Orthography

An orthography is a set of conventions for writing a language, including norms of spelling, punctuation, word boundaries, capitalization, hyphenation, and emphasis.

Most national and international languages have an established writing system that has undergone substantial standardization, thus exhibiting less dialect variation than the spoken language. These processes can fossilize pronunciation patterns that are no longer routinely observed in speech (e.g. would and should); they can also reflect deliberate efforts to introduce variability for the sake of national identity, as seen in Noah Webster's efforts to introduce easily noticeable differences between American and British spelling (e.g. honor and honour).

Orthographic norms develop through social and political influence at various levels, such as encounters with print in education, the workplace, and the state. Some nations have established language academies in an attempt to regulate aspects of the national language, including its orthography—such as the Académie Française in France and the Royal Spanish Academy in Spain. No such authority exists for most languages, including English. Some non-state organizations, such as newspapers of record and academic journals, choose greater orthographic homogeneity by enforcing a particular style guide or spelling standard such as Oxford spelling.

Terminology

The English word orthography is first attested in the 15th century, ultimately from Ancient Greek: ὀρθός (orthós 'correct') and γράφειν (gráphein 'to write').

Orthography in phonetic writing systems is often concerned with matters of spelling, i.e. the correspondence between written graphemes and the phonemes found in speech. Other elements that may be considered part of orthography include hyphenation, capitalization, word boundaries, emphasis, and punctuation. Thus, orthography describes or defines the symbols used in writing, and the conventions that regulate their use.

Most natural languages developed as oral languages and writing systems have usually been crafted or adapted as ways of representing the spoken language. The rules for doing this tend to become standardized for a given language, leading to the development of an orthography that is generally considered "correct". In linguistics, orthography often refers to any method of writing a language without judgement as to right and wrong, with a scientific understanding that orthographic standardization exists on a spectrum of strength of convention. The original sense of the word, though, implies a dichotomy of correct and incorrect, and the word is still most often used to refer specifically to a standardized prescriptive manner of writing. A distinction is made between emic and etic viewpoints, with the emic approach taking account of perceptions of correctness among language users, and the etic approach being purely descriptive, considering only the empirical qualities of any system as used.

Units and notation

Orthographic units, such as letters of an alphabet, are conceptualized as graphemes. These are a type of abstraction, analogous to the phonemes of spoken languages; different physical forms of written symbols are considered to represent the same grapheme if the differences between them are not significant for meaning. Thus, a grapheme can be regarded as an abstraction of a collection of glyphs that are all functionally equivalent. For example, in written English (or other languages using the Latin alphabet), there are two different physical representations (glyphs) of the lowercase Latin letter a: ⟨a⟩ and ⟨ɑ⟩. Since the substitution of either of them for the other cannot change the meaning of a word, they are considered to be allographs of the same grapheme, which can be written |a|. The italic and boldface forms are also allographic.

Graphemes or sequences of them are sometimes placed between angle brackets, as in |b| or |back|. This distinguishes them from phonemic transcription, which is placed between slashes (/b/, /bæk/), and from phonetic transcription, which is placed between square brackets ([b], [bæk]).

Types

The writing systems on which orthographies are based can be divided into a number of types, depending on what type of unit each symbol serves to represent. The principal types are logographic (with symbols representing words or morphemes), syllabic (with symbols representing syllables), and alphabetic (with symbols roughly representing phonemes). Many writing systems combine features of more than one of these types, and a number of detailed classifications have been proposed. Japanese is an example of a writing system that can be written using a combination of logographic kanji characters and syllabic hiragana and katakana characters; as with many non-alphabetic languages, alphabetic romaji characters may also be used as needed.

Correspondence with pronunciation

Orthographies that use alphabets and syllabaries are based on the principle that written graphemes correspond to units of sound of the spoken language: phonemes in the former case, and syllables in the latter. In virtually all cases, this correspondence is not exact. Different languages' orthographies offer different degrees of correspondence between spelling and pronunciation. English, French, Danish, and Thai orthographies, for example, are highly irregular, whereas the orthographies of languages such as Russian, German, Spanish, Finnish, Turkish, and Serbo-Croatian represent pronunciation much more faithfully.^{[citation needed]}

An orthography in which the correspondences between spelling and pronunciation are highly complex or inconsistent is called a deep orthography (or less formally, the language is said to have irregular spelling). An orthography with relatively simple and consistent correspondences is called shallow (and the language has regular spelling).

One of the main reasons why spelling and pronunciation diverge is that sound changes taking place in the spoken language are not always reflected in the orthography, and hence spellings correspond to historical rather than present-day pronunciation. One consequence of this is that many spellings come to reflect a word's morphophonemic structure rather than its purely phonemic structure (for example, the English regular past tense morpheme is consistently spelled -ed in spite of its different pronunciations in various words). This is discussed further at Phonemic orthography § Morphophonemic features.

