Textkit Logo

Why is it not back in print?!

Here's where you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get translation help and more!

Moderator: thesaurus

Why is it not back in print?!

Postby Episcopus » Tue Sep 02, 2003 7:36 pm

In all seriousness (albeit tinged with incredulity and of course anger) I do not be understanding why Latin For Beginners is not for sale, for example, on amazon.com. <br /><br />Basically Latin For Beginners beats all competition. Yes Wheelock and M&F (I've looked at these). If a beginner with no Latin knowledge whatsoever wishes that she might learn Latin were to ask me (I don't be biased really, if you y think as I was/be a beginner) I would point her to the book that we can not find in a new glossy format. <br /><br />If A&G does be reprinted as a reference grammar, then may the "Teach Yourself" Latin books burn in a nice monastery fire; for we beginners in actuality need only one book to teach us. The most good book is of course every one's preference. Any one new to textkit or procrastinating from learning Latin due to various insecurities and/or doubts, you knows your destiny.<br /><br />Amazon could make great abundances of paper if the Oxford/Cambridge GCSE Latin courses were to be beaten to the ground to be replaced by a far easier yet more rewarding course. Yes Latin For Beginners takes work and time and considerable intelligence I will not be lying (Latin is the language of the learned) but read the first of the Cambridge Latin Course and you will be amazed by how little is accomplished in the hundreds of pages whilst Professor D'Ooge has a small book whose cover's texture strongly resembles that of grain.<br /><br />There are so many obvious and pointless things in this world. Some things that beg to be stopped, others to be realised.<br /><br />Yes yes go on all of you say that I want to marry Professor D'Ooge etc.
phpbb
User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby Alundis » Tue Sep 02, 2003 8:47 pm

Latin Super Review by D'Ooge is available. Is it reprint or a different work?
phpbb
Alundis
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 1:56 am
Location: new jersey

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby MDS » Tue Sep 02, 2003 11:36 pm

Judging by the price I would assume it was a different book but....<br /><br />And Episcopus; I have an uncle whos an undertaker and could dig up D'Ooge for you if you want a wedding ceremony forthwith. :) jk
MDS
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2003 4:04 am
Location: Pickering, Ontario, Canada

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby mariek » Wed Sep 03, 2003 4:30 am

Alundis wrote:<br />Latin Super Review by D'Ooge is available. Is it reprint or a different work?
<br /><br />Somebody mentioned this book was available on Amazon. I haven't actually seen it in any bookstore, and would love to hear someone's review of it.<br />
User avatar
mariek
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 1387
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 11:19 pm
Location: California

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby Milito » Fri Sep 05, 2003 1:20 am

Alundis wrote:<br />Latin Super Review by D'Ooge is available. Is it reprint or a different work?<br />
<br /><br />It is a different book entirely....<br /><br />Kilmeny
Milito
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 352
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 6:01 pm
Location: Various Points in Canada

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby Keesa » Fri Sep 05, 2003 11:35 am

I think I saw that book on Amazon...I forget what else I was looking for, but it wasn't that. ;D <br /><br />Keesa
phpbb
Keesa
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1108
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:59 pm

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby gabby » Wed Sep 10, 2003 9:33 pm

I found several copies of this book (or at the very least, the same title) at alibris.com for reasonable prices.
phpbb
gabby
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 9:32 pm

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby benissimus » Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:01 pm

Basically, books like D'ooge's are what scared everyone away from Latin. Now that books are focusing more on reading stories, less grammar, and history, Latin seems to be becoming more popular (though this is no doubt due to many factors). The older books are still available to people who are willing to take the hard route, but for the slower-paced learner we have books like Oxford Latin Course, which is 4 volumes of stories and hardly any grammar or Wheelock, which does have a lot of grammar, but softens it by providing oodles of work and examples.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae
User avatar
benissimus
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
Location: Berkeley, California

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby Keesa » Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:37 pm

Well, it definitely doesn't scare me away, but I know what you mean. (Don't attack him too quickly, Episcopus-look at his icon and take warning! ;)) <br /><br />Perhaps you can find a publisher willing to reprint it, Episcopus; Dover does a lot of reprints, I believe. <br /><br />Keesa
phpbb
Keesa
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1108
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:59 pm

