Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst 123456789101112 LastLast
Results 181 to 200 of 231

Thread: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

  1. #181
    Diocle's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Amon Amarth
    Posts
    12,572

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    Quote Originally Posted by Renatus View Post
    Why is there an extra 'a' added to several words which is not justified by the written text?
    I wish I were able to find even just 1 of those extra"A" you have found Renatus, but I haven't found them.

    In any case here the "A"-count in the reading of the Latin text by prof. Andrea Marcelli (from 0:00 to 1:04 of the video), I want to remember once again that this is the CORRECT pronunciation of the Latin language:



    1- The first "A" is in the first word of the first line: "QUA", it's OK.
    2- The next "A" are in the third word of the first line: "CAUSA" and this is OK,
    3- then it comes the "A" of "GALLOS" and also this is OK.
    4- The "A" in "GERMANIS" is natürlich incumbent as the Germans themselves in their history.
    5- Then we find a new interesting (and very Italian) "A" in third word of the second line: "COTIDIANIS" and this is correct.
    6/7- The ninth word of the second line contains a nice "A" at its beginning, it's the famous and beautiful "A" of "AUT" and it's OK of course, and this is also the case of second "AUT" of the third line.
    8/9/10- Now a barrage of Italian "A": they are the tenth, eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth words of the third line: ".. UNA, PARS, QUAM GALLOS ..", and they are perfect.
    11/12/13/14/15- The fourth line contains five "A": "..CAPIT A ..", "RHODANO", "GARUMNA", beautiful vowel for wonderful rivers!
    16/17/18/19/20/21- Large amount of "A" in the fifth line, they are 6: "OCEANO", "BELGARUM", "ATTINGIT ETIAM AB SEQUANIS".
    22/23/24/25- The sixth line has just four "A" (the "A" contained in the diphthong of the desinence "AE" of the nouns BELGAE and GALLIAE do not count, being CORRECTLY pronounced with the sound of the Italian "E"), they are: "AD", "GALLIAE", "AB", "AD"
    26/27- The last line contains only two "A" in: "PARTEM" and "SPECTANT".

    I think we can state that in the text there are twenty seven (27) "A"-sounds (but I may be wrong, I still have to get used to my new glasses) in the reading of prof Marcelli, I add that his Italian is very good so it's hard identifying the regional accent, even though I think he's from North Italy but I can't identify the region with precision, all those Latin "A" are correctly pronounced using the nice Italian & Latin "A" sound, I've listened not even a single supernumerary and/or unecessary "A"-sound.

    Now the question is not why you listened so many "A" sounds 'not justifyed by the written text', but why I didn't listened them. Of course I've no answer for this compelling question, but I've a feeling, this one: if I was be able to listen the same amount of "A" as you, I suspect my English would be better, but I fear my Latin would be worse.

  2. #182
    Renatus's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bedford, England
    Posts
    546

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    I wish I were able to find even just 1 of those extra"A" you have found Renatus, but I haven't found them.
    You and I must be listening to different things. Here is a list:

    praecedunt-a; contendunt-a; prohibent-a; gerunt-a; dictum est-a; capit-a; continent-a; attingit-a; flumen-a; vergit-a; septentriones-a; oriunt-a; pertinent-a; spectant-a; septentionem-a.

  3. #183
    Diocle's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Amon Amarth
    Posts
    12,572

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    Yes we are listening two different things, because we speaks two different tongues and sorry but .. the sounds, especially the vowel sounds, of the English language are incompatible with the phonetics (I would also add: with the morphology and syntax), of the Latin language.

    So, coming back to the text and analyizing your list of not existent "A" ..

    - Prof. Marcelli after the "T" of "praecedunt" doesn't add any vowel, instead he takes a short, good pause; the same for "contendunt" , prof Marcelli after the final "T" of contendunt takes a short pause followed by no vowel.I exclude that in your tongue the Italian "T" sounds like the vowel "A", so, in this case the mystery is deep and in some way terrifying.
    - The "A" that you listen after the verb "prohibent" probably is the "A" of the following word: "AUT".
    - After the last "T" of "gerunt" professor Marcelli takes one of the longest pauses of the whole reading, so I really don't know what's happening to your audio hardware, Renatus.
    - After the "T" of "dictum est", the man pauses and breathes so it's impossible listening any "A" sound after the verb "est".
    - After "capit" what you listen is the sound of the Latin vowel "A" of the Latin preposition "A".
    - After "continetur" professor Marcelli clearly pronounces the initial syllabe of the noun "GARUMNA", and it's highly possible you have listened the sound "A" of the initial syllabe of "GArumna", in Italian the river is Garonna, in French, Garonne; have you seen it? it's so beautiful!



