I recently bought a book about the history of Latin and it's really quite interesting. It turns out latin was spoken by about only 1000-2000 people who lived in rome. Because people lived so far from each other separate languages eventually emerged and latin was spoken by those who lived in rome. Interesting stuff.
Latin
- Thread starter gooooogle
- Start date
I studied linguistics in university, and it was interesting learning about how languages shifted, how dialects arose and why, et cetera.
I suspect that the quote about only 1000-2000 people speaking Latin meant that only a small group of people spoke a specific dialect of Latin, with a certain set of slang and a certain regional accent. Even today in Italy, there are distinct accents and words in southern, central, and northern Italian. A bit like Californian-English versus New York-English versus Minnesota-English versus Newfoundland-English. (Linguists love to classify and sub-classify and define smaller and smaller groups - patterns make us mental with glee. This then gets misinterpreted, passed on, and the darndest statements enter the common conscious...kind of like "Eskimos have 47 different words for snow." Ask a surfer about different types of waves, and you could come away with the idea that surfers have just over dozen words for "water".)
The most interesting thing I remember from one of my earliest survey courses was a dialectical map of America. You could very easily trace the migration waves and patterns by what dialects are now spoken where.
I forget: is Latin technically a dead language at this point (only in active use by scholars and professionals, like certain clergy, rather than being taught to children as their main language), or is it still actively spoken in some tiny pockets somewhere in any form?
I suspect that the quote about only 1000-2000 people speaking Latin meant that only a small group of people spoke a specific dialect of Latin, with a certain set of slang and a certain regional accent. Even today in Italy, there are distinct accents and words in southern, central, and northern Italian. A bit like Californian-English versus New York-English versus Minnesota-English versus Newfoundland-English. (Linguists love to classify and sub-classify and define smaller and smaller groups - patterns make us mental with glee. This then gets misinterpreted, passed on, and the darndest statements enter the common conscious...kind of like "Eskimos have 47 different words for snow." Ask a surfer about different types of waves, and you could come away with the idea that surfers have just over dozen words for "water".)
The most interesting thing I remember from one of my earliest survey courses was a dialectical map of America. You could very easily trace the migration waves and patterns by what dialects are now spoken where.
I forget: is Latin technically a dead language at this point (only in active use by scholars and professionals, like certain clergy, rather than being taught to children as their main language), or is it still actively spoken in some tiny pockets somewhere in any form?
...that and the Roman "if it's there, we must conquer it" mentality 
The English language (once it got into its contemporary form) spread pretty much the same way: through trade, through the English empire, and through colonization.
Come to think of it, that's kind of how the English language was started. Norman mercenaries needed to pick up Saxon barmaids.
These days, radio/television/movies are doing an...interesting...job of linguistic conquest. One theory that was passed about was that English was starting to get fairly homogenized because of widespread use and acceptance of mass media. Currently, it's interesting to see how many little regional quirks exist even within American English - but I wonder if those will still be around in another century?
The English language (once it got into its contemporary form) spread pretty much the same way: through trade, through the English empire, and through colonization.Come to think of it, that's kind of how the English language was started. Norman mercenaries needed to pick up Saxon barmaids.
These days, radio/television/movies are doing an...interesting...job of linguistic conquest. One theory that was passed about was that English was starting to get fairly homogenized because of widespread use and acceptance of mass media. Currently, it's interesting to see how many little regional quirks exist even within American English - but I wonder if those will still be around in another century?
I know they are still doing Latin in a school here. There is only the one school doing it.
I don't think anyone should be doing latin as a subject in school these days when they could be doing something more practical that could be used a lot more.
I don't mean its optional, its compulsory to do it.
I don't think latin is spoken in any part of the world as a first language.
Sure, it's ok if someone wants to do it to learn about languages, it could be useful for other situations, eg. law seems to favor students that did latin.
Are you sure that book is right?
Didn't they also speak it in Pompaii and surrounding areas?
I think the language will change a huge amount from now and in another century, just think about English in the last century, there has been a huge change, especially in England.
Ever seen one of the very old films?Or read an old book from the last century?The language used is very very different from what is spoken today, in any part of the world
I don't think anyone should be doing latin as a subject in school these days when they could be doing something more practical that could be used a lot more.
I don't mean its optional, its compulsory to do it.
I don't think latin is spoken in any part of the world as a first language.
Sure, it's ok if someone wants to do it to learn about languages, it could be useful for other situations, eg. law seems to favor students that did latin.
Are you sure that book is right?
Didn't they also speak it in Pompaii and surrounding areas?
I think the language will change a huge amount from now and in another century, just think about English in the last century, there has been a huge change, especially in England.
Ever seen one of the very old films?Or read an old book from the last century?The language used is very very different from what is spoken today, in any part of the world
I found learning my Greek and Latin roots / suffixes to be **very** helpful. It is to make my English goodly.
If you want to really challenge yourself, sit down with Chaucer. I forget if that's the first surviving book written in the contemporary form of English, or the last book written in Old English.
If you want to really challenge yourself, sit down with Chaucer. I forget if that's the first surviving book written in the contemporary form of English, or the last book written in Old English.
Latin is not spoken anywhere as a first language. But Latin should certainly be taught as an optional language in my view instead of German or French like we do in Norway (our second language is english). I myself plan to study latin and linguistics once I leave school and I've done the army duty I have to do (it's not really optional over here yet, but they say it will be soon).
