Slashdot Mirror
Thyne Oldest Known Tech Manual
johnshirley writes "How old is the oldest known technical manual? About 613 years, it seems. Written in 1391 by Geoffrey Chaucer for his ten year old son Lewis (Lowys), the manual explains in great detail but very rough spelling and grammar, the intricate workings of the Astrolabe--the predecessor to the sextant. Read Chaucer's 'A Treatise on the Astrolabe here."
There was no standardized spelling in Middle English. Different spellings of the same word in the same text are actually very common in writings of this era. Part of it has to do with spacing - a word would be spelled differently so that it would fit into a line better. Pronunciation and vocabulary were not fully standardized in this era either, causing a lot of problems.
It's not so much that it contains 'rough spelling and grammar' as it was 'written in Middle English'. Middle English is that period in the English language from after Romanticisation (following the Norman invasion in 1066) to roughly a century before Shakespeare.
It's also worth mentioning at this point that the concepts of correct spelling and correct grammar are essentially 20th century concepts within the English language. Samuel Johnson's Dictionary, the first in the language, was not published until 1755. Webster's Dictionary, the first such book in America, did not appear until 1828. Prior to the advent of Dictionaries, spellings were not considered absolute. In Shakespeare's time, it was not uncommon to spell your name differently on different occasions. Not only are spelling and grammar newcomers to our language, the concept of 'correct grammar' is a bit of a dated one. Linguists have come to realize that usage patterns vary from dialect to dialect and context to context. How we speak whe we are discussing Psychology tends to be very different from say, discussing Philosophy. Instead of saying 'incorrect grammar', it is better to speak of 'poor style'.
Bear in mind that when you are reading Greek and Latin you are reading it in a Greek/Latin alphabet.
Bear in mind that when you are reading English you are reading it in a Greek/Latin alphabet.
Since you grew up thinking of the way you read and write as "correct" it doesn't really strike your attention that the fit is rather poor and that there is no proper English alphabet. This makes a difference.
Also bear in mind that the Greek and Latin texts you read have the benefit of fairly stable language development behind them, spanning millenia, whereas English had only existed for a couple of centuries or so by force fitting language, at the point of a sword, into another. This not only screws up the rules but screws up how one thinks about whether their are rules or not.
When this piece was written the Language was still being made up. In fact, Mr. Chaucer helped make it up. What you see is not simply bad and inconsistent spelling but technical experimentation.
Hacking.
KFG
I have here on my desk at work (don't ask why) texts of mostly Roman-period artillery manuals (some in Greek, some in Latin), mostly cribbed from earlier, now-lost materials dating back to the 3rd and 2nd centuries BCE. Much older than the one referenced, and just as 'technical', to the point where they've been used to reconstruct some of the artillery engines described (stone and bolt throwers powered by twisted ropes and/or metal springs).
No linux mentioned anywhere, I'm afraid.
Actually to correct the issue a little more, the concept of correct spelling is actually a little more recent than even dictionaries. The first books published in English appear in the mid-15th century, from the press of William Caxton. The first being printed in 1475. The first dictionaries of English appear in the mid-18th century. Dr. Johnson's dictionary of 43,500 words appeared in 1755, and the American dictionary by Noah Webster slightly later in 1783. Dispite this, there was still lingering reluctance to adopt a standard spelling of words. Even American President Andrew Jackson (1767 - 1845) is reported as stating that he couldn't respect a man who only knew one way to spell a word.