Classical or Medieval?
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 7:19 am
Classical or Medieval?
which pronunciation do you prefer? Or do you use features of both pronunciations? or do you make up your own pronunciation system for latin?
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 9:55 am
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 9:55 am
then stop writing v! do you feel awkward pronouncing wine with a w? i bet you dont! why then would you feel awkward pronouncing vinum with a w which is the very same word?! you are just a big hypocrite! how about were(wolf) and vir? or wall and vallum? wind and ventus? will and volo? some people...Stancel wrote:the only part of classical I have a problem with is pronouncing v as a w. for me that's very awkward sounding.Celtica wrote:Classical. Eccleastical pronounciation grates my nerves.
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 72
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 1:10 pm
- Location: Sassari, Sardinia, Italia
- Contact:
I agree with Stancel... I prefer Classical pronunciation, but I hate reading "w".fierywrath wrote:then stop writing v! do you feel awkward pronouncing wine with a w? i bet you dont! why then would you feel awkward pronouncing vinum with a w which is the very same word?! you are just a big hypocrite! how about were(wolf) and vir? or wall and vallum? wind and ventus? will and volo? some people...Stancel wrote:the only part of classical I have a problem with is pronouncing v as a w. for me that's very awkward sounding.Celtica wrote:Classical. Eccleastical pronounciation grates my nerves.
I just feel awkward reading "vino", "virile" and "vallo" (which are the very same words indeed! ) with a semivowel, since my mother tongue is Italian
- Lucus Eques
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 2037
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
- Location: Pennsylvania
- Contact:
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 6:44 pm
- Location: Strathroy Ontario Canada
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 9:55 am
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 6:44 pm
- Location: Strathroy Ontario Canada
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 375
- Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 12:30 am
- Location: Montréal, QC
Brian wrote:Dear Professor Higginsfierywrath wrote:whoever said that first was a moronBrian wrote:De gustibus non disputandum (est).
Here is the completion of the saying, the first part of
which, you "slurred" as moronic.
"De veritate disputandum est."
Brian
Personally I prefer the classical pronunciation for everything except music, in which the ecclesiastical sounds softer (indeed more musical) to me. Even when singing along though (a nerdy admittance!) I use the classical. My major problem was, at first, separating Latin and Spanish: pronouncing the (non-existent) minuscule ‘v’ as ‘u/w’, always pronouncing ‘c’s and ‘g’s hard, having ‘i’s where ‘j’s should have been, pronouncing the ‘u’ after ‘q’, and separating the function of the macron from the acute accent. But all of these have long since been internalised, and now, to my mind at least, the classical pronunciation is the way Latin sounds.
I’m also trying to get away from the artificial ‘v’s in lowercase and ‘U’s in majuscule, though I can definitely see why grammarians gave consonantal ‘u’s their own letter, and I think they’re good if one has just begun. But, from my perspective, they definitely should be dropped once one has become even semi-comfortable with the language.
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 426
- Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 8:58 pm
- Location: Rhenen
- Contact:
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 7:19 am
I'm a hypocrite? Get over yourselffierywrath wrote:then stop writing v! do you feel awkward pronouncing wine with a w? i bet you dont! why then would you feel awkward pronouncing vinum with a w which is the very same word?! you are just a big hypocrite! how about were(wolf) and vir? or wall and vallum? wind and ventus? will and volo? some people...Stancel wrote:the only part of classical I have a problem with is pronouncing v as a w. for me that's very awkward sounding.Celtica wrote:Classical. Eccleastical pronounciation grates my nerves.
Latin does not have a standard pronunciation, so I can pronounce however the hell I damn please. If you want to keep latin as a "living language" you can't have it both ways and keep it from changing. And I see the ecclesiastical pronunciation as the evolution of the Latin system of pronunciation.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 764
- Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 10:40 pm
- Location: In a van down by the river
Bravissimo!!! Couldn't have said it better myself.Stancel wrote:If you want to keep latin as a "living language" you can't have it both ways and keep it from changing. And I see the ecclesiastical pronunciation as the evolution of the Latin system of pronunciation.
Two thumbs way up to Ecclesiastical pronounciation (although, in some rare instances, classical seems better: Vercingetorix [vershinyetorics] vs. Uercingetorix [werkinguetorics]).
