Re: Okay, so...

Alan Jones wrote:
>
> "B. T. Raven" <nihil@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:_uKdnTJSirt9lcLVnZ2dnUVZ_qTinZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [...]
>> Genitive singular marker -is in the third declension was (and often is)

>> pronounced short, like the end of the English word "miss." The ablative

>> plural marking in the first and second declensions -is was pronounced
like 
>> the end of the proper family name "Meese." So there would be no
confusion 
>> even in rapid speech.
>
> Is that certain? Church Latin seems to have the same "i" in both places.

> When I was a English chorister, we were drilled into making the
distinction 
> by a blue-stocking lady who taught both (classical) Latin and music; but
in 
> broadcasts and recordings I rarely if ever hear "-eece" in "Gloria in 
> excelsis" -- always "iss".
>
> It's not just a matter of length: there are different symbols in
phonetics 
> for the "i"s in "****p" [I]  and "sheep" [i], and the lengthening symbol
[:] 
> isn't used in "sheep". The [I] sound doesn't exist in some languages,
where 
> all i's are [i], and that is apparently true of Italian and Italianate 
> Latin. Various transcriptions of ecclesiastical Latin use the same
phonetic 
> [i] symbol for "cordis" genitive and "bonis" ablative; no [i:] for the 
> ablative.

Right - the classical pronunciation of Latin apparently distinguished long
I and short I by vowel quality in addition to quantity, but Italian (and
hence the Italian pronunciation of Latin) doesn't.  With the loss of the
classical distinction of vowel quantity, the result is that there is no
distinction between long and short I in the Italian (or other national)
pronunciations of Latin.  Quite possibly, some teachers of Ecclesiastical
Latin may attempt to re-introduce quantitative distinctions.

-- 
Will