Works and Days

You say mihi, I say michi

with 2 comments

Excerpt from Southey’s Common-place Book: page 643, under “Miscellaneous anecdotes and gleanings”. Comments in brackets are my own.

“Est enim nescio quid natura’ insitum nationibus aliis longe a’ nostris moribus ingeniisque alienum; atque ut Falerni vini sapor alius est quam Taracinensis, ita michi videntur homines ab ipsa’ in qua’ nascuntur terra’, saporem, ut ita dixerim, naturae ingeniorumque traxisse.” — Leon. Aretine, Epist. tom. 2, p. 101

[Roughly translated] For there is something (I know not what) foreign implanted by nature to other nations distant from our customs and characters; and as the flavor of Falernian wine is different than Taracinian, just so men seem to me (michi) to have drawn out from that very land in which they are born a flavor, as I have said, of nature and of characters.

Editor J.W.W. (Southey’s son-in-law John Wood Warter, B.D.) comments:

I am under the impression that in the word michi here, Southey thought he had a similar word to “miching”, see supra, p. 329, and in turning to his copy of Leon. Aretines’s “Letters” before me, I find his well-known mark against the word. I suspect he had in his mind the word Micha, on which see Du Cange in v. The word michi, however, is here simply the pedantic form of mihi. I give the following from Noltini, as the work may not be in everyone’s hands. [Indeed.]

“Absurda etiam est consuetudo pronunciantium H per CH, ut miCHi pro mihi, niCHil pro nihil; id quod ab Leonardo Aretino profectum est, qui consonantis C adjectionem in ejusmodi vocabulis serio defendere est adnixus, L. 8. Ep. 2. ad Antonium Grammaticum. Voss. Art. Gr. 149. A quo quidem tempore monachi ita non solum pronunciarunt, sed etiam scripserunt, ut codices complures manibus ipsorum exarati satis testantur, qui michi, nichil scriptum exhibent.” Lexicon Lat. Ling. Anibarbarum, H. p. 70. Ed, 1780. –J.W.W.

[Translated] Also absurd is the custom of pronouncing H as CH, for example “michi” for “mihi”, nichil for nihil; this was started by Leonardo Aretino, who earnestly took pains to defend the addition of the consonant C in such words… from which time indeed monks not only pronounced it thus, but also wrote it, as not a few manuscripts written by their hands give ample witness, which show “michi, nichil” written.

The Leon. Aretino mentioned seems to be on Leonardo Aretino, alias Bruni, 1369-1444. For “miching”, v. Southey 329, where he quotes from Dryden’s comedy The Wild Gallant: “a raw miching boy.” J.W.W. comments: “TODD in Johnson says that “micher” is used in the Western countries for a truant boy. the words of Hamlet naturally occur, “Marry this is miching malicho; it means mischief.” Act iii, sc. 2.”

I am not sure how exactly the mihi > michi shift is be explained given the otherwise general disappearance (in pronunciation, if not spelling) of h in post-classical Latin. Mihi and nihil sometimes appear as mi and nil (as expected, and even in classical Latin), but it may be that the appearance of ch was an overcompensatory attempt to keep h in those words while it was being lost elsewhere. The spelling “ch” presumably reflected the prevalent pronunciation, though Aretino seems to have been a conscious advocate of the practice.

Noltini also notes that with the loss in pronunciation of h it was also often inserted in spelling where it did not belong, particulary after “c” (after the pattern of loan-words from Greek with “chi”?): “ut Hionius pro Ionius, simulacrum pro simulacrum, cHorona, CHenturio, cHommoda, pro corona, Centurio, commoda; coHerceo pro coerceo.” (Johann Friedrich Nolte, Lexicon Latinae Linguae antibarbarum).

Am I to understand from J.W.W.’s commentary that Southey interpreted michi as meaning that the people of other countries were truant as well as flavorful?

That didn’t answer your question.

Written by Joseph

18 November 2007 at 5:56 pm

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. suggestion: tuscan dialect (not the later form that became ‘standard’ italian), till this day, tends to pronounce ‘ch’ as an aspirated h, which meant that ‘michi’ was ‘miHi’. perhaps the Hs went silent at some point, and the ‘ch’ was inserted to reëmphasise the ‘H’ sound, and later this was mistaken for standard italian ‘ch’?

    Edward Yong

    16 June 2008 at 11:05 am

  2. A search of the Cantus Database shows manuscript facsimiles with “michi” and “nichil” as early as the 12th century in the ones I looked at. This predates Leonardo Aretino. However, none of the 10 or so manuscripts from 0980+ that I looked at had the “c” in them. Just mihi or nihil.
    I wonder if its use came in with the neume based Gregorian Chant. How do you chant “mihi” or “nihil” with a silent “h” in the middle without ending up with just “mi” and “nil”. I haven’t come across any other latin words with an “h” sandwiched between 2 identical vowels. Perhaps the “k” sound was put in for clarity? Especially since all the chants I’ve seen give “mihi” and “nihil” at least 2 notes.
    Was it started by Guido d’Arezzo even?
    So while spelling has reverted to “mihi” and “nihil” in later chant sources, the “k” pronunciation has been retained – by most chanters.

    jogier49

    4 April 2014 at 4:09 am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: