The development of the Italian written language after the introduction of the letterpress

Between 1450 and 1455, Johannes Gutenberg (1400–1468) invented the letterpress with movable type. In the 1460s, this new art came to Italy. The letterpress was the basis for the development of a uniform Italian written language (cf. Trovato 1998: 131–141). To this purpose, there arose not only a partly uniform spelling (cf. Maraschio 1993: 140–227), but also a sys-tematic usage of punctuation marks. The standardization process, however, had to develop slowly.

Upon invitation from the Spanish cardinal Juan de Torquemada, the German typographers Conrad Sweynheym and Arnold Pannartz came to Subiaco (near Rome) in 1463 or 1464. They printed works by Cicero, De Oratore (1465) and Epistolae ad familiares (1467). From 1468 to 1473, Sweynheym and Pannartz published no fewer than 48 Latin classics. Be-tween 1470 and 1472, printing presses had already been set up in sixteen towns, and by 1479 a further thirty printers’ workshops had followed.

Venice, which introduced the letterpress in 1469, quickly became the Italian centre for this new art. By 1500, Venice had no fewer than 151 printers’ workshops. From 1540 onwards, book production strongly in-creased once again in Italy, and in the second half of the century more Ital-ian than Latin books were being published.² The presses in Venice, Rome, Naples, Florence, etc. not only published texts which had been produced in particular regions, but, when these texts came to be printed, there were often interferences from local dialects. For instance, Luigi Pulci’s (1432–

1484) Venetian edition of the Morgante (1482) contains various phonographemic Venetian influences (e.g., zente instead of gente, zorno instead of giorno, zentile instead of gentile).

3.1. The early printed editions of the classics of the Trecento

The majority of books printed were, at first, in Latin; however the Tuscan classics of the Trecento were also among the works produced in Italian printing houses practically from the beginning. In 1472, Johannes Nu-meister, a student of Gutenberg, and Evangelista Angelini published the Divina Commedia in Foligno. In Naples, an edition of Dante’s main work appeared in 1477, as well as an edition of Boccaccio’s Filocolo (1478).

Already in 1470 in Venice, there had appeared an edition of Petrarch’s Sonetti e canzoni. All printed editions of the Quattrocento, however, show

clear traces of the humanistic writing tradition, such as the Venetian edition of Petrarch’s Canzoniere (Sonetti e canzoni 1470) or the Neapolitan edition of Dante’s Divina Commedia (1477).

Figures 2 and 3. Extracts from the Venetian edition of the Canzoniere (1470) and from the Neapolitan edition of the Divina Commedia (1477)³ Both texts almost manage without punctuation marks. Elided forms are not expressed graphemically (che poi chaura; chel bel uiſo; lhumano; ſaccho-glieua). The phonemes /u/ and /v/ are both expressed by <u> (/v/: uanno, uerde, uelo; /u/: fiume, lunga, ſuo). In the Venetian edition of the Canzoniere the etymological <h> is left out in individual cases (aranno, but ha), Latin characters (ſaxo ['sasːo]) and letter combinations (aſpecti obſcuri [a'spHti o'skuri]) which had no sound counterpart in the Tuscan dialects are, however, consistently used. Similarly, <c> was combined before velar vowels with a redundant <h> (chon). Also in the Neapolitan edition of the Divina Commedia, many words show an etymologizing spelling, e.g., by the use of <h> (humano), the maintaining of Latin letters and letter combi-nations which had no phonological representation value in the volgare, such as <x> (dextra ['dHstra]) and <ct> (tractato [trat'ato]), as well as by the use of short Latin grammatical morphemes (et, ad). The phonetic word-stress at the end of a word is not expressed in writing (cantero, sentiro in-stead of modern canterò, sentirò).

Similarly, in the edition of Dante’s Convivio published in 1490 in Flor-ence, a Latinizing way of spelling dominates, which alternates with influ-ences of the contemporary language of the Quattrocento.

Figure 4. Extract from the Florentine edition of the Convivio (1490)⁴

The characteristics of the text are the redundant usage of <h> after <c> and

<g> before velar vowels (e.g., chome, ciaſchuna, alchuno, boccha, purgha, luogho). The retention of <h> (huomini), <ph> (philoſophia), <rh> (rheto-rici) and <ct> (ſubiecti) as well as the ending -tione (perfectione) are also Latinate forms. Apart from these forms, phonological spellings also appear (ſcrittura). The phoneme /ts/ is expressed partly by <c> (giudicio), partly by <z> (ſanza).

