Skip to main content

Laurel's Challenge: Down the Rabbit Hole with 14th-16th century Czech orthography

[This post was written in answer to Mistress Lissa Underhill’s “Down the Rabbit Hole” challenge in the East Kingdom Laurels Challenge event (https://moas.eastkingdom.org/list-of-laurels-challenges/).]


In the process of researching 14th-16th century Czech names for my own name registration, I realized that I didn’t know how Czech orthography had changed over the centuries. For nearly all languages, of course, there are shifts over time, but this question is particularly of interest in languages that use diacritical marks. Particularly for name submissions to the SCA College of Arms, where we register the period spelling whenever possible, it’s important to know what period spellings look like, both for submitting the most period-appropriate form and for evaluating sources in the research process.


With Czech names in particular, post-period secondary sources have a frustrating tendency to normalize the spelling of names, which seems primarily to be because Czech orthography in SCA period was (a) not standardized at all until the fifteenth century, and (b) different from modern Czech orthography in a couple of fairly key ways. So, in the process of hunting down what the most common period spelling of Anéžka was likely to be (and in trying to decipher the 15th c. manuscripts I had found), I fell down a rabbithole of learning about the history of Czech orthography.


I mentioned above that for languages with diacritics (like Czech) it’s particularly important to note how spellings have changed over time; this is because diacritics are used to represent sounds that aren’t otherwise represented in the letters used in the language. The sound that is modernly represented by the letter š, for example, is “sh” to English speakers, but that’s a result of our own spelling conventions, and is not reflected in the default letters available in the Latin alphabet. So, given that there are sounds present in the language that are not reflected in the available alphabet, how do we write those sounds?


For Czech, prior to about the early fifteenth century, these sounds were written using digraphs (two letters used together to represent a single sound), like the English “sh” above, but there wasn’t much standardization in what specific letters were used in these digraphs. The sound ř, for example, could be found as rz, rrz, rs, rzs, rzss, and zr (among others, I’m sure). Besides the digraphs, there were a handful of other letters that were used differently in period than they are today: c was used for k, instead of today’s ts; g was used for today’s j; w was used for today’s v; and there was no distinction made between short and long vowels.


In approximately 1406, a manuscript was published (commonly attributed to Jan Hus, though this isn’t certain) titled De orthographia bohemica - “On Bohemian Orthography” - that proposed a number of spelling standardizations to improve readability. The biggest changes were the punctus rotundus - a dot above certain letters to indicate palatalization, which would eventually become the modern háček towards the end of the sixteenth century - and acute accents over long vowels to indicate their length. Though this was published in the early fifteenth century, the changes took most of the century to fully propagate, and it’s interesting to see what orthographic choices each scribe made in a given manuscript. 


In printed works, in the latter half of the fifteenth century and into the sixteenth, the háček began to gain greater popularity, and in 1579, the first printing of the Kralice Bible (notable for being the first Czech translation of the Bible from the original languages, not from Latin) solidified the use of the háček rather than the punctus rotundus. Further changes in orthography continued over the following centuries, but as that gets past the end of SCA period, I haven't studied them at all.



For some really neat side-by-side comparisons, the University of Oxford has a page of Czech & Slovak Resources that includes transcriptions of, and links to, the same passage of Genesis 22 in a handful of 15th-century Czech bibles here: https://czech.mml.ox.ac.uk/vyvoj-jazyka-prekladu-bible


Further reading: 

Digraphic Orthography (University of Oxford, Faculty of Medieval and Modern Languages, Czech & Slovak Resources): https://czech.mml.ox.ac.uk/digraphic-orthography

Czech orthography (English Wikipedia): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czech_orthography

Český pravopis (Czech Wikipedia): https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%8Cesk%C3%BD_pravopis

Orthographia Bohemica (English Wikipedia): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthographia_bohemica



Labels

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

DMNES off-label use: Generating lists of names by culture

The Dictionary of Medieval Names from European Sources (DMNES) is one of my very favorite sources for documenting SCA names, but it can be hard to navigate, and it doesn’t have an easy built-in interface for just browsing names by culture. This is unfortunate, given that one of the ways a lot of names heralds like to handle consults is to hand your submitter a list of names to see if any of them stand out. Just because it doesn’t have an easily browsable interface, though, doesn’t mean it’s not possible to use it to generate lists of names by culture! I stumbled on this awhile back, and figured I’d write up a quick how-to. Fundamentally, this hinges on the fact that the sources for each name in the DMNES are meticulously cited, and that citation is bidirectional: not only is there a link to the source in each individual name’s citation, but each source text has links to every single name that’s listed from that source. The trick is getting the link to each source for your target cu...
Post a Comment
Read more

On the SCA A&S community and motivational barriers

A friend of mine posted a thread today asking people about motivation in the A&S community, and how students tend to feel unmotivated when they can't reach their goal. The question posed was whether there are things in SCA A&S that people find to be motivational barriers, and if so, what is it that stops people from believing that they can do the thing — and what can we do to help. Never one to answer the question as posed, when instead I can answer the question I see as fundamentally underlying one's assumptions, I wrote a series of comments getting up on my soapbox about SCA A&S, and what the goals are, and where the barriers are, with the intention of getting other people to consider the overall framework they're working in. I saw the discussion up to that point as addressing symptoms, but not the root cause, and figured I might as well take a stab at getting to the root of it. Here's an edited version of where I went with that. tl;dr: We're not doin...
3 comments
Read more

Silver Brooch scroll for Rosalie Jane Blackmoore

Okay so this scroll was more rushed than I wanted it to be. Between stress about the election and a trip to Vancouver, I had less time than is ideal to work on it, so I deliberately chose a relatively simple exemplar. As always, I started with the text. The recipient didn’t have a lot of persona information on her wiki - basically all I had to go on was that the scroll should be in English, and that she spends a lot of time with her father, whose persona is 13th century English. Given that I was tight on time, I was originally intending to just do this as a template scroll - using the various standard phrasings given in the EK Scribal Handbook to compose a scroll text that sounds vaguely period and hits all the important elements, but isn’t based on any particular period text. Once I actually sat down to work on it, though, I figured it wouldn’t take much time to look through the Epistolæ database of medieval women’s letters ( https://epistolae.ctl.columbia.edu/ ) to find something...
Post a Comment
Read more