What is Latin's "Sonus Medius" ?

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Many thanks to my sponsor Ancient Language Institute. To learn Latin, Ancient Greek, Hebrew, or Old English with some of the best instructors and pedagogy out there, sign up for online lessons at AncientLanguage.com. ⬅

[@o_o825]

Luke, you seriously need an OnlyFans... Just sayin'. 🙂

[@faryafaraji]

You know a thumbnail is good when I have to click out of curiosity; let’s learn something new!

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

What a huge compliment! I'm delighted if I succeeded with the thumbnail; it's the hardest job of all! Eυχαριστώ, φίλε μου.

[@ordinarryalien]

Hah, I knew you were following this channel. :)

[@kingjimmycraftofcalderonia2017]

I enjoyed listening to your music. I had a strange feeling you follow him and maybe Metatron

[@loxisito9533]

Hey, Luke. I never send comments, but just wanted to say I can notice you’ve been practicing your apical S. It’s one of my favorite sounds, you hit it perfectly, I hope you manage to use it consistently soon!

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Thanks! Yes, since Raphael Turrigiano taught me I have been trying me best at it.

[@Brandon55638]

I didn't know about the sonus medius until I came across early Latin spellings that seemed unusual to me like "decuma" for "decima". Ever since I started watching comprehensible input Latin videos, I came to use the sonus medius consistently.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Very cool!

[@francisdec1615]

You have something similar in modern English. Compare how Louise Homer pronounced 'perilous' when she sang The Star Spangled Banner in 1917 to how Lady Gaga pronounced it 104 years later: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rKm6ipWCa9ZmiLc kzbin.info/www/bejne/g2ipqGWZrbampq8

[@Brandon55638]

​@@francisdec1615I think it's a kind of schwa vowel in English, but I understand what you mean.

[@AlexThomson-EasternApproaches]

/ɨ/ occurs in (North) Welsh as well.

[@Krka1716]

Congrats for this interesting video!🙂 Interestingly enough, the unrounded central closed vowel /ɨ/ is everywhere in European Portuguese.

[@taimunozhan]

It would have been nice to mention that there was a letter specifically for the sonus medius in the Claudian orthography

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Claudia orthography is for another video!

[@marcmorgan8606]

Interesting! I speak Welsh (I’m from the South in Wales). We have 2 ‘ee’ sounding letters in the south- i and u - commonly known as ‘ee’ dot (i) and ‘ee’ bedol (u) or ‘ee’ cwpan- bedol = Welsh word for ‘horseshoe’ and ‘cwpan’ = cup (the shape of the letter ‘u’). In the southern dialect they sound the same, however in the North, they have the same difference as you are describing. We say that in the North, the difference in sound is achieved by the shape of the tongue - a tongue shaped like an i achieves ‘ee dot’, and a tongue shaped like a ‘u’ produces ‘ee bedol’. Try it!

[@TheTTax]

A very interesting video as always! As a native portuguese speaker (european), when I try to read the word "optumus" as if it were portuguese, the "Sonus Medius" on the 1st "u" is very natural and the first one that comes out. It is very hard for me to say it with two "u" sounds which are the same in quality both times!

[@garwert]

Here's something I would wholeheartedly suggest making a dive into: Latin alphabet. It is scarcely straightforward which letters were in the Latin alphabet during the classical period, which were added in later through Greek influence, which possibly (?) tacked on in the Middle Ages. Perhaps in the evolution of Latin letters in general, touching on what little remains of their handwriting, and how certain letters look unusual, swapped, or entirely unrecognizable. Hell, even punctuation could get a mention, though there's barely anything to it. I have been looking into it myself, just the littlest bit -- the discrepancies are quite amusing. Certain sources flat out lack any mention of "x", for instance. Wouldn't know where to start with "y" or "z", or even "k" and "v", although these should be easier to look up. Thankfully I've a better idea on "j" now, owing to your video. In any case, be it that you manage to touch on this particular bit or not, your work stands massively appreciated. A good one to you, sir. Do keep it up. o/

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Thanks! A fine suggestion. I have covered some of these, like y.

[@BillB23]

When I read Augustine's Confessions in the '70s I despaired when I encountered an antecedent to a phrase that was 3 pages back. This was not my idea of fun. Julius Caesar's Commentaries on the Gallic Wars were at the opposite end of the spectrum. I still marvel, after half a century, at how much of your spoken Latin I can comprehend, and sometimes say, "He should have used ablative when he used accusative." Please keep on keepin' on.

[@investmentgammler4550]

I prefer a somewhat different explanation: The sonus medius was an [ʏ], that developed out of an older [ʉ] (which remained as an allophone in the environment of back vowels). This fits the fact better that the sound caused some confusion with the greek in inscriptions, e.g. 'lachrymae', and that later grammarians identified it with the greek short [y] sound, while on the other hand that letter was not regularly used for the latin sound, but Claudius invented a special letter for it. Btw. the had that sound not only before m, b, p and f, but also after and , obviously caused by the lip rounding. Much more than by Quintilian is written by Velius Longus and later by Priscian about that sound.

