Help talk:IPA/Latin

Untitled
The section on the consonental I (aka "j") is wrong. The IPA should be ʝ. See Keller. Quodfui (talk) 17:24, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * And, for that matter, Cicero! Quodfui (talk) 17:32, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Can someone in the know add the English equivalents please? --MK (talk) 06:17, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Can someone record their voice for this entire thing
Title. Peace. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.40.180.138 (talk) 16:22, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

The bottom three vowels above the nasal vowel line are in English digraphs not IPA.The IPA has changed a lot since I was a little boy(especially in the last year or so)and I'm a bit of a novice at editing the tables, so could some valiant pedant fix this please? Logographicboobs (talk) 08:49, 31 March 2012 (UTC)]]


 * I believe that's the IPA convention we've been using.
 * The IPA hasn't changed much, but fashions in how to apply it come and go. — kwami (talk) 08:57, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Central /a/
If this article, Latin_spelling_and_pronunciation states clearly that the open vowel was central, why Aeusoes1 reverted my edit with this comment, "rv unmotivated change of quality for /a/"? --Mahmudmasri (talk) 06:29, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If I remember correctly, I checked similar edits to many of the IPA for X pages. In most instances, the changes really were unmotivated as the related language and phonology pages were either vague on the matter or explicitly contradicted the change.  I probably didn't even bother looking at the Latin page because AFAIK nobody knows if the /a/ of Latin was front or central.  Their position in an uncited vowel chart doesn't undo my skepticism. — Æµ§œš¹  [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]  12:49, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * And, I can assure you, as the person who put that table there in the first place, that the vowel's position in the central column of that table is not due to some special knowledge about the vowels of Latin. — Æµ§œš¹  [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 13:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Capital letters
Why is everything in capital letters?--2.245.66.112 (talk) 21:17, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Because the preference for these help pages is to write the original language (Latin) examples in the native script, which in this case is the one in which I/J and U/V were identical and there was no lower case. Good question though. SamuelRiv (talk) 15:47, 18 April 2014 (UTC)


 * "Native script" can't be the real reason. The same isn't done at Help:IPA for Greek, which likewise covers ancient and modern forms; Help:IPA for English is not in the Anglo-Saxon Futhorc; Help:IPA for Tagalog is not in Baybayin; Help:IPA for Sanskrit is in Devanagari... the practice for the other languages isn't to use their "native" or earliest scripts, but the ones commonly used to write them today, so why is Latin an exception?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.254.153.24 (talk) 20:59, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * No idea. It isn't even accurate to say "there was no lower case". Rather, there was no distinction between upper and lower case; inscriptions used forms that look like upper case to us, while handwriting used forms that look more like lower case to us. And that's only for the classical era; Latin was still used in the Middle Ages, by which time there was a distinction between upper and lower case. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:11, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

"cui" is [kuj], not [ku.i]?
No sources at hand, but... could someone re-check this? 83.8.39.224 (talk) 18:56, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I searched through a few books of the Aeneid and found this line (Aeneis II:71). Its scansion indicates that contains a diphthong rather than two short vowels:
 * A line in dactylic hexameter always begins with a long vowel or diphthong; here, therefore, must be a diphthong. There are other cases like this where  appears at the beginning of a line. There are also cases where  occurs in the second half of a foot, and there it could be either two short vowels or a diphthong (making the foot either a dactyl or a spondee), but assuming  is always pronounced one way, it must be pronounced with a diphthong. — Eru·tuon 23:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * A line in dactylic hexameter always begins with a long vowel or diphthong; here, therefore, must be a diphthong. There are other cases like this where  appears at the beginning of a line. There are also cases where  occurs in the second half of a foot, and there it could be either two short vowels or a diphthong (making the foot either a dactyl or a spondee), but assuming  is always pronounced one way, it must be pronounced with a diphthong. — Eru·tuon 23:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Big small caps
I removed the tags in footnotes. It seems redundant (although I think it's necessary in the table). The small caps are pretty tiny, so I understand why it was added. Maybe the unicode template causes this; but I think a better solution than using two font-size-related tags would be to simply use uppercase. — Eru·tuon 08:47, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Sentence case, table reorganization
Two changes need to happen here: small caps need to be replaced by sentence case, and IPA symbols need to be placed on the left, as in Help:IPA for Greek. Small caps need to be phased out of this page and Latin spelling and pronunciation, since modern editions of Latin texts typically use sentence case, and using small caps as the default is WP:OR and unhelpful to readers. Editors have objected to use of small caps in and elsewhere. Placing IPA symbols on the left is the usual practice on IPA help pages.

