initial commit of ebook 7528HEADmain

4 files changed, 5139 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/old/7rlat10.txt b/old/7rlat10.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..975d61e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/7rlat10.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2570 @@
+Project Gutenberg's The Roman Pronunciation of Latin, by Frances E. Lord
+
+Copyright laws are changing all over the world. Be sure to check the
+copyright laws for your country before downloading or redistributing
+this or any other Project Gutenberg eBook.
+
+This header should be the first thing seen when viewing this Project
+Gutenberg file.  Please do not remove it.  Do not change or edit the
+header without written permission.
+
+Please read the "legal small print," and other information about the
+eBook and Project Gutenberg at the bottom of this file.  Included is
+important information about your specific rights and restrictions in
+how the file may be used.  You can also find out about how to make a
+donation to Project Gutenberg, and how to get involved.
+
+
+**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts**
+
+**eBooks Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971**
+
+*****These eBooks Were Prepared By Thousands of Volunteers!*****
+
+
+Title: The Roman Pronunciation of Latin
+
+Author: Frances E. Lord
+
+Release Date: February, 2005 [EBook #7528]
+[Yes, we are more than one year ahead of schedule]
+[This file was first posted on May 14, 2003]
+[Most recently updated on May 24, 2007]
+
+Edition: 10
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-Latin-1
+
+*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ROMAN PRONUNCIATION OF LATIN ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by David Starner, Ted Garvin
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team.
+
+
+
+
+THE ROMAN PRONUNCIATION OF LATIN WHY WE USE IT AND HOW TO USE IT BY
+FRANCES E. LORD PROFESSOR OF LATIN IN WELLESLEY COLLEGE BOSTON, U.S.A.
+
+INTRODUCTION
+
+The argument brought against the 'Roman pronunciation' of Latin is
+twofold: the impossibility of perfect theoretical knowledge, and the
+difficulty of practical attainment.
+
+If to know the main features of the classic pronunciation of Latin were
+impossible, then our obvious course would be to refuse the attempt; to
+regard the language as in reality dead, and to make no pretence of
+reading it. This is in fact what the English scholars generally do. But
+if we may know substantially the sounds of the tongue in which Cicero
+spoke and Horace sung, shall we give up the delights of the melody and
+the rhythm and content ourselves with the thought form? Poetry
+especially does not exist apart from sound; sense alone will not
+constitute it, nor even sense and form without sound.
+
+But if it is true that the task of practical acquisition is, if not
+impossible, extremely difficult, 'the work of a lifetime,' as the
+objectors say, do the results justify the expenditure of time and labor?
+
+The position of the English-speaking peoples is not the same in this as
+that of Europeans. Europeans have not the same necessity to urge them to
+the 'Roman pronunciation.' Their own languages represent the Latin more
+or less adequately, in vowel sounds, in accent, and even, to some
+extent, in quantity; so that with them, all is not lost if they
+translate the sounds into their own tongues; while with us, nothing is
+left--sound, accent, quantity, all is gone; none of these is reproduced,
+or even suggested, in English.
+
+We believe a great part of our difficulty, in this country, lies in the
+fact that so few of those who study and teach Latin really know what the
+'Roman pronunciation' is, or how to use it. Inquiries are constantly
+being made by teachers, Why is this so? What authority is there for
+this? What reason for that?
+
+In the hope of giving help to those who desire to know the Why and the
+How this little compendium is made; in the interest of
+time-and-labor-saving uniformity, and in the belief that what cannot be
+fully known or perfectly acquired does still not prevent our perceiving,
+and showing in some worthy manner and to some satisfactory degree, how,
+as well as what, the honey-tongued orators and divine poets of Rome
+spoke or sung.
+
+In the following pages free use has been made of the highest English
+authorities, of Oxford and Cambridge. Quotations will be found from
+Prof. H. A. J. Munro's pamphlet on "Pronunciation of Latin," and from
+Prof. A. J. Ellis' book on "Quantitative Pronunciation of Latin"; also
+from the pamphlet issued by the Cambridge (Eng.) Philological Society,
+on the "Pronunciation of Latin in the Augustan Period."
+
+In the present compendium the chief points of divergence from the
+general American understanding of the 'Roman' method are in respect of
+the diphthong AE and the consonantal U. In these cases the pronunciation
+herein recommended for the AE is that favored by Roby, Munro, and Ellis,
+and adopted by the Cambridge Philological Society; for the V, or U
+consonant, that advocated by Corssen, A. J. Ellis, and Robinson Ellis.
+
+PART I.
+
+WHY WE USE IT.
+
+In general, the greater part of our knowledge of the pronunciation of
+Latin comes from the Latin grammarians, whose authority varies greatly
+in value; or through incidental statements and expressions of the
+classic writers themselves; or from monumental inscriptions. Of these
+three, the first is inferior to the other two in quality, but they in
+turn are comparatively meagre in quantity.
+
+In the first place, we know (a most important piece of knowledge) that,
+as a rule, Latin was pronounced as written. This is evident from the
+fact, among others, that the same exceptions recur, and are mentioned
+over and over again, in the grammarians, and that so much is made of
+comparatively, and confessedly, insignificant points. Such, we may be
+sure, would not have been the case had exceptions been numerous. Then we
+have the authority of Quintilian--than whom is no higher. He speaks of
+the subtleties of the grammarians:
+
+[Quint. I. iv. 6.] Interiora velut sacri hujus adeuntibus apparebit
+multa rerum subtilitas, quae non modo acuere ingenia puerilia sed
+exercere altissimam quoque eruditionem ac scientiam possit.
+
+And says:
+
+[Id, ib. iv. 7.] An cujuslibet auris est exigere litterarum sonos?
+
+But after citing some of those idiosyncrasies which appear on the pages
+of all the grammarians, he finally sums up the matter in the following
+significant words:
+
+[Id. ib. vii. 30, 31.] Indicium autem suum grammaticus interponat his
+omnibus; nam hoc valere plurimum debet. Ego (note the _ego_) nisi quod
+consuetudo obtinuerit sic scribendum quidque judico, quomodo sonat. Hic
+enim est usus litterarum, ut custodiant voces et velut depositum reddant
+legentibus, itaque id exprimere debent quod dicturi sumus.
+
+This is still a characteristic of the Italian language, so that one may
+by books, getting the rules from the grammarians, learn to pronounce the
+language with a good degree of correctness.
+
+On this point Professor Munro says:
+
+"We see in the first volume of the Corpus Inscr. Latin. a map, as it
+were, of the language spread open before us, and feel sure that change
+of spelling meant systematical change of pronunciation: _coira, coera,
+cura; aiquos, aequos, aecus; queicumque, quicumque_, etc., etc."
+
+And again:
+
+"We know exactly how Cicero or Quintilian did or could spell; we know
+the syllable on which they placed the accent of almost every word; and
+in almost every case we already follow them in this. I have the
+conviction that in their best days philological people took vast pains
+to make the writing exactly reproduce the sounding; and that if
+Quintilian or Tacitus spelt a word differently from Cicero or Livy, he
+also spoke it so far differently."
+
+Three chief factors are essential to the Latin language, and each of
+these must be known with some good degree of certainty, if we would lay
+claim to an understanding of Roman pronunciation.
+
+These are:
+
+(1) Sounds of the letters (vowels, diphthongs, consonants);
+
+(2) Quantity;
+
+(3) Accent.
+
+
+SOUNDS OF THE LETTERS.
+
+VOWELS.
+
+The vowels are five: A, E, I, O, U.
+
+These when uttered alone are always long.
+
+[Pompei. _Comm. ad Donat._ Keil. v. V. p. 101 et al.] Vocales autem
+quinque sunt: A, E, I, O, U. Istae quinque, quando solae proferuntur,
+longae sunt semper: quando solas litteras dicis, longae sunt. A sola
+longa est; E sola longa est.
+
+A is uttered with the mouth widely opened, the tongue suspended and not
+touching the teeth:
+
+[Ars Gram. Mar. Vict. de orthographia et de metrica ratione, I. vi. 6.]
+A littera rictu patulo, suspensa neque impressa dentibus lingua,
+enuntiatur.
+
+E is uttered with the mouth less widely open, and the lips drawn back
+and inward:
+
+[Id. ib. vi. 7.] E quae sequitur, de represso modice rictu oris,
+reductisque introrsum labiis, effertur.
+
+I will voice itself with the mouth half closed and the teeth gently
+pressed by the tongue:
+
+[Id. ib. vi. 8.] I semicluso ore, impressisque sensim lingua dentibus,
+vocem dabit.
+
+O (long) will give the "tragic sound" through rounded opening, with lips
+protruded, the tongue pendulous in the roof of the mouth:
+
+[Id. ib. vi. 9.] O longum autem, protrusis labiis rictu tereti, lingua
+arcu oris pendula, sonum tragicum dabit.
+
+U is uttered with the lips protruding and approaching each other, like
+the Greek ou:
+
+[Id. ib. vi. 10.] U litteram quotiens enuntiamus, productis et
+coeuntibus labris efferemus... quam nisi per ou conjunctam Graeci
+scribere ac pronuntiare non possunt.
+
+Of these five vowels the grammarians say that three (A, I, U) do not
+change their quality with their quantity:
+
+[Pompei. _Comm. ad Donat._ Keil. v. V. p. 101.] De istis quinque
+litteris tres sunt, quae sive breves sive longae ejusdemmodi sunt, A, I,
+U: similiter habent sive longae sive breves.
+
+But two (E, O) change their quality:
+
+[Id. ib.] O vero et E non sonant breves. E aliter longa aliter brevis
+sonat. Dicit ita Terentianus (hoc dixit) 'Quotienscumque E longam
+volumus proferri, vicina sit ad I (i with macron to show length)
+litteram.' Ipse sonus sic debet sonare, quomodo sonat I (i without
+macron to show short) littera. Quando dicis _evitat_, vicina debet esse,
+sic pressa, sic angusta, ut vicina sit ad I litteram. Quando vis dicere
+brevem e simpliciter sonat. O longa sit an brevis. Si longa est, debet
+sonus ipse intra palatum sonare, ut si dices _orator_, quasi intra
+sonat, intra palatum. Si brevis est debet primis labris sonare, quasi
+extremis labris, ut puta sic dices _obit_. Habes istam regulam expressam
+in Terentiano. Quando vis exprimere quia brevis est, primis labris
+sonat; quando exprimis longam, intra palatum sonat.
+
+[Ars Gram. Mar. Vict. de Orthog. et de Metr. Rat., I. vi. 9.] O qui
+correptum enuntiat, nec magno hiatu labra reserabit, et retrorsum actam
+linguam tenebit.
+
+It would thus seem that the long E of the Latin in its prolongation
+draws into the I sound, somewhat as if I were subjoined, as in the
+English _vein_ or Italian _fedele._
+
+The grammarians speak of the obscure sound of I and U, short and
+unaccented in the middle of a word; so that in a number of words I and U
+were written indifferently, even by classic writers, as _optimus_ or
+_optumus, maximus_ or _maxumus_. This is but a simple and natural thing.
+The same obscurity occurs often in English, as, for instance, in words
+ending in _able_ or _ible_. How easy, for instance, to confuse the sound
+and spelling in such words as _detestable_ and _digestible_.
+
+[Serg. Explan. Art. Donat. Keil. v. II. p. 475.] Hae etiam duae I et U
+... interdum expressum suum sonum non habent: I, ut _vir_; U, ut
+_optumus_. Non enim possumus dicere _vir_ producta I, nec _optumus_
+producta U; unde etiam mediae dicuntur. Et hoc in commune patiuntur
+inter se, et bene dixit Donatus has litteras in quibusdam dictionibus
+expressum suum sonum non habere. Hae etiam mediae dicuntur, quia
+quibusdam dictionibus expressum sonum non habent,... ut _maxume_ pro
+_maxime_.... In quibusdam nominibus non certum exprimunt sonum; I, ut
+_vir_ modo I (with 	macron) opprimitur; U ut _optumus_ modo U perdit
+sonum.
+
+Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 465.] Cur per VI scribitur (virum)? Quia omnia nomina a
+VI syllaba incipientia per VI scribuntur exceptis _bitumine_ et _bile_,
+quando _fel_ significat, et illis quae a _bis_ adverbio componuntur, ut
+_biceps, bipatens, bivium_. Cur sonum videtur habere in hac dictione I
+vocalis U litterae Graecae? Quia omnis dictio a VI syllaba brevi
+incipiens, D vel T vel M vel R vel X sequentibus, hoc sono pronuntiatur,
+ut _video, videbam, videbo_: quia in his temporibus VI corripitur,
+mutavit sonum in U: in praeterito autem perfecto, et in aliis in quibus
+producitur, naturalem servavit sonum, ut _vidi, videram, vidissem,
+videro_. Similiter _vitium_ mutat sonum, quia corripitur; _vita_ autem
+non mutat, quia producitur. Similiter _vim_ mutat quia corripitur,
+_vimen_ autem non mutat quia producitur. Similiter _vir_ et _virgo_
+mutant, quia corripiuntur: _virus_ autem et _vires_ non mutant, quia
+producuntur. _Vix_ mutant, quia corripitur: _vixi_ non mutant, quia
+producitur. Hoc idem plerique solent etiam in illis dictionibus facere,
+in quibus a FI brevi incipiunt syllabae sequentibus supra dictis
+consonantibus, ut _fides, perfidus, confiteor, infimus, firmus_. Sunt
+autem qui non adeo hoc observant, cum de VI nemo fere dubitat.
+
+From this it would seem that in the positions above mentioned VI short--
+and with some speakers FI short--had an obscure, somewhat thickened,
+sound, not unlike that heard in the English words _virgin, firm_, a not
+unnatural obscuration. As Donatus says of it:
+
+[Keil. v. IV. p. 367.] Pingue nescio quid pro naturali sono usurpamus.
+
+Sometimes, apparently, this tendency ran into excess, and the long I was
+also obscured; while sometimes the short I was pronounced too
+distinctly. This vice is commented on by the grammarians, under the name
+_iotacism_:
+
+[Pompei. _Comm. ad Donat_. Keil. v. V. p. 394.] _Iotacismum_ dicunt
+vitium quod per I litteram vel pinguius vel exilius prolatam fit. Galli
+pinguius hanc utuntur, ut cum dicunt _ite_, non expresse ipsam
+proferentes, sed inter E et I pinguiorem sonum nescio quem ponentes.
+Graeci exilius hanc proferunt, adeo expressioni ejus tenui studentes, ut
+si dicant _jus_, aliquantulum de priori littera sic proferant, ut videas
+dissyllabam esse factam. Romanae linguae in hoc erit moderatio, ut
+exilis ejus sonus sit, ubi ab ea verbum incipit, ut _ite_, aut pinguior,
+ubi in ea desinit verbum, ut _habui_, _tenui_; medium quendam sonum
+inter E et I habet, ubi in medio sermone est, ut _hominem_. Mihi tamen
+videtur, quando producta est, plenior vel acutior esse; quando autem
+brevis est medium sonum exhibere debet, sicut eadem exempla quae posita
+sunt possunt declarare.
+
+The grammarians also note the peculiar relation of U to Q, as in the
+following passage:
+
+[Serg. Explan. Art. Donat. Keil. v. IV. p. 475.] U vero hoc accidit
+proprium,	ut interdum nec vocalis nec consonans sit, hoc est ut non sit
+littera, cum inter Q et aliquam vocalem ponitur. Nam consonans non
+potest esse, quia ante se habet alteram consonantem, id est Q; vocalis
+esse non potest, quia sequitur illam vocalis, ut _quare, quomodo_.
+
+DIPHTHONGS.
+
+In Marius Victorinus we find diphthongs thus defined:
+
+[Mar. Vict. Gaisford, I. v. 54.] Duae inter se vocales jugatae ac sub
+unius vocis enuntiatione prolatae syllabam faciunt natura longam, quam
+Graeci _diphthongon_ vocant, veluti geminae vocis unum sonum, ut AE, OE,
+AU.
+
+And more fully in the following paragraph:
+
+[Mar. Vict. Gaisford, I. v. 6.] Sunt longae naturaliter syllabae, cum
+duae vocales junguntur, quas syllabas Graeci _diphthongos_ vocant; ut
+AE, OE, AU, EU, EI: nam illae diphthongi non sunt quae fiunt per vocales
+loco consonantium positas; ut IA, IE, II, IO, IU, VA, VE, VI, VO, VU.
+
+Of these diphthongs EU occurs,--except in Greek words,--only in _heus,
+heu, eheu_; in _seu, ceu, neu_. In _neuter_ and _neutiquam_ the E is
+probably elided.
+
+Diphthongs ending in I, viz., EI, OI, UI, occur only in a few
+interjections and in cases of contraction.
+
+While in pronouncing the diphthong the sound of both vowels was to some
+extent preserved, there are many indications that (in accordance with
+the custom of making a vowel before another vowel short) the first vowel
+of the diphthong was hastened over and the second received the stress.
+As in modern Greek we find all diphthongs that end in _iota_ pronounced
+as simple I, so in Latin there are numerous instances, before and during
+the classic period, of the use of E for AE or OE, and it is to be noted
+that in the latest spelling E generally prevails.
+
+Munro says:
+
+"In Lucilius's time the rustics said _Cecilius pretor_ for _Caecilius
+praetor_; in two Samothracian inscriptions older than B.C. 100 (the
+sound of AI by that time verging to an open E), we find  _muste piei_
+and _muste_: in similar inscriptions [Greek: transliterated]*_mystai_
+_piei_, and _mystae_: _Paeligni_ is reproduced in Strabo by
+[Greek: transliterated]_Pelignoi_: Cicero, Virgil, Festus, and Servius
+all alike give _caestos_ for [Greek: transliterated]_kestos_: by the
+first century, perhaps sooner, E was very frequently put for AE in words
+like _taeter_: we often find _teter_, _erumna_, _mestus_, _presto_ and
+the like: soon inscriptions and MSS. began pertinaciously to offer AE
+for E*: _praetum_, _praeces_, _quaerella_, _aegestas_ and the like, the
+AE representing a short and very open E: sometimes it stands for a long
+E, as often in _plaenus_, the liquid before and after making perhaps the
+E more open ([Greek: transliteration]_skaenae_ is always _scaena_): and
+it is from this form _plaenus_ that in Italian, contrary to the usual
+law of long Latin E, we have _pieno_ with open E. With such pedigree
+then, and with the genuine Latin AE _always_ represented in Italian by
+open E, can we hesitate to pronounce the AE with this open E sound?"
+
+The argument sometimes used, for pronouncing AE like AI, that in the
+poets we occasionally find AI in the genitive singular of the first
+declension, appears to have little weight in view of the following
+explanation:
+
+[Mar. Vict. de Orthog. et de Metr. Rat., I. iii. 38.] AE Syllabam quidam
+more Graecorum per AI scribunt, nec illud quidem custodient, quia omnes
+fere, qui de orthographia aliquid scriptum reliquerunt, praecipiunt,
+nomina femina casu nominativo A finita, numero plurali in AE exire, ut
+_Aeliae_: eadem per A et I scripta numerum singularem ostendere, ut
+hujus _Aeliai_: inducti a poetis, qui _pictai vestis_ scripserunt: et
+quia Graeci per I potissimum hanc syllabam scribunt propter exilitatem
+litterae, [Greek: transliteration]_ae_ autem propter naturalem
+productionem jungere vocali alteri non possunt: _iota_ vero, quae est
+brevis eademque longa, aptior ad hanc structuram visa est: quam
+potestatem apud nos habet et I, quae est longa et brevis. Vos igitur
+sine controversia ambiguitatis, et pluralem nominativum, et singularem
+genitivum per AE scribite: nam qui non potest dignoscere supra
+scriptarum vocum numeros et casum, valde est hebes.
+
+Of OE Munro says:
+
+"When hateful barbarisms like _coelum_, _coena_, _moestus_, are
+eliminated, OE occurs very rarely in Latin: _coepi_, _poena_, _moenia_,
+_coetus_, _proelia_, besides archaisms _coera_, _moerus_, etc., where
+OE, coming from OI, passed into U. If we must have a simple sound, I
+should take the open E sound which I have given to AE: but I should
+prefer one like the German Oe. Their rarity, however, makes the sound of
+OE, EU, UI, of less importance."
+
+Of AU Munro says:
+
+"Here, too, AU has a curious analogy with AE: The Latin AU becomes in
+Italian open O: _oro ode_: I would pronounce thus in Latin: _plostrum_,
+_Clodius_, _corus_. Perhaps, too, the fact that _gloria_, _vittoria_ and
+the common termination--_orio_, have in Italian the open O, might show
+that the corresponding *O in Latin was open by coming between two
+liquids, or before one: compare _plenus_ above." "I should prefer," he
+says, (to represent the Latin AU,) "the Italian AU, which gives more of
+the U than our _owl_, _cow_."
+
+CONSONANTS.
+
+B has, in general, the same sound as in English
+
+[Mar. Vict. Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] E quibus B et P litterae ... dispari
+inter se oris officio exprimuntur. Nam prima exploso e mediis labiis
+sono, sequens compresso ore velut introrsum attracto vocis ictu
+explicatur.
+
+B before S or T is sharpened to P: thus _urbs_ is pronounced _urps_;
+_obtinuit_, _optinuit_. Some words, indeed, are written either way; as
+_obses_, or _opses_; _obsonium_, or _opsonium_; _obtingo_, or _optingo_;
+and Quintilian says it is a question whether the change should be
+indicated in writing or not:
+
+[Quint. I. vii. 7.] Quaeri solet, in scribendo praepositiones, sonum
+quem junctae efficiunt an quem separatae, observare conveniat: ut cum
+dico _obtinuit_, secundam enim B litteram ratio poscit, aures magis
+audiunt P.
+
+This change, however, is both so slight and so natural that attention
+need scarcely be called to it. Indeed if quantity is properly observed,
+one can hardly go wrong. If, for instance, you attempt, in saying
+_obtinuit_, to give its normal sound to B, you can scarcely avoid making
+a false quantity (the first syllable too long), while if you observe the
+quantity (first syllable short) your B will change itself to P.
+
+C appears to have but one sound, the hard, as in _sceptic_:
+
+[Mar. vict. Keil, v. VI. p. 32.] C etiam et ... G sono proximae, oris
+molimine nisuque dissentiunt. Nam C reducta introrsum lingua hinc atque
+hinc molares urgens haerentem intra os sonum vocis excludit: G vim
+prioris pari linguae habitu palato suggerens lenius reddit.
+
+Not only do we find no hint in the grammarians of any sound akin to the
+soft C in English, as in _sceptre_, but they all speak of C and K and Q
+as identical, or substantially so, in sound; and Quintilian expressly
+states that the sound of C is always the same. Speaking of K as
+superfluous, he says:
+
+[Quint, I. vii. io.] Nam K quidem in nullis verbis utendum puto, nisi
+quae significat, etiam ut sola ponatur. Hoc eo non omisi, quod quidam
+earn quotiens A sequatur necessariam credunt, cum sit C littera, quae ad
+omnes vocales vim suam perferat.
+
+And Priscian declares:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 13.] Quamvis in varia figura et vario nomine sint k et
+q et c, tamen quia unam vim habent tarn in metre quam in sono, pro una
+littera accipi debent.
+
+Without the best of evidence we should hardly believe that words written
+indifferently with ae or e after C would be so differently pronounced by
+those using the diphthong and those using, the simple vowel, that, to
+take the instance already given, in the time of Lucilius, the rustic
+said _Sesilius_ for _Kaekilius_. Nor does it seem probable that in
+different cases the same word would vary so greatly, or that in the
+numerous compounds where after c the a weakens to i the sound of the c
+was also changed from k to s, as "kapio," "insipio"; "kado" "insido."
+
+Quintilian, noting the changes of fashion in the sounding of the h,
+enumerates, among other instances of excessive use of the aspirate, the
+words _choronae_ (for _coronae_), _chenturiones_ (for _centuriones_),
+_praechones_ (for _praecones_), as if the three words were alike in
+their initial sound.
+
+Alluding to inscriptions (first volume), where we have _pulcher_ and
+_pulcer_, _Gracchis_ and _Grams_, Mr. Munro says: "I do not well see how
+the aspirate could have been attached to the c, if c had not a k sound,
+or how in this case C before e or i could have differed from c before a,
+o, u."
+
+Professor Munro also cites an inscription (844 of the "Corpus Inscr.,"
+vol. I.) bearing on the case in another way. In this inscription we have
+the word _dekembres_. "This," says Mr. Munro, "is one of nearly two
+hundred short, plebeian, often half-barbarous, very old inscriptions on
+a collection of ollae. The k before e, or any letter except a, is
+solecistic, just as in no. 831 is the c, instead of k, for calendas.
+From this I would infer that, as in the latter the writer saw no
+difference between C and K, so to the writer of the former K was the
+same as C before E."
+
+Again he says:
+
+"And finally, what is to me most convincing of all, I do not well
+understand how in a people of grammarians, when for seven hundred years,
+from Ennius to Priscian, the most distinguished writers were also the
+most minute philologers, not one, so far as we know, should have hinted
+at any difference, if such existed."
+
+As to the peculiar effect of C final in certain particles to "lengthen"
+the vowel before it, this C is doubtless the remnant of the intensive
+enclitic CE, and the so-called 'length' is not in the vowel, but in the
+more forcible utterance of the C. It is true that Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 34.] Notandum, quod ante hanc solam mutam finalem
+inveniuntur longae vocales, ut _hoc_, _hac_, _sic_, _hic_ adverbium.
+
+And Probus speaks of C as often prolonging the vowel before it. But
+Victorinus, more philosophically, attributes the length to the "double"
+sound of the consonant:
+
+[Mar. Vict. I. v. 46.] Consideranda ergo est in his duntaxat
+pronominibus natura C litterae, quae crassum quodammodo et quasi geminum
+sonum reddat, _hic_ et _hoc_.
+
+And he adds that you do not get that more emphatic sound in, for
+instance, the conjunction _nec_.
+
+Si autem _nec_ conjunctionem aspiciamus, licet eadem littera finitam,
+diversum tamen sonabit.
+
+And again:
+
+Ut dixi, in pronominibus C littera sonum efficit crassiorem.
+
+Pompeius, commenting upon certain vices of speech, says that some
+persons bring out the final C in certain words too heavily, pronouncing
+_sic ludit_ as _sic cludit_; while others, on the contrary, touch it so
+lightly that when the following word begins with C you hear but a single
+C:
+
+[Keil. v. V. p. 394.] Item litteram C quidam in quibusdam dictionibus
+non latine ecferunt, sed ita crasse, ut non discernas quid dicant: ut
+puta siquis dicat _sic ludit_, ita hoc loquitur ut putes eum in secunda
+parte orationis _cludere_ dixisse, non _ludere_: et item si contra dicat
+illud contrarium putabis. Alii contra ita subtiliter hoc ecferunt, ut
+cum duo C habeant, desinentis prioris partis orationis et incipientis
+alterius, sic loquantur quasi uno C utrumque explicent, ut dicunt multi
+_sic custodit_.
+
+D, in general, is pronounced as in English, except that the tongue
+should touch the teeth rather than the palate.
+
+[Pompei. _Comm. ad Donat_. Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] D autem et T quibus, ut
+ita dixerim, vocis vicinitas quaedam est, linguae sublatione ac
+positione distinguuntur. Nam cum summos atque imos conjunctim dentes
+suprema sui parte pulsaverit D litteram exprimit. Quotiens autem
+sublimata partem, qua superis dentibus est origo, contigerit T sonare
+vocis explicabit.
+
+But when certain words in common use ending in D were followed by words
+beginning with a consonant, the sound of the D was sharpened to T; and
+indeed the word was often, especially by the earlier writers, written
+with T, as, for instance, _set_, _haut_, _aput_:
+
+[Mar. Vict. I. iii. 50.] D tamen litteram conservat si sequens verbum
+incipiat a vocali; ut _haud aliter muros_; et _haud equidem_. At cum
+verbum a consonante incipit, D perdit, ut 	_haut dudum_, et _haut
+multum_, et _haut placitura refert_, et inducit T.
+
+F is pronounced as in English except that it should be brought out more
+forcibly, with more breath.
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] F litteram imum labium superis imprimentibus
+dentibus, reflexa ad palati fastigium lingua, leni spiramine proferemus.
+
+Marius Victorinus says that F was used in Latin words as PH in foreign.
+
+Diomedes (of the fourth century) says the same:
+
+[Diom. Keil. v. I. p. 427.] Id hoc scire debemus quod F littera tum
+scribitur cum Latina dictio scribitur, ut _felix_. Nam si peregrina
+fuerit, P et H scribimus, ut _Phoebus_, _Phaethon_.
+
+And Priscian makes a similar statement:
+
+[Prise. Keil. v. I. p. 35.] F multis modis muta magis ostenditur, cum
+pro P et aspiratione, quae similiter muta est, accipitur.
+
+From the following words of Quintilian we may judge the breathing to
+have been quite pronounced:
+
+[Quint. XII. x. 29.] Nam et illa quae est sexta nostrarum, paene non
+humana voce, vel omnino non voce, potius inter discrimina dentium
+efflanda est, quae etiam cum vocalem proxima accipit quassa quodammodo,
+utique quotiens aliquam consonantem frangit, ut in hoc ipso _frangit_,
+multo fit horridior.
+
+G, no less than C, appears to have had but one sound, the hard; as in
+the English word _get_.
+
+[Mar. Vict. Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] C etiam et G, ut supra scriptae, sono
+proximae, oris molimine nisuque dissentiunt. Nam C reducta introrsum
+lingua, hinc atque hinc molares urgens, haerentem intra os sonum vocis
+excludit: G vim prioris, pari linguae habitu palato suggerens, lenius
+reddit.
