Mfw an anglo pronounces Caesar as SEE-ZURR

that sounds stupid

>said the Anglo

Not that guy but that pronunciation is fucking hideous.

>another Anglo

Okay but what about the pronunciation tho

It's a perfectly normal pronounciation if you're not an Anglo subhuman.

>All this Anglophobia ITT
Guys, remember global rule number 3.

I honestly would kind of like to know more about Finnish tanks desu

Ave! True to Caesar.

French pronunciation: Se-zar
Spanish: SAY-sar
Russian:TSE-zar’
Pretty much no modern language pronounces the name the original way, why single out Anglos?

Italian: Cheesaray

The first thing to know about Finnish tanks is that there actually were not many.

>Ahchileahs
>Not Akilayoos like the Classical Greeks did

Do you people even try?

Ave amice. Follow me to the dam. Lanius says we're attacking at dawn, bring your machete.

What's the correct pronunciation? And in what context? Didn't it change with the transition to the Romance languages? ie someone named Caeser today would pronounce it differently?

Wait, is it a (Finnish tank) enthusiast forum or a Finnish (tank enthusiast) forum?

>dumbass russkies pronounce Caesar "tsar"

ITT: Nerds argue over a salad.

>not killing caesar's whole tent with a little boy and insane constitution buffs

>triari-eye

I work at a British university in a life sciences field and I love the subtly confused look researchers and students from Romance language speaking countries give when they first hear an Englishman pronounce a Latin name ending with a double ii.

Doubly amusing when it's a seminar or a meeting they end up saying the name themselves. The assertive ones stick with their pronunciation, but I've seen some weak ones just give in and immediately ape the English pronunciation (only to return to their own when we talked later).

It's like a personality shibboleth. I am now tempted to mispronounce words when in a position of authority to see if I can get the weak willed to follow suit.

*double i

I bet this is the sort of person that expects me to pronounce a "c" like a "j"

git tae fuck, this is English

>when non-anglos can't pronounce Worcestershire at all
>when non-anglos can't pronounce Reading
>when non-anglos can't pronounce Edinburgh
Pathetic.

It's the language fault in those cases, not the speakers

Same with Caesar.

>tfw Greek pronounciacion of Latin is closer to actual Latin than every Romance language...

Who's the true heir of Rome?

>Implying shitty A*glo """"spooky"""" names are the same as eternal Latin
>Implying all of those won't be forgotten within a generation and changed with Muslim names like Al-Mumniiya or Al-Latakya

Damn I despise Anglos

You despise us because you're jealous of us. Largest empire and never beaten.

How does Veeky Forums pronounce hoplite then?

How do you know what's the correct way to say Caesar? Why would you trust larping germans over people that have a language largely based off latin and that lived under roman rule for centuries?

Hoplite. How do you pronounce it?

You're being retarded

0/10

>Woostersher
Pathetic

>Help! Historical linguistics is a thing! Me are confusies!

How does it feel to realize that you're speaking only a corrupted version of IndoProto-Indo-European?

Pleb. I only hiss and squeak in accordance with our original oral communication. Get on my level.

It's funny because that would be more coherent than *nglo """"phonetics""""

>never beaten

Whenever I learn that there's a word that REALLY YOU GUYS should be pronounced in (uncommon way) IF YOU REALLY WANT TO BE AUTHENTIC ABOUT IT GUYS, I make a point of pronouncing it the "wrong" way, unless I'm having a conversation with people who are specialized in that subject.

Because, see, when you're just chatting casually, the mispronunciation is correct.

I suppose this braintrust of Veeky Forums wizards with the anti-Anglo agenda know better than my Harvard classics professor.

Yeah, Anglo university... shit-tier education and all.

The chi was was aspirated, but nowhere to this extent. It was a velar stop. I suspect that the speaker's native language is Modern Greek. This is on the normal side for speakers of MG... they tend to understand Attic or Koine or whatever easily, but apply the modern phonetics.

And the last syllable is pronounced with an alpha, not a upsilon.

So yeah, all y'all's just a bunch of dickholes.

Nope that's bullshit. Our pronounciation of ancient Greek is the same but the words are slightly different, you retarded angols always pronounce the end as -eus as if everything that isn't english is Latin. Also because you can't pronounce straight phonetics for shit like normal people can. A more correct pronounciation is Ahilleas or in ancient greek Ahilevs. Note: the tone is NOT on the i, but the e.

I wish you'd shut up and stop being dumb.

Also: incoherent. Try having a coherent point next time, and rely less on strawmen.

>Sour grapes, the post.

They consist entirely of bombed out husks the Soviets left behind.

Silly anglo, looses his fuse so quickly.

About as retarded as when we read Beowulf in junior lit class and none of the "anglos" could pronounce Saxon names for shit.

