# Romance languages: ç (ts) sound



## Cilquiestsuens

Hello,

I wanted to know if any romance language (including dialects of oil or oc) has today preserved the sound of medieval French (ts) which was written c (as in ceci, cela), ç (as in François, pronounced fran-ntsouéss in very old French) or z (as in vous avez) ???


----------



## CapnPrep

The 2nd person plural verb ending written with _-z_ in French is written _-tz _in Occitan and usually pronounced [ʦ]. This is a separate case from the other examples you mention, because it actually comes from Latin [t] and [s], not from palatalization of [k].

You can also find varieties of Occitan where [ʦ] corresponds to _ch_, not _c/ç_. Like _vacha_ (vache) and _chantar_ (chanter) pronounced ['baʦɔ] and [ʦan'ta]. So this is not a preservation, but an innovation.


----------



## relativamente

The Romanian letter ţ is pronounced aproximately as ts.


----------



## Montesacro

Cilquiestsuens said:


> Hello,
> 
> I wanted to know if any romance language (including dialects of oil or oc) has today preserved the sound of medieval French (ts) which was written c (as in ceci, cela), ç (as in François, pronounced fran-ntsouéss in very old French) or z (as in vous avez) ???



In Italian the letter _z_ can be pronounced in two different ways:

a) [dz], as in _zero_, _zona_, _garza_, _razzo_['raddzo]

b) *[ts]*, as in _zucchero_, _zio_, _azione_ [at'tsjone], _pazzo_['pattso].


----------



## Ajura

Montesacro said:


> In Italian the letter _z_ can be pronounced in two different ways:
> 
> a) [dz], as in _zero_, _zona_, _garza_, _razzo_['raddzo]
> 
> b) *[ts]*, as in _zucchero_, _zio_, _azione_ [at'tsjone], _pazzo_['pattso].


 
Those sounds became θ in Spanish but written as z and c before /e/ and /i/ no wonder why written Italian and written Spanish look similar...

Veneto keeps the ç sound compared to most other Western Romance idioms.


----------



## CapnPrep

Are we just looking for every Romance language that has the sound [ʦ]?  I'm pretty sure Cilquiestsuens already knew about the pronunciation of Italian ‹z› and Romanian ‹ț›, and that even in French, some speakers use [ʦ] in words like _tu_, _petit_. 

I was under the impression that the original question had a more specific motivation, but I could be mistaken.


----------



## Cilquiestsuens

CapnPrep said:


> Are we just looking for every Romance language that has the sound [ʦ]? I'm pretty sure Cilquiestsuens already knew about the pronunciation of Italian ‹z› and Romanian ‹ț›, and that even in French, some speakers use [ʦ] in words like _tu_, _petit_.
> 
> I was under the impression that the original question had a more specific motivation, but I could be mistaken.


 
You are right on every account.

However most of the above posts were quite informative for me. I thank everyone for their precious input.

I was not aware that the final *z* of the _vous_ conjugation didn't have the same origin (can you kindly elaborate on that if you don't mind or post a link?)

Right, the wording of the original question wasn't maybe clear enough... It was about the palatalization of a (k)... and was more about less known Romance languages, mostly langues d'oc and langues d'oïl...

The (ts) sound of Old French seems to have been a short-lived one (disappears I've read as early as 13th-14th century, I don't know when it appeared, but does any one know?)

I was just wondering if any other Romance language had undergone the same process but has maintained the sound longer than French and possibly to date (what about Romanian? what's the origin of ţ ?).

Now what I gather from the above posts is that this (ts) sound is quite a common one in Romance languages, especially the Western ones it seems. I don't really know if it is widespread in Germanic (German has it) or Slavic (in Russian there is a ts) languages...


----------



## CapnPrep

Cilquiestsuens said:


> I was not aware that the final *z* of the _vous_ conjugation didn't have the same origin (can you kindly elaborate on that if you don't mind or post a link?)


I just meant that there was no [k] here in Latin… The 2pl ending was _-tĭs > -tes_, which normally became _-ts_ with the loss of final vowels (7th cent.)



> The (ts) sound of Old French seems to have been a short-lived one (disappears I've read as early as 13th-14th century, I don't know when it appeared, but does any one know?)