3.2. The influence of Aldus Manutius and Pietro Bembo

on the standardization of the written language in the Cinquecento The printing location of Venice had a great influence on the creation of a standardized Italian spelling at the beginning of the Cinquecento. This is especially due to two scholars who worked here: the publisher and

typogra-pher Aldus Manutius (1449–1515) and the humanistically-inclined cardinal Pietro Bembo (1470–1547).

Aldus Manutius settled in Venice in around 1490 and opened a printing workshop in 1494. At first, Manutius restricted himself to the publication of Greek authors; however, he also published works by contemporary Ital-ian writers. Worth mentioning in this connection is the work Hypneroto-machia Poliphili, attributed to Francesco Colonna (1433–1527), which was printed in 1499. The book comprises 234 unnumbered pages and is illus-trated with 171 woodcut illustrations by an unknown artist.

Figure 5. Extract from Francesco Colonna’s Hypnerotomachia Poliphili (1499)⁵ The text presents all the characteristics of the humanistic volgare of the 15th century. Apart from a vast number of abbreviations (nõ, dl, cãdide, erão etc.) in particular, etymologized spelling forms based on Latin attract attention (triũpho, Pyrrho, dicto, cyaneo, Saphyro, dextra, exſcalpto, hauea etc.). The phonemes /u/ and /v/ are not distinguished graphically and are both transcribed by <u> (miraueglioso, uolubile, uēule, uagamēte, uſciua etc.). Conversely, in cases of capitalization, both sounds are represented by

<V> (SEQVENTE).

From 1501 onwards, Manutius turned more and more towards Latin and Italian classics. Thus, together with Pietro Bembo, he published Petrarch’s Canzoniere. In 1502 an edition of Dante’s Divina Commedia followed, in which for the first time italics were used, based on the cursive handwriting that was used at the time in the Chancery.

Up until that time, the most important edition of Dante’s chief work had come from Cristoforo Landino (which, however, had a strong influence on the contemporary volgare). Bembo avoided the corruption of the Dante editions of the Quattrocento by using for his edition of the Divina Comme-dia a manuscript (Vat. Lat. 3199) from the 14th century, which had been a present to Petrarch from Boccaccio, and which somehow came to be in the library of Bernardo Bembo, Pietro’s father. Pietro Bembo copied the manu-script which Aldus Manutius used for his edition.

The text edition of Manutius and Bembo is characterised by a high de-gree of philological meticulousness, which for a vernacular work was un-usual at that time. For the first time, abbreviations were expanded, and words were separated according to grammatical criteria.

Figures 6 and 7. Extracts from Landino’s (1497) and from Bembo’s (1502) editions of the Divina Commedia⁶

The qualitative and linguistic programmatic difference is visible if one compares Landino’s and Bembo’s editions of the Divina Commedia:

Table 2. A comparison of Landino’s (1497) and Bembo’s (1502) extracts from the Divina Commedia

Landino (1497) Bembo (1502) Nel mezo del cami di nostra uita

Mi ritrouai p una ſelua obſcura Che la diricta uia era ſmarrita Ahi quanto adir qual era e cosa dura

esta ſelua ſeluaggia & aſpra & forte che nel penſier rinoua la paura Tanto era amara che poco e piu morte

ma per tractar del ben chío uí trouai díro dellaltre coſe chío uho ſcorte í non so ben rídír comío uentraí,

tantera piĕ dí ſonno a quel pũcto che la uerace uía abbandonaí Ma poi chio fui appíe dũ colle giunto

la oue termínaua quella ualle che mauea di paura il cor cŏponcto guardai in alto & uidi le ſue ſpalle

coperte gía de raggí del pianeta che mena drícto altruí p ogní calle Alhor fu la paura un puoco queta

che nel lago del cuor mera durata la nocte chio paſſaí con tanta píeta

nEl mezzo del camin di noſtra uita Mi ritrouai per una ſelua oſcura;

Che la diritta uia era ſmarrita:

Et quanto a dir qual era, è coſa dura esta ſelua ſelvaggia et aſpra et forte;

che nel penſier rinuoua la paura.