+
+Diomedes speaks of G as a new consonant, whose place had earlier been
+filled by C:
+
+[Keil. v. I. p. 423.] G nova est consonans, in cujus locum C solebat
+adponi, sicut hodieque cum Gaium notamus Caesarem, scribimus C. C.,
+ideoque etiam post B litteram, id est tertio loco, digesta est, ut apud
+Graecos [Greek: transliterated] _g_ posita reperitur in eo loco.
+
+Victorinus thus refers to the old custom still in use of writing C and
+CN, as initials, in certain names, even where the names were pronounced
+as with G.
+
+[Mar. Vict. I. iii. 98.] C autem et nomen habuisse G et usum
+praestitisse, quod nunc _Caius_ per C, et _Cneius_ per CN, quamvis
+utrimque syllabae sonus G exprimat, scribuntur.
+
+H has the same sound as in English. The grammarians never regarded it as
+a consonant,--at least in more than name,--but merely as representing
+the rough breathing of the Greeks.
+
+Victorinus thus speaks of its nature:
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] H quoque inter litteras obviam grammatici
+tradiderunt, eamque adspirationis notam cunctis vocalibus praefici; ipsi
+autem consonantes tantum quattuor praeponi, quotiens graecis nominibus
+latina forma est, persuaserunt, id est C, P, R, T; ut _chori_,
+_Phyllis_, _rhombos_, _thymos_; quae profundo spiritu, anhelis faucibus,
+exploso ore, fundetur.
+
+By the best authorities H was looked upon as a mere mark of aspiration.
+Victorinus says that Nigidius Figulus so regarded it:
+
+[Mar. Vict. I. iv. 5.] Idem (N. F.) H non esse litteram, sed notam
+adspirationis tradidit.
+
+There appears to have been the same difference of opinion and usage
+among the Romans as with us in the matter of sounding the H.
+
+Quintilian says that the fashion changed with the age:
+
+[Quint. I. v. 19,20,21.] Cujus quidem ratio mutata cum temporibus est
+saepius. Parcissime ea veteres usi etiam in vocalibus, cum _oedus
+vicos_que dicebant, diu deinde servatum ne consonantibus aspirarent, ut
+in _Graecis_ et in _triumpis_; erupit brevi tempore nimius usus, ut
+_choronae_, _chenturiones_, _praechones_, adhuc quibusdam
+inscriptionibus maneant, qua de re Catulli nobile epigramma est. Inde
+durat ad nos usque _vehementer_, et 	_comprehendere_, et _mihi_, nam
+_mehe_ quoque pro me apud antiques tragoediarum praecipue scriptores in
+veteribus libris invenimus.
+
+In the epigram above referred to Catullus thus satirizes the excessive
+use of the aspirate:
+
+
+[Catullus lxxxiv.]
+
+Chommoda dicebat, si quando commoda vellet Dicere, et hinsidias Arrius
+insidias: Et tum mirifice sperabat se esse locutum, Cum quantum poterat
+dixerat hinsidias. Credo sic mater, sic Liber avunculus ejus, Sic
+maternus avus dixerat, atque avia. Hoc misso in Syriam requierunt
+omnibus aures; Audibant eadem haec leniter et leviter. Nec sibi post
+ilia metuebant talia verba, Cum subito adfertur nuntius horribilis,
+Ionios fluctus postquam illuc Arrius isset Jam non Ionios esse, sed
+Hionios.
+
+
+On the other hand Quintilian seems disposed to smile at the excess of
+'culture' which drops its H's, to class this with other affected
+'niceties' of speech, and to regard the whole matter as of slight
+importance:
+
+[Quint. I. vi. 21, 22.] Multum enim litteratus, qui sine aspiratione et
+producta secunda syllaba salutarit (_avere_ est enim), et _calefacere_
+dixerit potius quam quod dicimus, et _conservavisse_; his adjiciat
+_face_ et _dice_ et similia. Recta est haec via, quis negat? sed adjacet
+mollior et magis trita.
+
+Cicero confesses that he himself changed his practice in regard to the
+aspirate. He had been accustomed to sound it only with vowels, and to
+follow the fathers, who never used it with a consonant; but at length,
+yielding to the importunity of his ear, he conceded the right of usage
+to the people, and 'kept his learning to himself.'
+
+[Cic. Or. XLVIII. 160.] Quin ego ipse, cum scirem ita majores locutos
+esse ut nusquam nisi in vocali aspiratione uterentur, loquebar sic, ut
+_pulcros_, _cetegus_, _triumpos_, _Kartaginem_, dicerem; aliquando,
+idque sero, convicio aurium cum extorta mihi veritas, usum loquendi
+populo concessi, scientiam mihi reservavi.
+
+Gellius speaks of the ancients as having employed the H merely to add a
+certain force and life to the word, in imitation of the Attic tongue,
+and enumerates some of these words. Thus, he says, they said
+_lachrymas_; thus, _sepulchrum_, _aheneum_, _vehement_, _inchoare_,
+_helvari_, _hallucinari_, _honera_, _honustum_.
+
+[Gellius II. iii.] In his enim verbis omnibus litterae, seu spiritus
+istius nulla ratio visa est, nisi ut firmitas et vigor vocis, quasi
+quibusdam nervis additis, intenderetur.
+
+And he tells an interesting anecdote about a manuscript of Vergil:
+
+Sed quoniam _aheni_ quoque exemplo usi sumus, venit nobis in memoriam,
+fidum optatumque, multi nominis Romae, grammaticum ostendisse mihi
+librum Aeneidos secundum mirandae vetustatis, emptum in Sigillariis XX.
+aureis, quem ipsius Vergilii fuisse credebat; in quo duo isti versus cum
+ita scripti forent:
+
+
+"Vestibulum ante ipsum, primoque in limine, Pyrrhus: Exultat telis, et
+luce coruscus aena."
+
+Additam supra vidimus H litteram, et _ahera_ factum. Sic in illo quoque
+Vergilii versu in optimis libris scriptum invenimus:
+
+"Aut foliis undam tepidi dispumat aheni."
+
+I consonant has the sound of I in the English word _onion_. The
+grammarians all express themselves in nearly the same terms as to its
+character:
+
+[Serg. Explan. in Art. Donat. Keil. v. IV. p. 520.] I et U varias habent
+potestates: nam sunt aliquando vocales, aliquando consonantes, aliquando
+mediae, aliquando nihil, aliquando digammae, aliquando duplices. Vocales
+sunt quando aut singulae positae syllabam faciunt aut aliis
+consonantibus sociantur, ut _Iris_ et _unus_ et _Isis_ et _urna_.
+Consonantes autem sunt, cum aliis vocalibus in una syllaba praeponuntur,
+aut cum ipsae inter se in una syllaba conjunguntur. Nisi enim et prior
+sit et in una syllaba secum habeat conjunctam vocalem, non erit
+consonans I vel U. Nam _Iulhis_ et _Iarbas_ cum dicis, I consonans non
+est, licet praecedat, quia in una syllaba secum non habet conjunctam
+vocalem, sed in altera consequentem.
+
+The grammarians speak of I consonant as different in sound and effect
+from the vowel I; and, as they do not say how it differs, we naturally
+infer the variation to be that which follows in the nature of things
+from its position and office, as in the kindred Romance languages.
+
+Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 13.] Sic I et U, quamvis unum nomen et unam habeant
+figuram tam vocales quam consonantes, tamen, quia diversum sonum et
+diversam vim habent in metris et in 	pronuntiatione syllabarum, non sunt
+in eisdem meo judicio elementis accipiendae, quamvis et Censorino,
+doctissimo artis grammaticae, idem placuit.
+
+It would seem to be by reason of this twofold nature (vowel and
+consonant) that I has its 'lengthening' power. Probus explains the
+matter thus:
+
+[Keil. v. IV. p. 220.] Praeterea vim naturamque I litterae vocalis
+plenissime debemus cognoscere, quod duarum interdum loco consonantium
+ponatur. Hanc enim ex suo numero vocales duplicem litteram mittunt, ut
+cetera elementa litterarum singulas duplices mittunt, de quibus suo
+disputavimus loco. Illa ergo ratione I 	littera duplicem sonum designat,
+una quamvis figura sit, si 	undique fuerit cincta vocalibus, ut
+_acerrimus Aiax_, et
+
+
+"Aio te, Eacida, Romanes vincere posse."
+
+
+Again in the commentaries on Donatus we find:
+
+[Keil. v. IV. p. 421.] Plane sciendum est quod I inter duas 	posita
+vocales in una parte orationis pro duabus est 	consonantibus, ut
+_Troia_.
+
+Priscian tells us that earlier it was, as we know, the custom to write
+two I's:
+
+[Keil. v. III. p. 467.] Antiqui solebant duas II scribere, et 	alteram
+priori subjungere, alteram praeponere sequenti, ut 	_Troiia_, _Maiia_,
+_Aiiax_.
+
+And Quintilian says:
+
+[Quint. I. iv. 11.] Sciat etiam Ciceroni placuisse _aiio Maiiam_ 	que
+geminata I scribere.
+
+This doubling of the sound of I, natural, even unavoidable, between
+vowels, gives us the consonant effect (as vowel, uniting with the
+preceding, as consonant, introducing the following, vowel).
+
+K has the same sound as in English.
+
+The grammarians generally agree that K is a superfluous, or at least
+unnecessary, letter, its place being filled by C. Diomedes says:
+
+[Keil. v. I. pp. 423, 424.] Ex his quibusdam supervacuae videntur K et
+Q, quod C littera harum locum possit implere.
+
+And again:
+
+K consonans muta supervacua, qua utimur quando A correpta sequitur, ut
+_Kalendae_, _caput_, _calumniae_.
+
+Its only use is as an initial and sign of certain words, and it is
+followed by short A only.
+
+Victorinus says:
+
+[I. iii. 23.] K autem dicitur monophonos, quia nulli vocali 	jungitur
+nisi soli A brevi: et hoc ita ut ab ea pars orationis 	incipit, aliter
+autem non recte scribitur.
+
+Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 36.] K supervacua est, ut supra diximus: quae quamvis
+scribetur nullam aliam vim habet quam C.
+
+And Quintilian speaks of it as a mere sign, but says some think it
+should be used when A follows, as initial:
+
+[Quint. I. iv. 9.] Et K, quae et ipsa quorundam nominum nota est.
+
+And:
+
+[Quint. I. vii. 10.] Nam K quidem in nullis verbis utendum puto nisi
+quae significat etiam ut sola ponatur. Hoc eo non omisi quod quidam eam
+quotiens A sequatur necessariam credunt, cum sit C littera, quae ad
+omnes vocales vim suam perferat.
+
+This use of K, as an initial, and in certain words, was regarded
+somewhat in the light of a literary 'fancy.' Priscian says of it:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 12.] Et K quidem penitus supervacua est; nulla enim
+videtur ratio cur A sequente haec scribi debeat: _Carthago_ enim et
+_caput_ sive per C sive per K scribantur nullam faciunt 	nec in sono nec
+in potestate ejusdem consonantis differentiam.
+
+L is pronounced as in English, only more distinctly and with the tongue
+more nearly approaching the teeth. The sound is thus given by
+Victorinus:
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] Sequetur L, quae validum nescio quid partem palati
+qua primordium dentibus superis est lingua trudente, 	diducto ore
+personabit.
+
+But it varies according to its position in the force and distinctness
+with which it is uttered. Pliny and others recognize three degrees of
+force:
+
+Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 29.] L triplicem, ut Plinius videtur, sonum 	habet:
+exilem, quando geminatur secundo loco posita, ut _ille_, 	_Metellus_;
+plenum, quando finit nomina vel syllabas, et quando 	aliquam habet ante
+se in eadem syllaba consonantem, ut _sol_, 	_silva_, _flavus_, _clarus_;
+medium in aliis, ut _lectum_, 	_lectus_.
+
+Pompeius, in his commentaries on Donatus, makes nearly the same
+statement, when treating of '_labdacism_':
+
+[Keil. v. V. p. 394.] _Labdacismum_ vitium in eo esse dicunt quod eadem
+littera vel subtilius, a quibusdam, vel pinguius, ecfertur. Et re vera
+alterutrum vitium quibusdam gentibus est. Nam ecce Graeci subtiliter
+hunc sonum ecferunt. Ubi enim dicunt _ille mihi dixit_ sic sonat duae
+_ll_ primae syllabae quasi per unum _l_ 	sermo ipse consistet. Contra
+alii sic pronuntiant _ille meum 	comitatus iter_, et _illum ego per
+flammas eripui_ ut aliquid 	illic soni etiam consonantis ammiscere
+videantur, quod 	pinguissimae prolationis est. Romana lingua
+emendationem habet in 	hoc quoque distinctione. Nam alicubi pinguius,
+alicubi debet 	exilius, proferri: pinguius cum vel _b_ sequitur, ut in
+_albo_; 	vel _c_, ut in _pulchro_; vel _f_, ut in _adelfis_; vel _g_, ut
+in _alga_; vel _m_, ut in _pulmone_; vel _p_, ut in _scalpro_: 	exilius
+autem proferenda est ubicumque ab ea verbum incipit; ut 	in _lepore_,
+_lana_, _lupo_; vel ubi in eodem verbo et prior syllaba in hac finitur,
+et sequens ab ea incipit, ut _ille_ et 	_Allia_.
+
+In another place he speaks of the Africans as 'abounding' in this vice,
+and of their pronouncing _Metellus_ and _Catullus_; _Metelus_,
+_Catulus_:
+
+[Keil. v. v. p. 287.] In his etiam agnoscimus gentium vitia;
+_labdacismis_ scatent Afri, raro est ut aliquis dicat _l_: per 	geminum
+_l_ sic loquuntur Romani, omnes Latini sic loquuntur, 	_Catullus_,
+_Metellus_.
+
+_M_ is pronounced as in English, except before _q_, where it has a nasal
+sound, and when final.
+
+[Mar. Vict. Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] _M_ impressis invicem labiis 	mugitum
+quendam intra oris specum attractis naribus dabit.
+
+But this 'mooing' sound, in which so many of their words ended, was not
+altogether pleasing to the Roman ear. Quintilian exclaims against it:
+
+[Quint, XII. x. 31.] Quid quod pleraque nos illa quasi mugiente littera
+cludimus _m_, qua nullum Graece verbum cadit.
+
+The offensive sound was therefore gotten rid of, as far as possible, by
+obscuring the M at the end of a word. Priscian speaks of three sounds
+of M,--at the beginning, in the middle, and at the end of a word:
+
+[Prisc. Keil. v. II. p. 29.] M obscurum in extremitate dictionum 	sonat,
+ut _templum_, apertum in principio, ut _magnus_; mediocre 	in mediis, ut
+_umbra_.
+
+This 'obscuring' led in verse to the cutting off of the final syllable
+in M when the following word began with a vowel,--as Priscian remarks in
+the same connection:
+
+Finales dictionis subtrahitur M in metro plerumque, si a vocali incipit
+sequens dictio, ut:
+
+"Illum expirantem transfixo pectore flammas."
+
+Yet, he adds, the ancients did not always withdraw the sound:
+
+Vetustissimi tamen non semper eam subtrahebant, Ennius in X Annalium:
+
+"Insigneita fere tum milia militum octo Duxit delectos bellum tolerare
+potentes."
+
+The M was not, however, entirely ignored. Thus Quintilian says:
+
+[Quint, IX. iv. 40.] Atqui eadem illa littera, quotiens ultima 	est et
+vocalem verbi sequentis ita contingit ut in eam transire 	possit,
+etiamsi scribitur tamen parum exprimitur, ut _multum 	ille_ et _quantum
+erat_; adeo ut paene cujusdam novae litterae 	sonum reddat. Neque enim
+eximitur, sed obscuratur, et tantum 	aliqua inter duas vocales velut
+nota est, ne ipsae coeant.
+
+It is a significant fact in this connection that M is the only one of
+the liquids (semivowels) that does not allow a long vowel before it.
+Priscian, mentioning several peculiarities of this semivowel, thus
+speaks of this one:
+
+[Priscian. Keil. v. II. p. 23.] Nunquam tamen eadem M ante se natura
+longam (vocalem) patitur in eadem syllaba esse, ut 	_illam_, _artem_,
+_puppim_, _illum_, _rem_, _spem_, _diem_, cum 	aliae omnes semivocales
+hoc habent, ut _Maecenas_, _Paean_, 	_sol_, _pax_, _par_.
+
+That the M was really sounded we may infer from Pompeius (on Donatus)
+where, treating of _myotacism_, he calls it the careless pronunciation
+of M between two vowels (at the end of one word and the beginning of
+another), the running of the words together in such a way that M seems
+to begin the second, rather than to end the first:
+
+[Keil. v. V. p. 287.] Ut si dices _hominem amicum_, _oratorem optimum_.
+Non enim videris dicere _hominem amicum_, sed _homine mamicum_, quod est
+incongruum et inconsonans. Similiter _oratorem optimum_ videris _oratore
+moptimum_.
+
+He also warns against the vice of dropping the M altogether. One must
+neither say _homine mamicum_, nor _homine amicum_:
+
+Plerumque enim aut suspensione pronuntiatur aut exclusione.... Nos quid
+sequi debemus? Quid? per suspensionem tantum modo. Qua ratione? Quia si
+dixeris per suspensionem _homimem amicum_, et haec vitium vitabis,
+_myotacismum_, et non cades in aliud vitium, id est in hiatum.
+
+From such passages it would seem that the final syllable ending in M is
+to be lightly and rapidly pronounced, the M not to be run over upon the
+following word.
+
+Some hint of the sound may perhaps be got from the Englishman's
+pronunciation of such words as Birmingham (Birminghm), Sydenham
+(Sydenhm), Blenheim (Blenhm).
+
+N, except when followed by F or S, is pronounced as in English, only
+that it is more dental.
+
+[Mar. Vict. Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] N vero, sub convexo palati 	lingua
+inhaerente, gemino naris et oris spiritu explicabitur.
+
+Naturally, as with us, it is more emphatic at the beginning and end of
+words than in the middle (as, _Do not give the tendrils the wrong turn.
+Is not the sin condemned?_)
+
+Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 29.] N quoque plenior in primis sonat, et in 	ultimis,
+partibus syllabarum, ut _nomen_, _stamen_; exilior in 	mediis, ut
+_amnis_, _damnum_.
+
+As in English, before a guttural (C, G, Q, X), N is so affected as to
+leave its proper sound incomplete (the tongue not touching the roof of
+the mouth) while it draws the guttural, so to speak, into itself, as in
+the English words _concord_, _anger_, _sinker_, _relinquish_, _anxious_.
+
+[Nigidius apud Gell. XIX. xiv. 7.] Inter litteram N et G est alia 	vis,
+ut in nomine _anguis_ et _angaria_ et _anchorae_ et 	_increpat_ et
+_incurrit_ et _ingenuus_. In omnibus enim his non 	verum N sed
+adulterinum ponitur. Nam N non esse lingua indicio 	est. Nam si ea
+littera esset lingua palatum tangeret.
+
+Not only the Greeks, but some of the early Romans, wrote G, instead of
+N, in this position, and gave to the letter so used a new name, _agma_.
+Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 29.] Sequente G vel C, pro ea (N) G scribunt 	Graeci et
+quidam tamen vetustissimi auctores Romani euphoniae 	causa bene hoc
+facientes, ut _Agchises_, _agceps_, _aggulus_, 	_aggens_, quod ostendit
+Varro in _Primo de Origine Linguae 	Latinae_ his verbis: Ut Ion scribit,
+quinquavicesima est littera, 	quam vocant "_agma_," cujus forma nulla
+est et vox communis est 	Graecis et Latinis, ut his verbis: _aggulus_,
+_aggens_, 	_agguilla_, _iggerunt_. In ejusmodi Graeci et Accius noster
+bina 	G scribunt, alii N et G, quod in hoc veritatem videre facile non
+est.
+
+This custom did not, however, prevail among the Romans, and Marius
+Victorinus gives it as his opinion that it is better to use N than G, as
+more correct to the ear, and avoiding ambiguity (the GG being then left
+for the natural expression of double G).
+
+[Mar. Vict. I. iii. 70.] Familiarior est auribus nostris N potius 	quam
+G, ut _anceps_ et _ancilla_ et _anguia_ et _angustum_ et 	_anquirit_ et
+_ancora_, et similia, per N potius quam per G 	scribite: sicut per duo G
+quotiens duorum G sonum aures exigent, 	ut _aggerem_, _suggillat_,
+_suggerendum_, _suggestion_, et 	similia.
+
+N before F or S seems to have become a mere nasal, lengthening the
+preceding vowel.
+
+Cicero speaks of this as justified by the ear and by custom, rather than
+by reason:
+
+[Cic. Or. XLVIII.] Quid vero hoc elegantius, quod non fit natura, sed
+quodam instituto? _indoctus_ dicimus brevi prima littera, 	_insanis_
+producta: _inhumanus_ brevi, _infelix_ longa: et, ne 	multis, quibus in
+verbis eae primae litterae sunt quae in 	_sapiente_ atque _felice_,
+producte dicitur; in ceteris omnibus 	breviter: itemque _composuit_,
+_consuevit_, _concrepit_, 	_confecit_. Consule veritatem, reprehendet;
+refer ad aures, 	probabunt. Quaere, cur? Ita se dicent juvari. Voluptati
+autem 	aurium morigerari debet oratio.
+
+In Donatus we have the same fact stated, with the same reason:
+
+[Keil. v. IV. p. 442.] Quod magis aurium indicio quam artis 	ratione
+colligimus.
+
+Thus we find numeral abverbs and others ending either in _iens_ or
+_ies_, as _centiens_ or _centies_, _decies_ or _deciens_, _millies_ or
+_milliens_, _quotiens_ or _quoties_, _totiens_ or _toties_. Other words,
+in like manner, participles and nouns, are written either with or
+without the N before S, as _contunsum_ or _contusum_, _obtunsus_ or
+_obtusus_, _thesaurus_ or _thensaurus_ (the _ens_ is regularly
+represented in Greek by [Greek transliteration: aes]); _infans_ or
+_infas_, _frons_ or _fros_. In late Latin the N was frequently dropped
+in participle endings. Donatus says that this nasal sound of N should be
+strenuously observed:
+
+[Keil. v. IV. p. 442.] Illud vehementissime observare debemus, ut _con_
+et _in_ quotiensque post se habent S vel F litteram, 	videamus
+quemadmodum pronuntientur. Plerumque enim non 	observantes in
+barbarismos incurrimus.
+
+GN in the terminations _gnus_, _gna_, _gnum_, has, according to
+Priscian, the power to lengthen the penultimate vowel.
+
+[Prisc. I.] _Gnus_ quoque, vel _gna_, vel _gnum_, terminantia, 	longam
+habent vocalem penultimam; ut a _regno_, _regnum_; a 	_sto_, _stagnum_;
+a _bene_, _benignus_; a _male_, _malignus_; ab 	_abiete_, _abiegnus_;
+_privignus_; _Pelignus_.
+
+(Perhaps the liquid sound, as in canon.)
+
+P is pronounced as in English.
+
+[Mar. Vict. Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] E quibus B et P litterae ... 	dispari
+inter se oris officio exprimuntur. Nam prima exploso e 	mediis labiis
+sono; sequens, compresso ore, velut introrsum 	attracto vocis ictu,
+explicatur.
+
+Q has the sound of English Q in the words _quire_, _quick_. Priscian
+says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 12.] K enim et Q, quamvis figura et nomine 	videantur
+aliquam habere differentiam, cum C tamen eandem, tam in sono vocum, quam
+in metro, potestatem continent.
+
+And again:
+
+[id. ib. p. 36.] De Q quoque sufficienter supra tractatum est, 	quae
+nisi eandem vim haberet quam C.
+
+Marius Victorinus says:
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 5.] Item superfluas quasdam videntur retinere, X et K
+et Q... Pro K et Q, C littera facillime haberetur; X autem per C et S.
+
+And again:
+
+[Id. ib. p. 32.] K et Q supervacue numero litterarum inseri 	doctorum
+plerique contendunt, scilicet quod C littera harum 	officium possit
+implere.
+
+The grammarians tell us that K and Q are always found at the beginning
+of a syllable:
+
+[Prisc. Keil. v. III. p. 111.] Q et K semper initio syllabarum
+ponuntur.
+
+They say also that the use of Q was more free among the earlier Romans,
+who placed it as initial wherever U followed,--as they placed K
+wherever A* followed,--but that in the later, established, usage, its
+presence was conditioned upon a vowel after the U in the same syllable:
+
+[Donat. Keil. v. IV. p. 442.] Namque illi Q praeponebant quotiens U
+sequebatur, ut _quum_; nos vero non possumus Q praeponere nisi ut U
+sequatur et post ipsam alia vocalis, ut _quoniam_.
+
+Diomedes says:
+
+[Keil. v. I. p. 425.] Q consonans muta, ex C et U litteris 	composita,
+supervacua, qua utimur quando U et altera vocalis in 	una syllaba
+junguntur, ut _Quirinus_.
+
+R is trilled, as in Italian or French:
+
+[Mar. Vict. Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] Sequetur R, quae, vibratione 	vocis in
+palato linguae fastigio, fragorem tremulis ictibus 	reddit.
+
+(This proper trilling of the R is most important.)
+
+S seems to have had, almost, if not quite, invariably the sharp sound of
+the English S in _sing_, _hiss_.
+
+In Greek words written also with Z, as _Smyrna_ (also written _Zmyrna_),
+it probably had the Z sound, and possibly in a few Latin words, as
+_rosa_, _miser_, but this is not certain. Marius Victorinus thus sets
+forth the difference between S and X (CS):
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] Dehinc duae supremae, S et X, jure 	junguntur. Nam
+vicino inter se sonore attracto sibilant rictu, 	ita tamen si prioris
+ictus pone dentes excitatus ad medium lenis 	agitetur, sequentis autem
+crasso spiritu hispidum sonet, quia per 	conjunctionem C et S, quarum et
+locum implet et vim exprimit, ut 	sensu aurium ducemur, efficitur.
+
+Donatus, according to Pompeius, complains of the Greeks as sounding the
+S too feebly:
+
+[Keil. v. V. p. 394.] Item S litteram Graeci exiliter ecferunt 	adeo ut
+cum dicunt _jussit_ per unum S dicere existimas.
+
+This would indicate that the Romans pronounced the sibilant
+distinctly,--yet not too emphatically, for Quintilian says, 'the master
+of his art (of speaking) will not fondly prolong or dally with his S':
+
+[Quint. I. xi. 6.] Ne illas quidem circa S litteram delicias hic
+magister feret.
+
+T is pronounced like the English T pure, except that the tongue should
+approach the teeth more nearly.
+
+[Pompei. _Comm. ad Donat._ Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] D autem et T, 	quibus,
+ut ita dixerim, vocis vicinitas quaedam est, linguae 	sublatione ac
+positione distinguuntur. Nam cum summos atque imos 	conjunctim dentes
+suprema sua parte pulsaverit D litteram 	exprimit. Quotiens autem
+sublimata partem qua superis dentibus est _origo_ contigerit, T sonore
+vocis explicabit.
+
+From the same writer we learn that some pronounced the T too heavily,
+giving it a 'thick sound':
+
+[Keil. v. V. p. 394.] Ecce in littera T aliqui ita pingue nescio 	quid
+sonant, ut cum dicunt _etiam_ nihil de media syllaba 	infringant.
+
+By which we understand that the T was wrongly uttered with a kind of
+effort, such as prevented its gliding on to the I.
+
+TH nearly as in _then_, not as in _thin_.
+
+U (consonant) or V.
+
+That the letter U performed the office of both vowel and consonant all
+the grammarians agree, and state the fact in nearly the same terms.
+Priscian says that they (I and U) seem quite other letters when used as
+consonants, and that it makes a great difference in which of these ways
+they are used:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 13.] Videntur tamen I et U cum in consonantes transeunt
+quantum ad potestatem, quod maximum est in elementis, aliae litterae
+esse praeter supra dictis; multum enim interest utrum vocales sint an
+consonantes.
+
+The grammarians also state that this consonant U was represented by the
+Greek digamma, which the Romans called _vau_ also.
+
+Marius Victorinus says:
+
+[I. iii. 44.] Nam littera U vocalis est, sicut A, E, I, O, sed 	eadem
+vicem obtinet consonantis: cujus potestatis notam Graeci 	habent [Greek
+letter: digamma], nostri _vau_ vocant, et alii 	_digamma_; ea per se
+scripta non facit syllabam, anteposita autem 	vocali facit, ut [Greek in
+which w = digamma:* wamaxa, 	wekaebolos] et [Greek, w = digamma:*
+welenae]. Nos vero, qui non 	habemus hujus vocis nomen aut notam, in
+ejus locum quotiens una 	vocalis pluresve junctae unam syllabam faciunt,
+substituimus U 	litteram.
+
+Now it is contended by some that this _digamma_, or _vau_, was merely
+taken as a symbol, somewhat arbitrarily perhaps, and that it did not
+indicate a particular sound, but might stand for anything which the
+Romans chose to represent by it; and that therefore it gives us no
+certain indication of what the Latin U consonant was. But we are
+expressly told that it had the force and sound of the Greek _digamma_.
+
+In Marius Victorinus we find:
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 23.] F autem apud Aeolis dumtaxat idem valere quod apud
+nos _vau_ cum pro consonante scribitur, vocarique 	[Greek
+transliteration: bau] et _digamma_.
+
+Priscian explains more fully:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 15.] U vero loco consonantis posita eandem 	prorsus in
+omnibus vim habuit apud Latinos quam apud Aeolis 	_digamma_. Unde a
+plerisque ei nomen hoc datur quod apud Aeolis 	habuit olim [Greek
+letter: digamma] _digamma_, id est _vau_, ab 	ipsius voce profectum
+teste Varrone et Didymo, qui id ei nomen 	esse ostendunt. Pro quo Caesar
+hanc [Greek letter: digamma 	rotated 90 degress] figuram scribi voluit,
+quod quamvis illi 	recte visum est tamen consuetude antiqua superavit.
