Request for variant subtag fr 16th-c 17th-c RESUBMISSION

Sun Jan 21 22:56:23 CET 2007

Addison:  Hi! I respond to your queries just below; though I have responded 
to these same queries with this same information previously.
--CEW
>
>Hi,
>
>I fail to understand how this pair of submissions will make sense to 
>language taggers looking at the registry. The variants proposed are not 
>separately described from medieval and modern French respectively. In fact, 
>the descriptions appear to *be* medieval and modern French. Based on these 
>subtags, one might make the assumption that 'frm' means "prior to 1606" and 
>'fr' means "after 1606".
>
>In other words, what variation do these variants describe, please?
>
>I might be happier if "1606nict" were a variant for 'fr', allowing content 
>to all be in 'fr' French, with variations for pre-modern (fr-1606nict) and 
>modern (fr, or, perhaps, fr-FR).
>
>Please note, I'm not opposing these registrations per se. I'm just unclear 
>(having mostly ignore previous conversation on the topic) how anyone 
>unfamiliar with that email thread would figure out what to use these 
>subtags for.
>
>Best Regards,
>
>Addison

Hi, Addison,
What do you mean by Medieval French; the registry tags Old French (fro) 
which spans most of the Middle Ages, 1200-1400; Middle French (frm) which 
spans the last of the Middle Ages and the first of the Renaissance, 
1400-1600; and finally Modern (post-1600) French.
If you had read the request form for the subtags, you would have noted that 
although 17th century French is considered somewhat modern, many texts are 
still translated into more modern versions (the oient is replaced with 
aient, etc):
"
>>Comments: with elements of Middle and Modern French and not completely 
>>stable; the 17th century texts that this subtag indicates are often 
>>translated into modern French.
"

Ah me.

As for the 16th century, the French of Montaigne (1590's) and Du Bellay 
(after 1550) is much lke some of the 17th century French except that the 
variation in it is more fixed;
for example the insertion of the extra s is consistent in 16th century 
French; though I note also that while Montaigne adopts the modern past 
participle form for er verbs (participle is the verb stem plus the ending, e 
with an accent ecout) in the 17th century other forms (ez or er) might 
substitute for the more modern form!
By the 17th century French has become a bit unstable--that is sometimes you 
get oient, sometimes aient (plural imperfect verb ending), sometimes estre, 
sometimes etre ('be').

How is 16th century French different from Villon in the 15th?  For starters, 
Villon's moyen Francais still has many elements of Old French (z endings for 
the nominative singular, no ending for the oblique singular; no ending for 
the nominative plural; endings for the oblique plural; hence the modern 
forms for the nominative emerged from the oblique forms).  Of course, the 
17th century text in the Americas occasionally slips a bit and uses these 
(for example, sometimes the nominative singular for an island is "uns isles" 
but at least you do not see Villon's "z" ending; other times the nominative 
singular for an island might be "un isle"; sometimes this author also 
crosses something out and then writes in another form, and seems hesitant.  
But the French did not settle at all in Canada till this  century so this 
cannot be blamed on Old French being retained by persons whose ancestors 
came to the Americas when Old French was still in use!!
In the 17th century many different varieties of French were in use as the 
French had expanded, really gotten into Nation building and even colonial 
expansion, and the Academy was formed as an effort to stabilize this.
So maybe that helps to explain why French got less not more stable in this 
period.

--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar at hotmail.com
(See below links to trace the variants that can be found in French 
dictionaries;
and to trace French as it was used in different French texts!
You should be able to see the differences in the different texts at the 
different links, but
I've also summarized the differences with each evolution!)

* * *
COPIES OF NOTES ON CHANGES IN FRENCH SUBMITTED PREVIOUSLY

Nicot names his dictionary,
"THRESOR DE LA LANGUE FRANCOYSE,
TANT ANCIENNE
que Moderne"
thus he is the one that says it includes two varieties of French (ancien and 
moderne);
I've not been through the whole dictionary but the French in it seems to be 
essentially modern enough to be 16th century French.

the earlier (16th century) dictionary at Artfl is
Robert Estienne (1552)  I have not been able to get into it.