Tant’è amara; che poco è piu morte.

Ma per trattar del ben ch’i ui trouai;

Diro de l’altre coſe, ch’i u’ho ſcorte.

I non so ben ridir, com’i u’entrai;

Tant’era pien di ſonno in su quel punto, che la uerace uia abbandonai.

Ma poi ch’i fui al pie d’un colle giunto, La, oue terminaua quella ualle, Che m’hauea di paura il cor compunto;

Guarda’in alto; e uidi le ſue ſpalle vestite gia d’e raggi del pianeta, che mena dritt’ altrui per ogne calle.

Allhor fu la paura un poco queta;

Che nel lago del cor m’era durata La notte, ch’i paſſai con tanta pieta.

Apart from some lexical variants (Ahi quanto vs. Et quanto; Tanto era amara/Tant’è amara), Bembo’s edition is especially characterized by com-prehensive punctuation. Bembo’s word-limits are more or less consistently marked by an apostrophe (ch’i u’ho vs. chío uho; m’hauea vs. mauea).

While the edition by Landino is full of abbreviations, the words in the Bembo edition appear in their full form (dũ colle vs. d’un colle; p ogní calle/per ogne calle). Whereas Landino uses an etymologized spelling, Bembo generally prefers a phonological spelling system (obſcura vs.

oſcura; diricta/diritta; tractar/trattar; cŏponcto/compunto; nocte/notte).

Despite a phonological orientation, the edition of Bembo also has Latiniz-ing elements, in particular with regard to the letter <h> (Allhor, m’hauea), but also in the form of Latin short words (et). Neither Landino nor Bembo make a graphemic distinction of /u/ and /v/: in both editions, <u> serves for a representation of the vowel as well as for the consonant phoneme. In Bembo’s edition, <v> only appears at the beginning of the verse (vestite gia).

The edition of the Tuscan classics of the Trecento formed the starting point for the Venetian influence on the establishment of the old Tuscan linguistic model as a pan-Italian written language. Bembo was not content with editing old texts, but deliberately imitated their language. With regard to this, special consideration deserves to be given to the prosimetrum Aso-lani, a philosophical dialogue about Platonic love in the style of Boccaccio, written between 1497 and 1502, which was published for the first time by Aldus Manutius in 1505.

Figure 8. Extract from Bembo’s Asolani (1505)⁷

The extract shows the dedication to Lucrezia Borgia, which contains the following graphemic characteristics. The letter <u> stands for both /u/ (gi-unto, fuoco, perduto) and for /v/ (uita, riuolger, tuttauia), while in the case of capitalization, <V> is generally used (LVCRETIA, DVCHESSA ILLVSTRISSIMA). Sporadically after <c> an <h> appears before velar vowels (peranchora). Apart from etymological <h>, the spelling of the conjunction et (pronounced e) also shows Latinizing influences. The di-graph <ſſ> alternates with <ß> (e.g., neßuna, eſſermi).

Bembo’s efforts in the area of textual criticism and textual edition, as well as in the field of poetry and literary prose, paved the way for the

lin-guistic model of the Trecento. The linlin-guistic and literary reform project culminated in the programmatic Le prose della volgar lingua (1525), in which Petrarch and Boccaccio were proposed as linguistic models for the Italian literary language, in the same way that Virgil and Cicero had served as models for the humanistic usage of the Latin language.

While Pietro Bembo raised the literary canon of the Tuscan Trecento to a pan-Italian level, Aldus Manutius introduced a series of innovations into both Italian and international printing practices, which have partly been maintained up to the present day. The most important contribution he made to the modern written language was the systematization of punctuation: he imposed the full stop, comma, semicolon, apostrophe and graphic accents as a general standard.

As a whole, the written language of the 16th century is characterized by fluctuations in the usage of certain notations.