If there are any objections, voice them now. I will go ahead and make the changes soon, since I'm pretty sure they're commonsense and have consensus. — Eru·tuon 00:14, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Mid vowels in Ecclesiastical Latin
I started a discussion on the pronunciation of mid vowels in Ecclesiastical Latin. Head over to the WikiProject Latin talk page if you know anything about this. — Eru·tuon 01:30, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Split
It may be time to split this into two pages: one for Classical Latin, the other for Ecclesiastical. The complexity of the vowel table is difficult to read. I'll begin this process by creating the Classical Latin table here. — Eru·tuon 22:11, 17 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose. We are seldom concerned about the pronunciation of Latin of a specific era, and in the articles where we are, we don't use this key.  We're generally interested in Latin words mixed into English, and people have different preferences as to which era's pronunciation they wish to imitate.  We might provide the classical pronunciation, while the reader wants ecclesiastical, or vice versa.  It is therefore useful to have the varieties of Latin side by side, so that the reader can switch back and forth.
 * I agree that the table is getting a bit hard to read. We could split it but keep it in this key, or perhaps it would be better to switch things around, with the orthography in the left-most column, followed by the classical and ecclesiastical pronunciations.  — kwami (talk) 17:56, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I think you're right that we need for a table illustrating orthography, and that we need a table comparing Classical and Ecclesiastical Latin for reader convenience. However, such a table belongs in Latin spelling and pronunciation or another such article, not in the Help:IPA for X article. We do not provide a guide to orthography in Help:IPA for German, but rather in German orthography. Therefore, the same practice should be followed with Latin. Currently, this page and the Greek page are anomalous in giving a guide to orthography.


 * The question of reader concerns is valid, but I'm not sure what you mean about "Latin words mixed into English". I have been adding pronunciations to articles like Augustus, where the relevant pronunciation is clearly Classical. Similarly, the relevant pronunciation in Holy See is Ecclesiastical. What examples are you thinking of? — Eru·tuon 20:26, 20 March 2015 (UTC)


 * "Augustus" is a good example, actually. It is not "clearly Classical"; depending on personal preference, people say it with Classical, Ecclesiastical, and English pronunciations.  Granted, if a reader has such a preference, they probably don't need the IPA key at all, but we will get readers who are used to one convention and then come across a different convention in one of our articles.  Having both in the IPA key is handy in such situations. — kwami (talk) 22:28, 20 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I see what you mean. What I meant was that Classical pronunciation is the historically correct one for Augustus, the one used during Augustus's own time, and Ecclesiastical is the correct one for Sancta Sedes, since it's used in the Vatican. So, arguably we should present only the Classical one in Augustus, but only the Ecclesiastical one in Holy See.


 * But as you say, the case is less clear for Augustus. Classical Latin is probably frequently taught with Ecclesiastical pronunciation, like in Catholic schools, and some readers will be looking for the EL pronunciation. But based on that argument, perhaps regional pronunciations should be included as well. Actually, have you seen the table in Latin regional pronunciation? This is basically the sort of table you're referring to, so perhaps we don't need a similar table in the IPA help page. — Eru·tuon 23:21, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

{"wikitable" style="margin: 1em" ! colspan="3" | Prosody ! IPA !! Examples !!
 * style="text-align: center;" |
 * rowspan="2" | Gāius
 * Stress (placed before the stressed syllable)
 * style="text-align: center;" |
 * Syllable marker, generally used between vowels in hiatus
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }

The table for Ecclesiastical Latin: — Eru·tuon 22:44, 18 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I think the distinction between close-mid and open-mid vowels is unlikely to be made, because it requires marking of long vowels, which is not done in Ecclesiastical Latin. So, I've removed this distinction. — Eru·tuon 22:58, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Other solutions
Continuing the discussion, it seems that there is some consensus that that the table is getting a bit long. At the same time, there is no agreement that splitting the article is the right solution. So maybe we should be looking for another solution to the problem. Maybe there's a technical one? Tables are pretty versatile; maybe there's a way to hide the display of certain rows in a table. Would that meet everybody's need? &mdash; Sebastian 08:22, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Help talk:IPA which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:17, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

"Mit"
...is not an English word, which makes it useless as an "approximation". Surely this is supposed to be "mitt", like "oven mitt"? I know I'll be reverted if I just change it, so I'm bringing it up here. 108.34.186.243 (talk) 02:03, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Ecclesiastical Latin pronunciation
I notice that Mulieris dignitatem lacked pronunciation. I have some doubts, beacuse if Italianate Ecclesiastical Latin should be preferred, then the correct pronunciation would be [muˈljɛːris diɲɲiˈtaːtem]; however in Help:IPA/Latin there's no explanation about the lengthening of vowels in open/free syllables (just like in Standard Italian); furthermore "The digraph ⟨gn⟩ is pronounced as [ŋn] in Classical Latin but [ɲ] in Ecclesiastical Latin" should be corrected: "The digraph ⟨gn⟩ is pronounced as [ŋn] in Classical Latin but [ɲɲ] in Ecclesiastical Latin" (again, like Standard Italian). The same is true for [ʃʃ, tts, ddz], always geminate in Italianate Ecclesiastical Latin pronunciation.--Carnby (talk) 23:34, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Onion
onion is not a good example for ŋ Awesomecat713 (talk) 02:11, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It's for, not . Nardog (talk) 02:33, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

x
It seems that there has been an omission. The letter "x" is no where to be found. In Ecclesiastical Latin, we pronounce ⟨x⟩ as /ks/. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimwj4cr (talk • contribs) 21:51, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It's because $⟨x⟩$ is a letter that stands for two sounds: followed by . It's not considered to be an affricate... usually. Wiese (1996) says that  is just as much of an affricate as,  and  - but that's in German. Sol505000 (talk) 18:00, 22 April 2022 (UTC)