Reform of the French language. Part 1. Performance for all

To begin with, it is important to note that French is one of the most widely spoken languages ​​in the world.

Leaders of a rating of languages ​​who study in different countries of the world as foreign languages ​​- English, French, Spanish. And the French language in this ranking is firmly entrenched in second place. Also, the French language engenders the whole culture of many countries around the world and is now in third place by the number of countries in which it is officially recognized and used. (based on the article " World distribution of languages " andorro )

According to data from Wikipedia , approximately 274 million people currently speak French. By 2025, this number will reach 500 million, and by 2050 it will be 650 million.

Starting this year, the French Ministry of Education (Le ministère de l'Éducation nationale) requires textbook publishers to switch to new spelling rules to improve school performance.

This is a list of approximately 2400 words (≈ 4% of the French vocabulary), the spelling of which was simplified by experts. ( Article at www.lefigaro.fr )

Thus, the French Minister of Education Najat Vallaud-Belkacem of France is struggling with school failure by actively advocating for the use of simplified spelling rules .

It seems to be a reform (at least the government calls it so, but not quite).

However, along with the simplified versions, the classical norms of spelling will remain in force.

Reform 26 years ago

"Amendments to the French spelling" were approved by the French Academy and the French High Council in the late 1980s, and published in the Official Gazette of France (December 6, 1990).

For a long time, they were only taken into consideration, and only in 2008 did the Official Gazette of the Ministry of Education of France (No. 3 of June 19, 2008) integrate them into the school curriculum.

And still, for about 7 years, the rules were only partially applied in practice. Thus, since 2008, some new spelling rules began to appear in the textbooks of the Belin publishing house, but were applied with certain restrictions, and the recommendations were not particularly followed. Everything changed a few months ago, when the Official Gazette of the Ministry of Education of France dated November 26, 2015 noted for the first time:

"Spelling training refers to amendments to spelling, published in the Official Journal of the French Republic on December 6, 1990."

Finally! Not even 26 years)

In February 2016 (more than two months after the publication of the newsletter ... Bravo speed! ), The media suddenly woke up (in particular after reporting on the main French TV channel TF1), and with zeal of Joan of Arc lined up in defense of the melodious, noble, unique French:

» Non, l'accent circonflexe ne va pas disparaître
» Réforme de l'orthographe: les contrevérités continuent
» Réforme de l'orthographe: inapplicable!
» Que cache la réforme de l'orthographe?

The government has actively spoken about the need to extend the new spelling rules to all school textbooks. Since September 2016, books with “new spelling rules” are marked with a special icon: “Nouvelle orthographe” (New spelling).

So what has changed? Perhaps I will highlight the main points:

• Compound numbers

The rule was simple: we put a hyphen between dozens and units (i.e., for numerals below one hundred), except in cases when they are connected with "et" (and).
Example: "quatre-vingt-douze" (92)

From this point on, we put a hyphen between each numeral:

"cent cinquante et un" (151) becomes "cent-cinquante-et-un"
The mille sept cent quatre-vingt-quatorze (1794) becomes the mille-sept-cent-quatre-vingt-quatorze.

In this case, absolutely nothing justifies the use of a hyphen between each numeral. Yes, and such a cluster of hyphens is annoying visually.

• Hyphen and simplifying spelling of the words "with difficulties"

You, of course, remember these vile puzzles, when it was necessary to reconcile the words “with difficulties” correctly? When they consisted of “verb + noun” or “preposition + noun,” the second part systematically adopted “s”.

Simple, practical and effective: des après-midis (pl. Afternoon), des perce-neiges (snowdrops), des porte-paroles (speakers).

Now "s" take both component words. Personally, this novelty in spelling doesn’t bother me much, but I can understand the nostalgia of those who loved to try to find the right ending.

Also, words written with a hyphen can be written without it: weekend (weekend), millepattes (centipede), portemonnaie (wallet), etc.

• Gravis (accent grave) instead of acuta (accent aigu)

The words céleri (celery), crémerie (dairy shop) and sécheresse (drought) are spelled with an acute letter, because in the second syllable of these words there is a so-called "deaf e" (e muet). According to the new rules, these words can be written with a grave: cèleri, crèmerie and sècheresse.

As well as the verbs, which in the future tense and conditional moods were conjugated by analogy of the verb "céder" (retreat). Now take the form: "je cèderai", "j'altèrerai".

• In some cases, the circumflex disappears (accent circonflexe)

Here is a whole range of impressions. What can you read recently in the network and the media about the alleged death of the circumflex! It was like the death of Moliere himself!

Although the question of the abolition of the circumflex never touched the vowels "a", "e", "o".

The disadvantages include the fact that it becomes optional on "i", "u", unless it creates confusion. For example:

("I will have a small post" and "I will have a young friend")

Thus, the use of the circumflex here remains mandatory, as well as in the words dû (proper), mûr (ripe), sûr (confident), since these words have meaning-changing homonyms - du (partial article), mur (wall) , sur (on) ...

But we could safely do without circumflex in such words: boite / boîte (box), buche / bûche (log), cout / coût (cost), maitresse / maîtresse (teacher), il parait / il paraît (it seems), and etc. Since there is no ambiguity in the use of these words; I'm not talking about contextual meanings, but about spelling.

Also the circumflex remains to distinguish some verb forms: tu crois (verb croire - to believe), tu croîs (verb croitre - to grow).