[@Philoglossos]

Was it actually confused with y? The 'lachryma' example has a very easy alternative explanation, which is the (probably) mistaken assumption that it was loaned from Greek δάκρυ. In fact I think it's precisely the fact that the sonus medius is generally not identified with υ, nor confused with it in inscriptions, which results in this not being the mainstream view.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

I have read all three extensively; Velius Longus is my best friend haha. But Priscian is too late to give especially helpful advice on Classical Latin (still very interesting, but see the chronology here: bit.ly/ranierilatingreekauthors ) The phenomenon of, e.g., vir and quid is also interesting to explore, but a slightly different development. Thus I agree with my esteemed colleague Philoglossos.

[@PedroKerstitzsch]

The Claudian letter Ⱶ. In European Portuguese, unstressed /e/ and sometimes /i/ are raised to /ɨ/, especially in final sillables, e.g: parte /partɨ/. In Romanian, it's the standard pronunciation of letters â and î and comes from Latin /a/, /e/, /i/ and sometimes /u/ in nasal position, e.g.: cantus → cânt /kɨnt/, manus → mână /mɨnə/, ventus → vânt /vɨnt/, incipit → începe /ɨnt͡ʃepe/, unquam → încă /ɨnkə/, even fontana → fântână /fɨntɨnə/. It is sometimes influenced by Latin labials or rhotic trill when preceded by them, e.g.: ventus → vânt /vɨnt/, but tempus → timp /timp/, rivus → old. Rom. riuu /rriwu/ → râu /rɨw/. And in initial position, it sometimes resolves in /i/ or /u/, e.g.: anima → old. Rom. ânemă /ɨnemə/ → inimă /inimə/, ambulare → old Rom. âmblare /ɨmblare/ → umblare /umblare/.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

I’ll be addressing Claudian letters in a future video.

[@Krka1716]

Good point! In Euro Portuguese, unstressed /e/ is normally raised to /ɨ/ when in medial or final syllables. When it occurs in the first syllable, it may be raised to either /ɨ/ or /i/, or just remain unaltered (maintaining the sound /e/ or /ɛ/). On the other hand, sometimes the /i/ can shift by dissimilation to /ɨ/ (seemingly not by raising but rather by backing), which is something that tends to occur more often in certain 'dialects' (like that of Lisbon - 'Lisboeta')... As a consequence, the /ɨ/ is everywhere in EP, but almost nonexistent in Brazilian Portuguese.

[@modmaker7617]

Belarusian & Belarusian: ɨ [written as ы] Ukrainian: ɨ [written as и] Polish: ɘ (but commonly transcribed as ɨ for some reason) [written as Y] Czech & Slovak still write Y but pronounce it as "i" in the IPA as ɨ disappeared and merged with i. While South Slavic languages don't have ɨ at all and you find i in cognate words.

[@cosimoalbaster]

We have it in Romanian too î or â. Those 2 letters represent the same sound. Usually any vowel between 2 certain types of consonants have been reduced to the î\â sound. This mostly happens with Latin inherited words, meaning that this change probably happened either at the beginning or during the Slavic migration in the same region where Romanians lived. Words like in became în or "manducare" became "mâncare". Usually vowels between "m" and "nc" become î\â, but there's other combinations that result in that.

[@Lausanamo]

There's a common merger of и and ы in russian, but it doesn't seem to be universal

[@pawel198812]

​@@LausanamoThey are considered positional allophones, afaik. Or are you saying that they also merged in pronunciation?

[@Lausanamo]

@@pawel198812 I don't know if this happens with other words, but I hear "ты" as [ti], while I can hear the [ɨ] in мы

[@guillermorivas7819]

Bravo, Lucas! De nuevo has hecho un video educativo. "Hay un sonido medio de las letras "u e i"; porque no decimos lo mejor como lo mejor." La palabra "documentum" aun existe como "documento" en las lenguas romances y el ingles.

[@MagisterAndrews-dy4nf]

I'd be fascinated to know what medieval Latinists knew about the sonus medius! Do you have sources? My understanding is that in medieval Latin is orthographically motivated. Their writing tools had thick vertical strokes and thin horizontal strokes, so eg a word like would come out looking like , which could be miago, iniago, nuago, unago, etc. Replacing i with y made it easier to read. (This is also where dotting i's came from.)

[@MagisterAndrews-dy4nf]

Also, I really appreciate the way you treat these pronunciation questions as something to play around and have fun with rather than stress over. That's impacted the way I teach Latin and learn Greek.

[@MarkLinJA]

Definitely something that I’ve been wondering about ever since I read of it being mentioned. Grātiās tibi agō!

