Textkit Logo

Classical or Medieval?

Here you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Latin, and more.

Classical or Medieval?

Postby Stancel » Sat Dec 24, 2005 10:26 pm

which pronunciation do you prefer? Or do you use features of both pronunciations? or do you make up your own pronunciation system for latin? :D
Stancel
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 7:19 am

Postby Stancel » Sat Dec 24, 2005 10:53 pm

Personally I find the Ecclesiastical / Medieval pronunciation better than the classical.
Stancel
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 7:19 am

Postby Brian » Sun Dec 25, 2005 11:38 am

Ecclesiastical........... definitely

Brian
Brian
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 6:44 pm
Location: Strathroy Ontario Canada

Postby fierywrath » Sun Dec 25, 2005 11:56 am

Personally I find the Reconstructed / Classical pronunciation better than the ecclesiastical.

Classical........... definitely
phpbb
User avatar
fierywrath
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 9:55 am

Postby Celtica » Mon Dec 26, 2005 1:34 am

Classical. Eccleastical pronounciation grates my nerves.
Celtica
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 9:05 am

Postby Stancel » Mon Dec 26, 2005 4:41 am

Celtica wrote:Classical. Eccleastical pronounciation grates my nerves.

the only part of classical I have a problem with is pronouncing v as a w. for me that's very awkward sounding.
Stancel
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 7:19 am

Postby fierywrath » Mon Dec 26, 2005 8:03 am

Stancel wrote:
Celtica wrote:Classical. Eccleastical pronounciation grates my nerves.

the only part of classical I have a problem with is pronouncing v as a w. for me that's very awkward sounding.

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...
phpbb
User avatar
fierywrath
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 9:55 am

Postby TADW_Elessar » Mon Dec 26, 2005 8:54 am

fierywrath wrote:
Stancel wrote:
Celtica wrote:Classical. Eccleastical pronounciation grates my nerves.

the only part of classical I have a problem with is pronouncing v as a w. for me that's very awkward sounding.

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...


I agree with Stancel... I prefer Classical pronunciation, but I hate reading "w".

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 ;)
phpbb
TADW_Elessar
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 1:10 pm
Location: Sassari, Sardinia, Italia

Postby Lucus Eques » Mon Dec 26, 2005 11:11 am

Classical.

To remedy the 'v' problem, I recommend writing 'u' instead.

After all, Elessar, do you feel uncomfortable saying "Iulia" rather than "Giulia" as it became in Italian?
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS
User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2017
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Postby Brian » Mon Dec 26, 2005 1:25 pm

At school I spoke the classical dialect, but at church it would, of course, be ecclesiastical. To me, the church dialect was intrinsically more pleasant to the ear. Now for those who prefer the classical pronunication....good for you.

But let us not forget.

De gustibus non disputandum (est).

Brian
Brian
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 6:44 pm
Location: Strathroy Ontario Canada

Postby fierywrath » Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:55 pm

Brian wrote:De gustibus non disputandum (est).

whoever said that first was a moron
phpbb
User avatar
fierywrath
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 9:55 am

Postby Brian » Tue Dec 27, 2005 4:19 pm

fierywrath wrote:
Brian wrote:De gustibus non disputandum (est).

whoever said that first was a moron


Dear Professor Higgins

Here is the completion of the saying, the first part of
which, you "slurred" as moronic.

"De veritate disputandum est."

Brian
Brian
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 6:44 pm
Location: Strathroy Ontario Canada

Postby nostos » Tue Dec 27, 2005 9:31 pm

Brian wrote:
fierywrath wrote:
Brian wrote:De gustibus non disputandum (est).

whoever said that first was a moron


Dear Professor Higgins

Here is the completion of the saying, the first part of
which, you "slurred" as moronic.

"De veritate disputandum est."

Brian


:lol:

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.
phpbb
User avatar
nostos
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 12:30 am
Location: Montréal, QC

Postby Adelheid » Tue Dec 27, 2005 10:29 pm

fierywrath wrote:
Brian wrote:De gustibus non disputandum (est).

whoever said that first was a moron


Such harsh words..
User avatar
Adelheid
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 8:58 pm
Location: Mijdrecht

Postby Stancel » Wed Dec 28, 2005 4:38 am

fierywrath wrote:
Stancel wrote:
Celtica wrote:Classical. Eccleastical pronounciation grates my nerves.

the only part of classical I have a problem with is pronouncing v as a w. for me that's very awkward sounding.

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...


I'm a hypocrite? Get over yourself

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.
Stancel
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 7:19 am

Postby Amadeus » Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:15 am

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.


Bravissimo!!! Couldn't have said it better myself.

Two thumbs way up to Ecclesiastical pronounciation (although, in some rare instances, classical seems better: Vercingetorix [vershinyetorics] vs. Uercingetorix [werkinguetorics]). :wink:
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.
User avatar
Amadeus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 764
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 10:40 pm
Location: In a van down by the river

Postby Mofmog » Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:21 am

Stancel wrote:
fierywrath wrote:
Stancel wrote:
Celtica wrote:Classical. Eccleastical pronounciation grates my nerves.

the only part of classical I have a problem with is pronouncing v as a w. for me that's very awkward sounding.

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...


I'm a hypocrite? Get over yourself

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 classical works you use the classical pronounciation.
When you read church, medieval and enlightenment works, use the ecclestial.

