Since when latin became less known?

[Yitong]

Once upon a time, latin was the common tongue of the western Europe, anyone there either can read latin, or can read nothing

my question though is, when do we have a considerable amount of intellectual, especially in the west, that may not necessary know latin?

 

[kozlosap]

Nowadays there is more of a need for educated people to learn one of the languages that affect business such as Japanese or English (if you are from a non-English speaking country). Classical education with Latin was awesome, but there are only so many hours in a school day and certain courses that were once thought to be very important are now no longer offered.

 

[pippin]

At one time Latin was required for High School graduation in many western countries. I has since been replaced with modern languages. Latin has not been required in the US since the early to mid-twentieth century.

 

[triumphguy]

Latin was the common tongue of the elite, the rich and powerful, the clerics and nobles.

It was never the common language of the people.

My ancestors would have spoken Saxon, Norse and Gaelic, and later on various forms of English, and some might have spoken Norman French originally. I doubt any spoke Latin.

 

[TuAutem]

Latin was the common tongue of the elite, the rich and powerful, the clerics and nobles.

It was never the common language of the people.

My ancestors would have spoken Saxon, Norse and Gaelic, and later on various forms of English, and some might have spoken Norman French originally. I doubt any spoke Latin.

Well, no. It *was *the common language of the people, you’re just not going back far enough! Although even in Roman times, there was a difference between what we now know as classical Latin, and common or ‘vulgar’ Latin. (But it was more a difference of register.)

Even in later centuries, any European ancestors who received any education would have done so in Latin, not their national languages (though of course, many fewer people were educated in those days). This remained the case until around the 17th century, and Latin has gradually lost ground to national languages ever since. Exactly which part slipping away depends on what you are looking at: in the 17th century it was replaced for diplomatic correspondence with French, in the early 20th it ceased to be required for high school graduation, etc.

Even today, it remains a widely studied language, comparatively speaking–but one which has been on the decline for a good 3 or 4 centuries.

 

[IbnFiktur]

Spanish, Italian, and French are essentially just dialects of late Vulgar Latin. Latin was never “replaced” per se, it just evolved slowly over time as all commonly used languages do.

 

[triumphguy]

Well, no. It *was *the common language of the people, you’re just not going back far enough! Although even in Roman times, there was a difference between what we now know as classical Latin, and common or ‘vulgar’ Latin. (But it was more a difference of register.)

Even in later centuries, any European ancestors who received any education would have done so in Latin, not their national languages (though of course, many fewer people were educated in those days). This remained the case until around the 17th century, and Latin has gradually lost ground to national languages ever since. Exactly which part slipping away depends on what you are looking at: in the 17th century it was replaced for diplomatic correspondence with French, in the early 20th it ceased to be required for high school graduation, etc.

Even today, it remains a widely studied language, comparatively speaking–but one which has been on the decline for a good 3 or 4 centuries.

While my British (not English, Irish or Welsh forbears) ancestors may have had to trade in Latin during the Roman occupation of Britain, they had their own languages. Later waves of immigrants/invaders never spoke Latin.

And it is unlikely that my forbears were rich or landholders, so they spoke whatever peasant dialect they were brought up with.

I bet I could have a conversation in Northern (Lancashire) English and you wouldn’t understand one word.

 

[ProVobis]

While my British (not English, Irish or Welsh forbears) ancestors may have had to trade in Latin during the Roman occupation of Britain, they had their own languages. Later waves of immigrants/invaders never spoke Latin.

During the first six centuries, Latin (in the form of Vulgar Latin) was spoken in the British Isles. (Do you know that London was once Londinium?) The barbarians took over until the 10th century or so, when Latin and French started to become more widespread. So much so many of the words in the English language today are Latin or Latin-formed, with some French and Greek thrown in as well. So if you’re going to slam Latin, you might consider not using anything that is Latin in origin. (For example, ancestor, occupation, immigrants, invaders.)

 

[ProVobis]

At one time Latin was required for High School graduation in many western countries. I has since been replaced with modern languages. Latin has not been required in the US since the early to mid-twentieth century.

