Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of my Latin teachers (the one who was under 60) did try to teach us a proper pronuncation once, but quickly gave up. But i wonder, what is the point? I think the use cases for Latin are, from most to least important: 1. reading Latin texts 2. casually dropping Latin phrases to impress your friends and intimidate your enemies 3. writing Latin mottoes, naming species, etc 4. listening to that Finnish radio station…
When you're learning latin, it's usually not mainly about the practical application, anyway, and aesthetically it feels somehow so much more pleasing to use the “correct” pronunciation - to me at least. Furthermore it can help to understand historic and linguistic relationships in unexpected ways: For example the German word for emperor “Kaiser” looks very different to the Latin “Caesar” and the relationship between…
Show HN: A Latin self study course, Khan Academy-style
101–110 of 112 posts
Re: Show HN: A Latin self study course, Khan Academy-style
#102I have been interested in learning Latin by self study, but memorizing conjugations and declinations seems like a chore. There are some modern variants of Latin that seems to simplify these aspects mainly Interlingua and Latine-sine-flexione(LSF). Are these worth while to learn?. For example if one is up to speed in LSF, can one still make sense of classical latin texts and poetry etc?.
I think that's fairly unlikely, because LSF uses modern Romance techniques of word order and prepositions to substitute for Latin inflections. In Latin the word order is relatively free, especially in some famous classical authors.
Check out this passage from the Aeneid:
his ego nigrantem commixta grandine nimbum, dum trepidant alae, saltusque indagine cingunt, desuper infundam, et tonitru caelum omne ciebo. diffugient comites et nocte tegentur opaca: speluncam Dido dux et Troianus eandem devenient; adero, et, tua si mihi certa voluntas conubio iungam stabili propriamque dicabo, hic hymenaeus erit." - Non adversata petenti adnuit, atque dolis risit Cytherea repertis.
If I try to remove all of the meaning that's given only by inflections (leaving singular/plural distinctions), this would be something like
these I darkening mixed hail cloud while shake forces and leaps circle close from above wetten and thunder sky all shake. scatter comrades and night hold dark cave Dido leader and Trojan same come; be present and your if me sure will marriage join firm and own call this marital is." - not opposed requestor agree and trick laugh Venus found
Looks like the inflections were doing a lot of work here. :-)
OK, how about Galileo's Siderius Nuncius?
Magna equidem in hac exigua tractatione singulis de natura speculantibus inspicienda contemplandaque propono. Magna, inquam, tum ob rei ipsius praestantiam, tum ob inauditam per aevum novitatem, tum etiam propter Organum, cuius beneficio eadem sensui nostro obviam sese fecerunt.
Big truly in this small treatise all about nature speculating to be inspected and to be contemplated propose. Big, say, then because thing itself excellence then because unheard through era novelty, then also because Instrument whose help same sense our apparent themselves make.
OK, that's a little more intelligible -- by Galileo's time Latin prose that's not meant to be fancy or showy is more similar to modern languages, and Galileo presumably was thinking like a modern Romance language speaker, using Latin as a foreign language.
Going back to Cicero:
Magna dis immortalibus habenda est atque huic ipsi Iovi Statori, antiquissimo custodi huius urbis, gratia, quod hanc tam taetram, tam horribilem tamque infestam rei publicae pestem totiens iam effugimus.
Big gods immortal to be given is and this himself Jupiter Stator, most ancient guardian this city, thanks, because this so foul, so horrible, and so dangerous republic danger so often now escape.
I guess you can get the idea here too, but the tenses would be helpful, and maybe being able to see where the "of" and "to" go...