In Francesco Sansovino’s (1521–1583) anthology Le osservationi della lingua volgare di diversi huomini illustri: cioe del Bembo, del Gabrielo, del Fortunio, del Corso, dell’Acarisio, et di altri scrittori..., for instance, pub-lished in Venice in 1562, we find a redundant <h> in Thoscana as well as an etymologizing ph in Ortographia. The written <u> and <v> stand re-spectively for the phonemes /u/ (vſaſſero) and /v/ (uoci):

Figure 9. Extract from Sansovino, Le osservationi… (1562)⁸

The character ß which arose from the ligature of long ſ and round s (o ſs o ß) was not unknown in the Italian language. The usage of <ſſ> and <ß>

did not follow firm rules: the position of either character was more depend-ent on the space available. The written sign <ß> which today only appears in the German language was used in handwritten as well as in printed texts at that time.

In some texts <ß> even appears as the last character before abbrevia-tions, as, for instance, in Giambattista Gelli’s (1498–1563) Il Gello. Sopra un sonetto di M. Franc. Petrarca (1549), which was printed in Florence (honoratiß. conteſſa = onoratissima contessa) (cf. figure 10).

Figure 10. Extract from the Gello (1549)⁹

We find the forms eſſe, haueſſe, paſſar, eſſere alongside neceßità and eßi (cf. figure 11). This practice would not be abandoned until the 18th century.

Figure 11. Extract from Sansovino’s Le osservationi… (1562)¹⁰

A further characteristic of the Cinquecento written language is the fluctuat-ing usage of separation signs in cases of word-separation at the end of a line. Separation was marked in printed texts by a single hyphen, a double hyphen, a superscripted dot, or not at all.

In many printed works of the Quattrocento separation signs were com-pletely unused, as is the case for instance in an edition of Dante’s treatise Convivio which dates from 1490 (see the form Ve ramente in lines 2–3).

Figure 12. Extract from Dante’s Convivio (1490)¹¹

In Aldus Manutius’ edition of Colonna’s Hypnerotomachia Poliphili (1499), however, separated words are marked by horizontal or transversal dashes.

Figure 13. Extract from Colonna’s Hypnerotomachia Poliphili (1499)¹²

In the Florentine edition of the Gello (1549), however, word-separation is used very inconsistently. Thus, in the cited part for instance in the case of famiglie (fa miglie), honoratiß (ho noratiß.) and inclita (incli ta), no separa-tion sign is used, but it is used in the case of nobilißimi (nobi-lißimi) and conteſſa (con-teſſa):

Figure 14. Extract from the Gello (1549)¹³

In turn, in the edition of Sansovino (1562), word-separations are basically marked by a double hyphen:

Figure 15. Extract from Sansovino’s Le osservationi… (1562)¹⁴

Here one can clearly see the influence of Manutius and Bembo, who had already used this method at the beginning of the 16th century, as we can see in the following extract from Bembo’s Asolani (1505):

con ſommo piacere di ciaſcuno. Erano quiui tra gli=

altri, che inuitati dalla Reina uennero a quelle feſte, tre gentili huomini della noſtra citta giouani et dalto cuo re : equali da loro primi anni ne gliotii delle Muſe alle=

uati, et in eſſi tuttauia dimoranti per lo piu tempo, ol=

tre gliornamenti delle lettre il pregio dogni bella loda ha

Figure 16. Extract from Bembo’s Asolani (1505)¹⁵

In the case of Manutius, however, one can sometimes see certain inconsis-tencies. Thus, gli altri (glialtri) is clearly comprehended as a single gra-phemic unit, and thus is separated at the end of a line (gli=altri), while the noun cuore is separated without any marking (cuo re).¹⁶ Striking is also the writing in one word of dalto¹⁷ (dalto cuo re), of gliornamenti (ol=tre glior-namenti)¹⁸ as well as of dogni (dogni bella loda)¹⁹.

3.3. Giangiorgio Trissino’s orthographical reform

While Pietro Bembo adopted the puristic linguistic model of the Trecento, the scholar and poet Giangiorgio Trissino, who came from Vicenza, was a follower of an eclectic language. He learnt Greek in Milan with the scholar Demetrios Chalcocondylis (1423–1511), who came from Athens. On the model of the Greek language as an Attic koinè, Trissino developed his own conception of a future Italian language in the Castellano (1529). On the basis of different diatopic varieties, a global informal Italian language should be created by the elimination of striking local and regional charac-teristics. The influence of Greek scholarship on the linguistic theories of Trissino is also visible in the Epistola de le lettere nuovamente aggiunte ne la lingua italiana (1524), in which the Italian phonemes /e/, /ɛ/, /o/ and /ɔ/

are differentiated on a graphemic basis by means of Greek characters (<ε>

for /e/, <ω> for /o/):

