Skip to main content

Latin did not die; it evolved and it is still very much alive.

A common belief among people is that Latin has ceased to exist centuries ago, or, in other words, Latin died. But, is Latin really dead? And, as language nerds, do we believe this without first considering the facts? So, in this article of today, you are going to see that Latin is not dead; Latin is still alive and kicking! But how is that? Read on! 

While Classical Latin is undoubtedly a dead, though not an extinct, language; some residue of this Classical Latin, called Ecclesiastical Latin, still roams our society as we speak, you can find it in such things as the Pope’s Twitter account. But this is not the kind of Latins I wanna talk about here. I want to talk about the one which has around 800 million speakers worldwide today; Modern Latin.

Modern Latin is what came to be known as Romance Languages, manifested in Spanish, French, Italian, Portuguese, Romanian, Catalan, etc. which can be regarded as dialects of Latin. Have at the following Romance Language family tree for a second: 

Source: Wikipedia.

Because change is the only constant, and because the thermodynamics of linguistics is language change, all languages must undergo change over time. Look no further than English itself. Here is the opening verse of Beowulf, written in nothing but English. See if you can comprehend any parcel of it:

Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum,
þeodcyninga þrym gefrunon,
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon!
oft Scyld Scefing sceaþena þreatum,
monegum mægþum meodosetla ofteah,
egsode eorlas, syððanærest wearð
feasceaft funden; he þæs frofre gebad,
weox under wolcnum weorðmyndum þah,
oð þæt him æghwylc ymbsittendra
ofer hronrade hyran scolde,
gomban gyldan; þæt wæs god cyning!

You can find the full poem here and its modern English translation here.


At some point in the relatively recent history, this was correct English that people used more or less for daily communication. Due to a number of complex factors, like the Norman Conquest, English had been subject to profound changes in structure and vocabulary, resulting in what we know today as (modern) English. (See why wasn't English completely replaced by French during the Norman Conquest). This explains why it is completely different from the language of Beowulf and its contemporaries. 

During this time, dozens of dialects had mushroomed from English. A detailed explanation of why and how this happened, or had to happen, is here. For those who don't want to read the whole explanation, here is an excerpt:

The game Telephone - also known as Chinese whispers, grapevine, or pass the message, among others - is played by having one person at the start of a circle whisper a word, phrase, or sentence into the next person’s ear. That person then whispers what they thought they heard - not necessarily what was actually said - into the next person’s ear, and so on, until it cycles to the last person, who says the now-garbled message out loud to humorous effect.

Language works just like Telephone: “mistakes” get passed on and repeated so much that they become accepted parts of the language; every bit of grammar you use was once considered “incorrect”. The change is on a much larger, wider, and more gradual scale, though, so most people don’t really notice it.

If you were to start at the very bottom tip of Texas and work your way straight north to Winnipeg (which, interestingly, are at almost exactly the same longitude), stopping at every town on the way and listening to the local dialect, you wouldn’t notice many differences between the dialects between two towns.

However, if you then compared the English spoken in Winnipeg and the English spoken in Brownsville, it would be noticeably different. A similar thing would happen if you went from Munich to Amsterdam: the transition from High German to Dutch would be gradual, instead of obvious “This is German” and “This is Dutch” sides. This sort of thing is called a dialect continuum.

European dialect continuums. From Wikipedia.

A dialect continuum is also present through time: you could probably have a conversation with Shakespeare, and Shakespeare could probably have a conversation with Chaucer (which I would love to see), and Chaucer could probably have a conversation with the people who fought against the Normans in 1066, and those guys could probably have a conversation with the people who wrote Beowulf, and the authors of Beowulf could probably have a conversation with the Anglo-Saxons who invaded Britain (the two groups may even be the same), etc.

But, as with a three-dimensional dialect continuum, you couldn’t have a nice chat with Alfred the Great because you’d be speaking gibberish to one another.

This four-dimensional dialect continuum can be found in all languages. It exists due to the linguistic Telephone game mentioned above and explained more in other ways here, here, and here.

In the midst of all this, it would be ridiculous to say that English had died or ceased to exist at any point during this evolution. Rather, the correct thing to say, considering the linguistic scene, is that English had changed. Beowulf didn't just become incomprehensible overnight. Instead, Anglophones understood less and less of it until it looked completely unrecognizable.


