Breve compendio de todo lo que debe saber

Guadalupe Ramírez, Antonio de

Domaine	Traditions non-occidentales
Secteur	Grammaires amérindiennes [4658]
Auteur(s)	Guadalupe Ramírez, Antonio de
	Datation: fl. 18e s. Antonio de Guadalupe Ramírez, the author of a Breve compendio de todo lo que debe saber, y entender el Christiano, was a Franciscan (O.F.M.), Guardián del Colegio de Propaganda Fide en Pachuca (Guerrero Galván 2013, p. 81), where later Joaquín López Yepes also worked. He wrote According to Náxera (1984, p. xii-xiii; 132-133) Guadalupe Ramírez criticizes Neve y Molina’s catechism. He was commissioned by the authorities to write another one.
Titre de l'ouvrage	Breve compendio de todo lo que debe saber, y entender el Christiano, para poder lograr, ver, conocer, y gozar de Dios Nuestro Señor en el cielo eternamente
Titre traduit	Brief compendium containing anything a Christian should know and understand, in order to reach, see, know and enjoy God our Lord in heaven eternally
Titre court	Breve compendio de todo lo que debe saber
Remarques sur le titre	Complete title: Breve compendio de todo lo que debe saber, y entender el Christiano, para poder lograr, ver, conocer, y gozar de Dios Nuestro Señor en el cielo eternamente. Dispuesto en lengua othomi, y Construido literalmente en la Lengua Castellana, por el P. Fr. Antonio de Guadelupe Ramírez, Predicador Apostólico, y ex-Guardian del Apostólico Colegio de Propaganda Fide de N.S.P.S. Francisco de la Ciudad de Pachuca. Quien por Decreto del Venerable Concilio Provincial IV, expedido el dia 17 de Agosto de 1771. formó un Cathecismo Breve en Lengua Othomi, el que (en parte à que dieron lugar las incidencias del tiempo) fue visto, examinado, y aprobado por los Señores Sinodales de dicho Idioma, nombrados por el mismo Venerable Concilio. Haviendose tenido sobre la materia Sesiones particulares en el Palacio Arzobispal, como consta de sus Actas en las que igualmente se acordó, el que siempre, que se diese à la Estampa dicho Cathecismo, se incorporase en él, el Alfabeto dicho Idioma, para que se pudiese leer sin error.
Période	\|18e s.\|
Type de l'ouvrage	“Cartilla”, with some morphophonemic rules on page 16 and a Catechism and Doctrina christiana, p. 19-80, in double columns of Spanish and Otomi.
Type indexé	Orthoépie \| Texte religieux \| Traité d'orthographe
Édition originale	1785, México, En la Imprenta nueva Madrileña de los Herederos del Lic. D.Joseph de Jauregui; en la Calle de San Bernardo.
Édition utilisée	John Carter Brown Library. Call number: b3904155.
Volumétrie	[16], 80 p., [1] folded leaf; 19 cm. (in-4°).
Nombre de signes	6000
Reproduction moderne	No recent editions.
Diffusion	The special alphabet was not very successful and it was probably not used after its implementation.
Langues cibles	Otomi (Otomanguean family, Otopamean branch). Otomi is a Nahuatl exonym. Today, Hñähñu is used as an endonym (also spelled as Hñäñho)
Métalangue	Castilian (Spanish)
Langue des exemples	Otomi
Sommaire de l'ouvrage	[Prologue, no title, no name of an author given, no numbered pages; Censura del Lic. D. Juan Francisco Caballero Jasso y Ossorio; Parecer del Sr. D. Ignacio Ramon Moreno; Licencia del Superior Gobierno; Licencia del Ordinario; Licencia de la orden Fr. Domingo Dominguez de Brozas; Fe de erratas; Orthography, starting with the special alphabet developed by the author, proper and obscure vowels, and consonants in alphabetical order (1-5); Ejemplares (for each letter/ symbol or letter combination, examples are given in order to learn the differences) (“ejemplares para su conocimiento diferencial”) (6-9); Formulario de dicciones con todas las letras para mejor inteligencia mas recta, y clara explicación de lo dicho (a ”cartilla” containing syllables, i.e. combinations of consonants and vowels) (9-10); Exemplares con que se explican las letras, o dicciones del primer renglón [examples containing these letter-combinations/ syllables] (10-15); Nota primera (all the letters which as written (“figuradas”) as in Castilian, have to be pronounced as in Castilian (15); Nota segunda (Special pronunciation of loans, and how they are “otomotized” (“se otomítizan”)) (15); Nota tercera (The introductory chapter of Guadalupe Ramírez is not exclusively a “cartilla” or spelling-book with explanations of how to pronounce this language, but here the author gives some information about morphophonological changes of initial consonants, a crucial topic for Otomanguean languages.”). The rest work is the bilingual catechism and a Doctrina Christiana, on the left in Otomi, and on the right column in Spanish, starting with “Palabras para persignarse, y santiguarse en Otomí, y Castellano” (18-80). As colophon, we find the abbreviation O.S.C.S.M.E.C.A.R. (Omnia Sub Correctione Sanctae Matris Ecclesiae Catholicae Apostolicae Romanae).