Internet users perceived a partial rejection of the circumflex as a complete abolition of this icon and appeared in social networks with the hashtag protest #Jesuiscirconflexe .

However, in many cases their arguments turned out to be erroneous. For example, they criticized linguists for rejecting the "hat" over those words, the meaning of which changes, if it is removed (for example, jeûne / jeune - post / young). And this is not provided by the reform.

To me, too much ado about nothing. Of course, with the abolition of the circumflex, we gradually forget about the origin of the words. After all, the circumflex, as a rule, indicated the letter "s" that disappeared from the word.

Example: from the Latin "Hospital" mutated in the "hôpital". "S" disappeared not only in the written version, but also in speech. But in the Russian version, this letter is actively pronounced: "gospital".

• Reconcile verb "laisser" + infinitive

Dear readers, I have a question for you! How can you still write: "elle s'est laissé faire" or "elle s'est laissée faire" (she gave up)?

I have good news for you: you no longer need to reread a lot of literature in search of a suitable rule or answer. Now the past participle of the verb laisser (leave) along with the indefinite form of the verb linguists propose not to change according to gender and number: elle s'est laissé faire, ils se sont laissé faire (current norm: elle s'est laissée faire, ils se sont laissés faire).

• Nouns ending in -illier and -illière

The changes affected only four words: joaillier (jeweler), marguillier (smoking pipe), quincaillier (managing shop), serpillière (mop).

From now on, they will lose their second "i" and become joailler, marguiller, quincailler, serpillère.

According to the reform, we are talking about correcting graphic anomalies that are contrary to the general rules of spelling.

• Borrowed words

Until now, the plural number of words borrowed abroad (Latin, English ...) followed the rules of their country: un scenario → des scenarii, un colombarium → des colombaria, un sandwich → des sandwichEs. I always thought this rule was absurd.

And voila, the reform now allows you to write des scenarios, des colombariums, des sandwichs ...

• Verbs ending in -eler and -eter

Until now, there were two types of verbs. Such as "peler" (peel the skin) or "acheter" (buy), which are conjugated with gravis: je pèle, j'achète. And such as "ruisseler" (drain) or "étiqueter" (make a label), which used two "t" or two "l" in conjugation: je ruisselle, j'étiquette.

But now all verbs obey the general rule and are written with a gravis: je ruissèle / j'étiquète.

The same applies to adverbs: un ruissellement (stock) will become un ruissèlement ...

Simple, effective, not expensive)

• Change spelling of some words

Oignon / Ognon (bow) - the main word of discord!

This is the only word that many media outlets "snatched" from comprehensive reform. It's all about spelling anomalies, stretching from the old French. At that time, they wrote besoigne ("besogne" - a task), estraigne ("étrange" - strange) or montaigne ("montagne" - a mountain). Only one oignon (bow) keeps this feature (the letter "i") until today.

Personally, I would leave the word oignon unchanged, as it is widely used, because it’s still funny to hear people say “ouagnon” (because there is an “i”, and according to the rules such pronunciation would be correct), since absolutely everyone knows how to write oignon correctly, since it is already a habit from childhood and a kind of tradition.

As for the other changes in spelling, they are very welcome, because they are quite "logical". And are as follows:

boursoufler (blow up) → boursouffler (souffler - blow)
bonhomie (friendliness) → bonhommie (homme - male)
combatif (warlike) → combattif (combattre - to fight)
chariot (cart) → charriot (Latin root carrus - wagon)
dissous (dissolved) → dissout (female gender: dissoute - dissolved)
imbécillité (dementia) → imbécilité (imbécile - idiot)
nénuphar (lily) → nénufar (Persian origin: nilufar - lily)
persifler (mock) → persiffler (siffler - whistle)
relais (relay) → relai (balai - broom / délai - delay) ...

"Performance for all"

Thus, the French Academy motivates its decision to simplify the spelling rules by the fact that "the language is changing," and "the spelling must be corrected in accordance with the requirements of the time." And I fully support this maxim. Change is the engine of progress.

Linguists argue that the complexities of language often make "even educated people" think about the spelling of certain words. Indeed, in the case of the long-suffering circumflex, it is probably easier to remember how to spell a word than to look for a rule. Why, for example, do the same words “jeûner” (fast) and déjeuner (dine) be spelled differently?

Other opponents of reforming the written French language saw in the introduced measures an attempt to simplify the written language and level it in accordance with the language level of the poorly educated segments of the population.

What to think about this reform? On the one hand, the media woke up too late, because the reform was published 26 years ago. In addition, she, like, does not oblige to anything (after all, both forms are preserved), and everyone, it would seem, can choose the form of spelling that he likes.

Finally, it is important to note that this reform still simplifies spelling. Sometimes, of course, complicates some spelling rules, but also annihilates many exceptions and "illogical" spelling rules.

But it is necessary to understand that language is a living creature that develops over time. We do not speak and do not write today the way it was three hundred years ago. Can we say that French has been simplified over the centuries?

And what to do with the search for words in dictionaries (traditional and electronic)?

After all, we all know that any dictionary contains a list of words in their normative spelling. But does this list keep up with spelling reforms, is the new French spelling possible for the electronic “know-all”?

This is what we'll talk about in the second part of the article, where I will compare a few common online translators, how they evolve and whether or not reforms follow spelling.