), and another with Vowel 6 (souk and foul would also have been pronounced differently, despite the shared graphemes). Why did the changes shown in Table 3.4 take place? The reasons for the Great Vowel Shift remain enigmatic, but scholars have suggested a number of factors. First, given the relatively unstable nature of vowels compared to consonants, as noted above, there may be a greater tendency for variation and shift over time. However, the availability of variant pronunciations of vowel sounds clearly also served as linguistic markers of different communities and groups within communities. As the structure of society changed in Scotland and England over the fourteenth to sixteenth centuries, different social groups may well have asserted their particular identities by adopting or avoiding certain innovative vowel sounds. Some vowel sounds will have become associated with prestige groups, resulting in their eventual imitation, or near-imitation, by other socially aspiring groups. Other vowel sounds – perhaps conservative ones – might have been eventually associated with lower prestige groups, and so they would have been avoided
46
Spelling Scots TABLE 3.4: Long monophthongs in Early and Middle Scots
Vowel Number Phoneme: Phoneme: Graphemes Examples Early Scots Middle Scots Vowel 1
/i:/
/e:i/
Vowel 2
/e:/
/i:/
Vowel 3
/ɛ:/
/i:/ or
Vowel 4
/a:/
/e:/ /e:/
Vowel 5
/ɔ:/
/o:/
Vowel 6
/u:/
/u/
Vowel 7
/y:/
/ø:/
tide, ‘time, occasion’ tyde tyd tyid laday, ‘lady’ lady bede, ‘prayer’ bede neid, ‘need’ neyd nead se(e), ‘sea’ sey sie sevin, ‘seven’ brede, ‘bread’ heid, ‘head’ heyd head stan, ‘stone’ stane stain stayn sten stean ga, ‘go’ gay gae glore, ‘give glory’ glor gloir gloyr to, ‘to’ too souk, ‘suck’ sowk schow, ‘shove’ fully, ‘completely’ ol(e), ‘oil’ wull, ‘wool’ gode, ‘good’ goid boyt, ‘cask for wine’
47
Older Scots Vowels TABLE 3.4: (continued)
Vowel Number Phoneme: Phoneme: Graphemes Examples Early Scots Middle Scots
blome, ‘blossom’ sone, ‘soon’ wod, ‘mad’ fule, ‘fool, foolish’ fwle fuil fuyl fwil fwyl foul fowl fool do, ‘do’ doe doo dou dow du(e) dw
by socially aspiring groups (see Millar 2012: 43–5). These patterns of change, imitation, adoption and avoidance would have been complicated by factors of class, nationality, gender and so on – and contemporary evidence is difficult to find. However, some literary evidence survives of linguistic attitudes in mediaeval and early modern England and Scotland. In England, a well-known literary representation of northern English forms of speech by a southerner is Chaucer’s The Reeve’s Tale. In a discussion of Chaucer’s construction of northern Middle English, Epstein (2008: 112) argues: It seems that many Middle English speakers habitually conceived their language differences along a North-South axis, turning observed pluralities into generalized dualities. Inevitably, these dualities cast one element as normative and dominant and the other as variant and subordinate. Much later, in late sixteenth-century Scotland, James VI indicated a keen understanding of linguistic propriety when advising his courtiers in his Reulis and Cautelis to be Observit and Eschewit in Scottis Poesie (see Smith 2012: 249): Gif zour purpose be of landwart effairis, To vse corruptit, and vplandis wordis. If your purpose be [to write] of country matters, to use corrupt and rustic terms. Later still, in London in the early seventeenth century, a language commentator called Alexander Gil poured scorn on innovative pronunciations by a group of
48
Spelling Scots
upwardly mobile speakers he called Mopsae (Smith 2007: 133–4). These speakers were clearly diffusing innovative GVS vowel sounds, which Gil, like many later writers on language variety and change, found to be offensive to the ear. From Chaucer via James VI to Gil, then, we can find a number of contemporary observers who bear witness to features of language variety and innovation acting as markers of social prestige and stigma in the Middle English and Older Scots periods. These complex dynamics and their role in the construction of social identity may help us to understand the reasons behind these shifts in the articulation of long vowels in the development of Scots and English. As well as short and long monophthongs, there were two sets of Early Scots diphthongs, which were produced while the tongue was moving, or ‘gliding’, during articulation. Generally, the tongue moved towards either an /i/ articulation or an /u/ articulation, giving the sets of diphthongs shown in Table 3.5. As with the short and long monophthongs, two or more written characters could correspond to one phoneme, thus the digraph corresponded to Early Scots Vowel 9 or 10, and to Vowel 13 or 14. Given that vowel length could be indicated by an i-digraph, then could in fact correspond to Vowel 5, 7, 9 or 10; that is, the sounds in gloir, goid, join and poison would have had different qualities in Early Scots. Table 3.5, then, shows the evolution of the Early Scots diphthongs in the Middle Scots period. Since these vowels were not generally affected by the GVS, the changes are not as marked as they are with the long monophthongs. Some diphthongs (Vowels 9 and 10) remained fairly consistent, while others show raising in their front element (Vowels 8 and 11). In the case of Vowel 11, this raising resulted in its becoming a monophthong, which also happened in the case of Vowel 12. In the case of Vowels 12 and 13, the elision of /l/ in the articulation of /al/ and /ol/ resulted in the merging of these sounds with /ɑ/ and /ou/ respectively in Middle Scots, prompting the variant spellings of hald, haud, ‘hold’, and gold, gowd, ‘gold’. The variants of Vowel 14 are discussed at length in Aitken and Macafee (2002: 36–9): effectively, several Early Scots vowels that were previously separate were merged, and then the resulting vowel split again, giving the diphthong and triphthong variants shown in the table. The result is that for some poets, in certain periods, blew and dew were perfect rhymes; at other times, for other poets, they were not.
