My answer could be seen as a complement to the answer of Revi Soekatno, who, of course, knows a lot more about this kind of thing as a linguist and philologist.
Revi says in the main lines that Latin has evolved into a number of modern Romance languages.So then it is in the same sentence a predecessor of, for example, current Italian as the old Dutch Frankish and Old English are of our language and that we usually do not mention dead languages.
Yet, from a certain point of view, there is still a special side to Latin, which makes it defensible to keep in mind that it is still a living language, written and spoken as a means of communication in this time too.The only thing that makes Latin left behind in other languages is that it is not his or her first language.
Latin was the lingua franca in the western world until the end of the 17th century.But already in the 16th century the Bible was translated into the various national languages. After the 17th century, French took a big flight, especially as a language of the elite and diplomacy. English and German were also spoken in language areas that were so large that for example for the science and philosophy those languages were usable to publish.
But through all these centuries, Latin remained the language of the Catholic Church to this day.Until the sixties of the last century world-wide the only language of the liturgy and now the language of the hierarchy in the church. Encyclicals and other official pieces appear in Latin and to this day modern notions are translated into Latin.
Before answering this question, we must first give a definition of a dead language.What does it actually mean when a language is called dead? This means that this language has no more native speakers.
In fact, Latin an sich is not a dead language, this language has evolved into the Romance languages, such as Italian, Romanian, French, Spanish and Portuguese.These languages can be considered as modern Latin languages.
However, it is indeed the case that a certain form of Latin is dead. Classical Latin is for no one a mother tongue, perhaps it had never been.This language was a cultivated standard language.
So the conclusion is that a certain form of Latin is no longer spoken as a mother tongue, so that this language can be considered dead.On the other hand, Latin has developed into a large number of modern languages, which makes it justifiable to say that Latin is not dead.
There are already two answers that are much better than mine, but I still wanted to give a little addition.
In my Latin-English Dictionary of High School, with which I have been toil in particular about Ovidius & Julius Caesar, this is on the first page (in an ugly manuscript, once written down in second grade):
That is Carlos Ruiz Zaf贸n, and I can tell you nothing more about that book except the quote, the rest I have forgotten again.
What I will not forget is ‘ sub Aqua Sub Aqua ‘ or what an onomatopoeia is, and also that Emperor of Caesar about the Gauls will keep me. Six years of Latin, and the best it has yielded me is a greater appreciation for Asterix and Obelix.
There are many languages that are more killer than Latin.Latin still hangs around, as the spectre that his relatives occasionally harassed with stories of how it used to be.
The phylum pterosaurs no longer exist.On the contrary, birds are the line of dinosaurs that have survived. So the phylum is not gone. Although in the secondary age it was very different from the current cormorants, herons, ducks, eagles, hummingbirds, penguins, ostriches, tilies, swallows, etc.
Similarly, Latin languages are the current forms of Latin.The closest form is probably the Italian dialect of Sardinia. In the same way, Proto-Germanic and Proto-slaves are not dead, but evolved into living language families.
Everything evolves.Languages or species, ancestors and descendants are never contemporaries: Man, chimpanzee and Bonobo have never lived together with their common ancestor.