It probably disappeared even earlier (12th cent.) but it appeared around the _3rd century_. So I wouldn't exactly call it  "short-lived"…



> I was just wondering if any other Romance language had undergone the same process but has maintained the sound longer than French and possibly to date (what about Romanian? what's the origin of ţ ?).


Well, it comes from… [t]. So it does correspond to some cases of orthographic ‹c› in French: e.g. _forţă_ – _force_ (< fortĭa), _graţie_ – _grace_ (< gratĭa). But it's only because French adopted a non-etymological spelling in these cases, i.e. it's not a palatalization of [k].


----------



## Ajura

CapnPrep said:


> I just meant that there was no [k] here in Latin… The 2pl ending was _-tĭs > -tes_, which normally became _-ts_ with the loss of final vowels (7th cent.)
> 
> It probably disappeared even earlier (12th cent.) but it appeared around the _3rd century_. So I wouldn't exactly call it "short-lived"…
> 
> Well, it comes from… [t]. So it does correspond to some cases of orthographic ‹c› in French: e.g. _forţă_ – _force_ (< fortĭa), _graţie_ – _grace_ (< gratĭa). But it's only because French adopted a non-etymological spelling in these cases, i.e. it's not a palatalization of [k].


 
The second palatalization of French was k and g (etymologic ch and gh) became /tSa/ and /dZa/ this affected arpitan and adjacent Occitan, RhaetoRomance and GalloItalian dialects near it and, Quebecois and Acadianois dialects have their own respective third palatalization.


----------



## mugibil

I don't know whether there is a Romance language that still uses /ts/ for historical palatalized /k/, but it may be worth to point out that German and most or all Slavic languages still use it in their traditional pronunciations of Latin (civilization - tsivilizatsion, tsivilizatsiya; Caesar - Tsezar). I don't know if that pronunciation arose through contact with mediaeval French or through contact with a specific late form of Latin, while it was still alive.


----------



## CapnPrep

mungu said:


> I don't know whether there is a Romance language that still uses /ts/ for historical palatalized /k/, but it may be worth to point out that German and most or all Slavic languages still use it in their traditional pronunciations of Latin (civilization - tsivilizatsion, tsivilizatsiya; Caesar - Tsezar). I don't know if that pronunciation arose through contact with mediaeval French or through contact with a specific late form of Latin, while it was still alive.


That is an excellent point. As your examples show, [ts] is also used for "ti" (followed by another vowel). This is the same pronunciation as in medieval French (before the 12th century) or in many varieties of spoken Latin, so that _could_ be ultimate origin of the Germanic/Slavic pronunciations. But it is unlikely that this borrowed pronunciation would have just stayed the same for 900 years, and it's obvious that words like _Zivilisation_ came into German much later than that. So I would say that this pronunciation has a more recent origin (for example, conscious efforts during the Renaissance to standardize Latin pronunciation).


----------



## Ajura

CapnPrep said:


> That is an excellent point. As your examples show, [ts] is also used for "ti" (followed by another vowel). This is the same pronunciation as in medieval French (before the 12th century) or in many varieties of spoken Latin, so that _could_ be ultimate origin of the Germanic/Slavic pronunciations. But it is unlikely that this borrowed pronunciation would have just stayed the same for 900 years, and it's obvious that words like _Zivilisation_ came into German much later than that. So I would say that this pronunciation has a more recent origin (for example, conscious efforts during the Renaissance to standardize Latin pronunciation).



Not exactly the contact with french but the romance dialects near the slavic and germanic languages influenced their pronunciation of latin..


----------



## sokol

CapnPrep said:


> That is an excellent point. As your examples show, [ts] is also used for "ti" (followed by another vowel). This is the same pronunciation as in medieval French (before the 12th century) or in many varieties of spoken Latin, so that _could_ be ultimate origin of the Germanic/Slavic pronunciations. But it is unlikely that this borrowed pronunciation would have just stayed the same for 900 years, and it's obvious that words like _Zivilisation_ came into German much later than that. So I would say that this pronunciation has a more recent origin (for example, conscious efforts during the Renaissance to standardize Latin pronunciation).


Well, this pronunciation of Latin <c> as [ts] in German speaking areas probably evolved independently from Old French: as Ajura said, it should have been rather the Alpine Romance dialects which influenced it.

"German Latin" pronunciation probably was fixed rather early in the Middle Ages already, and the fact that German had the sound [ts] too might have helped conserve it over the centuries.