    - After "attingit" the reader pronounces the Latin word "ETIAM", so in this case you probably mix the British "æ" with the Italian and Latin sound of the first vowel of the Latin word "ETIAM" -> "E".
    - What you listen after the word "flumen" is a deep mystery for me, I don't listen any vowel until professor Marcelli pronounces the name of another famous river: Rhenum; so, also in this case, you probably mistake the Italian/Latin sound of the vowel "E" of "Rhenum" with the british sound "æ", that you attribute to some not existent "A".
    - In the case of "vergit" we are lucky: in fact after it, there is the preposition "AD", and this is the reason for your mistake.
    - After "septemtriones", prof. Marcelli takes a long pause because there is a full stop. What you listen in this case is a mystery and, at this point, let me say please that probably it's a issue linked to some slight hearing problem, maybe due to aging, no fear, it happens and modern technology offers you a wide range of solutions!
    - Instead in the case of the "A" sound that you listen after "oriuntur" we come back to the previous case: you mistake the Italian/Latin "E" sound of the first syllabe of the following verb "PERtinent" with the bizarre English sound "æ" of the vowel "A".
    - For the "A" after "pertinent" we already have the solution: what actually you are listening it's just the first "A" of the following preposition "AD".
    - The case of what you listen after the verb "spectant" is weird and mysterious, in fact prof Marcelli after "spectant" clearly pronounces the word "in", and even considering the weird English pronunciation of the ancient and noble 5 Italian/Latin vowels, I can't figure out what exactly happens, it looks like you misteake the Italian/Latin vowel "I" of "in" with an "A", don't ask me how this can be possible.
    - Instead, in the last case, we have the solution: after "septentrionem" you listen the sound of the Latin conjunction "ET", mistaking it for an "A" due to the weird and infamous anglo saxon sound "æ".

    Job done. Few are the inexplicable cases, in the most cases you listen an inexistent sound "A" because you connect the sound of the final syllabe of the first word with the initial syllabe of the following word, and this happens because you're an English speaker, Latin and Italian never attach two words each other; in the other few cases you mix and mistake the different sounds of "A" and "E" because for you, as English speaker, the "æ" sound covers both the Latin/Italian vowels "A" and "E". End of the story.

    In conclusion, what may I do better than repeating what I've written on post #181, maybe in this case trying to give it a new formal dresses just to make it more clear?


    " ..if I was be able to listen the same amount of "A" as you, Renatus,
    I suspect my English would be better,
    but I fear my Latin would be worse. "





    To listen once again the Latin language pronouced as it asks to be pronounced and
    to make things slightly more complex: Seneca, "De brevitatae vitae", 1, 2-3;
    also in this case by Prof. Andrea Marcelli, good listening:





  4. #184
    Renatus's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bedford, England
    Posts
    546

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    I'm not talking about pauses between words nor about the opening syllables of following words. I'm talking about a distinct additional sound after certain words. You might understand me better if I say that it is an 'uh' sound, rather than 'a'. I suspect that this is all to do with the rhythms of Italian speech. A couple of years ago, I heard a lecture given by an Italian scholar in English and there were the same additional sounds at the end of certain words. However, they have no relevance to correctly spoken English and, therefore, I see no reason to suppose that they are any more correct in spoken Latin.

  5. #185
    Diocle's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Amon Amarth
    Posts
    12,572

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    If you listen carefully you'll verify that there isn't any vowel sound added after the consonant, in the Italian mental habit, adding a vowel is a very serious matter, it can change the meaning of a word,so, even in the case of regional accent, an educated Italian professor would not add any unnecessary vowel to any Italian or Latin text.
    A Latin teacher knows Italian pretty well and he knows Latin even better, he wouldn't add a vowel to a Latin word not even under threat of an SS firing squad!
    Then consider that these are recorded public lessons, in front of many students, so, even in the case I didn't listen his voice, I'd refuse to believe that an Italian Latin teacher could think of adding a vowel (any vowel) to a Latin word, it would be insane even because the whole classroom would start laughing hard, you can't imagine how much a single vowel can change the meaning of an Italian or Latin word!

    Few examples?

    - Consider the Italian verb "Cozzo", first person singular of the verb "Cozzare" - "to clash" in English - well, now exchange the vowel "o" with the vowel "a" and listen the reaction of the people! Another one? Well, add an "a" at the end of the Italian preposition "Per" in phrases like "Per favore vorrei un espresso." - "Please I would like to get an expresso coffe.", that you can find in any touristic guide of Italy - then watch closely at the face of the barman ...
    - Latin examples? OK: an "ANGOLUS" is not an "ANGLO" (Appendix Probi), or "SAPIO" is radically different from "SOPIO".. and so on.

