Quick question on Latin

[EphelDuath]

We know that there is a clear difference between “some form” of Latin and ecclesiastial Latin, because Pope St. Pius X was the one who “Italianized” the pronunciation of Latin for the Church. But if what was pronounced before that can be considered roughly the same as classical Latin, nobody knows. Recordings didn’t exist in Cicero’s time. I’m exactly not very sure how it’s been concluded that the V was pronounced like an English w, or that C was pronounced like an English K in the times of the Roman Republic.

 

[PietroPaolo]

Recordings didn’t exist in Cicero’s time. I’m exactly not very sure how it’s been concluded that the V was pronounced like an English w, or that C was pronounced like an English K in the times of the Roman Republic.

Scholars have studied poetry and have determined those sounds work better and thus must have been used, it is highly speculative, though and, as I mentioned above, differences in pronunciation would have existed then as now. To conclude that a fishmonger in Ostia in AD 350 would have pronounced Caesar “K-eye-sar” based off first century BC upper class Roman poetry is a leap of faith too far for me.

 

[Razanir]

Also, differences in pronunciation would almost certainly been observable over time (just like we don’t speak Shakespearean English)

For those who aren’t familiar with historical linguistics, this (I think) is referring to the Great Vowel Shift. Back in Shakespeare’s time, we pronounced vowels more similarly to most other languages. (It’s not even a Germanic-Romance split. German has the same vowels)

 

[EphelDuath]

Scholars have studied poetry and have determined those sounds work better and thus must have been used, it is highly speculative, though and, as I mentioned above, differences in pronunciation would have existed then as now. To conclude that a fishmonger in Ostia in AD 350 would have pronounced Caesar “K-eye-sar” based off first century BC upper class Roman poetry is a leap of faith too far for me.

Well, I’m no linguist, but that hardly seems like a viable method at all. It presumes, for one, that popular poetry sounded as good as it possibly could. As someone who has read poetry, I can assure you that this isn’t the case.

 

[Filii_Dei]

If it’s before AE, E, I, OE or Y, it’s pronounced like an English J.
If it’s before A, O, U or a consonant, it’s pronounced like an English G.
If it’s in the cluster GN, the cluster is pronounced like a Spanish Ñ (English NY)

Examples:
Regína Coeli (ray-GEE-nah CHAY-lee, where “gee” is like the interjection)
Ave María, grátia plena (AH-vay mah-REE-ah, GRAH-tsee-ah PLAY-nah)
Angus Dei (AN-yoos DAY-ee)

I’m pretty sure God isn’t a cow. It’s a delicious proposition though.

 

[Razanir]

I’m pretty sure God isn’t a cow. It’s a delicious proposition though.

Yeah… I noticed that spelling mistake about the first time someone quoted it. I really wish there wasn’t a time limit on editing (there isn’t on the other forum I’m on)

 

[JM3]

Hmmm… I’ve done a little more digging around on the mee-hee vs. mee-kee pronunciation and it seems to be dependent on regional differences. Both appear to be legitimate options. I wonder if the Liber Usualis has anything to say on the subject… Anyone have a copy handy?

Liber Usualis archive.org/details/TheLiberUsualis1961

xxxvilj. Rules for Interpretation.

CH is always like K (even before E or I).
e. g. Cham — Kam, machina = ma-kee-na.

G before e, ae, oe, i, y, is soft as in generous.
e. g. magi, genitor, Regina.

Otherwise G is hard as in Government.
e. g. Gubernator, Vigor, Ego.

GN has the softened sound given to these letters in French and Italian.
e. g. agneau, Signor, Monsignor.

The nearest English equivalent would be N followed by y.
e. g. Ah-nyoh, Regnum <=* Reh-nyoom; Magnificat = Mah-nyee-fee-caht.

H is pronounced K in the two words nihil (nee-keel) and mihi, (mee-kee) and
their compounds. In ancient books these words are often written nichil and
michi. In all other cases H is mute.

 

[PietroPaolo]

Liber Usualis archive.org/details/TheLiberUsualis1961

xxxvilj. Rules for Interpretation.

CH is always like K (even before E or I).
e. g. Cham — Kam, machina = ma-kee-na.

G before e, ae, oe, i, y, is soft as in generous.
e. g. magi, genitor, Regina.

Otherwise G is hard as in Government.
e. g. Gubernator, Vigor, Ego.

GN has the softened sound given to these letters in French and Italian.
e. g. agneau, Signor, Monsignor.

The nearest English equivalent would be N followed by y.
e. g. Ah-nyoh, Regnum <=* Reh-nyoom; Magnificat = Mah-nyee-fee-caht.

H is pronounced K in the two words nihil (nee-keel) and mihi, (mee-kee) and
their compounds. In ancient books these words are often written nichil and
michi. In all other cases H is mute.

