# Which Latin did you learn? [Classical vs other & differing pronunciations.]



## Nikkez

Classical or modern? (*Ego uideo* or *Ego video*)
How many verbal conjugations? (*Amare, Monere, Canere, Audire, Capere* or  *Amare, Monere, Canere, Audire*)
Do you write the diphthongs *ae / oe* or *æ / œ*?
How do you pronounce (*Roma = /rroma/* or *Roma = /roma/*; *Cicero = /kikero/* or *Cicero = /sisero/*; *Geminus = /jeminus/* or *Geminus = /geminus/*)?


----------



## Starfrown

Nikkez said:


> Classical or modern? (_Ego uideo_ or _Ego video_)
> How many verbal conjugations? (_Amare, Monere, Canere, Audire, Capere_ or _Amare, Monere, Canere, Audire_)
> Do you write the diphthongs _ae / oe_ or _æ / œ_?
> How did you pronounce (*Roma = /rroma/* or *Roma = /roma/*; *Cicero = /kikero/* or *Cicero = /sisero/*; *Geminus = /jeminus/* or *Geminus = /geminus/*)?


I think your first question should probably be rephrased, as there is really no such thing as modern Latin. I believe you are asking about the spelling conventions used in modern printed Latin texts. In classical times, _Ego video_ would always have been written _EGO VIDEO_; lowercase letters, as well as the letter _u_, were a postclassical--specifically, medieval--development. I personally use _v_ when representing the consonantal _V_ and _u_ when representing the sonant _V_ of classical Latin.
----
I learned that there were four conjugations. _Canere_ and _capere_ were seen as belonging to two different subsets of the third conjugation.
----
I always write the letters separately by hand. I occasionally use the ligatures when I'm typing Latin, but usually I don't bother since I have to take the time to go into the special symbols on my word processor.
----
I attempt to use the reconstructed classical pronunciation.  As an English speaker, however, it is not easy for me to replicate all of the necessary sounds.

I would pronounce _Roma_ with a trilled _R_, if I could trill _R_'s.

I always pronounce all _C_'s and _G_'s with their respective hard sounds.


----------



## Nikkez

Starfrown said:


> I think your first question should probably be rephrased, as there is really no such thing as modern Latin. I believe you are asking about the spelling conventions used in modern printed Latin texts. In classical times, _Ego video_ would always have been written _EGO VIDEO_; lowercase letters, as well as the letter _u_, were a postclassical--specifically, medieval--development. *I personally use v when representing the consonantal V and u when representing the sonant V of classical Latin.*
> ----
> I learned that there were four conjugations. _Canere_ and _capere_ were seen as belonging to two different subsets of the third conjugation.
> ----
> I always write the letters separately by hand. I occasionally use the ligatures when I'm typing Latin, but usually I don't bother since I have to take the time to go into the special symbols on my word processor.
> ----
> I attempt to use the reconstructed classical pronunciation.  As an English speaker, however, it is not easy for me to replicate all of the necessary sounds.
> 
> I would pronounce _Roma_ with a trilled _R_, if I could trill _R_'s.
> 
> I always pronounce all _C_'s and _G_'s with their respective hard sounds.


I tried to say that .

I write it as _*EGO VIDEO/Ego uideo*_; and I pronounce *Vu* as a vowel, always. It's a bit more difficult to separate in syllables, because some *Vu* are vowels (_*Filius : fi-li-us*_; cannot be together with another vowel) and some *Vu* are semi-vowels (_*uir : uir*_; *Uv* is linked to another vowel because it's a semi-vowel, that will change into a *V* in the Latin derivated languages).
--------------------
I learned that were five conjugations.
The difference between *cano, canis, canere* and *capio, capis, capere* (third and fifth conjugation) was a closed vowel (*i*, *u*), in this case, an *i*.
--------------------
I type the ligatures because it seems prettier. *ALT+145*; *ALT+146*; *ALT+0140*; *ALT+0156*.
-------------------
As a native Portuguese and Spanish talker, it's easy to do the classical pronunciation, so I do it.


