Help in a Tavern

[Kalailan]

Hello.<br /><br />i have a rather simple question.<br />in the sentence "in tabernis puellae non sunt" why is the "taberna" in the dative case? (or is it ablative?) <br />it just doesn't make sense to me.<br /><br />thanx anyway,<br />Ronen

[whiteoctave]

Hey Ronen,<br /><br />"tabernae" are in the ablative (not the dative, although the forms are the same in this instance) because of the preposition "in" preceeding them. As you probably know, "in" can, when taken with the accusative case (a.k.a. a direct object), mean "into". However, "in" when followed by the ablative can mean "in", "on" or "at". Here, the sense of being (or rather not being) "in the taverns" is duly covered by "in"+abl.<br /><br />~dave

[Kalailan]

thanx..<br />but the book that i am using <br />doesn't specify that info. it sais something about the ablative and prepositions but it does not completely explain...<br />i think i will change the book. it is very unclear.

[Keesa]

Which book is that?

[mariek]

[quote author=Kalailan link=board=3;threadid=741;start=0#7235 date=1064835636]<br />but the book that i am using <br />doesn't specify that info.[/quote]<br /><br />I felt exactly the same as you when I ran into a similar problem with one book I was using where it wasn't as clear to me which form goes after each preposition. My current book, on the other hand, explicitly states which form to use when they present new prepositions in the vocabulary list. This is much easier for me!<br /><br />Here are some notes I gathered from another helpful member on this site:<br /><br />AB + Abl.<br />CUM + Abl.<br />DE + Abl.<br />EX + Abl.<br /><br />APUD + Acc.<br />AD + Acc.<br /><br />IN + Abl. = in (situation)<br />IN + Acc. = into (motion into sth)<br /><br /><br /><br />

[Kalailan]

I was using "teach yourself Latin" by Gavin Betts,<br />but now i am using this,<br />http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/Wheelock-Latin/ (very good in my opinion, as it explains every thing.)<br /> as the other book is both missing on page and is very unclear. (on the pages before the missing one as well).<br /><br />

[mariek]

<br />I saw Teach Yourself Latin by Gavin Betts at the bookstore. It seemed like a very small book, and I decided not to get it because it's not a very comfortable book to hold open (it's a very "stiff" book). I hate books where I have to "fight" with them to read from them.<br /><br />

[klewlis]

oh, I saw that one just today in the book store too. I agree that it looked pretty little... hard to include much detail in such a small book!<br /><br />I'm sure Wheelock will serve you well.

[tdominus]

I have Teach Yourself Latin. I found that it required too much memorisation before one reached the relatively small number of exercises at the end of each chapter.<br /><br />I would say that it contains plenty of info, though, and that it serves as a good reference. Sure, it isn't the physically biggest book around, but the writing is free of any verbosity and is very upfront. The style is almost harsh. <br /><br />In its favour, the exercises are long and are "real" latin, and it has a companion website, tylatin.org , with additional exercises. <br /><br />I myself prefer D'Ooge.

[Keesa]

The tylatin.org is a neat site, but I never could get the exercise pages to load. I could call up part of the Carmina Burana, though. Very neat! <br /><br />Like you, Mariek, I hate working with a book that struggles to keep me from reading it. Books are meant to be read, not to be wrestled with!

[mariek]

[quote author=tdominus link=board=3;threadid=741;start=0#7568 date=1065098067]<br />Sure, it isn't the physically biggest book around, but the writing is free of any verbosity and is very upfront.[/quote]<br /><br />Oh, I have nothing against grammar books that appear to be better "reference" books than "learning" books. And that's what I think of this book... it seems to be a good basic grammar reference for the major points of the language. But I don't see myself buying this book because I would rather spend a little more on a more "robust" grammar reference. I would want a grammar reference which is more thorough, one which contains plenty of examples, especially examples illustrating exceptions to the general rule.<br /><br />(Here's a French grammar reference example. I will not pick up a lightweight grammar reference like Seymour Resnick's Essential French Grammar because it doesn't go into enough depth for me. Instead, I have Monique L'Huiller's Advanced French Grammar and Maurice Grevisse's Le Bon Usage.)<br /><br />I don't have a problem with the physical size of Teach Yourself Latin. I just have a problem with the "stiffness" of the book's pages and binding. It's very hard to hold the book open because if this. I like a more "flexible" book or one that will easily stay open to the page I'm looking at.<br /><br />

[mariek]

[quote author=Keesa link=board=3;threadid=741;start=0#7572 date=1065100788]<br />Like you, Mariek, I hate working with a book that struggles to keep me from reading it. Books are meant to be read, not to be wrestled with! <br />[/quote]<br /><br />My favorites are the bindings that will lie flat when you open it. (For example, some of the O'Reilly books are like this). Unfortunately, Teach Yourself Latin does the exact opposite binding ... it's designed to stay closed!<br /><br />

[Keesa]

I have a Dover book that I often have to fight with. The nice thing is, I can fight with it. I know my Dover books, and I don't have to worry about damaging the spine. I have another one (can't remember which one it is) where the spine will ruin, if I try too fiercely to keep it open, so trying to read that one is unpleasant, to say the least. My sister says I'm the only person she knows who can read a paperback without creasing the spine, but that spine is creased, believe you me!

[Kalailan]

Well, not only does "teach yourself latin" try to stay closed, it also releases the pages each time you try to open it. double trouble!<br /><br />and it does require a lot of memorization. <br />but now i'm using it as a reference source indeed.