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby benissimus » Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:41 pm

It's definitely not my opinion that difficult books should be avoided, but people in general tend to take the path of least resistance. There are also quite a few difficult books in print, and people are likely to choose newer ones over older ones if they are more or less peer.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae
User avatar
benissimus
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
Location: Berkeley, California

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby Keesa » Thu Sep 11, 2003 12:22 pm

I'm different; I like the older books better. (One of the great tragedies of my life is that there is no used bookstore near my house where I can go to look for treasures.) <br /><br />And it would seem to me that the older books have one thing over the newer ones, when it comes to Latin; they're closer to the heart of their subject.
phpbb
Keesa
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1108
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:59 pm

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby benissimus » Thu Sep 11, 2003 2:19 pm

Haha. If you mean they are closer in time then that is a very small decrease!
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae
User avatar
benissimus
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
Location: Berkeley, California

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby ingrid70 » Thu Sep 11, 2003 5:59 pm

The disadvantage for me of newer books, is that they focus entirely on translating from Latin into whatever your language is. I want to be able to write Latin too, and you don't learn that if you don't practise. On the other hand, the oldest Dutch Latin books I have (around 1900) are Dutch to latin only, that's a bit overdone :). I like to have some examples of how it should be.<br /><br />Ingrid
phpbb
ingrid70
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 394
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:29 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby Jeff Tirey » Thu Sep 11, 2003 6:30 pm

Episcopus wrote:<br />In all seriousness (albeit tinged with incredulity and of course anger) I do not be understanding why Latin For Beginners is not for sale, for example, on amazon.com.
<br /><br />I don't think there is any one clear answer. The real question here is why do textbooks go out use?<br /><br />I think some of the reasons are purely economical. Publishers compete with one another to sell books.<br /><br />Others factors have to do with changes in the educational environment. Both students and teacher were very different back when this book was first published. <br /><br />The textbooks also had different goals back then as well too. For example, White's First Greek Book is totally designed to get the student reading Xenophon and it was meant to be used for two terms meaning the following term would be spent on Goodwin's First Four Books of Xenophon and Goodwin's Greek Grammar. Sadly, most Greek in the U.S. is taught not in high school but in college and students can't spend 3 or 4 semesters on only Xenophon. So textbooks must have a good fit with the today's curriculum.<br /><br />Finally, our knowledge of Greek and Latin is always changing and perhaps some concepts or theories (although small) are out-dated or just plain wrong.<br /><br />For me, this is a fascinating subject. <br /><br />Why have these books been replaced?<br />What strengths and weaknesses are there in both modern and public domain textbooks?<br />Is there a place on today’s bookshelf for public domain textbooks?<br />Will they rise again?<br /><br />Of course, some books have never fallen out of style and can easily be found in reprints.<br /><br />Gildersleeve's Latin Grammar<br />A&G's Latin Grammar<br />Smyth's Greek Grammar<br />Goodwin's Moods and Tenses<br />and more!<br /><br />but all of these above are more reference material and they are not in-class textbooks.<br /><br />that's my two-cents - anyone else have an opinion?<br /><br />jeff<br />
Textkit Founder
User avatar
Jeff Tirey
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 891
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2002 6:58 pm
Location: Strongsville, Ohio

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby klewlis » Thu Sep 11, 2003 6:58 pm

ingrid70 wrote:<br />The disadvantage for me of newer books, is that they focus entirely on translating from Latin into whatever your language is. I want to be able to write Latin too, and you don't learn that if you don't practise. On the other hand, the oldest Dutch Latin books I have (around 1900) are Dutch to latin only, that's a bit overdone :). I like to have some examples of how it should be.<br /><br />Ingrid<br />
<br /><br />Really? I started with Wenham for koine and Wheelock for Latin, and they both have exercises going *both* ways so you practice reading *and* writing.<br /><br />I think the problem of texts changing and getting better or worse is lessened the more you diversify your learning materials... If you learn from a number of sources then your knowledge is much more rounded and complete :)
User avatar
klewlis
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 1591
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 1:48 pm
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby Episcopus » Thu Sep 11, 2003 7:28 pm