----------



## Starfrown

Nikkez said:


> I type the ligatures because it seems prettier. *ALT+145*; *ALT+146*; *ALT+0140*; *ALT+0156*.


I like their appearance as well. Perhaps I should take the time to memorize the shortcuts.



Nikkez said:


> As a native Portuguese and Spanish talker, it's easy to do the classical pronunciation, so I do it.


Yes, I envy the ability of native Romance speakers to so easily roll their _R_'s. The English speaker's tongue is very uncooperative on that point!

To further address your fourth question, I will say that I don't even attempt to replicate certain aspects of the reconstructed pronunciation--for instance, using the sound [kw] instead of [kw] for the Roman _qu_.

Also, it's worth noting that no one can be entirely historically accurate in his pronunciation.  Since we have never actually heard Romans speak their language, we do not know all the nuances of their phonology.


----------



## Wikislav

The original Latin pronouncing in modern Europe is the most familiar to _Spanish, German_ and _Slavic_ users having rather similar phonologies; it is more complicated to the users of other European languages. Latin pronunciation is the most embarassing for English (and Turkish) users, often applying a rather deviant _'*Anglatin*'_ pronouncing that hardly existed, and their frequent excuse is as above: 
"_Since we have never actually heard Romans speak their language, we do not know all the nuances of their phonology_." 

This is only partly true: We had not directly recorded the ancient Romans speaking, but there exist yet other satisfactory methods of indirect  recording. The most important and informative one is a comparison of Latin loanwords during the powerful Roman Empire, then transcribed in simultaneous classical languages of ancient Indo-Europeans, chiefly in Greek texts, less in Persian and rarely in other ones. Another less sure one is by a belated comparison of modern Romance languages, descending from Latin.


----------



## Kevin Beach

I'm almost multi-lingual in Latin (!!)

I learned classical Latin at school, with five conjugations; hard Cs and Gs; V = W; coelum = koilum etc.

Simultaneously, I was taught to serve at Mass in the pre-Vatican II Catholic Church. We used Church pronunciation: excelsis = ex_ch_elsis; coelis = _chay_lis; generatio - _dj_enerat_s_io etc.

From my early adulthood, I sang in the Philharmonia Chorus in London. Our Latin varied in accordance with the conductors' background.

Those of the Italianate school used more or less what I knew as Church Latin, but of course insisted on unaspirated Ts and Ps.

Germans, Austrians and East Europeans wanted Germanic Latin: Excelsis = E_ts_elsis; Accende = A_k-ts_ende; hard Gs and Cs etc.

Then there was the recently late Wyn Morris - he had a Latin all of his own! Gloria = Glo_y_a; Excelsis = E_ggsh_elsis (I kid you not); Accende = A_ts_ende.

The pronunciation of Latin can be almost as varied as the pronunciation of English.


----------



## CapnPrep

Starfrown said:


> In classical times, _Ego video_ would always have been written _EGO VIDEO_; lowercase letters, as well as the letter _u_, were a postclassical--specifically, medieval--development.


There was no established distinction between uppercase and lowercase, but there were certainly letter forms that look like today's lowercase letters, including ‹u›. Today we mostly think of inscriptions carved in marble, but Roman handwriting looked very different. (See also these letter forms found in graffiti.)



Kevin Beach said:


> I learned classical Latin at school, with five conjugations; hard Cs and Gs; V = W; coelum = koilum etc.


And what does _coelum_ mean in classical Latin?


----------



## Ben Jamin

Kevin Beach said:


> I
> Germans, Austrians and East Europeans wanted Germanic Latin: Excelsis = E_ts_elsis; Accende = A_k-ts_ende; hard Gs and Cs etc.


 
I learned Latin in the secondary school in Poland, and the pronunciation was Polish Latin, that is almost the same as German Latin:
g like in get
ci, ce = tsi, tse
x=ks (or gz if intervocalic)
v = v like 'very'
oe = ö
ae = ä
a e o u i like in Italian (always open and short e like in 'get', not like in German 'mehr')
cc = kts
intervocalic s = z 
all vowels short, despite the length diacritics

Which East Europeans you met pronounced Excelsis = E_ts_elsis? Certainly not Poles, and rather not Czechs or Russians. Taking the closeness of Polish and German Latin I do not suppose the Germans did this either. It was always Ekstselsis. Ecce was pronounced 'E*kts*e' like in German A*kz*ent.


