Editing Classical Latin (section)

== Studies on Latin by ancient Romans ==
Comparing all ancient languages, Latin is one of the most preserved and properly reconstructed languages. One of the principal reasons is that classical authors, as native Latin speakers, consciously documented and studied their own language. Some of the major works regarding the Latin language in the classical era are ''[[Marcus Terentius Varro|De lingua latina]]'' by [[Marcus Terentius Varro|Varro]], ''[[Institutio Oratoria|Institutio oratoria]]'' by [[Quintilian|Quintilianus]], and ''[[Ars grammatica]]'' by [[Aelius Donatus|Donatus]], which contribute to our knowledge about the language and the linguistic environment at that time regarding the following aspects:

=== Linguistic features ===
Utilizing ancient Roman texts concerning Latin, one is capable of gaining insights on the phonology of Latin. For example, one of the significant phonological features of classical Latin is that “c” [k] was not yet [[Palatalization (sound change)|palatalized]], which was reflected in ''Institutio oratoria by'' Quintilianus, “As to -''k'', I think it should not be used in any words… there is the letter -c, which suits itself to all vowels”.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2015-12-24 |title=Book 1 - Chapter 7: Quintilian's Institutes of Oratory |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151224005447/http://eserver.org/rhetoric/quintilian/1/chapter7.html |access-date=2025-03-29 |website=web.archive.org}}</ref> There it is also mentioned that the archaïc Greek letter [[Digamma|Aeolic digamma]], ϝ, representing the /w/ sound, lacked to Latin for words like ''servus'' or ''vulgus''.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |date=2015-12-24 |title=Book 1 - Chapter 4: Quintilian's Institutes of Oratory |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151224084250/http://eserver.org/rhetoric/quintilian/1/chapter4.html |access-date=2025-03-29 |website=web.archive.org}}</ref> Hence it is known that in classical Latin, v and u was not distinguished, both pronounced [w]. The letter “i” was applied to both [i] and [j], as reflected by the variant spelling ''Maiia.''<ref name=":1" /> Sometimes the [[vowel length]] changes the case, short in nominative but long in ablative, sometimes the entire meaning changes (malus).<ref name=":0" /> Apart from the vowel length, the accentuation rule was also detailedly explicated in the same book.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |date=2015-12-25 |title=Book 1 - Chapter 5: Quintilian's Institutes of Oratory |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151225043635/http://eserver.org/rhetoric/quintilian/1/chapter5.html |access-date=2025-03-29 |website=web.archive.org}}</ref> The Romans used various [[Diacritic|diacritics]], such as the [[circumflex]] and [[Acute accent|acute]] accent, to denote the [[Stress (linguistics)|accentuation]].<ref name=":2" />   Despite having a rather [[phonemic orthography]], some derivations still existed in Latin. The name ''[[Gaius]]'' was sometimes written with “c”, despite pronounced with [g], the “n” in “''columna''” was omitted due to [[Assimilation (phonology)|assimilation]], and [[Final-obstruent devoicing|final obstruents were devoiced]] while maintaining the spelling (obtinuit).<ref name=":0" />

The Romans have analyzed the grammar of their own Latin so comprehensively, that they were aware of various Latin’s grammatical features, such as:

* [[Singulare tantum|Singular]] and [[Plurale tantum|plural tantum]] (scala, hordea)<ref name=":2" />

* Vowel length of infinitives in the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> [[Latin declension|declension]]<ref name=":3">{{Cite web |date=2015-12-24 |title=Book 1 - Chapter 6: Quintilian's Institutes of Oratory |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151224005442/http://eserver.org/rhetoric/quintilian/1/chapter6.html#12 |access-date=2025-03-29 |website=web.archive.org}}</ref>

* [[Impersonal verb|Impersonal verbs]] (licet, piget)<ref name=":1" />
* [[Epicenity|Epicene]] gender (Muroena, Glycerium)<ref name=":1" />
* [[Instrumental case|Instrumental]] use of the [[Ablative case|ablative]] (e.g. hastā percussi)<ref name=":1" />
* Weakened vowels in compound verbs (cadit to excidit)<ref name=":1" />

Moreover, most original Latin grammatical terms (e.g. names for grammatical cases) have maintained as the actual standard academic terms, adopted into many languages. In other words, we now study linguistics mostly using Latin terms. Donatus, in ''Ars grammatica'', defined and exhausted numerous terms as well as provided a comprehensive guide on grammar rules, declensions and conjugations in the manner of question-and-answer,<ref>{{Cite web |title=Ars Minor - Table of Contents - IntraText CT |url=https://www.intratext.com/IXT/LAT0192/ |access-date=2025-03-29 |website=www.intratext.com}}</ref> which demonstrates formalized and systemized study on grammar. Throughout Latin’s long history, different classifications of words were developed. Varro, in “''De lingua latina''”, 47-45 BC, classified words both as local, foreign, and obsolete,<ref name=":4">{{Cite book |last=Varro |first=Marcus Terentius |url=https://archive.org/details/onlatinlanguage01varruoft/page/10/mode/2up |title=On the Latin language |last2=Kent |first2=Roland G. (Roland Grubb) |date=1938 |publisher=London : W. Heinemann |others=Pratt - University of Toronto |pages=xi}}</ref> and as body, place, time, and action,<ref name=":4" /> the latter being more proximate to current [[Part of speech|word classes]]. On the other hand, by the time of Quintilianus, the modern system was effectively complete, as words were classified as verbs, nouns, articles, prepositions, and nouns were further divided by [[Abstract noun|tangibility]].<ref name=":1" />