Le lettere, adunque, che io primamente aggiunsi a l’alphabɛto, furono ɛ apɛrto ɛt ω apɛrtω. ε questo feci, perciώ che, ɛssɛndo in e ɛt o lettere vocali due pronuntie, l’una più piccola ɛ più chiusa ω vero più corta ɛ più obtusetta chɛ l’altra…²⁰

[And so the letters that I first added to the alphabet were open ɛ and open ω.

And I did this because the vowel letters e and o have two pronunciations, one smaller and more closed (or rather, shorter and blunter)…]

Trissino also considers it necessary to express the phonemes /ts/ and /dz/ by special written signs.

… quando la pronuntia del z sarà simile al c, la scriveremo per lo z con-suεto, com’έ zωccolo, belleza, spɛzo ɛ simili; pωi, quando sarà simile al g, si scriverà per questo altro charactɛre ç, come έ çɛphyro, mɛço, reço, ɛ simili.²¹

[When the pronunciation of z is like that of c, we will write it with z in the usual way, as in zωccolo, belleza, spɛzo and others of this kind; however, when it is like a g, it will be written with this other character, ç, as in çɛphyro, mɛço, reço, and others of the same kind.]

From one text to another, there are certain fluctuations in the use of the characters. In the Castellano we find <c> (giudiciω) as well as <ç>

(Sannaçarω). Interestingly, Trissino forgoes double z (belleza, spɛzo).

The new orthographical model also appeared in the tragedy Sofonisba (LA SωPHωNISBA DԑL TRISSINω), and was explained and advocated in a letter to Pope Clement VII (CLԑMENTE SETTIMω).

Lodovico Martelli (1503–1531) and Agnolo Firenzuola (1493–1543) rejected Trissino’s spelling reform. Firenzuola criticized the usage of Greek characters in his polemic Discacciamento de le lettere inutilmente agguinte ne la lingua toscana published in 1524.²² Martelli refused the linguistic model in the Risposta alla Epistola del Trissino delle lettere nuovamente aggionte alla lingua volgar fiorentina. In turn, Trissino reaffirmed his con-ception in the treatise Dubbi grammaticali. In 1529, Trissino published the Epistola again in Vicenza. In the same year, Tolomeo Gianicolo printed a booklet in Trissino’s reformed Italian alphabet. As well as an index with all of the alphabetic characters, the printed work also contains an edition of Our Father as well as the Ave Maria. Trissino remained faithful to his re-formed spelling all his life and even used it in his will.²³

Che l’avenir, ne la virtù divina E’ postɷ, il cui nɷn cognitɷ cɷstume Fa’ l noſtrɷ antiveder privɷ di lume

Figure 17. Extracts from the cover and the colophon of Trissino’s tragedy Sofonisba (1529)²⁴

In Trissino’s spelling system (cf. table 3), not only open and closed e and o are differentiated, but also the phonemes /u/ and /v/ (lume, cɷstume vs.

divina, privɷ). Words with final stress are marked by an accent (virtù).

Also, the apostrophe is used after elided articles (l’avenir). Despite the phonological basis, some Greek-Latin elements are used as terms of hu-manistic scholarship in Trissino’s written system, for instance the diagraph

<ph> (SωPHωNISBA, Philippɷ), the digraph <ch> (cholera) and <ct> (cha-ractɛre), <y> (çɛphyro) as well as mute <h> (prɷhibiziɷne, hɷnɷrevɷli).

In a later printed edition of Trissino’s works (see figure 18) the re-formed orthography was forgone. In the Italian printing milieu of the Cin-quecento, Aldus Manutius generally prevailed as the model with regard to spelling and punctuation. A major part of the books printed from now on

In a later printed edition of Trissino’s works (see figure 18) the re-formed orthography was forgone. In the Italian printing milieu of the Cin-quecento, Aldus Manutius generally prevailed as the model with regard to spelling and punctuation. A major part of the books printed from now on

Im Dokument Orthographies in Early Modern Europe (Seite 75-104)