+Adeo autem 	hoc verum est quod pro Aeolico _digamma_ [Greek letter:
+digamma] 	U ponitur.
+
+What then was the sound of this Aeolic _digamma_ or [Greek
+transliteration: bau]? Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 11.] [Greek letter: digamma] Aeolicum _digamma_, 	quod
+apud antiquissimos Latinorum eandem vim quam apud Aeolis 	habuit. Eum
+autem prope sonum quem nunc habet significabat P cum 	aspiratione, sicut
+etiam apud veteres Graecos pro [Greek letter: 	ph] [Greek letter: p] et
+[Greek letter: eta]; unde nunc quoque in Graecis nominibus antiquam
+scripturam servamus, pro [Greek: ph] P et H ponentes, ut _Orpheus_,
+_Phaethon_ Postea 	vero in Latinis verbis placuit pro P et H, F scribi,
+ut _fama_, 	_filiu_, _facio_, loco autem _digamma_ U pro consonante,
+quod 	cognatione soni videbatur affinis esse _digamma_ ea littera.
+
+The Latin U consonant is here distinctly stated to be akin to the Greek
+_digamma_ ([Greek letter: digamma]) in sound.
+
+Now the office of the Greek _digamma_ was apparently manifold. It stood
+for [Greek letter: s, b] (Eng. V), [Greek letter: g, ch, ph], and for
+the breathings 'rough' and 'smooth.' Sometimes the sound of the
+_digamma_ is given, we are told, where the character itself is not
+written. It is said that in the neighborhood of Olympia it is to-day
+pronounced, though not written, between two vowels as [Greek letter: b]
+(Eng. V). Which of these various sounds should be given the digamma
+appears to have been determined by the law of euphony. It was sometimes
+written but not sounded (like our H).
+
+The question then is, which of these various sounds of the digamma is
+represented by the Latin U consonant, or does it represent all, or none,
+of these.
+
+Speaking of F, Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 35.] Antiqui Romanorum Aeolis sequentes loco
+aspirationis earn (F) ponebant, effugientes ipsi quoque 	aspirationem,
+et maxime cum consonante recusabant eam proferre in Latino sermone.
+Habebat autem haec F littera hunc sonum quem nunc habet U loco
+consonantis posita, unde antiqui AF pro AB scribere solebant; sed quia
+non potest _vau_, id est _digamma_, 	in fine syllabae inveniri, ideo
+mutata in B. _Sifilum_ quoque pro _sibilum_ teste Nonio Marcello _de
+Doctorum Indagine_ dicebant.
+
+And again:
+
+[Prisc. Keil. v. II. p. 15.] In B etiam solet apud Aeolis 	transire
+[Greek letter: digamma] _digamma_ quotiens ab [Greek: r] 	incipit dictio
+quae solet aspirari, ut [Greek transliteration: 	raetor], [Greek
+transliteration: braetor] dicunt, quod _digamma_ 	nisi vocali praeponi
+et in principio syllabae non potest. Ideo 	autem locum transmutavit,
+quia B vel _digamma_ post [Greek 	letter: r] in eadem syllaba
+pronuntiari non potest. Apud nos quoque est invenire quod pro U
+consonante B ponitur, ut _caelebs_, caelestium vitam ducens, per B
+scribitur, quod U 	consonans ante consonantem poni non potest. Sed etiam
+_Bruges_ et _Belena_ antiquissimi dicebant, teste Quintiliano, qui hoc
+ostendit in primo _institutionum oratoriarum_: nec mirum, cum B 	quoque
+in U euphoniae causa converti invenimus; ut _aufero_.
+
+[Quint, I. v. 69.] Frequenter autem praepositiones quoque 	copulatio
+ista corrumpit; inde _abstulit_, _aufugit_, _amisit_, 	cum praepositio
+sit ab sola.
+
+It is significant here that Cicero speaks of the change from DU to B as
+a contraction. He says:
+
+[Cic. Or. LXV.] Quid vero licentius quam quod hominum etiam nomina
+contrahebant, quo essent aptiora? Nam ut _duellum_, _bellum_; et _duis_,
+_bis_; sic _Duellium_ eum qui Poenos classe 	devicit  _Bellium_
+nominaverunt, cum superiores appellati essent 	semper _Duellii_.
+
+One cannot but feel in reading the numerous passages in the grammarians
+that treat of the sound of U consonant, that if its sound had been no
+other than the natural sound of U with consonantal force, they never
+would have spent so much time and labor in explaining and elucidating
+it. Why did they not turn it off with the simple explanation which they
+give to the consonantal I--that of double I? What more natural than to
+speak of consonant U as "double U" (as we English do W). But on the
+contrary they expressly declare it to have a sound distinct and
+peculiar. Quintilian says that even if the form of the Aeolic _digamma_
+is rejected by the Romans, yet its force pursues them:
+
+[Quint. XII. x. 29.] Aeolicae quoque litterae qua _servum 	cervum_que
+dicimus, etiamsi forma a nobis repudiata est, vis 	tamen nos ipsa
+persequitur.
+
+He gives it as his opinion that it would have been well to have adopted
+the _vau_, and says that neither by the old way of writing (by UO), nor
+by the modern way (by _servus_ et _cervus_) ea ratione quam reddidi:
+neutro sane modo vox quam sentimus efficitur. Nec inutiliter Claudius
+Aeolicam illam ad hos usus litteram adjecerat.
+
+And again still more distinctly:
+
+[Id. ib. iv. 7, 8.] At grammatici saltern omnes in hanc 	descendent
+rerum tenuitatem, desintne aliquae nobis necessariae 	literarum, non cum
+Graeca scribimus (tum enim ab iisdem duas 	mutuamur) sed propriae, in
+Latinis, ut in his _seruus_ et 	_uulgus_ Aeolicum digammon desideratur.
+
+This need of a new symbol, recognized by authorities like Cicero and
+Quintilian, is not an insignificant point in the argument.
+
+Marius Victorinus says that Cicero adds U (consonant) to the other five
+consonants that are understood to assimilate certain other consonants
+coming before them:
+
+[Mar. Vict. I. iv. 64.] Sed propriae sunt cognatae (consonantes) quae
+simili figuratione oris dicuntur, ut est B, F, R, M, P, 	quibus Cicero
+adjicit U, non eam quae accipitur pro vocali, sed 	eam quae consonantis
+obtinet vicem, et interposita vocali fit ut 	aliac quoque consonantes.
+
+He proceeds to illustrate with the proposition OB:
+
+[Id. ib. 67.] OB autem mutatur in cognatas easdem, ut _offert, officit_;
+et _ommovet, ommutescit_; et _oppandit, opperitur; 	ovvertit, ovvius_.
+
+Let any one, keeping in mind the distinctness with which the Romans
+uttered doubled consonants, attempt to pronounce _ovvius_ on the theory
+of consonant U like English (W) (!).
+
+By the advocates of the W sound of the V much stress is laid upon the
+fact that the poets occasionally change the consonant into the vowel U,
+and _vice versa_; as Horace, Epode VIII. 2:
+
+"Nivesque deducunt Jovem, nunc mare nunc siluae;"
+
+Or Lucretius, in II. 232:
+
+"Propterea quia corpus aquae naturaque tenvis."
+
+Such single instances suggest, indeed, a common origin in the U and V,
+and a poet's license, archaistic perhaps; but no more determine the
+ordinary value of the letter than, say, in the English poets the rhyming
+of wind with mind, or the making a distinct syllable of the _ed_ in
+participle endings.
+
+Another argument used in support of the W sound is taken from the words
+of Nigidius Figulus.
+
+He was contending, we are told, that words and names come into being not
+by chance, or arbitrarily, but by nature; and he takes, among other
+examples, the words _vos_ and _nos_, _tu_ and _ego_, _tibi_ and _mihi_:
+
+[Aul. Gell. X. iv. 4.] _Vos_, inquit, cum dicimus motu quodam 	oris
+conveniente cum ipsius verbi demonstratione utimur, et 	labias sensim
+primores emovemus, ac spiritum atque animam porro versum et ad eos
+quibuscum sermonicamur intendimus. At contra cum dicimus _nos_ neque
+profuso intentoque flatu vocis, neque projectis labiis pronunciamus; sed
+et spiritum et labias quasi 	intra nosmetipsos coercemus. Hoc idem fit
+et in eo quod dicimus 	_tu_ et _ego_; et _tibi_ et _mihi_. Nam sicuti
+cum adnuimus et 	abnuimus, motus quidem ille vel capitis vel oculorum a
+natura rei 	quam significabat non abhorret; ita in his vocibus, quasi
+gestus 	quidam oris et spiritus naturalis est.
+
+But a little careful examination will show that this passage favors the
+other side rather.
+
+The first part of the description: "labias sensim primores emovemus,"
+will apply to either sound, _vos_ or _wos_, although better, as will
+appear upon consulting the mirror, to _vos_ than to _wos_; but the
+second: "ac spiritum atque animam porro versum et ad eos quibuscum
+sermonicamur intendimus," will certainly apply far better to _vos_ than
+to _wos_. In _wos_ we get the "projectis labiis" to some extent,
+although not so marked as in _vos_; but we do not get anything like the
+same "profuso intentoque flatu vocis" as in _vos_.
+
+The same may be said of the argument drawn from the anecdote related by
+Cicero in his _de Divinatione_:
+
+[Cic. de Div. XL. 84.] Cum M. Crassus exercitum Brundisii 	imponeret,
+quidam in portu caricas Cauno advectas vendens 	"Cauneas!" clamitabat.
+Dicamus, si placet, monitum ab eo Crassum _caveret ne iret_, non fuisse
+periturum si omini paruisset.
+
+Now when we remember that Caunos, whence these particular figs came, was
+a Greek town; that the fig-seller was very likely a Greek himself
+(Brundisium being a Greek port so to speak), but at any rate probably
+pronounced the name as it was doubtless always heard; and that U in such
+a connection is at present pronounced like our F or V, and we know of no
+time when it was pronounced like our U, it is difficult to avoid the
+conclusion that the fig-seller was crying "Cafneas!"--a sound far more
+suggestive of _Cave-ne-eas_! than "_Cauneas!_" of _Cawe ne eas_!
+
+But beyond the testimony, direct and indirect, of grammarians and
+classic writers, an argument against the W sound appears in the fact
+that this sound is not found in Greek (from which the _vau_ is
+borrowed), nor in Italian or kindred Romance languages.
+
+The initial U in Italian represents not Latin U consonant, but some
+other letter, as H, in _uomo_ (for _homo_). On the other hand we find
+the V sound, as _vedova_ (from _vidua_),--notice the two V sounds,--or
+the U sometimes changed to B, as _serbare_ from _servare_; _bibita_ and
+_bevanda_, both from _bibo_.
+
+In French we find the Latin U consonant passing into F, as _ovum_ into
+_oeuf_; _novem_ into _neuf_.
+
+It seems not improbable that in Cicero's time and later the consonant U
+represented some variation of sound, that its value varied in the
+direction of B or F, and possibly, in some Greek words especially, it
+was more vocalized, as in _vae!_ (Greek [Greek transliteration: ouai]).
+Yet here it is worthy of note that the corresponding words in Italian
+are not written with U but with _gu_, as _guai!_
+
+In considering the sound of Latin U consonant we must always keep in
+mind that the question is one of time,--not, was U ever pronounced as
+English W; but, was it so pronounced in the time of Cicero and Virgil.
+Professor Ellis well says: "Any one who wishes to arrive at a conclusion
+respecting the Latin consonantal U must learn to pronounce and
+distinguish readily the four series of sounds: U<circumflex>A
+U<circumflex>E U<circumflex>I U<circumflex>O, WA WE WI WO WU, V'A V'E
+V'I V'O V'U, VA VE VI VO VU."
+
+Now the question is: At what point along this line do we find the U
+consonant of the golden age? Roby, though not agreeing with Ellis in
+rejecting the English W sound, as the representative of that period,
+declares himself "quite content to think that a labial V was
+provincially contemporary and in the end generally superseded it."
+
+But 'provincialisms' do not seem sufficient to account for the use of
+*[Greek letter: b] for U consonant in inscriptions and in writers of
+the first century. For instance, _Nerva_ and _Severus_ in contemporary
+inscriptions are written both with *[Greek: ou] and with [Greek letter:
+b]: [Greek transliteration: Neroua, Nerba; Seouaeros, Sebaeros]. And in
+Plutarch we find numerous instances of [Greek letter: b] taking the
+place of [Greek transliteration: ou].
+
+It is true that the instances in which we find [Greek letter: b] taking
+the place of [Greek trasnliteration: ou] in the first century, and
+earlier, are decidedly in the minority, but when we recollect that
+[Greek trasnliteration: ou] was the original and natural representative
+of the Latin U, the fact that a change was made at all is of great
+weight, and one instance of [Greek letter: b] for U would outweigh a
+dozen instances of the old form, OU. That the letter should be changed
+in the Greek, even when it had not been in the Latin, seems to make it
+certain that the 'Greek ear,' at least, had detected a real variation of
+sound from the original U, and one that approached, at least, their
+[Greek letter: b] (Eng. V).
+
+Nor, in this connection, should we fail to notice the words in Latin
+where U consonant is represented by B, such as _bubile_ from _bovile_,
+_defervi_ and _deferbui_ from _deferveo_.
+
+In concluding the argument for the labial V sound of consonantal U, it
+may be proper to suggest a fact which should have no weight against a
+conclusive argument on the other side, but which might, perhaps, be
+allowed to turn the scale nicely balanced. The W sound is not only
+unfamiliar but nearly, if not quite, impossible, to the lips of any
+European people except the English, and would therefore of necessity
+have to be left out of any universally adopted scheme of Latin
+pronunciation. Professor Ellis pertinently says: "As a matter of
+practical convenience English speakers should abstain from W in Latin,
+because no Continental nation can adopt a sound they cannot pronounce."
+
+X has the same sound as in English.
+
+Marius Victorinus says:
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] Dehinc duae supremae S et X jure jungentur, nam
+vicino inter se sonore attracto sibilant rictu, ita tamen si prioris
+ictus pone dentes excitatus ad medium lenis agitetur; sequentis autem
+crasso spiritu hispidum sonet qui per 	conjunctionem C et S, quarum et
+locum implet et vim exprimit, ut 	sensu aurium ducamur efficitur.
+
+Again:
+
+[Id. ib. p. 5.] X autem per C et S possemus scribere.
+
+And:
+
+Posteaquam a Graecis [Greek: x], et a nobis x, recepta est, abiit 	et
+illorum et nostra perplexa ratio, et in primis observatio 	Nigidii, qui
+in libris suis x littera non est usus, antiquitatem 	sequens.
+
+X suffers a long vowel before it, being composed of the c (the only mute
+that allows a long vowel before it) and the S.
+
+Z probably had a sound akin to ds in English. After giving the sound of
+X as cs, Marius Victorinus goes on to speak of Z thus:
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 5.] Sic et z, si modo latino sermoni necessaria esset,
+per d et s litteras faceremus.
+
+QUANTITY.
+
+A syllable in Latin may consist of from one to six letters, as _a_,
+_ab_, _ars_, _Mars_, _stans_, _stirps_.
+
+In dividing into syllables, a consonant between two vowels belongs to
+the vowel following it. When there are two consonants, the first goes
+with the vowel before, the second with the vowel after, unless the
+consonants form such a combination as may stand at the beginning of a
+word (Latin or Greek), that is, as maybe uttered with a single impulse,
+as one letter; in which case they go, as one, with the vowel following.
+An apparent exception is made in the case of compound words. These are
+divided into their component parts when these parts remain intact.
+
+On these points Priscian says:
+
+Si antecedens syllaba terminal in consonantem necesse est et sequentem a
+consonante incipere; ut _artus_, _ille_, _arduus_; 	nisi fit compositum:
+ut _abeo_, _adeo_, _pereo_. Nam in simplicibus dictionibus necesse est s
+et c ejusdem esse syllabae, ut _pascua_, _luscus_. M quoque, vel p, vel
+t, in simplicibus dictionibus, si 	antecedats, ejusdem est syllabae, ut
+_cosmos_, _perspirare_, _testis_.
+
+In semivocalibus similiter sunt praepositivae aliis semivocalibus in
+eadem syllaba; ut m sequente n, ut _Mnesteus_, _amnis_.
+
+Each letter has its 'time,' or 'times.' Thus a short vowel has the time
+of one beat (_mora_); a long vowel, of two beats; a single consonant, of
+a half beat; a double consonant, of one beat. Theoretically, therefore,
+a syllable may have as many as three, or even four, _tempora_; but
+practically only two are recognized. All over two are disregarded and
+each syllable is simply counted 'short' (one beat) or 'long' (two
+beats).
+
+Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 52.] In longis natura vel positione duo sunt 	tempora,
+ut _do_, _ars_; duo semis, quando post vocalem natura 	longam una
+sequitur consonans, ut _sol_; tria, quando post 	vocalem natura longam
+duae consonantes sequuntur, vel una duplex, 	ut _mons_, _rex_. Tamen in
+metro necesse est unamquamque syllabam 	vel unius vel duorum accipi
+temporum.
+
+ACCENT.
+
+The grammarians tell us that every syllable has three dimensions,
+length, breadth and height, or _tenor_, _spiritus_, _tempus_:
+
+[Keil. Supp. p. XVIII.] Habet etiam unaquaeque syllaba 	altitudinem,
+latitudinem et longitudinem; altitudinem in tenore; 	crassitudinem vel
+latitudinem, in spiritu; longitudinem in 	tempore.
+
+Diomedes says:
+
+[Keil. v. I. p. 430.] Accentus est dictus ab accinendo, quod sit quasi
+quidam cujusque syllabae cantus.
+
+And Cicero:
+
+[Cic. Or. XVIII.] Ipsa enim natura, quasi modularetur hominem orationem,
+in omni verbo posuit acutam vocem, nec una plus, nec a postrema syllaba
+citra tertiam.
+
+The grammarians recognize three accents; but practically we need take
+account of but two, inasmuch as the third is merely negative. The
+syllable having the grave accent is, as we should say, unaccented.
+
+[Diom. Keil. v. I. p. 430.] Sunt vero tres, acutus, gravis, et 	qui ex
+duobus constat circumflexus. Ex his, acutus in correptis 	semper,
+interdum productis syllabis versatur; inflexus (or 	'circumflexus'), in
+his quae producuntur; gravis autem per se 	nunquam consistere in ullo
+verbo potest, sed in his in quibus 	inflexus est, aut acutus ceteras
+syllabas obtinet.
+
+The same writer thus gives the place of each accent:
+
+[Keil. v. I. p. 431.] (Acutus) apud Latinos duo tantum loca 	tenent,
+paenultimum et antepaenultimum; circumflexus autem, 	quotlibet
+syllabarum sit dictio, non tenebit nisi paenultimum 	locum. Omnis igitur
+pars orationis hanc rationem pronuntiationis 	detinet. Omnis vox
+monosyllaba aliquid significans, si brevis 	est, acuetur, ut _ab, mel,
+fel;_ et, si positione longa fuerit, 	acutum similiter tenorem habebit,
+ut _ars, pars, pix, nix, fax_. 	Sin autem longa natura fuerit,
+flectetur, ut _lux, spes, flos, 	sol, mons, fons, lis_.
+
+Omnis vox dissyllaba priorem syllabam aut acuit aut flectit. Acuit, vel
+cum brevis est utraque, ut _deus, citus, datur, arat;_ vel cum positione
+longa est utraque, ut _sollers;_ vel alterutra positione longa dum ne
+natura longa sit, prior, ut _pontus;_ posterior, ut _cohors_. Si vero
+prior syllaba natura longa et 	sequens brevis fuerit, flectitur prior,
+ut _luna, Roma_.
+
+In trisyllabis autem et tetrasyllabis et deinceps, secunda ab ultima
+semper observanda est. Haec, si natura longa fuerit, inflectitur, ut
+_Romanus, Cethegus, marinus, Crispinus, amicus, Sabinus, Quirinus,
+lectica_. Si vero eadem paenultima positione longa fuerit, acuetur, ut
+_Metellus, Catullus, Marcellus_; ita 	tamen si positione longa non ex
+muta et liquida fuerit. Nam 	mutabit accentum, ut _latebrae, tenebrae_.
+Et si novissima natura 	longa itemque paenultima, sive natura sive
+positione longa 	fuerit, paenultima tantum acuetur, non inflectetur;
+sic, natura, 	ut _Fidenae_,
+
+_Athenae_, _Thebae_, _Cymae_; positione, ut _tabellae_, 	_fenestrae_.
+Sin autem media et novissima breves fuerint, prima 	servabit acutum
+tenorem, ut _Sergius_, _Mallius_, _ascia_, 	_fuscina_, _Julius_,
+_Claudius_. Si omnes tres syllabae longae 	fuerint, media acuetur, ut
+_Romani_, _legati_, _praetores_, 	_praedones_.
+
+Priscian thus defines the accents:
+
+[Keil. v. III. p. 519.] Acutus namque accentus ideo inventus est quod
+acuat sive elevet syllabam; gravis vero eo quod deprimat aut deponat;
+circumflexus ideo quod deprimat et acuat.
+
+Then after giving the place of the accent he notes some disturbing
+influences, which cause exceptions to the general rule:
+
+[Keil. v. III. pp. 519-521.] Tres quidem res accentuum regulas
+conturbant; distinguendi ratio; pronuntiandi ambiguitas; atque
+necessitas....
+
+Ratio namque distinguendi legem accentuum saepe conturbat. Siquis
+pronuntians dicat _pone_ et _ergo_, quod apud Latinos in 	ultima syllaba
+nisi discretionis causa accentus poni non potest: 	ex hoc est quod
+diximus _pone_ et _ergo_. Ideo _pone_ dicimus ne 	putetur verbum esse
+imperativi modi, hoc est _pone_; _ergo_ ideo 	dicimus ne putetur
+conjunctio rationalis, quod est _ergo_.
+
+Ambiguitas vero pronuntiandi legem accentuum saepe conturbat. Siquis
+dicat _interealoci_, qui nescit, alteram partem 	dicat _interea_,
+alteram _loci_, quod non separatim sed sub uno 	accentu pronuntiandum
+est, ne ambiguitatem in sermone faciat.
+
+Necessitas pronuntiationis regulam corrumpit, ut puta siquis dicat in
+primis _doctus_, addat _que_ conjunctionem, dicatque _doctusque_, ecce
+in pronuntiatione accentum mutavit, cum non in secunda syllaba, sed in
+prima, accentum habere debuit.
+
+He also states the law that determines the kind of accent to be used:
+
+[Id. ib. p. 521.] Syllaba quae correptam vocalem habet acuto accentu
+pronuntiatur, ut _pax_, _fax_, _pix_, _nix_, _dux_, 	_nux_, quae etiam
+tali accentu pronuntianda est, quamvis sit 	longa positione, quia
+naturaliter brevis est. Quae vero 	naturaliter producta est circumflexo
+accentu exprimenda est ut, 	_res_, _dos_, _spes_. Dissyllabae vero quae
+priorem productam 	habent et posteriorem correptam, priorem syllabam
+circumflectunt, 	ut _meta_, _Creta_. Illae vero quae sunt ambae longae
+vel prior 	brevis et ulterior longa acuto accento pronuntiandae sunt, ut
+_nepos_, _leges_, _reges_. Hae vero quae sunt ambae breves 	similiter
+acuto accentu proferuntur, ut _bonus_, _melos_. Sed notandum quod si
+prior sit longa positione non circumflexo, sed acuto, accentu
+pronuntianda est, ut _arma_, _arcus_, quae, 	quamvis sit longa
+positione, tamen exprimenda est tali accentu 	quia non est naturalis.
+
+Trisyllabae namque et tetrasyllabae sive deinceps, si paenultimam
+correptam habuerint, antepaenultimam acuto accentu proferunt, ut
+_Tullius_, _Hostilius_. Nam paenultima, si positione longa fuerit,
+acuetur, antepaenultima vero gravabitur, ut _Catullus_, _Metellus_. Si
+vero ex muta et liquida longa in versu esse 	constat, in oratione quoque
+accentum mutat, ut _latebrae_, 	_tenebrae_. Syllaba vero ultima, si
+brevis sit et paenultimam 	naturaliter longam habuerit ipsam paenultimam
+circumflectit, ut 	_Cethegus_, _perosus_. Ultima quoque, si naturaliter
+longa 	fuerit, paenultimam acuet, ut _Athenae_, _Mycenae_. Ad hanc autem
+rem arsis et thesis necessariae. Nam in unaquaque parte oratione 	arsis
+et thesis sunt, non in ordine syllabarum, sed in 	pronuntiatione: velut
+in hac parte _natura_, ut quando dico 	_natu_ elevatur vox, et est arsis
+intus; quando vero sequitur 	_ra_ vox deponitur, et est thesis deforis.
+Quantum, autem 	suspenditur vox per arsin tantum deprimitur per thesin.
+Sed ipsa 	vox quae per dictiones formatur donee accentus perficiatur in
+arsin deputatur, quae autem post accentum sequitur in thesin.
+
+In the matter of exceptions to the rule that accent does not fall on the
+ultimate, we find a somewhat wide divergence of opinion among the
+grammarians. Some of them give numerous exceptions, particularly in the
+distinguishing of parts of speech, as, for instance, between the same
+word used as adverb or preposition, as _ante_ and _ante_; or between the
+same form as occurring in nouns and verbs, as _reges_ and _reges_; and
+in final syllables contracted or curtailed, as _finit_ (for _finivit_).
+
+But since on this point the grammarians do not agree among themselves,
+either as to number or class of exceptions, or even as to the manner of
+making them, we may treat this matter as of no great importance (as in
+English, we please ourselves in saying _perfect_ or _perfect_). And here
+it may be said that due attention to the quantity will of itself often
+regulate the accent in doubtful cases; as when we say _doce_, if we duly
+shorten the o and lengthen the e the effect will be correct, whether the
+ear of the grammarian detect accent on the final syllable, or not. For
+as Quintilian well says:
+
+Nam ut color oculorum indicio, sapor palati, odor narium dinoscitur, ita
+sonus aurium arbitrio subjectus est.
+
+PITCH.
+
+But besides the length of the syllable, and the place and quality of the
+accent, another matter claims attention.
+
+In English all that is required is to know the place of the accent,
+which is simply distinguished by greater stress of voice. This
+peculiarity of our language makes it more difficult for us than for
+other peoples to get the Latin accent, which is one of pitch.
+
+In Latin the acute accent means that on the syllable thus accented you
+raise the pitch; the grave indicates merely the lower tone; the
+circumflex, that the voice is first raised, then depressed, on the same
+syllable. To quote again the passage from Priscian:
+
+[Keil. v. in p. 519.] Acutus namque accentus ideo inventus est quod
+acuat sive elevet syllabam; gravis vero eo quod deprimat aut deponet;
+circumflexus ideo quod deprimat et acuat.
+
+In conclusion of this part of the work the following anecdotes from
+Aulus Gellius are given, as serving to show that to the rules of classic
+Roman pronunciation there were exceptions, apparently more or less
+arbitrary, some--perhaps many--of which we may not now hope to discover;
+and as serving still more usefully to show, by the stress laid upon
+points of comparative insignificance, that exceptions were rare, such as
+even scholars could afford to disagree upon, and not such as to affect
+the general tenor of the language. So that we are encouraged to believe
+that, as the English language may be well and even elegantly spoken by
+those whose speech still includes scores, if not hundreds, of variations
+in pronunciation, in sounds of letters or in accent, so we may hope to
+pronounce the Latin with some good degree of satisfaction, whether, for
+instance, we say _quiesco_ or _qui'esco_, _actito_ or _actito_:
+
+[Aul. Cell. VI. xv.] Amicus noster, homo multi studii atque in bonarum
+disciplinarum opere frequens, verbum _quiescit_ usitate e littera
+correpta dixit. Alter item amicus homo in doctrinis, 	quasi in
+praestigiis, mirificus, communiumque vocum respuens 	nimis et
+fastidiens, barbare eum dixisse opinatus est; quoniam 	producere
+debuisset, non corripere. Nam _quiescit_ ita oportere 	dici praedicavit,
+ut _calescit_, _nitescit_, _stupescit_, atque 	alia hujuscemodi multa.
+Id etiam addebat, quod _quies_ e 	producto, non brevi, diceretur. Noster
+autem, qua est omnium 	rerum verecunda mediocritate, ne si Aelii quidem
+Cincii et 	Santrae dicendum ita censuissent obsecuturum sese fuisse ait,
+contra perpetuam Latinae linguae consuetudinem. Neque se tam 	insignite
+locuturum, absona aut inaudita ut diceret. Litteras 	autem super hac re
+fecit, item inter haec exercitia quaedam 	ludicra; et _quiesco_ non esse
+his simile quae supra posui, nee a 	_quiete_ dictum, sed ab eo
+_quietem_; Graecaeque vocis [Greek: 	eschon kai eskon], lonice a verbo
+[Greek: escho ischo] et modum 	et originem verbum illud habere
+demonstravit. Rationibusque haud 	sane frigidis docuit _quiesco_ e
+littera longa dici non 	convenire.
+
+
+[Aul. Gell. IX. vi.] Ab eo, quod est _ago_ et _egi_, verba sunt 	quae
+appellant grammatici frequentativa, _actito_ et _actitavi_. Haec quosdam
+non sane indoctos viros audio ita 	pronuntiare ut primam in his litteram
+corripiant; rationemque dicant, quoniam in verbo principali, quod est
+_ago_, 	prima littera breviter pronuntiatur. Cur igitur ab eo quod est
+_edo_ et _ungo_, in quibus verbis prima littera 	breviter dicitur,
+_esito_ et _unctito_, quae sunt eorum frequentativa prima littera longa
+promimus? et contra, _dictito_, 	ab eo verbo quod est _dico_, correpte
+dicimus? Num ergo potius 	_actito_ et _actitavi_ producenda sunt?
