4 ms·

Ah, so they did indeed use the same letter for two distinct sounds. Makes sense, thanks!

• thaumasiotes 5y ago
  They used the same letter for two sounds in the sense that it had a consonantal use and a vowel use. But they did not, themselves, perceive the two sounds as being different sounds. They are, to the Romans, one sound in two different contexts. Quoting Vox Latina: > There is also a much-quoted anecdote of Cicero's, which tells how, when Marcus Crassus was setting out on an ill-fated expedition against the Parthians, a seller of Caunean figs was crying out 'Cauneas!'; and Cicero comments [...] that it would have been well for Crassus if he had heeded the 'omen', viz. 'Caue ne eas'; this hardly makes sense unless, as we presume, the [consonantal] u of caue was similar to the [vocalic] u of Cauneas. A parallel case is provided by Varro's etymology of auris from auere (The book is accurate in representing the Latin spelling as being identical for the consonant and the vowel; in fact they used V and U is a much later invention. Perhaps the book felt English speakers would have more trouble accepting V as a vowel than U as a consonant.)
  • StavrosK 5y ago
    > But they did not, themselves, perceive the two sounds as being different sounds. This makes sense, thanks. I guess we generally don't perceive the different sounds in our languages, like an English speaker generally won't perceive the difference between t͟hə and t͟hē (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/the https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/the for audio).
    • thaumasiotes 5y ago
      For what it's worth, the sounds really are similar. The technical term for W [w] and Y [j] is "semivowels" (or "glides"); they are pronounced like vowels with no obstruction of airflow.