So when one is studying Latin, one uses a hard “c”. But when one is studying Roman history in English speaking countries do they generally use a soft “c” for names? For example, “Cincinnatus”. Do Roman history professors make the “c” soft generally?
The issue of pronunciation is a sticky one, but generally speaking, people in English speaking countries will use the anglicized soft “c”. For example, Caesar and Cicero. This stems from the fact that people used to (and sometimes still do) pronounce Latin according to the rules of their native languages. For example, the English would read Latin as if it were English, and the Italians as if it were Italian.
The issue is sticky, however, because someone studying Roman history may opt for the restored (hard “c”) pronunciation in order to sound learned/precise (I think it’s pompous outside of a Latin class). At the same time, since so many people are accustomed to the anglicized names of prominent figures, even Latinists may opt for the soft “c”. In my Latin class I would use the soft “c” version unless I was reading something in Latin that involved the name.
Kikero should only be said in Latin class and whilst speaking Latin. Sisero is how his name is pronounced in English and also by most professors of Latin when they speak English. When I say Paris there’s an s in there when I speak English although it’s silent in French.
I’m trying to remember a hundred or so figures from early Rome. Maybe it only seems like double work. But let’s make this precise. Suppose you were in a graduate level Roman history class in classics at Oxford, Princeton, or Berkeley and the texts were half original sources, how do _the_y pronounce the names? I strongly suspect there is only one answer to this question. What is it? So my question is about the current convention that those professors have and nobody else’s convention or views on convention.
When you’re speaking in Latin, pronounce how it is in Latin. When in English, English pronunciation.
Hmm, Now that I think of it, I always pronounced “Cicero” with hard “c’s,” even in English.
It can be pronounced either way in Latin; those who use modern restored pronunciation one way, everyone else (for 1700 years) the other.
Utro modo latinè dicitur: uno modo ab eis qui ore restaurato utuntur, alio modo ab reliquiis septimum decimum saeculum.
I’m not speaking from knowledge but opinion(mostly): I think in a history class, Cicero would be pronounced (in a USA school) with the soft c’s. The point of history class would be well removed from the finer points of the language so they would use the commonly used form. I have generally always heard ‘Sisero’ as the way to say his name in english. A teacher may mention ‘Kikero’ as the way to pronounce his name in latin as a simple point of fact. But I don’t see them bogging down a class with the language itself.
Their conventions are the same as others. If you listen to this Harvard professor of law (Mary Ann Glendon) before an audience in Princeton (many of them Catholic clergy), she says “Sisero” for “Cicero” in English but “Kiwilis” for “Civilis” in a Latin book title, using restored pronunciation (uninfluenced by her period as US Ambassador to the Holy See in Rome where you might expect “Chivilis”).
Ut alii professores sonant. Huic legis professori (Mary Ann Glendon) universitatis Harvardianae ante auditores (ex quibus sunt multi clerici catholici) in universitate Princetoniense ausculta, quae anglicè “Sisero” pro “Cicero” at latinè “Kiwilis” (pronuntiatione restituâ) pro “Civilis” in libris titulo sonat, etiamsi fuit Apostolicae Sedis Legatus Romae ubi “Chivilis” dici solet.
Thanks adrianus. And I’m sorry to be so stubborn about this, but that isn’t exactly the community that I’m speaking of. I’m just speaking of Anglo-American Romanists at the top dozen universities. It may that there is a variety, but I would doubt it. Now from time to time Cicero may get pronounced with a soft ‘c’. But if someone has just completed a commentary on Livy Book Whatever and is giving a seminar on it at one of the top classics departments, my guess is that they would just use a hard ‘c’ throughout. I’ve been in such seminars for Greek subjects, just never for Roman.
It may sound harsh, pster, but if I had been at that seminar, honestly, I would think that speaker was a bit of a prat to speak so in English, regardless of his/her community; but he/she might think me a prat, too, for other reasons.
Fortassè severum id videtur, pster, at, si ego isto colloquio interfuissem, desipientiorem locutorem qui sic sonaret certè habuissem, gregem eius neglegens; sed locutorem aliâ de causâ me ipsum desipientem habere fieri potest.