+quoniam frequentativa ferme omnia eodem modo in prima syllaba dicuntur,
+quo participia 	praeteriti temporis ex iis verbis unde ea profecta sunt
+in eadem 	syllaba pronuntiantur; sicut _lego_, _lectus_, _lectito_
+facit; _ungo_, _unctus_, _unctito_; _scribo_, _scriptus_, _scriptito_;
+_moneo_, _monitus_, _monito_; _pendeo_, _pensus_, _pensito_; _edo_,
+_esus_, _esito_; _dico_, autem, _dictus_, 	_dictito_ facit; _gero_,
+_gestus_, _gestito_; _veho_, _vectus_, _vectito_; _rapio_, _raptus_,
+_raptito_; _capio_, 	_captus_, _captito_; _facio_, _factus_, _factito_.
+Sic igitur _actito_ producte in prima syllaba pronuntiandum, 	quoniam ex
+eo fit quod est _ago_ et _actus_.
+
+PART II.
+
+HOW TO USE IT.
+
+The directions now to be given may be fittingly introduced by a few
+paragraphs from Professor Munro's pamphlet on the pronunciation of
+Latin, already more than once quoted from. He says--and part of this has
+been cited before:
+
+"We know exactly how Cicero, or Quintilian did or could spell; we know
+the syllable on which they placed the accent of almost every word; and
+in almost every case we already follow them in this. I have the
+conviction that in their best days philological people took vast pains
+to make the writing exactly reproduce the sounding; and that if
+Quintilian or Tacitus spelt a word differently from Cicero or Livy, he
+also spoke it so far differently. With the same amount of evidence,
+direct and indirect, we have for Latin, it would not, I think, be worth
+anybody's while to try to recover the pronunciation of French or
+English; it might, I think, be worth his while to try to recover that of
+German or Italian, in which sound and spelling accord more nearly, and
+accent obeys more determinable laws."
+
+"I am convinced," he says in another place, "that the mainstay of an
+efficient reform is the adoption essentially of the Italian vowel
+system: it combines beauty, firmness and precision in a degree not
+equalled by any other system of which I have any knowledge. The little
+ragged boys in the streets of Rome and Florence enunciate their vowels
+in a style of which princes might be proud."
+
+And again:
+
+"I do not propose that every one should learn Italian in order to learn
+Latin. What I would suggest is, that those who know Italian should make
+use of their knowledge and should in many points take Italian sounds for
+the model to be followed; that those who do not know it should try to
+learn from others the sounds required, or such an approxi-mation to them
+as may be possible in each case."
+
+We may then sum up the results at which we have arrived in the following
+directions:
+
+First of all pay particular attention to the vowel sounds, to make them
+full and distinct, taking the Italian model, if you know Italian, and
+always observing strictly the quantity.
+
+Pronounce
+
+[long a] as in Italian _fato_ or as final a in aha!
+
+a as in Italian _fatto_; or as initial a in aha! or as in fast (not as
+in fat).
+
+[long e] as second e in Italian _fedele_; or as in fete (not fate); or
+as in vein.
+
+e as in Italian _fetta_; or as in very.
+
+[long i] as first i in Italian _timide_; or as in caprice,
+
+i as second i in Italian _timide_; or as in capricious.
+
+i or u, where the spelling varies between the two (e.g. _maximus_,
+_maxumus_), as in German Mueller.
+
+[long o] as first o in Italian _orlo_; or as in more.
+
+o as first o in Italian _rotto_; or as in wholly (not as in holly).
+
+[long u] as in Italian _rumore_; or as in rural.
+
+u as in Italian _ruppe_; or as in puss (not as in fuss).
+
+Let i in vi before d, t, m, r or x, in the first syllable of a word, be
+pronounced quite obscurely, somewhat as first i in virgin.
+
+In the matter of diphthongs, be sure to take always the correct
+spelling, to begin with, and thus avoid what Munro justly terms "hateful
+barbarisms like _coelum_, _coena_, _moestus_." Much time is wasted by
+students and bad habits are acquired in not finding, at the outset, the
+right spelling of each word and holding to it. This each student must do
+for himself, consulting a good dictionary, as editors and editions are
+not always to be depended on. Here it is the diphthongs that present the
+chief difficulty and call for the greatest care.
+
+In pronouncing diphthongs sound both vowels, but glide so rapidly from
+the first to the second as to offer to the ear but a single sound. In
+the publication of the Cambridge (Eng.) Philological Society on
+"Pronunciation of Latin in the Augustan Period," the following
+directions are given:
+
+"The pronunciation of these diphthongs, of which the last three are
+extremely rare, is best learnt by first sounding each vowel separately
+and then running them together, AE as ah-eh, AU as ah-oo, OE as o-eh, EI
+as eh-ee, EU as eh-oo, and UI as oo-ee."
+
+Thus:
+
+AE (ah-eh) as in German _naeher_; or as EA in pear; or AY in aye (ever);
+(not like a* in fate nor like AI in aisle).
+
+AI (ah-ee) as in aye (yes).
+
+AU (ah-oo) as in German _Haus_, with more of the U sound than OU in
+house.
+
+EI (eh-ee) nearly as in veil. (In _dein_, _deinde_, the EI is not 	a
+diphthong, but the E, when not forming a distinct syllable, is 	elided.)
+
+EU (eh-oo) as in Italian _Europa_. (In _neuter_ and _neutiquam_ 	elide
+the E.)
+
+OE (o-eh) nearly like German oe in _Goethe_.
+
+OI is not found in the classical period. (In _proin_, _proinde_, 	the O
+is either elided or forms a distinct syllable. OU in 	_prout_ is not a
+diphthong; the U is either elided or forms a 	distinct syllable.)
+
+UI (oo-ee) as in cuirass.
+
+In the pronunciation of consonants certain points claim special
+attention. And first among these is the sounding of the doubled
+consonants. Whoever has heard Italian spoken recognizes one of its
+greatest beauties to be the distinctness, yet smoothness, with which its
+ll and rr and cc--in short, all its doubled consonants--are pronounced.
+No feature of the language is more charming. And one who attempts the
+same in Latin and perseveres, with whatever difficulty and pains, will
+be amply rewarded in the music of the language.
+
+A good working rule for pronouncing doubled consonants is to hold the
+first until ready to pronounce the second: as in the words _we'll lie
+till late_, not to be pronounced as _we lie till eight_.
+
+Next in importance, and, in New England at least, first in difficulty,
+is the trilling of the r. There can be no approximation to a
+satisfactory pronunciation of Latin until this r is acquired; but the
+satisfaction in the result when accomplished is well worth all the pains
+taken.
+
+Another point to be observed is that the dentals t, d, n, l, require
+that the tongue touch the teeth, rather than the palate. Munro says: "d
+and t we treat with our usual slovenliness, and force them up to the
+roof of our mouth: we should make them real dentals, as no doubt the
+Romans made them, and then we shall see how readily _ad at_, _apud
+aput_, _illud illut_ and the like interchange." This requires care, but
+amply repays the effort.
+
+It is necessary also to remember that n before a guttural is pronounced
+as in the same position in English, e.g., in _ancora_ as in anchor; in
+_anxius_ as in anxious; in _relinquo_ as in relinquish.
+
+Remember to make n before f or s a mere nasal, having as little
+prominence otherwise as possible, and to carefully lengthen the
+preceding vowel.
+
+Studiously observe the length of the vowel before the terminations
+_gnus_, _gna_, _gnum_.
+
+Remember that the final syllable in m, when not elided, is to be
+pronounced as lightly and rapidly as possible, the more lightly and
+indistinctly the better.
+
+Remember that s must not be pronounced as z, except where it represents
+z in Greek words, as Smyrna (Zmyrna), Smaragdus (Zmaragdus), otherwise
+always pronounce as in sis.
+
+Remember in pronouncing v to direct the lower lip toward the upper lip,
+avoiding the upper teeth.
+
+In general, in pronouncing the consonants conform to the following
+scheme:
+
+b as in blab.
+
+b before s or t, sharpened to p, as _urbs_==_urps_; _obtinuit_==
+_optinuit_.
+
+c as sceptic (never as in sceptre).
+
+ch as in chemist (never as in cheer or chivalry).
+
+d as in did, but made more dental than in English.
+
+d final, before a word beginning with a consonant, in particles
+especially, often sharpened to t as in tid-bit (tit-bit).
+
+f as in fief, but with more breath than in English.
+
+g as in gig (never as in gin).
+
+gn in terminations _gnus_, _gna_, _gnum_, makes preceding vowel 	long.
+
+h as in hah!
+
+i (consonant) as in onion.
+
+k as in kink.
+
+l initial and final, as in lull.
+
+l medial, as in lullaby, always more dental than in English.
+
+m initial and medial, as in membrane.
+
+m before q, nasalized.
+
+m final, when not elided, touched lightly and obscurely, somewhat as in
+tandem (tandm); or as in the Englishman's pronunciation of Blenheim
+(Blenhm), Birmingham (Birminghm).
+
+n initial and final, as in nine.
+
+n medial, as in damnable, always more dental than in English.
+
+n before c, g, q, x, as in concord, anger, sinker, relinquish, anxious,
+the tongue not touching the roof of the mouth.
+
+n before f or s, nasal, lengthening the preceding vowel, as in
+_renaissance_.
+
+p as in pup.
+
+q as in quick.
+
+r as in roar, but trilled, as in Italian or French. (This is most
+important.)
+
+s as in sis (never as in his).
+
+t as in tot, but more dental than in English (never as in 	motion).
+
+th nearly as in then (never as in thin).
+
+v (u consonant) nearly as in verve, but labial, rather than
+labio-dental; like the German w (not like the English w). Make English v
+as nearly as may be done without touch-* the lower lip to the upper
+teeth.
+
+x as in six.
+
+z nearly as dz in adze.
+
+Doubled consonants to be pronounced each distinctly, by holding the
+first until ready to pronounce the second.
+
+As Professor Ellis well puts it: "No relaxation of the organs, no puff
+of wind or grunt of voice should intervene between the two parts of a
+doubled consonant, which should more resemble separated parts of one
+articulation than two separate articulations."
+
+"Duplication of consonants is consequently regarded simply as the
+energetic utterance of a single consonant."
+
+ELISION.
+
+Professor Ellis believes that the m was always omitted in speaking and
+the following consonant pronounced as if doubled (_quorum pars_ as
+_quoruppars_). Final m at the end of a sentence he thinks was not heard
+at all. Where a vowel followed he thinks that the m was not heard, the
+vowel before being slurred on to the initial vowel of the following
+word.
+
+The Cambridge (Eng.) Philological Society, however, takes the view that
+"final vowels (or diphthongs) when followed by vowels (or diphthongs)
+were not cut off, but lightly run on to the following word, as in
+Italian. But if the vowel was the same the effect was that of a single
+sound."
+
+Professor Munro says:
+
+"In respect of elision I would only say that, by comparing Plautus with
+Ovid, we may see how much the elaborate cultivation of the language had
+tended to a more distinct sounding of final syllables; and that but for
+Virgil's powerful influence the elision of long vowels would have almost
+ceased. Clearly we must not altogether pass over the elided vowel or
+syllable in m, except perhaps in the case of e* in common words, _que_,
+_neque_, and the like."
+
+This view, held by the Cambridge Philological Society and by Professor
+Munro, is the one generally accepted; the practice recommended by them
+is the one generally in use, and that which seems safe and suitable to
+follow. That is: Do not altogether pass over the elided vowel or
+syllable in m, except in cases of very close connection, in compound
+words or phrases, or when the final and initial vowel are the same, or
+in the case of e* final in common words, as _que_, _neque_, and the
+like; but let the final vowel run lightly on to the following vowel as
+in Italian, and touch lightly and obscurely the final syllable in m. The
+o or e of _proin_, _proinde_, _prout_, _dein_, _deinde_, _neuter_,
+_neutiquam_, when not forming a distinct syllable, are to be treated as
+cases of elision between two words.
+
+QUANTITY.
+
+In the pronunciation of Latin the observance of quantity and of pitch
+are the two most difficult points of attainment; and they are the
+crucial test of good reading.
+
+The observance of quantity is no less important in prose than in verse.
+A little reflection will convince the dullest mind that the Romans did
+not pronounce a word one way in prose and another in verse, that we have
+not in poetry and prose two languages. Cicero and Quintilian both enjoin
+a due admixture of long and short syllables in prose as well as verse;
+and any one who takes delight in reading Latin will heartily agree with
+Professor Munro when he says: "For myself, by observing quantity, I seem
+to feel more keenly the beauty of Cicero's style and Livy's, as well as
+Virgil's and Horace's."
+
+Therefore until one feels at home with the quantities, let him observe
+the rule of beating time in reading, to make sure that the long
+syllables get twice the time of the short ones. In this way he will soon
+have the pronunciation of each word correctly fixed in mind, and will
+not be obliged to think of his quantities in verse more than in prose. A
+long step has been taken in the enjoyment of Latin poetry when the
+reader does not have to be thinking of the 'feet.'
+
+Young students particularly should be especially careful in the final
+syllable of the verse. Since, so far as the measure is concerned, there
+is no difference there between the long and the short syllable, the
+reader is apt to be careless as to the length of the syllable itself,
+and to make all final syllables long, even to the mispronouncing of the
+word, thereby both making a false quantity and otherwise injuring the
+effect of the verse, by importing into it a monotony foreign to the
+original. Does not Cicero himself say that a short syllable at the end
+of the verse is as if you 'stood' (came to a stand), but a long one as
+if you 'sat down'?
+
+It is, in fact, in the pronouncing of final syllables everywhere that
+the most serious and persistent faults are found, bus for bus being one
+of the worst and most common cases. How much of the teacher's time might
+be spared, for better things, if he did not have to correct bus into
+bus!
+
+The disposition to neglect the double and doubled consonants is another
+serious fault, as well as the slovenly pronunciation of two consonants,
+where the reader fails to give the time necessary to speak each
+distinctly, making false quantity and mispronunciation at the same time.
+
+In general, if two symbols are written we are to infer that two sounds
+were intended. The only exception to this is in the case of a few words
+where the spelling varies, as casso or caso. In such cases we may
+suppose that the doubled consonant was only designed to indicate length.
+
+Another, apparent, exception is in the case of a mute followed by a
+liquid; but the mute and liquid are regularly sounded as one, and
+therefore do not affect the length of the preceding vowel. Sometimes,
+however, for the sake of time, the verse requires them to be pronounced
+separately. In this case each is to be given distinctly; the mute and
+liquid must not coalesce. For it must not be forgotten that, as a rule,
+the vowel before a mute followed by a liquid is short, in which case it
+must on no account be lengthened. Thus, ordinarily, we say pa-tris, but
+the verse may require pat-ris.
+
+Although the vowel before two consonants is generally--short, we find,
+in some instances, a long vowel in this position. For example, it would
+appear that the vowel of the supine and cognate parts of the verb is
+long if the vowel of the present indicative, though short, is followed
+by a medial (b, g, d, z), as actus, lectus, from ago, lego.
+
+Let it be remembered in the matter of i consonant between two vowels,
+that we have really the force of two ii's, as originally written, one,
+vowel, making a diphthong with the preceding, the other, consonant,
+introducing the new syllable; and that the same is true of the compounds
+of _jacio_, which should be written with a single i but pronounced as
+with two, as _obicit (objicit)_.
+
+ACCENT.
+
+The question of accent presents little difficulty as to place, but some
+as to quality, and much as to kind. As to quality, it must be remembered
+that while the acute accent is found on syllables either short or long
+(by nature or position), and on either the penult or the antepenult, the
+circumflex is found only on long vowels, and (in words of more than one
+syllable) only on the penult, and then only in case the ultima is short.
+Thus, _spes_, but _dux_; _luna_, but _lun[long a]_; _legatus_, but
+_legati_. In these examples the length of the syllable is the same and
+of course remains the same in inflection, but the quality of the accent
+changes. In the one case the voice is both raised and depressed on the
+same syllable, in the other it is only raised. As Professor Ellis puts
+it: "If the last syllable but one is long, it is spoken with a raised
+pitch, which is maintained throughout if its vowel is short, as:
+_vent[long o]s_, or if the last syllable is long, as: _f[long a]m[long
+a]e_; but sinks immediately if its own vowel is long, and at the same
+time the vowel of the last syllable is short, as _fama_, to be
+distinguished from _f[long a]m[long a]_."
+
+But when we come to the question of the _kind_ of accent, we come upon
+the most serious matter practically in the pronunciation of Latin, and
+this because of a difficulty peculiar to the English speaking peoples.
+The English accent is one of _stress_, whereas the Roman is one of
+_pitch_.
+
+No one will disagree with Professor Ellis when he "assumes," in his
+Quantitative Pronunciation of Latin, "that the Augustan Romans had _no_
+force accent, that is, that they did not, as we do, distinguish one
+syllable in every word _invariably_ by pronouncing it with greater
+force, that is, with greater loudness, than the others, but that the
+force varied according to the feeling of the moment, or the beat of the
+timekeeper in singing, and was used for purposes of expression; just as
+with us, musical pitch is free, that is, just as we may pronounce the
+same word with different musical pitches for its different syllables,
+and in fact are obliged to vary the musical pitch in interrogations and
+replies. The fixity of musical pitch and freedom of degrees of force in
+Latin, and the freedom of musical pitch and fixity of degrees of force
+in English sharply distinguish the two pronunciations even irrespective
+of quantity."
+
+But this pitch accent, while alien to us, is not impossible of
+acquisition, and it is essential to any adequate rendering of any Latin
+writer, whether of prose or verse. Nor will the attainment be a work of
+indefinite time if one pursues with constancy some such course as the
+following, recommended by Professor Ellis:
+
+"The place of raised pitch," he says, "must be strictly observed, and
+for this purpose the verses had better be first read in a kind of
+sing-song, the high pitched syllables being all of one pitch and the low
+pitched syllables being all of one pitch also, but about a musical
+'fifth' lower than the other, as if the latter were sung to the lowest
+note of the fourth string of a violin, and the former were sung to the
+lowest note of its third string."
+
+In the foregoing pages an effort has been made to bring together
+compactly and to set forth concisely the nature of the 'Roman method' of
+pronouncing Latin; the reasons for adopting, and the simplest means of
+acquiring it. No attempt has been made at a philosophical or exhaustive
+treatment of the subject; but at the same time it is hoped that nothing
+unphilosophical has crept in, or anything been omitted, which might have
+been given, to render the subject intelligible and enable the
+intelligent reader to understand the points and be able to give a reason
+for each usage herein recommended.
+
+The main object in view in preparing this little book has been to help
+the teachers of Latin in the secondary schools, to furnish them
+something not too voluminous, yet as satisfactory as the nature of the
+case allows, upon a subject which the present diversity of opinion and
+practice has rendered unnecessarily obscure.
+
+To these teachers, then, a word from Professor Ellis may be fitly spoken
+in conclusion:
+
+"To teach a person to read prose _well_, even in his own language, is
+difficult, partly because he has seldom heard prose well read, though he
+is constantly hearing prose around him, intonated, but unrhythmical. In
+the case of a dead language, like the Latin, which the pupil never hears
+spoken, and seldom hears read, except by himself or his equally ignorant
+and hobbling fellow-scholars, this difficulty is inordinately increased.
+Let me once more impress on every teacher of Latin the _duty_ of himself
+learning to read Latin readily according to accent and quantity; the
+_duty_ of his reading out to his pupils, of his setting them a
+_pattern_, of his hearing that they follow it, of his correcting their
+mistakes, of his _leading_ them into right habits. If the quantitative
+pronunciation be adopted, no one will be fit to become a classical
+teacher who cannot read a simple Latin sentence decently, with a strict
+observance of that quantity by which alone the greatest of Latin orators
+regulated his own rhythms."
+
+"All pronunciation is acquired by imitation, and it is not till after
+hearing a sound many times that we are able to grasp it sufficiently
+well to imitate. It is a mistake constantly made by teachers of language
+to suppose that a pupil knows by once hearing unfamiliar sounds, or even
+unfamiliar combinations of familiar sounds. When pupils are made to
+imitate too soon, they acquire an erroneous pronunciation, which they
+afterward hear constantly from themselves actually or mentally, and
+believe that they hear from the teacher during the small fraction of a
+second that each sound lasts, and hence the habits of these organs
+become fixed."
+
+The following direction is of the utmost importance (Curwen's "Standard
+Course," p. 3): "The teacher never sings (speaks) _with_ his pupils, but
+sings (utters, reads, dictates) to them a brief and soft _pattern_. The
+first art of the pupil is to _listen well_ to the pattern, and then to
+imitate it exactly. He that listens best sings (speaks) best."
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Roman Pronunciation of Latin
+by Frances E. Lord
+
+*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ROMAN PRONUNCIATION OF LATIN ***
+
+This file should be named 7rlat10.txt or 7rlat10.zip
+Corrected EDITIONS of our eBooks get a new NUMBER, 7rlat11.txt
+VERSIONS based on separate sources get new LETTER, 7rlat10a.txt
+
+Produced by David Starner, Ted Garvin
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team.
+
+Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the US
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we usually do not
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+We are now trying to release all our eBooks one year in advance
+of the official release dates, leaving time for better editing.
+Please be encouraged to tell us about any error or corrections,
+even years after the official publication date.
+
+Please note neither this listing nor its contents are final til
+midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement.
+The official release date of all Project Gutenberg eBooks is at
+Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month.  A
+preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment
+and editing by those who wish to do so.
+
+Most people start at our Web sites at:
+http://gutenberg.net or
+http://promo.net/pg
+
+These Web sites include award-winning information about Project
+Gutenberg, including how to donate, how to help produce our new
+eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter (free!).
+
+
+Those of you who want to download any eBook before announcement
+can get to them as follows, and just download by date.  This is
+also a good way to get them instantly upon announcement, as the
+indexes our cataloguers produce obviously take a while after an
+announcement goes out in the Project Gutenberg Newsletter.
+
+http://www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg/etext03 or
+ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/docs/books/gutenberg/etext03
+
+Or /etext02, 01, 00, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 92, 91 or 90
+
+Just search by the first five letters of the filename you want,
+as it appears in our Newsletters.
+
+
+Information about Project Gutenberg (one page)
+
+We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work.  The
+time it takes us, a rather conservative estimate, is fifty hours
+to get any eBook selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright
+searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc.   Our
+projected audience is one hundred million readers.  If the value
+per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2
+million dollars per hour in 2002 as we release over 100 new text
+files per month:  1240 more eBooks in 2001 for a total of 4000+
+We are already on our way to trying for 2000 more eBooks in 2002
+If they reach just 1-2% of the world's population then the total
+will reach over half a trillion eBooks given away by year's end.
+
+The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away 1 Trillion eBooks!
+This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers,
+which is only about 4% of the present number of computer users.
+
+Here is the briefest record of our progress (* means estimated):
+
+eBooks Year Month
+
+    1  1971 July
+   10  1991 January
+  100  1994 January
+ 1000  1997 August
+ 1500  1998 October
+ 2000  1999 December
+ 2500  2000 December
+ 3000  2001 November
+ 4000  2001 October/November
+ 6000  2002 December*
+ 9000  2003 November*
+10000  2004 January*
+
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation has been created
+to secure a future for Project Gutenberg into the next millennium.
+
+We need your donations more than ever!
+
+As of February, 2002, contributions are being solicited from people
+and organizations in: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut,
+Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois,
+Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts,
+Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New
+Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio,
+Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South
+Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West
+Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
+
+We have filed in all 50 states now, but these are the only ones
+that have responded.
+
+As the requirements for other states are met, additions to this list
+will be made and fund raising will begin in the additional states.
+Please feel free to ask to check the status of your state.
+
+In answer to various questions we have received on this:
+
+We are constantly working on finishing the paperwork to legally
+request donations in all 50 states.  If your state is not listed and
+you would like to know if we have added it since the list you have,
+just ask.
+
+While we cannot solicit donations from people in states where we are
+not yet registered, we know of no prohibition against accepting
+donations from donors in these states who approach us with an offer to
+donate.
+
+International donations are accepted, but we don't know ANYTHING about
+how to make them tax-deductible, or even if they CAN be made
+deductible, and don't have the staff to handle it even if there are
+ways.
+
+Donations by check or money order may be sent to:
+
+Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+PMB 113
+1739 University Ave.
+Oxford, MS 38655-4109
+
+Contact us if you want to arrange for a wire transfer or payment
+method other than by check or money order.
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation has been approved by
+the US Internal Revenue Service as a 501(c)(3) organization with EIN
+[Employee Identification Number] 64-622154.  Donations are
+tax-deductible to the maximum extent permitted by law.  As fund-raising
+requirements for other states are met, additions to this list will be
+made and fund-raising will begin in the additional states.
+
+We need your donations more than ever!
+
+You can get up to date donation information online at:
+
+http://www.gutenberg.net/donation.html
+
+
+***
+
+If you can't reach Project Gutenberg,
+you can always email directly to:
+
+Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com>
+
+Prof. Hart will answer or forward your message.
+
+We would prefer to send you information by email.
+
+
+**The Legal Small Print**
+
+
+(Three Pages)
+
+***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN EBOOKS**START***
+Why is this "Small Print!" statement here? You know: lawyers.
+They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with
+your copy of this eBook, even if you got it for free from
+someone other than us, and even if what's wrong is not our
+fault. So, among other things, this "Small Print!" statement
+disclaims most of our liability to you. It also tells you how
+you may distribute copies of this eBook if you want to.
+
+*BEFORE!* YOU USE OR READ THIS EBOOK
+By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
+eBook, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept
+this "Small Print!" statement. If you do not, you can receive
+a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this eBook by
+sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person
+you got it from. If you received this eBook on a physical
+medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request.
+
+ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM EBOOKS
+This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBook, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBooks,
+is a "public domain" work distributed by Professor Michael S. Hart
+through the Project Gutenberg Association (the "Project").
+Among other things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright
+on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and
+distribute it in the United States without permission and
+without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth
+below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this eBook
+under the "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark.
+
+Please do not use the "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark to market
+any commercial products without permission.
+
+To create these eBooks, the Project expends considerable
+efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain
+works. Despite these efforts, the Project's eBooks and any
+medium they may be on may contain "Defects". Among other
+things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
+intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged
+disk or other eBook medium, a computer virus, or computer
+codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.
+
+LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES
+But for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described below,
+[1] Michael Hart and the Foundation (and any other party you may
+receive this eBook from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBook) disclaims
+all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including
+legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR
+UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT,
+INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE
+OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE
+POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
+
+If you discover a Defect in this eBook within 90 days of
+receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any)
+you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that
+time to the person you received it from. If you received it
+on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and
+such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement
+copy. If you received it electronically, such person may
+choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to
+receive it electronically.
+
+THIS EBOOK IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU "AS-IS". NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS
+TO THE EBOOK OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT
+LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A
+PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
+
+Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or
+the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the
+above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you
+may have other legal rights.
+
+INDEMNITY
+You will indemnify and hold Michael Hart, the Foundation,
+and its trustees and agents, and any volunteers associated
+with the production and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
+texts harmless, from all liability, cost and expense, including
+legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the
+following that you do or cause:  [1] distribution of this eBook,
+[2] alteration, modification, or addition to the eBook,
+or [3] any Defect.
+
+DISTRIBUTION UNDER "PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm"
+You may distribute copies of this eBook electronically, or by
+disk, book or any other medium if you either delete this
+"Small Print!" and all other references to Project Gutenberg,
+or:
+
+[1]  Only give exact copies of it.  Among other things, this
+     requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the
+     eBook or this "small print!" statement.  You may however,
+     if you wish, distribute this eBook in machine readable
+     binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form,
+     including any form resulting from conversion by word
+     processing or hypertext software, but only so long as
+     *EITHER*:
+
+     [*]  The eBook, when displayed, is clearly readable, and
+          does *not* contain characters other than those
+          intended by the author of the work, although tilde
+          (~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may
+          be used to convey punctuation intended by the
+          author, and additional characters may be used to
+          indicate hypertext links; OR
+
+     [*]  The eBook may be readily converted by the reader at
+          no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent
+          form by the program that displays the eBook (as is
+          the case, for instance, with most word processors);
+          OR
+
+     [*]  You provide, or agree to also provide on request at
+          no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the
+          eBook in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC
+          or other equivalent proprietary form).
+
+[2]  Honor the eBook refund and replacement provisions of this
+     "Small Print!" statement.
+
+[3]  Pay a trademark license fee to the Foundation of 20% of the
+     gross profits you derive calculated using the method you
+     already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  If you
+     don't derive profits, no royalty is due.  Royalties are
+     payable to "Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation"
+     the 60 days following each date you prepare (or were
+     legally required to prepare) your annual (or equivalent
+     periodic) tax return.  Please contact us beforehand to
+     let us know your plans and to work out the details.
+
+WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO?
+Project Gutenberg is dedicated to increasing the number of
+public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed
+in machine readable form.
+
+The Project gratefully accepts contributions of money, time,
+public domain materials, or royalty free copyright licenses.
+Money should be paid to the:
+"Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+If you are interested in contributing scanning equipment or
+software or other items, please contact Michael Hart at:
+hart@pobox.com
+
+[Portions of this eBook's header and trailer may be reprinted only
+when distributed free of all fees.  Copyright (C) 2001, 2002 by
+Michael S. Hart.  Project Gutenberg is a TradeMark and may not be
+used in any sales of Project Gutenberg eBooks or other materials be
+they hardware or software or any other related product without
+express permission.]