Lisa: Relax?! I can't relax! Nor can I yield, relent, or... Only two synonyms? Oh my God! I'm losing my perspicacity! Aaaaa!
Homer: Well it's always in the last place you look.
Homer: Well it's always in the last place you look.
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 73
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:03 pm
When you read classical works you use the classical pronounciation.Stancel wrote:I'm a hypocrite? Get over yourselffierywrath wrote:then stop writing v! do you feel awkward pronouncing wine with a w? i bet you dont! why then would you feel awkward pronouncing vinum with a w which is the very same word?! you are just a big hypocrite! how about were(wolf) and vir? or wall and vallum? wind and ventus? will and volo? some people...Stancel wrote: the only part of classical I have a problem with is pronouncing v as a w. for me that's very awkward sounding.
Latin does not have a standard pronunciation, so I can pronounce however the hell I damn please. If you want to keep latin as a "living language" you can't have it both ways and keep it from changing. And I see the ecclesiastical pronunciation as the evolution of the Latin system of pronunciation.
When you read church, medieval and enlightenment works, use the ecclestial.
How easy!
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 5:45 pm
- Lucus Eques
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 2037
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
- Location: Pennsylvania
- Contact:
As regards Ecclesiastical pronunciation: it changed frequently and was different in all the European countries; there was no "standard" as there exsists today. The modern Ecclesiastical pronunciation is hardly an evolution, but a choice: for instance, the Saints of whom we speak would have pronounced 'j' or consonantal 'i' as 'gi' in Italian, for this is how the language evolved in our modern tongues (uidē Iūli?nus, Giuliano, Julius e.g.), as well as "v" at times.
But there are some places where the 'v' never quite caught on: Abruzzo, the Italian region, for instance; 'v' sounds like a faint 'w' there in the dialect; and moreover, many words that start with 'gi' in italian have remained 'i' in Abruzzese. It's a remarkable thing of beauty.
But there are some places where the 'v' never quite caught on: Abruzzo, the Italian region, for instance; 'v' sounds like a faint 'w' there in the dialect; and moreover, many words that start with 'gi' in italian have remained 'i' in Abruzzese. It's a remarkable thing of beauty.
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 8:05 pm
i always get the feeling that when someone doesn't pronounce latin with the classical pronuciation that they don't know about it, and are, ahem, an idiot. i know this is far from the truth, but with people my age (21) in college barely knowing more than one language it reminds me of the stupidity of the average person. anyone else get that???
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 718
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 2:29 pm
- Location: nanun Hanguge issoyo (in Korea sum)
- Contact:
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 6:44 pm
- Location: Strathroy Ontario Canada
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 7:19 am
I see good qualities in both actually.
One thing I don't like about Classical is the pronunciation of v as w. But the "ch" pronunciation of c before e, i , ae can be clumsy, as I sometimes find saying it with a k sound much easier
so I'm confused about how to pronounce latin
I'm thinking of just pronouncing it Classical without pronouncing the v as a w
One thing I don't like about Classical is the pronunciation of v as w. But the "ch" pronunciation of c before e, i , ae can be clumsy, as I sometimes find saying it with a k sound much easier
so I'm confused about how to pronounce latin
I'm thinking of just pronouncing it Classical without pronouncing the v as a w
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 903
- Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:37 am
- Location: Mountain View
I am the Glottal Greek Geek, not the Vocal Latin Geek. However, I would imagine that the classical pronunciation is best for classical texts, and appropriate medieval latin pronunciation is best for medieval latin. In essence, the best pronunciation is the one which evidence indicates is closest to the original speaker's pronounciation. For neo-Latin, I think whatever pronunciation which pleases oneself is best.
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 8:20 am
A little OOT but though I would prefer Classical, I would take Ecclesiastical over the 'scientific ' pronunciation any day. Araneae becomes "a-ra-ni", mitochondrion becomes "mai-to-kon-jri-on", though i can tolerate the more common scientific pronunciations of some words like "homo sapiens", it really grates my nerves to speak or hear Latin and Greek words spoken that way.