The story I heard is that the requirement was dropped about the same time “In God We Trust” was written on the U.S. bill in English. Prior to that, Latin was used in the design of the currency. (“Annuit coeptis…novus ordo seclorum”, “E Pluribus Unum”)

 

[triumphguy]

During the first six centuries, Latin (in the form of Vulgar Latin) was spoken in the British Isles. (Do you know that London was once Londinium?) The barbarians took over until the 10th century or so, when Latin and French started to become more widespread. So much so many of the words in the English language today are Latin or Latin-formed, with some French and Greek thrown in as well. So if you’re going to slam Latin, you might consider not using anything that is Latin in origin. (For example, ancestor, occupation, immigrants, invaders.)

Latin was spoken reluctantly by the occupied “native” Britons, in the same way that English was spoken in India during the Raj, and so I bet Boadicea and her daughters didn’t speak it (at least not voluntarily)!

Of course London was called Londinium - by the Romans - it was built on the ashes of a British town that was burnt to the ground by the Legions. Those ashes still exist BTW and are a reminder that the origins of London go back beyond the Romans. Latin was the language of the invader, and the oppressor, at least in Britain, and then it disappeared to the monasteries of Ireland when first the Saxons and then the Norsemen invaded and settled.

The name London actually originates with old King Ludd of the Trinovantes tribe, who called the town Caerludein prior to the Roman occupation. There’s a pub near my old University college and the Old Bailey where I used to drink called the Old King Lud. My College, King’s was built over a still working Roman Bath.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_PjMVCKQDV...SH0RZbzy1c/s320/ludgate+king+lud+pub+sign.jpg

So I bet that most Latin was spoken in pre-christian Britain, and after the Romans left 99.9% of the population could not and did not learn, speak or read Latin, until the “Age of Enlightenment” when Latin and Greek was taught so children of the rich could read the classics (Pliny, Virgil, Homer etc) not the Vulgate bible (since they were all reading the King James Version in glorious Elizabethan English).

BTW there are dictionaries that only employ English words of Germanic origin, so with a little work I probably could slam Latin in English that contains no Latin whatsoever.

 

[IbnFiktur]

Triumphguy is correct.

After the legions left Britain (well before the 476 fall of the Western empire), Roman culture almost totally disappeared. Christianity itself disappeared until it was reintroduced by the Irish much later.

This is quite different from what happened in post-Roman France and Spain, where the Gothic and Frankish invaders virtually adopted wholesale Roman culture, administrative practices, and customs. This is also why French and Spanish are essentially dialects of Latin, whereas English is truly a Germanic language with relatively minimal Latin influence.

 

[ProVobis]

BTW there are dictionaries that only employ English words of Germanic origin, so with a little work I probably could slam Latin in English that contains no Latin whatsoever.

Sure, and you’ll wind up like Old or Middle English. And no using the Latin alphabet either.

whereas English is truly a Germanic language with relatively minimal Latin influence.

Latin has had a significant influence in the formation of English at all stages of its insular development. In the medieval period, much borrowing from Latin occurred through ecclesiastical usage established by Saint Augustine of Canterbury in the 6th century, or indirectly after the Norman Conquest through the Anglo-Norman language. From the 16th to the 18th centuries, English writers cobbled together huge numbers of new words from Latin and Greek words. These were dubbed “inkhorn terms”, as if they had spilled from a pot of ink. Many of these words were used once by the author and then forgotten, but some which proved useful survived, such as imbibe and extrapolate. Many of the most common polysyllabic English words are of Latin origin, through the medium of Old French.

Due to the influence of Roman governance and Roman technology on the less developed nations under Roman dominion, those nations adopted Latin phraseology in some specialized areas, such as science, technology, medicine and law. For example, the Linnaean system of plant and animal classification was heavily influenced by Historia Naturalis, an encyclopedia of people, places, plants, animals and things published by Pliny the Elder. Roman medicine, recorded in the works of such physicians as Galen, established that today’s medical terminology would be primarily derived from Latin and Greek words, the Greek being filtered through the Latin. Roman engineering had the same effect on scientific terminology as a whole.* Latin law principles have survived partly in a long list of legal Latin terms.