Vulgate?
in principio creavit Deus caelum et terram. terra autem erat inanis et vacua et tenebrae super faciem abyssi et spiritus Dei ferebatur super aquas. dixitque Deus fiat lux et facta est lux. et vidit Deus lucem quod esset bona et divisit lucem ac tenebras. appellavitque lucem diem et tenebras noctem factumque est vespere et mane dies unus. dixit quoque Deus fiat firmamentum in medio aquarum et dividat aquas ab aquis. et fecit Deus firmamentum divisitque aquas quae erant sub firmamento ab his quae erant super firmamentum et factum est ita. vocavitque Deus firmamentum caelum et factum est vespere et mane dies secundus.
in beginning create God sky and land. land however is idle and empty and darknesses over face abyss and spirit God carry over waters. and says God make light and made is light. and see God light because is good and divide light and darknesses. and call light day and darknesses night and made is evening and morning day one. say also God make firmament in middle waters and divide waters from waters. and make God firmament and divide waters which are below firmament from these which are over firmament and made is thus. and call God firmament sky and made is evening and morning day second.
(That one might be deceptively easy because this text is so familiar...)
Cicero's De Finibus, the origin of the text that got corrupted into "Lorem Ipsum"?
Sed ut perspiciatis, unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque laudantium, totam rem aperiam eaque ipsa, quae ab illo inventore veritatis et quasi architecto beatae vitae dicta sunt, explicabo. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem, quia voluptas sit, aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos, qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt, neque porro quisquam est, qui do lorem ipsum, quia dolor sit amet consectetur adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt, ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercitationem ullam corporis suscipit laboriosam, nisi ut aliquid ex ea commodi consequatur? Quis autem vel eum iure reprehenderit, qui in ea voluptate velit esse, quam nihil molestiae consequatur, vel illum, qui dolorem eum fugiat, quo voluptas nulla pariatur?
But so see, from where all that born error is pleasure accusing and pain praising, all thing open and those themselves, which from that finder truth and nearly architect happy life said are, explain. Nobody indeed itself pleasure, because pleasure is, scorn or hate or flee, but because follow big pains those, who reason pleasure follow don't know, nor indeed anyone is, who pain itself, because pain is love pursue drawn to want, but because not never his kind times occur, so work and pain big other seeks pleasure. So indeed to smallest come, who of us exercises any body undertake laborious, except so something from her use obtain? Who however or him right blame, which in that pleasure want be, which nothing bother follow, or him, which pain that flee, which pleasure no give birth?
Anyway, I don't think full-scale inflected Latin texts will be any easier or more comprehensible than those above if you learn Latin entirely without inflections. :-)
Re: Show HN: A Latin self study course, Khan Academy-style
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
I won't stop anyone from learning anything they find interesting, and Logban is probably easier to learn. However I wouldn't recommend in general that anyone learn a constructed language. Learn the languages that people actually speak, they are much harder to learn, but in return you can actually talk to people, which is the point of learning a language. That is instead of two people learning some weird language why…
This view is a little strange in a thread where the alternative is learning Latin. With Latin, too, you typically have to go to conventions in order to encounter other speakers... I've participated in many spoken Latin events (and loved them), but they were akin to conlang events in that every single person was a non-native speaker, and the majority were not fully fluent. Following the view which I think I took from…
Re: Show HN: A Latin self study course, Khan Academy-style
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe the other popular suggestion is Ørberg's Lingua Latīna : * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_%C3%98rberg
I thought the common suggestion for a modern Latin textbook is Wheelock. https://www.amazon.com/Wheelocks-Latin-7th/dp/0061997226#
> It teaches about Latin, teaching you the Latin language is not the goal of this book […]
* https://old.reddit.com/r/latin/comments/8rp222/
Wheelock can be used as a technical reference if you want to know the exact structure. But it's like trying to read the C++ ISO spec if you want to program.
The consensus seems to be either Ørberg and/or Cambridge if you want dead-tree materials.
Re: Show HN: A Latin self study course, Khan Academy-style
#105As an aside, I'd like to recommend to people the Cambridge Latin Course ( https://www.cambridgescp.com/ ) This was the course I followed learning Latin in school. Whilst it may be tailored more towards a school audience, much of the content of their books is available for free online, which includes lots of translation and vocabulary practice. The books and stories are all very light-hearted and fun and teach a lot a…
Ecce Romani gets no love despite the exciting saga of the main characters being stuck in a ditch for half a book.