- Lucus Eques
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 2037
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
- Location: Pennsylvania
- Contact:
It grates my nerves too. Clearly the classical pronounciations of both Latin and Greek terms is necessary.
Stancel, I'd recommend spelling 'v' as 'u', because that's what it actually is, and writing 'v' is completely counterproductive and absolutely unuseful.
Ὦ ΓΓΓ! I like how the forum alters your signature ironically. :-p Speaking of classical languages ... jeez.
Stancel, I'd recommend spelling 'v' as 'u', because that's what it actually is, and writing 'v' is completely counterproductive and absolutely unuseful.
Ὦ ΓΓΓ! I like how the forum alters your signature ironically. :-p Speaking of classical languages ... jeez.
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 6:58 pm
Beyond issues of "taste" preferences, from what I have just been informed, Ecclesiastically-oriented teaching programs do not include macrons to show vowel lengths. This would include teaching programs for children such as Prima Latina/Latina Christiana from Memoria Press.
I just don't understand this approach!
Wouldn't you lose the differention between certain case ending, and cause confusion between words that are spelled the same (save vowel lenghts)?
And just mispronounce many, many words (beyond issues of Ws, Cs, Gs, etc.)?
I'm not sure how they deal with long and short vowels.
Are they ignored?
Are they expecting students to learn vowel lenghts without marking them?
I'm stunned to learn of this...can anyone explain?
I just don't understand this approach!
Wouldn't you lose the differention between certain case ending, and cause confusion between words that are spelled the same (save vowel lenghts)?
And just mispronounce many, many words (beyond issues of Ws, Cs, Gs, etc.)?
I'm not sure how they deal with long and short vowels.
Are they ignored?
Are they expecting students to learn vowel lenghts without marking them?
I'm stunned to learn of this...can anyone explain?
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
- Location: Music City, USA
- Contact:
Don't we do this in English? (He took the lead. Get the lead out.)Spyus Carus wrote: Are they expecting students to learn vowel lenghts without marking them?
Didn't the Romans themselves do this? (i.e., not use macrons)
By the way, I'm a strong believer in the classical pronunciation, 'w' and all. In fact, this is how I was taught in Catholic high school 20 years ago.
The lists:
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 903
- Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:37 am
- Location: Mountain View
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
- Location: Music City, USA
- Contact:
But you can say that about learning any aspect of the language. And what about deaf visitors to the forum? Are you suggesting they cannot comprehend my previous post because they didn't learn English the same way you did?GlottalGreekGeek wrote: Not having any native speakers handy, we don't have this luxury.
Regardless of how you learn to distinguish the words, it can readily be done without macrons. Macrons are ok when you are first learning, but they can become a crutch. You don't want to limit yourself to editions of classic authors where someone has added all those extra lines for you. Look at some of the available latin works in Project Gutenberg. Some have html versions with macrons, but most you will find are pure text with no macrons. On the other hand, if you learn to read without macrons, you can always read a text that has them.
The lists:
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 6:58 pm
Well....we do have words that mean different things when pronounced with different vowel lengths.edonnelly wrote:Don't we do this in English? (He took the lead. Get the lead out.)
Which is why we frequenty use phonetic markers (in phonics programs and reading "Primers") when we teach young children how to read and pronounce words properly.
And, as GottalGreekGeek points out, English speaking kids often have the advantage of growing up surrounded by native speakers.
But why in the world would one design a Latin program, aimed at children as young as 5 or 6 years old, and made to be taught not by Latin scholars, but rather by home-schooling parents (most of whom are learning along with their children), that doesn't include marcons? I don't understand the logic.
And I'm still not clear, do they just ignore vowel lengthts, or what???
Anyone?
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 6:44 pm
- Location: Strathroy Ontario Canada
[quote="Spyus Carus"]Beyond issues of "taste" preferences, from what I have just been informed, Ecclesiastically-oriented teaching programs do not include macrons to show vowel lengths. This would include teaching programs for children such as Prima Latina/Latina Christiana from Memoria Press.
Hello
A Primer of Ecclesiastical Latin, by John Collins has all these macrons. I found this book very helpful in my return to the study of Latin. And I certainly did not mind the macrons to help in pronunciation.