----------



## Kevin Beach

Ben Jamin said:


> I learned Latin in the secondary school in Poland, and the pronunciation was Polish Latin, that is almost the same as German Latin:
> g like in get
> ci, ce = tsi, tse
> x=ks (or gz if intervocalic)
> v = v like 'very'
> oe = ö
> ae = ä
> a e o u i like in Italian (always open and short e like in 'get', not like in German 'mehr')
> cc = kts
> intervocalic s = z
> all vowels short, despite the length diacritics
> 
> Which East Europeans you met pronounced Excelsis = E_ts_elsis? Certainly not Poles, and rather not Czechs or Russians. Taking the closeness of Polish and German Latin I do not suppose the Germans did this either. It was always Ekstselsis. Ecce was pronounced 'E*kts*e' like in German A*kz*ent.


Istvan Kertesz, Georg Solti, Laszlo Heltay (all Hungarian), Radu Lupu (Romanian) and ? Smetacek (Czech) all pronounced Excelsis as E_t_selsis. Forgive the lack of appropriate diacritics on their names. I'm using a British keyboard.


----------



## Ben Jamin

Kevin Beach said:


> Istvan Kertesz, Georg Solti, Laszlo Heltay (all Hungarian), Radu Lupu (Romanian) and ? Smetacek (Czech) all pronounced Excelsis as E_t_selsis. Forgive the lack of appropriate diacritics on their names. I'm using a British keyboard.


I think it is better to discard the term 'East Europe". It is imprecise in most contexts and involves putting into one sack countries that are very dissimilar. It is something like "in Western Europe men wear kilt and eat baguette and paella"


----------



## Kevin Beach

Ben Jamin said:


> I think it is better to discard the term 'East Europe". It is imprecise in most contexts and involves putting into one sack countries that are very dissimilar. It is something like "in Western Europe men wear kilt and eat baguette and paella"


Fair point, but it's a bit more widespread than your examples from Western Europe. I don't think we ever had the privilege of being conducted by a Pole, but I can safely put Valery Gergiev and Vladimir Ashkenazy in the E_t_selsis group, because I heard them at rehearsals. Gergiev accepted our advice that nothing but Italiante Latin was appropriate for Verdi's "Requiem"!


----------



## bibax

In Bohemia and Moravia we pronounce Latin similarly like in Germany and Poland.

Cicero - 'tsitsero: (ts is an affricate)
excelsis - eks'tselsi:s
deliberatio - de:li:be'ra:tsio:

The main difference:

as in Czech the short and long vowels can be on any position independently on the word stress we retain the vowel quantity in Latin as well, for example

sub tutela Romana - suptu:'te:la: ro:'ma:na:, all vowels in _"tutela romana"_ are long;


----------



## Ben Jamin

bibax said:


> In Bohemia and Moravia we pronounce Latin similarly like in Germany and Poland.
> 
> Cicero - 'tsitsero: (ts is an affricate)
> excelsis - eks'tselsi:s
> deliberatio - de:li:be'ra:tsio:
> 
> The main difference:
> 
> as in Czech the short and long vowels can be on any position independently on the word stress we retain the vowel quantity in Latin as well, for example
> 
> sub tutela Romana - suptu:'te:la: ro:'ma:na:, all vowels in _"tutela romana"_ are long;


 
Do you sound intervocalic 's' (becoming 'z')?
How do you pronounce 'ae' (Caesar) and 'oe' (poena, coelum)?
How do you pronounce 'qu': as 'kw' or as 'kv'?


----------



## bibax

> Do you sound intervocalic 's' (becoming 'z')?


Yes, often even between r/l and a vowel (excel*z*us, univer*z*us), but the rule is not so strict.



