According to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_spelling_and_pronunciation

> However, ae and oe generally became monophthongs, /ɛː/ and /eː/
> respectively, already at the start of the imperial period.

I'm a bit confused by this. From what I've read the ɛ character is 
pronounced as the e 'bed' in American English, and the e character is 
pronounced as the ay in 'play' in Canadian English or as e in 'bebe' in 
Spanish. It would seem as though those two pronunciations are reversed.

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford escribió:
> According to
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_spelling_and_pronunciation
> 
>> However, ae and oe generally became monophthongs, /ɛː/ and /eː/
>> respectively, already at the start of the imperial period.
> 
> I'm a bit confused by this. From what I've read the ɛ character is 
> pronounced as the e 'bed' in American English, and the e character is 
> pronounced as the ay in 'play' in Canadian English or as e in 'bebe' in 
> Spanish. It would seem as though those two pronunciations are reversed.

o_o

I thought e was the same as ɛ, but more commonly used due to being 
possible in ASCII.

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:34:50 +0100, Mike Raiford  
<mra### [at] hotmailcom> did spake, saying:

> According to
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_spelling_and_pronunciation
>
>> However, ae and oe generally became monophthongs, /ɛː/ and /eː/
>> respectively, already at the start of the imperial period.
>
> I'm a bit confused by this. From what I've read the ɛ character is  
> pronounced as the e 'bed' in American English, and the e character is  
> pronounced as the ay in 'play' in Canadian English or as e in 'bebe' in  
> Spanish. It would seem as though those two pronunciations are reversed.

So they went from /ai/ (w*i*se) to /ɛɪ/ (*ei*nd) and /oi/ (*oi*l) to /eɪ/  
(pl*ay*). Certainly the latter is a bit of a shift, but English has  
similiar.

It's interesting to think that pronunciations are best found in the  
phonetic renderings of foreigners or people who just couldn't spell... so  
everyone be kind to Andy he's helping future research :-P

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> According to
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_spelling_and_pronunciation
> 
>> However, ae and oe generally became monophthongs, /ɛː/ and /eː/
>> respectively, already at the start of the imperial period.
> 
> I'm a bit confused by this. From what I've read the ɛ character is 
> pronounced as the e 'bed' in American English, and the e character is 
> pronounced as the ay in 'play' in Canadian English or as e in 'bebe' in 
> Spanish. It would seem as though those two pronunciations are reversed.

Wait... people *know* how to pronounce Latin now? I thought it was a 
dead language, and hence we'll never "really" know what the "correct" 
way is.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Wait... people *know* how to pronounce Latin now? I thought it was a 
> dead language, and hence we'll never "really" know what the "correct" 
> way is.

  That's not the definition of dead language. A dead language is one
which has had native speakers in the past but doesn't have anymore
anywhere. Just because it's not used as native language anymore doesn't
mean the knowledge of how it's pronounced has been lost. There have always
been people who know Latin.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> Wait... people *know* how to pronounce Latin now? I thought it was a 
>> dead language, and hence we'll never "really" know what the "correct" 
>> way is.
> 
>   That's not the definition of dead language. A dead language is one
> which has had native speakers in the past but doesn't have anymore
> anywhere. Just because it's not used as native language anymore doesn't
> mean the knowledge of how it's pronounced has been lost. There have always
> been people who know Latin.
> 

Further Latin is used in taxonomy and pretty heavily in the medical field.

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   That's not the definition of dead language. A dead language is one
> which has had native speakers in the past but doesn't have anymore
> anywhere. 

FWIW, my college linguistics class defined "dead language" as "one 
nobody knows how to speak any more". The prof specifically excluded 
Latin from being a dead language.  So I think even the pros don't agree 
on what they're talking about there.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>> Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>> Wait... people *know* how to pronounce Latin now? I thought it was a
>>> dead language, and hence we'll never "really" know what the "correct"
>>> way is.
>>
<snip>
> 
> Further Latin is used in taxonomy and pretty heavily in the medical field.

IIRC there's a bunch of guys living in the centre of Rome who speak it
pretty well ;-)

John

-- 
I will be brief but not nearly so brief as Salvador Dali, who gave the
world's shortest speech. He said, "I will be so brief I am already
finished," then he sat down.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 19:35:24 +0100, Doctor John wrote:

> Mike Raiford wrote:
>> Warp wrote:
>>> Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>>> Wait... people *know* how to pronounce Latin now? I thought it was a
>>>> dead language, and hence we'll never "really" know what the "correct"
>>>> way is.
>>>
> <snip>
>> 
>> Further Latin is used in taxonomy and pretty heavily in the medical
>> field.
> 
> IIRC there's a bunch of guys living in the centre of Rome who speak it
> pretty well ;-)

Yes, but I don't know that any of them are *natively* speaking it.  Pope 
Benedict certainly doesn't speak it as his native tongue - that would be 
Austrian (wouldn't it?)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Fri, 25 Apr 2008 19:35:24 +0100, Doctor John  
<doc### [at] gmailcom> did spake, saying:

> Mike Raiford wrote:
>> Warp wrote:
>>> Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>>> Wait... people *know* how to pronounce Latin now? I thought it was a
>>>> dead language, and hence we'll never "really" know what the "correct"
>>>> way is.
>>>
> <snip>
>>
>> Further Latin is used in taxonomy and pretty heavily in the medical  
>> field.
>
> IIRC there's a bunch of guys living in the centre of Rome who speak it
> pretty well ;-)

To be precise they're speaking Ecclesiastical Latin not Classical Latin,  
as I said we know (guess) on the pronunciation of Classical Latin from  
foreign renderings. If English became extinct but German was still spoken  
then we could guess how the word category was pronounced from the German  
kategorie. Note that in this example someone trying to speak 'extinct'  
English from this would be likely to pronounce the e and full 'gorie'  
rather then vowel switch the e to a and slur to -gry. IOW you could  
probably make yourself understood, but you'd be considered to have an odd  
accent or most likely a non-native speaker.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message