Grammatica - loco

Grammatica - loco Grammatica - loco

04.05.2013 Views

1111 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 1 12111 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 20111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 30111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 40 41111 vowel was required or not, e.g. beenen ‘legs’, but beter ‘better’, boomen ‘trees’ but boter ‘butter’. Needless to say, the Dutch found this distinction confusing, and its abolition was long overdue. The above archaic spellings are still sometimes found in place and people’s names as the spelling changes were not deemed necessarily to apply to proper nouns: ’s-Hertogenbosch, de Nederlandsche Bank, Boschma, Heerenveen, Hoogeveen (c) In Belgium an archaic spelling of long a (now written aa or a), namely ae, continued to be used in placenames until 1946, but was then abolished, e.g. Schaerbeek, Laeken. The French spelling of Flemish towns containing ae took no notice of this reform; thus the French write Schaerbeek and Waterloo where the Flemings now write Schaarbeek and Waterlo. The combination ae can nevertheless still be found in personal names, even in The Netherlands, e.g. Van Haeringen. 1 (d) In some proper nouns the archaic combination gh is found, but it does not differ in pronunciation from g, e.g. Breughel, Van Gogh, Veghel. 2.2 Recent changes to Dutch spelling Modern Dutch spelling is based on a spelling reform that was introduced in 1947 (1946 in Belgium). The recommendations appeared in 1954 in the Woordenlijst van de Nederlandse Taal—samengesteld in opdracht van de Nederlandse en de Belgische regering (’s-Gravenhage, 1954). This reform abolished the now archaic spelling conventions mentioned above. Het Groene Boekje, as this publication is known colloquially because of its compact format and green cover, attracted a great deal of criticism over the subsequent forty years, particularly with respect to the spelling of loanwords, then called bastaardwoorden in Dutch. The most controversial aspect of the new spelling was that it allowed many loanwords to be written in one of two ways (e.g. cultuur or kultuur, succes or sukses, organisatie or organizatie), while making clear that one of the two was ‘preferred’; this was known as de voorkeurspelling (preferred spelling). A later spelling reform in 1995, which was introduced into schools from 1 In similar vein the spelling uy or uij is archaic for ui and eij is archaic for ei; they are commonly found in personal names, e.g. Kruyskamp, Meijer. Recent changes to Dutch spelling 9

2 Spelling 10 August 1996, dictated that the ‘preferred spelling’ become the only permissible spelling. 2 Ever since there has been considerable confusion among the populace as to what is now considered correct, as well as many people refusing to take any notice of the spelling reform as they could see nothing wrong with the way the spelling was. Many people are no longer aware what variant of a given spelling was regarded as ‘preferred’, compounded by the fact that in 39 instances the spelling committee scrapped the preferred spelling for the sake of consistency, e.g. now product to conform with productie, but previously produkt. What is more, it was decided that it would be advisable to take a fresh look at spelling issues every ten years, with the result that a further refinement of the spelling reform was announced in 2005, something which aroused great discontent and criticism. The guidelines of this most recent official spelling, and a spelling list containing 110,000 words, are contained in Woordenlijst Nederlandse Taal (Sdu Uitgevers, Den Haag/Standaard Uitgeverij, Antwerpen, 2005). The issues dealt with under 2.3 to 2.7 are all discussed in detail in the preface of the Woordenlijst. Spelling reform, and indeed all official issues concerning the Dutch language, have been conducted under the auspices of the Nederlandse Taalunie, a joint Dutch-Flemish body founded in 1980 and based in The Hague. The Woordenlijst can be consulted online on the website of the Taalunie. The level of discontent with the constant spelling changes is such that in 2006 Het Witte Boekje was published by a non-government body, Genootschap Onze Taal, to offer people a less rigid alternative to the official spelling as prescribed by Het Groene Boekje. As a non-native speaker of the language you are advised not to buy into the controversy and to follow the officially sanctioned spelling as advocated by the Nederlandse Taalunie in Het Groene Boekje; this is after all the spelling that all governmental bodies, including all educational institutions, in both countries are expected to adhere to, although a number of influential newspapers have publically declared that they prefer to use de witte spelling. 2 The consequences of this change of policy are likely to be greater in Flanders than in The Netherlands. In the latter the government always advocated use of the voorkeurspelling, but in Flanders the alternative had the advantage of making loanwords look less French and thus attracted many followers, especially the Flemish press. In fact permitting two spelling variants was from the beginning an attempt to arrive at a compromise between what the two Dutch-speaking nations desired. It was felt by 1995 that allowing alternative spellings had not been a wise thing to do.

1111<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

5<br />

6<br />

7<br />

8<br />

9<br />

1011<br />

1<br />

12111<br />

3<br />

4<br />

5<br />

6<br />

7<br />

8<br />

9<br />

20111<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

5<br />

6<br />

7<br />

8<br />

9<br />

30111<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

5<br />

6<br />

7<br />

8<br />

9<br />

40<br />

41111<br />

vowel was required or not, e.g. beenen ‘legs’, but beter ‘better’,<br />

boomen ‘trees’ but boter ‘butter’. Needless to say, the Dutch found<br />

this distinction confusing, and its abolition was long overdue.<br />

The above archaic spellings are still sometimes found in place and<br />

people’s names as the spelling changes were not deemed necessarily<br />

to apply to proper nouns:<br />

’s-Hertogenbosch, de Nederlandsche Bank, Boschma,<br />

Heerenveen, Hoogeveen<br />

(c) In Belgium an archaic spelling of long a (now written aa or a),<br />

namely ae, continued to be used in placenames until 1946, but was<br />

then abolished, e.g. Schaerbeek, Laeken. The French spelling of<br />

Flemish towns containing ae took no notice of this reform; thus the<br />

French write Schaerbeek and Waterloo where the Flemings now<br />

write Schaarbeek and Waterlo. The combination ae can nevertheless<br />

still be found in personal names, even in The Netherlands, e.g. Van<br />

Haeringen. 1<br />

(d) In some proper nouns the archaic combination gh is found, but it does<br />

not differ in pronunciation from g, e.g. Breughel, Van Gogh, Veghel.<br />

2.2<br />

Recent changes to Dutch spelling<br />

Modern Dutch spelling is based on a spelling reform that was introduced<br />

in 1947 (1946 in Belgium). The recommendations appeared in 1954 in<br />

the Woordenlijst van de Nederlandse Taal—samengesteld in opdracht van<br />

de Nederlandse en de Belgische regering (’s-Gravenhage, 1954). This reform<br />

abolished the now archaic spelling conventions mentioned above. Het<br />

Groene Boekje, as this publication is known colloquially because of its<br />

compact format and green cover, attracted a great deal of criticism over<br />

the subsequent forty years, particularly with respect to the spelling of<br />

loanwords, then called bastaardwoorden in Dutch. The most controversial<br />

aspect of the new spelling was that it allowed many loanwords to be<br />

written in one of two ways (e.g. cultuur or kultuur, succes or sukses,<br />

organisatie or organizatie), while making clear that one of the two was<br />

‘preferred’; this was known as de voorkeurspelling (preferred spelling). A<br />

later spelling reform in 1995, which was introduced into schools from<br />

1 In similar vein the spelling uy or uij is archaic for ui and eij is archaic for ei; they<br />

are commonly found in personal names, e.g. Kruyskamp, Meijer.<br />

Recent<br />

changes to<br />

Dutch<br />

spelling<br />

9

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!