A paradox of the linguistic research of Neo–Latin. Symptoms and causes
A paradox of the linguistic research of Neo–Latin. Symptoms and causes

Summary/Abstract: A vast majority of Latin texts available to us have been written after the Middle Ages. These writings are very diverse, culturally relevant, and interesting for linguistic research. Yet, this is not reflected in the scholarly attention given to post–medieval Latin. The research dealing with it is neither systematic nor up to date with the modern theoretical and methodological advances in linguistics. As nearly all linguists interested in Latin limit their investigations to the classical and medieval periods, the vast bulk of the texts written in Latin is severely under–researched. In this paper it is argued that the marginal position of post–medieval Latin in the research is caused by the preservation of traditional paths of work and that it is not tenable on the grounds of valid scientifi c reasoning. First, a definition of Neo–Latin is presented and the quantity of its texts is compared to the size of the ancient Latin literature. Then, a quantitative meta–analysis of several major publications in the fields of Latin linguistics and Neo–Latin studies is performed in order to determine the presence of linguistic research of Neo–Latin in them. In the following section, some important reasons why it is under–represented are singled out and contextualised within linguistic methodology and the history of the classical studies. By questioning their validity, a case is made for a full and consistent integration of the linguistic research of Neo–Latin into Latin linguistics.

• Details
• Contents