    The vowels A, E, I, O and U are a very serious matter in Latin and in Italian, indeed, we could say that the changes (any change and transformation) in the vowels are fundamental and structural parts and steps of the evolution of the Latin Language into the Vulgar Latin of the V-VII centuries and then into the new national Vulgars and Romance languages. Anyone who has to deal with Latin and Italian is very cautious with vowels; consonants are cannon fedder, brutalize, rape them, but be cautious with vowels!


    *****

    Now a curiosity that has almost killed me!
    It seems infact that Spanish language is not an evolution of the Latin, so, in strict terms, Spanish it's not a Romance language!

    At least this is what she thinks a serious Spanish professor Carmen J. Huertas, who has studied and teaches Latin: "We don't descend from Latin", she says!

    NO VENIMOS DEL LATIN!



    My opinion? The mania of innovating, that nowadays has become a true psychotic 'Compulsion to Repeat', is killing the Western Civilization much more than he did Attila the Hun with the Western Roman Empire!

  6. #186
    Renatus's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bedford, England
    Posts
    546

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    If you listen carefully you'll verify that there isn't any vowel sound added after the consonant, in the Italian mental habit, adding a vowel is a very serious matter, it can change the meaning of a word,so, even in the case of regional accent, an educated Italian professor would not add any unnecessary vowel to any Italian or Latin text.
    I have listened carefully and it is definitely there. I'm sorry that you can't hear it. Perhaps, as I implied, it is so much part of Italian speech that you do not notice it.

  7. #187
    Diocle's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Amon Amarth
    Posts
    12,572

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    No, perhaps it's more like as I explained you:

    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle
    ..we are listening two different things, because we speaks two different tongues and sorry but .. the sounds, especially the vowel sounds, of the English language are incompatible with the phonetics (I would also add: with the morphology and syntax), of the Latin language.
    I hate quoting myself, Renatus! You can't imagine how much I hate quoting myself!

  8. #188
    Renatus's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bedford, England
    Posts
    546

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    Yes we are listening two different things, because we speaks two different tongues
    Which is pretty much what I am saying. I hear it; you don't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    the sounds, especially the vowel sounds, of the English language are incompatible with the phonetics (I would also add: with the morphology and syntax), of the Latin language.
    Morphology and syntax have nothing to do with this discussion. As to sounds, I don't agree with you but you wouldn't expect me to. In truth, since neither of us can project ourselves back in time, the notion that present-day Italian sounds anything like Latin could be equally fallacious.

  9. #189
    Diocle's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Amon Amarth
    Posts
    12,572

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    Quote Originally Posted by Renatus
    Which is pretty much what I am saying. I hear it; you don't.
    Do you know what would we need? Some sort of Jury of Honour, a Committee composed by non-anglosaxon speakers and by non-Italian speakers, which, listened the reading, could expresse an impartial judgment about the phantom-"A" in the text. Sadly, you me, and few others (which can be counted on the fingers of one single hand still attending this forum) are not fit for purpose.
    Quote Originally Posted by Renatus
    Morphology and syntax have nothing to do with this discussion. As to sounds, I don't agree with you but you wouldn't expect me to. In truth, since neither of us can project ourselves back in time, the notion that present-day Italian sounds anything like Latin could be equally fallacious.
    In fact I've used the brackets.

    About present day Italian and Latin on one side and English and Latin on the other, let me make just a small experiment about vowel sounds:

    Latin and Vulgar Latin vowels sounds:



    Latin and Italian vowel sounds:




    This is the English vowel chart:



    This is a complete English/American phonetic vowel chart (I have had to split it into three parts because it was too large for my laptop, sorry! ):






    Have understood what I mean when I write

    " the vowel sounds of the English language are incompatible with the phonetics of the Latin language."?

    Or .. do I need to show more charts?

  10. #190
    Renatus's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bedford, England
    Posts
    546

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    I don't know what you're getting at. English vowels can be pronounced in a variety of ways. So what? Within that range, you will find a pronunciation equivalent to Latin.

