Every single name in my appendix of names in my textbook which has an ‘us’ for an ending does not have a macron. Are they ommitting it on purpose? If it is omitted they are all being pronounced similar to the word ‘Marcus’. I believe they should all be pronounced ‘Marcoos’. Are all of the macrons or long u’s being omitted in this appendix? Is it possible that every sinlge first name of a person ending in ‘us’ is a short u?
Thanks.
The nominative form of the second declension always has a short “u” in the ending. 
Is it a short -us in the nominative second declension for peoples names such as marcus or does this also include such words which represent objects such as domus? My talking dictionary pronounces all ‘us’ words as ‘oos’ but my textbook does not put a long macron over any of the u’s whether they are objects or people.
Thanks.
Are you talking about an English “us” (like in “us and them” )? If so, that is not the latin pronounciation. The correct pronounciation is “oos”, but there’s a short oos and a long one. One of the grammars in this website makes the distinction like this:
u (with macron) = boot
u (with breve) = foot.
Hope this helps.
Yes, i am talking about the pronounciation ‘us’ in latin which is ‘oos’. If it is really ‘oos’ then why is every single name of an object (domus) and person (marcus) in my entire dictionary lacking the long u macron? They are
written as if they are pronounced like the english word ‘us’ when they should really have a macron. I don’t know where the button is for a macron on this system but the book is listing domus and magnus and multus and marcus
without any lines over the u. There should be a line there no?[/list][/code]
Ah, but remember that adding a macron is not a change in quality, only of quantity. A latin “us” without a macron does not mean it is pronounced like the English “us” (as in US magazine), as there is no such sound in latin.
I take it that if in your book there is no macron in names ending in us, then that means they are in the nominative, which always ends in short “u” pronounced oo as in foot.
smacks forehead This is so absurd it’s almost funny.
Amadeus, you are quite right in pointing out that our friend blutoonwithcarrotandnail, likely an Anglophone, has been taught the “English” pronunciation of Latin, a pronunciation inherently incorrect. This is why he is having such trouble and coming to ask all these very good questions.
For indeed, there are only five vowels in Latin: A, E, I, O, U. The quality, that is, the sound of A, I, and U does not change. They somewhat resemble these English vowels:
A: father
I: machine
U: true
E and O, when long or short, have slightly different sounds. It is impossible to describe them properly with English phonetics, since there are very few accents in our language which possess similar sounds (though Scottish and Irish accents tend to be pretty clean). In any case, Latin vowels are identical to Italian vowels, if that helps. In the meantime, for E, I suggest to our friend to err towards the ‘e’ in “get,” but to smile broadly while making the sound. For the O, try to make a very closed version of the British vowel “hot.”
C?re Amadīue, just as blutoonwithcarrotandnail’s (presumed) Anglophonic origins prevent him from understanding Romance vowels just yet, it would seem that being by birth an Hispanophone you may not be able to distinguish the (often unattractive) complexity of English vowels. For that website you noted seems to be using the English pronunciation of Latin (the same appears at the beginning of Wheelock, that damnable pseudoergon), for the vowel in “boot” is very, very different from the vowel in “foot.” The vowel in “foot” is closer to a schwa, while the sound in “boot” is closer to the true Latin sound of the vowel U, and thus closer to Spanish, Italian, et ceteras. In my experience, most English teachers in Spain and Italy have very strong accents, and in these accents no distinction is made between “foot” and “boot.” It is possible you yourself, amīce, have come to understand these English sounds in the same manner.
To the point, Latin U is always pronounced in a way similar to the ‘u’ in my name: Luke (this is not true for the British accents, unfortunately). When it is long, it is held for a longer period of time. When it is short, it is held for a shorter period of time. There is no difference in quality, only in quantity.
blutoonwithcarrotandnail, I would be delighted to continue this conversation with you by means of Skype, a free phone-calling service through the internet. By ear and by voice is the only means of acquiring any true sense of these sounds. The written word fails us.
I do not have skype at the moment.
I think i just read two replies which say the opposite.
One person said pronounce Domus as in ‘foot’ and the other said pronounce it as in ‘boot’.
The talking dictionary is pronouncing it as in the word ‘boot’. (Domoos)
Which is correct? Further, if it pronounced oos why is it written us (like in english) without the macron.
Thanks.
I just caught on to something in one of the last messages. It said that the word is given in the nominative. It was stated by whoever replied “There is no US (like in english) in the latin language”. I am going to assume therefore that there is no -US in any of these words but that they are all -oos. There is
boot (long) and foot (short). But the word foot is short and sounds like Domus and not Domoos. Talking dictionaries pronounce it domuus and not domus. Why isn’t there a macron over the -us? What is the
thing about quantity and not quality? I am not sure how those two words figure into pronounciation.[/u]
blutoon,
Better that you listen to Lucus’ pronounciation over the phone. Indeed, upon further reflection, foot and boot are different in quality (yes, I can tell the difference, Lucus 
).
I’m glad you’ve taken my comments in good humor, Amadeus. I apologize even to suggest that you might lack something in English; clearly you write marvelously well, and we should all wish to be so competent in another language.
Personally, the antīquus in me wishes they were the same sound. I greatly admire my language’s variety and endearing qualities, even in its vowels, but sometimes the proverbial casino of it all, being wholly nouit?s, causes me to yern from the phonic clarity of Spanish or Italian.
Maybe I should just move to Ireland.