Should we write
“acute”
or
“acute”
?
During the 1990 corrections, the guardians of the French language became interested in the question of accents.
And in particular the placement of the umlaut, this diacritic sign, formed of two points, which is placed above a vowel in order to clarify the pronunciation of the word.
It indicates that two vowels, which follow one another, are pronounced separately one after the other: thanks to the presence of the diaeresis, we know that we must pronounce "
corn"
in this way
"ma-hisse"
and not like the conjunction
“but”
where the vowels
“a”
and
“i”
form a digraph (group of two letters representing a single sound).
To discover
Crosswords, Sudoku, 7 Letters... Keep your mind alert with Le Figaro Games
Despite its apparent simplicity, the diaeresis has long been mistreated.
Depending on the mood of the moment, we place it, we ignore it, we replace it with a letter (why do we write
“trahir”
and not
“traïr”
for example?) or with an accent (exit
“gull”
, place for the
“seagull”
).
If it is customary to place it on the vowel which precedes the one which must also be pronounced, such as the adjective
“naive”
, the noun
“carpharnaüm”
, the rule is not always applied in other words.
What do we think of the term
"acute"
where the diaeresis is located above the
final
"e" called
"mute"
and not on the letter
"u"
that we should hear?
Also read “Oignon”: a spelling that reflects the errors of the French language
“A printing term”
Originally, the umlaut comes from the ancient Greek,
“trêmatos”
which means
“hole, hollow”
.
It is first used to designate the points which appeared on the first dice, we learn via the Trésor de la langue française.
However, it was only during the 13th century that we note the appearance of the first umlauts in Old French in manuscripts.
But their employment begins in a very uncertain manner.
The Renaissance, with the advent of printing, made it known.
Its use is becoming widespread and beginning to be codified.
To the point that it was introduced into the French-Latin dictionary of the printer and lexicologist Robert Estienne who gave it a name:
“trematz points”
.
The diaeresis of the time marks the vowels
"e"
and
"i"
, probably to distinguish them from the consonants
"j"
(which was then written
"i"
) and
"v"
(
"u"
).
However, the first uses remain quite fluctuating regarding its usefulness and its placement.
It is in fact absent from 17th century dictionaries.
- that of Jean Nicot in 1606, of Antoine Furetière in 1690 or even of the first edition of the
Dictionary of the French Academy
in 1694 - which do not have an entry on the word
"umlaut"
.
And this, although we find the colon placed above certain letters in these works.
Only Pierre Richelet, in his
New French dictionary generally containing all the words and materials
published in 1680, sheds light on the use of the diaeresis at the time.
It is indicated there as an adjective, and not indicated as a noun as it is presented today.
The definition he gives is as follows:
“Trêma.
This word is a printing term which is said of three letters, the “e”, the “i”, and the “u”, on which we put two points.
If we stick to this definition, we understand that the diaeresis was perhaps not used to indicate an accent in speech but to distinguish letters in writing.
However, no trace remains of its role in the language.
But we remember the influence of printers in the formation of French spelling.
Also read “Water lily”: incorrect spelling has come into use
A definition that becomes clearer
We had to wait until 1743 with the publication of the
Dictionnaire dit de Trévoux
to find a definition of diaeresis and an indication of its true role in the French language.
The “umlaut” appears there under its current spelling with the acute accent, instead of the circumflex accent, and is defined as such:
“Printing term, which is said with three letters, e, l 'i & u, on which we put two points.
(...) The umlaut vowel must be pronounced alone & separately from the preceding vowel.”
A definition taken up by the French Academy, which finally included it in the fourth edition of its dictionary:
“Says a vowel accented with two points which warn that this vowel alone forms a syllable, & must not unite with another.
These two points are only placed on three vowels, “ë”, “ï”, “ü”.”
And gives as an example the following words:
“poet”
,
“naïve”
,
“ïambe”
,
“Saül”
.
Note the confusion that can be brought by the example of the word
“ïambe”
which emphasizes the “i”, an indication which has no place.
It is still used in the definition of the current edition of the Dictionary of the French Academy.
The grammarian and lexicographer Jean-François Féraud clarified the role of the diaeresis in his
Critical Dictionary of the French Language
(1788) by slightly modifying the definition given previously:
“This is what we call the two points placed on a vowel, to detach it, in pronunciation, from the vowel which immediately precedes it: hate, secular, pagan, enjoy, ambiguous, ambiguity, Saul, etc.”
Note that none of the words mentioned have the silent letter
“e”
topped with an umlaut like the terms
“ambiguë”
,
“ciguë”
as used in the definition of the French Academy.
If the latter uses Féraud's definition in the 5th edition of his dictionary, it nevertheless maintains the example of the word
"ïambe"
used in its previous definition.
Also read: Should we write “event” or “event”?
The evolution of the diaeresis in the 20th century
The French Academy reviewed its position on the umlaut in 1975.
“It decided (...) that the umlaut would be placed on the vowel which must be pronounced with its own timbre: acute, ambiguous, ambiguity, hemlock, cramped, etc. .
She also decided to put an umlaut on “u” in certain words to combat defective pronunciation: argüer, gageüre, mangeüre, rougeüre, vergeüre,”
wrote Professor Joseph Hanse in his
New Dictionary of the Difficulties of Modern French
in 1983 But these proposals were not followed up on.
The Academy finally reversed its decision in 1987. Until the permanent secretary of the French Academy Maurice Druon clarified the question of the diaeresis, evoking a
"source of difficulties"
, in his speech of June 19, 1990 before the Superior Council of the French Language.
The 1990 spelling corrections, published in the
Official Journal
, recognize that the diaeresis
"confuses in cases where it overcomes a silent vowel"
as with the words
"acute"
or
"hemlock"
and state that it is
"desirable that these anomalies be deleted
.
They also reiterate the proposal of the French Academy of 1975 to extend the umlaut in case it makes it possible to avoid incorrect pronunciations such as in
“gageure”
or
“arguer”
, which are in reality pronounced
“gajure”
and not
“ gajeur”
and
“ar-gu-é”
(the
“u”
being heard).
Also read: “Lace maker”, “interpellate”: these spellings revised by Maurice Druon
What do current dictionaries ultimately say about it?
For the New Petit Robert, the diaeresis is a
“sign formed of two juxtaposed dots that we put on the vowels e, i, u, to indicate that the preceding vowel must be pronounced separately, and on the vowels a and o in certain loans
.
The Larousse definition is somewhat different and less clear:
“Orthographic sign consisting of two juxtaposed points which are placed on the vowels e and i (as well as o and u in some foreign words) to indicate that the preceding vowel has an independent pronunciation (naive, coincidence, acute).”
Both spellings are permitted for the diaeresis (traditional spelling and spelling of the 1990 corrections).
Enough to leave us doubting for a while longer.