Audio?

[jjhayes84]

This is the best site that I found. You get 1 GB of storage for free--not bad.
http://www.box.net/
NB: I did notice that their site was going up and down quite often this morning. They are apparently upgrading some of their services. While it's not good that their site was down for a bit this morning, it is good that this site is maintained.

I also found these sites, but you only get 25MB --not quite enough for a lot of audio.
http://www.streamload.com/
http://briefcase.yahoo.com/

I also ran accross some other sites that host your file for only a specific period of time (1week to a month). I didn't list these sites since they don't offer a permanent solution.

[Lucus Eques]

Thanks! I'll try the Box one when it comes back up.

[jjhayes84]

Now that the site is back up, I noticed that, unless you sign up for their paid service, only those who also have a box.net account can access your shared files.

QUESTION: Why doesn't TextKit offer hosting for such files?

[Agrippa]

http://www.tindeck.com/ is the best site to upload these files. Speedy and always works.

[Lucus Eques]

Thanks very much, Agrippa! finally one that works,and very well.

Here we go, gents, from the Ørberg edition of De Bello Gallico, 1-3:



Transcipsi:

DE BELLO GALLICO
Jūliī Caesaris

1. Gallia est omnis dÄ«vÄ«sa in partÄ“s trÄ“s, quÄ￾rum Å«nam incolunt Belgae, aliam AquitÄ￾nÄ«, tertiam quÄ« ipsÅ￾rum linguÄ￾ Celtae, nostrÄ￾ GallÄ« appellantur. HÄ« omnÄ“s linguÄ￾, Ä«nstitÅ«tÄ«s, lÄ“gibus inter sÄ“ differunt.
GallÅ￾s ab AquitÄ￾nÄ«s Garumna flÅ«men, Ä￾ BelgÄ«s MÄ￾trona et SÄ“quana dÄ«vidit.
HÅ￾rum omnium fortissimÄ« sunt Belgae, proptereÄ￾ quod Ä￾ cultÅ« atque hÅ«mÄ￾nitÄ￾te PrÅ￾vinciae longissimÄ“ absunt, minimÄ“que ad eÅ￾s mercÄ￾tÅ￾rÄ“s saepe commeant atque ea quae ad effÄ“minandÅ￾s animÅ￾s pertinent important, proximÄ«que sunt GermÄ￾nÄ«s, quÄ« trÄ￾ns RhÄ“num incolunt, quibuscum continenter bellum gerunt.
QuÄ￾ dÄ“ causÄ￾ HelvÄ“tiÄ« quoque reliquÅ￾s GallÅ￾s virtÅ«te praecÄ“dunt, quod ferÄ“ cotÄ«diÄ￾nÄ«s proeliÄ«s cum GermÄ￾nÄ«s contendunt, cum aut suÄ«s fÄ«nibus eÅ￾s prohibent aut ipsÄ« in eÅ￾rum fÄ«nibus bellum gerunt. ...