[@hiberniancaveman8970]

A bit off topic, maybe, but a lot of people say Slavic languages are difficult. Here, maybe, is a suggestion. Back in the 50s and 60s, I did Latin at school, and liked it. In the early 60s, there was in the UK a discussion about whether to teach Latin or Russian. I was starting to attempt to teach myself Russian, and I found my Latin basis very helpful with the declensions and conjugations, not only as regards the concept of inflections, but how closely the patterns in Russian resembled those of Latin. For example, neuter plurals in Latin (-a in nom and acc) correspond to those in Russian with -а and -я. Some time later, I encountered Polish, which retains the nasalized vowels ą and ę found in Old Church Slavonic. In declensions and conjugations they generally correspond to vowels followed by m or n in Latin. So, here is added value to teaching Latin in schools!

[@sycration]

the latin -m is practically a nasal vowel anyway

[@re1v3r]

Luke, a lot of Latin in Warhammer 40k. Loyal community bound for lots of views 😊

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Thanks for the suggestion! I just need to find videos on YT I can analyze

[@re1v3r]

@@polyMATHY_Luke That makes sense. You could always save your research time and collab with a WH40k content creator. MajorKill is the largest, Chapter Master Vulrak is the best live interactions, and Baldermort is like your favorite granddad with the best nighttime stories. Any way, just a thought for you as you and your family enjoy a lovely Thanksgiving! Spero Meliora!

[@friiq0]

Luke! You’ve got to do an episode with Jordan Schlansky! He and Conan just had a huge debate about the Ancient Greek pronunciation of “Socrates” which I think you are uniquely qualified to adjudicate!

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

They did?! I would love to! Where can I find that episode?

[@chloeedmund4350]

Cool! I didn't know Julius Caesar wrote a book on grammar.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Yes! We only know a little about it from other authors.

[@troelspeterroland6998]

Isn't the term 'ablative' attributed to him?

[@RobinPoe]

When I was in the Army stationed in Italy, I started learning Latin, so I used the Italian accent. (i.e. cena like "chaina"). I noticed in your videos with Italians, it's at least understandable. I lived near Venice, and I remember sometimes in Venetian accent, an i would get an oo pronunciation like in the word cinquanta (fifty) in Venice would get pronounced "shunquanta."

[@hieratics]

Yaayyy! Thanks for this video🎉

[@GiulioPiccinno]

I'm Italian. I tried reading the "u"-version of these words out loud, then the "i"-version of them. It comes pretty natural to me to pronounce them both with the greek "u", frontal close [y]. I guess it doesn't mean much for Latin pronunciation reconstruction, though.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Interessante!

[@celsoaugusto8360]

"Maxuma pars....." . O melhor mestre. Obrigado.❤❤❤❤

[@tedvendlegard9776]

Vilket sammanträffande om det är som Luke säger, att "sonus medius" bara råkar vara något som motsvarar det svenska U-ljudet. Annars brukar man ju lära sig att latinet saknar det svenska U:et.

[@midtskogen]

Thanks. I requested your take on this interesting topic a while ago.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

You gave me the idea!

[@midtskogen]

​@@polyMATHY_Luke Another idea, if you find it of general interest: Spelling conventions in antiquity and what the Romans themselves struggled with, like what's the thing with q(u) versus c(u), uu vs uo, i vs ii (two syllables, "ji" or a long "i"?). Should it be cui or quoi. cuius or quoius, or even quoiius or cuiius? aeuom or aeuum or aeum? inicio or iniicio? iuuenis or iuenis? Does uoluit come from uoluo or uolo? cum, quom, quum or qum? Clearly the Romans must have felt that their alphabet had some issues. Much was of course fixed a millennium and a half later with the i/j and u/v distinction. Or wasn't it a real problem, perhaps with the exception of the true ambiguity of uoluit?

[@nagili4]

It might be important to take it one step further back and consider the origin of the vowel in question in your cited examples: is a compound of the i-stem 'pons, pontis' + 'facere', therefore the original sound in this word has to be some kind of [i]. however is 'monere' + the instrumental suffix, therefore the original sound in this one must be some kind of [e]. There's actually examples for every main vowel: from 'taberna';

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

I agree with everything you beautifull summarized, until your final conclusion that [y] must be the correct realization (or another high front rounded vowel). The reason is that letter Y was borrowed into Latin for exactly this sound, and the evidence that Greek υ was /y/ in Classical Roman times is rock-solid, yet Y is not used for the sonus medius. Indeed, the two sounds are described by Quintilian in different terms. While I think that high centra rounded is the correct realization, I'm open to considering a more forward vowel, but it has to be quite different from the Y of contemporary Greek. Thanks for the comment.

[@TheOnyomiMaster]

This reminds me of the mute vowels in Japanese, e.g. _hokutou_, _deshita_, where the close vowel _i_ or _u_ is elided between two voiceless consonants. Saying the Latin words like _optimus_ out loud, I noticed that I was pronouncing the middle _i_ sort of like the Japanese mute vowels, i.e. very fast and sort of skipping over it, like _opt'mus_.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Absolutely! I thought of mentioning this, but left it out to keep the video shorter.

