Snakes, ladders, and standard language

Quantifying the Consistency of ‘Standard’ Old English Spelling

“…Another strand of argument against the existence of ‘standard’ Old English has been that whatever regularity the surviving manuscripts show can be explained via unexceptional linguistic processes like convergence and focusing (Machan : 67–71, and more generally, Devitt : esp. 1–4 and Stein : esp.…”

“…Such consistency, moreover, requires explanation. It is too stable over time, too regular across different regions and found in the work of too many scribes to be attributed merely to ordinary linguistic processes, as Machan (: 67–71) seems to suggest it might. Whether this consistency legitimises labelling the language found in these manuscripts as a ‘standard’ is likely to remain contentious, but consideration of the term's appositeness can now rest on a firmer empirical basis.…”

“…Machan assesses the claims of these varieties to the status of standard languages en bloc rather than individually, offering five principal reasons for withholding the label. First, he suggests, all seven varieties including ‘standard’ Old English, ‘allow significantly more morphological and phonological variation than is typically acknowledged’ (Machan : 64). Second, the article raises the possibility that literatim copying (whereby scribes chose to reproduce the language of the manuscript which was in front of them exactly, even if it favoured spellings and forms alien to their own natural usage) might overstate the geographical and chronological spread of particular varieties.…”

“…Second, the article raises the possibility that literatim copying (whereby scribes chose to reproduce the language of the manuscript which was in front of them exactly, even if it favoured spellings and forms alien to their own natural usage) might overstate the geographical and chronological spread of particular varieties. Third, for these varieties, and specifically for ‘Offa's Mercian or even Æðelwold's West Saxon’, ‘there are significantly fewer texts than the notion of a standard implies’ (Machan : 64). Fourth, all seven varieties ‘fail, some spectacularly so’ to achieve several or all of the four stages identified as comprising the process of standardisation by Haugen (Machan : 65).…”

“…Third, for these varieties, and specifically for ‘Offa's Mercian or even Æðelwold's West Saxon’, ‘there are significantly fewer texts than the notion of a standard implies’ (Machan : 64). Fourth, all seven varieties ‘fail, some spectacularly so’ to achieve several or all of the four stages identified as comprising the process of standardisation by Haugen (Machan : 65). Finally, the article suggests that focusing – that is, the reduction of linguistic variation by language users in their language use – must be seen as a natural linguistic process, an inherent part of communication, and thus in no way exceptional (Machan : 67–71).…”