2. Apud HelvÄ“tiÅ￾s longÄ“ nÅ￾bilissimus fuit et dÄ«tissimus OrgetorÄ«x. Is, MarcÅ￾ MesallÄ￾ et MarcÅ￾ PÅ«piÅ￾ PÄ«sÅ￾ne cÅ￾nsulibus, rÄ“gnÄ« cupiditÄ￾te inductus conjÅ«rÄ￾tiÅ￾nem nÅ￾bilitÄ￾tis fÄ“cit, et cÄ«vitÄ￾tÄ« persvÄ￾sit ut dÄ“ fÄ«nibus suÄ«s cum omnibus cÅ￾piÄ«s exÄ«rent: perfacile esse, cum virtÅ«te omnibus praestÄ￾rent, tÅ￾tÄ«us Galliae imperiÅ￾ potÄ«rÄ«.
Id hÅ￾c facilius eÄ«s persvÄ￾sit quod undique locÄ« nÄ￾tÅ«rÄ￾ HelvÄ“tiÄ« continentur: Å«nÄ￾ ex parte flÅ«mine RhÄ“nÅ￾ lÄ￾tissimÅ￾ atque altissimÅ￾, quÄ« agrum HelvÄ“tium Ä￾ GermÄ￾nÄ«s dÄ«vidit; alterÄ￾ ex parte monte JÅ«rÄ￾ altissimÅ￾, quÄ« est inter SÄ“quanÅ￾s et HelvÄ“tiÅ￾s; tertiÄ￾ lacÅ« LemannÅ￾ et flÅ«mine RhodanÅ￾, quÄ« prÅ￾vinciam nostram ab HelvÄ“tiÄ«s dÄ«vidit.
HÄ«s rÄ“bus fÄ«Ä“bat ut et minus lÄ￾tÄ“ vagÄ￾rentur et minus facile fÄ«nitimÄ«s bellum Ä«nferre possent — quÄ￾ ex parte hominÄ“s bellandÄ« cupidÄ« magnÅ￾ dolÅ￾re afficiÄ“bantur!
PrÅ￾ multitÅ«dine autem hominum et prÅ￾ glÅ￾riÄ￾ bellÄ« atque fortitÅ«dinis angustÅ￾s sÄ“ fÄ«nÄ“s habÄ“re arbitrÄ￾bantur, quÄ« in longitÅ«dinem mÄ«lia passuum CCXL, in lÄ￾titÅ«dinem CLXXX patÄ“bant.
3. HÄ«s rÄ“bus adductÄ« et auctÅ￾ritÄ￾te OrgetorÄ«gis permÅ￾tÄ« cÅ￾nstituÄ“runt ea quae ad proficÄ«scendum pertinÄ“rent comparÄ￾re: jÅ«mentÅ￾rum et carrÅ￾rum quam mÄ￾ximum numerum coemere, sÄ“mentÄ“s quam mÄ￾ximÄ￾s facere, ut in itinere cÅ￾pia frÅ«mentÄ« suppeteret, cum proximÄ«s cÄ«vitÄ￾tibus pÄ￾cem et amÄ«citiam cÅ￾nfÄ«rmÄ￾re. Ad eÄ￾s rÄ“s cÅ￾nficiendÄ￾s biennium sibi satis esse dÅ«xÄ“runt: in tertium annum profectiÅ￾nem lÄ“ge cÅ￾nfÄ«rmant. ...

[Lucus Eques]

Caesar is pretty dry though. Is there something more lively you would like to hear, Amadeus? or others?

[jjhayes84]

http://www.tindeck.com/ is the best site to upload these files. Speedy and always works.

Good find, Agrippa!

[jjhayes84]

Lucus,

I didn't realize that "ellisions" occured in oral Latin outside of poetry, but in your recording I noticed that you observed the ellisions as if it were poetry. Is this really how the Romans spoke? I did not know this.

[Lucus Eques]

Of course! It's understandable if you weren't aware of this; most educators of the classics are terrible these days and have no idea about the real languages. In any case, yes; Latin poetry is just Latin prose in a certain metre. Great orators like Cicero would use the natural rhythms, quantities, and metres of speech to emphasize a point; the Romans were quite conscious of it, you can be sure, as were the Greeks. And to the modern case of elision in speech and poetry, Italian follows the same pattern identically. In short, the mechanics of Latin poetry and prose are identical.

[Interaxus]

Luce,

That means this site now has TWO highly professional and totally generous speakers of Latin to delight and guide us. I feel incredibly privileged.

Vivat Internet!

Int

[Amadeus]

Amadeus Luco salutem p.d.

Wow, thanks! Now I see that I was putting too much emphasis on the macrons. Indeed, your reading speed was about the same as mine before I started to obsess with the long vowels. I want just a little more time to study the mp3 recording and bring judgment upon you... uh... no, I mean... to study the language (yes, that'll do) and also to pick up on the subtleties (I didn't catch those ellisions). Well, all in all an excellent job, Luke! Kudos!

Vale!

P.S.: What happened to your h's? Didn't you use to pronounce them?