However it's possible to trace particular usages through the other 
dictionaries; some words are the same from 1606 to the present;
other words, such as scavoir (modern savoir, there was a c in moyen 
francais)
are in use only in the 1606 and the 1694 dictionary
other words come into use in later dictionaries primarily such as the past 
participles like trouve
(with the accent ecout on a final e--the accent I've not reproduced--rather 
than another ending such as ez!)
(But late 16th century texts such as Montaigne's essais, 1690's, do use the 
modern past participle)

TRACE OF USAGES

See the links below to trace:

boeuf, 1606-1932
http://portail.atilf.fr/cgi-bin/dico1look.pl?strippedhw=boeuf&headword=&docyear=ALL&dicoid=ALL&articletype=1

estuy 1606-1694
http://portail.atilf.fr/cgi-bin/dico1look.pl?strippedhw=estuy&headword=&docyear=ALL&dicoid=ALL&articletype=1

scavoir
1606-1694

trouve (past participle with the accent ecout which I apologize for my 
negligence in never reproducing but you will see it
if you follow the link)
1694 ff
http://portail.atilf.fr/cgi-bin/dico1look.pl?strippedhw=trouve

EXAMPLES FROM TEXTS, 15th - 17th centuries

1.  early frm (15th century, Francois Villon, 2 texts--clearly different 
even from the mid-16th century texts!)
(it's clearly frm not fr)

A.
http://www.bartleby.com/244/31.html

"Si ne suis, bien le considere,
Filz d’ange, portant dyademe
D’estoille ne d’autre sidere.
Mon pere est mort, Dieu en ait l’ame;
Quant est du corps, il gist soubz lame …         5
J’entens que ma mere mourra,
—Et le scet bien, la povre femme—
Et le filz pas ne demourra.

Je congnois que povres et riches,
Sages et folz, prestres et laiz,         10
Nobles, villains, larges et chiches,
Petiz et grans, et beaulx et laiz,
Dames à rebrassez collez,
De quelconque condicion,
Protans atours et bourrelez,         15
Mort saisit sans exception.

Et meure Paris et Helaine,
Quiconques meurt, meurt à douleur
Telle qu’il pert vent et alaine;
Son fiel se creve sur son cuer,         20
Puis sue, Dieu scet quelle sueur!
Et n’est qui de ses maulx l’alege:
Car enfant n’a, frere ne seur,
Qui lors voulsist estre son plege.

La mort le fait fremir, pallir,         25
Le nez courber, les vaines tendre,
Le col enfler, la chair mollir,
Joinctes et nerfs croistre et estendre.
Corps femenin, qui tant est tendre,
Poly, souef, si precieux,         30
Te fauldra il ces maulx attendre?
Oy, ou tout vif aller es cieulx."

B.

http://www.bartleby.com/244/38.html

"FRERES humains, qui après nous vivez,
N’ayez les cuers contre nous endurcis,
Car, se pitié de nous povres avez,
Dieu en aura plus tost de vous mercis.
Vous nous voiez cy atachez cinq, six,         5
Quant de la chair, que trop avons nourrie,
Elle est pieça devorée et pourrie,
Et nous, les os, devenons cendre et pouldre.
De nostre mal personne ne s’en rie,
Mais priez Dieu que tous nous vueille absouldre!         10

Se freres vous clamons, pas n’en devez
Avoir desdaing, quoy que fusmes occis
Par justice. Toutesfois, vous sçavez
Que tous hommes n’ont pas bon sens assis;
Excusez nous—puis que sommes transsis—         15
Envers le filz de la Vierge Marie,
Que sa grace ne soit pour nous tarie,
Nous preservant de l’infernale fouldre.
Nous sommes mors, ame ne nous harie;
Mais priez Dieu que tous nous vueille absouldre!         20

La pluye nous a buez et lavez,
Et le soleil desechez et noircis;
Pies, corbeaulx, nous ont les yeux cavez,
Et arraché la barbe et les sourcilz.
Jamais, nul temps, nous ne sommes assis;         25
Puis çà, puis là, comme le vent varie,
A son plaisir sans cesser nous charie,
Plus becquetez d’oiseaulx que dez à couldre.
Ne soiez donc de nostre confrairie,
Mais priez Dieu que tous nous vueille absouldre!         30

ENVOI

Prince Jhesus, qui sur tous a maistrie,
Garde qu’Enfer n’ait de nous seigneurie:
A luy n’ayons que faire ne que souldre.
Hommes, icy n’a point de mocquerie,
Mais priez Dieu que tous nous vueille absouldre."

2.

Middle 16th century, Du Bellay, which would clearly be:
frm 16siecle or 1606Nict

A.

http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:nRnB7jCI7g8J:www.unil.ch/webdav/site/fra/shared/Histoire%2520litteraire/DuBellay.pdf+Du+Bellay+La+deffence+et+illustration+de+la+langue+francoyse&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=6
Deffence, Published 1549

"Se compose donq celuy qui voudra enricher sa Langue, a l'immitation des 
meilleurs aucteurs Grez et
Latins:  et a toutes leurs plus grandes vertuz"

{Comparison of this with modern French

Je dy (for dis) cecy for ceci
the systematic differences between the latter and modern French are 
slightly,
and are slight between it and 17th ce French; for example
motz for mots  aucteur for auteur  scavans for savants  mesmes for memes
otherwise the following
ressemblent  un ou je aussi veux les plus
and
"a tout lecteur" are the same in 16th century and modern French

B.