Difficult? Latin For Beginners is a concise (one can never say simple) course which actually gives the reader more of the language than the OCR course.<br /><br />I have seen books from the Cambridge course. yay! colour pictures, nice glossy pages filled with old roman coins. Let's spend 2 years making slow retarded progress! This-here is why Latin For Beginners is ignored and I think that even modern language courses in school (GCSE particularly) are those which employ the "let us leave the grammar for as long as possible and spend 2 years instead of an easy 3 months studying" teaching tactics.<br /><br />I don't Latin every day any more. I am too fatigued. And when I do it is just for 20 minutes. <br /><br />I am laughing at those who do Latin GCSE and have to spend 2 years doing it. <br /><br />Modern society sometimes baffles me.
phpbb
User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby benissimus » Thu Sep 11, 2003 8:52 pm

What you say about D'Ooge's book is correct, but as I said, it is exactly what the majority of modern teachers and students are afraid of. Also, I have to disagree with your opinion of the longer courses. I would much prefer the pace at which I learn Latin to learning it all within an extremely short (and taxing) period. Sure, you will know it more quickly, but will you really comprehend it? Will you be able to read it by just looking at it and appreciate the depth, as well as catch your own mistakes? Of course, I do have the advantage of having a teacher who is wonderful, but even then a great deal of time must be invested to be truly good at a language, no matter how intensive, or you simply will not be immersed in it enough.
Last edited by benissimus on Fri Feb 06, 2004 5:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae
User avatar
benissimus
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
Location: Berkeley, California

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby Alundis » Fri Sep 12, 2003 1:58 am