Unfortunately, Romance languages aren't my forte, and I also don't know if it has ever been established where the "German" pronunciation of Latin <c> as [ts] had its origin.

The word "Caesar" might help establish what happened there: it was loaned to German as "Kaiser" (!) (and to Slavic languages as "Tsar" (car, цар)), but in "German Latin" it is of course always "[Ts]aesar".
(Except in "classicised" pronunciation: some scholars, especially in Germany, try to re-establish the ancient pronunciation of <c> as [k] in all positions, which is an altogether different story. )


----------



## berndf

Right, Old High German loans normally preserve the classical Latin /k/, like in "Kaiser". Another example is "Kicherebse" (chickpea) where "kicher" is derived from Latin "cicer" (the second <c> becoming <ch> is the normal OHG sound shift).

Imports as [ts] (spelled <z>) are usually academic/religious loans in late Middle and Modern High German. E.g. _civilis>zivil_ is attested as of the 16 century.


----------



## mugibil

CapnPrep said:


> That is an excellent point. As your examples show, [ts] is also used for "ti" (followed by another vowel). This is the same pronunciation as in medieval French (before the 12th century) or in many varieties of spoken Latin, so that _could_ be ultimate origin of the Germanic/Slavic pronunciations. But it is unlikely that this borrowed pronunciation would have just stayed the same for 900 years, and it's obvious that words like _Zivilisation_ came into German much later than that. So I would say that this pronunciation has a more recent origin (for example, conscious efforts during the Renaissance to standardize Latin pronunciation).



The specific word is relatively new, of course, but that has no implications for the general pronunciation of <c>s before front vowels - there are a huge number of such words. And this is not just a matter of loans - let's not forget that Latin was actually _spoken_ by learned men and clerics throughout Europe, throughout the Middle Ages. And there is no reason why this pronunciation _must_ change - compare English, which has preserved the original French pronunciation of the consonants in words such as _change_ from William the Conqueror to this day, while French itself has lost it. I doubt the /ts/ is the product of Renaissance standardization (Renaissance humanists were interested in establishing the original classical pronunciation in the case of Greek, they did some decent job of it, and they disparaged the "traditional" mediaeval pronunciations; and /ts/ is not the original classical pronunciation of Latin); it is unclear what that "standardization" would have replaced anyway - unsystematic pronunciation of <c> by mediaeval scholars in every manner possible? There must have been some usual practice. Finally, it is unclear why the Renaissance people would have come up with such a strange alternation between /k/ and /ts/ in the first place; it certainly doesn't make the language more logical, consistent, or easy, and it looks like something that occurs in a natural language, so it must have been taken from one. 

The same applies to the French, Italian, English and Scandinavian traditional pronunciations - they all have developed mostly naturally through the languages' own development and through borrowing, not through some conscious academic effort. As I said, I am more inclined to believe that the German /ts/ for <c> goes back to some late Latin or early Romance variety - probably not Old French, but some variety that shared this development of <c>.

_Really_ old Germanic loans such as Kaiser have /k/, simply because that was the real pronunciation of spoken Latin at the time they were borrowed. It is very plausible that later loans (and the entire language as one big borrowing) would have the corresponding _later_ pronunciation of spoken Latin.


----------



## berndf

mungu said:


> The same applies to the French, Italian, English and Scandinavian traditional pronunciations - they all have developed mostly naturally through the languages' own development and through borrowing, not through some conscious academic effort. As I said, I am more inclined to believe that the German /ts/ for <c> goes back to some late Latin or early Romance variety - probably not Old French, but some variety that shared this development of <c>.


I don't think anyone suggested anything to the contrary. The pronunciation of <c> in Academic Latin is frozen Late Latin. The claim was that it was re-introduced into living European languages in the Renaissance through Academic Latin where it was never lost.


mungu said:


> _Really_ old Germanic loans such as Kaiser have /k/, simply because that was the real pronunciation of spoken Latin at the time they were borrowed. It is very plausible that later loans (and the entire language as one big borrowing) would have the corresponding _later_ pronunciation of spoken Latin.


The question is of course how old these loans really are. OHG is attested only as of the 8th century. The "ai" is "Kaiser" suggests a very old loan because the Latin "ae" ceased to be a diphthong in early imperial times already.