That settles it for me. Thanks

 

[GangGreen]

H is pronounced K in the two words nihil (nee-keel) and mihi, (mee-kee) and
their compounds. In ancient books these words are often written nichil and
michi. In all other cases H is mute.

How come whenever I hear a chant (e.g., magnificat) they always pronounce it as mee-hee rather than mee-kee?

 

[Baelor]

Basically, “Classical” Latin is Latin pronounced as scholars imagine it would have been pronounced based off ancient poetry.

That is not the case at all. Your information source(s) is/are simply incorrect.

First, I would recommend the short book Vox Latina.

Second, there are various linguistic sources for Classical pronunciation:

1. Clues through literature. Poetry suggests that the final m was not pronounced but rather indicated nasalization, for example. There is really no compelling reason to believe that was a purely poetic pronunciation. We can get a sense of meter and stress through prose (e.g. Cicero’s), again in a way that does not suggest limitation to prose.
2. We also have the development of the daughter languages and the cognate languages, which clue us in to the pronunciation.
3. Ironically the most relevant to your post, we have graffiti, which includes phonetic spellings that sometimes do not correspond to the spelling. These spelling errors do tell us a lot about pronunciation.

There are others.

Most Latin speakers in the ancient world didn’t speak perfect Ciceronian Latin, but rather spoke a “vulgar” Latin, which may have sounded more like Italian and which eventually evolved into Italian.

That does not mean that the Classical pronunciation is an illusion or that at a particular time it was not current or predominant.

Also, differences in pronunciation would almost certainly been observable over time (just like we don’t speak Shakespearean English) and through space (people in Boston and people in Alabama don’t pronounce English the same way).

Of course.

Scholars have studied poetry and have determined those sounds work better and thus must have been used, it is highly speculative,

Again, the reconstruction is neither “highly speculative” or based solely on poetry. You are simply incorrect.

 

[JM3]

How come whenever I hear a chant (e.g., magnificat) they always pronounce it as mee-hee rather than mee-kee?

My cd “Salve Regina” by the Benedictine Monks of the Abbey of Saint-Maurice & Saint-Maur, Clervaux (recorded in October of 1959) clearly says mee-kee.

 

[PietroPaolo]

That is not the case at all. Your information source(s) is/are simply incorrect.

First, I would recommend the short book Vox Latina.

Second, there are various linguistic sources for Classical pronunciation:

1. Clues through literature. Poetry suggests that the final m was not pronounced but rather indicated nasalization, for example. There is really no compelling reason to believe that was a purely poetic pronunciation. We can get a sense of meter and stress through prose (e.g. Cicero’s), again in a way that does not suggest limitation to prose.
2. We also have the development of the daughter languages and the cognate languages, which clue us in to the pronunciation.
3. Ironically the most relevant to your post, we have graffiti, which includes phonetic spellings that sometimes do not correspond to the spelling. These spelling errors do tell us a lot about pronunciation.

There are others.

That does not mean that the Classical pronunciation is an illusion or that at a particular time it was not current or predominant.

Of course.

Again, the reconstruction is neither “highly speculative” or based solely on poetry. You are simply incorrect.

Granted, there are other literary sources than poetry that inform our understanding of how Classical Latin might have been pronounced, I used poetry as the most important. The rest of my points are unchallenged by your reply. I never suggested that the classical pronunciation is completely fictional just that it is what it is, primarily a reconstruction of how Latin was written by upper class Romans in the City of Rome in the First Century BC. To leap from there to suggesting that, as per my example above, we know how a fishmonger in Ostia in the fourth cent. would have pronounced Caesar is a leap of faith in current scholarship I can’t make with you.

 

[Baelor]

Granted, there are other literary sources than poetry that inform our understanding of how Classical Latin might have been pronounced, I used poetry as the most important.

You did. The linguists did not, contrary to your assertions.

The rest of my points are unchallenged by your reply. I never suggested that the classical pronunciation is completely fictional just that it is what it is, primarily a reconstruction of how Latin was written by upper class Romans in the City of Rome in the First Century BC. To leap from there to suggesting that, as per my example above, we know how a fishmonger in Ostia in the fourth cent. would have pronounced Caesar is a leap of faith in current scholarship I can’t make with you.

I am so confused – does anyone within the academic establishment actually claim anything of the sort? Certainly none of my Classics professors, some of the most reputable Latinists in the world. Who is making these claims?

 

[bcuster]

[

http://www.biblestudytools.com/resources/latin-pronunciation-guide.html](http://www.biblestudytools.com/resources/latin-pronunciation-guide.html)

In Latin, if a word has the letter G- what sound is made? Are there variations?