Objectif de l'auteur	The reason behind the decision to compose a new catechism, was that those which appeared earlier, were not printed with an adequate alphabet adapted to the Otomi language. The author of an earlier printed work in Otomi, the Jesuit Francisco de Miranda’s Catecismo breve en lengua otomí (Mexico, 1759) informed his readers that the publishing house missed the adequate fonts for the representation of Otomi sounds (Miranda 1759, p. 13). In his catechism, the vowels with the diacritics â, ê, ô, û and ò or ã are “mixed up” (“se han mezclado así”). Vowels with diacritics, regardless of the symbol used, are “obscure” and pronounced through the nose, opening the lips slightly (“se pronuncian obscuras, y por las narices pronounced “clear” (“claras”), those which do not have diacritics are “clear” vowels (“claras”)) (p. 13-14). Miranda also gives some rules regarding aspiration, stressed vowels written with the grave accent are “long” (“largas”), which means that Miranda does not use the dichotomy high versus low for this tonal language. Miranda also gives some information about the geminated consonants {tt} (“se hace pegando la lengua a los dientes”), an expression which is also used by earlier grammarians. Special symbols are also used, such as the “diphthong of the {u}”, resembling the symbol ʯ (in Word the exact symbol is not available), the æ, and Miranda also compares the pronunciation of {x} and the digraph {tz} with Nahuatl (“mexicano”). Miranda announces the publication of an “orthographia” which will appear “soon” (“que saldrá á la luz, siendo Dios servido”). It is not clear if the author refers to Neve y Molina’s work or if he planned to write an orthography himself. In any case, Guadalupe Ramírez’s main goal was to follow the guidelines of the IV Concilio Mexicano, to publish a catechism which is precise and as clear as possible (“con la precision, y claridad posible”). Different from the Catechisms written in Castilian, Nahuatl, Huastec, works which the author had seen, there is no clear orthography for Otomi. The author also states that he has planned to write a second and third part of the Doctrina Chrsitiana, and a copious Dictionary (“un copioso Vocabulario”), all to be printed in the special fonts developed for Otomi, but these works never appeared. P. 5: “no escribe Arte de este Idioma… solo se encamina, a que adjunta con la que contiene el Alfabeto, sirvan de evitar malas locuciones”.
Intérêt général	Guadalupe Ramírez developed a special alphabet for Otomi containing 34 symbols, digraphs and trigraphs included (Wright Carr 2005, p. 7). The alphabet is remarkably different from those developed be his predecessors. The Franciscan from Pachuca developed his, both inspired by classical orthographies and by those of his time (Guerrero Galván 2013, p. 219). The printing of this work was a real challenge and the printing house worked 14 years on it. The fonts had to be made in Europe. The interest of this development was aesthetic, but it was also criticised since it was difficult to read. For more details about the special symbols developed by Guadalupe Ramírez, see Garone Gravier (2014, p. 277) and in particular Guerrero Galván (2013).
Parties du discours	The work is not a grammar but contains information on orthography and pronunciation.
