This page is within the scope of the Wikipedia Help Project, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's help documentation for readers and contributors. If you would like to participate, please visit
the project page, where you can join the
discussion and see a list of open tasks. To browse help related resources see the
Help Menu or
Help Directory. Or ask for help on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you there.Wikipedia HelpWikipedia:Help ProjectTemplate:Wikipedia Help ProjectHelp articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
This page falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a
WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to
writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by
the project page and/or leave a query at
the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system articles
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)]]reply
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)reply
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. —
Ƶ§œš¹[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 12:49, 19 July 2012 (UTC)reply
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. —
Ƶ§œš¹[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 13:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)reply
Capital letters
Why is everything in capital letters?--
2.245.66.112 (
talk) 21:17, 2 January 2014 (UTC)reply
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)reply
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)reply
"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)reply
I searched through a few books of the Aeneid and found this line (
Aeneis II:71). Its scansion indicates that CVI contains a diphthong rather than two short vowels:
CUI NEQU(E) A|PUD DANA|OS US|QUAM LOCU|S, ET SUPE|R IPSI
A line in dactylic hexameter always begins with a long vowel or diphthong; here, therefore, UI must be a diphthong. There are other cases like this where CVI appears at the beginning of a line. There are also cases where CVI 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 CVI is always pronounced one way, it must be pronounced with a diphthong. —
Eru·
tuon 23:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)reply
Big small caps
I removed the <big></big> 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)reply
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
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Latin § Small caps 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)reply
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)reply
This page is getting a bit too long
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)reply
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)reply
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)reply
"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)reply
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)reply
{"wikitable" style="margin: 1em"
! colspan="3" | Prosody
|-
! IPA !! Examples !!
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | ˈ
| rowspan="2" | Gāius /ˈɡa.i.us/
|
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)reply
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)reply
Syllable marker, generally used between vowels in
hiatus
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? —
Sebastian 08:22, 29 March 2015 (UTC)reply
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)reply
"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)reply
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)reply
It's for [
ɲ, not [
ŋ.
Nardog (
talk) 02:33, 13 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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)reply
It's because ⟨x⟩ is a letter that stands for two sounds: [
k followed by [
s. It's not considered to be an
affricate... usually. Wiese (1996) says that /ks/ is just as much of an affricate as /pf/, /ts/ and /tʃ/ - but that's in German.
Sol505000 (
talk) 18:00, 22 April 2022 (UTC)reply