----------



## mugibil

berndf said:


> I don't think anyone suggested anything to the contrary. The pronunciation of <c> in Academic Latin is frozen Late Latin. The claim was that it was re-introduced into living European languages in the Renaissance through Academic Latin where it was never lost.



I see, I must have misunderstood. That makes more sense. Still I imagine that if scholars had been digging, they would have found out the classical pronunciation as well and probably would have preferred it, as modern scholars do. In fact, I'd imagine that if both pronunciations had been lost, they would have found out the classical pronunciation first - Greek renditions of Latin names and the Latin orthography itself suggest it, while the evidence for the late one is not so obvious (to me at least). Also, the question remains - if that pronunciation was introduced during the Renaissance, what was the learned pronunciation before that? I think the simplest theory remains to assume no change.


----------



## indiegrl

Cilquiestsuens said:


> (what about Romanian? what's the origin of ţ ?).
> ...



 It is quite clear that the evolution of Romanian was quite different from the evolution of the other Romance languages.
Here's an explanation I've found regarding this matter: -_ t' became ţ [ts = the same as the german z]. Its voiced variant -d'- turned into dz (still used dialectally), which was later reduced at z: lat. dies > old. rom.(and dial.) dzi > mod.rom. zi. Ex. ţin "I hold", toţi "(they) all (masc.)"._
. There are several sounds which are not present in the other Romance language+palatalisation.


----------



## Penyafort

For [ts] coming from -TES/-TIS, they are preserved in some varieties of Occitan as well as in Benasquese, an extreme Upper Ribagorzan dialect, transitional between Aragonese, Catalan and Gascon. 

Modern Aragonese and Catalan changed them instead.


Occitan *parlatz */paɾˈlats/, Benasquese *parlats */paɾˈlats/​​Old Aragonese *parlatz */paɾˈlats/ > Modern Aragonese *parlaz */paɾˈlaθ/​Old Catalan _*parlats *_/paɾˈlats/ > Modern Catalan *parlau *> *parleu*​


----------



## danielstan

Aromanian is that Romance language that matches quite well the title of this topic.
Indeed, the Latin groups [ce] / [ci] are pronounced [tse] / [tsi] in Aromanian for a large number of Latin inherited words.
E.g.:
lat. _facere_ > arom.  _fatsiri_, rom. _face_
lat. _cervus_ > arom. _tserbu_, rom. _cerb_
lat. _circus_ > arom.  _tserkiu_, rom. _cerc_

Romanian (Daco-Romanian) has the Italian-like pronounciation [tʃe] / [tʃi] of these groups.

On another hand, usually the Slavic loanwords in Aromanian have preserved the [tʃ] sound:
Old Slavic _чекан_ > arom. _ciucanu_, rom. _ciocan_

This proves that the Latin groups [ce]/[ci] have evolved to  [tse] / [tsi] in Proto-Romanian (the Romance language directly derived from Vulgar Latin spoken in the Balkans, before the Slavic massive settlement here)
and later they evolved to [tʃe] / [tʃi] in (Daco-) Romanian.

It is difficult to find an Aromanian - English online dictionary.
For whoever might be interested I suggest an Aromanian - Romanian dictionary:
Societatea Culturală Aromână - Dicționar

and the most complete Romanian etymological dictionary online:
dexonline

General note:
In many phonetic aspects, modern Aromanian is more archaic than modern Romanian
and reflects a stage that Romanian had some 500 years ago.
With indirect accounts from Byzantine chronicles it is believed that Aromanian language was separated from Daco-Romanian in the 10th century,
when the so-called Vlachs are attested near Ohrida lake (close to the today tri-point border of Albania, Macedonia an Greece), in a Greek-speaking space.


----------



## guihenning

In some areas of Northern Portugal some speakers are said to _still_  pronounce ç like [ts] so _passo and paço_ are pronounced differently, whereas they're pronounced exactly the same elsewhere.


----------



## Dymn

I thought in Transmontano there was a four-way sibilant system with _ss_ and _s_ being apical /s̺/ and /z̺/ (like most of European Spanish) and _c/ç_ and _z_ laminal /s̻/ and /z̻/ (like standard Portuguese). This is the system used by Mirandese (which is a different language though).


----------



## guihenning

You're right. I mixed ç with ch and made an absolute mess. However, this 4 way sibilant system isn't due to Mirandese, since its area is very limited and these pronunciations aren't exclusive to that exact area. More to that here and here.


----------

