Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2012 November 25

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

November 25

Is French spelling conservative?

Is it true that the French language possesses a conservative orthography, if not the most conservative of its sister languages? --66.190.69.246 (talk) 02:49, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, far more so than any of the other Romance national standards. For alphabetic languages, it and English vie with each other for the most conservative, with English probably the worst. I can't find any sources that confirm this, but here are comments at Google Books on the conservative nature of French orthography. μηδείς (talk) 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

If there is a judgement to be made on "conservativeness" being connected to a level of disconnectedness between orthography and speech, then French is certainly much more conservative than its sister languages. Many written parts of french words are unpronounced, except in cases of Liaison. In French, it is often the case that entire letter clusters are reduced to a single vowel sound (i.e. "eux" as /ə/). French has seen changes in orthography, for example the change from "es" to "accented e" spellings, but in general much of French does not have anything close to a one-to-one symbol-to-sound orthography. French also has entire tenses of verbs which are purely "literary", i.e. only written but rarely used in common speech, such as the Passé antérieur and Passé simple and imperfect subjunctive. About dot com is blocked from linking, but french dot about dot com/od/grammar/a/literarytenses_2.htm has a good synposes of French literary tenses. --Jayron32 03:20, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

For Jayron's 'inaccesible' link, go here to the first link given, Jayron was focusing on the second page you will find there. μηδείς (talk) 03:39, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I think it may be a little excessive to call the passé simple "purely literary". I suspect you'll find that it is used in any highly formal discourse, down to the level of television news. The interesting thing is that, if you ask a French person, you will be told that it is not used in television news, but Italians will say the same, and they are simply wrong. I believe they hear it, understand it, and "translate" it to the composite past in their memory.

Here's an (admittedly written) example from the current Le Monde: notamment, en 1958, cette magnifique version de Veuve de guerre, d'Edgar Bischoff et Marcel Cuvelier, implacable plaidoyer pour la vie, qui lui valut une interdiction d'antenne pour cause de guerre d'Algérie.

Certainly literary tenses can be spoken aloud (for example, when reciting literary works), and simple past does occasionally show up in speech, but most literary tenses sound to French ears as though a person were reading aloud Chaucer or Shakespeare in English, excepting that French writing (unlike English writing) has not abandoned that form of writing. --Jayron32 03:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I could have sworn I had heard the passe simple spoken either on the news or in a movie in a setting in the 20th century. Of course we were taught it was not spoken, and were required only to recognize it and to produce a the regular forms and those of the auxiliaries. I was shocked to realize it was the same as the Spanish preterito. μηδείς (talk) 03:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I strongly suspect that you did, and that Jayron has a somewhat exaggerated idea of just how archaic it sounds. I don't understand spoken French well enough to listen to the news, but I do understand spoken Italian well enough (actually, newsies are easier to listen to than most people, because of their precise articulation), and I can tell you that Italians will insist that passato remoto is not used there, and that they are just wrong. If it really sounded that archaic, they presumably would notice when it happens. --Trovatore (talk) 03:59, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

(On re-reading, Jayron may have been talking about tenses rarer than the passe' simple, like the passe' anterieur, which I think is like the Italian trapassato remoto — a simple-past auxiliary verb plus past participle. If that's what he means, I'm sure he's right. --Trovatore (talk) 09:57, 25 November 2012 (UTC) )

Well, I don't trust myself and give myself a big OR. But it is the memory of thinking to myself "OH, she just used the passe simple!" and within the last year or so that makes me believe I did hear it. Last full movie I watched in French was 8 femmes. But that doesn't seem right. Perhaps I am remembering my Almodovar in French now. Or maybe a dream, since I do have bizarre polyglot dreams. μηδείς (talk) 04:14, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I do think it is pretty rare in speech, even in formal contexts. The one exception I can think of is "ce fut", which I have seen and heard even in informal contexts, e.g. "Ce fut une journée magnifique" (I've heard that this is to avoid the vowel hiatus in "ça a été" or "ç'a été"). I just checked a news program [1], a Hollande speech [2], and an interview with Sartre [3] and didn't hear any examples. But on the other hand, it is ubiquitous in published writing (even trashy novels). So I agree that "archaic" is not the right word; there's really no good equivalent in English. One complicating factor is that the historical present, which is very common, sometimes has the same form as the simple past, e.g. "il dit". Lesgles (talk) 04:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I am coming to think either I saw a newscast in a movie or heard someone reading from a book. It certainly was not a conversation. Mary de Guise didn't use it in Elizabeth (film), did she? I doubt it. And the form I am pretending to remember was something regular and obvious, like parla, not a confusion with an irregular verb. μηδείς (talk) 04:59, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Back on the original question, I think "conservative" is a misleading word. Italian and Spanish are equally close (or closer) to Latin spelling, so in a way they are equally conservative, but French has gone through much more radical sound changes, and the spelling has failed to keep up, as Medeis and Jayron have explained. English and French Renaissance scholars also tended to meddle with the spellings to bring them in line with Latin roots (e.g., by adding a silent b to Middle English dette). Sometimes they were mistaken about which root a word came from; for example, in Middle French, savoir was spelt sçavoir because it was thought to derive from Latin scire instead of sapere. Lesgles (talk) 04:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Valid points, except Jayron really gets the credit for the prior explanation. I'll redeem myself with the links to French_language#Writing_system and French orthography. μηδείς (talk) 04:53, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