> How do you pronounce 'ae' (Caesar) and 'oe' (poena, coelum)?


Long e:, like in fe:mina.



> How do you pronounce 'qu': as 'kw' or as 'kv'?


Usually kv like in Czech (kvalita, akvadukt, ...). V is pronouced like normal Slavic v (neither bilabial nor semivowel).

And we usually devoice the voiced consonants before the voiceless ones and in the end of the words (like in Czech):

apud - apu*t*, obtineo - o*p*tineo, ...;

But we have a problem with the pronountiation of the Greek names: for example Circe pronounced [tsirtse:] sounds odd as we normally say Kirke in Czech. Similarly Ceberus, Cyprus, Cilicia, etc. Many of us pronounce kerberus, kiprus and kilikia.


----------



## francisgranada

Hungarian Latin:

g - always g (like in get)
ci, ce = tsi, tse (like in German _*z*ehn_)
x= ks (gz if intervocalic)
v = v (like in English _*v*ery_)
cc = kts (like in German _A*kz*ent_) 
s = s (z if intervocalic)
h = h (always pronounced, like in English _*h*elp_)
r = r (like e.g. in Italian _*R*oma_)
rh = r (in greek loanwords; like e.g. in Italian _*R*oma_)
ph = f (in greek loanwords) 
ch = kh (in greek loanwords; sometimes _k_, because in hung. kh/ch doesn't exist)
qu = kv (like in German _*Qu*elle_)
double consonants = long (like in Italian _pre*ss*o_, _a*nn*o_...)

oe = ő (long ö, like in German _sch*ö*n_)
ae = é (long e, like in German _l*e*ben_)
y = ü/i (in greek loanwords) 
vowels generally - short, sometimes long (I can't give an exact rule)


----------



## Ben Jamin

francisgranada said:


> Hungarian Latin:
> 
> g - always g (like in get)
> ci, ce = tsi, tse (like in German _*z*ehn_)
> x= ks (gz if intervocalic)
> v = v (like in English _*v*ery_)
> cc = kts (like in German _A*kz*ent_)
> s = s (z if intervocalic)
> h = h (always pronounced, like in English _*h*elp_)
> r = r (like e.g. in Italian _*R*oma_)
> rh = r (in greek loanwords; like e.g. in Italian _*R*oma_)
> ph = f (in greek loanwords)
> ch = kh (in greek loanwords; sometimes _k_, because in hung. kh/ch doesn't exist)
> qu = kv (like in German _*Qu*elle_)
> double consonants = long (like in Italian _pre*ss*o_, _a*nn*o_...)
> 
> oe = ő (long ö, like in German _sch*ö*n_)
> ae = é (long e, like in German _l*e*ben_)
> y = ü (in greek loanwords)
> vowels generally - short, sometimes long (I can't give an exact rule)


 
We can thus establish that there exists a Germano-Slavo-Hungarian dialect of Latin, with small local variations, generally mutually intelligible. 
The speakers of this dialect(s) will also understand Italian and Spanish Latin. It would be worse with understanding French Latin, and even more difficult with English Latin.


----------



## Starfrown

Wikislav said:


> The original Latin pronouncing in modern Europe is the most familiar to _Spanish, German_ and _Slavic_ users having rather similar phonologies; it is more complicated to the users of other European languages. Latin pronunciation is the most embarassing for English (and Turkish) users, often applying a rather deviant _'*Anglatin*'_ pronouncing that hardly existed, and their frequent excuse is as above:
> "_Since we have never actually heard Romans speak their language, we do not know all the nuances of their phonology_."
> 
> This is only partly true: We had not directly recorded the ancient Romans speaking, but there exist yet other satisfactory methods of indirect  recording. The most important and informative one is a comparison of Latin loanwords during the powerful Roman Empire, then transcribed in simultaneous classical languages of ancient Indo-Europeans, chiefly in Greek texts, less in Persian and rarely in other ones. Another less sure one is by a belated comparison of modern Romance languages, descending from Latin.


