History of Breton
History of Breton language and of its spellings
« There is a position that most languages have taken, [that is] to tap into the old language. This is what French has done by bringing thousands of words from Latin, the mother tongue, back to life. All the words in -tion are scholarly borrowings. The indifference with regard to the history of Breton has meant that we too often condemn to a definitive death terms or turns of phrase which were still alive in the 19th century when the language, spoken by a mass of monolinguals, did not did not offer the appearance of a mosaic of dialects, increasingly creolized by bilinguals.
But it must be admitted that certain modern theories discourage the comparative study of languages. We want to study the language of a restricted group, by erecting walls between this dialect and the closest dialects, between the current state of the language and the closest past, in the name of a sacred synchrony, whereas fairs, pardons, markets, weddings, journeys, until recently, maintained the knowledge of multiple forms by the same speaker.
It is only in the past thirty years that atomization has accelerated, with the rapid disappearance of awareness of common forms among current pre-terminal and terminal speakers, whose Breton is only a distorted reflection of what one heard before the war among many monolinguals. It is the sad privilege of age to remember this and to know that “synchrony” exists only in the imagination of theoreticians. »
Léon FLEURIOT, studies director at École Pratique des Hautes Études
in An Teodeg, 69-70 (1982), p. 18-20.
Old Breton (5th – 10th centuries)
The language knew a real unity (L. FLEURIOT, Eléments d’une grammaire, Paris, 1964, p. 10) within it and with the other Brittonic languages – Old Welsh and Old Cornish: unius linguae, unius natione, said- we then. The spelling of Old Breton – like other Brittonic languages -, a heritage of the primitive Celtic Church, was based on the Latin alphabet. It remained identical throughout the period (notwithstanding the evolution of sounds) (K. JACKSON, Language and History in early Britain, Edinburgh 1953, p. 61).
The phonetic system of Breton was richer than that of Latin. Brittonic languages had to innovate. Thus, our C’H is denoted C, CH, sometimes H. The phonemes /ð/ and /θ/ (soft and hard th in English) are denoted th, t, d, sometimes h. The u will be used to note ou /u/ as well as u /y/, sometimes eu /ø/. Mutations are noted only very rarely.
Norman invasions destabilized the country: Vannes was burned down in 920. Men of the North devastate all of Brittany for a century, the total occupation of the country lasts from 915 to 935, leading to the exodus of the monks. Thus Saint Samson is still honored near Rouen, Saint Tugdual in Angers, Saint Patern in Deols…. Dukes were less powerful than kings. The duchy was also governed by the Dreux family, which did not prevent the dukes from being fierce defenders of national independence. Political and social organizations took a long time to restore. Many manuscripts – both Latin and Breton – have disappeared. The nobility becomes Romanized – before becoming Frenchified.
Middle Breton (12th century - 1650)
The phonetic system
Middle Breton will be marked by the impoverishment of the phonetic system, dialectal fractures, the influence of the novel. The vocabulary of Old Breton was very rich in terms of grammar, mathematics, theatre… Abstract words in general were gradually replaced by words of French origin. There will be many exchanges between the Upper Brittany novel and Breton (in both directions).
The spelling
It is especially in the spelling that Middle Breton will differentiate itself. French notations or, u, eu /u y ø/ make the u unique to the ancient language. The th is gradually abandoned in favor of z or tz. It is sometimes – already – denoted zh. The /ð/ (soft th) is denoted z, while our z common to all dialects is denoted s. The sound /s/ is noted s in the initial, ss between vowels (as in French). Letters c and qu are common to make our current k.
Mutations are not yet noted as a rule. The rich versification (common to Celtic languages) makes it possible to find them.
Without going into details, we can note the digraph ff to make the special phoneme /-v/. This sign is still often found in our surnames: Le Derff an derv, “the oak”, Le Hénaff = an henañ, “the elder”… Its pronunciation has changed. We generally hear /o/ in Léon, /f/ or /v/ in Goelo, /ɥ/ (w labial) in Vannes, it has sometimes disappeared in Cornouaille. Only Trégor has retained /w/.
Dialectalisation
It was during this period that several fractures caused the dialectalization of the language. H. D’ARBOIS DE JUBAINVILLE (Grammatical studies on Celtic languages, Paris 1881), gave the example of the Vannes toponym noted Pen an garzo in 1562 and Pen an garhou in 1572 (modern Br.: Penn ar garzhoù, “the end of the hedges”). From the 15th century, we find Le Liorho for liorzhoù, “gardens”, in Baden. The written language still kept the standard notation, whereas the old /ð/ had become /x/ [c’h] in the country of Vannes.
This evolution in the history of Breton “was beginning in the 15th century”, writes Kenneth JACKSON, Historical Phonology of Breton. 683sq. In truth, it must have begun – to the east of the dialect at least – at the end of the war of succession in Brittany (1341-1364). At this time, stress begins to rise on the penultimate syllable in KLT dialects (whereas in the north-south central art it shifted to the first). High-Vannetais is the only dialect to have retained the old accent.