De Bellay's poetry may be more recent as it in versions I have read online 
and off looks more modern than the above text by him, "Deffense"

3.

Montaigne

(late 16th century frm in transition to fr--kind of think both tags would be 
appropriate here, fr, and frm, alas, this violates a requirement that fr and 
frm uses of the tags be clearly distinct)

(Montaigne's text replaces the participles ending in z with the modern past 
participle which actually does not make its way into the dictionary till 
1694!
In Montaigne's text, we still insert an s between e and c ["eschappé" for 
modern "echappé"]
but as noted above we already have the modern past participle ending in e 
with the accent ecout--except this past participle will be used irregularly 
if at all in the Americas at least until the final part of the Nicolas de la 
Salle document published in 1685.
In Montaigne, also, we still have "nostre" for modern "notre", and still use 
the "y" where we now have "i".
But this is the case in some French 17th century texts too such as the 
Nicholas de la Salle text below this; I wish I had Suchon's "Petit Traite" 
in front of me as well, which is French.):

http://www.etudes-litteraires.com/montaigne.php

Montaigne Essaies
1595

"Comme nous voyons des terres oysives, si elles sont grasses et fertilles, 
foisonner en cent mille sortes d'herbes sauvages et inutiles, et que pour 
les tenir en office, il les faut assubjectir et employer à certaines 
semences, pour nostre service. Et comme nous voyons, que les femmes 
produisent bien toutes seules, des amas et pieces de chair informes, mais 
que pour faire une generation bonne et naturelle, il les faut embesongner 
d'une autre semence : ainsin est-il des esprits, si on ne les occupe à 
certain subject, qui les bride et contraigne, ils se jettent desreiglez, 
par-cy par là, dans le vague champ des imaginations,"

"Dernierement que je me retiray chez moy, deliberé autant que je pourroy, ne 
me mesler d'autre chose, que de passer en repos, et à part, ce peu qui me 
reste de vie : il me sembloit ne pouvoir faire plus grande faveur à mon 
esprit, que de le laisser en pleine oysiveté, s'entretenir soy-mesmes, et 
s'arrester et rasseoir en soy : Ce que j'esperois . . . "

4.

Nicholas de La Salle

(late 17th century, 1685; again this is frm in transition to fr, and it's 
used in CA and the US;
I do not know which tag to give it)

(In the excerpts below, sometimes you get estoit, sometimes "etoit"--closer 
to the modern spelling of the form, without the inserted s,
but still with the oit spelling of the imperfect ending, instead of the ait 
form--
this spelling difference means a pronunciation difference too!;
you tend to get coste always instead of "cote"--for 'side';
past participles are spelled with ez, e with an accent ecout [the modern way 
as in Montaigne above], or like the infinitive form, with er; thus the past 
participle
spelling is less standardized here than in the late 16th century French of 
Montaigne who was more literary;
you get New World words such as "canot"--'canoe' and "mahis"--'maize' or 
'corn'
as well as Old Word words such as "boeufs"--'cows' now meaning 'bison'):

http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/treasures/giants/lasalle/lasalle-cover.html
http://teacherweb.com/FL/Cocoa/CEWhitehead/HTMLPage15.stm

"M de la Salle sejourna 12 jours à l'embouchure de la rivière des Illinois 
dans celle de Mississipi parce que la rivière charioit* des glaces pendant 
ce temps les sauvages firent des canots d'écorces d'ormes parce qu'ils 
avoient laissé les leurs dans le lac des Illinois et estoient venus a pied 
jusque/a?la, c'estoit* en ? ?re 1681."

. . .

"Le lendemain après 4 lieuës on trouva un canot de bois avec trois sauvages 
ils gagnerent la rive droite--les hommes se sauveren[-t, but illegible 
because in the page margin] on trouva dans le canot du caymant boucanné et 
un autre morçeau de chaire, on mangea le tout et on reconnat après par les 
os que ce morceau étoit un plat costé d'homme cette chair étoit meilleure 
que celle de Caymant, on laissa en payement une alesne dans le canot, on fut 
cabaner à 5 lieuës de la le pays commençoit les roseaux estoient plus épais 
tous les arbres plus petits, le pays plus plat et plus noyé on s'eleva de 
l'eau pour cabaner.
Le lendemain après 3 lieuës on vit de loing comme de grandes prairies, étant 
proche on vit le pays noyé plein de roseaux, les arbres éloignez de la 
rivière"
. . .