For the Spanish pronunciation its more like... (S-eh-sar)

>Silly anglo, looses his fuse so quickly.

Nah, that's called backing off from someone who not only isn't very educated, but has also launched into an incoherent mini-diatribe.

Pearls before swine... angry swine.

Kek here come dat anglo to teach me my own language

Your language is not AG.

Riddle me this: have you progressed into the study beyond high school? Or still in high school?

To assert that MG and AG pronunciations are identical goes beyond stupid and deep into the realm of silly.

"Modern Greek is not Ancient Greek."
"Modern Greek is not Ancient Greek."
"Modern Greek is not Ancient Greek."

Let it fill you, like a mantra. You might even calm down a bit!

I have studied ancient greek nigel. I know more than you can ever pretend to. The pronounciation are very similar. It's the spelling that varies, along with meaning and disappeared words. Let me riddle you something, your minimal knowledge of a subject that you might have "heard" or "read" from somewhere doesn't compare to a thorough understanding. Now take your smugness and fuck off. If you'd like me to tell you how the ancients said Achilles, i already stated it was Ahillevs, the modern version being Ahilleas. The prpnounciation is exactly the same, but with the ev(εύ) being replaced by an ea(έα). It still sounds exactly the same with the emphasis on the e, the word has slightly evolved.

>I know more than you can ever pretend to

No, you don't, if you "know" that MG and AC pronunciation is identical (well, that was your first assertion... now it's become tempered as "very similar" which doesn't mean much, and more begs the question about the chi as pronounced in the video).

Also, you've dodged a very simple question.

Your confusion and apparent lack of education aside: the rest of what you say is just assertion, frustration, assertion. Anglo-obsession, defensiveness, a bit more anger, and more assertion. Plus vagueness.

Now, son, if you're able to say something interesting, or cite some sources, or answer a question, or offer something of substance, that'd be just swell.

Kallo apoyayma!

same as it's spelt

Unless I'm working in Ancient Greek or being a douchebag, yeah, this. Like "fog light."

>No, you don't, if you "know" that MG and AC pronunciation is identical
It's not "identical". It's the same
>(well, that was your first assertion... now it's become tempered as "very similar" which doesn't mean much, and more begs the question about the chi as pronounced in the video).
Pronounciation=/=grammar my friend, the "chi" as you call it is the letter "χ" and it's always been the same, pronounced as a hard h
>Kallo apoyayma!
Don't even try

Holy cringe

>It's not "identical". It's the same

Ok, I'm now more confident that your education was just crap. Not only your AG is suffering. You need to return to remedial ESL.

>Pronounciation=/=grammar my friend

Who's talking grammar? Was this another attempt to set up a strawman?

>the "chi" as you call it is the letter "χ" and it's always been the same, pronounced as a hard h

Assert, assert, assert... you still haven't answered the question. Without that, I'll just have to go with the "poor thing, his education was shit" theory.

>Don't even try

To trigger you? It's too easy. It's effortless. Just being born in the Anglosphere is enough, why not fuck around with your (modern, modern, modern) native tongue? After all, sincere conversation was out the window from the get-go.

O, HOW I TOY WITH YOU AS A CAT WITH A MOUSE.

Right right, I get it, its bait. I'm done then.

>It's not "identical". It's the same
Look, dude, I'm genuinely not trying to antagonize you, just trying to get a handle on what you're saying, because the dude you're arguing with is right: you are not communicating very clearly. "Identical" and "the same" are synonyms when we're talking about phonetics, so what I just quoted is a meaningless contradiction.

So just so we understand each other: are you or are you not asserting that "Ancient Greek" and modern Greek were/are correctly pronounced the same, and that Greek phonology has not changed significantly over the centuries and millennia?

The pronounciation is very similar, I was just memeing but they guy was trying to make me say that it's 100% identical which I never said. Accents and the way we speak it is the closest thing you'll get. It's even closer when you speak to a greek cypriot or a cretan, they even use ancient greek prefixes in their dialects. The names are pronounced the same though, some of the grammar has merely changed to fit the canonical factors of the language regaring address and derivitives. We say Achilles the same way the ancients did, we just substitute the ev in Ahillevs to ea for Ahilleas. Not "akyleoos" like some retard said, thinking he was knowledgeable.

>they guy was trying to make me say that it's 100% identical which I never said

Aww, poor you. The big mean Anglo was being mean to you :F

>Our pronounciation of ancient Greek is the same

(What did he mean by this?)

I can just sense it radiating from the screen

OK. I'm sorry, dude, but you're wrong, and whoever taught you that was wrong. Modern Greek may be your native language, but that doesn't automatically make you trained in historical linguistics. You clearly are not.