Later Developments: The Scottish Vowel Length Rule (SVLR) The various changes to the long vowels that happened as a result of the Great Vowel Shift meant that the oppositions between short vowels and long vowels that historically had been used to differentiate meanings no longer held true. For example, after the GVS, the difference between bad, ‘unwell’, and bade, ‘abiding, delay’, was expressed via the quality of the vowel, and not through its duration. Once the function of vowel duration had been obscured by the GVS, it was possible for Scots speakers to reduce the longer monophthongs, and also the first element in the Vowel 1 diphthong /e:i/. This shortening of the long vowels occurred, but only in specific phonetic environments; the specification of these contexts is known as the Scottish Vowel Length Rule (SVLR), or Aitken’s Law.
49
Older Scots Vowels TABLE 3.5: Early and Middle Scots diphthongs
Vowel Number
Phoneme: Early Scots
Phoneme: Graphemes Examples Middle Scots
Vowel 8
/ai/
/ɛi/
Vowel 8a
/ai#/
/ɛi#/
Vowel 9
/oi/
/oɪ/
Vowel 10
/ui/
/ui/
Vowel 11
/ei#/
/i:#/
Vowel 12
/au/
/ɑ:/
Vowel 12a
/al/
/ɑ:/
Vowel 13
/ou/
/ou/
graith, ‘equipment’ grayth grathe paen, ‘pain’ pein peyn pen pean cuntray, ‘country’ cuntrey join, ‘join’ joyn poisoun, ‘poison’ poyson piusson spuilȝe, ‘spoliation, theft’ spwilȝe pwynt, ‘point’ pint pynt piynt drey, ‘endure’ dre dree drie lauch, ‘laugh’ lawch law, ‘hill’ la ald, ‘old’ all, ‘all’ hauld, ‘hold’ saut, ‘salt’ sawt haw, ‘hall’ a, ‘all’ gouk, ‘cuckoo’ gowk golk schow, ‘show’
50
Spelling Scots TABLE 3.5: (continued)
Vowel Number
Phoneme: Early Scots
Phoneme: Graphemes Examples Middle Scots
Vowel 13a
/ol/
/ou/
Vowel 14
/iu/
/iu/
Vowel 14bii /ɛou/
/iu̞u/
gold, ‘gold’ gould boll, ‘a measure of weight’ creuell, ‘cruel’ crewel buke, ‘buke’ blew, ‘blue’ blue deuty, ‘duty’ dewty bouté, ‘beauty’ dew, ‘worthy’ plow, ‘plough’
Although Aitken himself credited Murray (1873) with formulating this process, his own detailed exploration of its consequences has, for many scholars, indelibly associated it with his name (see Aitken 1981: 156, n.1; Aitken and Macafee 2002: 169, n.42). The main characteristic of the SVLR is that long vowels were shortened except in phonetic environments that were conducive to longer articulations. These SVLR-long environments were: • before /r/ • before the voiced fricatives /v, z, ʒ, ð/ • before word-boundaries (#) or pauses. We can therefore distinguish between SVLR-short and SVLR-long environments, as in the examples in Table 3.6. In addition to the examples in the table, the SVLR accounts for the difference, in Scots, between the pronunciation of the diphthongised Vowel 1 in long environments, like tie /a:i/, and in short environments, like tide /əi/, /ʌi/ or /ɛi/. Note that the past tense inflection of tied also retains the long vowel; this is a general feature of inflected verbs whose stems end in a vowel – compare short deed with long dee’d, ‘died’ (see Aitken and Macafee 2002: 125–9 for a more detailed description of further consequences of and minor exceptions to the SVLR). The SVLR accounts for differences in articulation amongst the dialects of Scots: there were occasions when allophones of SVLR-short vowels split from their SVLR-long counterparts. This process can be shown with reference to Vowel 7, where the long articulation /ø:/ was shortened to /ø/. Two things then happened in some Scots dialects. First, the long /ø:/ was unrounded to give /e:/ in SVLR-long environments, e.g. puir, use, /pe:r, je:z/. Second, in SVLR-short environments /ø/ was unrounded to give /ɪ/ or /ɛ̈/, hence the different p ronunciations
51
Older Scots Vowels TABLE 3.6: Examples of post-GVS vowels in SVLR-long and
SVLR-short environments
Vowel Number
Post-GVS Realisations
SVLR-long
SVLR-short
2
/i:, i/
4
/e:, e/
6
/u:, u/
7
/ø:, ø/
feir, ‘companion’ preve, ‘test, prove’ dree, ‘endure’ cair, ‘care’ knave, ‘boy, servant’ prais, ‘praise’ allow, ‘praise’ dow, ‘dove’ dour, ‘stern, sullen’ burde, ‘board’ bro, ‘broth’ muve, ‘move’
sele, ‘happiness’ beit, ‘beat, strike’ leif, ‘leaf’ stane, ‘stone’ baith, ‘both’ blait, ‘timid, shy’ thoum, ‘thumb’ doun, ‘down’ soupill, ‘supple’ cruke, ‘hook, crook’ blude, ‘blood’ truith, ‘truth’