=== Etymology ===
Despite not equipped with modern linguistic knowledge nor the availability of [[Comparative linguistics|comparative linguistic]], ancient Roman grammarians and linguists still attempted to establish the relation between words and explore their origins. Varro preferred deducing the [[etymology]] by relating words with another Latin words,<ref name=":4" /> i.e. establishing words as [[Derivative (linguistics)|derivatives]] of other local words, e.g. he indicated “humilis” (humble) as a derivative of “humus” (soil), as both have a connotation of “low”.<ref name=":4" /> He also attempted to analyze words of cultural importance, such as the god ''[[Jupiter (god)|Iuppiter]]'', whom he analyzed as ''dies pater''.<ref name=":4" /> However, sometimes this method caused implausible results, such as considering that “solus” (soil) gained its name because the earth can “only” (sola) be trodden.<ref name=":4" /> On the contrary, Quintilianus criticized this approach for its counterintuitive result, such as relating the dark “''lucus”'' (grove) with ''luceo'' (to shine), or ''“ludus”'' (school) with ''“ludo”'' (play) as a school is “as far as possible from play”.<ref name=":3" /> In fact, he directly criticized Varro for relating “''ager”'' (field) with ''“agi”'' (to be done), and ''“graculus”'' (jackdaws) with ''“gregatim”'' (in flocks). Instead Quintilianus considered these to be a Greek [[loanword]] and an [[Onomatopoeia|onomatopoeïa]], respectively.<ref name=":3" /> Varro was also criticized for deliberately misspellings in order to suit his theories.<ref name=":4" />

=== Foreign influences ===
Varro's approach could be explicated by his preference on attributing Latin words to Latin rather than Greek origins.<ref name=":4" /> In Roman times, the influence of Greek on Latin was debated. As Greek was the [[Diglossia|language of philosophy and high culture]], not only were educated Romans fluent in Greek, but they also developed sort of Greek xenophilia, such that it was custom that children only spoke Greek for a long time before learning Latin.<ref name=":5">{{Cite web |date=2015-12-22 |title=Book 1 - Chapter 1: Quintilian's Institutes of Oratory |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151222230542/http://eserver.org/rhetoric/quintilian/1/chapter1.html |access-date=2025-03-29 |website=web.archive.org}}</ref> Romans admired Greek loanwords more, e.g. using κυρταύχενα while deriding ''incurvicervicum.''<ref name=":2" />  The Greek language also influenced Latin’s orthography by importing letters such as k and x,<ref name=":1" /> as well as [[Digraph (orthography)|diagraphs]] such as ''“ei”'', as a non-standard spelling of ''“ī”'', which was criticized by Quintilianus.<ref name=":0" /> Nonetheless, he advocated that children should learn Greek first, because children would learn Latin eventually anyway and because he considered Latin to be derived from Greek. He did not neglect Latin either, advocating that it be learned shortly after children started learning Greek, because he intended to avoid the contamination of Latin’s [[Linguistic purism|purity]] by Greek accent and [[Idiom|idioms]].<ref name=":5" /> 

Besides Greek, due to the vast expanse of the Empire, numerous [[Loanword|loanwords]] entered Latin and became imprescindible part of the language, as Gallic words like ''rheda'' (chariot) and ''petorritum'' (four-wheeled carriage) were used even by [[Cicero]] and [[Horace|Horatius]].<ref name=":2" />

These loanwords originated from various nations that the Romans contacted, such as:

* ''Mappa'' (napkin) from Carthagine
* ''Gurdus'' (slang for foolish) from Spain
* ''Casnar'' (parasite) from Gallia
* ''Mastruca'' (shaggy garment) from Sardinia<ref name=":2" />

These loanwords have become so nativized, that Romans combined different loanwords or loan [[Morpheme|morphemes]] to form compound words in Latin, e.g. the Latin word ''epirhedium'' was formed from the Greek prefix ''epi-'' and the Gallic word ''rheda''.<ref name=":2" />