Brian
Hello
A Primer of Ecclesiastical Latin, by John Collins has all these macrons. I found this book very helpful in my return to the study of Latin. And I certainly did not mind the macrons to help in pronunciation.
Brian
- Lucus Eques
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 2037
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
- Location: Pennsylvania
- Contact:
If I may reorder your words, my friend, I would say that a deaf person couldn't comprehend the same way we have. They read and understand, but litterally don't have the ear for the language. Equally, those who ignore vowel lengths or proper pronunciation are learning and teaching the language essentially as if they were deaf to it.edonnelly wrote:But you can say that about learning any aspect of the language. And what about deaf visitors to the forum? Are you suggesting they cannot comprehend my previous post because they didn't learn English the same way you did?GlottalGreekGeek wrote: Not having any native speakers handy, we don't have this luxury.
I don't agree that macrons are a crutch. Indeed, they are an invaluable test of knowledge of the language in composition; even when I write things where I am incapable of submitting macrons, I write them anyway and then replace them with non-macroned vowels. This exercise connects my knowlege and recollection of the language directly with how it ought to be pronounced, and keeps my spoken pronunciation sharp (especially without many speakers to hear in the course of a day), and my fluency in reading unmacroned poetry quite acute. In fact one of my favorite exercises is to write all the macrons over prose. Doing all this extra work makes reading non-macroned text easier, not harder.
To answer your question, Spye, on vowel lengths in the Church, it would seem that they generally ignore them nowadays. Italians have an advantage in that they (unknowing) tend to place most of the correct vowel lengths naturally. Germans, the French, and others are less fortunate, and it shows in their speech (Ratzinger, Ratzinger).
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
- Location: Music City, USA
- Contact:
Hey Lucus,Lucus Eques wrote:Germans, the French, and others are less fortunate, and it shows in their speech (Ratzinger, Ratzinger).
Is this true of his Latin only, or also of his Italian? I ask because I had heard it said that his Italian was "flawless," but I didn't know if that was true or not. (I hadn't heard anything about his Latin until now).
Well, not to drag the discussion on too much, but that argument sounds a lot like what I hear from those advocating for j's and v's -- something I know you reject. Macrons, j's and v's were all added later by people trying to improve either our ability to pronounce or comprehend the language and they take us further away from the original source.Lucus Eques wrote:This exercise connects my knowlege and recollection of the language directly with how it ought to be pronounced, and keeps my spoken pronunciation sharp (especially without many speakers to hear in the course of a day),
Ed
The lists:
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 764
- Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 10:40 pm
- Location: In a van down by the river
The lack of macrons in Ecclesiastic-oriented programs is a methodology flaw. It has nothing to do with the merits or demerits of the Church-pronounciation.
http://www.orbilat.com/Languages/Latin/ ... ccent.html
http://www.orbilat.com/Languages/Latin/ ... habet.html
But, anyway, as someone said earlier, when you read medieval writings, use the ecclesiastical pronounciation; when reading classical, use the classical pronounciation. There is no sense in mixing them up.
From what I've read, the introduction of j's and v's was neither modern nor pragmatic, but a natural evolution of the language in the middle ages. Here are a couple of links from whee I get my info:edonnelly wrote:
Well, not to drag the discussion on too much, but that argument sounds a lot like what I hear from those advocating for j's and v's -- something I know you reject. Macrons, j's and v's were all added later by people trying to improve either our ability to pronounce or comprehend the language and they take us further away from the original source.
Ed
http://www.orbilat.com/Languages/Latin/ ... ccent.html
http://www.orbilat.com/Languages/Latin/ ... habet.html
But, anyway, as someone said earlier, when you read medieval writings, use the ecclesiastical pronounciation; when reading classical, use the classical pronounciation. There is no sense in mixing them up.
Lisa: Relax?! I can't relax! Nor can I yield, relent, or... Only two synonyms? Oh my God! I'm losing my perspicacity! Aaaaa!
Homer: Well it's always in the last place you look.
Homer: Well it's always in the last place you look.
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 392
- Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:34 pm
- Location: Newer Mexico
I'm not sure, but I think that long and short vowel lengths in Latin had dissapeared* by the Early Middle Ages. I think so because Latin poetry's meter in the Middle Ages went from being quantitative to being qualitative.
