gardening in mediterranean climates worldwide

This is continued from It’s all Latin to me (part 2) – What should I make of these Latin binomial listings?

Years ago, when my GIMCW team and I were working on the previous version of this site, we foolishly thought it would be cool to provide an easy way to pronounce the various Scientific Latin names (binomials) associate with the plants we were profiling. Each of us tried to locate an authoritative guide (there must be one out there, right?!).

Instead, we found a various, seeming confident statements on the Internet for particular genus & species names, many of which contradicted each other! On closer inspection, as well as our personal verbal attempts to follow these suggestions, we concluded that the regional dialect or local language was strongly influencing their pronunciation.

Eventually, we all agreed that the approach stated in the The Jepson Manual Vascular Plants of California was our favorite –“… practice what sounds good to your ear; conviction is important.” “When someone presumes to correct your pronunciation, a knowing smile is an appropriate response.”

A short time later, I was asked to provide a gift list by my family. My son chose a book I’d listed – Botanical Latin, by William Thomas Stearn (1911-2001), but had to order it from a local bookstore. The bookseller remarked “This is an unusual request!”, to which our son proudly responded “My dad is an unusual guy!”

I was very pleased to see that Stearn included a section specifically devoted to the pronunciation of Botanical Latin! His premise was that Scientific Latin was based on the original Latin rediscovered during the Renaissance and Enlightenment (see my part 1 of this series) and not the current versions of Latin. It’s pronunciation rules also differed from various language that use the Latin alphabet. Since Stearn was perhaps the most eminently accepted authority on botanical Latin, we decided to follow his lead.

While we were developing our pronunciation suggestions for the GIMCW on Stearn’s pronunciation guidelines, I found myself incorporating what I had learned while discussing plants with horticultural friends. Many of these friends are quite knowledgeable and experienced, yet they were taken aback by my ‘unusual’ way of speaking a family, genus, of species name! During my apologies for confusing them, I mentioned that I had been reading Stearn’s book. To my surprise, a number of them were unaware of his work. But, over time, I noted that some of the speakers our local horticultural group scheduled had also started using this mode of pronunciation!

I present this following synopsis of Stearn’s guidelines not to be snobbish or pedantic. Stearn discusses the extensive research by many experts regarding the intended pronunciation of how this dead language was originally used in science. Until someone else comes forward with another definitive guide, I think we all should try to fall back on the tremendous work William Stearn has already done for us.

The following is a summarization of William T Stearn’s Botanical Latin, chapter IV, section Pronunciation

The author describes the ‘reformed’ or ‘restored’ pronunciation adopted by classical scholars as presenting ‘a reasonably close approximation to the actual sounds of the language as spoken by educated Romans’. We have attempted to simplify some of these very complex concepts which are the basis of the ‘Pronunciation Pointers’ provided on individual pages of this website.

It is important to remember that in Latin every vowel is pronounced in a separate syllable. One would say co-to-ne-as-ter and not cot-on-easter . The same applies to the Latinized Greek ending -o-i-des and not -oi-des (meaning ‘like, having the form of’). Words may consist of several syllables, such as al-bi-dus, ple-ni-flo-rus, mag-ni-fo-li-us, ros-ma-ri-ni-for-mis, o-phi-o-glos-so-i-des, con-stan-ti-no-po-li-ta-nus.

Diphthongs – ae, au, ei, eu, oe, ui – are pronounced as one, unless otherwise noted as in Danaë. The umlaut-e (ë) indicates that this is not part of the dipthong ae and each vowel is pronounced separately (i.e. da-na-ë). This is an old type of notation and, unfortunately seldom seen in use today (possibly due to computers having issues with diacritics?)

In classical Latin, the stress falls on the syllable next to the last one (the penultimate) when this syllable is long (i.e. when it ends in a long vowel or diphthong, e.g . for-MO-sus, or when two consonants separate the two last vowels, e.g. cru-EN-tus), but falls on the third to last syllable (the antepenultimate) when the last but one is short, e.g. FLO-ri-dus, la-ti-FO-li-us , sil-VA-ti-cus. Diphthongs are treated as long vowels. When, however, two vowels come together in a Latin word without forming a diphthong, the first is short, e.g. CAR-në-us ; in a word of Greek origin, this does not apply, hence gi-gan-TE-us. The -inus ending also varies, in some Latin words, the i is long, e.g. al-PI-nus, but short in others, e.g. se-RO-tĭ-nus; in words of Greek origin, e.g. bom-BY-cĭ-nus, hy-a-CIN-thĭ-nus, it is usually short.