[@deadgavin4218]

also interesting all voiceless consonants except for k absorb the one of the vowels, original p both, çi, ɸu, chi, tsu, shi, su. k though actually drops between high vowels so arigataku -> arigatou, arigataki -> arigatai, akaki -> akai

[@leocomerford]

@@polyMATHY_Luke Similarly, could it just be English-like vowel reduction towards a schwa? The schwa may not be dead in the middle between i and u on a modern vowel chart but you can certainly see how someone could describe it as falling between the two, especially in the ancient world where (as far I know!) even the grammarians didn't have the modern linguist's conception of a 2D vowel space.

[@Brandon55638]

I don't know much Japanese but I also tend to skip over the sonus medius if I don't pronounce it. I learned from listening to Korean speakers.

[@nicolanobili2113]

Have you seen any documents written under Claudius (41-54 a.D.)? There was even a letter for that sound (I cannot type it, it's not in my keyboard), though it quickly disappeared from the Latin alphabet. This "sonus medius" sounds (no pun intended) like one of the many variants of a language which have no practical importance and are relatively uncommon, and languages naturally tend to get rid of non-symmetrical appendices. In any case, the 1st century b.C. (when Caesar allegedly wrote his lost grammar book) was certainly a period of great changes in the Latin pronunciation, I clearly remember that, as Catullus mentioned in one of his poems, apparently many people were dropping the "h" altogether.

[@jauregi2726]

Fascinating as usual.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Thanks!

[@ashleythorpe7933]

Наконец! Люк упомянул и произнёс звук 'ы'! Возможно, звук 'ы' существовал в классическом латинском

[@bigbo1764]

I do feel like something a bit lower than “I” always sounded and felt a bit more natural than trying to reach that high on a short vowel, so I think the idea that the pronunciation tended towards this middle ground is valid.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Yeah, it seems reasonable to me. Plus it's attested.

[@malahamavet]

thats surprising because in romanian we have this sound!... represented by the leter â and î. i wondered why romanian is the only romance language that has this sound

[@Krka1716]

You mean /ɨ/ ?

[@khantsal2305]

Thank you very much Mr Luke. I have been learning latin for two years and I have reached some level in latin and I studied some latin texts and inscriptions mostly (pre classcal time). Is that true that original Latin masculine ending is Os instead of Us because I found old latin inscription that use Os ending in nominative singular masculine in stead of Us. Thank you very much. Mr luke. Gratias tibi. 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@troelspeterroland6998]

It's true.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

That is indeed true; o and e in certain environments closed to u.

[@khantsal2305]

Thank you very much. 🙏🙏🙏

[@iberius9937]

The Romans were clearly very good at discerning subtleties in phonology, even in how they transcribed Greek words, and vice versa! It seems to me that spoken language appears to have been even more appreciated back then even more so than today. Proof? Oratory and rhetoric were highly valued skills to get ahead in society. Poetry and literature were meant to be read aloud, and reading silently to oneself was not as common as today!

[@pestylenz7344]

Regarding morphology, how can pons, pontis make such a sound ponti/ufex ? And can we trace this sonus what it was in proto-latin /proto-italic ?

[@esti-od1mz]

Cool. I wonder if this is related to the fact that sicilian change "i" to "u", depending on the dialect

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

That’s an interesting idea

[@esti-od1mz]

@@polyMATHY_Luke thank you for your comment! Honestly I can't tell: I've noticed that some elders may use both sounds in the same place. Also, some sicilian dialects, like messinese, have the sonus medius! Not mine, though...

[@thomasgaliana6288]

Thank you for another entertaining video.

[@jakubolszewski8284]

Sometimes I cry cause of lost Caesars works hahae.

[@MrRabiddogg]

I'm curious, do any of the Ancient writings mention dialects of Latin in the provinces/colonies of Rome and how they differ from the Latin spoken in Italy or Rome? Something akin to Chaucer in English.

[@coolandhip_7596]

There was actually some writing on that. One are that fascinates me in particular is latin in north africa and as it is called in later periods "African romance". As early as the, I want to say, 3rd century AD there were mentions of this north African dialect (and iberian) having a number of unique or archaic features. I'm sure you can find the some of same for Gaul and Brittania with a few short Google searches.

[@MrRabiddogg]

@@coolandhip_7596 it'd be interesting. there is a podcast called History of English that I listen to that outlines English's history from the PIE to present. I wish someone would do the same for the Latin language and its offshoots. Seems to me that this would be better to hear than to read about

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Yes, JN Adams has a couple great books that cover this. The short answer is that there isn’t a lot of variation until late antiquity.

[@MrRabiddogg]

@@polyMATHY_Luke Interesting. I would have assumed that based on how the legends say Rome was founded (a rag tag group of outlaws from all over central Italy) that they would have brought their own dialect of Latin into the mix to begin with

[@javier6489]

Great video

[@dauidianus]

Actually, emperor Claudius intoduced a letter for _sonus medius_ (Ⱶ): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudian_letters

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

That’s what the best video in this series will cover.