The syllabaries in the Japanese writing system (hiragana and katakana) are examples of almost perfectly shallow orthographies—the kana correspond with almost perfect consistency to the spoken syllables, although with a few exceptions where symbols reflect historical or morphophonemic features: notably the use of ぢ ji and づ zu (rather than じ ji and ず zu, their pronunciation in standard Tokyo dialect) when the character is a voicing of an underlying ち or つ (see rendaku), and the use of は, を, and へ to represent the sounds わ, お, and え, as relics of historical kana usage.

Korean hangul and Tibetan scripts were also originally extremely shallow orthographies, but as a representation of the modern language those frequently also reflect morphophonemic features.

Defective orthographies

An orthography based on a correspondence to phonemes may sometimes lack characters to represent all the phonemic distinctions in the language. This is called a defective orthography. An example in English is the lack of any indication of stress.^{[citation needed]} Another is the digraph |th|, which represents two different phonemes (as in then and thin) and replaced the old letters |ð| and |þ|. A more systematic example is that of abjads like the Arabic and Hebrew alphabets, in which the short vowels are normally left unwritten and must be inferred by the reader.

When an alphabet is borrowed from its original language for use with a new language—as has been done with the Latin alphabet for many languages, or Japanese katakana for non-Japanese words—it often proves defective in representing the new language's phonemes. Sometimes this problem is addressed by the use of such devices as digraphs (such as |sh| and |ch| in English, where pairs of letters represent single sounds), diacritics (like the caron on the letters |š| and |č|, which represent those same sounds in Czech), or the addition of completely new symbols (as some languages have introduced the letter |w| to the Latin alphabet) or of symbols from another alphabet, such as the rune |þ| in Icelandic.

After the classical period, Greek developed a lowercase letter system with diacritics to enable foreigners to learn pronunciation and grammatical features. As pronunciation of letters changed over time, the diacritics were reduced to representing the stressed syllable. In Modern Greek typesetting, this system has been simplified to only have a single accent to indicate which syllable is stressed.

See also

• Cursive
• Keyboard layout
• Lateral masking
• List of language disorders
• Palaeography
• Penmanship
• Prescription and description

References

1. Ammon, Ulrich (2004). "Standard Variety". Sociolinguistics. pp. 273–283. doi:10.1515/9783110141894.1.2.273. ISBN 978-3-11-014189-4.
2. Coulmas & Guerini (2012), pp. 454ff.
3. "Orthography", Online Etymology Dictionary
4. Seidenberg, Mark S. (1992). "Beyond Orthographic Depth in Reading: Equitable Division of Labor". Orthography, Phonology, Morphology, and Meaning. Advances in Psychology. Vol. 94. pp. 85–118. doi:10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62790-9. ISBN 978-0-444-89140-2.
5. Donohue, Mark (2007), "Lexicography for Your Friends", in Siegel, Jeff; Lynch, John; Eades, Diana (eds.), Language Description, History and Development: Linguistic indulgence in memory of Terry Crowley, Creole Language Library, vol. 30, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, p. 396, doi:10.1075/cll.30, ISBN 978-90-272-5252-4
6. Coulmas (1996), p. 379.
7. Koda, Keiko; Zehler, Annette M., eds. (2008). Learning to Read Across Languages. p. 17. doi:10.4324/9780203935668. ISBN 978-1-135-60034-1.
8. Bulley, Michael (December 2011). "Spelling reform – a lesson from the Greeks: Learning from the Greeks about English spellings". English Today. 27 (4): 71–72. doi:10.1017/S0266078411000575.

Works cited

• Borgwaldt, Susanne R.; Joyce, Terry (2013), Typology of Writing Systems, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, ISBN 978-90-272-0270-3
• Condorelli, Marco; Rutkowska, Hanna, eds. (2023), The Cambridge Handbook of Historical Orthography, Cambridge handbooks in language and linguistics, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-1-108-48731-3
• Coulmas, Florian (2002) [1996], The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Writing Systems (Repr. ed.), Malden, MA: Blackwell, ISBN 978-0-631-19446-0
• Sebba, Mark (2007), Spelling and society: the culture and politics of orthography around the world, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-84845-9
• Spolsky, Bernard, ed. (2012), "Literacy and Writing Reform", The Cambridge Handbook of Language Policy, Cambridge handbooks in language and linguistics, Cambridge University Press, doi:10.1017/cbo9780511979026, ISBN 978-0-511-97902-6
  • Coulmas, Florian; Guerini, Federica. "Literacy and Writing Reform". In Spolsky (2012), pp. 437–460.

Further reading

• Cahill, Michael; Rice, Keren (2014), Developing Orthographies for Unwritten Languages, Dallas: SIL International, ISBN 978-1-55671-347-7
• Smalley, William A. (1964), Orthography Studies: Articles on New Writing Systems, Helps for translators, London: United Bible Societies, OCLC 5522014 – via Google Books
• Venezky, Richard L.; Trabasso, Tom (2005), From orthography to pedagogy: essays in honor of Richard L. Venezky, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, ISBN 0-8058-5089-9

External links

Look up orthography in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.