+
+*END THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN EBOOKS*Ver.02/11/02*END*
diff --git a/old/7rlat10.zip b/old/7rlat10.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9f4496d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/7rlat10.zip
diff --git a/old/8rlat10.txt b/old/8rlat10.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..269104c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/8rlat10.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2569 @@
+Project Gutenberg's The Roman Pronunciation of Latin, by Frances E. Lord
+
+Copyright laws are changing all over the world. Be sure to check the
+copyright laws for your country before downloading or redistributing
+this or any other Project Gutenberg eBook.
+
+This header should be the first thing seen when viewing this Project
+Gutenberg file.  Please do not remove it.  Do not change or edit the
+header without written permission.
+
+Please read the "legal small print," and other information about the
+eBook and Project Gutenberg at the bottom of this file.  Included is
+important information about your specific rights and restrictions in
+how the file may be used.  You can also find out about how to make a
+donation to Project Gutenberg, and how to get involved.
+
+
+**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts**
+
+**eBooks Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971**
+
+*****These eBooks Were Prepared By Thousands of Volunteers!*****
+
+
+Title: The Roman Pronunciation of Latin
+
+Author: Frances E. Lord
+
+Release Date: February, 2005 [EBook #7528]
+[Yes, we are more than one year ahead of schedule]
+[This file was first posted on May 14, 2003]
+[Most recently updated on May 24, 2007]
+
+Edition: 10
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-Latin-1
+
+*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ROMAN PRONUNCIATION OF LATIN ***
+
+
+
+Produced by David Starner, Ted Garvin
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team.
+
+
+
+
+THE ROMAN PRONUNCIATION OF LATIN WHY WE USE IT AND HOW TO USE IT BY
+FRANCES E. LORD PROFESSOR OF LATIN IN WELLESLEY COLLEGE BOSTON, U.S.A.
+
+INTRODUCTION
+
+The argument brought against the 'Roman pronunciation' of Latin is
+twofold: the impossibility of perfect theoretical knowledge, and the
+difficulty of practical attainment.
+
+If to know the main features of the classic pronunciation of Latin were
+impossible, then our obvious course would be to refuse the attempt; to
+regard the language as in reality dead, and to make no pretence of
+reading it. This is in fact what the English scholars generally do. But
+if we may know substantially the sounds of the tongue in which Cicero
+spoke and Horace sung, shall we give up the delights of the melody and
+the rhythm and content ourselves with the thought form? Poetry
+especially does not exist apart from sound; sense alone will not
+constitute it, nor even sense and form without sound.
+
+But if it is true that the task of practical acquisition is, if not
+impossible, extremely difficult, 'the work of a lifetime,' as the
+objectors say, do the results justify the expenditure of time and labor?
+
+The position of the English-speaking peoples is not the same in this as
+that of Europeans. Europeans have not the same necessity to urge them to
+the 'Roman pronunciation.' Their own languages represent the Latin more
+or less adequately, in vowel sounds, in accent, and even, to some
+extent, in quantity; so that with them, all is not lost if they
+translate the sounds into their own tongues; while with us, nothing is
+left--sound, accent, quantity, all is gone; none of these is reproduced,
+or even suggested, in English.
+
+We believe a great part of our difficulty, in this country, lies in the
+fact that so few of those who study and teach Latin really know what the
+'Roman pronunciation' is, or how to use it. Inquiries are constantly
+being made by teachers, Why is this so? What authority is there for
+this? What reason for that?
+
+In the hope of giving help to those who desire to know the Why and the
+How this little compendium is made; in the interest of
+time-and-labor-saving uniformity, and in the belief that what cannot be
+fully known or perfectly acquired does still not prevent our perceiving,
+and showing in some worthy manner and to some satisfactory degree, how,
+as well as what, the honey-tongued orators and divine poets of Rome
+spoke or sung.
+
+In the following pages free use has been made of the highest English
+authorities, of Oxford and Cambridge. Quotations will be found from
+Prof. H. A. J. Munro's pamphlet on "Pronunciation of Latin," and from
+Prof. A. J. Ellis' book on "Quantitative Pronunciation of Latin"; also
+from the pamphlet issued by the Cambridge (Eng.) Philological Society,
+on the "Pronunciation of Latin in the Augustan Period."
+
+In the present compendium the chief points of divergence from the
+general American understanding of the 'Roman' method are in respect of
+the diphthong AE and the consonantal U. In these cases the pronunciation
+herein recommended for the AE is that favored by Roby, Munro, and Ellis,
+and adopted by the Cambridge Philological Society; for the V, or U
+consonant, that advocated by Corssen, A. J. Ellis, and Robinson Ellis.
+
+PART I.
+
+WHY WE USE IT.
+
+In general, the greater part of our knowledge of the pronunciation of
+Latin comes from the Latin grammarians, whose authority varies greatly
+in value; or through incidental statements and expressions of the
+classic writers themselves; or from monumental inscriptions. Of these
+three, the first is inferior to the other two in quality, but they in
+turn are comparatively meagre in quantity.
+
+In the first place, we know (a most important piece of knowledge) that,
+as a rule, Latin was pronounced as written. This is evident from the
+fact, among others, that the same exceptions recur, and are mentioned
+over and over again, in the grammarians, and that so much is made of
+comparatively, and confessedly, insignificant points. Such, we may be
+sure, would not have been the case had exceptions been numerous. Then we
+have the authority of Quintilian--than whom is no higher. He speaks of
+the subtleties of the grammarians:
+
+[Quint. I. iv. 6.] Interiora velut sacri hujus adeuntibus apparebit
+multa rerum subtilitas, quae non modo acuere ingenia puerilia sed
+exercere altissimam quoque eruditionem ac scientiam possit.
+
+And says:
+
+[Id, ib. iv. 7.] An cujuslibet auris est exigere litterarum sonos?
+
+But after citing some of those idiosyncrasies which appear on the pages
+of all the grammarians, he finally sums up the matter in the following
+significant words:
+
+[Id. ib. vii. 30, 31.] Indicium autem suum grammaticus interponat his
+omnibus; nam hoc valere plurimum debet. Ego (note the _ego_) nisi quod
+consuetudo obtinuerit sic scribendum quidque judico, quomodo sonat. Hic
+enim est usus litterarum, ut custodiant voces et velut depositum reddant
+legentibus, itaque id exprimere debent quod dicturi sumus.
+
+This is still a characteristic of the Italian language, so that one may
+by books, getting the rules from the grammarians, learn to pronounce the
+language with a good degree of correctness.
+
+On this point Professor Munro says:
+
+"We see in the first volume of the Corpus Inscr. Latin. a map, as it
+were, of the language spread open before us, and feel sure that change
+of spelling meant systematical change of pronunciation: _coira, coera,
+cura; aiquos, aequos, aecus; queicumque, quicumque_, etc., etc."
+
+And again:
+
+"We know exactly how Cicero or Quintilian did or could spell; we know
+the syllable on which they placed the accent of almost every word; and
+in almost every case we already follow them in this. I have the
+conviction that in their best days philological people took vast pains
+to make the writing exactly reproduce the sounding; and that if
+Quintilian or Tacitus spelt a word differently from Cicero or Livy, he
+also spoke it so far differently."
+
+Three chief factors are essential to the Latin language, and each of
+these must be known with some good degree of certainty, if we would lay
+claim to an understanding of Roman pronunciation.
+
+These are:
+
+(1) Sounds of the letters (vowels, diphthongs, consonants);
+
+(2) Quantity;
+
+(3) Accent.
+
+
+SOUNDS OF THE LETTERS.
+
+VOWELS.
+
+The vowels are five: A, E, I, O, U.
+
+These when uttered alone are always long.
+
+[Pompei. _Comm. ad Donat._ Keil. v. V. p. 101 et al.] Vocales autem
+quinque sunt: A, E, I, O, U. Istae quinque, quando solae proferuntur,
+longae sunt semper: quando solas litteras dicis, longae sunt. A sola
+longa est; E sola longa est.
+
+A is uttered with the mouth widely opened, the tongue suspended and not
+touching the teeth:
+
+[Ars Gram. Mar. Vict. de orthographia et de metrica ratione, I. vi. 6.]
+A littera rictu patulo, suspensa neque impressa dentibus lingua,
+enuntiatur.
+
+E is uttered with the mouth less widely open, and the lips drawn back
+and inward:
+
+[Id. ib. vi. 7.] E quae sequitur, de represso modice rictu oris,
+reductisque introrsum labiis, effertur.
+
+I will voice itself with the mouth half closed and the teeth gently
+pressed by the tongue:
+
+[Id. ib. vi. 8.] I semicluso ore, impressisque sensim lingua dentibus,
+vocem dabit.
+
+O (long) will give the "tragic sound" through rounded opening, with lips
+protruded, the tongue pendulous in the roof of the mouth:
+
+[Id. ib. vi. 9.] O longum autem, protrusis labiis rictu tereti, lingua
+arcu oris pendula, sonum tragicum dabit.
+
+U is uttered with the lips protruding and approaching each other, like
+the Greek ou:
+
+[Id. ib. vi. 10.] U litteram quotiens enuntiamus, productis et
+coeuntibus labris efferemus... quam nisi per ou conjunctam Graeci
+scribere ac pronuntiare non possunt.
+
+Of these five vowels the grammarians say that three (A, I, U) do not
+change their quality with their quantity:
+
+[Pompei. _Comm. ad Donat._ Keil. v. V. p. 101.] De istis quinque
+litteris tres sunt, quae sive breves sive longae ejusdemmodi sunt, A, I,
+U: similiter habent sive longae sive breves.
+
+But two (E, O) change their quality:
+
+[Id. ib.] O vero et E non sonant breves. E aliter longa aliter brevis
+sonat. Dicit ita Terentianus (hoc dixit) 'Quotienscumque E longam
+volumus proferri, vicina sit ad I (i with macron to show length)
+litteram.' Ipse sonus sic debet sonare, quomodo sonat I (i without
+macron to show short) littera. Quando dicis _evitat_, vicina debet esse,
+sic pressa, sic angusta, ut vicina sit ad I litteram. Quando vis dicere
+brevem e simpliciter sonat. O longa sit an brevis. Si longa est, debet
+sonus ipse intra palatum sonare, ut si dices _orator_, quasi intra
+sonat, intra palatum. Si brevis est debet primis labris sonare, quasi
+extremis labris, ut puta sic dices _obit_. Habes istam regulam expressam
+in Terentiano. Quando vis exprimere quia brevis est, primis labris
+sonat; quando exprimis longam, intra palatum sonat.
+
+[Ars Gram. Mar. Vict. de Orthog. et de Metr. Rat., I. vi. 9.] O qui
+correptum enuntiat, nec magno hiatu labra reserabit, et retrorsum actam
+linguam tenebit.
+
+It would thus seem that the long E of the Latin in its prolongation
+draws into the I sound, somewhat as if I were subjoined, as in the
+English _vein_ or Italian _fedele._
+
+The grammarians speak of the obscure sound of I and U, short and
+unaccented in the middle of a word; so that in a number of words I and U
+were written indifferently, even by classic writers, as _optimus_ or
+_optumus, maximus_ or _maxumus_. This is but a simple and natural thing.
+The same obscurity occurs often in English, as, for instance, in words
+ending in _able_ or _ible_. How easy, for instance, to confuse the sound
+and spelling in such words as _detestable_ and _digestible_.
+
+[Serg. Explan. Art. Donat. Keil. v. II. p. 475.] Hae etiam duae I et U
+... interdum expressum suum sonum non habent: I, ut _vir_; U, ut
+_optumus_. Non enim possumus dicere _vir_ producta I, nec _optumus_
+producta U; unde etiam mediae dicuntur. Et hoc in commune patiuntur
+inter se, et bene dixit Donatus has litteras in quibusdam dictionibus
+expressum suum sonum non habere. Hae etiam mediae dicuntur, quia
+quibusdam dictionibus expressum sonum non habent,... ut _maxume_ pro
+_maxime_.... In quibusdam nominibus non certum exprimunt sonum; I, ut
+_vir_ modo I (with 	macron) opprimitur; U ut _optumus_ modo U perdit
+sonum.
+
+Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 465.] Cur per VI scribitur (virum)? Quia omnia nomina a
+VI syllaba incipientia per VI scribuntur exceptis _bitumine_ et _bile_,
+quando _fel_ significat, et illis quae a _bis_ adverbio componuntur, ut
+_biceps, bipatens, bivium_. Cur sonum videtur habere in hac dictione I
+vocalis U litterae Graecae? Quia omnis dictio a VI syllaba brevi
+incipiens, D vel T vel M vel R vel X sequentibus, hoc sono pronuntiatur,
+ut _video, videbam, videbo_: quia in his temporibus VI corripitur,
+mutavit sonum in U: in praeterito autem perfecto, et in aliis in quibus
+producitur, naturalem servavit sonum, ut _vidi, videram, vidissem,
+videro_. Similiter _vitium_ mutat sonum, quia corripitur; _vita_ autem
+non mutat, quia producitur. Similiter _vim_ mutat quia corripitur,
+_vimen_ autem non mutat quia producitur. Similiter _vir_ et _virgo_
+mutant, quia corripiuntur: _virus_ autem et _vires_ non mutant, quia
+producuntur. _Vix_ mutant, quia corripitur: _vixi_ non mutant, quia
+producitur. Hoc idem plerique solent etiam in illis dictionibus facere,
+in quibus a FI brevi incipiunt syllabae sequentibus supra dictis
+consonantibus, ut _fides, perfidus, confiteor, infimus, firmus_. Sunt
+autem qui non adeo hoc observant, cum de VI nemo fere dubitat.
+
+From this it would seem that in the positions above mentioned VI short--
+and with some speakers FI short--had an obscure, somewhat thickened,
+sound, not unlike that heard in the English words _virgin, firm_, a not
+unnatural obscuration. As Donatus says of it:
+
+[Keil. v. IV. p. 367.] Pingue nescio quid pro naturali sono usurpamus.
+
+Sometimes, apparently, this tendency ran into excess, and the long I was
+also obscured; while sometimes the short I was pronounced too
+distinctly. This vice is commented on by the grammarians, under the name
+_iotacism_:
+
+[Pompei. _Comm. ad Donat_. Keil. v. V. p. 394.] _Iotacismum_ dicunt
+vitium quod per I litteram vel pinguius vel exilius prolatam fit. Galli
+pinguius hanc utuntur, ut cum dicunt _ite_, non expresse ipsam
+proferentes, sed inter E et I pinguiorem sonum nescio quem ponentes.
+Graeci exilius hanc proferunt, adeo expressioni ejus tenui studentes, ut
+si dicant _jus_, aliquantulum de priori littera sic proferant, ut videas
+dissyllabam esse factam. Romanae linguae in hoc erit moderatio, ut
+exilis ejus sonus sit, ubi ab ea verbum incipit, ut _ite_, aut pinguior,
+ubi in ea desinit verbum, ut _habui_, _tenui_; medium quendam sonum
+inter E et I habet, ubi in medio sermone est, ut _hominem_. Mihi tamen
+videtur, quando producta est, plenior vel acutior esse; quando autem
+brevis est medium sonum exhibere debet, sicut eadem exempla quae posita
+sunt possunt declarare.
+
+The grammarians also note the peculiar relation of U to Q, as in the
+following passage:
+
+[Serg. Explan. Art. Donat. Keil. v. IV. p. 475.] U vero hoc accidit
+proprium,	ut interdum nec vocalis nec consonans sit, hoc est ut non sit
+littera, cum inter Q et aliquam vocalem ponitur. Nam consonans non
+potest esse, quia ante se habet alteram consonantem, id est Q; vocalis
+esse non potest, quia sequitur illam vocalis, ut _quare, quomodo_.
+
+DIPHTHONGS.
+
+In Marius Victorinus we find diphthongs thus defined:
+
+[Mar. Vict. Gaisford, I. v. 54.] Duae inter se vocales jugatae ac sub
+unius vocis enuntiatione prolatae syllabam faciunt natura longam, quam
+Graeci _diphthongon_ vocant, veluti geminae vocis unum sonum, ut AE, OE,
+AU.
+
+And more fully in the following paragraph:
+
+[Mar. Vict. Gaisford, I. v. 6.] Sunt longae naturaliter syllabae, cum
+duae vocales junguntur, quas syllabas Graeci _diphthongos_ vocant; ut
+AE, OE, AU, EU, EI: nam illae diphthongi non sunt quae fiunt per vocales
+loco consonantium positas; ut IA, IE, II, IO, IU, VA, VE, VI, VO, VU.
+
+Of these diphthongs EU occurs,--except in Greek words,--only in _heus,
+heu, eheu_; in _seu, ceu, neu_. In _neuter_ and _neutiquam_ the E is
+probably elided.
+
+Diphthongs ending in I, viz., EI, OI, UI, occur only in a few
+interjections and in cases of contraction.
+
+While in pronouncing the diphthong the sound of both vowels was to some
+extent preserved, there are many indications that (in accordance with
+the custom of making a vowel before another vowel short) the first vowel
+of the diphthong was hastened over and the second received the stress.
+As in modern Greek we find all diphthongs that end in _iota_ pronounced
+as simple I, so in Latin there are numerous instances, before and during
+the classic period, of the use of E for AE or OE, and it is to be noted
+that in the latest spelling E generally prevails.
+
+Munro says:
+
+"In Lucilius's time the rustics said _Cecilius pretor_ for _Caecilius
+praetor_; in two Samothracian inscriptions older than B.C. 100 (the
+sound of AI by that time verging to an open E), we find  _muste piei_
+and _muste_: in similar inscriptions [Greek: transliterated]*_mystai_
+_piei_, and _mystae_: _Paeligni_ is reproduced in Strabo by
+[Greek: transliterated]_Pelignoi_: Cicero, Virgil, Festus, and Servius
+all alike give _caestos_ for [Greek: transliterated]_kestos_: by the
+first century, perhaps sooner, E was very frequently put for AE in words
+like _taeter_: we often find _teter_, _erumna_, _mestus_, _presto_ and
+the like: soon inscriptions and MSS. began pertinaciously to offer AE
+for E*: _praetum_, _praeces_, _quaerella_, _aegestas_ and the like, the
+AE representing a short and very open E: sometimes it stands for a long
+E, as often in _plaenus_, the liquid before and after making perhaps the
+E more open ([Greek: transliteration]_skaenae_ is always _scaena_): and
+it is from this form _plaenus_ that in Italian, contrary to the usual
+law of long Latin E, we have _pièno_ with open E. With such pedigree
+then, and with the genuine Latin AE _always_ represented in Italian by
+open E, can we hesitate to pronounce the AE with this open E sound?"
+
+The argument sometimes used, for pronouncing AE like AI, that in the
+poets we occasionally find AI in the genitive singular of the first
+declension, appears to have little weight in view of the following
+explanation:
+
+[Mar. Vict. de Orthog. et de Metr. Rat., I. iii. 38.] AE Syllabam quidam
+more Graecorum per AI scribunt, nec illud quidem custodient, quia omnes
+fere, qui de orthographia aliquid scriptum reliquerunt, praecipiunt,
+nomina femina casu nominativo A finita, numero plurali in AE exire, ut
+_Aeliae_: eadem per A et I scripta numerum singularem ostendere, ut
+hujus _Aeliai_: inducti a poetis, qui _pictai vestis_ scripserunt: et
+quia Graeci per I potissimum hanc syllabam scribunt propter exilitatem
+litterae, [Greek: transliteration]_ae_ autem propter naturalem
+productionem jungere vocali alteri non possunt: _iota_ vero, quae est
+brevis eademque longa, aptior ad hanc structuram visa est: quam
+potestatem apud nos habet et I, quae est longa et brevis. Vos igitur
+sine controversia ambiguitatis, et pluralem nominativum, et singularem
+genitivum per AE scribite: nam qui non potest dignoscere supra
+scriptarum vocum numeros et casum, valde est hebes.
+
+Of OE Munro says:
+
+"When hateful barbarisms like _coelum_, _coena_, _moestus_, are
+eliminated, OE occurs very rarely in Latin: _coepi_, _poena_, _moenia_,
+_coetus_, _proelia_, besides archaisms _coera_, _moerus_, etc., where
+OE, coming from OI, passed into U. If we must have a simple sound, I
+should take the open E sound which I have given to AE: but I should
+prefer one like the German Ö. Their rarity, however, makes the sound of
+OE, EU, UI, of less importance."
+
+Of AU Munro says:
+
+"Here, too, AU has a curious analogy with AE: The Latin AU becomes in
+Italian open O: _òro òde_: I would pronounce thus in Latin: _plòstrum_,
+_Clòdius_, _còrus_. Perhaps, too, the fact that _gloria_, _vittoria_ and
+the common termination--_orio_, have in Italian the open O, might show
+that the corresponding *Ô in Latin was open by coming between two
+liquids, or before one: compare _plenus_ above." "I should prefer," he
+says, (to represent the Latin AU,) "the Italian AU, which gives more of
+the U than our _owl_, _cow_."
+
+CONSONANTS.
+
+B has, in general, the same sound as in English
+
+[Mar. Vict. Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] E quibus B et P litterae ... dispari
+inter se oris officio exprimuntur. Nam prima exploso e mediis labiis
+sono, sequens compresso ore velut introrsum attracto vocis ictu
+explicatur.
+
+B before S or T is sharpened to P: thus _urbs_ is pronounced _urps_;
+_obtinuit_, _optinuit_. Some words, indeed, are written either way; as
+_obses_, or _opses_; _obsonium_, or _opsonium_; _obtingo_, or _optingo_;
+and Quintilian says it is a question whether the change should be
+indicated in writing or not:
+
+[Quint. I. vii. 7.] Quaeri solet, in scribendo praepositiones, sonum
+quem junctae efficiunt an quem separatae, observare conveniat: ut cum
+dico _obtinuit_, secundam enim B litteram ratio poscit, aures magis
+audiunt P.
+
+This change, however, is both so slight and so natural that attention
+need scarcely be called to it. Indeed if quantity is properly observed,
+one can hardly go wrong. If, for instance, you attempt, in saying
+_obtinuit_, to give its normal sound to B, you can scarcely avoid making
+a false quantity (the first syllable too long), while if you observe the
+quantity (first syllable short) your B will change itself to P.
+
+C appears to have but one sound, the hard, as in _sceptic_:
+
+[Mar. vict. Keil, v. VI. p. 32.] C etiam et ... G sono proximae, oris
+molimine nisuque dissentiunt. Nam C reducta introrsum lingua hinc atque
+hinc molares urgens haerentem intra os sonum vocis excludit: G vim
+prioris pari linguae habitu palato suggerens lenius reddit.
+
+Not only do we find no hint in the grammarians of any sound akin to the
+soft C in English, as in _sceptre_, but they all speak of C and K and Q
+as identical, or substantially so, in sound; and Quintilian expressly
+states that the sound of C is always the same. Speaking of K as
+superfluous, he says:
+
+[Quint, I. vii. io.] Nam K quidem in nullis verbis utendum puto, nisi
+quae significat, etiam ut sola ponatur. Hoc eo non omisi, quod quidam
+earn quotiens A sequatur necessariam credunt, cum sit C littera, quae ad
+omnes vocales vim suam perferat.
+
+And Priscian declares:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 13.] Quamvis in varia figura et vario nomine sint k et
+q et c, tamen quia unam vim habent tarn in metre quam in sono, pro una
+littera accipi debent.
+
+Without the best of evidence we should hardly believe that words written
+indifferently with ae or e after C would be so differently pronounced by
+those using the diphthong and those using, the simple vowel, that, to
+take the instance already given, in the time of Lucilius, the rustic
+said _Sesilius_ for _Kaekilius_. Nor does it seem probable that in
+different cases the same word would vary so greatly, or that in the
+numerous compounds where after c the a weakens to i the sound of the c
+was also changed from k to s, as "kapio," "insipio"; "kado" "insido."
+
+Quintilian, noting the changes of fashion in the sounding of the h,
+enumerates, among other instances of excessive use of the aspirate, the
+words _choronae_ (for _coronae_), _chenturiones_ (for _centuriones_),
+_praechones_ (for _praecones_), as if the three words were alike in
+their initial sound.
+
+Alluding to inscriptions (first volume), where we have _pulcher_ and
+_pulcer_, _Gracchis_ and _Grams_, Mr. Munro says: "I do not well see how
+the aspirate could have been attached to the c, if c had not a k sound,
+or how in this case C before e or i could have differed from c before a,
+o, u."
+
+Professor Munro also cites an inscription (844 of the "Corpus Inscr.,"
+vol. I.) bearing on the case in another way. In this inscription we have
+the word _dekembres_. "This," says Mr. Munro, "is one of nearly two
+hundred short, plebeian, often half-barbarous, very old inscriptions on
+a collection of ollae. The k before e, or any letter except a, is
+solecistic, just as in no. 831 is the c, instead of k, for calendas.
+From this I would infer that, as in the latter the writer saw no
+difference between C and K, so to the writer of the former K was the
+same as C before E."
+
+Again he says:
+
+"And finally, what is to me most convincing of all, I do not well
+understand how in a people of grammarians, when for seven hundred years,
+from Ennius to Priscian, the most distinguished writers were also the
+most minute philologers, not one, so far as we know, should have hinted
+at any difference, if such existed."
+
+As to the peculiar effect of C final in certain particles to "lengthen"
+the vowel before it, this C is doubtless the remnant of the intensive
+enclitic CE, and the so-called 'length' is not in the vowel, but in the
+more forcible utterance of the C. It is true that Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 34.] Notandum, quod ante hanc solam mutam finalem
+inveniuntur longae vocales, ut _hôc_, _hâc_, _sîc_, _hîc_ adverbium.
+
+And Probus speaks of C as often prolonging the vowel before it. But
+Victorinus, more philosophically, attributes the length to the "double"
+sound of the consonant:
+
+[Mar. Vict. I. v. 46.] Consideranda ergo est in his duntaxat
+pronominibus natura C litterae, quae crassum quodammodo et quasi geminum
+sonum reddat, _hic_ et _hoc_.
+
+And he adds that you do not get that more emphatic sound in, for
+instance, the conjunction _nec_.
+
+Si autem _nec_ conjunctionem aspiciamus, licet eadem littera finitam,
+diversum tamen sonabit.
+
+And again:
+
+Ut dixi, in pronominibus C littera sonum efficit crassiorem.
+
+Pompeius, commenting upon certain vices of speech, says that some
+persons bring out the final C in certain words too heavily, pronouncing
+_sic ludit_ as _sic cludit_; while others, on the contrary, touch it so
+lightly that when the following word begins with C you hear but a single
+C:
+
+[Keil. v. V. p. 394.] Item litteram C quidam in quibusdam dictionibus
+non latine ecferunt, sed ita crasse, ut non discernas quid dicant: ut
+puta siquis dicat _sic ludit_, ita hoc loquitur ut putes eum in secunda
+parte orationis _cludere_ dixisse, non _ludere_: et item si contra dicat
+illud contrarium putabis. Alii contra ita subtiliter hoc ecferunt, ut
+cum duo C habeant, desinentis prioris partis orationis et incipientis
+alterius, sic loquantur quasi uno C utrumque explicent, ut dicunt multi
+_sic custodit_.
+
+D, in general, is pronounced as in English, except that the tongue
+should touch the teeth rather than the palate.
+
+[Pompei. _Comm. ad Donat_. Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] D autem et T quibus, ut
+ita dixerim, vocis vicinitas quaedam est, linguae sublatione ac
+positione distinguuntur. Nam cum summos atque imos conjunctim dentes
+suprema sui parte pulsaverit D litteram exprimit. Quotiens autem
+sublimata partem, qua superis dentibus est origo, contigerit T sonare
+vocis explicabit.
+
+But when certain words in common use ending in D were followed by words
+beginning with a consonant, the sound of the D was sharpened to T; and
+indeed the word was often, especially by the earlier writers, written
+with T, as, for instance, _set_, _haut_, _aput_:
+
+[Mar. Vict. I. iii. 50.] D tamen litteram conservat si sequens verbum
+incipiat a vocali; ut _haud aliter muros_; et _haud equidem_. At cum
+verbum a consonante incipit, D perdit, ut 	_haut dudum_, et _haut
+multum_, et _haut placitura refert_, et inducit T.
+
+F is pronounced as in English except that it should be brought out more
+forcibly, with more breath.
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] F litteram imum labium superis imprimentibus
+dentibus, reflexa ad palati fastigium lingua, leni spiramine proferemus.
+
+Marius Victorinus says that F was used in Latin words as PH in foreign.
+
+Diomedes (of the fourth century) says the same:
+
+[Diom. Keil. v. I. p. 427.] Id hoc scire debemus quod F littera tum
+scribitur cum Latina dictio scribitur, ut _felix_. Nam si peregrina
+fuerit, P et H scribimus, ut _Phoebus_, _Phaethon_.
+
+And Priscian makes a similar statement:
+
+[Prise. Keil. v. I. p. 35.] F multis modis muta magis ostenditur, cum
+pro P et aspiratione, quae similiter muta est, accipitur.
+
+From the following words of Quintilian we may judge the breathing to
+have been quite pronounced:
+
+[Quint. XII. x. 29.] Nam et illa quae est sexta nostrarum, paene non
+humana voce, vel omnino non voce, potius inter discrimina dentium
+efflanda est, quae etiam cum vocalem proxima accipit quassa quodammodo,
+utique quotiens aliquam consonantem frangit, ut in hoc ipso _frangit_,
+multo fit horridior.
+
+G, no less than C, appears to have had but one sound, the hard; as in
+the English word _get_.
+
+[Mar. Vict. Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] C etiam et G, ut supra scriptae, sono
+proximae, oris molimine nisuque dissentiunt. Nam C reducta introrsum
+lingua, hinc atque hinc molares urgens, haerentem intra os sonum vocis
+excludit: G vim prioris, pari linguae habitu palato suggerens, lenius
+reddit.