[@zfranky]

Thanks for that very interesting video! I love it!❤

[@YiannissB.]

Yoy know Lule, i think you should a series specificly on IPA. Given how helpful it can be to aproaching any Language, i reckon you would allow many of us decipher what the frick some of the symbols mean and how to go about it.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

I actually have that for you, φίλε μου! IPA vowels: kzbin.info/www/bejne/mqPCp4WdfZVpo6Msi=D5jqfHTLGwNlq8b8 IPA consonants: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pZ2wYqCja5uMhtksi=MJ5EAXdS7ckA6Kcm

[@YiannissB.]

@@polyMATHY_Luke Well, someone hasn't been keeping up with class!😐 Since you got that covered already then, show what books does the teacher's library hold! Especially the right shelf. I get teased for years now by looking at it in the background. Cheers.

[@antongetman7110]

optыmus

[@brunocoliveira89]

Thank you so much!

[@christophertorak8301]

In some ways this phenom reminds me of Labial Mutation in Old Norse (‽) Alternately, As dacruma shares an origin with Grk. δακρυ, I wonder if Grk. διδυμος 'twin' might be paralleling Old Latin sonus medius ordinal *umus we see in forms like decumus.(¿?). That could also be a chance convergence, since it seems the suffix /δυμος/ is used for multiples, or like the suffix /fold/ in English with numbers.

[@iberius9937]

Could not the sonus medius have actually been the fronted vowel /y/ in a word like "lacruma", which would explain it later beinɡ spelled "lacrima", as an /i/ vowel? Makes a lot of sense to me. I also believe the u in "-que", "quid" and "quem" was almost certainly pronounced the same way (e.g. /kyɛ̃/), given the way that set of letters is pronunced in modern romance languages as a result of it later palatalizing to /kʲɛɴ/, for example. Further evidence of this is in a certain Greek inscription that I read about where the name Quintiliánus is rendered as Κυιντιλιανός instead of the usual κουιντιλιανός. In addition, the spelling of the word "Quirítés" in Greek as κυρίτες may also be more than just a cognate but rather also indicative of this phenomenon.

[@newq]

Shocked to see Luke holding a copy of Vox Latina given the side he's taken on the Latin Vowel Wars lol.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Lol “Vowel Wars”! I’m pretty sure I’m the one who started those Vowel Wars, haha. Allen’s work is some of the best of the 20th century, and his manuals helped bring the knowledge of ancient phonology to a wider audience than Sturtevant (though his book is extremely valuable too). There can be cordial disagreement among colleagues; Allen was no dummy, and the few points of contention are indeed few. On the whole, Vox Latina and Vox Graeca are essential starting points on this subject.

[@tepan]

Thanks for the explanation. So, the sonus medius is kind of a Latin man's schwa: it's never stressed.* *oversimplified

[@pierreabbat6157]

Оптыме!

[@CleopaOrthodox]

Can you please review the Latin in the TV series 'Wolf Hall' during the Tudor period of England.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Sure! If there is a clip on KZbin, please send to ScorpioMartianus @ gmail

[@celsoaugusto8360]

The best vídeo ever made.

[@hglundahl]

2:03 _"all kinds of Latin"_ That of St. Gregory of Tours too? Or the one where you can nearly say "ultrerius et surserius" but turn that into a neutre plural, not into "ultreriora et surseriora" but into "ultreria et surseria" which is then pronounced (and actually written "ultreya e suseya" ... a k a Mozarabic Latin. That one too?

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Absolutely. You need a foundational course in order to track into more esoteric Latin.

[@hglundahl]

wait,@@polyMATHY_Luke , I didn't say that a foundational course was not needed, but at 2:03 you said basically it was sufficient, right?

[@hglundahl]

Let me reformulate. When I had an extra-curricular course in St. Thomas Aquinas, the teacher helped me in scholastic terminology, plus the use of "ly" when equivalent to "to" before a phrase or an infinitive. But when I had a course on Gesta Francorum, inside the curriculum, I definitely needed extra help with the Latin as such, not sth I could have pulled off just using my previous knowledge of Latin.

[@petermontell9564]

Gratias tibi

[@bencornwell6209]

Right on Man!

[@Columbator]

I see you spell "māximus" with a long a, while dictionaries most often spell it with a short a, the long a being only an hypothesis. Do you have any relevant data about this vowel's length?

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Indeed, the controversy over “māximus” seems strange, because we freely add the long mark over other vowels that we know to be long due to Lachmann’s Law or other factors, but aren’t attested at all. In the case of māximus, it is actually attested ( en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/maximus ). The etymology is *magisəmos > *magsumos, and the only possible result of this is the change of g>k, which, per Lachmann’s Law, must lengthen the preceding vowel. Thus we have 1) one actual attestation, which is better than we get for most hidden quantities, and 2) a general principle which informs the majority of hidden quantities. As far as this goes, I would have to see some pretty compelling evidence why the vowel should be short in the word; either another linguistic theory, or some ancient attestation to indicate that it cannot be long. Here is my video on hidden quantity: kzbin.info/www/bejne/f4bGlJiHhLKpncUsi=BjAc44jtpTupQp0D

[@HCRAYERT.]