I hate to seem combative, but I would say my earlier statement was _wholly_ true.  Note that I was very careful to use the term "nuances," as I, having read Allen's _Vox Latina_, was aware when I made the post of the evidence you mentioned.  I certainly never attempted to make my statement an excuse for poor Latin pronunciation on anyone's part--I even mentioned earlier in this thread that I would pronounce _Roma_ with a trilled _R_ if I could.

Surely you must own that we will never know the intricacies of spoken Latin--which must have differed from region to region--to the extent we know those of, say, contemporary Spanish.



CapnPrep said:


> There was no established distinction between uppercase and lowercase, but there were certainly letter forms that look like today's lowercase letters, including ‹u›. Today we mostly think of inscriptions carved in marble, but Roman handwriting looked very different. (See also these letter forms found in graffiti.)


I concede this point entirely.  Your post is much more informative.  I learned about cursive forms after I made my original post--but I suppose what I said still applies to texts and most inscriptions???



Starfrown said:


> To further address your fourth question, I will say that I don't even attempt to replicate certain aspects of the reconstructed pronunciation--for instance, using the sound [kw] instead of [kw] for the Roman _qu_.


The first _kw_ should appear with _w_ as a superscript.


----------



## Passante

in italian latin

g - often J like in job so Germanicus = Jermanicus but in Gallus i use g like in get
x= cs so excelsis = ecscelsis like example in english (if i remember well english)
v in some word = W  but in other is v like very (ex. verba volant)
cc = is like sacco in italian ... double consonants = long (like in Italian _pre*ss*o_, _a*nn*o_...)
 oe and ae sometimes i erase the first so oe= e ... coeli=celi 
but also micaela =mikaela 

it depende but almost we have soft consonant and not so hard like east europe
bye


----------



## Brioche

Kevin Beach said:


> I learned classical Latin at school, with five conjugations; hard Cs and Gs; V = W; coelum = koilum etc.
> 
> Simultaneously, I was taught to serve at Mass in the pre-Vatican II Catholic Church. We used Church pronunciation: excelsis = ex_ch_elsis; coelis = _chay_lis; generatio - _dj_enerat_s_io etc.



That was pretty much my experience.

The missals all had stress marks, rather like Spanish, to help with the pronunciation.
_et dimítte nobis débita nostra sicut et nos dimíttimus debitóribus  nostris
et ne nos indúcas in tentatiónem_


----------



## berndf

Kevin Beach said:


> Germans, Austrians and East Europeans wanted Germanic Latin: Excelsis = E_ts_elsis; Accende = A_k-ts_ende; hard Gs and Cs etc.





Kevin Beach said:


> Istvan Kertesz, Georg Solti, Laszlo Heltay (all Hungarian), Radu Lupu (Romanian) and ? Smetacek (Czech) all pronounced Excelsis as E_t_selsis. Forgive the lack of appropriate diacritics on their names. I'm using a British keyboard.


I don't know about Eastern European usage. But in German it is always _Ekstselsis_. I've never ever heard _Etselsis._ The latter pronunciation would be understood as "et celsis".


----------



## Wikislav

Originally Posted by *Kevin Beach* 

 
                 Germans, Austrians and East Europeans wanted Germanic Latin: Excelsis = E_ts_elsis; Accende = A_k-ts_ende; hard Gs and Cs etc.


berndf said:


> I don't know about Eastern European usage. But in German it is always _Ekstselsis_. I've never ever heard _Etselsis._ The latter pronunciation would be understood as "et celsis".


I agree with above remark of *berndf* and cannot confirm at all the false 'German' Latin as interpreted by Kevin Beach (for his apologizing the instability & variability of Latin pronouncing by English speakers). 

We in Croatia know very well the standardized medieval Latin, because up to *1848* it was the *main official public* language in Croatian principate of Austrian Empire (then the _second tardive *latinized* entity in World besides Vatican)_. Up to that year all Croatian provincial laws were in Latin, provincial parliament discussed in Latin only, and the unique early newspaper _Ephemerides Zagrabienses_ was in Latin, too; all pupils studied in Latin and anyone could not receive his certificate ignoring Latin (one was treated as illiterate). 

Also up to _1*9*46_, Latin was the obligate second language in our scools. Even to nowadays, many Croatian elder intellectuals kow well a stable standard Latin (especially in Croatian northwest at Zagreb). Therefore I heard here *never* anyone serious pronouncing such deviant nonsenses as 'etselsis' - except the immigrant turkised Bosnians, or some semiliterate teenagers without certificate.


----------



## Kevin Beach

Wikislav said:


> Originally Posted by *Kevin Beach*
> 
> 
> Germans, Austrians and East Europeans wanted Germanic Latin: Excelsis = E_ts_elsis; Accende = A_k-ts_ende; hard Gs and Cs etc.
> 
> I agree with above remark of *berndf* and cannot confirm at all the false 'German' Latin as interpreted by Kevin Beach (for his apologizing the instability & variability of Latin pronouncing by English speakers).
> 
> We in Croatia know very well the standardized medieval Latin, because up to *1848* it was the *main official public* language in Croatian principate of Austrian Empire (then the _second tardive *latinized* entity in World besides Vatican)_. Up to that year all Croatian provincial laws were in Latin, provincial parliament discussed in Latin only, and the unique early newspaper _Ephemerides Zagrabienses_ was in Latin, too; all pupils studied in Latin and anyone could not receive his certificate ignoring Latin (one was treated as illiterate).
> 
> Also up to _1*9*46_, Latin was the obligate second language in our scools. Even to nowadays, many Croatian elder intellectuals kow well a stable standard Latin (especially in Croatian northwest at Zagreb). Therefore I heard here *never* anyone serious pronouncing such deviant nonsenses as 'etselsis' - except the immigrant turkised Bosnians, or some semiliterate teenagers without certificate.


[Grin] ... then the world-famous conductors I named in an earlier thread must all have come from illiterate backgrounds!


----------



## berndf

One more thing, I forgot: In German pronunciation of "xc" [ksts] might fuse to [ks:] but not to [ts].


----------



## bibax

In the Czech pronunciation of Latin the pronunciation of  -xc- [ksts] can be reduced to [kts], so it is pronounced like -cc- (before e or i, of course).

Excelsis [ekstselsi:s] can be pronounced like eccelsis [ektselsi:s] but _*never*_ like ecelsis [etselsi:s].


----------



## berndf

Yes, this variant sounds familiar to me too. In the end, quite a few contractions seem possible as long as the [k] is not suppressed. Without it, the letter "x" would not be recognized.


----------



## Al-Indunisiy

I myself have a mixed pronunciation:

Pronounce ae, oe, s and h as in Classical latin;
Pronounce c, g and v as in Ecclesiastical/Italianate;
Pronounce th and ch as in Modern Greek;


----------



## Dr. Fumbles

As I learn Latin on my own, I prefer the reconstructed classical pronunciation.  I think, if I'm learning Classical Latin, it's better to use the reconstructed Classical pronunciation.  Plus, I've heard that Latin was a complete phonetically spelled language, so c and g have more than one value wouldn't make any sense.  And, we do know that v represented w as a consonant and u as a vowel, you can see this in the descendant languages, quota is cuota in Castilian or quota in English both pronounced kw and  it's cu because in Castilian, qu represents k before e or i and isn't  really used before o a or u that's where cu is used.  V transcribed into ancient Greek was ou which represented w as far as I can remember,    And I was wondering are there any surviving manuscripts or books from the time period describing the pronunciation for learners of Latin?


----------



## Dr. Fumbles

Not to cause any arguments, but wouldn't Castilian, Parisien, Tuscan, Galician, Portuguese, Catalan, etc. be modern forms of Latin?  Sacerdote is still sacerdote in Castilian and Tuscan, which comes from the accusative of sacerdos. It's not hard to see that gratia became grazia and gracia from gratiam in Tuscan and Castilian, t to ts then th in Castilian.  The plurals coming from gratiae grazie and gratias gracias.  So wouldn't you say Latin is still very much alive.  Just curious on your thoughts on this.


----------