[cantator]

Of course! It's understandable if you weren't aware of this; most educators of the classics are terrible these days and have no idea about the real languages. In any case, yes; Latin poetry is just Latin prose in a certain metre. Great orators like Cicero would use the natural rhythms, quantities, and metres of speech to emphasize a point; the Romans were quite conscious of it, you can be sure, as were the Greeks. And to the modern case of elision in speech and poetry, Italian follows the same pattern identically. In short, the mechanics of Latin poetry and prose are identical.

Massive compliments for your reading, I hope you record more passages. I think Caesar turned out to be a good choice for recording. His constructions are sensible, he has the quality of directness, and there's even an evident (and possibly editorial) care for sonority. Whether Caesar polished it himself, he knew it would be announced, that it would be read aloud to an attentive audience.

I'm not sure I agree with you re: identical mechanics in Latin prose and poetry. I agree that elision likely occurs, but I'm not so sure it's as enforced in prose as in the poetry. I need to study more Latin phonology (Vox Latina, here I come).

Anyway, fine stuff, please do more.

[Lucus Eques]

Thank you all for the compliments! I hardly feel worthy of them. Name the passages you'd like to hear and I'll do more right today.

Amadeus, as for my 'h's, they're still there. They're just very gentle, and get eclipsed by other sounds, like consonants. I like to vary their intensity between English 'h' and none — it's really just a natural occurrence, though; just make the 'h' gentle, and it will decide how prominent it wishes to be of its own accord. If you didn't notice major elisions, I'd say it's because Spanish naturally does them all the time, so it wouldn't be as jarring for you as it is for Anglophones.

Cantator, you're right; perhaps I should have said "virtually identical," for irregularities, pauses, slides, and other elements are a part of natural conversation, and perforce cannot be so strictly enforced as should a strong metre. But if you apply the strictest rules of verse to non verse, I feel that makes for good prose.

I look forward to further suggestions.

[jjhayes84]

I'm not sure I agree with you re: identical mechanics in Latin prose and poetry. I agree that elision likely occurs, but I'm not so sure it's as enforced in prose as in the poetry. I need to study more Latin phonology (Vox Latina, here I come).

I wonder, too, how much difference in practice there was between the Latin of different centuries.

[Amadeus]

If you didn't notice major elisions, I'd say it's because Spanish naturally does them all the time, so it wouldn't be as jarring for you as it is for Anglophones.

True, some letters appearing at the end of a word sometimes get elided like the 'd' (¿Verdá que sí?) but, other than that and foreign words, Spanish doesn't have natural elisions, so I guess I didn't notice your major elisions because I just wasn't concentrating enough. And doesn't English have its own elisions? Y'all and c'mon come to mind.

That aside, let me just say, that I've looked all over the Internet (if that's possible) and haven't found what we are doing here, to wit (!), recording Latin prose. So you, my friend, are a pioneer, and I bet that if we all pitch in we can make a significant contribution to the learning of Latin. When did Latin teachers and students ever had the advantage of having recordings of different pronunciations from different countries all in one place? Maybe this is the beginning of a mini-revolution?

Vale atque valete!

[Lucus Eques]

I like your spirit, Amadeus! Pioneers, aye!

[Sigma]

Wow... Just wow... I've saved the transcript and your recording, and if I ever need a motivational boost, now I have one.

On a side note, why did you use <j> in your transcript? When I saved it, I went through and replaced each one with an <i>. So much nicer.

Also, if you're looking for something more to record, may I reccomend any passage from Vergil's Aeneid? That should have a nice epic feel to it.

[Hu]

That aside, let me just say, that I've looked all over the Internet (if that's possible) and haven't found what we are doing here, to wit (!), recording Latin prose. So you, my friend, are a pioneer, and I bet that if we all pitch in we can make a significant contribution to the learning of Latin. When did Latin teachers and students ever had the advantage of having recordings of different pronunciations from different countries all in one place? Maybe this is the beginning of a mini-revolution?

Vivant res novae parvae, then. I hope our efforts convince more people to treat Latin as a living language, and with such fine examples, we could certainly provide an excellent basis. I should try recording some things, now that I know of that website .

