Old Dutch
- For the potato chip company, please see Old Dutch Foods.
| Old Dutch | |
|---|---|
| Region | the Low Countries |
| Extinct | developed into Middle Dutch by the middle of the 12th century |
| Latin | |
| Language codes | |
| ISO 639-3 | – |
Old Dutch (Also Old West Low Franconian) is a branch of Old Low Franconian spoken and written during the early middle ages (c. 500 - 1150) in the present day Low Countries and areas of France near the North Sea coast. It is a direct descendant of the Old Franconian language.
Language area
The area where Old Dutch was spoken doesn't coincide with the area in which standard Dutch is spoken now. In the present provinces of Groningen, Friesland and along the coast of North Holland, Frisian was spoken and in the East of the present day Netherlands (Achterhoek, Overijssel and Drenthe) Old Saxon was spoken. However in the South and South East the area in which Old Dutch was spoken was more extensive than the range of the modern standard. Old Dutch was spoken in the area which is now known as French Flanders, part of Wallonia and a large portion of the Lower Rhine and Westphalia.
Linguistic boundaries
Relation with Old Low East Franconian
The differences between Old Dutch and Old East Low Franconian are thought to have been minute. It has been known to occasionally show some Central German features but was most certainly mutually intelligible with Old Dutch. The difference in classification rests solely in the fact that when both dialects evolved into Middle Dutch, the dialects that descended from Old Low East Franconian did not contribute much to the creation of standard Dutch, whereas Old West Low Franconian (thus Old Dutch) did.
Relation with Middle Dutch
Although there were major changes, Old Dutch gradually transformed into Middle Dutch. Generally 1150 is given as the point at which Middle Dutch appears, mainly because at that time the amount of surviving written sources increases greatly, but the real boundary between Old and Middle Dutch is almost impossible to give. The criterion for conceptual separation is therefore mainly methodological and doesn't reflect a change acceleration. Around 1200 the peculiarities used to typify Old Dutch disappear in the sources.
The biggest difference between Old and Middle Dutch is a feature called vocal reduction. While round vocals positioned at a word's last syllable are rather prominent in Old Dutch, in Middle Dutch they evolved into schwa.
Examples:
- [Old Dutch] vogala --> [Middle Dutch] vogele (bird)
- [Old Dutch] dago/a --> [Middle Dutch] daghe (day)
- [Old Dutch] brecan --> [Middle Dutch] breken (break)
- [Old Dutch] gescrivona --> [Middle Dutch] gheschreven (written, past tense)
Differences with Old Frisian
A notable difference between Old Dutch and Old Frisian is the Germanic au. In Old Dutch the Germanic au became an ō (/o:/), in Frisian however it became an ā (/a:/). Example:
The present Dutch village of Akersloot was spelled Ekerslat in Old Frisian texts.
Differences with Old High German
The main difference between the Western Old High German dialects, which were influenced by Frankish, the direct ancestor of Old Dutch, and Old Dutch is the latter’s lack of participation in the High German consonant shift. Because of this Old Dutch was closer to the original Frankish and its area can be seen as a remnant from which High Franconian has split off. There was still a dialect continuum though.
Differences with Old Low Saxon
At the time there was also a dialect continuum between Low Franconian and Low Saxon, which only was broken by the much later influence of standard languages. Despite a number of similarities there are also a lot of differences between Old Low Saxon and Old Dutch.
Examples:
- The Germanic sound hl (chl) at the beginning of a word was preserved in Old Low Saxon but changed to l in Old Dutch.
- Old Low Saxon verbs have the same verb ending in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd person plural while Old Dutch has three different verb endings, namely: -on, -et and -unt.
- The Germanic ō (/o:/) became a diphthong in Old Dutch while Old Low Saxon kept the Germanic ō, this resulted in Old Dutch fluot versus Old Low Saxon flōd.
- In Old Low Saxon plural noun endings are often -as or -os whereas Old Dutch mostly uses -a.
- Old Dutch experienced "final obstruent devoicing" much earlier than Old Low Saxon. For example: Old Dutch fluot versus Old Low Saxon flōd.
Position of Old Dutch within West Germanic
Old Dutch had a clear separate identity from the other West Germanic languages or dialect groups. It should be emphasized however that the other groups did not form a unity against this Low Franconian; the present situation where the continental West Germanic dialects all use German as their standard with the only true exception being the area using standard Dutch, cannot be correctly projected into the past, a past having no standards and in which it was still unclear which would develop and what their range would be.
Surviving texts
Old Dutch texts are extremely rare, and much more limited when compared to related languages like Old English and Old High German. Most of the earliest texts written in the Netherlands were written in Latin rather than Old Dutch. Some of these Latin texts however contained Old Dutch words interspersed with the Latin text. Also, it is extremely hard to determine whether a text actually is written in Old Dutch as the Germanic dialects spoken at that time were much more closely related.