Innovations term.	(Semi-)metalinguistic and articulatory descriptions: Pectoral obscurísima (“Pectoral, very obscure”) (p. 1); empuje de la voz del que adolorido se queja (“pushing the voice with pressure, as would someone complaining when he has pain”) (p. 1); teniendo los labios cerrados, y luego se abren, pegar el empuje de la voz (“keeping the lips closed, and then opening them initiating the pressure of the voice”) (p. 1); castañuelas (“castanets”) (p. 2); empuje de la voz, que tiene su origen en la campanilla (“pushing [with pressure] the voice, which has its origin in the uvula”), Abiertos y despegados los labios, se pegue a la vocal, (“the lips opened and loosened, striking the vowel”) (p. 2); se forma con la campanilla, y las fauces (“formed in the uvula, and the fauces (pharynx]”) (p. 2); las hace claras u obscuras (“making them clear or dark” (p. 3); dental fortísima (“very strong dental”), (letra) con rabo, sin rabo (“letter with tail, without tail”) (p. 4); pegar la lengua al paladar (“striking the tongue to the palate”) (p. 4); aspirando siempre dicha voz totalmente, sin que llegue à ser narigal (“aspirating the sound totally, without becoming nasal”) (p. 4); totalmente pectoral obscura, semejante al graznido de la Paloma (“totally dark and pectoral, resembling the sound of squawking doves”); el valido de la Oveja, y por eso la llaman los Artistas ovejuna (“the sound of bleating sheep, and for that reason grammarians called it sheepish”) (p. 4); voz aspirada, semejante à la del quejido de los enfermos (“aspirated sound, which resembles the moaning of sick people”) (p. 7); es necesario formar un susurro, semejante al del moscardón, llamado vulgarmente Gicote, ò al del pajarillo, llamado chupamirtos (“It is necessary to produce a humming sound, which resembles the sound of a hornet, commonly known “Gicote” [from Nahuatl xicotl, avispa cimarrona, Molina: “abeja grande”, “big wasp”; “hummingbird”] (p. 8); No seseando, al tocar la lengua a los dientes se pronuncia bien (“without producing ‘s-es’, as the Andalusians do not pronounce /θ/ or maybe as some Andalusian varieties articulate the {s} as with a lisp”) (p. 8); en formando el sonido de la voz en la gutur, y acercando la lengua a los dientes con un mediano seseo (“producing the sound of the voice in the throat, bringing the tongue near to the teeth, with a partial ‘seseo’ (“lisping”) (p. 8); no solo del remedo del Gicote, sino también de la del quejido del enfermo (“not only pronounced imitating the xicotl but also producing the moaning of the sick”) (p. 13); “los nombres y dicciones Castellanas, que solo se Otomotizan, como en el nombre de Jesu Christo” (“Castilian nouns and words, which they “Otomitize”, as in the name of Jesus Christ”) (p. 15).
Corpus illustratif	The “cartilla” and the articulatory descriptions are accompanied by “exemplares” (examples) in Otomi.
Indications compl.
Influence subie	It is not clear where Guadalupe Ramírez took his information regarding orthography and pronunciation from, but there is a shared terminology and vocabulary describing sounds and their articulation with some of his predecessors, mainly Sánchez de la Baquera, as the buzzing sound of the “gicote” (xicotl). Guadalupe Ramírez mentions in his prologue the catecisms of Nahuatl and Huastec, which served as his model. As Garona Gravier (2014, p.274) demonstrates, these works are translations of Riplada’s Catechism by Ignacio de Paredes into Nahuatl (1758), and the one included in Carlos de Tapia Zenteno’s Noticia de la lengua huasteca (1767) both printed by the Biblioteca Mexicana. Although Guadalupe Ramírez gives some morpohphonemic rules on pages 16-17, the author tells his readers explicitly that it was not his goal to compose a grammar. His main goal was to publish a tool which enables the users to pronounce the Catechism correctly (“No por estas Notas se entienda que escribo Arte, porque no ha sido, ni es mi ánimo, sino puramente, el que se lea sin error el Catecismo, que me mandó formar el Venerable Concilio Provincial Mexicano IV”).
Influence exercée	The alphabet developed by Guadalupe Ramíez was criticised by the anonymous author of the “examen Crítico” and the “Discurso crítico”, together with the rigid rules of Neve y Molina which do not apply to the Otomi language. There are three reasons (“circunstancias formales”) why this language cannot be “reduced” to grammar. Otomi is “diverse” (diverso) and “singular” and always “particular”, and it is impossible to give “general” rules. The second “circunstancia” is its pronunciation, which is impossible to “reduce” to “Arte”. The third problem is the inadequate Latin alphabet, which only has “moldes no competentes”, not appropriate for this language (fol. 5-6). In the “Discurso (c. 1785), the anonymous author criticises the alphabet developed by Guadalupe Ramírez, which is totally useless according to him. Different from what Sánchez de la Baquera and Neve y Molina tried to demonstrate, it is impossible for an adult to learn the language. Teachers must always be native speakers. Joaquín López Yepes also criticised the alphabet of Guadalupe Ramírez (1826, cited in Guerrero Galván 2013, p. 220).
Renvois bibliographiques	Anonyme 1647; Buelna E. (éd.) 1893 {[ca 1767]}; Garone Gravier M. 2014; Guadalupe Ramírez A. de 1785; Guerrero Galván A. 2013; López Yepes J. 1826; Miranda F. de 1759; Nájera M. de San Juan Crisóstomo 1835; Neve y Molina L. de 1767; Paredes I. 1758; Tapia Zenteno C. de 1767; Wright Carr D. C. 2005
Rédacteur	Zwartjes, Otto
Création ou mise à jour	2018-09