This work describes the orthographic content in grammars of European languages in the 17th and the 18th century. Reviewed were 17 grammars for 7 languages in Rationalism, 15 grammars for 11 languages in the Enlightenment, and 12 Latin orthographies. As for orthographic entities in the broader sense (orthography as a way to write down speech), our starting point were orthographic grapheme units which are contrasted to meaning (i.e. orthographic entities in the narrower sense, e.g. punctuation). Contrary to the traditional description which focused on spelling, this work observes the beginnings of orthographic content in grammars and its development into an autonomous language phenomenon and norm. The strong connection between orthography and grammar is described and it is established that, from the diachronic point of view, orthography cannot be integrally reviewed without studying the grammatical teachings.

This paper discusses the impact of orthographic manuals on the state of literacy, i.e. the relation of orthographic literacy and orthographic standardisation. The established hypothesis claims that frequent changes of orthographic rules during the pupils’ primary and secondary education do not have any considerable impact on their orthographic habits. In other words, the quantity of orthographic mistakes observed during a longer period of time and in conditions of changed orthographic rules would not show significant oscillations in their spelling. In order to confirm the hypothesis, a questionnaire was conducted encompassing 41 tests among 526 students of a technical study programme during four consecutive academic years, pursuant to whose results a writing uniformity index and a categorisation of orthographic controversy into six classes is established. The Croatian language has been selected for the observation due to multiple orthographic changes in the last 30 years in the three major orthographic points: writing of the covered r, writing of d and t in front of c and č in declination of words ending in -tak, -tac, -dak and -dac, and the issue of compound or separate spelling of the negation particle and the auxiliary biti (to be). Moreover, the paper methodologically and quantitatively establishes criteria according to which the second established hypothesis on evolutionary orthographic literacy can be confirmed. The conclusions are expected to be able to contribute to the better understanding of orthographic planning and application of orthographic norms in schools.

This paper researches the as yet unstudied topic of orthographic content in antique, medieval, and Renaissance grammar books in European languages, as part of a wider research of the origin of orthographic standards in European languages. As a central place for teachings about language, grammar books contained orthographic instructions from the very beginning, and such practice continued also in later periods. Understanding the function, content, and orthographic forms in the past provides for a better description of the nature of the orthographic standard in the present. The evolution of grammatographic practice clearly shows the continuity of development of orthographic content from a constituent of grammar studies through the littera unit gradually to an independent unit, then into annexed orthographic sections, and later into separate orthographic manuals. 5 antique, 22 Latin, and 17 vernacular grammars were analyzed, describing 19 European languages. The research methodology is based on distinguishing orthographic content in the narrower sense (grapheme to meaning) from the broader sense (grapheme to phoneme). In this way, the function of orthographic description was established separately from the study of spelling. As for the traditional description of orthographic content in the broader sense in old grammar books, it is shown that orthographic content can also be studied within the grammatographic framework of a specific period, similar to the description of morphology or syntax. We found that 4 out of 5 antique, 11 out of 22 Latin and 5 out of 17 vernacular grammarians describe orthographic content in the narrower sense.