Modern Breton
Father Maunoir’s spelling
In 1659, P. MAUNOIR (1606-1683) published his Sacred College of Iésus in a new spelling, that of Middle Breton appearing to him henceforth unsatisfactory. The few texts that have come down to us show that, from the beginning of the 16th century, following the devastation caused by the wars of the League, following the loss of independence and therefore of national unity, Breton had very quickly fragmented. Dialects and sub-dialects were already those we know today.
We can already ask ourselves the question of whether it was appropriate to reform a standard orthography which maintained the unity of the language. MAUNOIR codified the dialectal variants, thus creating the spellings of the bishoprics of Quimper (K) and Léon (L), but precipitated the decline of the language. It was moreover more a question of ratifying these variants than of creating a new spelling. However, it made disappear, in particular, the distinction between /ð/ /θ/ and /z/, unanimously denoted by z.
The dioceses have preserved until today a specific spelling that some – even non-Christians – still wish to maintain!
The diocese of Vannes had been the first to radically change the spelling of Middle Breton. Its particular spellings, through several modifications, have survived to the present day.
Gonidec’s work
The “anarchic” spelling of P. MAUNOIR – using the complexities of French (eg c and qu for our k) – was revised in Bas-Léon (L) by Le GONIDEC (1775-1838). He was influenced by the relatively simple graphical system of German and by the equally simple one of Welsh. He introduced the k and maintained the hard g in all positions (e.g. gad, “hare”, ger [ger] “word”), which we kept. ll was not followed for the use of l (underlined l; our (i)lh] and ñ tilde; our gn]. On the other hand its n̄, overlined n] was replaced by ñ to mark nasal vowels (e.g. bleuñv “flowers”).
The dioceses of Cornouaille (K) and Tréguier (T) adapted this spelling to their local peculiarities. It was not until 1907 that the spelling known as KLT was born – KLT indicating a spelling and not a dialect! – which was no longer diocesan. The dialect of Goelo, distinct in particular by the accent on the first syllable, has never known its own spelling.
School of Gwalarn brought the language into modernity and brought some simplifications. The KLT wrote gant, evit, mat (adjective) before a consonant, but gand, evid, mad (adjective) before a vowel. Gwalarn retained only the first forms. They prepared complete unification by introducing the wealth of Vannes (vocabulary, forms, constructions).
The case of vannetais
With regard to vannetais, LE JOUBIOUX (1808-1888), a native of the island of Arz, simplified its spellings by using k and g like LE GONIDEC and replacing the notation /ɥ/, formerly hüe (! ) published. Loeiz HERRIEU brought closer, by small discrete reforms, the spelling of written vannetais from other dialects and from Lower vannetais. We cannot forget that, as a diocesan language, it was based on the dialects of the extreme south-east (around Vannes). We wrote brer (L. HERRIEU: breur), unlike the rest of the Breton area.
While the KLT maintained extremist spellings from Bas-Léon (pounner, ploum, etc.), vannetais perpetuated spellings corresponding to local pronunciations. (aveit next to Bas-vannetais /aɥiD/; fari, for the unified fazi , while /fɑj/ and /fɑdi/ are also heard; pear, while /poar/ (pevar) is the most common in the whole dialect.
Contemporary spellings
Unified spelling, known as Peurunvan
In 1941, faced with the certainty of the introduction of the language at school, the writers agreed for a unified orthography. Thus KLT maro, V. marù, became marv; piou, più, became piv. Some will say that *marw, *piw would have been preferable. However, the small dialect of Goëlo pronounces /marf pif/.
The most important mark is the use of the digraph zh to unite the z of KLT and the h of Vannes. Opponents wanted to see a German influence (understand Nazi!). However, we have seen that the grapheme zh existed in Middle Breton. It also exists in English, but for the sound /ʒ/ (j). The abbots GUILLEVIC and LE GOFF (authors of a teaching method for Vannes) had proposed zh at the beginning of the century. Y. AR GOW, for his part, suggested hz.
Following a meeting in Vannes, in 1936, a proposal was drawn up, which already uses the zh, and is signed by R. HEMON, L. HERRIEU, LANGLEIZ. On November 3, 1938, the Vannetais asked for the application of the unified spelling; signed: LE BARON, PRIELLEC, COËTMEUR, LE GOFF, LE MARECHAL, MARY, AUDIC, LE NESTOUR, L. HERRIEU, LE DIBERDER.
Academic spelling (skolveurieg)
As early as 1953 (Annales de Bretagne 60, pp. 48-77), FALC’HUN proposed a spelling that was more Leonardian and closer to… French, to oppose Peurunvan, “born under German influence”. His proposal was modified by some “experts” and resulted in the so-called university spelling (1955), which was mainly used by the clergy and the communists of Cornwall and Léon. Moreover, it was not followed unanimously by the writers. Very few Trégor writers used this “reform”.