Some larger texts
The Wachtendonck Psalms
The Wachtendonck Psalms are a number of psalms written in Latin and an eastern variety of Old Franconian. It is unclear whether the dialect is Old Limburgish or a variety of Rhine Franconian. Very little remains of them. The psalms were named after a manuscript which has not come down to us, but out of which scholars believe the surviving fragments must have been copied. This manuscript was once owned by Canon Arnold Wachtendonck. The surviving fragments are handwritten copies made by the Renaissance scholar Justus Lipsius in the sixteenth century. Lipsius made a number of separate copies of apparently the same material and these versions do not always agree. In addition, scholars conclude that the numerous errors and inconsistencies in the fragments point not only to some carelessness or inattentiveness by the Renaissance scholars but also to errors in the now lost manuscript out of which the material was copied. The language of the Psalms suggests that they were originally written in the 10th century. A number of editions exist, among others by the 19th-century Dutch philologist Willem Lodewijk van Helten and, more recently, the diplomatic edition by the American historical linguist Robert L. Kyes (1969) and the critical edition by the Dutch philologist Arend Quak (1981).
The Leiden Willeram
The Leiden Willeram is the name given to a manuscript containing a Low Franconian version of the Old High German commentary on Song of Solomon by the German abbot Williram (ultimately by Isidore of Seville). Until recently, based on its orthography and phonology the text of this manuscript was believed by most scholars to be Middle Franconian, that is Old High German, with some Limburgic or otherwise Franconian admixtures. But in 1974, the German philologist Willy Sanders proved in his study Der Leidener Willeram that the text actually represents an imperfect attempt by a scribe from the northwestern coastal area of the Low Countries to translate the East Franconian original into his local vernacular. The text contains many Old Dutch words not known in Old High German, as well as mistranslated words caused by the scribe's unfamiliarity with some Old High German words in the original he translated, and a confused orthography heavily influenced by the Old High German original. For instance, the graphme <z> is used after the High German tradition where it represents Germanic t shifted to /ts/. Sanders also proved that the manuscript, now in the University Library of Leiden University, was written at the end of the 11th century in the Abbey of Egmond in modern North Holland, whence the manuscript's other name Egmond Willeram.
Further sources
- Glosses
- Place names
- Personal names
The most famous sentence
Hebban olla vogala nestas hagunnan hinase hic
enda thu uuat unbidan uue nu.
Arguably, the most famous text containing "Old Dutch" is: Hebban olla vogala nestas hagunnan, hinase hic enda tu, wat unbidan we nu ("All birds have started making nests, except me and you, what are we waiting for"), dating around the year 1100, written by a Flemish monk in a convent in Rochester, England. For a long time this sentence was considered to be the earliest in Dutch. However according to professor Luc de Grauwe the text could equally well be Old English, more specifically Old Kentish, which would make more sense considering it was written in England. However, there doesn't seem to be a general consensus on this matter. It should also be noted that Old (West) Dutch and Old English were very similar. [1]
Spelling
Old Dutch was spelled using the Latin alphabet. Because the missionaries in the region now known as the Low Countries were mostly from the Old English and Old High German speaking areas one can spot some Old English and Old High German elements, which were never present in the spoken language of the native speakers.
- th is used to indicate the Germanic þ-sound.
Example: thāhton ("dachten").
- dh is used for the ð-sound.
- c is often used for a k-sound if the beginning of a word contains a velar (back) vowel.
Example: cuning (Modern Dutch "koning", meaning "king"). In front of palatal (front) vowels the earlier texts (especially names in Latin deeds and charters) used ch. By the later tenth century, the newer letter k (which was rarely used in Latin) was starting to replace this spelling. Example: kēron (Modern Dutch "keren", meaning "to turn"). It is not exactly clear how c was pronounced in Old Dutch. In Latin orthography c in front of front vowels stood for an assibilated sound ts; it is quite likely that early Dutch had a similar pronunciation. The spellings ch and k both stood for the regular velar plosive. In later texts the consistent distinction between c and ch/k starts to break down.
- u represented the vowel u and consonant v.
Example: uusso ("foxes", genitive plural). In this example the first u represents the consonant v and the second one the vowel u. The w-sound was normally represented as uu as the letter w didn't exist yet.
- g was most likely a fricative /ɣ/, much like in modern Dutch.
This is based on the change between weh (Modern Dutch "weg", meaning "way" accusative) and wege ("way", dative).
- h represents an h-sound (close to h) and a ch-sound (close to χ or ç).
Examples: holto (Modern Dutch "hout" - wood-), naht (Modern Dutch "nacht" -night-).
- i is used for both the vowel i and the consonant j.
Examples: witton (Modern Dutch "weten" - to know-), iār (Modern Dutch "jaar" - year-).
- qu always represents a kw-sound.
Example: quāmon vs. modern Dutch kwamen ("they came").
- z rarely appears and when it does, it's pronounced ts.
Example: quezzodos vs. modern Dutch kwetsen ("to hurt").
The length of a vowel was not represented in writing, probably because the monks, who were the ones capable of writing and teaching how to write, tended to base the written language on Latin which also does not make a distinction in writing. Examples: Example: dag ("day", short vowel), thahton ("they thought", long vowel).
