Did the Roman Empire have like standardized grammar? Rules for

>>1518216
>Did the Roman Empire have like standardized grammar?
More or less. The language of course evolved over centuries and underwent changes. Furthermore, many people developed their own rhetorical style, in which they would also write, e.g. Cicero who often leaves of the "esse" when using an AcI.
>Rules for capitalization & punctuation?
No, because there was neither.
>Codified spellings?
I'm not really sure what you mean.

>>1518216
>Codified spellings
Nah.
>standardized grammar
One or two analyses of Latin were published, notably by Varro.
>Rules for capitalization & punctuation
The interpunct was, at that point, the only form of Latin punctuation.

>>1518252
>codified spelling? Nah

They did have, though, an enormous set of abbreviations. That is why is hard for us Latin students to read monumental inscriptions.

For example, they wrote cos instead of consul, fil instead of filius, cn instead of Gnaeus, and so on.

>>1518361
>For example, they wrote cos instead of consul, fil instead of filius, cn instead of Gnaeus, and so on.
I swear the more i learn about Romans, the more i think of them as facebook using teenagers

>>1518527
People never change, only the times we live in do

>>1518527

>Restituta, take off your tunic, please, and show us your hairy privates

t. Restitutus

>>1518361
I don't think it's that difficult, once you know how the system works, given that the inscription is legible.
The abbreviation of names and titles follows a certain pattern and there really aren't that many variations.
It only gets more challenging, when they shorten words which are not that common.

>>1518527
It shows that we are returning to high culture.