One thing to remember: French spelling was thoroughly modernized in the 17th century, with the founding of the Académie française, but has hardly moved since (the few reforms adopted recently have had extremely marginal effect). So French spelling is indeed quite conservative, but hardly medieval. Original texts of Molière's plays are spelled exactly as they would be today, for example. But it's not as if perfection was reached with the 17th century reforms either, as a few posters have pointed out above. There would be plenty of scope for further reform, if that was desired. --Xuxl (talk) 09:33, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

This is false. French spelling has been relatively fixed only since the 19th century. The illusion that it was the same in the 17th century is created by the fact that French publishers (almost) always modernize the spelling of classical texts. Here are the opening two paragraphs of the preface of Les Précieuses ridicules (1659) by Molière, followed by a version in modern spelling and punctuation, which is the way it's usually seen. (By the way, how do you get an unbreakable space? I would have liked one before the colons, exclamation marks, etc.)

C'est une chose estrange, qu'on imprime les gens, malgré eux. Je ne vois rien de si injuste, et je pardonnerois toute autre violence, plustost que celle-là. Ce n'est pas que je veüille faire icy l'autheur modeste, et mépriser par honneur ma comedie. J'offencerois mal à propos tout Paris, si je l'accusois d'avoir pû applaudir à une sottise : comme le public est le juge absolu de ces sortes d'ouvrages, il y auroit de l'impertinence à moy, de le démentir, et quand j'aurois eu la plus mauvaise opinion du monde de mes Precieuses ridicules, avant leur representation, je dois croire maintenant, qu'elles valent quelque chose, puisque tant de gens ensemble en ont dit du bien : mais comme une grande partie des graces, qu'on y a trouvées, dépendent de l'action, et du ton de voix, il m'importoit, qu'on ne les dépoüillast pas de ces ornemens, et je trouvois que le succés, qu'elles avoient eû, dans la representation, estoit assez beau, pour en demeurer là. J'avois resolu, dis-je, de ne les faire voir, qu'à la chandelle, pour ne point donner lieu à quelqu'un, de dire le proverbe ; et je ne voulois pas qu'elles sautassent du Theatre de Bourbon, dans la Galerie du Palais. Cependant, je n'ay pû l'eviter, et je suis tombé dans la disgrace de voir une copie dérobée de ma piece, entre les mains des libraires, accompagnée d'un privilege obtenu par surprise. J'ay eu beau crier, ô temps ! ô moeurs ! on m'a fait voir une necessité pour moy d'estre imprimé, ou d'avoir un procès, et le dernier mal est encore pire, que le premier. Il faut donc se laisser aller à la destinée, et consentir à une chose, qu'on ne laisseroit pas de faire sans moy.

C’est une chose étrange qu’on imprime les gens malgré eux. Je ne vois rien de si injuste, et je pardonnerais toute autre violence plutôt que celle-là. Ce n’est pas que je veuille faire ici l’auteur modeste, et mépriser, par honneur, ma comédie. J’offenserais mal à propos tout Paris, si je l’accusais d’avoir pu applaudir à une sottise. Comme le public est le juge absolu de ces sortes d’ouvrages, il y aurait de l’impertinence à moi de le démentir ; et quand j’aurais eu la plus mauvaise opinion du monde de mes Précieuses ridicules avant leur représentation, je dois croire maintenant qu’elles valent quelque chose, puisque tant de gens ensemble en ont dit du bien. Mais comme une grande partie des grâces qu’on y a trouvées dépendent de l’action et du ton de voix, il m’importait qu’on ne les dépouillât pas de ces ornements ; et je trouvais que le succès qu’elles avaient eu dans la représentation était assez beau pour en demeurer là. J’avais résolu, dis-je, de ne les faire voir qu’à la chandelle, pour ne point donner lieu à quelqu’un de dire le proverbe ; et je ne voulais pas qu’elles sautassent du théâtre de Bourbon dans la galerie du Palais. Cependant je n’ai pu l’éviter, et je suis tombé dans la disgrâce de voir une copie dérobée de ma pièce entre les mains des libraires, accompagnée d’un privilège obtenu par surprise. J’ai eu beau crier : « Ô temps ! ô mœurs ! » on m’a fait voir une nécessité pour moi d’être imprimé, ou d’avoir un procès ; et le dernier mal est encore pire que le premier. Il faut donc se laisser aller à la destinée, et consentir à une chose qu’on ne laisserait pas de faire sans moi. 96.46.195.242 (talk) 08:54, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