I think that every introductory Latin textbook I have read is awful. I think of them as basically simplified grammars which do not teach you to actually read or write the language. Take D'Ooge's advice on translating Latin, for instance,<br /><br />
Observe the following suggestions:<br /><br />1. Read the Latin sentence through to the end, noting endings of nouns, adjectives, verbs, etc.<br />2. Read it again and see if any of the words you know are nominatives or accusatives. This will often give you what may be called the backbone of the sentence; that is subject, verb, and object.<br />...<br />6. When the sentence is correctly translated, read the Latin over again, and try to understand it as Latin, without thinking of the English translation.
<br /><br />This is horrible advice. How could you possibly hope to render a decent translation of a Latin sentence into English before you understand it? <br /><br />I am amazed that this poor method of instruction has persisted for so long; even I was taught this way in high school! William Hale outlined a far more logical method of instruction in 1887 in The Art of Reading Latin: How to Teach It The first half is a publication of a speech he gave; the second a later addendum. In bound form, the entire work comes to 74 pages, but I highly recommend it. Here is an excerpt in which Hale presents his plan:<br /><br />
Now, it will not do to say that students, by beginning in this way, get, quite early, beyond the need of it. At any rate, I can testify, from my own experience, that, in spite of the admirable efforts of the schools in "sight-reading," they do not, when they come to Harvard or Cornell. I allow myself in my class-room – keeping well inside of what is said to be customary among college professors – one jest a year. When I first meet the new Freshman class (for I could not bear to leave such precious material wholly to the most perfect assistant), I question them: "Suppose, now, you are set, as you were at the examination for admission the other day, to tell me the meaning of a sentence in a book you never say, – say an oration of Cicero, – how do you proceed to get at the writer’s meaning?" There is at once a chorus of voices (for they are crammed for that question, having learned printed directions, as we have seen, in the first books they studied), "First find the – SUBJECT," three-quarters of them say; "PREDICATE," the other quarter. "Now here," I say to them, "is an unhappy difference of opinion about first principles in a matter of everyday practice, and of very serious importance. Which is right?" They do not know. "Which do you suppose the Romans who heard the oration delivered in the Forum first hunted up, the subject or the predicate?" That little jest, simple as it is, always meets with great success; for it not only raises a laugh (of no value in itself), but it shows at once, even to a Freshman, the entire absurdity of trying to read Latin by a hunting-up first of either his subject or his predicate; and so enlists his sympathy in favor of trying some other way, if any can be shown him. But, at the same time, it proves to me that the method taught at the most critical of all periods, the beginning, is still wrong. Only in late years, and very rarely, does some student answer my question with: "First read the first Latin word without translating it, then the second, then the third, and so on to the end, taking in all the possible constructions of every word, while barring out at once the impossible, and, above all, erring, if anywhere, in the direction of keeping the mind in suspense unnecessarily long, waiting, at least, until a sure solution has been given by the sentence itself." <br /><br />Yet this is the one method that should everywhere be rigorously used, from the day of the first lesson to the last piece of Latin that the college graduate reads to solace his old age. Only, the process which at first is at every point conscious and slow, as it was not with the Romans, becomes, in Latin of ordinary difficulty, a process wholly unconscious and very rapid, precisely as it was with the Romans.<br />
<br /><br /><br />Now, you might say that D'Ooge and other books are perfectly fine if you simply replace their advice for reading Latin with Hale's. I would disagree. They teach some bizarre English-Latin conversion process, which does not deserve to be called translation.<br /><br />Here is my personal experience. After I memorized all the inflections, I decided to give the Vulgate a try. I knew the most common uses of the cases from my year of high school Latin, and I skimmed some material about verbs (what a deponent is, some vague notions about the subjunctive, the most common uses of the tenses, etc.) Then I started Genesis 1:1. I looked at the words in a sentence, one at a time, and mentally constructed a list of their possible functions. I hadn't read Hale yet, but I wanted to read Latin, not just muddle through it. This process seemed like the only way one could possibly understand a Latin sentence the first time through. It was very slow going. I had to look up multiple words from every sentence in a dictionary. The syntax seemed unusual...why does the imperfect subjunctive always refer to the present time and never to the past? But somehow, it usually made sense to me, even though I hadn't seen the constructions abstracted in some grammar. I checked myself with Douay-Rheims, and occasionally looked at it sooner when I was really stuck.<br /><br />After chapter Gen 6 or so, I decided to read some Latin textbooks. I was feeling rather shaky about my grammatical knowledge, and I wanted to clear some points up. So I read through most of D'Ooge, some thin grammar by Wilson, and I read all of M&F. This was during the summer, and I had a lot of free time, so this only took me seven weeks or so. I memorized as many constructions as I could, and I tried to memorize the vocabulary I didn't recognize in the lists, but somehow they didn't stick in my head. Fortunately, I had enough sense to ignore D'Ooge's suggestions. Unfortunately, (or perhaps fortunately) M&F contained no advice for reading Latin at all. But it did ask me to translates lots of contrived sentences from Latin to and from English, which I did not do. I forced myself to work through the sample readings in M&F. They started off okay, but sharply increased in difficulty after Cicero was introduced. And just when I started to get used to Cicero's style, the next reading would be Seneca, or Martial. When I finally got somewhat comfortable with Martial, it would switch to Caesar, or back to Cicero....Where was the slow, graded progression? Would you start off an ESL student with Shakespeare or Milton? I don't think so. <br /><br />When I finally finished the last chapter of M&F, I went back to reading the Vulgate. I swear that I was even worse at reading it than before I started with D'Ooge! I certainly learned some useful things from the textbooks, like indirect constructions with the accusative as subject, but you know what? That construction is rarely used in the Vulgate, and I bet I would have assimilated it into my reading apparatus if I had seen it more often. Moreover, I knew most of the vocabulary in M&F and D'Ooge just by writing on an index card every new word I came across in the Vulgate (and whatever else I tried to read.)<br /><br /><br />Around this time, I read Hale's address. I found it quite illuminating, and it confirmed many of my suspicions. I was immediately convinced of the correctness of his method for reading Latin. And I now appreciate the value of reference grammars. I'll use them to find out what a certain word could mean when it comes up in a sentence. But I will not go around memorizing lots of constructions in haphazard fashion, kind of like how they're presented in M&F and D'Ooge.<br /><br />Unfortunately, I don't have access to a real Latin class, but I'll try to practice Hale's system anyway. He recommends reading a series of graded texts. I think that Orberg's Lingua Latina series would fit the bill, but it's hard to find for sale here. Perhaps an even better text has been written, but I have no idea where to look for it. However, there is no shortage of books like Wheelock's and D'Ooge.<br /><br />Not really caring enough to find a copy of Orberg, I decided to stick with the Vulgate, because it works for me. It is not supposed to be difficult, after all. And I'm really I purchased a Clementine edition because it actually has punctuation (this was hard to find, my version was published in Spain, and I had to buy it through a Christian book store. I also bought ecclesiastical dictionary, because Cassell's isn't sufficient. I sometimes use Vulsearch, but I cannot stand to read on a computer screen for hours at a time.<br /><br />Finally, no, I don't care if I'm damaging my Latinity, or that I'm not reading the golden age of Latin. Otherwise, I would have ordered Orberg. I rather enjoy ecclesiastical and medieval Latin. Besides, I would want to read the Vulgate eventually, so I might as well start now. And I can honestly say that reading Latin is fun and enjoyable. <br /><br /><br />
phpbb
Alundis
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 1:56 am
Location: new jersey