RobAPI. Do you know some latin?
RobAPI. Do you know some latin?
Well it turns out that all the first works written in Latin are translations from Greek. The Greeks introduced writing as a form of art to the romans who had only used it previously for writing down laws and so on. Slowly people started to follow the greeks and use writing as a form of art but all the first latin works of written art were actually translations of greek work. It took a while before they started writing their own work.
imported_HadleyHost
New member
How hard is latin to learn
I would not really know that. I don't study the actual grammar. At the moment I'm just reading about the history as we know it. But at the end of the book there is a grammar section. I'll have a look at it.
I do know that the word order is different. In english it is SVO but in latin it is SOV, which makes things a bit difficult.
Also there are several pressure rules.
I do know that the word order is different. In english it is SVO but in latin it is SOV, which makes things a bit difficult.
Also there are several pressure rules.
BlackStorm
New member
I found Latin VERY difficult.
My memory has always been very bad, but I think once you learn a few endings, its not so hard.
My problem was always with trying to remember the endings though.
There are a lot of words in latin very similar to English, English is based on Latin.
It's a lot easer to translate from Latin to English, most could be done using guess work really, but harder to translate into Latin
My memory has always been very bad, but I think once you learn a few endings, its not so hard.
My problem was always with trying to remember the endings though.
There are a lot of words in latin very similar to English, English is based on Latin.
It's a lot easer to translate from Latin to English, most could be done using guess work really, but harder to translate into Latin
MidnightFrost
New member
"I forget: is Latin technically a dead language at this point (only in active use by scholars and professionals, like certain clergy, rather than being taught to children as their main language), or is it still actively spoken in some tiny pockets somewhere in any form?"
yes, latin is technically considered a dead language. its amazing the information i learn through choir. gotta love it
yes, latin is technically considered a dead language. its amazing the information i learn through choir. gotta love it
Who defines it as dead varies from person to person. Some people define it as dead some do not. People simply can't agree on how to define a dead language. If you go by how many people learn it then no it is not dead. If you go by how many people use it daily then no it is not dead. But if you go by how many people speak it natively then yes it is most certainly dead.
It all depends on how you look at it. But my opinion is that Latin is not dead.
It all depends on how you look at it. But my opinion is that Latin is not dead.
MidnightFrost
New member
yea i agree with that. well when you said if you go by how many people speak it natively. i think thats how you determine whether or not a language is dead.
its still alive in other ways. you can still take it up as a language in school, its still used a lot in church, there are many songs that are in latin that are being performed all the time..so in that sense, latin is most definitely not dead.
its still alive in other ways. you can still take it up as a language in school, its still used a lot in church, there are many songs that are in latin that are being performed all the time..so in that sense, latin is most definitely not dead.
42.
Or African swallow, I forget which
No, seriously...I don't completely understand your last post.
When I asked if Latin was considered a dead language, I meant dead according to the international linguistics panels. Their professional definition is that if a language isn't being learned by children as their primary language, then that language is dead. It may be used by scholars, by certain social groups, et cetera, but it won't evolve and continue in the same organic fashion that languages do when they're learned by listening / osmosis, rather than in the semi-structured environment of a church or an academic setting.
Or African swallow, I forget which
No, seriously...I don't completely understand your last post.
When I asked if Latin was considered a dead language, I meant dead according to the international linguistics panels. Their professional definition is that if a language isn't being learned by children as their primary language, then that language is dead. It may be used by scholars, by certain social groups, et cetera, but it won't evolve and continue in the same organic fashion that languages do when they're learned by listening / osmosis, rather than in the semi-structured environment of a church or an academic setting.
Is esperanto being taught to children as their first language? (Seriously - I don't know.)
Linguists have been watching esperanto rather interestedly. It's the first contemporary artificial language, and they're like kids with a neat new toy or pet: "Oooooo, what's it going to do next?!??" You've got your detractors, natch (they exist in every field), but it's an interesting case study.
It's unique from, say, Hebrew (the only language successfully brought back from the dead) or Celtic (saved on the brink) because it is a totally artificial language. It was consciously, specifically constructed rather than organically evolved through the unstructured blending of different languages.
Makes me think back fondly on the language I constructed during Geometry. (I hated that instructor, and had to have something to keep my brain occupied. ) It can be used to speak, if you don't mind a fairly simple structure and a minimum of abstracts. It worked for "Meet you at lunch" or "We're skipping class tomorrow to go to the city."
Linguists have been watching esperanto rather interestedly. It's the first contemporary artificial language, and they're like kids with a neat new toy or pet: "Oooooo, what's it going to do next?!??" You've got your detractors, natch (they exist in every field), but it's an interesting case study.
It's unique from, say, Hebrew (the only language successfully brought back from the dead) or Celtic (saved on the brink) because it is a totally artificial language. It was consciously, specifically constructed rather than organically evolved through the unstructured blending of different languages.
Makes me think back fondly on the language I constructed during Geometry. (I hated that instructor, and had to have something to keep my brain occupied.
) It can be used to speak, if you don't mind a fairly simple structure and a minimum of abstracts. It worked for "Meet you at lunch" or "We're skipping class tomorrow to go to the city."-
HostingDiscussion
A community for web hosting professionals and enthusiasts, since 2002.
