# Pronunciation of the letter "V"



## Redline2200

In all the popular Latin phrases used in English (such as _Veni vidi vici_) we always pronounce the "v" as an English "v" (or a German "w").
I do realize English speakers would of course pronounce things the way their language does, but I never thought this was wrong...until I got a Latin grammar book in which it said to pronounce all Latin words with the letter "v" as the English "w" _(_for example: _veritas="weritas" _and _veni vidi vici = "weni widi wici")._

Is my book using a strange pronunciation of Latin, or do we English-speakers really butcher this ancient language that badly?


----------



## judkinsc

This has come up before. The brief answer is that English speakers mangle it at will, yes, but also "v" is pronounced as a "vee" sound in late Latin and Church Latin; while the _Classical_ pronunciation of the letter "v" is as a "w". Latin has the one letter, "v", to stand for three letters in the modern English alphabet: "v", "u", and "w".

You will also find variation in "v" and "u", which are used interchangeably throughout various traditions of Latin orthography.


----------



## Redline2200

OK, well I know I am opening up another can of worms by asking this, but what would the Romans of the time of Christ have said?
The standard Roman pronunciation (let's say around the time of 200BC-200AD) of that letter would have been like the English "w" then?


----------



## judkinsc

Redline2200 said:


> [W]hat would the Romans of the time of Christ have said?
> The standard Roman pronunciation (let's say around the time of 200BC-200AD) of that letter would have been like the English "w" then?



Yes, at least for the authors like Caesar, Cicero, Augustus, and Tacitus. 

Maybe not for vulgar Latin. If you want to get very specific, you'll need to ask someone who studies Latin pronunciation specifically across time periods. That sort of linguistic and phonological analysis isn't within my field.

There are a few other posters on here who might be able to explain it further.


----------



## Redline2200

I have been browsing some of the past threads on this issue and I feel like I understand it much better now. I very much appreciate your help though .

Although I think I understand it now (it seems that the people of that period did indeed pronoune it like the English "w"), if there are any experts on this topic who would still like to add their two cents, please feel free to do so as I would find it most interesting.


----------



## judkinsc

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=654405

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=531689

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=514614

Here, see these three threads too, if you haven't already.


----------



## modus.irrealis

judkinsc said:


> Yes, at least for the authors like Caesar, Cicero, Augustus, and Tacitus.


That's also the conclusion of Allen in his book _Vox Latina_ (which is one of the best sources for the reconstructed pronunciation of Latin), where he says about the development of _v_ from a semivowel to a fricative:



> Howerever, there is no evidence for any such development before the first century A.D., and the [w] value of consonantal _u_ must be assumed for the classical period.


So it's a post-classical development, but just barely, since even in the first century there are inscriptions that confuse _u_ and _b_, which also had a [v]-type sound in certain contexts. And Allen seems to think that by the fifth century, the fricative pronunciation was well established.


----------

