07-12-2007, 07:59 PM
Quote:Another is spelling errors in inscriptions, where things were written as they were pronounced ...In a paper entitled "Spoken Latin in Britain as evidenced in the inscriptions" (Britannia 2, 1971, 218-224 -- thanks for getting me a copy of this, Ross!), the late John Mann published what he hoped was a comprehensive listing of spelling peculiarities, which (he argued) might be indicative of provincial pronunciation.
He has examples of AE becoming E (e.g. prefectus for praefectus) and I becoming E (e.g. lebertus for libertus), but also E becoming AE (e.g. maemoria for memoria), E becoming I (e.g. equis for eques), U becoming I (e.g. monimentum for monumentum), and then E, I and U becoming O (e.g. Astores for Astures).
All very confusing! And some (or all) might simply be stonemason's errors.
Interestingly, in his list of consonants (e.g. Jasper's bita for vita), he has no examples of F changing, although TH has a tendency to become simply T (e.g. Tracum for Thracum, Mitras for Mithras).
(I can understand that transformation, but I'm not sure whether F becoming P -- getting back to Kai Teipel's catapract -- works the same way.)
One interesting phenomenon is the "dropped H": Ispani for Hispani, eres for heres, etc. Very London!
