🚀 go-pugleaf

Posted and e-mailed.

In article <587ugn$o0u@nimble.mta.ca>, cprchrd@mailserv.mta.ca (Christian P
Richard) wrote:

>How exactly is Latin supposed to be pronounced?
>
>The textbook I have describes thoroughly how to stress Latin words,
>but it only explains pronunciation by comparing to words in English.

The short answer is, I think, that Latin vowels are the basis for the IPA
vowels.  I'm not so sure about consonants (and a little befuddled that all
these weeks later I don't see a much more detailed answer here...).  The
long answer would undoubtedly have to take account of the fact that Latin
lived for so very, very long, changing pronunciation over time.  (The most
technically-correct early music groups are careful to sing their masses in
e.g. French ecclesiastical Latin of the 16th century, as opposed to Polish
ecclesiastical Latin of the 18th, or whatever!)

>It suggests the short "a" is like a schwa and the long "a" is the "a" of 
>father.

If it says schwa, there you go, that's IPA.  The long a is the lowest of
the back vowels, the one written a in IPA.

>It says the long "e" is like in "day," but I doubt it is really a diphtong! 
>What about words such as "deinde"?  Don't they have that diphtong?

No, long e is the middle front vowel, the one written e in IPA.  I said it
was easy!  In "deinde", yes, there's a diphthong.  The book you're looking
at presumes typical English-speaking reader's unfamiliarity with the fact
that most of our "vowels" are really diphthongs.

>What sort of "r" is used?
>And is it true that the "gn" is pronounced like in French? Or is it 
>separate "g" and "n" sounds?
>Is "y" pronounced like the French "u"?

My guesses would be 1) no guess (but probably not the English retroflex
"r"!), 2) separate sounds, 3) yes.  I could *very* easily be wrong here
though and would appreciate help.

>If anybody can help me find a mini-treaty on Latin pronunciation that is 
>not biased to English accents?  Or can anybody explain the proper phonetics 
>for all long/short vowels and consonants of Latin?

I have this fugitive memory that this is something actually answered in the
long-silent sci.classics FAQ.  Regardless, it looks from *here* as though
nobody's previously answered Mr. Richard's queries on the newsgroup; my
apologies if it's just a local newsfeed problem, but this is what
encourages me to post the above.  Could you (globally, not Mr. Richard!)
send me an answer if it *was* previously posted, or post one if it wasn't? 
Thanks...

Joe Bernstein
-- 
Joe Bernstein, writer, banker, bookseller joe@sfbooks.com
speaking for myself alone http://www.tezcat.com/~josephb/
But...co-proponent for soc.history.ancient, soon to be voted
on in news.announce.newgroups!