"on y attacha les armes du Roy faite du cuivre d'une chaud[-re ? or ière ? 
"chaudre?," "chaudron?," 'cauldron;' or perhaps "chaudière?," 'boiler;' 
obscured in margin] on planta aussi une croix et on enterra dessous une 
plaque a plomb ou il y avoit ces mots écrits [the earlier spelling, 
"escrits," seems to be written under this but scratched off] au nom de Louis 
quatorse [? final spelling obscured in page margin] Roy de France et de 
Navarre. le 9 e avril 1682 on chanta le vescilla regis au plantement de la 
croix, puis le te deum et fait trois décharges des fusil[-s? end of word 
obscured in margin]
Les vivres manquoient et on n'av[-oit probably; obscured in margin] par jour 
qu'une poigné de mahis "

5.
Other 17th century texts, such as "La Princesse de Cleves" 1789; clearly 
modern French, fr
but such a text would not need a tag actually)

http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/18797

--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar at hotmail.com

Here is my complete summary of the language variation
>CE Whitehead wrote:
>>Hi!
>>Once more I'll try to get two subtags.
>>The two requests for the subtags are below, one is for a subtag with frm 
>>as the prefix, and one is for a subtag with fr as the prefix.
>>Thanks.
>>
>>--C. E. Whitehead
>>cewcathar at hotmail.com
>>* * *
>>
>>First Request for subtag (for prefix frm)
>>
>>LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM
>>1. Name of requester:  C. E. Whitehead
>>2. E-mail address of requester: cewcathar at hotmail.com
>>3. Record Requested:
>>Type: Variant
>>Subtag:  1606Nict
>>         (or alternately 16siecle)
>>Description: 16th century French as in Jean Nicot, "Thresor de la langue 
>>francoyse" 1606; ARTFL Project, University of Chicago:
>>http://portail.atilf.fr/dictionnaires/TLF-NICOT/index.htm
>>Prefix: frm
>>Preferred-Value:
>>Deprecated:
>>Suppress-Script:
>>Comments:
>>
>>4. Intended meaning of the subtag:
>>5. Reference to published description
>>of the language (book or article):
>>
>>
>>* Jean Nicot, "Thresor de la langue francoyse" 1606; ARTFL Project, 
>>University of Chicago:
>>http://portail.atilf.fr/dictionnaires/TLF-NICOT/index.htm
>>
>>* Joachim du Bellay, La deffence et illustration de la langue francoyse, 
>>1549; ed critique by Henri Chamard, Geneve, Slatkine Rpt. 1969
>>
>>* Montaigne, "Essais"
>>
>>6. Any other relevant information:
>>
>>* * *
>>
>>2nd request (for prefix fr)
>>
>>LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM
>>1. Name of requester:  C. E. Whitehead
>>2. E-mail address of requester: cewcathar at hotmail.com
>>3. Record Requested:
>>
>>Type: Variant
>>Subtag:  1694acad
>>              alternately 17siecle
>>Description: French as catalogued in the "Dictionnaire de l'acadï¿½me 
>>franï¿½oise", 4eme ed. 1694; which is 17th century French, or early Modern 
>>French, sometimes with elements of Middle French; includes 17th century 
>>French as used in the Americas
>>Prefix: fr
>>Preferred-Value:
>>Deprecated:
>>Suppress-Script:
>>Comments: with elements of Middle and Modern French and not completely 
>>stable; the 17th century texts that this subtag indicates are often 
>>translated into modern French
>>
>>4. Intended meaning of the subtag:
>>5. Reference to published description
>>of the language (book or article):
>>
>>* Dictionnaire de l'acadï¿½me franï¿½oise, 4eme ed. 1694; RTFL Project, 
>>University of Chicago:
>>http://portail.atilf.fr/dictionnaires/ACADEMIE/index.htm
>>
>>* Fï¿½nelon, Franï¿½ois de Salignac de La Mothe (1984), Fenelon's Letter 
>>to the French Academy : with an introduction and commentary.
>>
>>*  http://www.arlea.fr/spip.php?article278 (note that 17th century writer 
>>Suchon has to be translated into modern French)
>>
>>*
>>http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/treasures/giants/lasalle/lasalle-01.html
>>http://teacherweb.com/FL/Cocoa/CEWhitehead/HTMLPage15.stm
>>
>>* Ayres-Bennett, Wendy (2004), Sociolinguistic variation in 
>>seventeenth-century France : methodology and case studies.
>>
>>
>>6. Any other relevant information:
>>
>>
>>* * *
>>--C. E. Whitehead
>>cewcathar at hotmail.com
>>

_________________________________________________________________
Get in the mood for Valentine's Day. View photos, recipes and more on your 
Live.com page. 
http://www.live.com/?addTemplate=ValentinesDay&ocid=T001MSN30A0701