Re: Show HN: A Latin self study course, Khan Academy-style
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
This view is a little strange in a thread where the alternative is learning Latin. With Latin, too, you typically have to go to conventions in order to encounter other speakers... I've participated in many spoken Latin events (and loved them), but they were akin to conlang events in that every single person was a non-native speaker, and the majority were not fully fluent. Following the view which I think I took from…
Latin opens up ancient worlds.
> Learn the languages that people actually speak, they are much harder to learn, but in return you can actually talk to people, which is the point of learning a language.
Maybe we could emend this to
"that people actually speak or have spoken ... in return you can actually experience other people's thoughts and feelings, which is the point of learning a language"
and then it would work well for widely-spoken modern and ancient languages alike?
Re: Show HN: A Latin self study course, Khan Academy-style
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
I won't stop anyone from learning anything they find interesting, and Logban is probably easier to learn. However I wouldn't recommend in general that anyone learn a constructed language. Learn the languages that people actually speak, they are much harder to learn, but in return you can actually talk to people, which is the point of learning a language. That is instead of two people learning some weird language why…
This view is a little strange in a thread where the alternative is learning Latin. With Latin, too, you typically have to go to conventions in order to encounter other speakers... I've participated in many spoken Latin events (and loved them), but they were akin to conlang events in that every single person was a non-native speaker, and the majority were not fully fluent. Following the view which I think I took from…
I unfortunately can't say the same for any of the constructed languages I tinkered with - though they were fun and possibly provided different types of cognitive gains
Re: Show HN: A Latin self study course, Khan Academy-style
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think there’s any evidence that learning Latin helps you learn Romance languages any faster than learning a Romance language does. Why should learning Latin and then French be any faster than Spanish->French ?
I studied Latin and French from the age of 11. When I spent a year in Bologna as a student on the Erasmus scheme (studying Latin, in fact), I can assure you that my schoolboy French was the more useful of the two as a starting point for learning Italian.
The Late-Roman republic and the Roman Empire saw the emergence of vulgar Latin next to classical Latin. Vulgar Latin developed first in Italy and was subsequently adopted throughout the Empire. Vulgar Latin also saw active evolution during late antiquity. It diverged from classical Latin to a point where both lost out being mutual intelligible (7th century). That's when classical Latin became a dead language.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgar_Latin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_languages#Vulgar_Latin
The decline of the Roman Empire coincided with an age of mass migrations. As Roman influenced waned, people across the European peninsula fragmented. As did language development. That's where you find the common root of modern romance languages. Over the course of several centuries, local changes and influences forged distinct languages.
For sure, classical Latin and modern romance language are all of the same family. But Cicero's Latin is further removed from French then modern day Italian.
Re: Show HN: A Latin self study course, Khan Academy-style
#109It may seem old-fashioned, but I think this is the best strategy for learning such a highly inflected and essentially dead language, especially if you only have experience with mostly analytical languages to begin with. Much of what makes this work is the work of genius that is LLPSI, but I have come to see the value of this strategy for language learning in general. If you are as convinced of the input-hypothesis as me, then you might agree that this is the quickest way to get reading independently in Latin, which is where most learning will take place.
The only objection I have with Dowling's method, is that you should start reading LLPSI immediately, rereading chapters over and over while you are memorizing the tables. Only pace yourself, and don't rush on to chapters covering grammar that you haven't started memorizing yet. If you get bored with old chapters, pick up the companion books, like Fabellae Latinae, for more reading materials.
Re: Show HN: A Latin self study course, Khan Academy-style
#110I have been interested in learning Latin by self study, but memorizing conjugations and declinations seems like a chore. There are some modern variants of Latin that seems to simplify these aspects mainly Interlingua and Latine-sine-flexione(LSF). Are these worth while to learn?. For example if one is up to speed in LSF, can one still make sense of classical latin texts and poetry etc?.
> For example if one is up to speed in LSF, can one still make sense of classical latin texts and poetry etc? I think that's fairly unlikely, because LSF uses modern Romance techniques of word order and prepositions to substitute for Latin inflections. In Latin the word order is relatively free, especially in some famous classical authors. Check out this passage from the Aeneid : his ego nigrantem commixta grandine n…