Vannetais aligned itself with university spelling by modifying very slightly the system of Loeiz HERRIEU (introduction of the w – which Canon MARY had already used in his Grammar; soft final consonants ged, aveid, glaz, instead of get, aveit next to glove, avoid, glas). This spelling has hardly been used except in rare (re)editions (Ar en deulin by KALLOC’H; Dasson ur galon by Loeiz HERRIEU) and liturgical publications. Most of the contemporary vannetais writers (LANGLEIZ, Sten KIDNA, ABENNEZ) gave their writings in Peurunvan.
Interdialectal spelling (etrerannyezhel)
It is with Assimil (1975) that a third spelling appears, supposed to put the two others in agreement. Per DENEZ had launched meetings in Carhaix with a view to an agreement between the proponents of the one and the other system present. The “major” reforms had been passed:
- zh;
- (i)lh instead of academic (which confused dillad /diʎad /kõntili/);
- w instead of v leonardo (piw, marw, tewel);
- soft final consonants (gand, ewid…);
- distinction between s (pronounced /z/ everywhere) and z (/z/ remaining only in Leon);
- introduction of ss /s/, as in Middle Breton (plassenn, tress).
One may wonder why this system – subject to greater scientific rigor than the others – has not been generally accepted. More or less, it took up the convergent proposals of G BERTHOU-KERVERZHIOÙ, Alan RAUDE and O. MORDREL. To be complete, let us mention Jules LE ROUX who, in his Roman de Peredur, had for his part, updated, from 1923, the spelling of Middle Breton. All these experts were not followed.
I had myself said to F. MORVANNOU (the author of Assimil) that, if he launched this new spelling, he had to immediately found a publishing house and publish as many works as possible. 95% of Breton editions was publishing in peurunvan. The birth of Diwan, who advocated Peurunvan, further increased this percentage and there are few publications in other spellings.
Either way, it was probably too late. The great reforms of the graphic systems of other languages were completed before the war or immediately after.
The vision of the modern language
There is a spirit that differentiates the proponents of the two recent spellings from those of the KLTG – although currently some of the latter’s writers – bad disciples of Roparz HEMON – rather belong to the other two: it is a question of the vision of the modern language.
Having had its scholars until the 16th century, Breton literature was content with devotional works, written in a poor and Frenchified language, from 1650 until the beginning of this century. At the same time, the grammarians Grégoire de ROSTRENEN and Dom LE PELLETIER (1663-1733) restored a classical meaning to Breton and reintroduced old words. They were followed by LE GONIDEC, F. VALLÉE (1860-1949), R. HEMON (1900-1980), in particular.
The followers of university and interdialectal spellings want, for the most part, to stick to the popular language, described as sabir by my own mother (1906-1996). Generations born before 1914 still used razh (and holl), trugarez… Young people only know everything and mersi – to which we add bras… to make it more Breton! We can compare the current Alsatian which, to stand out from German, also says /”mɛrsi/. But what do we want to stand out from in Breton?
The school of Gwalarn had already reintroduced old terms not used since Middle Breton (poell, meiz…) and composed many neologisms. Y.-B. KALLOC’H were among those who had paved the way by taking up Middle Breton diougan, in the sense of “prophecy” (whereas, dialectally, it only meant “omen, announcement (of rain)”, Old Breton dihuz, “consolation”, unknown to the texts for a thousand years L. HERRIEU borrowed several terms from Welsh (anien, awen, delwenn…).
F. VALLÉE codified the use of prefixes and suffixes of which our language is among the richest. Scholars have continued to enrich the modern language to make it a language capable of competing with others even in their modernity. The problem remains whether speakers want to be satisfied with a fragmented language – faced with the unification of all literary languages – and a peasant and medieval vocabulary.
The process of modernizing the language is well under way, to such an extent that the proponents of popular Breton use old terms or neologisms thinking that they belong to the language of old.
During this time, the spoken language continued to crumble. Following the war of 14-18, following the last war, following the introduction of television. The dialects, taught by the catechism, the prayers and the canticles, knew a classic, standard form (cf. Vannes taught at the minor seminary). Currently, only local dialects remain.
“With sorrow and sorrow”, as I wrote to the president of Dihun, I was able to note that, this year, the Bro Gwened Festival had two programs, in two different spellings, using divergent terms.” When is -that the Bretons will acquire discernment”, would have said again Anjela DUVAL. A spelling is always a “bad coat” for a language. Whatever the feelings of the heart, the intellectual motivations, it is necessary to think of the students and especially of the children. If each teaching group uses its own script, its dissimilar vocabulary, what will become of Breton ? It is high time to think about it.
“In the century in which we live, no language, let alone a small language, can afford the luxury of two spellings. The luck of the people of Vannes lies in the unification, in the transposition of all its riches into a common language. Otherwise, he is doomed. And, I’m afraid, everything else with it.
(Per Denez, About Breton spelling, 1958).
Turiaw AR MENTEG, ospital Gwened, du 2000,
Text redigitized and formatted by An Drouizig