This is irrelevant to the video, but what are your thoughts on languages like Neapolitan and Sicilian.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

They’re beautiful and really cool. See my video here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/sIbPf5upbdd9lcksi=J9VyQjDvbSdOuyUi

[@LinguarumFautor]

If only the Claudian reform had survived!

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

If only!

[@MBP1918]

🤯

[@balanjayf9368]

Perhaps we should bring back the Claudian letter for the sonus medius.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

That shall be the next discussion!

[@violador5037]

@@polyMATHY_Luke Do you plan on making a video about the Claudian letters?

[@impCaesarAvg]

Vellem Cicerōnem Caesaremque audīre possēmus!

[@thli8472]

Sounds like a Swedish u. Central rounded high.

[@ivanproynov7078]

In Polish you spell that short schwa sound with “y”

[@RoyalKnightVIII]

We must figure this out before we senf an ambassador to Cybertron

[@beatoriche7301]

Nōnne correpta est vōcālis a verbī _maximus_? Ad breve qvoddam tempus qvaesīvī in rēte et Vōce Latīnā neqve mī patet cui qvantitātī crēdendum sit (qvamqvam sententia Allenis mī nōta est). Sīs, dīc mī ubī invēnerīs qvantitātem ejjus vōcālis, praecipuē argūmentum qvod tibī persvāserit. Grātiās agō! Sermōnem tuum edō.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Optimē rogās! Hinc incipiāmus: en.wiktionary.org/wiki/maximus "Note: the only evidence for a long /a/ in this word is the inscriptional MÁX(IMVS) in the acts of the Arval Brethren for 120 CE. If genuine, this would be an example of the much-debated Lachmann's law." Lēgem tamen Lachmannī satis firmam esse cōnstat; rēgulārissimē invenītur in īnscrīptiōnibus, et magna pars macrōrum quibus ūtimur (ut tū, ut ego scrībentēs) ex hāc lēge intellegitur. Licet nōnnūllōs Classicae Periodī "maximus" prō "māximus" dīxisse; Aulus vērō Gellius ipse certiōrēs nōs facit "actitō" prō "āctitō" dīcere barbarismum subrīdiculum esse - tamen, quod exstitit, licet et nōbīs barbarismum adhibēre, cum sit antīquum. Itaque nōn videō quīn scrībāmus dīcāmusque "māximus," tamquam "ācta," "scrīpta," et cētera multa. Quid tū cēnsēs?

[@beatoriche7301]

@@polyMATHY_Luke Hujjus reī scientia mea est multō minor tuā, qvam ob rem dubitō, an aliqvid praeteream. Sīs, nōlī legere hunc nūntium, qvasi fingam mē qvantitātibus vōcālium perītam esse; sōlum placet mī prōnūntiātiōnem Latīnam discere atqve dē eā rē disputāre. Ut egō intellegō lēgem Lachmannī, pertinet ad plōsīvōs sonōs; est lēx qvae pertinet ad, ut dīxistī, plōsīvum post plōsīvum vōce factum, ut in participiīs, supīnō, et fōrmīs qvae illinc dūcuntur. Mī qvidem nōn pertinēre vidētur ad *maximus*, in qvō verbum tantum est fricātīvus post plōsīvum. Forsitan vōx etiam hīc eādem ratiōne perierit, sed nōn omnīnō persvāsa sum, qvoniam vōcālis manet brevis in praefīxō *ex-* et in nōnnūllīs verbīs ut *grex*; sī phonologia vōcālem prōdūcī coēgerit, cūr nōn productae sunt eae vōcālēs? Scīlicet magnī interest ad qvantitātēs intellegendās, qvid ferant īnscrīptiōnēs, sed nōn omnēs apicēs neqve omnēs i longae referunt prōnūntiātiōnem. Interdum (sed rārius) vōcālēs in verbīs ut *sine* et *imperātor* et *dignus* accipiunt signum prōductiōnis qvamqvam correptae sunt; Allen, nisi fallor, cēnsuit adjūmentō ēlegantiam stilī esse. Nesciō (nōn ērudīta), an ūnus apex nōn minus certī afferat, qvam ut possīmus vōcālī prōductā ūtī. Haec est mea sententia; errāvīne alicubi? Rūrsus dīcam tē mē multō sapientiōrem esse, crēdam igitur rem sīc sē habēre. Post scrīptum: Cum magna fautrīx pelliculārum tuārum sim, laetor vērē, qvod tēcum possum dē prōnūntiātiōne Lātīnā disputāre. Sunt multae rēs, dē qvibus tē rogāre adhūc voluerim, hahae.