+
+Diomedes speaks of G as a new consonant, whose place had earlier been
+filled by C:
+
+[Keil. v. I. p. 423.] G nova est consonans, in cujus locum C solebat
+adponi, sicut hodieque cum Gaium notamus Caesarem, scribimus C. C.,
+ideoque etiam post B litteram, id est tertio loco, digesta est, ut apud
+Graecos [Greek: transliterated] _g_ posita reperitur in eo loco.
+
+Victorinus thus refers to the old custom still in use of writing C and
+CN, as initials, in certain names, even where the names were pronounced
+as with G.
+
+[Mar. Vict. I. iii. 98.] C autem et nomen habuisse G et usum
+praestitisse, quod nunc _Caius_ per C, et _Cneius_ per CN, quamvis
+utrimque syllabae sonus G exprimat, scribuntur.
+
+H has the same sound as in English. The grammarians never regarded it as
+a consonant,--at least in more than name,--but merely as representing
+the rough breathing of the Greeks.
+
+Victorinus thus speaks of its nature:
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] H quoque inter litteras obviam grammatici
+tradiderunt, eamque adspirationis notam cunctis vocalibus praefici; ipsi
+autem consonantes tantum quattuor praeponi, quotiens graecis nominibus
+latina forma est, persuaserunt, id est C, P, R, T; ut _chori_,
+_Phyllis_, _rhombos_, _thymos_; quae profundo spiritu, anhelis faucibus,
+exploso ore, fundetur.
+
+By the best authorities H was looked upon as a mere mark of aspiration.
+Victorinus says that Nigidius Figulus so regarded it:
+
+[Mar. Vict. I. iv. 5.] Idem (N. F.) H non esse litteram, sed notam
+adspirationis tradidit.
+
+There appears to have been the same difference of opinion and usage
+among the Romans as with us in the matter of sounding the H.
+
+Quintilian says that the fashion changed with the age:
+
+[Quint. I. v. 19,20,21.] Cujus quidem ratio mutata cum temporibus est
+saepius. Parcissime ea veteres usi etiam in vocalibus, cum _oedus
+vicos_que dicebant, diu deinde servatum ne consonantibus aspirarent, ut
+in _Graecis_ et in _triumpis_; erupit brevi tempore nimius usus, ut
+_choronae_, _chenturiones_, _praechones_, adhuc quibusdam
+inscriptionibus maneant, qua de re Catulli nobile epigramma est. Inde
+durat ad nos usque _vehementer_, et 	_comprehendere_, et _mihi_, nam
+_mehe_ quoque pro me apud antiques tragoediarum praecipue scriptores in
+veteribus libris invenimus.
+
+In the epigram above referred to Catullus thus satirizes the excessive
+use of the aspirate:
+
+
+[Catullus lxxxiv.]
+
+Chommoda dicebat, si quando commoda vellet Dicere, et hinsidias Arrius
+insidias: Et tum mirifice sperabat se esse locutum, Cum quantum poterat
+dixerat hinsidias. Credo sic mater, sic Liber avunculus ejus, Sic
+maternus avus dixerat, atque avia. Hoc misso in Syriam requierunt
+omnibus aures; Audibant eadem haec leniter et leviter. Nec sibi post
+ilia metuebant talia verba, Cum subito adfertur nuntius horribilis,
+Ionios fluctus postquam illuc Arrius isset Jam non Ionios esse, sed
+Hionios.
+
+
+On the other hand Quintilian seems disposed to smile at the excess of
+'culture' which drops its H's, to class this with other affected
+'niceties' of speech, and to regard the whole matter as of slight
+importance:
+
+[Quint. I. vi. 21, 22.] Multum enim litteratus, qui sine aspiratione et
+producta secunda syllaba salutarit (_avere_ est enim), et _calefacere_
+dixerit potius quam quod dicimus, et _conservavisse_; his adjiciat
+_face_ et _dice_ et similia. Recta est haec via, quis negat? sed adjacet
+mollior et magis trita.
+
+Cicero confesses that he himself changed his practice in regard to the
+aspirate. He had been accustomed to sound it only with vowels, and to
+follow the fathers, who never used it with a consonant; but at length,
+yielding to the importunity of his ear, he conceded the right of usage
+to the people, and 'kept his learning to himself.'
+
+[Cic. Or. XLVIII. 160.] Quin ego ipse, cum scirem ita majores locutos
+esse ut nusquam nisi in vocali aspiratione uterentur, loquebar sic, ut
+_pulcros_, _cetegus_, _triumpos_, _Kartaginem_, dicerem; aliquando,
+idque sero, convicio aurium cum extorta mihi veritas, usum loquendi
+populo concessi, scientiam mihi reservavi.
+
+Gellius speaks of the ancients as having employed the H merely to add a
+certain force and life to the word, in imitation of the Attic tongue,
+and enumerates some of these words. Thus, he says, they said
+_lachrymas_; thus, _sepulchrum_, _aheneum_, _vehement_, _inchoare_,
+_helvari_, _hallucinari_, _honera_, _honustum_.
+
+[Gellius II. iii.] In his enim verbis omnibus litterae, seu spiritus
+istius nulla ratio visa est, nisi ut firmitas et vigor vocis, quasi
+quibusdam nervis additis, intenderetur.
+
+And he tells an interesting anecdote about a manuscript of Vergil:
+
+Sed quoniam _aheni_ quoque exemplo usi sumus, venit nobis in memoriam,
+fidum optatumque, multi nominis Romae, grammaticum ostendisse mihi
+librum Aeneidos secundum mirandae vetustatis, emptum in Sigillariis XX.
+aureis, quem ipsius Vergilii fuisse credebat; in quo duo isti versus cum
+ita scripti forent:
+
+
+"Vestibulum ante ipsum, primoque in limine, Pyrrhus: Exultat telis, et
+luce coruscus aëna."
+
+Additam supra vidimus H litteram, et _ahera_ factum. Sic in illo quoque
+Vergilii versu in optimis libris scriptum invenimus:
+
+"Aut foliis undam tepidi dispumat aheni."
+
+I consonant has the sound of I in the English word _onion_. The
+grammarians all express themselves in nearly the same terms as to its
+character:
+
+[Serg. Explan. in Art. Donat. Keil. v. IV. p. 520.] I et U varias habent
+potestates: nam sunt aliquando vocales, aliquando consonantes, aliquando
+mediae, aliquando nihil, aliquando digammae, aliquando duplices. Vocales
+sunt quando aut singulae positae syllabam faciunt aut aliis
+consonantibus sociantur, ut _Iris_ et _unus_ et _Isis_ et _urna_.
+Consonantes autem sunt, cum aliis vocalibus in una syllaba praeponuntur,
+aut cum ipsae inter se in una syllaba conjunguntur. Nisi enim et prior
+sit et in una syllaba secum habeat conjunctam vocalem, non erit
+consonans I vel U. Nam _Iulhis_ et _Iarbas_ cum dicis, I consonans non
+est, licet praecedat, quia in una syllaba secum non habet conjunctam
+vocalem, sed in altera consequentem.
+
+The grammarians speak of I consonant as different in sound and effect
+from the vowel I; and, as they do not say how it differs, we naturally
+infer the variation to be that which follows in the nature of things
+from its position and office, as in the kindred Romance languages.
+
+Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 13.] Sic I et U, quamvis unum nomen et unam habeant
+figuram tam vocales quam consonantes, tamen, quia diversum sonum et
+diversam vim habent in metris et in 	pronuntiatione syllabarum, non sunt
+in eisdem meo judicio elementis accipiendae, quamvis et Censorino,
+doctissimo artis grammaticae, idem placuit.
+
+It would seem to be by reason of this twofold nature (vowel and
+consonant) that I has its 'lengthening' power. Probus explains the
+matter thus:
+
+[Keil. v. IV. p. 220.] Praeterea vim naturamque I litterae vocalis
+plenissime debemus cognoscere, quod duarum interdum loco consonantium
+ponatur. Hanc enim ex suo numero vocales duplicem litteram mittunt, ut
+cetera elementa litterarum singulas duplices mittunt, de quibus suo
+disputavimus loco. Illa ergo ratione I 	littera duplicem sonum designat,
+una quamvis figura sit, si 	undique fuerit cincta vocalibus, ut
+_acerrimus Aiax_, et
+
+
+"Aio te, Eacida, Romanes vincere posse."
+
+
+Again in the commentaries on Donatus we find:
+
+[Keil. v. IV. p. 421.] Plane sciendum est quod I inter duas 	posita
+vocales in una parte orationis pro duabus est 	consonantibus, ut
+_Troia_.
+
+Priscian tells us that earlier it was, as we know, the custom to write
+two I's:
+
+[Keil. v. III. p. 467.] Antiqui solebant duas II scribere, et 	alteram
+priori subjungere, alteram praeponere sequenti, ut 	_Troiia_, _Maiia_,
+_Aiiax_.
+
+And Quintilian says:
+
+[Quint. I. iv. 11.] Sciat etiam Ciceroni placuisse _aiio Maiiam_ 	que
+geminata I scribere.
+
+This doubling of the sound of I, natural, even unavoidable, between
+vowels, gives us the consonant effect (as vowel, uniting with the
+preceding, as consonant, introducing the following, vowel).
+
+K has the same sound as in English.
+
+The grammarians generally agree that K is a superfluous, or at least
+unnecessary, letter, its place being filled by C. Diomedes says:
+
+[Keil. v. I. pp. 423, 424.] Ex his quibusdam supervacuae videntur K et
+Q, quod C littera harum locum possit implere.
+
+And again:
+
+K consonans muta supervacua, qua utimur quando A correpta sequitur, ut
+_Kalendae_, _caput_, _calumniae_.
+
+Its only use is as an initial and sign of certain words, and it is
+followed by short A only.
+
+Victorinus says:
+
+[I. iii. 23.] K autem dicitur monophonos, quia nulli vocali 	jungitur
+nisi soli A brevi: et hoc ita ut ab ea pars orationis 	incipit, aliter
+autem non recte scribitur.
+
+Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 36.] K supervacua est, ut supra diximus: quae quamvis
+scribetur nullam aliam vim habet quam C.
+
+And Quintilian speaks of it as a mere sign, but says some think it
+should be used when A follows, as initial:
+
+[Quint. I. iv. 9.] Et K, quae et ipsa quorundam nominum nota est.
+
+And:
+
+[Quint. I. vii. 10.] Nam K quidem in nullis verbis utendum puto nisi
+quae significat etiam ut sola ponatur. Hoc eo non omisi quod quidam eam
+quotiens A sequatur necessariam credunt, cum sit C littera, quae ad
+omnes vocales vim suam perferat.
+
+This use of K, as an initial, and in certain words, was regarded
+somewhat in the light of a literary 'fancy.' Priscian says of it:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 12.] Et K quidem penitus supervacua est; nulla enim
+videtur ratio cur A sequente haec scribi debeat: _Carthago_ enim et
+_caput_ sive per C sive per K scribantur nullam faciunt 	nec in sono nec
+in potestate ejusdem consonantis differentiam.
+
+L is pronounced as in English, only more distinctly and with the tongue
+more nearly approaching the teeth. The sound is thus given by
+Victorinus:
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] Sequetur L, quae validum nescio quid partem palati
+qua primordium dentibus superis est lingua trudente, 	diducto ore
+personabit.
+
+But it varies according to its position in the force and distinctness
+with which it is uttered. Pliny and others recognize three degrees of
+force:
+
+Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 29.] L triplicem, ut Plinius videtur, sonum 	habet:
+exilem, quando geminatur secundo loco posita, ut _ille_, 	_Metellus_;
+plenum, quando finit nomina vel syllabas, et quando 	aliquam habet ante
+se in eadem syllaba consonantem, ut _sol_, 	_silva_, _flavus_, _clarus_;
+medium in aliis, ut _lectum_, 	_lectus_.
+
+Pompeius, in his commentaries on Donatus, makes nearly the same
+statement, when treating of '_labdacism_':
+
+[Keil. v. V. p. 394.] _Labdacismum_ vitium in eo esse dicunt quod eadem
+littera vel subtilius, a quibusdam, vel pinguius, ecfertur. Et re vera
+alterutrum vitium quibusdam gentibus est. Nam ecce Graeci subtiliter
+hunc sonum ecferunt. Ubi enim dicunt _ille mihi dixit_ sic sonat duae
+_ll_ primae syllabae quasi per unum _l_ 	sermo ipse consistet. Contra
+alii sic pronuntiant _ille meum 	comitatus iter_, et _illum ego per
+flammas eripui_ ut aliquid 	illic soni etiam consonantis ammiscere
+videantur, quod 	pinguissimae prolationis est. Romana lingua
+emendationem habet in 	hoc quoque distinctione. Nam alicubi pinguius,
+alicubi debet 	exilius, proferri: pinguius cum vel _b_ sequitur, ut in
+_albo_; 	vel _c_, ut in _pulchro_; vel _f_, ut in _adelfis_; vel _g_, ut
+in _alga_; vel _m_, ut in _pulmone_; vel _p_, ut in _scalpro_: 	exilius
+autem proferenda est ubicumque ab ea verbum incipit; ut 	in _lepore_,
+_lana_, _lupo_; vel ubi in eodem verbo et prior syllaba in hac finitur,
+et sequens ab ea incipit, ut _ille_ et 	_Allia_.
+
+In another place he speaks of the Africans as 'abounding' in this vice,
+and of their pronouncing _Metellus_ and _Catullus_; _Metelus_,
+_Catulus_:
+
+[Keil. v. v. p. 287.] In his etiam agnoscimus gentium vitia;
+_labdacismis_ scatent Afri, raro est ut aliquis dicat _l_: per 	geminum
+_l_ sic loquuntur Romani, omnes Latini sic loquuntur, 	_Catullus_,
+_Metellus_.
+
+_M_ is pronounced as in English, except before _q_, where it has a nasal
+sound, and when final.
+
+[Mar. Vict. Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] _M_ impressis invicem labiis 	mugitum
+quendam intra oris specum attractis naribus dabit.
+
+But this 'mooing' sound, in which so many of their words ended, was not
+altogether pleasing to the Roman ear. Quintilian exclaims against it:
+
+[Quint, XII. x. 31.] Quid quod pleraque nos illa quasi mugiente littera
+cludimus _m_, qua nullum Graece verbum cadit.
+
+The offensive sound was therefore gotten rid of, as far as possible, by
+obscuring the M at the end of a word. Priscian speaks of three sounds
+of M,--at the beginning, in the middle, and at the end of a word:
+
+[Prisc. Keil. v. II. p. 29.] M obscurum in extremitate dictionum 	sonat,
+ut _templum_, apertum in principio, ut _magnus_; mediocre 	in mediis, ut
+_umbra_.
+
+This 'obscuring' led in verse to the cutting off of the final syllable
+in M when the following word began with a vowel,--as Priscian remarks in
+the same connection:
+
+Finales dictionis subtrahitur M in metro plerumque, si a vocali incipit
+sequens dictio, ut:
+
+"Illum expirantem transfixo pectore flammas."
+
+Yet, he adds, the ancients did not always withdraw the sound:
+
+Vetustissimi tamen non semper eam subtrahebant, Ennius in X Annalium:
+
+"Insigneita fere tum milia militum octo Duxit delectos bellum tolerare
+potentes."
+
+The M was not, however, entirely ignored. Thus Quintilian says:
+
+[Quint, IX. iv. 40.] Atqui eadem illa littera, quotiens ultima 	est et
+vocalem verbi sequentis ita contingit ut in eam transire 	possit,
+etiamsi scribitur tamen parum exprimitur, ut _multum 	ille_ et _quantum
+erat_; adeo ut paene cujusdam novae litterae 	sonum reddat. Neque enim
+eximitur, sed obscuratur, et tantum 	aliqua inter duas vocales velut
+nota est, ne ipsae coeant.
+
+It is a significant fact in this connection that M is the only one of
+the liquids (semivowels) that does not allow a long vowel before it.
+Priscian, mentioning several peculiarities of this semivowel, thus
+speaks of this one:
+
+[Priscian. Keil. v. II. p. 23.] Nunquam tamen eadem M ante se natura
+longam (vocalem) patitur in eadem syllaba esse, ut 	_illam_, _artem_,
+_puppim_, _illum_, _rem_, _spem_, _diem_, cum 	aliae omnes semivocales
+hoc habent, ut _Maecenas_, _Paean_, 	_sol_, _pax_, _par_.
+
+That the M was really sounded we may infer from Pompeius (on Donatus)
+where, treating of _myotacism_, he calls it the careless pronunciation
+of M between two vowels (at the end of one word and the beginning of
+another), the running of the words together in such a way that M seems
+to begin the second, rather than to end the first:
+
+[Keil. v. V. p. 287.] Ut si dices _hominem amicum_, _oratorem optimum_.
+Non enim videris dicere _hominem amicum_, sed _homine mamicum_, quod est
+incongruum et inconsonans. Similiter _oratorem optimum_ videris _oratore
+moptimum_.
+
+He also warns against the vice of dropping the M altogether. One must
+neither say _homine mamicum_, nor _homine amicum_:
+
+Plerumque enim aut suspensione pronuntiatur aut exclusione.... Nos quid
+sequi debemus? Quid? per suspensionem tantum modo. Qua ratione? Quia si
+dixeris per suspensionem _homimem amicum_, et haec vitium vitabis,
+_myotacismum_, et non cades in aliud vitium, id est in hiatum.
+
+From such passages it would seem that the final syllable ending in M is
+to be lightly and rapidly pronounced, the M not to be run over upon the
+following word.
+
+Some hint of the sound may perhaps be got from the Englishman's
+pronunciation of such words as Birmingham (Birminghm), Sydenham
+(Sydenhm), Blenheim (Blenhm).
+
+N, except when followed by F or S, is pronounced as in English, only
+that it is more dental.
+
+[Mar. Vict. Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] N vero, sub convexo palati 	lingua
+inhaerente, gemino naris et oris spiritu explicabitur.
+
+Naturally, as with us, it is more emphatic at the beginning and end of
+words than in the middle (as, _Do not give the tendrils the wrong turn.
+Is not the sin condemned?_)
+
+Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 29.] N quoque plenior in primis sonat, et in 	ultimis,
+partibus syllabarum, ut _nomen_, _stamen_; exilior in 	mediis, ut
+_amnis_, _damnum_.
+
+As in English, before a guttural (C, G, Q, X), N is so affected as to
+leave its proper sound incomplete (the tongue not touching the roof of
+the mouth) while it draws the guttural, so to speak, into itself, as in
+the English words _concord_, _anger_, _sinker_, _relinquish_, _anxious_.
+
+[Nigidius apud Gell. XIX. xiv. 7.] Inter litteram N et G est alia 	vis,
+ut in nomine _anguis_ et _angaria_ et _anchorae_ et 	_increpat_ et
+_incurrit_ et _ingenuus_. In omnibus enim his non 	verum N sed
+adulterinum ponitur. Nam N non esse lingua indicio 	est. Nam si ea
+littera esset lingua palatum tangeret.
+
+Not only the Greeks, but some of the early Romans, wrote G, instead of
+N, in this position, and gave to the letter so used a new name, _agma_.
+Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 29.] Sequente G vel C, pro ea (N) G scribunt 	Graeci et
+quidam tamen vetustissimi auctores Romani euphoniae 	causa bene hoc
+facientes, ut _Agchises_, _agceps_, _aggulus_, 	_aggens_, quod ostendit
+Varro in _Primo de Origine Linguae 	Latinae_ his verbis: Ut Ion scribit,
+quinquavicesima est littera, 	quam vocant "_agma_," cujus forma nulla
+est et vox communis est 	Graecis et Latinis, ut his verbis: _aggulus_,
+_aggens_, 	_agguilla_, _iggerunt_. In ejusmodi Graeci et Accius noster
+bina 	G scribunt, alii N et G, quod in hoc veritatem videre facile non
+est.
+
+This custom did not, however, prevail among the Romans, and Marius
+Victorinus gives it as his opinion that it is better to use N than G, as
+more correct to the ear, and avoiding ambiguity (the GG being then left
+for the natural expression of double G).
+
+[Mar. Vict. I. iii. 70.] Familiarior est auribus nostris N potius 	quam
+G, ut _anceps_ et _ancilla_ et _anguia_ et _angustum_ et 	_anquirit_ et
+_ancora_, et similia, per N potius quam per G 	scribite: sicut per duo G
+quotiens duorum G sonum aures exigent, 	ut _aggerem_, _suggillat_,
+_suggerendum_, _suggestion_, et 	similia.
+
+N before F or S seems to have become a mere nasal, lengthening the
+preceding vowel.
+
+Cicero speaks of this as justified by the ear and by custom, rather than
+by reason:
+
+[Cic. Or. XLVIII.] Quid vero hoc elegantius, quod non fit natura, sed
+quodam instituto? _indoctus_ dicimus brevi prima littera, 	_insanis_
+producta: _inhumanus_ brevi, _infelix_ longa: et, ne 	multis, quibus in
+verbis eae primae litterae sunt quae in 	_sapiente_ atque _felice_,
+producte dicitur; in ceteris omnibus 	breviter: itemque _composuit_,
+_consuevit_, _concrepit_, 	_confecit_. Consule veritatem, reprehendet;
+refer ad aures, 	probabunt. Quaere, cur? Ita se dicent juvari. Voluptati
+autem 	aurium morigerari debet oratio.
+
+In Donatus we have the same fact stated, with the same reason:
+
+[Keil. v. IV. p. 442.] Quod magis aurium indicio quam artis 	ratione
+colligimus.
+
+Thus we find numeral abverbs and others ending either in _iens_ or
+_ies_, as _centiens_ or _centies_, _decies_ or _deciens_, _millies_ or
+_milliens_, _quotiens_ or _quoties_, _totiens_ or _toties_. Other words,
+in like manner, participles and nouns, are written either with or
+without the N before S, as _contunsum_ or _contusum_, _obtunsus_ or
+_obtusus_, _thesaurus_ or _thensaurus_ (the _ens_ is regularly
+represented in Greek by [Greek transliteration: aes]); _infans_ or
+_infas_, _frons_ or _fros_. In late Latin the N was frequently dropped
+in participle endings. Donatus says that this nasal sound of N should be
+strenuously observed:
+
+[Keil. v. IV. p. 442.] Illud vehementissime observare debemus, ut _con_
+et _in_ quotiensque post se habent S vel F litteram, 	videamus
+quemadmodum pronuntientur. Plerumque enim non 	observantes in
+barbarismos incurrimus.
+
+GN in the terminations _gnus_, _gna_, _gnum_, has, according to
+Priscian, the power to lengthen the penultimate vowel.
+
+[Prisc. I.] _Gnus_ quoque, vel _gna_, vel _gnum_, terminantia, 	longam
+habent vocalem penultimam; ut a _regno_, _regnum_; a 	_sto_, _stagnum_;
+a _bene_, _benignus_; a _male_, _malignus_; ab 	_abiete_, _abiegnus_;
+_privignus_; _Pelignus_.
+
+(Perhaps the liquid sound, as in cañon.)
+
+P is pronounced as in English.
+
+[Mar. Vict. Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] E quibus B et P litterae ... 	dispari
+inter se oris officio exprimuntur. Nam prima exploso e 	mediis labiis
+sono; sequens, compresso ore, velut introrsum 	attracto vocis ictu,
+explicatur.
+
+Q has the sound of English Q in the words _quire_, _quick_. Priscian
+says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 12.] K enim et Q, quamvis figura et nomine 	videantur
+aliquam habere differentiam, cum C tamen eandem, tam in sono vocum, quam
+in metro, potestatem continent.
+
+And again:
+
+[id. ib. p. 36.] De Q quoque sufficienter supra tractatum est, 	quae
+nisi eandem vim haberet quam C.
+
+Marius Victorinus says:
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 5.] Item superfluas quasdam videntur retinere, X et K
+et Q... Pro K et Q, C littera facillime haberetur; X autem per C et S.
+
+And again:
+
+[Id. ib. p. 32.] K et Q supervacue numero litterarum inseri 	doctorum
+plerique contendunt, scilicet quod C littera harum 	officium possit
+implere.
+
+The grammarians tell us that K and Q are always found at the beginning
+of a syllable:
+
+[Prisc. Keil. v. III. p. 111.] Q et K semper initio syllabarum
+ponuntur.
+
+They say also that the use of Q was more free among the earlier Romans,
+who placed it as initial wherever U followed,--as they placed K
+wherever A* followed,--but that in the later, established, usage, its
+presence was conditioned upon a vowel after the U in the same syllable:
+
+[Donat. Keil. v. IV. p. 442.] Namque illi Q praeponebant quotiens U
+sequebatur, ut _quum_; nos vero non possumus Q praeponere nisi ut U
+sequatur et post ipsam alia vocalis, ut _quoniam_.
+
+Diomedes says:
+
+[Keil. v. I. p. 425.] Q consonans muta, ex C et U litteris 	composita,
+supervacua, qua utimur quando U et altera vocalis in 	una syllaba
+junguntur, ut _Quirinus_.
+
+R is trilled, as in Italian or French:
+
+[Mar. Vict. Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] Sequetur R, quae, vibratione 	vocis in
+palato linguae fastigio, fragorem tremulis ictibus 	reddit.
+
+(This proper trilling of the R is most important.)
+
+S seems to have had, almost, if not quite, invariably the sharp sound of
+the English S in _sing_, _hiss_.
+
+In Greek words written also with Z, as _Smyrna_ (also written _Zmyrna_),
+it probably had the Z sound, and possibly in a few Latin words, as
+_rosa_, _miser_, but this is not certain. Marius Victorinus thus sets
+forth the difference between S and X (CS):
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] Dehinc duae supremae, S et X, jure 	junguntur. Nam
+vicino inter se sonore attracto sibilant rictu, 	ita tamen si prioris
+ictus pone dentes excitatus ad medium lenis 	agitetur, sequentis autem
+crasso spiritu hispidum sonet, quia per 	conjunctionem C et S, quarum et
+locum implet et vim exprimit, ut 	sensu aurium ducemur, efficitur.
+
+Donatus, according to Pompeius, complains of the Greeks as sounding the
+S too feebly:
+
+[Keil. v. V. p. 394.] Item S litteram Graeci exiliter ecferunt 	adeo ut
+cum dicunt _jussit_ per unum S dicere existimas.
+
+This would indicate that the Romans pronounced the sibilant
+distinctly,--yet not too emphatically, for Quintilian says, 'the master
+of his art (of speaking) will not fondly prolong or dally with his S':
+
+[Quint. I. xi. 6.] Ne illas quidem circa S litteram delicias hic
+magister feret.
+
+T is pronounced like the English T pure, except that the tongue should
+approach the teeth more nearly.
+
+[Pompei. _Comm. ad Donat._ Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] D autem et T, 	quibus,
+ut ita dixerim, vocis vicinitas quaedam est, linguae 	sublatione ac
+positione distinguuntur. Nam cum summos atque imos 	conjunctim dentes
+suprema sua parte pulsaverit D litteram 	exprimit. Quotiens autem
+sublimata partem qua superis dentibus est _origo_ contigerit, T sonore
+vocis explicabit.
+
+From the same writer we learn that some pronounced the T too heavily,
+giving it a 'thick sound':
+
+[Keil. v. V. p. 394.] Ecce in littera T aliqui ita pingue nescio 	quid
+sonant, ut cum dicunt _etiam_ nihil de media syllaba 	infringant.
+
+By which we understand that the T was wrongly uttered with a kind of
+effort, such as prevented its gliding on to the I.
+
+TH nearly as in _then_, not as in _thin_.
+
+U (consonant) or V.
+
+That the letter U performed the office of both vowel and consonant all
+the grammarians agree, and state the fact in nearly the same terms.
+Priscian says that they (I and U) seem quite other letters when used as
+consonants, and that it makes a great difference in which of these ways
+they are used:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 13.] Videntur tamen I et U cum in consonantes transeunt
+quantum ad potestatem, quod maximum est in elementis, aliae litterae
+esse praeter supra dictis; multum enim interest utrum vocales sint an
+consonantes.
+
+The grammarians also state that this consonant U was represented by the
+Greek digamma, which the Romans called _vau_ also.
+
+Marius Victorinus says:
+
+[I. iii. 44.] Nam littera U vocalis est, sicut A, E, I, O, sed 	eadem
+vicem obtinet consonantis: cujus potestatis notam Graeci 	habent [Greek
+letter: digamma], nostri _vau_ vocant, et alii 	_digamma_; ea per se
+scripta non facit syllabam, anteposita autem 	vocali facit, ut [Greek in
+which w = digamma:* wamaxa, 	wekaebolos] et [Greek, w = digamma:*
+welenae]. Nos vero, qui non 	habemus hujus vocis nomen aut notam, in
+ejus locum quotiens una 	vocalis pluresve junctae unam syllabam faciunt,
+substituimus U 	litteram.
+
+Now it is contended by some that this _digamma_, or _vau_, was merely
+taken as a symbol, somewhat arbitrarily perhaps, and that it did not
+indicate a particular sound, but might stand for anything which the
+Romans chose to represent by it; and that therefore it gives us no
+certain indication of what the Latin U consonant was. But we are
+expressly told that it had the force and sound of the Greek _digamma_.
+
+In Marius Victorinus we find:
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 23.] F autem apud Aeolis dumtaxat idem valere quod apud
+nos _vau_ cum pro consonante scribitur, vocarique 	[Greek
+transliteration: bau] et _digamma_.
+
+Priscian explains more fully:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 15.] U vero loco consonantis posita eandem 	prorsus in
+omnibus vim habuit apud Latinos quam apud Aeolis 	_digamma_. Unde a
+plerisque ei nomen hoc datur quod apud Aeolis 	habuit olim [Greek
+letter: digamma] _digamma_, id est _vau_, ab 	ipsius voce profectum
+teste Varrone et Didymo, qui id ei nomen 	esse ostendunt. Pro quo Caesar
+hanc [Greek letter: digamma 	rotated 90 degress] figuram scribi voluit,
+quod quamvis illi 	recte visum est tamen consuetude antiqua superavit.