  11. #191
    Diocle's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Amon Amarth
    Posts
    12,572

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    I'm getting at this: Italian vowels are A, E, I, O, and U; Latin vowels are A, E, I, O and U. In Italian the Latin A sounds as A, in Italian the Latin E sounds E, in Italian the Latin I sounds I, in Italian the Latin O sounds O, in Italian the Latin U sounds U, i.e., in Latin and in Italian "what you see is what you get." *

    The same can't be said for English, this is the reason why, to learn Latin, firstly you have to learn a foreign and for great part alien phonetics, not belonging to your linguistic heritage, so you need to study how to pronounce the Latin vowels and the Latin consonants, to do this you need to use phonetics to teach Latin to an anglosaxon audience.

    To learn Latin in Italy you don't need to study phonetics, the letters you read are the same letters you use in your tongue, apart few rilevant exceptions of course, this means that for Italians the real difficulties begin exactly from this similarity of sounds, nouns, meanings and phonetics. I love to speculate that the Latin "vulgus" possibly had similar problems when they had to understand and learn the language spoken and written by the aristocratic elites of the empire.




    * Michael A. Covington, Program in Linguistic, University of Georgia: "Latin Pronunciation Demystified".

  12. #192
    Renatus's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bedford, England
    Posts
    546

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    The same can't be said for English, this is the reason why, to learn Latin, firstly you have to learn a foreign and for great part alien phonetics, not belonging to your linguistic heritage, so you need to study how to pronounce the Latin vowels and the Latin consonants, to do this you need to use phonetics to teach Latin to an anglosaxon audience.
    I think you make too much of this. The pronunciation of all Latin vowels and consonants falls within the range of English pronunciation. All we have to remember is that 'c' is always hard and pronounced as a 'k' and that 'v' (which is really a 'u') is pronounced as a 'w'.

    If I follow your argument, you assume that Italian pronunciation is the same as Latin (a rash assumption, in my opinion, but we'll let that pass) and that it derives from vulgar Latin, the Latin of the streets. On the other hand, Latin as it is taught in British schools is the Latin of the educated classes, the Caesars and Ciceros of this world. I'm happy to go along with this. After all, the Latin literature that we study was written for just those educated classes.

  13. #193
    Diocle's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Amon Amarth
    Posts
    12,572

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    Nobody knows if the Romans pronounced ALL the "C" as "K", nobody. I'd follow in this case this simple and naive rule, if in doubt look at the Romance languages.

    For example: "CAELUM, -I", in Italian: "IL CIELO" with the sweet sound of "C", in Spanish: "EL CIELO" with the Spanish sibilant sound of "C", in French: "LE CIEL" with the sibilant French sound of "C", in Catalan: "EL CEL", with sibilant sound of "C", in Romanian: "CERUL" with sweet sound of "C", in Portuguese: "O CEU" with sibilant sound of "C", I think in this case that forcing the pronunciation of "C" as "K" not only is a silly and idiotic concept, but it's also insane and denotes a deep disinterest for the historical roots of the Latin as real language spoken by real men and women living on our same planet.


    Italian pronunciation is not the "same as Latin" of course, but it's very, very, very close to the Latin pronunciation, my suggestion to all the non-Romance guys, who begin their studies of Latin language is this one: go in France, go in Spain and Portugal, then go in Italy, listen the language spoken by all those people, understand the sounds, listen the national and regional accents and then, begin your way into Latin world. With project like Erasmus this can be done, it's no more the ancient Grand Tour , today it's a small trip in interesting and very touristic places, but it's important, much more important than studying in some British University an invented Latin pronunciation, a form of plastic and synthetic language, adapted to the British tastes and ears.


    Beware of synthetic polymers, beware of nylon Latin, choose natural products!

  14. #194
    Renatus's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bedford, England
    Posts
    546

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    You forget the linguistic changes that can take place within a single language over the centuries, never mind within several related but distinct languages. You have only to consider the difference between Middle English (the language of Chaucer) and present-day English to see what I mean. You know my method. See how Latin is transliterated into Greek, much closer to the period than any modern Romance language, and I think that you will see that much of what I say is corroborated. Bear in mind also that Latin itself will have changed over time. I doubt very much whether, say, Caesar and Ammianus Marcellinus sounded entirely alike.

  15. #195
    Diocle's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Amon Amarth
    Posts
    12,572

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    Quote Originally Posted by Renatus
    You forget the linguistic changes that can take place within a single language over the centuries, never mind within several related but distinct languages. You have only to consider the difference between Middle English (the language of Chaucer) and present-day English to see what I mean. You know my method. See how Latin is transliterated into Greek, much closer to the period than any modern Romance language, and I think that you will see that much of what I say is corroborated. Bear in mind also that Latin itself will have changed over time. I doubt very much whether, say, Caesar and Ammianus Marcellinus sounded entirely alike.
    - No, I don't forget the changes, even because I can't forget the changes that have taken place over the centuries because from them it was born my own language, really I can't!