[@okj9060]

May I ask what religion you are

[@QuintusEuander]

Disputatione tua de vocalibus "i" et "u" audita iam "commentarium" de sono medio scribere volebam, cum vidi a te hanc disputationem in rete postitam esse. Quo gaudeo valde! Perge edere tales disputationes!

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Euge!

[@hglundahl]

I take it, this is your follow up to the one on lax vowels?

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Certainly, though I’d call them parallel topics.

[@hglundahl]

The reason I ask is, I would have taken this vowels as a probable counter example. So, I thought someone else might have asked you that same question and this is your response?

[@HCRAYERT.]

I don't know.

[@jakubolszewski8284]

And so every i or u before labial consonant is sonus medius?

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

If it’s unstressed, and like the other examples, it’s a likely candidate.

[@jakubolszewski8284]

@@polyMATHY_Luke So to be sure we must check some etymology?

[@joshuakalpakoff1073]

Hey Luke! Big fan of your channel. I have a question that's sort of unrelated to the video, but... I was wondering if you would ever do a video on Ancient Greek grammar, compared with Latin grammar - and then compare modern Greek with modern Italian (or Romanian). I tend to be very interested in grammar, and how languages develop. It can be interesting how a simple sentence like: The woman bought a basket at the market and took it home. Can change so much over time, and be so different, even between related languages. But it is also so interesting to see all the things that they have in common. I find it so interesting and cool to see how words develope in a language, and how grammar developes. Perhaps even a further comparison: Modern Greek and Tsakonian, And modern Italian and Romanian. Related languages that are still different from each other, having developed from their parent languages in different ways. Anyways, have a good day. Your videos are always interesting.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

That is a great idea; I’ve actually been working on this for a while. It may not be surprising to hear that, while some forms are quite similar between the ancient and modern language pairs, quite a lot is different too. So far my assessment is that the changes from Ancient Greek to Modern Greek are about the same (sometimes more) than those we see between Latin and Italian.

[@joshuakalpakoff1073]

It's also quite interesting to see how two languages that come from the same parent can differ so greatly. Tsakonian: gounaika, mati. Modern Greek: gynaika, mitera. Or how Romanian preserves the neuter gender, whereas Italian has lost it. I find all that kind of stuff really interesting.

[@joshuakalpakoff1073]

​@@polyMATHY_Luke like the difference between: Latin: homo (human) Italian: uomo. Ancient Greek: Aner (man) Modern Greek: Andras With the modern Greek word developing from the Ancient Greek Accusative form. It's interesting that this actually happens in several languages, where the Accusative developes into the main form of the word, and in some cases, nominative and Accusative forms become identical .

[@MulladeNegu]

Nunca imaginei que "surrupiar" vinha do latim.

[@hakonsoreide]

I must academically disagree. As someone natively speaking norwegian, a language that has [ʉ], so I would claim to have some authority in how it is correctly pronounced, I would say it seems a highly unlikely sound change to go from [u] to [ʉ] in these kinds of words since it makes the words _harder_ and not easier to pronounce than if the last two vowels remain the same. As we know, sound changes are highly unlikely to make something harder to pronounce, and the vowel combination [u]/[u] for the last two syllables of a word is already very close to being "optumum". In my view, the only plausible sound change, therefore, would be a weakening of the vowel towards a schwa, which of course is the most "medius" of all vowels, and it would be perceived to be in the middle between [i] and [u]. Certainly, it may have been a slightly elevated schwa, but a schwa nonetheless.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

The problem is that doesn't explain well the reflexes in Romance. That it shifted to /i/ before the end of antiquity is a virtual certainty, thus a schwa is less likely.

[@hakonsoreide]

@@polyMATHY_Luke But did it change to /i/ because it was pronounced /ʉ/, or because it was written "i"? 🤔Spelling can affect pronunciation in a literary language, Greek words having entered English via Latin spelling being full of examples of that. I still think schwa is still a more likely stepping stone towards [i] than [ʉ], as the words are easier to pronounce with both [ɘ] and [i] than they are with a properly pronounced [ʉ]. The thing is, if the middle vowel changed to [ʉ], it would also make sense for the final vowel to assimilate to it and also become [ʉ] for ease of pronounciation. Not so if it became more centralised in its unstressed position and became more like a schwa first before heading forward and upwards again. A sound transition in two steps doesn't have to take the shortest possible route to the known end point, but would normally go through the easiest-to-pronounce progression. Regardless of what actually happened, it's certainly an interesting sound change and more than one hypothesis can be plausible.

[@tiziocaio2631]

@@hakonsoreide What is "easier to pronounce" depends often on context. For an Italian voicing distinctions are easy, for a Chinese-only speaker they're hard. Distinctions of aspiration are the opposite. I would struggle immensely to distinguish French and Italian r due to my pronounciation quirk, but can easily pronounce and distinguish (at least in slow speech, I don't have a change to use it) the labiovelar fricative, the bilabial one and the bilabial aspirated stop (f phi and ph). Vowel lenght is easy for Finnish speakers, hard for Spanish. Frenchies struggle with stress and Italians with nasal vowels and so on and so on.