+Adeo autem 	hoc verum est quod pro Aeolico _digamma_ [Greek letter:
+digamma] 	U ponitur.
+
+What then was the sound of this Aeolic _digamma_ or [Greek
+transliteration: bau]? Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 11.] [Greek letter: digamma] Aeolicum _digamma_, 	quod
+apud antiquissimos Latinorum eandem vim quam apud Aeolis 	habuit. Eum
+autem prope sonum quem nunc habet significabat P cum 	aspiratione, sicut
+etiam apud veteres Graecos pro [Greek letter: 	ph] [Greek letter: p] et
+[Greek letter: eta]; unde nunc quoque in Graecis nominibus antiquam
+scripturam servamus, pro [Greek: ph] P et H ponentes, ut _Orpheus_,
+_Phaethon_ Postea 	vero in Latinis verbis placuit pro P et H, F scribi,
+ut _fama_, 	_filiu_, _facio_, loco autem _digamma_ U pro consonante,
+quod 	cognatione soni videbatur affinis esse _digamma_ ea littera.
+
+The Latin U consonant is here distinctly stated to be akin to the Greek
+_digamma_ ([Greek letter: digamma]) in sound.
+
+Now the office of the Greek _digamma_ was apparently manifold. It stood
+for [Greek letter: s, b] (Eng. V), [Greek letter: g, ch, ph], and for
+the breathings 'rough' and 'smooth.' Sometimes the sound of the
+_digamma_ is given, we are told, where the character itself is not
+written. It is said that in the neighborhood of Olympia it is to-day
+pronounced, though not written, between two vowels as [Greek letter: b]
+(Eng. V). Which of these various sounds should be given the digamma
+appears to have been determined by the law of euphony. It was sometimes
+written but not sounded (like our H).
+
+The question then is, which of these various sounds of the digamma is
+represented by the Latin U consonant, or does it represent all, or none,
+of these.
+
+Speaking of F, Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 35.] Antiqui Romanorum Aeolis sequentes loco
+aspirationis earn (F) ponebant, effugientes ipsi quoque 	aspirationem,
+et maxime cum consonante recusabant eam proferre in Latino sermone.
+Habebat autem haec F littera hunc sonum quem nunc habet U loco
+consonantis posita, unde antiqui AF pro AB scribere solebant; sed quia
+non potest _vau_, id est _digamma_, 	in fine syllabae inveniri, ideo
+mutata in B. _Sifilum_ quoque pro _sibilum_ teste Nonio Marcello _de
+Doctorum Indagine_ dicebant.
+
+And again:
+
+[Prisc. Keil. v. II. p. 15.] In B etiam solet apud Aeolis 	transire
+[Greek letter: digamma] _digamma_ quotiens ab [Greek: r] 	incipit dictio
+quae solet aspirari, ut [Greek transliteration: 	raetor], [Greek
+transliteration: braetor] dicunt, quod _digamma_ 	nisi vocali praeponi
+et in principio syllabae non potest. Ideo 	autem locum transmutavit,
+quia B vel _digamma_ post [Greek 	letter: r] in eadem syllaba
+pronuntiari non potest. Apud nos quoque est invenire quod pro U
+consonante B ponitur, ut _caelebs_, caelestium vitam ducens, per B
+scribitur, quod U 	consonans ante consonantem poni non potest. Sed etiam
+_Bruges_ et _Belena_ antiquissimi dicebant, teste Quintiliano, qui hoc
+ostendit in primo _institutionum oratoriarum_: nec mirum, cum B 	quoque
+in U euphoniae causa converti invenimus; ut _aufero_.
+
+[Quint, I. v. 69.] Frequenter autem praepositiones quoque 	copulatio
+ista corrumpit; inde _abstulit_, _aufugit_, _amisit_, 	cum praepositio
+sit ab sola.
+
+It is significant here that Cicero speaks of the change from DU to B as
+a contraction. He says:
+
+[Cic. Or. LXV.] Quid vero licentius quam quod hominum etiam nomina
+contrahebant, quo essent aptiora? Nam ut _duellum_, _bellum_; et _duis_,
+_bis_; sic _Duellium_ eum qui Poenos classe 	devicit  _Bellium_
+nominaverunt, cum superiores appellati essent 	semper _Duellii_.
+
+One cannot but feel in reading the numerous passages in the grammarians
+that treat of the sound of U consonant, that if its sound had been no
+other than the natural sound of U with consonantal force, they never
+would have spent so much time and labor in explaining and elucidating
+it. Why did they not turn it off with the simple explanation which they
+give to the consonantal I--that of double I? What more natural than to
+speak of consonant U as "double U" (as we English do W). But on the
+contrary they expressly declare it to have a sound distinct and
+peculiar. Quintilian says that even if the form of the Aeolic _digamma_
+is rejected by the Romans, yet its force pursues them:
+
+[Quint. XII. x. 29.] Aeolicae quoque litterae qua _servum 	cervum_que
+dicimus, etiamsi forma a nobis repudiata est, vis 	tamen nos ipsa
+persequitur.
+
+He gives it as his opinion that it would have been well to have adopted
+the _vau_, and says that neither by the old way of writing (by UO), nor
+by the modern way (by _servus_ et _cervus_) ea ratione quam reddidi:
+neutro sane modo vox quam sentimus efficitur. Nec inutiliter Claudius
+Aeolicam illam ad hos usus litteram adjecerat.
+
+And again still more distinctly:
+
+[Id. ib. iv. 7, 8.] At grammatici saltern omnes in hanc 	descendent
+rerum tenuitatem, desintne aliquae nobis necessariae 	literarum, non cum
+Graeca scribimus (tum enim ab iisdem duas 	mutuamur) sed propriae, in
+Latinis, ut in his _seruus_ et 	_uulgus_ Aeolicum digammon desideratur.
+
+This need of a new symbol, recognized by authorities like Cicero and
+Quintilian, is not an insignificant point in the argument.
+
+Marius Victorinus says that Cicero adds U (consonant) to the other five
+consonants that are understood to assimilate certain other consonants
+coming before them:
+
+[Mar. Vict. I. iv. 64.] Sed propriae sunt cognatae (consonantes) quae
+simili figuratione oris dicuntur, ut est B, F, R, M, P, 	quibus Cicero
+adjicit U, non eam quae accipitur pro vocali, sed 	eam quae consonantis
+obtinet vicem, et interposita vocali fit ut 	aliac quoque consonantes.
+
+He proceeds to illustrate with the proposition OB:
+
+[Id. ib. 67.] OB autem mutatur in cognatas easdem, ut _offert, officit_;
+et _ommovet, ommutescit_; et _oppandit, opperitur; 	ovvertit, ovvius_.
+
+Let any one, keeping in mind the distinctness with which the Romans
+uttered doubled consonants, attempt to pronounce _ovvius_ on the theory
+of consonant U like English (W) (!).
+
+By the advocates of the W sound of the V much stress is laid upon the
+fact that the poets occasionally change the consonant into the vowel U,
+and _vice versa_; as Horace, Epode VIII. 2:
+
+"Nivesque deducunt Jovem, nunc mare nunc siluae;"
+
+Or Lucretius, in II. 232:
+
+"Propterea quia corpus aquae naturaque tenvis."
+
+Such single instances suggest, indeed, a common origin in the U and V,
+and a poet's license, archaistic perhaps; but no more determine the
+ordinary value of the letter than, say, in the English poets the rhyming
+of wind with mind, or the making a distinct syllable of the _ed_ in
+participle endings.
+
+Another argument used in support of the W sound is taken from the words
+of Nigidius Figulus.
+
+He was contending, we are told, that words and names come into being not
+by chance, or arbitrarily, but by nature; and he takes, among other
+examples, the words _vos_ and _nos_, _tu_ and _ego_, _tibi_ and _mihi_:
+
+[Aul. Gell. X. iv. 4.] _Vos_, inquit, cum dicimus motu quodam 	oris
+conveniente cum ipsius verbi demonstratione utimur, et 	labias sensim
+primores emovemus, ac spiritum atque animam porro versum et ad eos
+quibuscum sermonicamur intendimus. At contra cum dicimus _nos_ neque
+profuso intentoque flatu vocis, neque projectis labiis pronunciamus; sed
+et spiritum et labias quasi 	intra nosmetipsos coercemus. Hoc idem fit
+et in eo quod dicimus 	_tu_ et _ego_; et _tibi_ et _mihi_. Nam sicuti
+cum adnuimus et 	abnuimus, motus quidem ille vel capitis vel oculorum a
+natura rei 	quam significabat non abhorret; ita in his vocibus, quasi
+gestus 	quidam oris et spiritus naturalis est.
+
+But a little careful examination will show that this passage favors the
+other side rather.
+
+The first part of the description: "labias sensim primores emovemus,"
+will apply to either sound, _vos_ or _wos_, although better, as will
+appear upon consulting the mirror, to _vos_ than to _wos_; but the
+second: "ac spiritum atque animam porro versum et ad eos quibuscum
+sermonicamur intendimus," will certainly apply far better to _vos_ than
+to _wos_. In _wos_ we get the "projectis labiis" to some extent,
+although not so marked as in _vos_; but we do not get anything like the
+same "profuso intentoque flatu vocis" as in _vos_.
+
+The same may be said of the argument drawn from the anecdote related by
+Cicero in his _de Divinatione_:
+
+[Cic. de Div. XL. 84.] Cum M. Crassus exercitum Brundisii 	imponeret,
+quidam in portu caricas Cauno advectas vendens 	"Cauneas!" clamitabat.
+Dicamus, si placet, monitum ab eo Crassum _caveret ne iret_, non fuisse
+periturum si omini paruisset.
+
+Now when we remember that Caunos, whence these particular figs came, was
+a Greek town; that the fig-seller was very likely a Greek himself
+(Brundisium being a Greek port so to speak), but at any rate probably
+pronounced the name as it was doubtless always heard; and that U in such
+a connection is at present pronounced like our F or V, and we know of no
+time when it was pronounced like our U, it is difficult to avoid the
+conclusion that the fig-seller was crying "Cafneas!"--a sound far more
+suggestive of _Cave-ne-eas_! than "_Cauneas!_" of _Cawe ne eas_!
+
+But beyond the testimony, direct and indirect, of grammarians and
+classic writers, an argument against the W sound appears in the fact
+that this sound is not found in Greek (from which the _vau_ is
+borrowed), nor in Italian or kindred Romance languages.
+
+The initial U in Italian represents not Latin U consonant, but some
+other letter, as H, in _uomo_ (for _homo_). On the other hand we find
+the V sound, as _vedova_ (from _vidua_),--notice the two V sounds,--or
+the U sometimes changed to B, as _serbare_ from _servare_; _bibita_ and
+_bevanda_, both from _bibo_.
+
+In French we find the Latin U consonant passing into F, as _ovum_ into
+_oeuf_; _novem_ into _neuf_.
+
+It seems not improbable that in Cicero's time and later the consonant U
+represented some variation of sound, that its value varied in the
+direction of B or F, and possibly, in some Greek words especially, it
+was more vocalized, as in _vae!_ (Greek [Greek transliteration: ouai]).
+Yet here it is worthy of note that the corresponding words in Italian
+are not written with U but with _gu_, as _guai!_
+
+In considering the sound of Latin U consonant we must always keep in
+mind that the question is one of time,--not, was U ever pronounced as
+English W; but, was it so pronounced in the time of Cicero and Virgil.
+Professor Ellis well says: "Any one who wishes to arrive at a conclusion
+respecting the Latin consonantal U must learn to pronounce and
+distinguish readily the four series of sounds: U<circumflex>A
+U<circumflex>E U<circumflex>I U<circumflex>O, WA WE WI WO WU, V'A V'E
+V'I V'O V'U, VA VE VI VO VU."
+
+Now the question is: At what point along this line do we find the U
+consonant of the golden age? Roby, though not agreeing with Ellis in
+rejecting the English W sound, as the representative of that period,
+declares himself "quite content to think that a labial V was
+provincially contemporary and in the end generally superseded it."
+
+But 'provincialisms' do not seem sufficient to account for the use of
+*[Greek letter: b] for U consonant in inscriptions and in writers of
+the first century. For instance, _Nerva_ and _Severus_ in contemporary
+inscriptions are written both with *[Greek: ou] and with [Greek letter:
+b]: [Greek transliteration: Neroua, Nerba; Seouaeros, Sebaeros]. And in
+Plutarch we find numerous instances of [Greek letter: b] taking the
+place of [Greek transliteration: ou].
+
+It is true that the instances in which we find [Greek letter: b] taking
+the place of [Greek trasnliteration: ou] in the first century, and
+earlier, are decidedly in the minority, but when we recollect that
+[Greek trasnliteration: ou] was the original and natural representative
+of the Latin U, the fact that a change was made at all is of great
+weight, and one instance of [Greek letter: b] for U would outweigh a
+dozen instances of the old form, OU. That the letter should be changed
+in the Greek, even when it had not been in the Latin, seems to make it
+certain that the 'Greek ear,' at least, had detected a real variation of
+sound from the original U, and one that approached, at least, their
+[Greek letter: b] (Eng. V).
+
+Nor, in this connection, should we fail to notice the words in Latin
+where U consonant is represented by B, such as _bubile_ from _bovile_,
+_defervi_ and _deferbui_ from _deferveo_.
+
+In concluding the argument for the labial V sound of consonantal U, it
+may be proper to suggest a fact which should have no weight against a
+conclusive argument on the other side, but which might, perhaps, be
+allowed to turn the scale nicely balanced. The W sound is not only
+unfamiliar but nearly, if not quite, impossible, to the lips of any
+European people except the English, and would therefore of necessity
+have to be left out of any universally adopted scheme of Latin
+pronunciation. Professor Ellis pertinently says: "As a matter of
+practical convenience English speakers should abstain from W in Latin,
+because no Continental nation can adopt a sound they cannot pronounce."
+
+X has the same sound as in English.
+
+Marius Victorinus says:
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 32.] Dehinc duae supremae S et X jure jungentur, nam
+vicino inter se sonore attracto sibilant rictu, ita tamen si prioris
+ictus pone dentes excitatus ad medium lenis agitetur; sequentis autem
+crasso spiritu hispidum sonet qui per 	conjunctionem C et S, quarum et
+locum implet et vim exprimit, ut 	sensu aurium ducamur efficitur.
+
+Again:
+
+[Id. ib. p. 5.] X autem per C et S possemus scribere.
+
+And:
+
+Posteaquam a Graecis [Greek: x], et a nobis x, recepta est, abiit 	et
+illorum et nostra perplexa ratio, et in primis observatio 	Nigidii, qui
+in libris suis x littera non est usus, antiquitatem 	sequens.
+
+X suffers a long vowel before it, being composed of the c (the only mute
+that allows a long vowel before it) and the S.
+
+Z probably had a sound akin to ds in English. After giving the sound of
+X as cs, Marius Victorinus goes on to speak of Z thus:
+
+[Keil. v. VI. p. 5.] Sic et z, si modo latino sermoni necessaria esset,
+per d et s litteras faceremus.
+
+QUANTITY.
+
+A syllable in Latin may consist of from one to six letters, as _a_,
+_ab_, _ars_, _Mars_, _stans_, _stirps_.
+
+In dividing into syllables, a consonant between two vowels belongs to
+the vowel following it. When there are two consonants, the first goes
+with the vowel before, the second with the vowel after, unless the
+consonants form such a combination as may stand at the beginning of a
+word (Latin or Greek), that is, as maybe uttered with a single impulse,
+as one letter; in which case they go, as one, with the vowel following.
+An apparent exception is made in the case of compound words. These are
+divided into their component parts when these parts remain intact.
+
+On these points Priscian says:
+
+Si antecedens syllaba terminal in consonantem necesse est et sequentem a
+consonante incipere; ut _artus_, _ille_, _arduus_; 	nisi fit compositum:
+ut _abeo_, _adeo_, _pereo_. Nam in simplicibus dictionibus necesse est s
+et c ejusdem esse syllabae, ut _pascua_, _luscus_. M quoque, vel p, vel
+t, in simplicibus dictionibus, si 	antecedats, ejusdem est syllabae, ut
+_cosmos_, _perspirare_, _testis_.
+
+In semivocalibus similiter sunt praepositivae aliis semivocalibus in
+eadem syllaba; ut m sequente n, ut _Mnesteus_, _amnis_.
+
+Each letter has its 'time,' or 'times.' Thus a short vowel has the time
+of one beat (_mora_); a long vowel, of two beats; a single consonant, of
+a half beat; a double consonant, of one beat. Theoretically, therefore,
+a syllable may have as many as three, or even four, _tempora_; but
+practically only two are recognized. All over two are disregarded and
+each syllable is simply counted 'short' (one beat) or 'long' (two
+beats).
+
+Priscian says:
+
+[Keil. v. II. p. 52.] In longis natura vel positione duo sunt 	tempora,
+ut _do_, _ars_; duo semis, quando post vocalem natura 	longam una
+sequitur consonans, ut _sol_; tria, quando post 	vocalem natura longam
+duae consonantes sequuntur, vel una duplex, 	ut _mons_, _rex_. Tamen in
+metro necesse est unamquamque syllabam 	vel unius vel duorum accipi
+temporum.
+
+ACCENT.
+
+The grammarians tell us that every syllable has three dimensions,
+length, breadth and height, or _tenor_, _spiritus_, _tempus_:
+
+[Keil. Supp. p. XVIII.] Habet etiam unaquaeque syllaba 	altitudinem,
+latitudinem et longitudinem; altitudinem in tenore; 	crassitudinem vel
+latitudinem, in spiritu; longitudinem in 	tempore.
+
+Diomedes says:
+
+[Keil. v. I. p. 430.] Accentus est dictus ab accinendo, quod sit quasi
+quidam cujusque syllabae cantus.
+
+And Cicero:
+
+[Cic. Or. XVIII.] Ipsa enim natura, quasi modularetur hominem orationem,
+in omni verbo posuit acutam vocem, nec una plus, nec a postrema syllaba
+citra tertiam.
+
+The grammarians recognize three accents; but practically we need take
+account of but two, inasmuch as the third is merely negative. The
+syllable having the grave accent is, as we should say, unaccented.
+
+[Diom. Keil. v. I. p. 430.] Sunt vero tres, acutus, gravis, et 	qui ex
+duobus constat circumflexus. Ex his, acutus in correptis 	semper,
+interdum productis syllabis versatur; inflexus (or 	'circumflexus'), in
+his quae producuntur; gravis autem per se 	nunquam consistere in ullo
+verbo potest, sed in his in quibus 	inflexus est, aut acutus ceteras
+syllabas obtinet.
+
+The same writer thus gives the place of each accent:
+
+[Keil. v. I. p. 431.] (Acutus) apud Latinos duo tantum loca 	tenent,
+paenultimum et antepaenultimum; circumflexus autem, 	quotlibet
+syllabarum sit dictio, non tenebit nisi paenultimum 	locum. Omnis igitur
+pars orationis hanc rationem pronuntiationis 	detinet. Omnis vox
+monosyllaba aliquid significans, si brevis 	est, acuetur, ut _ab, mel,
+fel;_ et, si positione longa fuerit, 	acutum similiter tenorem habebit,
+ut _ars, pars, pix, nix, fax_. 	Sin autem longa natura fuerit,
+flectetur, ut _lux, spes, flos, 	sol, mons, fons, lis_.
+
+Omnis vox dissyllaba priorem syllabam aut acuit aut flectit. Acuit, vel
+cum brevis est utraque, ut _deus, citus, datur, arat;_ vel cum positione
+longa est utraque, ut _sollers;_ vel alterutra positione longa dum ne
+natura longa sit, prior, ut _pontus;_ posterior, ut _cohors_. Si vero
+prior syllaba natura longa et 	sequens brevis fuerit, flectitur prior,
+ut _luna, Roma_.
+
+In trisyllabis autem et tetrasyllabis et deinceps, secunda ab ultima
+semper observanda est. Haec, si natura longa fuerit, inflectitur, ut
+_Romanus, Cethegus, marinus, Crispinus, amicus, Sabinus, Quirinus,
+lectica_. Si vero eadem paenultima positione longa fuerit, acuetur, ut
+_Metellus, Catullus, Marcellus_; ita 	tamen si positione longa non ex
+muta et liquida fuerit. Nam 	mutabit accentum, ut _latebrae, tenebrae_.
+Et si novissima natura 	longa itemque paenultima, sive natura sive
+positione longa 	fuerit, paenultima tantum acuetur, non inflectetur;
+sic, natura, 	ut _Fidenae_,
+
+_Athenae_, _Thebae_, _Cymae_; positione, ut _tabellae_, 	_fenestrae_.
+Sin autem media et novissima breves fuerint, prima 	servabit acutum
+tenorem, ut _Sergius_, _Mallius_, _ascia_, 	_fuscina_, _Julius_,
+_Claudius_. Si omnes tres syllabae longae 	fuerint, media acuetur, ut
+_Romani_, _legati_, _praetores_, 	_praedones_.
+
+Priscian thus defines the accents:
+
+[Keil. v. III. p. 519.] Acutus namque accentus ideo inventus est quod
+acuat sive elevet syllabam; gravis vero eo quod deprimat aut deponat;
+circumflexus ideo quod deprimat et acuat.
+
+Then after giving the place of the accent he notes some disturbing
+influences, which cause exceptions to the general rule:
+
+[Keil. v. III. pp. 519-521.] Tres quidem res accentuum regulas
+conturbant; distinguendi ratio; pronuntiandi ambiguitas; atque
+necessitas....
+
+Ratio namque distinguendi legem accentuum saepe conturbat. Siquis
+pronuntians dicat _poné_ et _ergo_, quod apud Latinos in 	ultima syllaba
+nisi discretionis causa accentus poni non potest: 	ex hoc est quod
+diximus _poné_ et _ergó_. Ideo _poné_ dicimus ne 	putetur verbum esse
+imperativi modi, hoc est _pone_; _ergó_ ideo 	dicimus ne putetur
+conjunctio rationalis, quod est _érgo_.
+
+Ambiguitas vero pronuntiandi legem accentuum saepe conturbat. Siquis
+dicat _interealoci_, qui nescit, alteram partem 	dicat _interea_,
+alteram _loci_, quod non separatim sed sub uno 	accentu pronuntiandum
+est, ne ambiguitatem in sermone faciat.
+
+Necessitas pronuntiationis regulam corrumpit, ut puta siquis dicat in
+primis _doctus_, addat _que_ conjunctionem, dicatque _doctusque_, ecce
+in pronuntiatione accentum mutavit, cum non in secunda syllaba, sed in
+prima, accentum habere debuit.
+
+He also states the law that determines the kind of accent to be used:
+
+[Id. ib. p. 521.] Syllaba quae correptam vocalem habet acuto accentu
+pronuntiatur, ut _páx_, _fáx_, _píx_, _níx_, _dúx_, 	_núx_, quae etiam
+tali accentu pronuntianda est, quamvis sit 	longa positione, quia
+naturaliter brevis est. Quae vero 	naturaliter producta est circumflexo
+accentu exprimenda est ut, 	_rês_, _dôs_, _spês_. Dissyllabae vero quae
+priorem productam 	habent et posteriorem correptam, priorem syllabam
+circumflectunt, 	ut _mêta_, _Crêta_. Illae vero quae sunt ambae longae
+vel prior 	brevis et ulterior longa acuto accento pronuntiandae sunt, ut
+_népos_, _léges_, _réges_. Hae vero quae sunt ambae breves 	similiter
+acuto accentu proferuntur, ut _bonus_, _melos_. Sed notandum quod si
+prior sit longa positione non circumflexo, sed acuto, accentu
+pronuntianda est, ut _arma_, _arcus_, quae, 	quamvis sit longa
+positione, tamen exprimenda est tali accentu 	quia non est naturalis.
+
+Trisyllabae namque et tetrasyllabae sive deinceps, si paenultimam
+correptam habuerint, antepaenultimam acuto accentu proferunt, ut
+_Túllius_, _Hostílius_. Nam paenultima, si positione longa fuerit,
+acuetur, antepaenultima vero gravabitur, ut _Catúllus_, _Metéllus_. Si
+vero ex muta et liquida longa in versu esse 	constat, in oratione quoque
+accentum mutat, ut _latébrae_, 	_tenébrae_. Syllaba vero ultima, si
+brevis sit et paenultimam 	naturaliter longam habuerit ipsam paenultimam
+circumflectit, ut 	_Cethêgus_, _perôsus_. Ultima quoque, si naturaliter
+longa 	fuerit, paenultimam acuet, ut _Athénae_, _Mycénae_. Ad hanc autem
+rem arsis et thesis necessariae. Nam in unaquaque parte oratione 	arsis
+et thesis sunt, non in ordine syllabarum, sed in 	pronuntiatione: velut
+in hac parte _natura_, ut quando dico 	_natu_ elevatur vox, et est arsis
+intus; quando vero sequitur 	_ra_ vox deponitur, et est thesis deforis.
+Quantum, autem 	suspenditur vox per arsin tantum deprimitur per thesin.
+Sed ipsa 	vox quae per dictiones formatur donee accentus perficiatur in
+arsin deputatur, quae autem post accentum sequitur in thesin.
+
+In the matter of exceptions to the rule that accent does not fall on the
+ultimate, we find a somewhat wide divergence of opinion among the
+grammarians. Some of them give numerous exceptions, particularly in the
+distinguishing of parts of speech, as, for instance, between the same
+word used as adverb or preposition, as _ánte_ and _anté_; or between the
+same form as occurring in nouns and verbs, as _réges_ and _regés_; and
+in final syllables contracted or curtailed, as _finit_ (for _finivit_).
+
+But since on this point the grammarians do not agree among themselves,
+either as to number or class of exceptions, or even as to the manner of
+making them, we may treat this matter as of no great importance (as in
+English, we please ourselves in saying _pérfect_ or _perféct_). And here
+it may be said that due attention to the quantity will of itself often
+regulate the accent in doubtful cases; as when we say _doce_, if we duly
+shorten the o and lengthen the e the effect will be correct, whether the
+ear of the grammarian detect accent on the final syllable, or not. For
+as Quintilian well says:
+
+Nam ut color oculorum indicio, sapor palati, odor narium dinoscitur, ita
+sonus aurium arbitrio subjectus est.
+
+PITCH.
+
+But besides the length of the syllable, and the place and quality of the
+accent, another matter claims attention.
+
+In English all that is required is to know the place of the accent,
+which is simply distinguished by greater stress of voice. This
+peculiarity of our language makes it more difficult for us than for
+other peoples to get the Latin accent, which is one of pitch.
+
+In Latin the acute accent means that on the syllable thus accented you
+raise the pitch; the grave indicates merely the lower tone; the
+circumflex, that the voice is first raised, then depressed, on the same
+syllable. To quote again the passage from Priscian:
+
+[Keil. v. in p. 519.] Acutus namque accentus ideo inventus est quod
+acuat sive elevet syllabam; gravis vero eo quod deprimat aut deponet;
+circumflexus ideo quod deprimat et acuat.
+
+In conclusion of this part of the work the following anecdotes from
+Aulus Gellius are given, as serving to show that to the rules of classic
+Roman pronunciation there were exceptions, apparently more or less
+arbitrary, some--perhaps many--of which we may not now hope to discover;
+and as serving still more usefully to show, by the stress laid upon
+points of comparative insignificance, that exceptions were rare, such as
+even scholars could afford to disagree upon, and not such as to affect
+the general tenor of the language. So that we are encouraged to believe
+that, as the English language may be well and even elegantly spoken by
+those whose speech still includes scores, if not hundreds, of variations
+in pronunciation, in sounds of letters or in accent, so we may hope to
+pronounce the Latin with some good degree of satisfaction, whether, for
+instance, we say _quiésco_ or _qui'esco_, _ãctito_ or _actito_:
+
+[Aul. Cell. VI. xv.] Amicus noster, homo multi studii atque in bonarum
+disciplinarum opere frequens, verbum _quiescit_ usitate e littera
+correpta dixit. Alter item amicus homo in doctrinis, 	quasi in
+praestigiis, mirificus, communiumque vocum respuens 	nimis et
+fastidiens, barbare eum dixisse opinatus est; quoniam 	producere
+debuisset, non corripere. Nam _quiescit_ ita oportere 	dici praedicavit,
+ut _calescit_, _nitescit_, _stupescit_, atque 	alia hujuscemodi multa.
+Id etiam addebat, quod _quies_ e 	producto, non brevi, diceretur. Noster
+autem, qua est omnium 	rerum verecunda mediocritate, ne si Aelii quidem
+Cincii et 	Santrae dicendum ita censuissent obsecuturum sese fuisse ait,
+contra perpetuam Latinae linguae consuetudinem. Neque se tam 	insignite
+locuturum, absona aut inaudita ut diceret. Litteras 	autem super hac re
+fecit, item inter haec exercitia quaedam 	ludicra; et _quiesco_ non esse
+his simile quae supra posui, nee a 	_quiete_ dictum, sed ab eo
+_quietem_; Graecaeque vocis [Greek: 	eschon kai eskon], lonice a verbo
+[Greek: escho ischo] et modum 	et originem verbum illud habere
+demonstravit. Rationibusque haud 	sane frigidis docuit _quiesco_ e
+littera longa dici non 	convenire.
+
+
+[Aul. Gell. IX. vi.] Ab eo, quod est _ago_ et _egi_, verba sunt 	quae
+appellant grammatici frequentativa, _actito_ et _actitavi_. Haec quosdam
+non sane indoctos viros audio ita 	pronuntiare ut primam in his litteram
+corripiant; rationemque dicant, quoniam in verbo principali, quod est
+_ago_, 	prima littera breviter pronuntiatur. Cur igitur ab eo quod est
+_edo_ et _ungo_, in quibus verbis prima littera 	breviter dicitur,
+_esito_ et _unctito_, quae sunt eorum frequentativa prima littera longa
+promimus? et contra, _dictito_, 	ab eo verbo quod est _dico_, correpte
+dicimus? Num ergo potius 	_actito_ et _actitavi_ producenda sunt?