Well, prat judgments may be more appropriate for mixed audiences composed of law professors, clergy, and ambassadors. In a tight small classics community I strongly assume there is just a convention that people follow because everybody does it. It is like if you say “Frisco”. Anybody actually from Frisco would know that you weren’t from there. Doesn’t make you a bad person or even a prat. I just don’t wanna blow my cover like that and reveal that I’m just an auto-didact. Hehe. It is just a factual question: What is _thei_r convention? I’ll bet anybody that they have such a convention as I’ve seen similar conventions in other humanities departments.
I cannot imagine an American classicist saying Kinkinnatus, given the large American city of Cincinnati. Stretching my memory to Roman Civ in college (and generous phonetic spelling): Myushus Seevola, Verjil, Horus, Veea Uhrayleea, Rowm (not Roma), Cashus, etc. Or should I say ets.? Anyway, all pronounced as English when discussed in English at a small four-year liberal arts college in the midwest. All pronounced as Latin when using Latin in Latin class. (I’d tell you what other PhDs say, but conventicula are obviously not in English.)
A certain professor insisted on a-go-RA as the pronunciation for agora. I humored him when in his classes, but always considered him to be splitting a hair given that I heard much of the above out of his mouth.
pster, I understand that you are looking for a practical tip on how to proceed with your conference paper. However, I fear you’re looking for a firm distinction where, as far as I am aware, there isn’t one.
In a nutshell, I’d go with the English pronunciations as a default unless you’ve observed specific cases where others deviate from this and prefer other pronunciations.
Based on my experience with academia in the field of literature, the majority of academics will use the pronunciation of their native language (English) for foreign names. You will occasionally run into some who clearly take pride in pronouncing French, Italian, Latin, etc. with an authentic accent, but this usually feels like an idiosyncrasy.
Otherwise, people are going to be more concerned with what you’re saying rather than which pronunciation you opt for.
I’ve been to many history and classicist conferences and advanced research seminars and never heard anyone speaking English say “Kikero”.
Multis colloquiis disciplinisque praestantioribus historicis et classicis interfui. Nunquàm unus qui anglicè “Kikero” sonuit.
Aren’t you contradicting yourself here? Or is Cincinnatus an exception? If they are reading Livy on Cincinnatus, don’t they say Kinkinnatus?
@ ALL: OK, you’ve beaten me down. But here is what you want me to believe. In a seminar on Roman history in a classics department where passages are read frequently, the participants will use a hard ‘c’ when quoting the passage in Latin, but then switch to a soft ‘c’ when discussing the passage. I’ve never seen people switch back and forth between pronunciations regularly. Must be quite odd. But I take it adrianus you have seen such a thing? The convention is to actually have two conventions and to switch back and forth between them day in and day out??
What about when they are reading about Cicero in Latin?
Restored pronunciation, but with non-English speakers and clerics sometimes not. As Hampie said, don’t you say “Paris” and not “Parie” in English? We do this sort of thing all the time with proper names.
Pronuntiatio restitua, separatim saepe cum illis qui anglice non loquuntur vel clericis. Ut dixit Hampie, nonne anglice Paris non Pari sonas? Sic semper facimus nominibus propriis.
Post scriptum
Suddenly accents aren’t working in Textkit editor!
Accenta per redactionis instrumentum in Textkit subito non denotantur!
The Paris vs. Paree example is hardly analagous. If it were, we wouldn’t be here. So I have repeated my question. (In fact, the Paris vs. Paree type examples support the possibility that people would just stick with the hard ‘c’ except for a few of the most famous people. Why do I say that? Because when speaking English, one doesn’t anglicize most French names, just the most common ones.)
Oh yes, pster. I have seen such a thing: historians and classicists switching language and switching pronunciation of proper names and anatomical and botanical names, and I’ve participated in such a thing. It never struck me as strange or arcane or a guilty pleasure, because I believe it’s what people do naturally,—but there are still variations between speakers.
Iterùm, pster. Vidi quidem talem rem: historicos professoresque classicarum litterarum qui linguas alternabant et sonus mutabant in nominum propriorum atque anatomiae herbariaeque tractando; porrò ego ipse talem rem participavi. Nunquàm ut alienum ut arcanum ut sons voluptas id mihi visum est, immò ut naturale,—exstant autem quaedam discrimina inter locutores.
Post scriptum
Accents working again, surprisingly.
Accenta denuò se ostendunt, de improvisó.
Thanks. No more questions your honor.