Re: Okay, so...

"Will Parsons" <oudeis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:slrng60inp.2cta.oudeis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> B. T. Raven wrote:
[...]
>> ........I favor the restored
>> pronunciation of circa 50 B.C., if everone can agree on it.
>
> I like the reconstructed pronunciation too for pronouncing classical 
> Latin,
> but it's not going to be appropriate in all cir***stances, and I doubt
if
> everyone will be able to agree on it.
>
>> If not, then
>> I would accept the later imperial pronunciation if that would lead to
>> EVERYONE, from now on, using it for all ordinary purposes. Singers of
>> the liturgy would of course continue to use Latin with an Italian 
>> accent.**
>
> So, everyone except "singers of the liturgy"?  And why the exception? 
And
> why "of course" with an Italian accent?  Would that apply to singing
music
> in Latin that was not part of the liturgy?  I'm no singer, but if I were

> to
> sing in Latin, why should I sing it as if it were Italian seeing that I
am
> neither Italian nor Roman Catholic?

Now that the RC liturgy is generally said and sung in the vernacular, I 
rather think that most singers of Church Latin are in your position: they 
belong to secular choral societies or school choirs, or just join
cheerfully 
in a carol refrain. In England they have for many years used a sort of 
semi-Italianate pronunciation: soft g and "ch" c before vowels, "anyoos" 
rather than "aggnoos", but otherwise quite anglicised. The emphasis lately

on "authentic" performance has led to attempts by most professionals and 
some amateur singers to use pronunciations probably expected by composers,

giving Fauré his French "u" and nasalised "um" and Haydn his "extselsiss".
I 
find, as an amateur choral conductor, that visiting soloists will almost 
always ask "German or Italian Latin?" (French is still a bit more outré.)

For anyone interested in non-classical pronunciation I recommend "Singing
in 
Latin" by Harold Copeman (privately published and now very hard to find,
but 
perhaps big libraries have it). He deals thoroughly with local and 
historical variations, and is particularly good on the Italianate 
standardisation of RC Latin, which is just about a century old and was 
bitterly opposed by non-Italian bishops, especially the French. (One does 
need familiarity with the international phonetic alphabet to get the best 
out of this book.) Copeman also wrote the "Latin" chapters of "Singing
Early 
Music: The Pronunciation of European Languages in the Late Middle Ages and

Renaissance" ed. McGee, Rigg & Klausner, but this doesn't by definition 
cover anything after about 1600. At least it appears to be available at 
Amazon in paperback, with a sup****ting CD.

Alan Jones