    But .., but .., but if the changes in the English language can be understood, seen the great changes occurred in the country, firstly with the so called anglo saxon invasion (why we always forget the damn Jutes & Franks - having found hundreds franziskas in Britain - Why?) then with the deep changes caused by the Norman Invasion of Guillaume le Conquérant, what happend in Italy has been very different: the Ostrogoths and the Langobards in fact, even considering the different opinions about the dimensions of their hordes, were not enough in number to change in a significant way the ethinc substrate of the Peninsula (at least this is the current opinion among historians), this data is confirmed by the last studies about the blood groups (haplotype? How much I hate this matter!), stating without any doubt, that the ethnic composition of the peninsula has not changed very much through history, in fact in the North we find a strong and clear prevalence of the Celtic group, in the center (Tuscany, Lazio) we still heve the predominance of ancient Italic Osco-Umbrian and Etruscan genotype, and in the South we have the predominance of the ancient Greek genotype (more or less, the modern Italian genetic picture reminds the situation at the time of the Late Roman Republic and this is really surprising!):



    This situation is confirmed by the study of the different dialects' (languages) groupings on the national territory:



    So, what did happen to the Latin language in Italy during the Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Age? The common position among Italian historians and experts in Linguistics, is that the changes in the Latin pronunciation possibly reflect the reemerging of the ancient ethnic-linguistic groups of Celtic, Osco-Umbrian/Etruscan (the fantastic aspiration, actually a disappearance, of the hard sound of "C", so caracteristic of any Tuscan citizen, actually derives from the ancient Etruscan language) and Greek origins, during the crisis of the Imperial statal architecture, more than a real foreign element imported into the Peninsula by the Germanic invaders (consider that finding the Germanic influences on the Italian language it's really easy: you have just to search for not Latin words such as: guerra (war), guerriero (warrior), scranno (chair), usbergo (hauberk) and so on).
    So, the reemerging of the ancient linguistic roots, more than the limited action of the Germanic invaders, is at the basis of the developments of the Vulgar Latin, spoken in Italy during the Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Age, into the National Vulgar from which derived the modern Italian language (actually the Tuscan dialect of the XIII century, in short: the language of Dante).

    - About the influences of the Greek language on the ancient Latin, well, let me say that, even though the subject is of the max interest for me, I've many doubts on the matter for a wide range of motivations, which I can't and I don't want to enumerate here (my posts are already too long, too boring and too annoying, and too off-topic to open a new front!). Sorry. So, sadly, this answer has to be synthesized and raped by a big NO. Sorry but ancient Greek cannot be used to explain the Latin sounds! No, no and no, it can't!

    - About the changes and the transformations (even the increasing Greek influences) occured during the prolonged historical time we call "Late Antiquity", I agree with you: it's highly possible that Tacitus and Ammianus would not have fully understood each other's language, in the case of a meeting in the streets of Rome (what a wonderful SF plot for a time paradox, in which the student meets the teacher after the disaster of Adrianople and talks with him about what we call "Imperial Crisis"! Where may we place the meeting? Perhaps into a tavern? Why not? But .. what tavern? and where on the map of Rome during the late IV century can we place our Tacitus, our Ammianus and a taberna decent (or indecent) enough to host them both? Great subject! .. sadly, for other pens than mine! )

  16. #196
    Renatus's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bedford, England
    Posts
    546

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    I think that you may have misunderstood my point about Greek. I am not suggesting that Latin was influenced by Greek (although I suppose that this cannot be ruled out entirely in the later Empire). What I meant was that Greek writers transformed what they heard in Latin speech into the equivalent sound in Greek. Thus, if they heard, say, a hard 'c', they would render it as a kappa or, if they heard the 'v' sound, they would render it as omicron upsilon.

    What you say about the emergence of Italian conforms with what I was beginning to think, that it arose from a combination of the revival of ancient regional languages and dialects with some Germanic influences built upon a Latin substrate. Latin itself was preserved in the language of the Church but this was not immune from outside influences. Your professor's reading of Caesar, I think, demonstrates this. I see it as basically Church Latin but with certain Italian influences, particularly the additional sounds which I hear but which you do not.