Many international auxiliary languages have been heavily influenced by Latin. Interlingua, which lays claim to a sizeable following, is sometimes considered a simplified, modern version of the language. Latino sine Flexione, popular in the early 20th century, is Latin with its inflections stripped away, among other grammatical changes

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin

• FWIW, the modern day spacing between railroad tracks, 4 feet, 8.5 inches has its roots from Roman Empire.

 

[Cristiano]

**Latin was the common tongue of the elite, the rich and powerful, **the clerics and nobles.

It was never the common language of the people.

My ancestors would have spoken Saxon, Norse and Gaelic, and later on various forms of English, and some might have spoken Norman French originally. I doubt any spoke Latin.

No I understand why my socio-economic status has been going down the drain since the end of high school. I forgot almost all of the Latin that I studied.

 

[ProVobis]

So I bet that most Latin was spoken in pre-christian Britain, and after the Romans left 99.9% of the population could not and did not learn, speak or read Latin, until the “Age of Enlightenment” when Latin and Greek was taught so children of the rich could read the classics (Pliny, Virgil, Homer etc) not the Vulgate bible (since they were all reading the King James Version in glorious Elizabethan English).

Not only Latin disappeared but all Church property was confiscated during the term of Henry VIII. Catholicism did not appear in England again until maybe around 1850AD.

 

[triumphguy]

Sure, and you’ll wind up like Old or Middle English. And no using the Latin alphabet either.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin

• FWIW, the modern day spacing between railroad tracks, 4 feet, 8.5 inches has its roots from Roman Empire.

And the impact of the Romans had a significant and lasting effect on Britain. I’ve walked lengths of Hadrians Wall, and been to the Roman Baths in Bath, and ruins in Chester, and etc etc. I was fascinated by the Romans as a kid, but as a teen became more enamoured of the Celtic, Saxon and Norse cultures - maybe they felt more “british.” When I go to a stone circle or a barrow in Britain I feel a “tingle” that I never get from Roman ruins.

 

[ProVobis]

No I understand why my socio-economic status has been going down the drain since the end of high school. I forgot almost all of the Latin that I studied.

How about Shakespeare or Chaucer you studied in high school?

“The quality of mercy is not strained” is about all I remember.

 

[ProVobis]

When I go to a stone circle or a barrow in Britain I feel a “tingle” that I never get from Roman ruins.

Maybe that “tingle” is from the imagination of axes falling on necks?

 

[Cristiano]

How about Shakespeare or Chaucer you studied in high school?

“The quality of mercy is not strained” is about all I remember.

I grew up in Italy and in high school I had to memorize the monologue from the Hamlet for my English class, luckily I had to spend more time on Dante Alighieri (Divine Comedy) than on Chaucer. The Canterbury Tales were considered a little bit raunchy because of a movie that came out at the time.

 

[TuAutem]

While my British (not English, Irish or Welsh forbears) ancestors may have had to trade in Latin during the Roman occupation of Britain, they had their own languages. Later waves of immigrants/invaders never spoke Latin.

And it is unlikely that my forbears were rich or landholders, so they spoke whatever peasant dialect they were brought up with.

I bet I could have a conversation in Northern (Lancashire) English and you wouldn’t understand one word.

I’ve no argument with you over Roman Britain (my own ancestors are from Yorkshire), but the OP was asking about Latin in general, which was the common language of most of Western Europe and North Africa for a very long time. So I took issue with the blanket statement “it was never the common language of the people.” Obviously there are plenty of places on Earth where it was never spoken commonly, though.

 

[triumphguy]

I’ve no argument with you over Roman Britain (my own ancestors are from Yorkshire), but the OP was asking about Latin in general, which was the common language of most of Western Europe and North Africa for a very long time. So I took issue with the blanket statement “it was never the common language of the people.” Obviously there are plenty of places on Earth where it was never spoken commonly, though.

Yorkshire! We Lancastrians still remember the War of the Roses

Even in Rome Latin wasn’t spoken by everyone. The Universal Language in Jesus’ time was Greek.