today of words like abune and boots as /ʌbøn, ʌbɪn/ and /bøts, bɪts/. This process has had an impact on later spelling variants, e.g. abune, abin, ‘above’. Aitken and Macafee (2002: 129–30) discuss possible dates for the SVLR. Grant and Dixon (1921: §151, cited in Aitken and Macafee 2002: 129) point out that Robert Burns’s rhyme of ane and abune, /jɪn, ʌbɪn/ (Vowels 15 and shortened Vowel 7), indicates that the rule was established in Ayrshire by the eighteenth century, and its prevalence throughout present-day Scotland and Northern Ireland suggests an earlier rather than a later date for its occurrence. Aitken and Macafee conclude that evidence from Shetland suggests that the rule was established there – and probably elsewhere in Scotland – by the late sixteenth century.
Older Scots Vowel Graphemes: A Summary The foregoing sections offer a sketch of the complex history of the Older Scottish vowels, a history that necessarily had an impact on the way the vowels were represented orthographically in the Older Scots period. Tables 3.1 to 3.6 above focus on the development of the different vowels, short and long. Another way of representing this information is in Tables 3.7a to 3.7e below, which focus instead on the main graphemes and digraphs used to reflect the Early Scots vowels (short, long and diphthongs), with their vowel numbers. For each set of graphemes, we can see the corresponding vowel phonemes, with long vowels and diphthongs shown before and after the GVS, and in SVLR-short and SVLR-long contexts. Tables 3.7a to 3.7e indicate some of the challenges to the modern student and scholar of Older Scots when faced with a written passage and wishing to reconstruct an approximation of the sound of it. The variant spellings, like , are one problem; another is the fact that a single grapheme or digraph corresponded to a sometimes wide set of phonemes, altered by time, phonetic environment and dialect. The main factor to bear in mind when looking at a text
52
Spelling Scots
is its date of composition: consider whether it was composed before or after 1450, bearing in mind the quotation from Lass, above, that cautions us that linguistic change is both messy and patchy, and does not happen everywhere overnight. Furthermore, given the fact that the earliest surviving manuscripts and prints of some early texts date from some time after their actual composition, there may be blurring of the linguistic features associated with the period of composition. To take one example, Smith (2012: 144, 146–7) produces diplomatic versions of different editions of the opening of John Barbour’s Brus. This epic romance, which is the foundation of literature in Scots, was composed in 1375; however, no contemporary manuscript of this poem survives. The two earliest extant manuscripts were both copied from lost versions by the scribe John Ramsay: one that dates from 1487 now resides in St John’s College, Cambridge; another, transcribed in 1489, is in the National Library of Scotland. These fifteenth-century manuscripts date from the Middle Scots period, after the Great Vowel Shift, but, given the date of the poem’s composition, they may retain features of Early Scots. Later editions changed the orthography, as a comparison of some lines of Ramsay’s text with the 1616 edition, printed by Andro Hart, demonstrates. (Italics in the manuscript version indicate that a contraction has been expanded, e.g. yt has been expanded to yat.) The Edinburgh Manuscript (Ramsay) Andro Hart’s edition Storys. to red ar delitabill Stories to read are delectable Suppos yat yai be nocht bot fabill/ Supose they noght co[n]tain but fable yan suld storys yat suthfast wer Then sould Stories y[at] soothfast wer, And yai war said on gud maner If they be spoken in good maner, Hawe doubill plesance in heryng Haue double pleasure in hearing: ye first plesance is ye carping The first is their pleasant carping. And ye toyir ye suthfastnes The other is, the soothfastness, Yat schawis ye thing rycht as it wes That shawes the thing right as it wes, And suth thyngis yat ar likand And soothfast things that are likand, Tyll mannys heryng are plesand To mens hearing are pleasand: These ten lines serve to illustrate some of the orthographic features noted so far in Chapters 2 and 3. Ramsay uses the consonant grapheme , which in scribal handwriting was often indistinguishable from thorn, , in the words yat, yai, yan, ye and toyir, but he also uses the digraph