Pronouncing a dead language–who cares?

or “Pronouncing a language dead”?  But perhaps that’s another post for another time.

This week I will publish for you my Epitoma Sermonis Classici – a guide to pronouncing Classical Latin in your classrooms.  It is written with middle and young high schoolers in mind and includes archaeological goodies like a page from a 5th century Latin textbook for Greek speakers in Egypt.  I’ve researched the heck out of this thing because the use of the Restored Classical Pronunciation of Latin is contentious.  A much respected friend, Luke Henderson, teacher at Santa Monica High School and a huge influence on me, uses the Ecclesiastical Pronunciation saying “I prefer the method that actually has evidence.

The Epitoma will address the issue of evidence for the Restored Classical Pronunciation.  But first we must ask: who cares?  Why is the pronunciation of a dead language important?  Yes, people use Latin to communicate orally today.  But if there are no native speakers, then why should there be any effort to pronounce Latin well by any particular method?

My personal answer is because of Latin’s inherent beauty.  Every language has its phonological pleasures and Latin is no different.  By striving to pronounce the language as Caesar, Cicero, Catullus, and Clodia heard it (and that alliteration of /k/), we can enjoy the language as best we can two millennia later.  I’ll also cite three more personal reasons: its dissimilarities to English, the benefit in scanning poetry, and the need for wide-spread standards.

• Firstly, Latin distinguishes between long and short vowels in a way English does not.  (e.g.: malum-evil vs. maalum-apple or puella-nom vs. puellaa-abl)  This challenge is beneficial for students to undertake because part of learning a foreign language is to explore its differences.  By understanding the differences between Latin and English, the student learns more about English and gains a new skill – in this case distinguishing meaning by vowel length.
• Secondly, in scanning poetry, knowing vowel lengths is crucial to scanning fluently.  Scanning poetry is crucial to its appreciation.
• Lastly, if we are to teach students to speak Latin and communicate their opinions and emotions using the oral language, then they must be able to understand each other.  Students from other schools should be intelligible to one another and using as few varieties of pronunciation makes this as efficient as possible.  Ideally, teachers would teach either Restored Classical or Ecclesiastical Pronunciation and students would learn to understand the other.  What could be more amazing than a German and an American Latin student communicating with each other in Latin?  (Yes, yes, they probably both speak English…BUT WHAT IF?!?)

(I must also add that I once had a dream that I had been transported back in time and was trying to speak with Julius Caesar who was unfamiliar with my Latin accent.  This has forced me to wonder if I were given a time machine and could not return, how would I leave a record of the pronunciation of classical Latin for modern day scholars?  How would I make sure this record was preserved until modern times?  Yes, this is definitely a first-world problem and yes, I know that this is a crazy waste of time.  But I still wonder…)

ANYWAY, here’s an excerpt from Vox Latina by W. Sidney Allen on the question at hand.  This book is quite interesting and one of the more accessible texts addressing the question of Classical Latin phonology.  I recommend it if this interests you.  In my research, Allen is supported in nearly every assertion by at least two other modern scholars and many others cite his book.

“First, why should we concern ourselves with the pronunciation of a dead language? …

…it is desirable to seek an appreciation of Latin literature, and … such literature was based on a living language.  Moreover, much of early literature, and poetry in particular, was orally composed and was intended to be spoken and heard rather than written and seen.  If, therefore, we are to try and appreciate an author’s full intentions, including the phonic texture of his work, we must put ourselves as nearly as possible in the position of the native speaker and hearer of his day.  Otherwise, however full our grammatical and lexical understanding of the work, we shall still be missing an important element”  (vii)

L. R. Palmer, too, in his The Latin Language says on the note of phonic appreciation:

“Spoken language is distinguished primarily from writing by the greater intimacy of contact between the speaker and hearer.  The give-and-take of dialogue increases the emotional tension, which reveals itself in interjections, exclamations, forcefulness, exaggeration, insistence, and constant interruption.  The speed and spontaneity of conversation reduces the element of reflection. … colloquial speech is characterized by its allusiveness, by deictic elements, abbreviation, ellipse, and aposiopesis.  J. B. Hoffmann has applied such criteria to the language of the Roman writers of comedy and Cicero’s letters and he has reaffirmed the general opinion that such documents reflect contemporary spoken Latin. (emphasis mine, p74)
“The emotional tension of popular speech is evident, further, in repetition such as abi abi aperite aperite; ut voles, ut tibi lubebit; and in the constant insistence on the attention of the hearer: tu, frater bi ubi est; tun, Sceledre, hic, scelerum caput. (p75)”

Palmer includes much on alliterative phrases and the beauty which is best heard in Latin.

So here it is – the argument to care how Latin is pronounced.  There is no “native-like” level of proficiency to strive towards, only the best educated theory.  By doing so, however, we will create classrooms in which appreciation of Plautus, Terence, and Sulpicia will be thoroughly evident.  Ennius’ “O Tite tute Tati tanta tyrrane tulisti” will spark smiles by its sound, not by saying “oh look at all the pretty letter T’s!”