*Enough to ignore them, at least. Italians are not taught about long and short vowels in their language and yet, unless one's a robot, the second 'a' in amare is always going to come out longer than the first one.
I also think that English speakers should worry about their Latin vowels instead of worrying about consonantal u's and i's, for which they have the ready English sounds of 'w' and 'y'. It breaks my heart to hear J.C. being quoted as saying "Weenay, weeday, wykie."
*Enough to ignore them, at least. Italians are not taught about long and short vowels in their language and yet, unless one's a robot, the second 'a' in amare is always going to come out longer than the first one.
I also think that English speakers should worry about their Latin vowels instead of worrying about consonantal u's and i's, for which they have the ready English sounds of 'w' and 'y'. It breaks my heart to hear J.C. being quoted as saying "Weenay, weeday, wykie."
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
- Location: Music City, USA
- Contact:
Bardo - Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying don't worry about the vowel lengths, I'm just saying that the use of those little lines came much later and aren't present in all the texts you will find, so it's advantageous to be able to read the text without them. The vowel length is there, and should be learned, regardless of whether someone at a later date has annotated the original text with macrons for you.
Amadeus - Just because those letters appeared in the Middle Ages doesn't mean it wasn't pragmatic. Your first link even says that the 'j' is used for "convenience" and that 'u' and 'v' are used in "modern texts." To impose them on classic works is artificial, since they were not originally there, and thus "retrofitting" someone's work with them is analogous to the use of macrons. Why not argue that we should read Cicero in Italian since that is the "natural evolution of the language?"
[OK, I don't really believe Italian is the natural evolution of Latin, but I just wanted to make the point. I'm also not arguing against the use of 'j' or 'v', that's certainly been hashed through here before, I'm just pointing out that it seems inconsistent to be in favor of macrons but against 'j' and 'v.']
Amadeus - Just because those letters appeared in the Middle Ages doesn't mean it wasn't pragmatic. Your first link even says that the 'j' is used for "convenience" and that 'u' and 'v' are used in "modern texts." To impose them on classic works is artificial, since they were not originally there, and thus "retrofitting" someone's work with them is analogous to the use of macrons. Why not argue that we should read Cicero in Italian since that is the "natural evolution of the language?"
[OK, I don't really believe Italian is the natural evolution of Latin, but I just wanted to make the point. I'm also not arguing against the use of 'j' or 'v', that's certainly been hashed through here before, I'm just pointing out that it seems inconsistent to be in favor of macrons but against 'j' and 'v.']
The lists:
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library
- Lucus Eques
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 2037
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
- Location: Pennsylvania
- Contact:
edonnelly wrote:Hey Lucus,Lucus Eques wrote:Germans, the French, and others are less fortunate, and it shows in their speech (Ratzinger, Ratzinger).
Is this true of his Latin only, or also of his Italian? I ask because I had heard it said that his Italian was "flawless," but I didn't know if that was true or not. (I hadn't heard anything about his Latin until now).
Hey Ed,
Well, certainly his words are fine, but he has one of the strongest German accents in his Italian that I've heard. It's very cute, actually.
Writing 'j' or 'v' though does not change the pronunciation. But if we forget where the long vowels fall, we don't end up pronouncing correctly. Actually, 'j' and 'v' are simply short 'i' and 'u'; if we even mark the extra-short vowels, such as these, we are certain to obtain a very fluid sense of the ancient pronunciation.Well, not to drag the discussion on too much, but that argument sounds a lot like what I hear from those advocating for j's and v's -- something I know you reject. Macrons, j's and v's were all added later by people trying to improve either our ability to pronounce or comprehend the language and they take us further away from the original source.Lucus Eques wrote:This exercise connects my knowlege and recollection of the language directly with how it ought to be pronounced, and keeps my spoken pronunciation sharp (especially without many speakers to hear in the course of a day),
Ed
I am not against 'j' and 'v' so much as against only 'v'. Having both 'j' and 'v' is, perhaps, archaic, or even unnecessary (and mainly confusing in my opinion), but otherwise it is consistent.
I only think truly fluent masters should fully give up the macrons.