The above rules of accentuation apply both to the traditional English and the reformed academic pronunciation of Latin. The consonants b, d, f, h, l, m, n/, p, qu, z are pronounced as in English.

Pronunciation is determined by the sounds of the individual letters, the length (quantity) of the vowels and the place of stress (accent). Vowels are described as ‘long’ (ā, ē, ī, ō, ū) or ‘short’ (ă, ĕ, ĭ, ŏ, ŭ), according to the relative time spent in saying them. Accurate pronunciation can sometimes require research into the language origin of the specific word or the person who is being honored.

The following Table indicates the main pronunciations

Whichever system is adopted, the word will sound best and be least objectionable to scholars if a distinction is made between long and short vowels as above and the stress put in the right place according to classical Latin procedure. To do this, reference must be made to a standard dictionary such as C. T. Lewis and C. Short, Latin Dictionary, to the works cited below, or to a Flora, such as M. L. Fernald, Gray’s Manual of Botany (8th ed., 1950), giving careful attention to accentuation.

These rules cannot satisfactorily be applied to all generic names and specific epithets commemorating persons. About 80 per cent of generic names and 30 per cent of specific epithets come from languages other than Latin and Greek. A simple and consistent method of pronouncing them does not exist, because different peoples use the same letters for different sounds and different letters for the same sounds, The cz of Polish corresponds to the English ch and the Italian c before / of e, but the English ch is not the same as the French ch or the Italian ch before i or e.

The ideal method with most names commemorating persons is to pronounce them as nearly as possible like the original name but with a Latin ending. The uncouth-looking Warszewiczella will then be euphoniously pronounced as var-she-vl-CHEL-la and not uncouthly as wars-zew-ic-ZELL-a. The main difficulty is that this method involves giving a German pronunciation to Heuchera, a French pronunciation to Choisya , a Scottish pronunciation to Menziesia , an Italian pronunciation to cesatianus , a Polish pronunciation to przewalsfcii, etc., and to do this is more than most botanists and gardeners can manage.

The ending –ii or –iae of most epithets commemorating persons also creates difficulty if the rules of Latin accentuation are applied strictly, since the accent will then fall on the syllable before the –ii or –iae, which is not its usual place in most personal names.

---

Had enough yet!! I know it is a lot to take in all at once. I still struggle with it. And if anyone give you grief in your efforts, the ‘knowing smile’ response mentioned above is appropriate.

So, accordingly, the Danaë racemosa mentioned previously in this series would be pronounced dah-NAH-eh rrra-ke-MOH-sah. It is place in the family : Asparagaceae – as-pah-rrra-GAW-keh-eye and the subfamily : Nolinoideae – no-lin-o-I-deh-eye. (I tried to suggest ‘trilling’ the ‘r’s as ‘rrr’ even though my own tongue is noncompliant!). 

---

And now a bit of levity (poetry by my friend Janet Davis)

I tried to wax botanical,
But they made a nasty fuss,
When I called my vine clem-AH-tis,
Instead of CLEM-a-tis.

I’ve been speaking well
Since I was five and riding on my trike,
But when it comes to flower names,
It seems my tongue’s on strike.

If I say: “How tall my DAY-lia’s grown,”
They’ll gasp: “You mean your DAW-lia!”
I don’t say African violet now,
Instead I say Saint-PAUL-ee-a.

In grandma’s time, “bluebell” was fine,
Now it’s a conversation-killer.
“Bluebell?” they’ll say, “Oh, nay, nay, nay!
It’s Hyacinthoides or Scilla.”

Linguistically speaking, I’m just a dolt
But I’m learning on the job.
And soon – like Homer’s Virgil,
I’ll be a Latin snob.

The pronunciation suggestions on these pages following this guidelines. It is offered here, not dictated. If we seem to have missed the mark on some of those, feel free to propose to us your own versions.

---

References and Links

Baldwin, Goldman, Keil, Patterson, Rosatti, Wilken (Editors). The Jepson Manual Vascular Plants of California. January 2022
https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520253124/the-jepson-manual

William T. Stearn. Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_T._Stearn

Stearn, William. Botanical Latin. Timber Press. 2004
https://www.abebooks.com/book-search/title/botanical-latin/author/william-stearn/