Later on, the long vowels were sometimes marked with a horizontal line (macron) to indicate a long vowel: ā. In some texts long vowels were indicated by simply doubling the vowel in question: Examples: Heembeke, and the given name Oodhelmus (both from deeds, written in 941 and 797 respectively).
Translation of Old Dutch sentence in Middle and Contemporary Dutch
The following sentence of Old Dutch offers an evolutionary view of the Dutch language starting with an Old Dutch sentence written around 900 till the modern Dutch language.
Old Dutch
- "Irlôsin sol an frithe sêla mîna fan thên thia ginâcont mi, wanda under managon he was mit mi."
Middle Dutch
- "Erlosen sal hi in vrede siele mine van dien die genaken mi, want onder menegen hi was met mi"
Modern Dutch
Due to the loss of most of the inflection of both Old and Middle Dutch, contempory Dutch uses a different word order.
(Using same word order)
- "Verlossen zal hij in vrede ziel mijn van zij die genaken mij, want onder menigen hij was met mij"
(Using correct contemporary Dutch word order)
- "Hij zal mijn ziel verlossen in vrede van hen die mij genaken, want onder menigen was hij met mij"
Characteristics
An important feature of Old Dutch is the use of full vowels in final position. Examples: vogala ("bird/fowl"), hebban ("to have"), gevon ("to give"), herro ("lord"), gesterkon ("reinforce"), gewisso ("certainty"), fardiligon ("exterminate"): compare to present Dutch: vogel, hebben, geven, heer, gesterken, gewis and verdelgen.
Another clear characteristic is the survival of the Germanic four-case system, which by Middle Dutch had started to become less distinct as a result of the collapse of full vowels in final position.
dag "day" singular:
- dag (nominative)
- dages (genitive)
- dage (dative)
- dag (accusative)
plural:
- daga (nominative)
- dago (genitive)
- dagon (dative)
- daga (accusative)
Sound developments
Monophthong changes
The Old Germanic diphthong ai and au became the long monotones ''ē and ō in Old Dutch. Examples: hēm, slōt.
A similar development can be found in the Anglo-Frisian languages Old Frisian and Old English.
In Old English the Western Germanic ai, ā and au became an ēa-sound. Examples: Western Germanic *hām (versus Early Modern English home), slēat.
h disappears at the beginning of a word
In Old Dutch the h-sound at the beginning of a word disappears around the 9th century. Examples include Old Dutch ringis ("ring", genitive) versus Old Low German and Old English hring.
Reductions of vowels
In the Wachtendonckse Psalmen with unstressed syllables the e and i merge together, as with o and u. This led to variants like dagi and dage ("day", dative singular) and tungon and tungun ("tongue", genitive, dative, accusative singular and nominative, dative, accusative plural). From the 11th century onwards, unvoiced vowels were reduced to schwa (ə). This sound wasn't only spelled as e but also as a (like "Egmondse Williram").
Final obstruent devoicing
Old Dutch already underwent "Final obstruent devoicing". This means that voiced consonants become voiceless at the end of a word.
Examples:
- wort ("word", nominative) versus wordes (genitive)
- gif ("give!", imperative) versus geuon ("to give", infinitive)
- weh wɛç ("way", accusative) versus wege ("way", dative)
This still occurs in modern Dutch, but this is no longer always reflected in spelling: woord (word) is spelled with d but this is pronounced as t.
hs becomes s
The sound combination hs, as in ch+s, became a voiceless s. Example: Old Dutch vusso versus common West Germanic fuhs (fuχ).
In German and English the hs sound became ks: German Fuchs, English fox
h disappears between vowels
In Old Dutch, the h-sound disappears when it is positioned between vowels.
Examples:
- Old Dutch thion versus Old High German dîhan
- Old Dutch (ge)sian versus Old High German sehan
In New High German the h when position between vowels is written, but not voiced. In Old High German however, it was voiced.
Voicing of f and s
In the course of the Old Dutch period the voiceless spirants f and s became voiced, (v and z) when positioned at the beginning of the word. In the Wachtendonckse Psalmen this feature is very rare while much later it can be seen in the spelling of Dutch toponyms which indicated the sound change was taking place during the 10th and 11th century.
Sources
- A. Quak en J.M. van der Horst, Inleiding Oudnederlands. Leuven: Universitaire Pers Leuven, 2002).
- Maurits Gysseling m.m.v Willy Pijnenburg, Corpus van Middelnederlandse teksten (tot en met het jaar 1300) reeks II (literaire handschriften), deel 1: Fragmenten. 's-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff, 1980.
- M. Gysseling, "Prae-Nederlands, Oudnederlands, Vroegmiddelnederlands", in: Vierde Colloquium van hoogleraren en lectoren in de neerlandistiek aan buitenlandse universiteiten. Gent, 1970, pp. 78-89.
- M.C. van den Toorn, W.J.J. Pijnenburg, J.A. van Leuvensteijn, e.a., Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse taal. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1997.
- Willy Sanders, Der Leidener Willeram. Untersuchungen zu Handschrift, Text und Sprachform. München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1974.