This is exactly what happened to Latin. Classical Latin, which was in use in the era between 100 BC and 100 AD and which I can liken to Old English, is what most people think of as Latin, which rather few people used as their everyday language.

What people used for communication was not Latin per se, but rather Vulgar Latin, a nonstandard form of Classical Latin. Vulgar not in the sense of an obscenity-strung or a dirty form of communication, but a form of communication that was used by average people in the Roman Empire. The negative connotation of the term Vulgar Latin will lessen when we consider its etymology; it came from Vulgaris Latinus meaning ‘commoner’s Latin’. Due to the same factors relevant to Old English and the linguistic Telephone game, Latin itself mushroomed into different dialects, then over time into different languages that are together called today Romance Languages. So, Latin never died, people never stopped speaking it; it changed- evolved into other forms.

Thank you for reading through this article. Please share it if you think it deserves. Don't forget to subscribe by email to get our latest articles. I will see you in my next article. Have a bright day.  


  1. Yes. Latin is a dead language. A dead language is a linguistic term used when a language has no speakers. Latin is a dead language. Like... that is the definition of a dead language. And the development from Old English to Modern English is absolutely not the same thing as the fact that there are tons of language descendant from Latin. No, all Romance languages are of course NOT dialects of Latin. They are mutually unintelligible. They are in no way.... the same language. What you're doing in this blog post is just a play with words where you use the everyday definitions of dialect and language death to make a point that is completely unfounded in linguistic research. It just makes absolutely no sense at all, I'm sorry.

    1. It doesn't sound like you are sorry at all. It sounds like you are bitter. About what I have little interest in attempting to surmise. The author of the blog made a good argument and I liked it, for the most part. I take exception however with the use of "wanna" in place of "want to." This kind of thing I really cannot abide.

    2. Romance languages might INITIALLY be mutually unintelligible. However, in the moment any romance-speaker learns the basics of any other romance languages suddenly the doors of understanding opens in a timeframe of a month.

      With love, from a native spanish speaker who was fluent in italian after a month, who listens to the portuguese radio by pleasure and therefore understands galician, who once after learning italian was perfectly able to understand catalonian, and who is perfectly able to read books in french.

      However after living in Norway for a year and being fluent in English, I hardly understand any sentance in Norwegian.

    3. And I add. I live in Norway where most of norwegians speak their own dialect. SOmetimes unintelligible for other norwegians if not used to that kind of dialect... maybe the same that happens among romance-languages? ;)

    4. By the way, the chart (that is so cool btw) lacks on showing Galician as an Ibero Romance Language. Many argue that actually Spanish and Portuguese evolve from it. In Spain we study "glosas" as the first historic written material in Spanish, but it is actually a proto-spanish that happens to be closer to what nowadays galician people speak.

    5. Oh and BTW (Sorry this is a topic I truly like despite I haven´t studied philology or linguistics). Other theories point out that actually since Latin expanded from Rome to its far limits, those languages that were closer to the "epicenter" evolved faster than those that are actually further. That´s why some argue that Portuguese or Romanian might actually be closer among them and with latin than other languages.

      Before when I didn´t know Italian or some Portuguese/french I couldn´t understand Romanian. However now I can almost translate any wikipedia article in romanian to Spanish, eventhoug I will ofcourse doubt with some words.

    6. Last comment: watching some mexican movies in my mothertongue (spanish) I´ve found myself turning on subtitles because I am not used to their slang and I didn´t understand some parts of what they said... does it make it another language? or it is maybe that there is a gray area there in what constitutes dialect and language?

      My mexican friend said the other they: "Yo jalaba a esa chica"
      What from my spanish perspective I thought: Jalar=to eat... but he is being methaphorical... "You fucked this girl?!?!?"

      He actually meant "I understood this girl".

      Regards :)

  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  3. Dear Denise,

    This is an example of Modern English in the Orcadian dialect of Nothern Great Britain.

    [I don't know if you'll succeed in reading it but if you ever heard it in person (as I once did) you would probably not recognize it as a form of English. I couldn't always understand my Uncle Cecil's Georgian drawl either but, for me, Orcadian English sounded every bit as foreign as Dutch or Norwegian.]