There are no languages whose phonologies have not changed significantly in thousands of years. Obviously "Ancient Greek" wasn't actually a language, it was several - dialects from different regions, separated by hundreds or sometimes more than a thousand years, depending on whether or not you count Koine as "ancient" (as some people do). But whether we're talking about Koine or Attic Greek or some other flavor, you're still wrong.

>We say Achilles the same way the ancients did
You don't. Several of the sounds have changed, as well as the whole accent system, as agreed upon by virtually all linguists and all modern reconstructions. Without breaking it down completely, the poster you are replying to is absolutely correct that χ was pronounced /kʰ/; it was an aspirated velar stop, not a fricative the way you are claiming.

Citations on this are numerous and trivial to produce - like I said, it is not controversial - but I'd really rather not go digging them up for you. You can find dozens with a few keyboard clicks, and not just in English, either.

In your opinion, how do you think /kʰ/ is pronounced?

I literally just said how it's pronounced: it's an aspirated velar stop. There's no "opinions" here, that's a specific and definite claim. What are you looking for beyond that? You do know what that means, right? And if you don't, why are you trying to talk about phonology?

>A/kʰ/illevs
And
>Achillevs
Aren't extremely different

I'm not the guy you're replying to, but what I've learned is that a χ or kʰ is like a k with a touch of aspiration.

But a written description can't really make it clear. Try this: start by sounding out the word "cookie"...

With a little IPA, it'd be this more or less:

kʊkʰi:

The phoneme that begins the second syllable in "cookie"... it's aspirated. The first phoneme would be a k (not aspirated).

Most languages don't distinguish between a k and a χ... to my own ears, the difference is almost nonexistent unless I'm listening or speaking carefully. Kind like how many (most?) ancient languages didn't have a distinct word for "blue." For us the difference between blue and green smacks us in the face. But for them, not so much.

The difference between kʰ and contemporary Greek "ch" is very clear, at least to me.

Yes, they are, if you're pronouncing the second one with a fricative instead of a stop, the way you seem to be claiming ("Ahilleas") although there would be less confusion if you used IPA symbols. The speaker in the video certainly pronounced it with a fricative instead of a stop.

Different guy but just drop the h and instead of ending it like 'ite', it would be i-te
But honestly who cares, it's a Greek word which has been absorbed into English, and as such, has been Anglicised. Like the name John in English, is the only one with a 'J' sound, all others use a 'Y' or 'zh'.

I know it's wiki, but (I'm assuming you're Greek) this is a good starting point:

Search for Βασιkά σημεία and you'll see the αρχαία-νέα differences in pronunciation between.

Here are some other sources, non-wiki:

greek-language.gr/digitalResources/ancient_greek/history/ag_history/browse.html?start=67
hellinon.net/NeesSelides/NEOTERES/EllAlfavito.htm
greekalert.com/2014/09/blog-post_861.html

These sources (ελληνιkές) that confirm these (and other) differences.

It is crazy, though, how little the language has changed over such a long period, in comparison to most.

KABOOL
A
B
O
O
L

Wor chester shire
Dumb anglo

>It's another "Demotiki speaker who had Ancient Greek 3 years in high school who thinks he knows how it was pronounced 2300 years ago" episode

Greek nationalists are fucking funny.

MFW plebs don't pronounce it as KIK-ERO

ahaha is the faggy lisping a requirement?

literally everyone pronounces it Cesar at this point. Let it go

>the truth is democratic

You've got it backwards. Stressed syllables and often initial syllables have aspirated stops, unless preceded by an s. The first is aspirated, the second is not. Unless you're speaking some strange dialect that is

That one is annoying

so why does literally everything with romans give them a british accent

>pronouncing it as anything other than цapь

This is why you will never be 4th Rome.

>why do Anglo media have Anglo speech in them
whoah idk

>Not being a Classics PhD and reconstructing Ancient Greek pronunciation yourself like Ioannis Stratakis

plebs

youtube.com/watch?v=Q_jnHuiB_5M

That's pretty much just the accepted classical pronunciation though.

He's done his homework way more than Anglo universities have at least. For example, his phi, theta and beta are stop consonants, which is completely different to modern Greek.

dont know about your department but as a fellow phd candidate, everyone uses erasmian in my dep. and erasmian is still being instructed.

and that guy still has strong modern greek accent to it.

But Anglo universities have done their homework and know that those were aspirated stops, that iota subscripts were pronounced, that the three accents are distinct (which is pretty obvious since they're orthographically distinct, but I'm just listing any differences), etc, the professors just don't pronounce it entirely accurately because it's burdensome and unnecessary. Not to say that the video isn't impressive, but it's not like he revolutionized the pronunciation.

>Anglos pronounce Buddha as "Booda"

Well he doesn't use Erasmian. He has researched what the Greeks themselves said the language sounded like in those days. You know, he's actually read people like Dionysus of Halicarnassus.