[Lucus Eques]

Wow... Just wow... I've saved the transcript and your recording, and if I ever need a motivational boost, now I have one.

I'm glad to hear it, amice!

On a side note, why did you use <j> in your transcript? When I saved it, I went through and replaced each one with an <i>. So much nicer.

The letters j and v are sometimes used to repraesent consonantal "i' and "u." Either both are to be used together, or neither. I realize this runs contrary to the common practice nowadays; however, to use just 'v' and not 'j' would be as strange as if I had done the opposite and written "conjurationem ciuitati." Neither makes sense.

The Romans, of course, did not have separate letters to distinguish between vocalic and consonantal 'i' or 'u', and for this reason I more strongly advocate the universal use of 'i' and 'u' when writing Latin (I maintain my website by the same convention). The Romans didn't put macrons over every long vowel either; and although they would often adhibit the "apex" (it looks like an accute accent) over certain long vowels of "hidden" quantity, generally they did not. However, for this passage the macrons were requaested, and when I write out Latin with macrons I also like to include 'j' and 'v' to clarify pronunciation.

You'll also notice that I took care to write "persvasit" with a 'v' and not 'u' as it is also by the standard convention — yet this 'u/v' here is most certainly a consonant, and not a vowel, and therefore it would be hypocritical to write "civitati" right next to "persuasit." Or at least, it would be inconsistent.

Also, if you're looking for something more to record, may I reccomend any passage from Vergil's Aeneid? That should have a nice epic feel to it.

Sure, I can do that, though there have been many to record the Aeneid. What about on the subject of prose? Unless Amadeus and the others aren't interested in more of that.


Ah yes, Hu, you're right; would you like to upload the files you sent me there on your own, or should I?

[Hu]

I'd rather you upload them since my home connection is 56k. What did you think, by the way?

[Lucus Eques]

Oh they're great! I love them. I also have 56K, though. Still, whatever you like. I'm going to spend the next hour uploading the Aeneid passage I just recorded.

[Lucus Eques]

Here we go, from book IV of the Aeneid, one of my favorite passages, where Aeneas is attempting to calm Dido after she finds out that he was secretly trying to slip away on to Italy after Mercury admonished him to obey the will of the gods:



tandem pauca refert: 'ego te, quae plurima fando
enumerare uales, numquam, regina, negabo
promeritam, nec me meminisse pigebit Elissae               335
dum memor ipse mei, dum spiritus hos regit artus.
pro re pauca loquar. neque ego hanc abscondere furto
speraui (ne finge) fugam, nec coniugis umquam
praetendi taedas aut haec in foedera ueni.
me si fata meis paterentur ducere uitam               340
auspiciis et sponte mea componere curas,
urbem Troianam primum dulcisque meorum
relliquias colerem, Priami tecta alta manerent,
et recidiua manu posuissem Pergama uictis.
sed nunc Italiam magnam Gryneus Apollo,               345
Italiam Lyciae iussere capessere sortes;
hic amor, haec patria est. si te Karthaginis arces
Phoenissam Libucaeque aspectus detinet urbis,
quae tandem Ausonia Teucros considere terra
inuidia est? et nos fas extera quaerere regna.               350
me patris Anchisae, quotiens umentibus umbris
nox operit terras, quotiens astra ignea surgunt,
admonet in somnis et turbida terret imago;
me puer Ascanius capitisque iniuria cari,
quem regno Hesperiae fraudo et fatalibus aruis.               355
nunc etiam interpres diuum Ioue missus ab ipso
(testor utrumque caput) celeris mandata per auras
detulit: ipse deum manifesto in lumine uidi
intrantem muros uocemque his auribus hausi.
desine meque tuis incendere teque querelis;               360
Italiam non sponte sequor.'

ex Vergilii Aeneidis libro IV, a Lucio Amadeo Ranierio lectum

[edonnelly]

Lucus,
These are really great and are going to help a lot of people. There are not many people out there willing to do something like this. You should at least get these linked to by something other than just this thread which will eventually fall down the list and not be seen by the newcomers to this site. Maybe a new thread with a sticky or a link somewhere else on this site.
Ed

[cantator]

Wonderful reading, Lucus, thank you for the treat. Your rendering is fluent and poetical, the best I could ask for. I promise I won't complain if you record more.