    “Trou da hairst dat wanjoy Secretary o’ wirs – Tamson – speered me gin I wadna gae a paper I’ wir ain dialec. I telt’im at aince ‘at I hed been sae lang awa fae hame ‘at feinty bit o’ me minded on ony o’d, an’ even gin I deud I hed tent da way o’ makin’ a dacent discourse. Da common galloos wadna leed tae me, bit jeust pat me doon for id. Tae mak a lang story short, he sent a lang screed back tae me sayin ‘I high English “Thu’re a leer.” Noo, bairns, I pit id tae yersels, waas dat right? I wad hae taen da laa api’ ‘im for takin’ awa me guid name ‘I dat wey gin gin id warna ‘at ‘a body kens laaweers ar’ sic scoondrels dey wad hae jeust reuined is baith, sae I made ap me mind hid wad be better tae geong aboot wi’ a little wirt name nor loss da twa tree babees I hae…”

    Those who insist that ALL the dialects of English are mutually intelligible have simply not yet encountered English in ALL of its dialects!

    Best Regards

  4. I mean, why stop there? Proto-Indo-European isn't dead! It's just highly dialecticized. It's a somewhat subjective classification, anyway, right? But there's more to language than that. The Romance languages are linguistically divergent. They show major departures in grammar. Perhaps equally important, however, is the politics of it. The Romance languages represent distinct ethnicities. Language and cultural identity are closely tied. The French are French, and they largely speak French. Spanish is most closely tied (by sheer number of speakers) to the Americas, but is obviously also spoken in Spain, with whom those peoples of the Spanish-speaking Americas share an important and complex cultural heritage. I'm glad the example of the Germanic languages of Britain came up. It's a great example. Scots was long considered a dialect of English, despite the evidence that it is as old as English, and underwent a similar, but separate, evolution to its modern form. The movement to recognize Scots as a language in its own right was tied to a cultural movement by the Scottish people to embrace and assert with dignity their cultural identity.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What can you do with a degree in linguistics?

People so often assume that a linguist's job is to learn as many languages as possible, when in actuality it is not anything near that. So, let us put an end to this erroneous assumption once and for all. 
Linguists do not engage in learning languages, linguists engage in studying how language works. And when I say language, I mean human language, an umbrella term that subsumes all languages spoken by humans, including pidgins, creoles, and sign languages. Thanks to linguists the world is a better place now, many daunting problems that existed for centuries have been solved because now we have a better understanding of language and language-related issues. in this article, you will see, in full-length, the contributions of linguists to the modern world. And you are going to see that it's a disgrace to confine a linguist's job to just learning languages. 
Let me just give you some examples before we break things down in more detail. A linguist's job could involve explo…

What linguists know that other people don't.

Studying languages is a privilege. When you analyze language and everyday speech you start to realize that there is an astonishing amount of wonder in this system that we take for granted. Linguists questioned the obvious, which is language, and got answers that forever changed mankind’s understanding of Language and human nature. In this article, you will see what linguists know that is not so evident to other people. So let's see what we've got. We all speak one language. One of the main discoveries of modern linguistics is that it made us aware that all the languages we speak are similar in astonishing respects; they manifest the same pattern, follow the same rules, they are learnt in exactly the same way, and that all the differences are only superficial. So, in a sense we all speak the same language. This was captured by Chomsky in an excellent metaphor in an excellent book of his titled Language and Mind in which he says that if a Martian scientist, somebody with a diffe…

8 books everyone into linguistics should read.

When you want to decide on what to read in language and linguistics, it is never easy to pick a reading list; there is just so many books out there under the label of linguistics, especially that publications in linguistics have been growing like wild fire in the last couple of decades. So with your limited time and the unlimited number of books, it is always wise to make some research beforehand on what exactly you want to read. There is a lot to choose from, and the best book will depend on what you are specifically interested in. This is why we, at The Language Nerds, compiled a list of linguistics books that will entertain the novice and the expert alike. Here are some places to start: 

1.The Language Instinct by Steven Pinker

This is a book for the general science readers, it is very accessible whether you have a background in linguistics or not. It is considered by many as a landmark in linguistics. It is a great introduction and primer to some of the more basic problems and que…