0

Is there a difference in meaning between Haeusling and Häusling?

I have been told that 'häusling' in Thode’s "German English Genealogical Dictionary" it defines 'häusling' as a “Cottager (and day laborer)”.

My sources uses the term 'Haeusling' for the occupation of an ancestor born in 1675. I am trying to identify the differences and an English definition of the occupation(s).

I am also aware that written German uses initial capitals differently than English. In a genealogical report is it appropriate to use an initial capital, 'Haeusling'?

user unknown
  • 23,274
  • 4
  • 47
  • 97
  • You got the umlauts wrong. It's the A (Haus/Häuser) which carries the dots, not the U. Since I didn't knew the word, I had to look it up by myself, and found your definition (day laborer), so I'm confident, I got it right, but I don't know any case, where a double vocal has an umlaut in second position, at least not in diphthongs. In compositions, ymmv: Gnuära, Trullalaübung, Akneüberraschung, Knieödem usw. – user unknown Apr 30 '22 at 16:44
  • See http://www.genealogie-reichel.de/berufe.htm. "Häusling" and "Häusler" seem to be synonym. The latter was known to me, some of my ancestors have been Häusler. – Paul Frost Apr 30 '22 at 16:59

1 Answers1

2

Much of this answer has already been covered in the comments, so this is pretty much just a rehash of what has already been said. It's not clear how much German you know so I'm going to try to answer at a very basic level.

First, unlike most European languages, German capitalizes all nouns, not just proper nouns. This includes occupation names no matter how they're spelled. But this hasn't always been standardized, and it may be possible that records from the 17th century use uncapitalized nouns. See What is the origin of the rules about the capitalization of the first letter of each noun? for more information on this topic. Anything written today would always use capitalized nouns; doing otherwise would be considered a spelling error. While German and English capitalization rules have other differences, this is most obvious one.

The mark above the 'a' in 'ä' is called an umlaut. Historically, this was a ligature combining 'a' and 'e', something like 'æ' in older forms of English. In German, the 'e' moved to the top of the letter and was reduced to the two dots as they exist today. There are only three letters with umlauts in German, 'ä', 'ö' and 'ü'. There are also capital versions of these, 'Ä', 'Ö' and 'Ü'. Note that the umlaut is not the same as the diaeresis which appears in some languages other than German; they appear to be the same but they have different uses and histories. There is one other German ligature, the eszet 'ß', which combines an old style long 's', 'ſ', with a 'z'. This should not be confused with the Greek 'β'. The eszet only exists in lower case, making a total of seven characters used in German but not in English. If the umlauts or eszet are not available for some reason, then it's customary to replace them with the corresponding letter combinations, so 'ae', 'oe', 'ue', 'Ae', 'Oe', 'Ue', 'sz'. In the past this might have been because the printer did not have them, or because a typewrite did not have the corresponding keys. With modern computer systems, it should be possible to reproduce these characters on non-German equipment, though figuring out how to do it can be a challenge. So while you may see Häusling spelled Haeusling, it should be avoided if possible. Other than that, they are just different spellings of the same word.

Umlauts rarely occur as the second of two vowels, so the Haüsling spelling you had in the original version of your question would be highly unlikely.

As to what a Häusling actually is or was, and how it could be translated into English, this is where I feel we're getting into areas of expertise outside the German language. Pre-industrial occupations were partly a matter of class and local custom, so there wouldn't necessarily be an exact correspondence between the occupations of different countries. Then there's the fact that some of these terms aren't in many people's active vocabulary, and that their meanings may have changed a good deal over time. I didn't know what a "cotteger" was until I looked it up, and it seems to have meant something different in the 17th century. So I think the best I can do is to offer my (with help from Google) translations of the definitions given in the link given above by Paul Frost. It defines Häusling as:

Small farmers with their own house and little property. See also Häusler. In some regions also cohabitors or renters of a small house without their own possessions. They mostly worked as day laborers or small businesses.

It defines Häusler thus:

Small farmers with their own house but little or no real estate and little or no livestock were called Häusler. The Häusler often only had employment opportunities as small craftsmen, servants, day labourers, schoolmasters or shepherds. In the 19th century, the Häusler were a transitional form of day laborers for the respective landlords and dependent on this additional income, since their own agricultural property was not sufficient to make a living. Due to their weak social position, they were disproportionately burdened with taxes and duties from the landlord in most communities.

RDBury
  • 11,442
  • 1
  • 13
  • 42
  • The "ß" (eszet) is NOT a ligature between "s" and "z" but between two forms of "s" (in Fraktur), 'ſ' and "s". Because one was used at syllable ends and the other in the middle of syllables it was possible to differentiate between i.e. "Kreischen" (diminutive of "Kreis") and "kreischen" (to scream). This is the reason why i.e. "Maße" (Mas-se) and "Masse" (Mass-e) are written as they are. One is a doubled consonant like "ll", "mm", "nn", etc., the other is a ligature to show that two "s"-es from adjoining syllables happened to come together. – bakunin May 01 '22 at 21:27
  • 1
    Notice that Fraktur was the predominant font until Martin Bormann (in the "Bormann-Erlaß", which called Fraktur "Schwabacher Judenlettern") more or less dictated the use of Antiqua-fonts in 1942. The Neonazis who use Fraktur today because it is soooo "german" obviously have it backwards (not only in this regard, if i may add). – bakunin May 01 '22 at 21:31
  • @bakunin: I'm just going by what it says in Wikipedia. Having read Fraktur, my main thought about it is that it must have been named after what it does to your eyes. Unicode has code blocks for Fractur by the way, so I can actually demonstrate how hard it is to tell the difference between , and . – RDBury May 02 '22 at 03:43
  • far be it from me to argue about the superiority of fonts - suffice it to say that the readability of fonts depends heavily on how used one is to reading them. Musicians read notes with much more ease than non-musicians: does that mean that notes are particularly hard to read? Fact is, most books were printed in Fraktur and this gradually switched to Antiqua over the last ~250 years. At 1941 (the "1942" above was a typo) the "Deutsche Schreibschrift" (aka "Sütterlin" or "Kurrent", which also had the 2 forms of "s") was replaced to by the "Deutsche Lateinschrift" we use still today. – bakunin May 02 '22 at 08:43
  • 1
    ß is not replaced with sz (anymore). It is replaced with ss if necessary. (I should know, my family name contains an ß.) –  May 02 '22 at 14:11
  • @Roland: Thanks, I stand corrected. – RDBury May 02 '22 at 18:56