It's been so long since I've been near a classroom. Can it be true that Latin teachers still don't work with it as a living language ?

Perhaps some industrious Textkat or Textkitten would care to scour Google for Latin audio recordings and make a list for permanent addition to the Textkit resources ?

Lots of interesting stuff out there. I'm sure many of you know this site :

http://www.yleradio1.fi/nuntii/

And I'm sure this one is also well-known :

http://www.drammondt.com/english/index.php

Those Finns are wild about their Latin.

There are a number of sites with readings from Wheelock and the Bible, if prose is what you're looking for, but I haven't checked them out yet. I have listened to many of the currently available on-line sites with readings from Latin poetry. Some are good, some bad, but all are of interest to anyone researching the sound of the language.

I've recorded two passages of prose, a selection from Cicero and a passage from the Vulgate, with different pronunciations. I'll try to post them over the weekend.

Interaxus: I'll also record your requested ode (Vides ut alta) and the Copa Surisca. Hopefully I'll have all this stuff on-line by Monday.

This thread has been great fun for me, I hope everyone else is getting as much enjoyment from it.

[Amadeus]

Ave, Luce!

Just a couple of observations, nothing to be worried about. Ok?

After hearing both recordings, it seems to me that "io" is not a diphthong, but a hiatus, no? According to the books I've read, there are only 5 diphthongs, namely: ae, oe, au, eu, ei, ui. I'm thinking the rest are hiati (?).

You've done a good job of trilling the r's, but maybe you are trilling a wee too much? To my ears at least, there should be a difference between 'r' and 'rr'.

Please don't kill me.

Vale!

[jjhayes84]

for this reason I more strongly advocate the universal use of 'i' and 'u' when writing Latin (I maintain my website by the same convention).

Why is it that the character 'u' is preferred, when (unless I'm mistaken) the character 'v' is what the Romans actually used because it is easier to carve?

Personally, I don't think people should make too big a deal over i/j or v/u usage--on either side of the argument. The Romans also didn't have miniscules, but is any one of us willing to revert from that too? I think that we can use Js and Vs and miniscules without taking the "Latin-ness" out of Latin.

[edonnelly]

Why is it that the character 'u' is preferred, when (unless I'm mistaken) the character 'v' is what the Romans actually used because it is easier to carve?

Personally, I don't think people should make too big a deal over i/j or v/u usage--on either side of the argument. The Romans also didn't have miniscules, but is any one of us willing to revert from that too? I think that we can use Js and Vs and miniscules without taking the "Latin-ness" out of Latin.

Both the topic of the u/v and i/j and the issue of whether Romans had miniscules comes up quite a bit around here. You may want to see, for example, these:

http://www.textkit.com/greek-latin-foru ... php?t=4133

http://www.textkit.com/greek-latin-foru ... php?t=3916

[jjhayes84]

Thanks! I probably should have poked around a bit more before derailing this conversation with my tangental question. My apologies!

[Lucus Eques]

Ave, Luce!

Just a couple of observations, nothing to be worried about. Ok?

Obserua, amice!

After hearing both recordings, it seems to me that "io" is not a diphthong, but a hiatus, no? According to the books I've read, there are only 5 diphthongs, namely: ae, oe, au, eu, ei, ui. I'm thinking the rest are hiati (?).

What do you mean to say? Do you mean, in, for instance, my name, "Ä￾ LÅ«ciÅ￾"? this "io"? Indeed, they are two vowels, though it was common in speech for the 'i' vowel to become consonantal, as it did in Italian. In the first Georgic of Vergil, he has "et-jam" scanned only two versus away from "et-i-am." Conversely, the exclamation "io!" may be written "jo!" and the 'i' is a consonant.

