When was Latin first mentioned as being a dead language?

by regis_regum
rkmvca

While I agree with much of what u/fathan says, I'll take a partial counterpoint and say that I'm not sure that it is dead. It lives on as a liturgical language; it lives on in the scientific, medical, and legal lexicons which are replete with Latin terms, and it spawned daughter languages that, when you add up French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Romanian and a few others*, add up to over a billion speakers.

You might claim that "these are not Latin". But languages evolve, and even if the Western Roman Empire had never fallen, the "Latin" that it evolved to would have been very different from classical Latin as well. If you have ever tried to read Beowulf in the original, the old Anglo-Saxon is just this side of unintelligible for modern English speakers. Even when the Empire was still intact, the vulgar Latin spoken on the street was not the same as the Latin of, for example Cicero's oratory. Languages changes, and it may not be a popular opinion, but the Romance languages are essentially evolutions of Latin. Had the Western Empire not fallen, and there was only one such evolution kicking around, I'm pretty sure we'd be calling it Latin.

  • one of those daughter languages, Romansh, spoken in a few Cantons of Switzerland, is still close to Latin. Perhaps I exaggerate a bit.