I was just taking up the question on what the law actually required in 1906.
You know, the law which famously respelled "vet du hvem som gåfvan gaf" as "vet du vem som gåvan gav" (without changing the pronunciation).
For my part, I'd have no qualms braving that law
if it had required of all citizens (or subjects as we are a kingdom) to spell it the newer way. Why? Because of a certain exchange at Constance between an Emperor and his Latin scholars.
It so happens, "schisma" is not a word like "rosa", which has the genitive "rosae". It is rather a Greek loan, which in Greek has the genitive "schismatos" and in Latin can either keep that or slightly latinise to "schismatis".
You can imagine what genitive the Emperor used after "crimen" for the phrase "the crime of schism". I'm not repeating it. He was corrected.
His reply was:
"Cæsar supra grammaticos" — "Caesar is above the grammarians"
Their reply to that was:
"Cæsar non supra grammaticam" — "Caesar is not above the grammar"
So, if the law
had required of me to spell "vet du vem som gåvan gav" (ugh), I'd have replied "nah, Caesar is not above grammar, and that goes for a Senate as well" ...
But in fact it doesn't.
Den 7 april 1906 antog riksdagen den nya stavningsreformen. Det innebar att man slutade lära ut gammalstavning i skolorna och myndigheterna skulle använda ett mer modernt språk. Om inte denna reform hade gått igenom så hade vi kanske fortfarande skrivit "hvirfvel" (virvel), hvalf (valv) och hvi (vi). Hvem skulle hvilja ha det så?*
7 April 1906 the Riksdag accepted the new spelling reform. It involved stopping to teach the old spelling in schools and that authorities should use a more modern language. If this reform hadn't passed, we might still have been spelling
"hvirfvel" (virvel), "hvalf" (valv) and
"hvi" (vi). Who would whant it like that?
The spelling mistake in "whant" is deliberate and reflects the probably ignorant "hvilja" which doesn't exist in Swedish after or before 1906. The only words with "hvil-" in Swedish are "hvilken", "hvilket", "hvilkendera", "hvilketdera".
Other ignorant proposition: we would be spelling "vi" as "hvi" ... well, in fact, there are two "vi" in that sense in Swedish, namely the older "hvi" which means "why" and which disappeared before 1906, apart from:
Jungfru Månstråle, hvi gråten I
in a (1970's,) translation from Carl Barks. Where "hvi" for "hvarföre" is as deliberately archaic** as "gråten I" for "gråter ni".
The other "vi" was already spelled "vi" before 1906. Just as "hvi" means "why" (a word with hv corresponding to one with wh) so also "vi" means "we" (a word with v corresponding to one with w).
The other two spellings, as in "gåfvan gaf" ("the gift gave"), Swedish allowing to finalise the verb in a subsidiary clause, are spellings with f after a vowel and fv between vowels (you can also have l or r before the f). These correspond to words which in English have a v (except when English has a loan word, like "Viking" from Norse or "very" from French). Or sometimes English even has an f here.
The point is, it is perfectly legal to spell Swedish with the older spelling, as long as:
- you are not teaching Swedish in a school in Sweden and
- you are not doing in in the quality of a Swedish administrator.
The latter is ignored by the military. A certain form there is called "afse-blankett" and "blankett" means "a form leaving blanks for writing what you are supposed to write in them" and "afse" is short for "afseende" — now spelled "avseende". It means "concerning" and the form is used when some object of equipment has been lost and needs replacing.
"Concerning the spade — it broke when we used it as a lever to get the car up" / "Afseende spaden — den gick sönder när vi använde den som häfstång för att lyfta bilen"
That kind of form, as said, is an "afse-blankett" and not an "avse-blankett" ...
The point is, when I'm writing Swedish as I do, I'm doing nothing illegal.
I'll still get harrassed for it by Swedish authorities, who'd pretend I'm doing something childish by not cooperating with the hopeless progressivist social leverage this reform has produced in many parts of the population. Like, some will ignore my actual response, pretending I responded in some fit of madness, because I didn't change the spelling I normally use to fit their hysteric fanaticism for modernism and for state above the people. This very much explains why I'd hate the idea of going back to Sweden.
Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Camillus of Lellis
18.VII.2026
14 Julii Romae natalis sancti Camilli de Lellis, Presbyteri et Confessoris, Clericorum Regularium infirmis ministrantium Institutoris; quem, virtutibus et miraculis clarum, Summus Pontifex Benedictus Decimus quartus in Sanctorum numero recensuit, et Leo Decimus tertius caelestem hospitalium et infirmorum Patronum renuntiavit. Ipsius tamen festivitas quintodecimo Kalendas Augusti recolitur. —
18 Julii Sancti Camilli de Lellis, Presbyteri et Confessoris, Clericorum Regularium infirmis ministrantium Institutoris, caelestis hospitalium et infirmorum Patroni; cujus dies natalis pridie Idus Julii recolitur.
* Posted on Facebook:
Svenska Öden & Äventyr
7 april 2020
https://www.facebook.com/odenochaventyr/posts/den-7-april-1906-antog-riksdagen-den-nya-stavningsreformen-det-innebar-att-man-s/1559494404202318/
** There is a clear difference between clearly archaic Swedish and a clear refusal to join the consensus around the new spelling. The latter obviously doesn't require competense in a period's typical diction, simply in the older spelling and grammar.