You've done a good job of trilling the r's, but maybe you are trilling a wee too much? To my ears at least, there should be a difference between 'r' and 'rr'.

That may be! I had to learn to trill 'r's as a teen, and it took a while to get good at it, and I've been out of Italy for half a year already. Although, there are many variations of 'r' even in Spanish, and certainly among the Italian dialects, some stronger than others.
There are a couple instances where the spelling is "rh" as in "Rhenus," and in these instances the 'r' will perforce sound too strong, because I'm putting that extra Greek air behind it, that aspiration in the 'h'.

for this reason I more strongly advocate the universal use of 'i' and 'u' when writing Latin (I maintain my website by the same convention).

Why is it that the character 'u' is preferred, when (unless I'm mistaken) the character 'v' is what the Romans actually used because it is easier to carve?

A good quaestion! David bpq seems especially good at finding these old threads where such things were discussed; I don't know how to find it. In short, however, the Romans, like us, wrote by hand; and when they wrote by hand, they often formed their 'u/v' letter in a shape very similar to this letter u, more than a sharp 'v' — it was easier to write. Only later in the Renascence was a distinction enforced between 'u' and 'v'.

I concurr with your favor to variety in Latin.

[Lucus Eques]

Nice going, Ed! you beat me to it.

And as for putting these in a permanent place, I'll have to place them somewhere on Laureola.

[Amadeus]

What do you mean to say? Do you mean, in, for instance, my name, "Ä￾ LÅ«ciÅ￾"? this "io"? Indeed, they are two vowels, though it was common in speech for the 'i' vowel to become consonantal, as it did in Italian. In the first Georgic of Vergil, he has "et-jam" scanned only two versus away from "et-i-am." Conversely, the exclamation "io!" may be written "jo!" and the 'i' is a consonant.

But there are instances where the 'i+vowel' is not consonantal or semi-consonantal. For example, I wouldn't say in Latin "Luc-jo" or "Fil-ji", but I would say "jo-cosus" and "con-jicere". So in "Lucio" the 'i' is, imo, a simple vowel (i.e. not a consonant) and, according to the rules of the diphthongs, it should be pronounced "Lu-ci-o".

Does that make sense?

Vale!

[edonnelly]

Thanks! I probably should have poked around a bit more before derailing this conversation with my tangental question. My apologies!

I hope you didn't mistake the tone of my post. I very much enjoy those types of conversations (because I learn a lot from them) and wasn't even trying to prevent another, I just wanted to prepare you for the vigor with which some of the people on both sides of those issues will defend their position.

[Lucus Eques]

Amadeus, you are correct absolutely. However, as I mentioned, in conversation and even sometimes in verse this 'i' as a vowel was transformed into the consonant. Here is the end of Vergil's second Georgic:

necdum etiam audierant inflari classica, necdum
impositos duris crepitare incudibus ensis. 540

We see in that line that "etiam" cannot possibly be trisyllabic; it must perforce be disyllabic in order to conform with the metre: "-dum" elides with "et-" and "-jam" elides with "au-."

Although my Latin name Lucius is truly trisyllabic, most certainly in conversation and at times in verse this name could become disyllabic. As we see from Italian, ultimately, the disyllabic form won out.

[Amadeus]

Perhaps, Lucus, perhaps. I would like to research this more, because constructing a general rule based on how italians today pronounce 'i or u + vowel' is somewhat dubious; but, alas, there is almost no information on this on the Internet. Also, it was my understanding that Latin was a phonetical language (i.e. orthography is in accord with use), and so the rule of there being only five diphthongs when you can make more with 'i or u + vowel' seems contradictory, unles such complex sounds are neither diphthong or hiatus.

http://www.experiencefestival.com/a/Dip ... id/1327234

[Lucus Eques]

The Italian is merely supporting evidence. The truth of the matter is clear in Vergil's very words; there can be no doubt. Moreover, there is hardly any phonetic rule broken when Latin aequally uses 'i' for a vowel and a consonant in the first place. Do not forget "coniicio."