+quoniam frequentativa ferme omnia eodem modo in prima syllaba dicuntur,
+quo participia 	praeteriti temporis ex iis verbis unde ea profecta sunt
+in eadem 	syllaba pronuntiantur; sicut _lego_, _lectus_, _lectito_
+facit; _ungo_, _unctus_, _unctito_; _scribo_, _scriptus_, _scriptito_;
+_moneo_, _monitus_, _monito_; _pendeo_, _pensus_, _pensito_; _edo_,
+_esus_, _esito_; _dico_, autem, _dictus_, 	_dictito_ facit; _gero_,
+_gestus_, _gestito_; _veho_, _vectus_, _vectito_; _rapio_, _raptus_,
+_raptito_; _capio_, 	_captus_, _captito_; _facio_, _factus_, _factito_.
+Sic igitur _actito_ producte in prima syllaba pronuntiandum, 	quoniam ex
+eo fit quod est _ago_ et _actus_.
+
+PART II.
+
+HOW TO USE IT.
+
+The directions now to be given may be fittingly introduced by a few
+paragraphs from Professor Munro's pamphlet on the pronunciation of
+Latin, already more than once quoted from. He says--and part of this has
+been cited before:
+
+"We know exactly how Cicero, or Quintilian did or could spell; we know
+the syllable on which they placed the accent of almost every word; and
+in almost every case we already follow them in this. I have the
+conviction that in their best days philological people took vast pains
+to make the writing exactly reproduce the sounding; and that if
+Quintilian or Tacitus spelt a word differently from Cicero or Livy, he
+also spoke it so far differently. With the same amount of evidence,
+direct and indirect, we have for Latin, it would not, I think, be worth
+anybody's while to try to recover the pronunciation of French or
+English; it might, I think, be worth his while to try to recover that of
+German or Italian, in which sound and spelling accord more nearly, and
+accent obeys more determinable laws."
+
+"I am convinced," he says in another place, "that the mainstay of an
+efficient reform is the adoption essentially of the Italian vowel
+system: it combines beauty, firmness and precision in a degree not
+equalled by any other system of which I have any knowledge. The little
+ragged boys in the streets of Rome and Florence enunciate their vowels
+in a style of which princes might be proud."
+
+And again:
+
+"I do not propose that every one should learn Italian in order to learn
+Latin. What I would suggest is, that those who know Italian should make
+use of their knowledge and should in many points take Italian sounds for
+the model to be followed; that those who do not know it should try to
+learn from others the sounds required, or such an approxi-mation to them
+as may be possible in each case."
+
+We may then sum up the results at which we have arrived in the following
+directions:
+
+First of all pay particular attention to the vowel sounds, to make them
+full and distinct, taking the Italian model, if you know Italian, and
+always observing strictly the quantity.
+
+Pronounce
+
+[long a] as in Italian _fato_ or as final a in aha!
+
+a as in Italian _fatto_; or as initial a in aha! or as in fast (not as
+in fat).
+
+[long e] as second e in Italian _fedele_; or as in fête (not fate); or
+as in vein.
+
+e as in Italian _fetta_; or as in very.
+
+[long i] as first i in Italian _timide_; or as in caprice,
+
+i as second i in Italian _timide_; or as in capricious.
+
+i or u, where the spelling varies between the two (e.g. _maximus_,
+_maxumus_), as in German Müller.
+
+[long o] as first o in Italian _orlo_; or as in more.
+
+o as first o in Italian _rotto_; or as in wholly (not as in holly).
+
+[long u] as in Italian _rumore_; or as in rural.
+
+u as in Italian _ruppe_; or as in puss (not as in fuss).
+
+Let i in vi before d, t, m, r or x, in the first syllable of a word, be
+pronounced quite obscurely, somewhat as first i in virgin.
+
+In the matter of diphthongs, be sure to take always the correct
+spelling, to begin with, and thus avoid what Munro justly terms "hateful
+barbarisms like _coelum_, _coena_, _moestus_." Much time is wasted by
+students and bad habits are acquired in not finding, at the outset, the
+right spelling of each word and holding to it. This each student must do
+for himself, consulting a good dictionary, as editors and editions are
+not always to be depended on. Here it is the diphthongs that present the
+chief difficulty and call for the greatest care.
+
+In pronouncing diphthongs sound both vowels, but glide so rapidly from
+the first to the second as to offer to the ear but a single sound. In
+the publication of the Cambridge (Eng.) Philological Society on
+"Pronunciation of Latin in the Augustan Period," the following
+directions are given:
+
+"The pronunciation of these diphthongs, of which the last three are
+extremely rare, is best learnt by first sounding each vowel separately
+and then running them together, AE as ah-eh, AU as ah-oo, OE as o-eh, EI
+as eh-ee, EU as eh-oo, and UI as oo-ee."
+
+Thus:
+
+AE (ah-éh) as in German _näher_; or as EA in pear; or AY in aye (ever);
+(not like a* in fate nor like AI in aisle).
+
+AI (ah-ée) as in aye (yes).
+
+AU (ah-óo) as in German _Haus_, with more of the U sound than OU in
+house.
+
+EI (eh-ée) nearly as in veil. (In _dein_, _deinde_, the EI is not 	a
+diphthong, but the E, when not forming a distinct syllable, is 	elided.)
+
+EU (eh-óo) as in Italian _Europa_. (In _neuter_ and _neutiquam_ 	elide
+the E.)
+
+OE (o-éh) nearly like German ö in _Goethe_.
+
+OI is not found in the classical period. (In _proin_, _proinde_, 	the O
+is either elided or forms a distinct syllable. OU in 	_prout_ is not a
+diphthong; the U is either elided or forms a 	distinct syllable.)
+
+UI (oo-ée) as in cuirass.
+
+In the pronunciation of consonants certain points claim special
+attention. And first among these is the sounding of the doubled
+consonants. Whoever has heard Italian spoken recognizes one of its
+greatest beauties to be the distinctness, yet smoothness, with which its
+ll and rr and cc--in short, all its doubled consonants--are pronounced.
+No feature of the language is more charming. And one who attempts the
+same in Latin and perseveres, with whatever difficulty and pains, will
+be amply rewarded in the music of the language.
+
+A good working rule for pronouncing doubled consonants is to hold the
+first until ready to pronounce the second: as in the words _we'll lie
+till late_, not to be pronounced as _we lie till eight_.
+
+Next in importance, and, in New England at least, first in difficulty,
+is the trilling of the r. There can be no approximation to a
+satisfactory pronunciation of Latin until this r is acquired; but the
+satisfaction in the result when accomplished is well worth all the pains
+taken.
+
+Another point to be observed is that the dentals t, d, n, l, require
+that the tongue touch the teeth, rather than the palate. Munro says: "d
+and t we treat with our usual slovenliness, and force them up to the
+roof of our mouth: we should make them real dentals, as no doubt the
+Romans made them, and then we shall see how readily _ad at_, _apud
+aput_, _illud illut_ and the like interchange." This requires care, but
+amply repays the effort.
+
+It is necessary also to remember that n before a guttural is pronounced
+as in the same position in English, e.g., in _ancora_ as in anchor; in
+_anxius_ as in anxious; in _relinquo_ as in relinquish.
+
+Remember to make n before f or s a mere nasal, having as little
+prominence otherwise as possible, and to carefully lengthen the
+preceding vowel.
+
+Studiously observe the length of the vowel before the terminations
+_gnus_, _gna_, _gnum_.
+
+Remember that the final syllable in m, when not elided, is to be
+pronounced as lightly and rapidly as possible, the more lightly and
+indistinctly the better.
+
+Remember that s must not be pronounced as z, except where it represents
+z in Greek words, as Smyrna (Zmyrna), Smaragdus (Zmaragdus), otherwise
+always pronounce as in sis.
+
+Remember in pronouncing v to direct the lower lip toward the upper lip,
+avoiding the upper teeth.
+
+In general, in pronouncing the consonants conform to the following
+scheme:
+
+b as in blab.
+
+b before s or t, sharpened to p, as _urbs_==_urps_; _obtinuit_==
+_optinuit_.
+
+c as sceptic (never as in sceptre).
+
+ch as in chemist (never as in cheer or chivalry).
+
+d as in did, but made more dental than in English.
+
+d final, before a word beginning with a consonant, in particles
+especially, often sharpened to t as in tid-bit (tit-bit).
+
+f as in fief, but with more breath than in English.
+
+g as in gig (never as in gin).
+
+gn in terminations _gnus_, _gna_, _gnum_, makes preceding vowel 	long.
+
+h as in hah!
+
+i (consonant) as in onion.
+
+k as in kink.
+
+l initial and final, as in lull.
+
+l medial, as in lullaby, always more dental than in English.
+
+m initial and medial, as in membrane.
+
+m before q, nasalized.
+
+m final, when not elided, touched lightly and obscurely, somewhat as in
+tandem (tandm); or as in the Englishman's pronunciation of Blenheim
+(Blenhm), Birmingham (Birminghm).
+
+n initial and final, as in nine.
+
+n medial, as in damnable, always more dental than in English.
+
+n before c, g, q, x, as in concord, anger, sinker, relinquish, anxious,
+the tongue not touching the roof of the mouth.
+
+n before f or s, nasal, lengthening the preceding vowel, as in
+_renaissance_.
+
+p as in pup.
+
+q as in quick.
+
+r as in roar, but trilled, as in Italian or French. (This is most
+important.)
+
+s as in sis (never as in his).
+
+t as in tot, but more dental than in English (never as in 	motion).
+
+th nearly as in then (never as in thin).
+
+v (u consonant) nearly as in verve, but labial, rather than
+labio-dental; like the German w (not like the English w). Make English v
+as nearly as may be done without touch-* the lower lip to the upper
+teeth.
+
+x as in six.
+
+z nearly as dz in adze.
+
+Doubled consonants to be pronounced each distinctly, by holding the
+first until ready to pronounce the second.
+
+As Professor Ellis well puts it: "No relaxation of the organs, no puff
+of wind or grunt of voice should intervene between the two parts of a
+doubled consonant, which should more resemble separated parts of one
+articulation than two separate articulations."
+
+"Duplication of consonants is consequently regarded simply as the
+energetic utterance of a single consonant."
+
+ELISION.
+
+Professor Ellis believes that the m was always omitted in speaking and
+the following consonant pronounced as if doubled (_quorum pars_ as
+_quoruppars_). Final m at the end of a sentence he thinks was not heard
+at all. Where a vowel followed he thinks that the m was not heard, the
+vowel before being slurred on to the initial vowel of the following
+word.
+
+The Cambridge (Eng.) Philological Society, however, takes the view that
+"final vowels (or diphthongs) when followed by vowels (or diphthongs)
+were not cut off, but lightly run on to the following word, as in
+Italian. But if the vowel was the same the effect was that of a single
+sound."
+
+Professor Munro says:
+
+"In respect of elision I would only say that, by comparing Plautus with
+Ovid, we may see how much the elaborate cultivation of the language had
+tended to a more distinct sounding of final syllables; and that but for
+Virgil's powerful influence the elision of long vowels would have almost
+ceased. Clearly we must not altogether pass over the elided vowel or
+syllable in m, except perhaps in the case of e* in common words, _que_,
+_neque_, and the like."
+
+This view, held by the Cambridge Philological Society and by Professor
+Munro, is the one generally accepted; the practice recommended by them
+is the one generally in use, and that which seems safe and suitable to
+follow. That is: Do not altogether pass over the elided vowel or
+syllable in m, except in cases of very close connection, in compound
+words or phrases, or when the final and initial vowel are the same, or
+in the case of e* final in common words, as _que_, _neque_, and the
+like; but let the final vowel run lightly on to the following vowel as
+in Italian, and touch lightly and obscurely the final syllable in m. The
+o or e of _proin_, _proinde_, _prout_, _dein_, _deinde_, _neuter_,
+_neutiquam_, when not forming a distinct syllable, are to be treated as
+cases of elision between two words.
+
+QUANTITY.
+
+In the pronunciation of Latin the observance of quantity and of pitch
+are the two most difficult points of attainment; and they are the
+crucial test of good reading.
+
+The observance of quantity is no less important in prose than in verse.
+A little reflection will convince the dullest mind that the Romans did
+not pronounce a word one way in prose and another in verse, that we have
+not in poetry and prose two languages. Cicero and Quintilian both enjoin
+a due admixture of long and short syllables in prose as well as verse;
+and any one who takes delight in reading Latin will heartily agree with
+Professor Munro when he says: "For myself, by observing quantity, I seem
+to feel more keenly the beauty of Cicero's style and Livy's, as well as
+Virgil's and Horace's."
+
+Therefore until one feels at home with the quantities, let him observe
+the rule of beating time in reading, to make sure that the long
+syllables get twice the time of the short ones. In this way he will soon
+have the pronunciation of each word correctly fixed in mind, and will
+not be obliged to think of his quantities in verse more than in prose. A
+long step has been taken in the enjoyment of Latin poetry when the
+reader does not have to be thinking of the 'feet.'
+
+Young students particularly should be especially careful in the final
+syllable of the verse. Since, so far as the measure is concerned, there
+is no difference there between the long and the short syllable, the
+reader is apt to be careless as to the length of the syllable itself,
+and to make all final syllables long, even to the mispronouncing of the
+word, thereby both making a false quantity and otherwise injuring the
+effect of the verse, by importing into it a monotony foreign to the
+original. Does not Cicero himself say that a short syllable at the end
+of the verse is as if you 'stood' (came to a stand), but a long one as
+if you 'sat down'?
+
+It is, in fact, in the pronouncing of final syllables everywhere that
+the most serious and persistent faults are found, bus for bus being one
+of the worst and most common cases. How much of the teacher's time might
+be spared, for better things, if he did not have to correct bus into
+bus!
+
+The disposition to neglect the double and doubled consonants is another
+serious fault, as well as the slovenly pronunciation of two consonants,
+where the reader fails to give the time necessary to speak each
+distinctly, making false quantity and mispronunciation at the same time.
+
+In general, if two symbols are written we are to infer that two sounds
+were intended. The only exception to this is in the case of a few words
+where the spelling varies, as casso or caso. In such cases we may
+suppose that the doubled consonant was only designed to indicate length.
+
+Another, apparent, exception is in the case of a mute followed by a
+liquid; but the mute and liquid are regularly sounded as one, and
+therefore do not affect the length of the preceding vowel. Sometimes,
+however, for the sake of time, the verse requires them to be pronounced
+separately. In this case each is to be given distinctly; the mute and
+liquid must not coalesce. For it must not be forgotten that, as a rule,
+the vowel before a mute followed by a liquid is short, in which case it
+must on no account be lengthened. Thus, ordinarily, we say pa-tris, but
+the verse may require pat-ris.
+
+Although the vowel before two consonants is generally--short, we find,
+in some instances, a long vowel in this position. For example, it would
+appear that the vowel of the supine and cognate parts of the verb is
+long if the vowel of the present indicative, though short, is followed
+by a medial (b, g, d, z), as actus, lectus, from ago, lego.
+
+Let it be remembered in the matter of i consonant between two vowels,
+that we have really the force of two ii's, as originally written, one,
+vowel, making a diphthong with the preceding, the other, consonant,
+introducing the new syllable; and that the same is true of the compounds
+of _jacio_, which should be written with a single i but pronounced as
+with two, as _obicit (objicit)_.
+
+ACCENT.
+
+The question of accent presents little difficulty as to place, but some
+as to quality, and much as to kind. As to quality, it must be remembered
+that while the acute accent is found on syllables either short or long
+(by nature or position), and on either the penult or the antepenult, the
+circumflex is found only on long vowels, and (in words of more than one
+syllable) only on the penult, and then only in case the ultima is short.
+Thus, _spés_, but _dúx_; _lûna_, but _lún[long a]_; _legâtus_, but
+_legáti_. In these examples the length of the syllable is the same and
+of course remains the same in inflection, but the quality of the accent
+changes. In the one case the voice is both raised and depressed on the
+same syllable, in the other it is only raised. As Professor Ellis puts
+it: "If the last syllable but one is long, it is spoken with a raised
+pitch, which is maintained throughout if its vowel is short, as:
+_vént[long o]s_, or if the last syllable is long, as: _f[long a]m[long
+a]e_; but sinks immediately if its own vowel is long, and at the same
+time the vowel of the last syllable is short, as _fâma_, to be
+distinguished from _f[long a]m[long a]_."
+
+But when we come to the question of the _kind_ of accent, we come upon
+the most serious matter practically in the pronunciation of Latin, and
+this because of a difficulty peculiar to the English speaking peoples.
+The English accent is one of _stress_, whereas the Roman is one of
+_pitch_.
+
+No one will disagree with Professor Ellis when he "assumes," in his
+Quantitative Pronunciation of Latin, "that the Augustan Romans had _no_
+force accent, that is, that they did not, as we do, distinguish one
+syllable in every word _invariably_ by pronouncing it with greater
+force, that is, with greater loudness, than the others, but that the
+force varied according to the feeling of the moment, or the beat of the
+timekeeper in singing, and was used for purposes of expression; just as
+with us, musical pitch is free, that is, just as we may pronounce the
+same word with different musical pitches for its different syllables,
+and in fact are obliged to vary the musical pitch in interrogations and
+replies. The fixity of musical pitch and freedom of degrees of force in
+Latin, and the freedom of musical pitch and fixity of degrees of force
+in English sharply distinguish the two pronunciations even irrespective
+of quantity."
+
+But this pitch accent, while alien to us, is not impossible of
+acquisition, and it is essential to any adequate rendering of any Latin
+writer, whether of prose or verse. Nor will the attainment be a work of
+indefinite time if one pursues with constancy some such course as the
+following, recommended by Professor Ellis:
+
+"The place of raised pitch," he says, "must be strictly observed, and
+for this purpose the verses had better be first read in a kind of
+sing-song, the high pitched syllables being all of one pitch and the low
+pitched syllables being all of one pitch also, but about a musical
+'fifth' lower than the other, as if the latter were sung to the lowest
+note of the fourth string of a violin, and the former were sung to the
+lowest note of its third string."
+
+In the foregoing pages an effort has been made to bring together
+compactly and to set forth concisely the nature of the 'Roman method' of
+pronouncing Latin; the reasons for adopting, and the simplest means of
+acquiring it. No attempt has been made at a philosophical or exhaustive
+treatment of the subject; but at the same time it is hoped that nothing
+unphilosophical has crept in, or anything been omitted, which might have
+been given, to render the subject intelligible and enable the
+intelligent reader to understand the points and be able to give a reason
+for each usage herein recommended.
+
+The main object in view in preparing this little book has been to help
+the teachers of Latin in the secondary schools, to furnish them
+something not too voluminous, yet as satisfactory as the nature of the
+case allows, upon a subject which the present diversity of opinion and
+practice has rendered unnecessarily obscure.
+
+To these teachers, then, a word from Professor Ellis may be fitly spoken
+in conclusion:
+
+"To teach a person to read prose _well_, even in his own language, is
+difficult, partly because he has seldom heard prose well read, though he
+is constantly hearing prose around him, intonated, but unrhythmical. In
+the case of a dead language, like the Latin, which the pupil never hears
+spoken, and seldom hears read, except by himself or his equally ignorant
+and hobbling fellow-scholars, this difficulty is inordinately increased.
+Let me once more impress on every teacher of Latin the _duty_ of himself
+learning to read Latin readily according to accent and quantity; the
+_duty_ of his reading out to his pupils, of his setting them a
+_pattern_, of his hearing that they follow it, of his correcting their
+mistakes, of his _leading_ them into right habits. If the quantitative
+pronunciation be adopted, no one will be fit to become a classical
+teacher who cannot read a simple Latin sentence decently, with a strict
+observance of that quantity by which alone the greatest of Latin orators
+regulated his own rhythms."
+
+"All pronunciation is acquired by imitation, and it is not till after
+hearing a sound many times that we are able to grasp it sufficiently
+well to imitate. It is a mistake constantly made by teachers of language
+to suppose that a pupil knows by once hearing unfamiliar sounds, or even
+unfamiliar combinations of familiar sounds. When pupils are made to
+imitate too soon, they acquire an erroneous pronunciation, which they
+afterward hear constantly from themselves actually or mentally, and
+believe that they hear from the teacher during the small fraction of a
+second that each sound lasts, and hence the habits of these organs
+become fixed."
+
+The following direction is of the utmost importance (Curwen's "Standard
+Course," p. 3): "The teacher never sings (speaks) _with_ his pupils, but
+sings (utters, reads, dictates) to them a brief and soft _pattern_. The
+first art of the pupil is to _listen well_ to the pattern, and then to
+imitate it exactly. He that listens best sings (speaks) best."
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Roman Pronunciation of Latin
+by Frances E. Lord
+
+*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ROMAN PRONUNCIATION OF LATIN ***
+
+This file should be named 8rlat10.txt or 8rlat10.zip
+Corrected EDITIONS of our eBooks get a new NUMBER, 8rlat11.txt
+VERSIONS based on separate sources get new LETTER, 8rlat10a.txt
+
+Produced by David Starner, Ted Garvin
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team.
+
+Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the US
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we usually do not
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+We are now trying to release all our eBooks one year in advance
+of the official release dates, leaving time for better editing.
+Please be encouraged to tell us about any error or corrections,
+even years after the official publication date.
+
+Please note neither this listing nor its contents are final til
+midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement.
+The official release date of all Project Gutenberg eBooks is at
+Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month.  A
+preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment
+and editing by those who wish to do so.
+
+Most people start at our Web sites at:
+http://gutenberg.net or
+http://promo.net/pg
+
+These Web sites include award-winning information about Project
+Gutenberg, including how to donate, how to help produce our new
+eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter (free!).
+
+
+Those of you who want to download any eBook before announcement
+can get to them as follows, and just download by date.  This is
+also a good way to get them instantly upon announcement, as the
+indexes our cataloguers produce obviously take a while after an
+announcement goes out in the Project Gutenberg Newsletter.
+
+http://www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg/etext03 or
+ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/docs/books/gutenberg/etext03
+
+Or /etext02, 01, 00, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 92, 91 or 90
+
+Just search by the first five letters of the filename you want,
+as it appears in our Newsletters.
+
+
+Information about Project Gutenberg (one page)
+
+We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work.  The
+time it takes us, a rather conservative estimate, is fifty hours
+to get any eBook selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright
+searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc.   Our
+projected audience is one hundred million readers.  If the value
+per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2
+million dollars per hour in 2002 as we release over 100 new text
+files per month:  1240 more eBooks in 2001 for a total of 4000+
+We are already on our way to trying for 2000 more eBooks in 2002
+If they reach just 1-2% of the world's population then the total
+will reach over half a trillion eBooks given away by year's end.
+
+The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away 1 Trillion eBooks!
+This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers,
+which is only about 4% of the present number of computer users.
+
+Here is the briefest record of our progress (* means estimated):
+
+eBooks Year Month
+
+    1  1971 July
+   10  1991 January
+  100  1994 January
+ 1000  1997 August
+ 1500  1998 October
+ 2000  1999 December
+ 2500  2000 December
+ 3000  2001 November
+ 4000  2001 October/November
+ 6000  2002 December*
+ 9000  2003 November*
+10000  2004 January*
+
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation has been created
+to secure a future for Project Gutenberg into the next millennium.
+
+We need your donations more than ever!
+
+As of February, 2002, contributions are being solicited from people
+and organizations in: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut,
+Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois,
+Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts,
+Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New
+Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio,
+Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South
+Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West
+Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
+
+We have filed in all 50 states now, but these are the only ones
+that have responded.
+
+As the requirements for other states are met, additions to this list
+will be made and fund raising will begin in the additional states.
+Please feel free to ask to check the status of your state.
+
+In answer to various questions we have received on this:
+
+We are constantly working on finishing the paperwork to legally
+request donations in all 50 states.  If your state is not listed and
+you would like to know if we have added it since the list you have,
+just ask.
+
+While we cannot solicit donations from people in states where we are
+not yet registered, we know of no prohibition against accepting
+donations from donors in these states who approach us with an offer to
+donate.
+
+International donations are accepted, but we don't know ANYTHING about
+how to make them tax-deductible, or even if they CAN be made
+deductible, and don't have the staff to handle it even if there are
+ways.
+
+Donations by check or money order may be sent to:
+
+Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+PMB 113
+1739 University Ave.
+Oxford, MS 38655-4109
+
+Contact us if you want to arrange for a wire transfer or payment
+method other than by check or money order.
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation has been approved by
+the US Internal Revenue Service as a 501(c)(3) organization with EIN
+[Employee Identification Number] 64-622154.  Donations are
+tax-deductible to the maximum extent permitted by law.  As fund-raising
+requirements for other states are met, additions to this list will be
+made and fund-raising will begin in the additional states.
+
+We need your donations more than ever!
+
+You can get up to date donation information online at:
+
+http://www.gutenberg.net/donation.html
+
+
+***
+
+If you can't reach Project Gutenberg,
+you can always email directly to:
+
+Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com>
+
+Prof. Hart will answer or forward your message.
+
+We would prefer to send you information by email.
+
+
+**The Legal Small Print**
+
+
+(Three Pages)
+
+***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN EBOOKS**START***
+Why is this "Small Print!" statement here? You know: lawyers.
+They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with
+your copy of this eBook, even if you got it for free from
+someone other than us, and even if what's wrong is not our
+fault. So, among other things, this "Small Print!" statement
+disclaims most of our liability to you. It also tells you how
+you may distribute copies of this eBook if you want to.
+
+*BEFORE!* YOU USE OR READ THIS EBOOK
+By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
+eBook, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept
+this "Small Print!" statement. If you do not, you can receive
+a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this eBook by
+sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person
+you got it from. If you received this eBook on a physical
+medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request.
+
+ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM EBOOKS
+This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBook, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBooks,
+is a "public domain" work distributed by Professor Michael S. Hart
+through the Project Gutenberg Association (the "Project").
+Among other things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright
+on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and
+distribute it in the United States without permission and
+without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth
+below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this eBook
+under the "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark.
+
+Please do not use the "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark to market
+any commercial products without permission.
+
+To create these eBooks, the Project expends considerable
+efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain
+works. Despite these efforts, the Project's eBooks and any
+medium they may be on may contain "Defects". Among other
+things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
+intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged
+disk or other eBook medium, a computer virus, or computer
+codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.
+
+LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES
+But for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described below,
+[1] Michael Hart and the Foundation (and any other party you may
+receive this eBook from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBook) disclaims
+all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including
+legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR
+UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT,
+INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE
+OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE
+POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
+
+If you discover a Defect in this eBook within 90 days of
+receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any)
+you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that
+time to the person you received it from. If you received it
+on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and
+such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement
+copy. If you received it electronically, such person may
+choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to
+receive it electronically.
+
+THIS EBOOK IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU "AS-IS". NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS
+TO THE EBOOK OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT
+LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A
+PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
+
+Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or
+the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the
+above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you
+may have other legal rights.
+
+INDEMNITY
+You will indemnify and hold Michael Hart, the Foundation,
+and its trustees and agents, and any volunteers associated
+with the production and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
+texts harmless, from all liability, cost and expense, including
+legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the
+following that you do or cause:  [1] distribution of this eBook,
+[2] alteration, modification, or addition to the eBook,
+or [3] any Defect.
+
+DISTRIBUTION UNDER "PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm"
+You may distribute copies of this eBook electronically, or by
+disk, book or any other medium if you either delete this
+"Small Print!" and all other references to Project Gutenberg,
+or:
+
+[1]  Only give exact copies of it.  Among other things, this
+     requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the
+     eBook or this "small print!" statement.  You may however,
+     if you wish, distribute this eBook in machine readable
+     binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form,
+     including any form resulting from conversion by word
+     processing or hypertext software, but only so long as
+     *EITHER*:
+
+     [*]  The eBook, when displayed, is clearly readable, and
+          does *not* contain characters other than those
+          intended by the author of the work, although tilde
+          (~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may
+          be used to convey punctuation intended by the
+          author, and additional characters may be used to
+          indicate hypertext links; OR
+
+     [*]  The eBook may be readily converted by the reader at
+          no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent
+          form by the program that displays the eBook (as is
+          the case, for instance, with most word processors);
+          OR
+
+     [*]  You provide, or agree to also provide on request at
+          no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the
+          eBook in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC
+          or other equivalent proprietary form).
+
+[2]  Honor the eBook refund and replacement provisions of this
+     "Small Print!" statement.
+
+[3]  Pay a trademark license fee to the Foundation of 20% of the
+     gross profits you derive calculated using the method you
+     already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  If you
+     don't derive profits, no royalty is due.  Royalties are
+     payable to "Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation"
+     the 60 days following each date you prepare (or were
+     legally required to prepare) your annual (or equivalent
+     periodic) tax return.  Please contact us beforehand to
+     let us know your plans and to work out the details.
+
+WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO?
+Project Gutenberg is dedicated to increasing the number of
+public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed
+in machine readable form.
+
+The Project gratefully accepts contributions of money, time,
+public domain materials, or royalty free copyright licenses.
+Money should be paid to the:
+"Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+If you are interested in contributing scanning equipment or
+software or other items, please contact Michael Hart at:
+hart@pobox.com
+
+[Portions of this eBook's header and trailer may be reprinted only
+when distributed free of all fees.  Copyright (C) 2001, 2002 by
+Michael S. Hart.  Project Gutenberg is a TradeMark and may not be
+used in any sales of Project Gutenberg eBooks or other materials be
+they hardware or software or any other related product without
+express permission.]
+
+*END THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN EBOOKS*Ver.02/11/02*END*
diff --git a/old/8rlat10.zip b/old/8rlat10.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d2c00a7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/8rlat10.zip