|The orthography of machine-readable Neolatin texts: A plaidoyer for minimal intervention|
Neolatin orthography is neither arbitrary nor uniform (II)
Contemporary and ancient Greek
Greek loanwords are often spelt following the CONTEMPORARY pronunciation of Greek; if they are changed into 'correct' forms (ex.: Lat. chiromantis, Gr. cheiromantis) evidence of the influence of contemporary Greek pronunciation is lost.
Greek words in Latin texts follow contemporary standards, not modern norms of classical Greek (ex.: Vida, De dign. rep., 2,54,6 pimena for classical poimena).
Whether there is aspiration in Greek loanwords, depends as much on an author's knowledge of Greek as on the evolving state of Greek philology in general - since Medieval Latin is mostly unaware of the aspiration, which had already ceased in Greek before the end of the Classical period (cp. Hugutio, Derivationes, C 306.13 ypocrisis). But despite the victory of Erasmian pronunciation*, as late as 1582 there is an example of ypo- for hypo- (Bruno, Cantus circaeus, p.187 ypocrisim).
Se also Iphicrates/Hiphicrates below.
*) See Chrys C. Caragounis, "The Error of Erasmus And Un-Greek Pronunciations of Greek", in: Filología Neotestamentaria 8 (1995) 151-185, URL: www.bsw.org/?l=72081&a=Art06.html.