[Amadeus]

Two minor points and a conclusion:

Modern Italian may be supporting evidence for certain latin pronunciations, but, meo judicio, weak evidence. Languages are always drifting: what today was a diphthong, yesterday could've been a hiatus.

As for Vergil's verse, it is only one line. Not enough to rule out artistic license.

Conclusion: I still have much to read about Latin phonetics, so I may be totally wrong, but, from what I gather, 'i or u + vowel' is NOT a diphthong (vowel+vowel), but a sequence of semi-consonant+vowel. Thus, the rule of 5 diphthongs is saved. The question now is, were there instances when "Luc-jo Ran-je-rjo" was ever broken up into hiati: "Lu-ci-o Ra-ni-e-ri-o". In short, which was commoner: "Lu-ci-o" or "Luc-jo"?

Cura, care amice, valetudinem tuam diligenter!

[cantator]

...I may be totally wrong, but, from what I gather, 'i or u + vowel' is NOT a diphthong (vowel+vowel), but a sequence of semi-consonant+vowel. Thus, the rule of 5 diphthongs is saved.

Allen & Greenough note: "The vowels i and u serve as consonants when pronounced rapidly before a vowel so as to stand in the same syllable". Their example of Indian is illustrative, In-dyan for 2 syllables, In-di-an for 3.

[jjhayes84]

Thanks! I probably should have poked around a bit more before derailing this conversation with my tangental question. My apologies!

I hope you didn't mistake the tone of my post. I very much enjoy those types of conversations (because I learn a lot from them) and wasn't even trying to prevent another, I just wanted to prepare you for the vigor with which some of the people on both sides of those issues will defend their position.

I didn't mistake your tone at all. I just realized that my question could have totaly derailed this conversation. Thanks for the heads up!

[cdm2003]

Here we go, from book IV of the Aeneid...

Luce...that was great! I've heard some audio examples of Latin here and there but none with both the feeling and attention to scansion that you accomplished. You would have been an orator to be reckoned with in the Senate!

Encore!

Chris

[Lucus Eques]

Luce...that was great! I've heard some audio examples of Latin here and there but none with both the feeling and attention to scansion that you accomplished. You would have been an orator to be reckoned with in the Senate!

Encore!

Chris

You are incredibly kind! I still have a lot to perfect, but I greatly appreciate your enthusiasm. Any requaests? Soon I'll be at school and recording will be more difficult, so now is the time.

Two minor points and a conclusion:

Modern Italian may be supporting evidence for certain latin pronunciations, but, meo judicio, weak evidence. Languages are always drifting: what today was a diphthong, yesterday could've been a hiatus.

As for Vergil's verse, it is only one line. Not enough to rule out artistic license.

Conclusion: I still have much to read about Latin phonetics, so I may be totally wrong, but, from what I gather, 'i or u + vowel' is NOT a diphthong (vowel+vowel), but a sequence of semi-consonant+vowel. Thus, the rule of 5 diphthongs is saved. The question now is, were there instances when "Luc-jo Ran-je-rjo" was ever broken up into hiati: "Lu-ci-o Ra-ni-e-ri-o". In short, which was commoner: "Lu-ci-o" or "Luc-jo"?

Cura, care amice, valetudinem tuam diligenter!

Care amice, it seems the meaning of "diphthong" was not clear. Ὁ διφθόγγος is litterally a "duel sound," two vowels in one syllable. "jo" as in "Jovis" is not a diphthong, but a consonant (j/i) plus a vowel 'o'. The quæstion is not whether the combination is a diphthong, just as you have said immediately above, but whether this transformation from vowel to consonant 'i' took place.

Undoubtedly "Lu-ci-o" was commoner in the classical period, but the slide from vowel to consonant is so easy that it happens naturally; in both of the above recordings I made wherewith I read my name, it is almost impossible to distinguish whether 'jo' or 'i-o' is being said in any one of the instances noted. I did not do this deliberately: it merely happened as a result of close imitation of the ancients in all other respects of the language. That it did happen is noted in the Vergil. I make no further claim.