    As to pronunciation generally, I think it probable that we could both be right, the difference being that we are not speaking about the same Latin. The Latin that I was taught is, I believe, Classical Latin whereas yours is Late or even Mediaeval Latin. The reason for this is that, in Italy, Latin remained to some extent a living language, preserved in the Church but subject to the outside influences that I have mentioned whereas, in England, it was lost, submerged by Saxon, Danish and Norman French. The result was, therefore, that it had to be recreated and what was created was the Classical Latin of Caesar and Cicero as linguists far cleverer than you or I perceived it to be. What follows from these reflections is that the reading of Caesar by your professor is, in fact, in the 'wrong' Latin and is anachronistic with regard to its subject matter.

  17. #197
    Diocle's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Amon Amarth
    Posts
    12,572

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    Quote Originally Posted by Renatus View Post
    I think that you may have misunderstood my point about Greek. I am not suggesting that Latin was influenced by Greek (although I suppose that this cannot be ruled out entirely in the later Empire). What I meant was that Greek writers transformed what they heard in Latin speech into the equivalent sound in Greek. Thus, if they heard, say, a hard 'c', they would render it as a kappa or, if they heard the 'v' sound, they would render it as omicron upsilon.
    Actually I've misunderstood your point about Greek and Greeks, but this doesn't change the point: how could the Greek writers translate sounds that their language didn't previde and didn't provide? The answer is easy: using what they had at their disposal, that is, their alphabet, but in which way can this choice help us for example in the case of the two sounds of the Latin "C"? Of course the Greeks (as did the Romans themselves, and the Italians today who do the same) used the same letter for both the sounds, because they had not at their disposal the right "ductus" to represent the sweet sound of "C", so, excluding the phonetic use of the sweet or sibilant sound of "C", basing this assumption on the Greek incapability or better, impossibility to phisically depict the right sound is a meaningless assumption.

    About the sound "v" in Greek and Latin, please, do not open that door!

    Just this:

    .. and all the history this grapheme takes with him!

    .. and these two Latin words: " PARVI ", " PARUI " .. and one name: PETRUS RAMUS.

    I stop here, there are more than enough puzzles on which applying our brain cells ..

    Quote Originally Posted by Renatus
    What you say about the emergence of Italian conforms with what I was beginning to think, that it arose from a combination of the revival of ancient regional languages and dialects with some Germanic influences built upon a Latin substrate. Latin itself was preserved in the language of the Church but this was not immune from outside influences. Your professor's reading of Caesar, I think, demonstrates this. I see it as basically Church Latin but with certain Italian influences, particularly the additional sounds which I hear but which you do not.
    - You say well Renatus: but please remember that among those regional dialects you quoted, there was the Osco-Umbrian and the Etruscan languages, that is, the mom of the Latin! If it's true that the mother tongue of what we call Latin was the Osco Umbrian language and the Etruscan itself played a relevant role in the formation of the Latin identity, the reemerging of the local Osco-Umbrian and Etruscan sounds cannot be considered as any other modification of the Latin language, for example as those emerged in the Northern regions of Italy or in Gaul and Spain.

    About the reading of Caesar, I repeat there is none "A"-sound where you say you have heard them and until proven otherwise, my auditory sensations are as good as yours, so, may you explain to me why do you attribute this non-existent "A" to the old and glorious (and non-existent) Latin of the Church? And why do you think that in Italy we spend our time adding vowels to the Latin verbs and nouns? Please, c'mon, try to be serious!

    Quote Originally Posted by Renatus
    As to pronunciation generally, I think it probable that we could both be right, the difference being that we are not speaking about the same Latin. The Latin that I was taught is, I believe, Classical Latin whereas yours is Late or even Mediaeval Latin. The reason for this is that, in Italy, Latin remained to some extent a living language, preserved in the Church but subject to the outside influences that I have mentioned whereas, in England, it was lost, submerged by Saxon, Danish and Norman French. The result was, therefore, that it had to be recreated and what was created was the Classical Latin of Caesar and Cicero as linguists far cleverer than you or I perceived it to be. What follows from these reflections is that the reading of Caesar by your professor is, in fact, in the 'wrong' Latin and is anachronistic with regard to its subject matter.
    I'm pretty sure we both are right, because I'm sure nobody can state how the Romans pronounced their words, not even Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus had listened Caesar reading his pages, the Lingua restituta, is just a synthetic creation based on interesting cultural hypothesis, instead the Italian pronunciation is based on more than two thousand years of historical, geographical and cultural continuity, sorry but I prefer history more than fiction.

    Side note: describing as "wrong" the reading of a European professor belonging to another nation, just because he doesn't use your British convention about the pronuntiation of Latin, perhaps can help us in understanding the results of the last referendum in Britain, perhaps it even makes you a champ of anglo saxon chauvinism, but for sure, it doesn't strengthen your cultural position about the pronunciation of Latin.

