More on the collapse of contrastive vowel length in late Latin: a review of the metalinguistic evidence

This article reexamines a thorny and much-debated issue of Latin and Romance studies, i.e. the loss of contrastive vowel length, which Latin had but which did not survive into any Romance language. Among the crucial evidence for assessing the chronology and exact course of the demise of Latin vowel length are the metalinguistic testimonies of grammarians. These have recently received accurate treatment and have been invoked by some (most notably, M. Mancini) to oppose the traditional view, dating back to H. Schuchardt, according to which contrastive vowel length was lost when an open syllable lengthening rule came into being, and to argue instead that its demise was caused by a sound change lengthening all stressed vowels independently of syllable structure during the imperial age. The present article reassesses the relevant testimonies by the grammarians placing them first within the framework of the artigraphic tradition to which they pertain and thereby weighing their value as witnesses to ongoing sound change, concluding that the evidence supports the traditional view. The latter is, finally, further corroborated by prosodic evidence from Gellius’ Noctes Atticae and Virgilius grammaticus’ Epitomae , who, at both ends of the period under consideration, attest to the fading of the vowel length contrast and to the subordination of vowel length not only to stress but also to syllable structure.