=== Language changes and descriptivism-prescriptivism debate ===
Owing to the long history of Latin, even Latin in the classical period has already experienced changes compared to [[Old Latin|pre-classical]] era. Just like nowadays Latin is used for a symbol of education and high status, Romans considered that archaic Latin had conveyed a sense of authority and majesty, which encouraged them to use obsolete words like "''topper''" (rapidly) or "''antigerio''" (very much).<ref name=":3" /> Varro mentioned in ''De lingua latina'', “Not every word that has been applied, still exists, because lapse of time has blotted out some. Not every word that is in use, has been applied without inaccuracy of some kind, nor does every word which has been applied correctly remain as it originally was.”<ref name=":4" /> He claimed that he could examine the etymology easily as he was able to trace the changes such as the loss and addition of syllables and letters. He gave the example of ''“hostis”'' which underwent a [[Semantic change|semantic shift]] from “foreigner” to “enemy”.<ref name=":4" /> Beside vocabulary, Quintilianus also documented certain [[phonological change]]s were also already developed in Classical Latin era, such as:

* Mehe to Me<ref name=":2" />
* Valesii to Valerii
* Mertare to Mersare
* Duellum to Bellum<ref name=":1" />

During the classical period, despite the existence of [[Standard language|standardized]] Latin, variation still existed in orthography. For example, the -unt verb ending for third-person plural was occasionally written as -ont (e.g. probaveront),<ref name=":1" /> while “s” was sometimes [[Gemination|geminated]] between long vowels (caussæ, cassus). ''“Ceruum”'' was also sometimes written as “''ceruom''” lest the same letters be confounded in the same sound.<ref name=":0" /> In fact, even Varro, a linguist writing a book about the language, used some non-standard spellings in his book.<ref name=":4" /> These variations could be both geographical and social, for example, in the countryside “h” was often dropped, while “e” was used for words spelled with “æ” in the city, as reflected in Varro's work.<ref name=":4" />

Various types of “mistakes” were documented by the ancient Romans under the name “[[Barbarism (linguistics)|barbarism]]” (orthographical) or “[[solecism]]” (grammatical). Donatus defined “barbarism” as “a defective part of speech in common speech” and classified it as letters’, syllables’, tenses’, tones’ and [[Aspirated consonant|aspirations]]’ addition, subtraction, immutation, and transmutation, e.g. ''*abiise(abise), *infantibu(infantibus), *Evandre(Evander), *displicina(disciplina), *salmentum(salsamentum).''<ref>{{Cite web |title=De barbarismo: text - IntraText CT |url=https://www.intratext.com/IXT/LAT0361/_P1.HTM |access-date=2025-03-29 |website=www.intratext.com}}</ref> According to him, “a solecism has word'''s''' that are inconsistent in '''themselves''', while a barbarism is made in individual words”.<ref name=":6">{{Cite web |title=De solecismo: text - IntraText CT |url=https://www.intratext.com/IXT/LAT0364/_P1.HTM |access-date=2025-03-29 |website=www.intratext.com}}</ref> Meanwhile, Quintilianus argued that solecism can in reality appear within individual words, supporting himself with examples like saying ''venite'' to one person (number dis[[Agreement (linguistics)|agreement]]) or answering ''‘quem vides”'' with ''“ego”'' (case disagreement), but the word by itself is never faulty of solecism. He divided solecism as addition, e.g. ''*nam enim''; retrenchment, e,g, ''*ambulo viam'' instead of ''ambulo in via''; and transposition, e.g. *''quoque ego'' instead of ''ego quoque''.<ref name=":2" />

Other examples of solecism include:

* ''*hanc virum'' instead of ''hunc'' (gender)
* ''*Torvumque repente clamat'' instead of ''torveque'' (word class)
* Misuse of prepositions and adverbs, e.g. ''foris'' vs ''foras, intro'' vs ''intus''<ref name=":6" />

Besides solecism and barbarism, Donatus also mentioned other vices such as [[Tautology (language)|tautology]], faulty repetition of the same word; eclipse, defect of certain necessary words; [[cacosyntheton]], faulty combination of words; and amphibolia, ambiguity in speech.<ref>{{Cite web |title=De ceteriis vitiis: text - IntraText CT |url=https://www.intratext.com/IXT/LAT0366/_P1.HTM |access-date=2025-03-29 |website=www.intratext.com}}</ref>

It is obvious that as language is constantly changing, debates regarding foreign influence and varieties existed already in Roman times. While some modern [[Linguistic prescription|prescriptivist]] may attempt to maintain or revert their language to a more classical era with a “correct” standard, some ancients Romans had been doing the same thing to Latin, one of the languages considered the most classical. The conflict between [[Linguistic description|descriptivism]] and prescriptivism is not a modern phenomenon, but was already a significant matter of debate in the classical era. The descriptivists were called “anomalists” for supporting anomalies and irregularities based on popular usage, meanwhile the prescriptivists were called “analogists” for deriving the correct grammar rule based on analogy with other word forms. Varro preferred to adopt a middle ground between the two.<ref name=":4" /> Quintilianus on one hand said, “Since analogy was not sent down from heaven… but was discovered after men had begun to speak… it is not therefore founded on reason, but on example. Nor is it a law for speaking, but the mere result of observation, so that nothing but custom has been the origin of analogy.”<ref name=":3" /> On the other hand, he considered it dangerous to both the language and to life itself, that customs be defined as anything the majority did. Therefore, he also adopted a middle ground, advocating to pursue the agreement only of the educated as the custom of the language.<ref name=":3" />