[@hakonsoreide]

@@tiziocaio2631 I am not talking about whether it's easy or hard to pronounce the [ʉ]. That does indeed depend on what your native language is, or how well you've practised foreign sounds if it isn't. My point is the combination of sounds is harder to say if you change two identical strong vowels (ie far from central tongue position [ɘ]) on either side of a single consonant to two strong but different vowels, especially two close together as they will then tend to assimilate. It is simply easier to pronounce two of the same vowel in succession on either side of a consonant cluster. It therefore is a common evolution of language sounds over time that a combination like [ʉmu], as a linguistic starting point, would turn into [umu] or [ʉmʉ], but not the other way around.

[@Planterobeets]

I was researching the origins of Do-Re-Mi, the English version goes Do Re Mi Fa So La Ti Do, La-Ti-Do means beat in Spanish so i looked at all the Romance Languages and they all translate Latido to different words all starting with B. So then i translated Latido to Latin and it spelled Beat, the exact same spelling and meaning as in English. Why is English not a Romance language when it has words spelled the same way and with the same meaning as Latin?

[@Muck-qy2oo]

In Danubius pro Rhenus!

[@macedonian_catholic_]

This vowel also exists in portuguese , and I wonder wether there is a connection to this

[@manfredneilmann4305]

Which vowel?

[@tiagorodrigues3730]

@@manfredneilmann4305 In European accents, particularly in Lisbon, non-tonic "e" is often pronounced as /ɨ/: "cidade feliz" /si.ˈða.ðɨ fɨ.ˈliʃ/

[@pawel198812]

The [ɨ] vowel is the most common pronunciation of inherited PRomance unstressed /e/ in European Portuguese. Please correct me if I'm wrong

[@hieratics]

Indeed, this vowel appears in European Portuguese, but is nowhere to be found in Brazil (to my knowledge)

[@troelspeterroland6998]

It would probably have to appear in the same places to support the assumption of a connection.

[@zeenohaquo7970]

Optuime.

[@ilghiz]

11:37 You pronounce artubus and artibus with a devoiced unaspirated [p]. I don't hear a voiced [b] in your pronunciation. And I heard [p] multiple times. I trust your pronunciation cuz you're extremely nerdy about it but as a nerd myself I'd like to know why I hear artu[p]us and arti[b]us rather than artu[b]us and arti[b]us 🤓

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Hi there, I always appreciate this kind of feedback. In both words the 'b' in definitely voiced, because when I do a voiceless unaspirated [p] I can heard a clear difference, and also feel the difference in my glottis, both internally through proprioception and externally with my fingers on my voice box. That doesn't mean the 'b' couldn't be articulated more distinctly; each phone has a number of possible realizations to still qualify as the approximate sound.

[@ilghiz]

​@@polyMATHY_Luke, I checked with two people. They hear [b]. I just asked them to repeat whatever they hear. There's something wrong with me then 🤔 Gratias tibi, amice 👍

[@ludwigvanbeethoven8164]

Proto europeans languages is very interesting.

[@highgroundproductions8590]

I think "Old latin" should be called "Early Latin" analogously to "Late Latin," because, well, all Latin is old!

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

That's fair

[@proteusaugustus]

👍🏻🍀✝️🇺🇲👊🏻

[@Sandra.Molchanova]

Awwwww so if I pronounce those words with a Russian accent, I would sound Republican Roman?! And who can say now that Fomenko was wrong and that all languages aren't actually cryptoRussian 🤣🤣🤣

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Haha. Well not entirely Russian; just the one vowel in certain environments

[@nimax97]

Optumam pelliculam! Multa excogitanda ac meditanda nobis protulisti, ut semper. Quid tractabis proxime? L pinguis? Illa digraphus vo~vu ut volt~vult, servos~servus? Apud vicipaediam nuper legebam, me mirante, "vo" pronuntiandam esse ut [wɔ]: "As one is pronounced in some English accents, but without the nasal sound: parvus [ˈpɐr.wɔs], vivunt [ˈwiː.wɔnt]. The spelling vu is post-classical (in order to become regular in spelling).". Cupidus sim audiendi, quid de his putes.

[@polyMATHY_Luke]

Quoad L "pinguis," quae vocātur, ea quae apud Classicōs Rōmānōs probāliter aliter erat atque ea quae in Vetere Latīnō (Old Latin, pre-Classical) vigēbat, quoniam nec Italī nec Dācorōmānī exitūs ejus quod Allen nōminat L pinguem dēmōnstrant. Probābilius est varietās eadem quae audītur hodiē in sermōne Italicō.

[@cooldogbearbutt3806]

You're Optumus!

[@rafalkaminski6389]

Polish y comes from pie. long u (ty 'thou'); btw, ive got to know that lacrima and lingua began with d- in a very old latin.