  18. #198
    Renatus's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bedford, England
    Posts
    546

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    Actually I've misunderstood your point about Greek and Greeks, but this doesn't change the point: how could the Greek writers translate sounds that their language didn't previde and didn't provide? The answer is easy: using what they had at their disposal, that is, their alphabet, but in which way can this choice help us for example in the case of the two sounds of the Latin "C"?
    The simple answer to this, of course, is that the 'c' pronounced 'ch' did not exist in classical Latin, so they didn't have the problem. However, if they had come across it, I am sure that they could have devised an approximation, tau sigma perhaps which is certainly closer than kappa.

    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    About the reading of Caesar, I repeat there is none "A"-sound where you say you have heard them and until proven otherwise, my auditory sensations are as good as yours, so, may you explain to me why do you attribute this non-existent "A" to the old and glorious (and non-existent) Latin of the Church? And why do you think that in Italy we spend our time adding vowels to the Latin verbs and nouns?
    I'm sorry, Diocle, it is there. If you listen carefully, you will hear it. If you still cannot, I can only conclude that these additions are such a part of Italian speech that you cannot hear them as something unusual. I repeat; I have heard it in an Italian scholar lecturing in English and I hear it in your professor reading in Latin. I do not attribute these additions to the Latin of the Church; I attribute them to your professor. However, I quote you from an earlier post:

    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    Do you know what would we need? Some sort of Jury of Honour, a Committee composed by non-anglosaxon speakers and by non-Italian speakers, which, listened the reading, could expresse an impartial judgment about the phantom-"A" in the text. Sadly, you me, and few others (which can be counted on the fingers of one single hand still attending this forum) are not fit for purpose.
    Why don't you post the clip on RAT, which we both belong to? There are plenty of non-English and non-Italian members there who could adjudicate on this issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    I'm pretty sure we both are right, because I'm sure nobody can state how the Romans pronounced their words, not even Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus had listened Caesar reading his pages, the Lingua restituta, is just a synthetic creation based on interesting cultural hypothesis, instead the Italian pronunciation is based on more than two thousand years of historical, geographical and cultural continuity, sorry but I prefer history more than fiction.
    You just don't get it, do you? Languages and the pronunciation of them change over time. Dammit, English pronunciation has changed in my lifetime, never mind over 2000 years.

    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    Side note: describing as "wrong" the reading of a European professor belonging to another nation, just because he doesn't use your British convention about the pronuntiation of Latin, perhaps can help us in understanding the results of the last referendum in Britain, perhaps it even makes you a champ of anglo saxon chauvinism, but for sure, it doesn't strengthen your cultural position about the pronunciation of Latin.
    I don't think that we should bring the referendum into this; I gather that it has already got you into trouble. However, my point, as you well know, is that your professor is reading a classical Latin text in a form of Latin that almost certainly was not in use when that text was written. If I read Chaucer's 'Canterbury Tales' with modern English pronunciation, that would be wrong as well; I should at least try to get as close to Middle English pronunciation as I could.

  19. #199

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    wRee-nay-tess is right diocle, stop arguing, gatherings have it that you are already in trouble...you would not want to attract attention to you do you? because some aura of trouble is already floating around you, so even an extremely fair and competent analyst would tend to suppose you guilty, more than lets say, your interlocutor who already, graciously warned you.

    facts are good of course, but if anyone advance other facts, or anything else, then facts do became a tool of exclusion,hate and aggression.saying things such as tradition of use and linguistic lineage and constant use for millennia, may help someone to grasp more easily the 'lay-tun' language is highly reactionary and almost biologically and culturally racist!

    of course as an Italian you naturally speak with all kind of added sound, its common knowledge that Italians do this, and your ambition of claiming better knowledge of lay-tun is fueled by ethno-geographical centrism.Being from rome's home province you bulge forward, claiming you know better whille adding various sounds..

    while this gentleman coldly and pragmatically explain it to you from far far away, detached from all envy or feeling of ownership.Its the wisdom of Cromwell and churchill comming to you.The well established fair and unbiased school of thoughts

    in this affair calling it a draw seem pretty fair...yeah yeah thats it just lets call it a draw ...so its equal, its just that your views contain a little less equality thats all.as i have demonstrated its not by the facts NO! its by the nature of your reasoning itself, your close minded and empiric views make you surrender all chance of winning but even in the case of a draw,your a little lower because of the moral charge.

    and im not even speaking about your own electric charge...there are rumors and whispering you see, and they got gathered...i wont say more
    last edited by flinn; reason removing hatespeech and similar stuff(legit quote)
    praise to allah,i got my blue letters by destroying the tavern and threatening people

