[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Latin Primer



--- In romconlang@yahoogroups.com, "Muke Tever" <muke@f...> wrote:
> habarakhe4 <theophilus88@h...> wrote:
> > Advising someone to ignore length in Latin is like advising themto ignore diacritics in 
a romance language - the diacritics existfor a reason. Furthermore, any understanding of 
Latin that lacksknowledge of vowel length cripples the understanding a poetry, oneof the 
major genres of Latin literature.
> 
> Hey now, I wasn't answering a question about vowel length, only
> a question about the writing system, i.e. "Latin with alot of
> diacritics, and [...] Latin with almost no diacritics."  The vowels
> are still long in Classical pronunciation whether you choose to write
> them that way or not.   The vowels aren't long in ecclesiastical
> pronunciation, but knowledge of what _was_ long helps one to know
> where the accent goes.  And that was another thing I forgot to mention
> to the original poster:  from what I'm told, the reconstructed
> classical pronunciation and the ecclesiastical pronunciations are
> the ones in most common use today.
> 
> 	*Muke!
> -- 
I confess I may have been overwrought when I wrote the message. I have seen the 
difficulties students who have been told 'don't worry about the macrons' experience later. 
The differences in length have grammatical implications (ablative -[a:] vs. nominative -[a]; 
present [weni:] vs. perfect [we:ni:]). Now I admit that these differences are not marked in 
orthography, and Latin writers exploit this ambiguity, but I find it easier to have a visual 
image with the macron that then was removed instead of supplying a macron which I 
never learned. It is worth noting, however, that the quantity of a Classical Latin word is not 
always known, since the Vulgar Latin can be different in quantity or vocabulary.

Strictly speaking, the two most common variants of Latin are Classical and _Roman_ 
Ecclesiastical, which was imposed as a standard on the church.