Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:44:54.478Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

33 - Orthographies

from Part 5 - Sociolinguistic and Geographical Approaches

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2024

Danko Šipka
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Wayles Browne
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

Most Slavic orthographies are relatively shallow, relying on phonemic and morphological principles; other orthographic principles play minor roles. However, some orthographies with a rather unbroken tradition give the historical principle a certain role (like Polish or Czech); others rely heavily on the morphological principle (like Russian or to some extent Bulgarian). In some minor details (like comma rules or quotation marks) one can see different external influences, especially French and German. In the ways writing systems were adapted, the major split is between languages written in Cyrillic and those written in Latin. In the Latin alphabet, the main devices used are diacritics (nowadays especially those introduced by the Hussites) and digraphs, whereas Cyrillic hardly has diacritics or digraphs at all but uses special letters created from ligatures or with diacritic elements or borrowed from a different script. Spelling reforms over the course of history have generally strengthened the phonemic principle, unified orthography for a language, or increased or decreased differences vis-à-vis other languages in line with the political situation.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anić, V. (1981). Daničićeve duljine. In Isaković, A. & Torbarina, J., eds., Zbornik o Ðuri Daničiću, Beograd, pp. 359364.Google Scholar
Bieder, H. (1998). Das Weißrussische. In Rehder, P., ed., Einführung in die slavischen Sprachen, 3rd ed., Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, pp. 110125.Google Scholar
Bunčić, D. (2003). Integracija inostrannyx slov iz evropejskix jazykov v kirillice i latinice. In Kotjurova, M. P., ed., Filologičeskie zametki: Mežvuzovskij zbornik naučnyx trudov, vypusk 2, Vol. 1, Perm: Permskij gosudarstvennyj universitet, pp. 122150.Google Scholar
Bunčić, D. (2017). Factors influencing the success and failure of writing reforms. Studi Slavistici, 14, 2146.Google Scholar
Bunčič, D. (2023). On the etymology of diacritics in general and the origin of the Czech diacritics in particular. Slavia: Časopis pro slovanskou filologii, 92(4), 385–424.Google Scholar
Bunčić, D. et al. (2016). Biscriptality: A Sociolinguistic Typology, Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Bunin, I. A. (1935). Okajannye dni, Berlin: Petropolis.Google Scholar
Čejka, M. (1999). Srovnání Devotyho opisu Loutny české Adama Michny z Otradovic s původním tiskem. In Zand, G. & Holý, J., eds., Tschechisches Barock: Sprache, Literatur, Kultur, 21−32, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Coseriu, E. (1952). Sistema, norma y habla, Montevideo: Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias.Google Scholar
Januszowski, J. (1983). Nowy karakter polski [1594]. In Urbańczyk, S., ed., Die altpolnischen Orthographien des 16. Jahrhunderts, Cologne: Böhlau, pp. 143208.Google Scholar
Karpova, O. (2010). Istorija s orfografiej: Neudavšiesja reformy russkogo pravopisanija vtoroj poloviny XX veka. Neprikosnovennyj zapas, 3, 195212.Google Scholar
Marti, R. (2012). On the creation of Croatian: The development of Croatian Latin orthography in the 16th century. In Baddeley, S. & Voeste, A., eds., Orthographies in Early Modern Europe, Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 269320.Google Scholar
Mazur, J. (1993). Geschichte der polnischen Sprache, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Pčelov, E. V. & Čumakov, V. T. (2000). Dva veka russkoj bukvy Ë: Istorija i slovarʹ, Moscow: Narodnoe obrazovanie.Google Scholar
Taraškevič, B. (1918). Belaruskaja hramatyka dlja škol, Vilnius: Kuxta.Google Scholar
Taraškiéwič, B. (1918). Biełaruskaja hramatyka dlja škoł, Vilnius: Kuchta.Google Scholar
Trubetzkoy, N. S. [= Trubeckoj, Nikolaj Sergeevič]. (1954). Altkirchenslavische Grammatik: Schrift‑, Laut‑ und Formensystem, Vienna: Rohrer.Google Scholar
Trunte, N. (2018). Kirchenslavisch in 14 Lektionen, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Uspenskij, B. A. (1975). Pervaja russkaja grammatika na rodnom jazyke: Dolomonosovskij period otečestvennoj rusistiki, Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Vuk Stefanović [Karadžić]. (1814). Pismenica serbskoga ïezika, po govoru prostoga Naroda, Vienna.Google Scholar
Vuk Stefanović [Karadžić]. (1818). Srpski rječnik, istolkovan njemačkim i latinskim riječma, Vienna.Google Scholar
Weth, C. & Bunčić, D. (2020). Foreign schriftdenken in ausbau languages: Luxembourgish and Rusyn orthographies in multiple language contact. Written Language & Literacy, 23(2), 289312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaborowski, S. (1983). Orthographia seu modus recte scribendi et legendi polonicum idioma quam utilissimus [1514]. In Urbańczyk, S., ed., Die altpolnischen Orthographien des 16. Jahrhunderts, Cologne: Böhlau, pp. 51115.Google Scholar
Zaliznjak, A. A. (2004). Drevnenovgorodskij dialekt, 2nd ed., Moscow: Jazyki slavjanskoj kulʹtury (1st ed. 1995).Google Scholar
Zhóp, [= Čop, Matija]. (1833). Nuovo discacciamento di lettere inutili, das ist: Slowenischer ABC-Krieg: Eine Beilage zum Illyr. Blatt, Ljubljana: Kleinmayr.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×