For how to make a non-breaking space, see WP:NBSP. 130.126.38.30 (talk) 16:50, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Kanji

Why is the kanji for cat (猫) so much more complicated than the kanji for dog (犬)? --168.7.239.112 (talk) 23:09, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

猫 contains the radical for dog 犭 and a phonetic indicator 苗 miáo. That tells us it's an animal sort of like a dog, but pronounced sort of like miáo, so 猫 māo, "cat".[4] (in Japanese, the Chinese reading of the character is myō). The traditional Chinese character 貓 uses the radical for badger instead, but the idea is the same. As to why cats don't have their own pictogram, I don't know. Maybe domestic cats arrived in China later than dogs? Lesgles (talk) 23:35, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

One theory is that the 豸 radical came from the name of a mythical beast in ancient China.

According to the respective Chinese Wikipedia articles on cat and dog, "cat" was first mentioned in documentation in the Zhou dynasty, though in a list of wild beasts, suggesting that it referred to some wild member of the cat family, while the first mention of a definitely domesticated cat was in the Western Han dynasty; by contrast, the character for "dog" appeared as early as the (much more ancient) oracle bones. The fact that the word is found across Sino-Tibetan languages suggests that dog domestication can be traced back to the proto-Sino-Tibetan peoples. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 00:33, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

It is worth noting that in vernacular Chinese they are about the same complexity (猫 vs 狗) with quan3 犬 being a literary word. And I was under the impression that the radical in question referred to a pig, not a dog. 24.92.74.238 (talk) 01:12, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

The radical for pig is 豕, radical 152. Lesgles (talk) 01:42, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

The radical in simplified Chinese is dog (deriving directly from 犬), the radical in traditional Chinese is 豸, a mythical beast / "badger". --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 09:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

It's worth noting that "狗" originally meant "puppies" / "young dogs", but over time came to be used to refer to all dogs regardless of age. 犬 is still the formal term. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 17:03, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

You might just as well ask why the character for man/male (男) is so much more complicated than the one for woman/female (女). Not sure there's always a very meaningful reason for such discrepancies... AnonMoos (talk) 02:47, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Or why 薔薇 is so complicated, especially if you have 鬱病 and have just received it from your 恋人. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 03:28, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

The theory is that 男 did not originally refer to the gender, but was solely the name of the lowest rank of nobility (what became in later ages equated to baron). In fact, the character 男 appeared rarely in the oracle bones, suggesting that the male counterpart to 女 was something else entirely. On the other hand, there is a theory that 女 did not origianlly referred to the female gender either, and was borrowed for its sound value to represent the already ancient word in the spoken language. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 09:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I was told by my Chinese teachers that 男 referred to strength or power in the fields (during the days when China's economic strength was in agriculture) and 女 was a pregnant woman, and hence 好, meaning 'good', as in the fact that having a family (wife and child) was good. This, of course, may have been a simple way of helping us, as students, to remember, and may have no basis in fact whatsoever. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 11:22, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

On 男: That is indeed the classical explanation for 男 given in the Shuowen Jiezi, which explains 男 as meaning "one who uses strength in the fields". The discovery of oracle bones in the 19th and 20th centuries have however given rise to other theories, one of which is that what now appears as "力" was originally a representation of what became the separate character "耒", "lei" or "plow", so that the whole character was something like "one who plows the fields". In other alternative theories based on oracle bone script, the two elements are read as something like "one who controls fields and plows" -> a figure of responsibility -> tribal leader ("baron"), an honorific which was later generalised to mean "men". In any case, we know that both the "rank of nobility" and "male" senses of the character have existed in parallel since ancient times. An interesting consequence of this is that the European title of baroness is translated into Chinese as "女男爵", which some learners of Chinese (even native speakers) find very confusing as it seems literally to say "female male noble".

On 女: The Shuowen Jiezi does not explain the pictographic (or other) origins of the character, but the oracle bone script and bronze script forms of 女 are clearly a kneeling person with arms outstretched. The orthodox interpretation of this is that by the time of the oracle bone scripts in the Shang dynasty, society in central China proper had already turned from matriarchal to strongly patriarchal. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 16:53, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

The word "baron" itself originally meant male (and means "husband" in archaic law French; see Baron and feme). -- AnonMoos (talk) 18:55, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

That's an amazing parallel, I had no idea! --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:03, 27 November 2012 (UTC)