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby klewlis » Fri Sep 12, 2003 4:08 am

wow, careful, episcopus will burn you at the stake for saying such things about his idol! :)<br /><br />my learning has been a mix of reading and memorization and I think it is working well... I find it best not to depend on one source but to mix it up as much as possible... I have several latin readers which help a lot. <br /><br />And I have a fabulous little greek-latin new testament that I adore. It's great because if I can't figure out the word/phrase in latin I can look at the greek and usually between the two I can figure it out. You would like it if you are studying greek in addition to your vulgate!<br /><br />As for Oerberg, his series was recommended to me by one of the top latin *speakers* in the world, and I have been looking for it ever since. Pullins distributes them in the US but I'm not sure if they will ship to Canada.... I should ask. :)
User avatar
klewlis
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 1591
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 1:48 pm
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby Episcopus » Fri Sep 12, 2003 3:59 pm

I do agree Alundis about the "translation" advice. Personally I believe it to have to be natural and subconscious, and it is thus for me. <br />And so, the translation advice of Professor D'Ooge can weaken neither the book nor His reputation nor my respect for him due to the fact that a few translation notes matter NOT if the reader has been already taught to read subconsciously like I have been.<br /><br />Lastly, you can not discard every single beginner's Latin textbook. Latin For Beginners is evidence of this - it is absolutely phenomenal. Other books I have tried but nothing thus have I seen before. As Nas says "All I need is one [book]", and evidence of Dr. D'Ooge's sheer brilliance is manifested in my ability to read Latin and my improving daily. <br /><br />And to "ignore D'Ooge's suggestions" would be fatal for me. <br />I can neither comprehend nor render such a thought in my mind "I was sensible to ignore D'Ooge's suggestions". <br />Moreover if you had studied Latin For Beginners properly you would not have been weaker and Latin than you were when you started. Again I am incredulous as to whether you be reading the same book or not! <br /><br />As the french say Vous vous trompez<br /><br />
phpbb
User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby annis » Fri Sep 12, 2003 4:36 pm

Episcopus wrote:<br />I agree about the advice; it's not the best - I know not how I read Latin exactly, but what I DO know is that I can trucking read it. Because of Latin For Beginners. Therefore I <br /><br />a) Resent your comments<br />b) accept that everyone does be different<br />c) know, because of my great progress with just one book, that you have no reason. <br />
<br /><br />Episcopus, I very strongly advise you to rethink your cultish devotion to the good Dr D'Ooge if this sort of ad hominem outburst is going to be a typical feature of your devotions.<br /><br />The Good Doctor is beyond all human cares now, and does not need defending.<br /><br />As a general rule of thumb, when you feel compelled to end a post with "I'm not being rude" - or anything like that - it may be best to delete the post, and try again later.<br /><br /><br />I will address the substantive questions in this little debate when I have more time this weekend.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
annis
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3397
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby tdominus » Fri Sep 12, 2003 4:51 pm

How much does D'ooge cover compared to the Cambridge and Oxford courses?<br />
phpbb
tdominus
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 12:15 pm
Location: Terra Australis

