classicalclarinet wrote:Lucus Eques wrote:but specifically for the short 'i' like English 'sit'. That drives me nuts. It's unforgivable.
Forgive me, how so?
Because the vowel sound of the 'i' in 's
it', especially in most American dialects (such as the one observed of Wheelock), does not exist in any other language, certainly no other in Europe. German is the closest, but not even the lowest of German comes close to matching that schwa-like sound, which has place in our beloved English, but which has absolutely no place in a language like Latin. The Romans very, very clearly state that the vowels A, I, and U sound just the same short as they do long —
[Pompei. _Comm. ad Donat._ Keil. v. V. p. 101.] De istis quinque
litteris tres sunt, quae sive breves sive longae ejusdemmodi sunt, A, I,
U: similiter habent sive longae sive breves.
— and in the case of 'i', this means always like an English 'ee' sound. The Romans describe a vowel system virtually identical to modern Italian, and no such sound as the 'i' in 's
it' exists in that daughter-tongue.
Yes, it does seem like Ceasar barking out orders- it's strange, but still the Wheelock people say "For purposes of clarity, all words are
pronounced at a slower pace and enunciated more distinctly
than would be usual in normal reading or conversation." I don't think they'd expect that to be representing naturally spoken speech.
Yeah, I don't see the point. Maybe for the first few words, but otherwise how is the student supposed to immitate natural reading or speech when no examples are provided?
Though given the ridiculous mispronunciations on the site (as cool as it is that it exists), especially the pronunciation of final '-us' much like the English word "us," it is likely any normal-speed reading would be just as painful and inaccurate.
This is my old lyre that I like to harp on — I'm very much an advocate of reviving the spoken Roman language.