How easy!
Mofmog
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:03 pm

Postby Flos Carmeli » Sat Dec 31, 2005 9:47 pm

Ecclesiastical.

What could be more pleasing than a Traditional Catholic Mass without making "Novus" sound like "No Wuuuuuss," so that just sounds weird. Ecclesiastical is much more proper! And saints used it!!!
Flos Carmeli
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 5:45 pm

Postby Lucus Eques » Mon Jan 02, 2006 8:27 pm

L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS
User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2017
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Postby latinbeginsnow » Mon Jan 02, 2006 10:27 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???
latinbeginsnow
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 8:05 pm

Postby bellum paxque » Tue Jan 03, 2006 6:02 pm

Stupidity is not a synonym for ignorance.

But I do sometimes get that sinking feeling in my stomach when I hear someone say "Eh-chay Romani."
bellum paxque
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 718
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 2:29 pm
Location: nanun Hanguge issoyo (in Korea sum)

Postby Brian » Wed Jan 04, 2006 6:30 pm

Friends

In necessariis unitas,
in dubiis libertas,
in omnibus caritas.

Brian
Brian
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 6:44 pm
Location: Strathroy Ontario Canada

Postby CharlesH » Thu Jan 05, 2006 6:29 pm

edited
Last edited by CharlesH on Sat Aug 05, 2006 5:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
CharlesH
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 4:14 am

Postby Brian » Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:13 pm

I am curious about the pronuciation used by some famous natural philosophers (now called scientists). For example, Isaac Newton, what pronunciation would he have used when teaching using his famous Prinicipia Mathematica, which was written in Latin? Is it known??

Brian
Brian
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 6:44 pm
Location: Strathroy Ontario Canada

Postby Stancel » Sat Jan 07, 2006 8:20 pm

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 :lol:

I'm thinking of just pronouncing it Classical without pronouncing the v as a w
phpbb
Stancel
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 7:19 am

Postby GlottalGreekGeek » Sat Jan 07, 2006 10:49 pm

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.
User avatar
GlottalGreekGeek
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:37 am
Location: Mountain View

Postby darthanakin » Sun Jan 08, 2006 12:57 pm

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.
darthanakin
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 8:20 am

Postby Lucus Eques » Sun Jan 08, 2006 6:33 pm

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.
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS
User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2017
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Postby Spyus Carus » Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:32 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?
phpbb
Spyus Carus
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 6:58 pm

Postby edonnelly » Thu Jan 12, 2006 1:39 am

Spyus Carus wrote:Are they expecting students to learn vowel lenghts without marking them?


Don't we do this in English? (He took the lead. Get the lead out.)

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
User avatar
edonnelly
Administrator
 
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
Location: Music City, USA

Postby GlottalGreekGeek » Thu Jan 12, 2006 1:53 am

Old Romans learned the vowel lengths from ear, not from writing, just as I know the distinction between lead and lead, (or read and read, among other examples) because I knew them by ear first, and learned to write them later.

Not having any native speakers handy, we don't have this luxury.
User avatar
GlottalGreekGeek
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:37 am
Location: Mountain View

Postby edonnelly » Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:43 am

GlottalGreekGeek wrote:Not having any native speakers handy, we don't have this luxury.


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?

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
User avatar
edonnelly
Administrator
 
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
Location: Music City, USA

Postby Spyus Carus » Thu Jan 12, 2006 4:30 am

edonnelly wrote:Don't we do this in English? (He took the lead. Get the lead out.)


Well....we do have words that mean different things when pronounced with different vowel lengths.

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?
phpbb
Spyus Carus
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 6:58 pm

Postby Brian » Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:02 pm

[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
Brian
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 6:44 pm
Location: Strathroy Ontario Canada

Postby Lucus Eques » Thu Jan 12, 2006 6:28 pm

edonnelly wrote:
GlottalGreekGeek wrote:Not having any native speakers handy, we don't have this luxury.


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?


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.

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).
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS
User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2017
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Postby edonnelly » Thu Jan 12, 2006 7:16 pm

Lucus Eques wrote:Germans, the French, and others are less fortunate, and it shows in their speech (Ratzinger, Ratzinger).


Hey Lucus,

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).


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),


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
The lists:
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library
User avatar
edonnelly
Administrator
 
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
Location: Music City, USA

Postby Amadeus » Thu Jan 12, 2006 10:10 pm

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.

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


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:

http://www.orbilat.com/Languages/Latin/Grammar/Latin-Pronunciation-Syllable-Accent.html
http://www.orbilat.com/Languages/Latin/Grammar/Latin-Alphabet.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.
User avatar
Amadeus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 764
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 10:40 pm
Location: In a van down by the river

Postby Bardo de Saldo » Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:52 am

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."
User avatar
Bardo de Saldo
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 392
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:34 pm
Location: Newer Mexico

Postby edonnelly » Fri Jan 13, 2006 2:00 pm

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.']
The lists:
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library
User avatar
edonnelly
Administrator
 
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
Location: Music City, USA

Postby Lucus Eques » Fri Jan 13, 2006 2:46 pm

edonnelly wrote:
Lucus Eques wrote:Germans, the French, and others are less fortunate, and it shows in their speech (Ratzinger, Ratzinger).


Hey Lucus,

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.


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),


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


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.

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.
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS
User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2017
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Next

Return to Learning Latin