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby Jeff Tirey » Fri Sep 12, 2003 5:00 pm

>:(
Episcopus wrote:<br />Then why make me more angry? I think that you should delete your post.<br />
<br /><br /> >:( >:( >:( Episcopus, visitors have the right to say exactly what they think and this forum is here to exchange and debate ideas - it's not a place for rudeness. Your 'resentment' for the opinions of others speaks poorly about your own character. It's ok to disagree but it's not ok to be a jerk about it. Alundis was giving you his comments on your post and you need to digest what others say without getting personal. <br /><br />I think you need to get up from your keyboard and take a walk and only return if you can respect others' opinions.<br /><br />
Textkit Founder
User avatar
Jeff Tirey
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 891
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2002 6:58 pm
Location: Strongsville, Ohio

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby Episcopus » Fri Sep 12, 2003 5:59 pm

It is always the same thing. <br /><br />After writing it, I thought those parts to be inappropriate hence my deleting them, jeff. Then to quote them as if I knew not that they were mere outbursts in a blind rage is unfair to me. <br /><br />Latin For Beginners is great - some may not think thus - but it is a fact that this book teaches an impatient child who had tried many books prior to discovering Dr. D'Ooge's work. <br />That is not an opinion; it is true. A good beginner's grammar teaches a beginner to read a language so that he may progress to Intermediate Level. Latin For Beginners is doing this right now.<br /><br />By the way jeff, I am not some insane freak contantly insulting people online on the computer for too long becoming tired and irate. I returned from school where nothing was learnt to some guy insulting my only good teacher. That is why I said "Resent" not because I am mentally deranged. <br />It is was one of those occasions on which one knows oneself that some one else is totally wrong and becomes very annoyed. Furthermore what I left in the end after careful moderation was perfectly fair. Indeed - what was there originally was not profane in any way nor was it disrespectful in my opinion. It was just a vehement disagreement (less than klewlis mockingly, as usual, predicted). <br /><br />And of character, this is a mere, albeit relatively great intelligent and insightful, internet forum - none of us know eachother well enough to judge anyone's true character. For all you know, I could be an internet paedophile. I thought you said it to be bad to make personal comments and calling me a jerk, although not offensive to me, is not what should be done given your reaction to my post. <br /><br />Equally >:(
phpbb
User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby klewlis » Fri Sep 12, 2003 6:23 pm

Episcopus wrote:<br /> (less than klewlis mockingly, as usual, predicted). <br />
<br /><br />ouch. <br /><br />I don't believe anything I have ever said here can be classified as "mocking"--that is much too strong. Friendly teasing is all that was meant, and is not unjustified considering the inordinate passion you have for this book.<br /><br />However, if my comment was offensive I apologize and will refrain in the future.
User avatar
klewlis
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 1591
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 1:48 pm
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re:Why is it not back in print?!

Postby Jeff Tirey » Fri Sep 12, 2003 6:32 pm

I was speaking to you as a Forum Administrator and so was William. This is something you don't seem to grasp.<br /><br />I'm sorry, but for me you're well past the courtesy PMs and private warnings so anything I say about your behavior in public is both warranted and truthful - and frankly, you deserve it.<br /><br />let's review where you're at in my mind:<br />1. remind member of guidelines<br />2. privately point out inappropriate postings<br />3. privately point out inappropriate postings and warn of consequences<br />4. post public message about inappropriate postings<br />5. post public message warning of consequences <-- you're here<br />6. You don't want to be here<br /><br /><br />I'm asking you for the last time to please keep your postings respectful and well targeted towards learning Greek and Latin.<br /><br />You also have the habit of deleted/editing your offensive posts as if that alone makes up for it. <br /><br />« Last Edit: Today at 02:05:49pm by Episcopus »<br /><br />Your editing of your message says to me that you retract what you said. Why not do the correct thing instead and apologize.<br /><br />Ok, you had your say in this and so did I. So let's consider this closed and return to learning Greek and Latin<br />Jeff
Textkit Founder
User avatar
Jeff Tirey
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 891
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2002 6:58 pm
Location: Strongsville, Ohio


Return to Learning Latin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AlexEmp and 38 guests