From the Middle Ages on, Latin was Europe’s international language of scholarship as well as the language of the Church. Newton wrote his Principia (1687) in Latin. Diderot wrote his Encyclopedie (1751-1772) in French. At some point, a collective decision (conscious or unconcious) must have been made that even the most serious works of non-ecclesiastical scholarship had better be written in the vernacular; but I don’t know why or how or when.
I wonder if it had something to do with the Reformation’s encouragement of the use of the vernacular in church ceremony, and the later anticlericalism of the Enlightenment? Latin was widely used by the RCC at the time but was otherwise pretty quickly falling by the wayside. Latin persists in its use in some universities’ diplomas and public orations today, and IIRC the Vatican still uses Latin in most official publications (along with Italian, English and other languages, as needed).
Latin is still the language of biological taxonomy, and arguably it’s still a living language, because new Latin words are regularly being created in that field for newly-discovered species and genera.
This is certainly a large factor in its abandonment as a de facto “international language”. One should also consider the fact that Latin pronunciation from the Middle-Ages on was fragmented to match the phonology of native languages. This made it difficult to use the language verbally as an international language. It seems to me there was an old anecdote about an English speaker invited to speak to some conclave in a European nation. He spoke in English, and afterward someone remarked something along the lines of “Boy, the English sure pronounce Latin strangely”. That joke doesn’t make sense unless the artificiality of Latin as a communication medium wasn’t already accepted.
Also, I think as education became universalized from the mid 18th-century onward, Latin was seen as an elitist, artificial barrier to scholarship, one that outweighed the slender advantages provided by having an international language of scholarship.
I would even argue the Latin was already losing ground as an international language in the Middle Ages. Dante’s choice to write his poem in native Italian was seen as critical, as poetic Latin was quickly becoming a medium only for sacred hymns or the parlor game of a smaller educated circle.
Remember, though, that Newton was writing for a mostly non-English speaking audience, while a great many of those whom Diderot wrote for did speak French.
Note that Christiaan Huygens was already writing in French in the mid- to late-17th century, while Galileo’s Dialogue was written in Italian, IIRC.
One thing that seems to have speeded the use of vernacular was Gutenbergs invention of movable type. The bulk of the earliest printed material (incunabula) was in Latin. But when the price of books fell to the point that a commoner could afford one the printers started producing works that the commoner would buy…in vernacular.
I can’t find a suitable cite. But I read somewhere that The Times (in the UK) published some articles in Latin throughout the 1800s. As it was assumed that your upper class educated Times reader would have gone to the right schools, and be versed in Latin.
No, it’s mummified. A living language has a community of people for which that language is their mother tongue.
That’s not mummified- mummified things don’t change.
Call it a zombie language, if you like.
No, Zombie languages have been brought back from the dead (e.g. Cornish). Latin never died (indeed, it thrives as Spanish etc.) but its usage is now restricted to L2 speakers. How about a vampire language? Very old, only seen in particular circumstances, and yet still powerful. Hmm. Surely there is some B-movie monster would better describe Latin than mummy or zombie.
Well, English is a Frankenstein language - cobbled together from bits of others, and pretty much unstoppable…
And it’s alive! IT’S ALIIIIIVE!!!
Every living language is cobbled together. English is no less pure than, say, Spanish or Italian or French.
And mummified things do change if the process is continued to prevent all rot and decay and maintain the decedent, as opposed to letting things slip and ending up with the rather pitiful things we extract from Egyptian pyramids. But you’re right in that it might be a bad metaphor. Perhaps Latin is a comatose language, currently on a heart-lung machine and dialysis and etc. but theoretically capable of being revived (as Hebrew was revived) after surgery.
Dr Drake: Calling Spanish “Latin” is rather specious. There is no common comprehension between an S1 speaker and a hypothetical L1 speaker in either written or spoken forms.
And we all know the correct monster to use to describe Latin is Cthulhu: “That is not dead which can eternal lie./And with strange æons even death may die.”
Yeah – everyone knows its Basque that’s really Spanish.
But L1 speakers could communicate with B1 speakers just fine. Give the L1 speaker a phalanx to use as his tongue and the B1 speakers knew precisely what was warranted.
Yes, the Romans had a legion of ways to communicate with non-Latin speakers…
Well, one data point, when Jules Verne wrote Journey to the Center of the Earth in 1864, he has two scholars from different countries communicating in Latin, as that was their common language. So it was apparently still considered the universal language of academia, even that late.
And I had thought that a “dead language” was one that nobody at all knew any more. Although Latin is certainly very short on native speakers nowadays (though I wouldn’t swear that there aren’t any), it’s known to a great many people. It’s also the official language of one nation, which is more than many living languages can claim.
I’m not so sure that follows: one of my teachers did that too in the 1980s. It was simply the best language-in-common.
I think the point was that English is especially impure, as languages go.
Any more specious than calling Anglo-Saxon “Old English”?
I believe there was an aside to the effect that they were able to both use Latin precisely because it was the language of academia. But I have no clue where my copy of the book would be to check (or even if I own a copy; it might have been borrowed).