  20. #200
    Diocle's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Amon Amarth
    Posts
    12,572

    Default Re: Latin Language during and after the Late Antiquity. Originally: Pronounciation of Aetius

    Quote Originally Posted by Renatus View Post
    The simple answer to this, of course, is that the 'c' pronounced 'ch' did not exist in classical Latin, so they didn't have the problem. However, if they had come across it, I am sure that they could have devised an approximation, tau sigma perhaps which is certainly closer than kappa.
    I have to assume that you can travel back in time, because there is no other way to be sure about the ancient pronunciation of the double sound of "C". So, please, when you organize your next time-travel, call me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Renatus
    I'm sorry, Diocle, it is there. If you listen carefully, you will hear it. If you still cannot, I can only conclude that these additions are such a part of Italian speech that you cannot hear them as something unusual. I repeat; I have heard it in an Italian scholar lecturing in English and I hear it in your professor reading in Latin. I do not attribute these additions to the Latin of the Church; I attribute them to your professor. However, I quote you from an earlier post:
    I'm sorry Renatus, it's not there, my partner and I, we have listened very, very carefully at the video, we have both studied Latin (and ancient Greek, because in Italy you cannot study latin without studying Greek.) in a pretty serious way, we have listened the reading at least 7 or 8 times, I swear:

    THERE IS NOW VOWEL SOUND IN THE PLACE YOU SAY THAT YOU HAVE HEARD IT.

    At this point I humbly suggest you a vist to a good otolaryngologist, I know they are pretty expencive, but they can solve your problems, today in fact the electronic tools that can solve your issue are really unbelievable in quality and for the most absolute invisibility!




    Quote Originally Posted by Renatus
    Why don't you post the clip on RAT, which we both belong to? There are plenty of non-English and non-Italian members there who could adjudicate on this issue.
    RAT? What's RAT? Ah yeah! Do ... you mean this one?



    No, sorry but, I don't think rats can help in pronunciation of ancient languages, they are with us from the beginning and sadly they'll be with us till the end, but for sure .. they do not know Latin!
    Than, consider that I'm a cat lover (regular memeber of the Cat-lovers group of TWC) and consider that .. we hate those disgusting, hateful, filthy beasts!




    Quote Originally Posted by Renatus
    You just don't get it, do you? Languages and the pronunciation of them change over time. Dammit, English pronunciation has changed in my lifetime, never mind over 2000 years.
    Sorry but it seems to me that you don't get that I've gotten it (sorry!) from the beginning of this thread, few years ago! Let me add that this is a shame for me, because it means that the quality of my English is even poorer than I thought!

    Quote Originally Posted by Renatus
    I don't think that we should bring the referendum into this; I gather that it has already got you into trouble. However, my point, as you well know, is that your professor is reading a classical Latin text in a form of Latin that almost certainly was not in use when that text was written. If I read Chaucer's 'Canterbury Tales' with modern English pronunciation, that would be wrong as well; I should at least try to get as close to Middle English pronunciation as I could.
    Troubles, my dear Renatus, follow me as old friends and comrades from the day on which I was born, by now, we are friends and inseparable comrades in adventure!
    Anyway thanks for your surprisingly well informed warning.

    Now let me try to explain my point: it's an absolute madness saying that it's wrong playing Shakespeare in modern English because the Renaissance English pronunciation was different! This is a Romantic excess of historicism, for which, a supposedly correct historical reconstruction (modern falsification?) of history, should prevent the diffusion of knowledge and culture in our modern society, and all this, basing your choice on arbitrary pseudo-restorations, which in architecture we call:"Historical Pastiche"



    They were interesting and fascinating buildings, belonging to the XIX century's artistic and cultural movement known as "Historicism", or even "Eclectic Historicism", they are Romantic buildings, trying to reconstruct ancient architectures based on what the architects of the time thought they were built the ancient buildings; the development of the modern historical scientific and critic consciousness, has pushed us to refuse such reconstructions, considering them wrong because falsifying history, from here the origin of the term "Pastiche" perfectly suited to the obscenity known as "Lingua Latina Restituta".

    This is why I refuse the whole construction technique at the basis of the "reconstructed Latin". In fact it's scientifically wrong building the image of a non-existent Classical Latin (for even the periodization is an artificial construct of course) built over an invented picture of the ancient world, artfully constructed inside academic circles and absolutely detached by any real historical data. This is not the way to approach the Latin sutdies, this is the way to build a pseudo-historical pastiche!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •