Lucus Eques is gay with Hans H. Ørberg!

Textkit is a learning community- introduce yourself here. Use the Open Board to introduce yourself, chat about off-topic issues and get to know each other.
Post Reply

Utrum Lucus est gay cum eo annon?

ita vero! opperiri enim in lectulo dominum Ørberg solet Lucus noster!
6
43%
minime! uncus non est Lucus!
6
43%
non quidem cum Hans Ørberg gay est, immo whiteoctaves mor
2
14%
 
Total votes: 14

User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Lucus Eques is gay with Hans H. Ørberg!

Post by Episcopus » Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:54 pm

Welcome!

You need Lingua Latina:

http://www.lingua-latina.dk/

It's by far the best. It's how I learned it. Now I speak it with Latin conversation groups.

I'll happily answer any questions about it.
I'm looking to learn Sanskrit. I've had great success in learning Latin from the Lingua Latina series
I wish you luck, Celtica! I highly recommend this:

http://www.lingua-latina.dk/
Lingua Latina is amazing, though; I will happily tell you anything about it if you wish; it's how I learned Latin. You can order the book online; I'm sure you can get it delivered to you (and a Latin dictionary) even in Australia.
try directly through the publisher; comes real fast.
pro! :shock:


Lingua Latina, all the way with Lingua Latina.
I write out every single chapter of Lingua Latina, at least once. Time consuming, but extremely enriching


ET CETERA

Quippe Lucus est gay. te quidem Episcopus maxime diligit, sed tamen te cum Hans valdé gé esse!

~E

User avatar
GlottalGreekGeek
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:37 am
Location: Mountain View

Post by GlottalGreekGeek » Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:11 am

Personally, I always thought that Lucus had some deal with Hans, like a kickback system or something :P But I guess that's me, thinking financial dealings before romantic dealings.

User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2019
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Contact:

Post by Lucus Eques » Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:18 am

Damn, that's funny stuff.

No indeed, and my fiery Latin girlfriend can elaborate fully on my flaming heterosexuality, for truly I've only corresponded twice with Hans Ørberg, by email, and my only reason for promoting his books so fervently is because I wish with utmost sincerity that the Latin language live again. Hah! earn money by it, I wish. Still, what I want most is just for the Latin language to be spoken and to live vigorously.




By the way, Epís, calling someone "gay" as an insult fell out of fashion in America five years ago. :-P
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS

User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Post by Episcopus » Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:52 am

well trans mare it's very much IN fashion therefore

GAY GAY GAY GAY GAY GAY
phpbb

User avatar
Cédric
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 10:03 am
Location: France
Contact:

Post by Cédric » Fri Dec 02, 2005 10:51 am

************
Last edited by Cédric on Sat Jun 10, 2006 10:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
phpbb

User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2019
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Contact:

Post by Lucus Eques » Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:34 am

Hah, well, from what I understand, that little Channel might as well be the Atlantic Ocean. Actually, it's more likely, due to its colonized past, that America is closer to France and to England than France and England to one another.
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS

User avatar
Cédric
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 10:03 am
Location: France
Contact:

Post by Cédric » Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:39 am

Lucus Eques wrote:Hah, well, from what I understand, that little Channel might as well be the Atlantic Ocean. Actually, it's more likely, due to its colonized past, that America is closer to France and to England than France and England to one another.
U're much right, i didnt check ur location before writing, me bad :oops:...
anyway, scripsi quod scripsi

C.
phpbb

annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by annis » Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:45 pm

Episcope, you have the most error-prone gaydar of anyone I currently know. You need to get that recalibrated. Operating a defective gaydar is a danger to you and to everyone around you.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2019
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Contact:

Post by Lucus Eques » Fri Dec 02, 2005 6:03 pm

Ditto, Will.

Cédric, my location is Florence, yes, mais je suis seulmente un american en Italie. Though I have Italian origins.
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS

User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Post by Episcopus » Fri Dec 02, 2005 8:50 pm

Well, don't say that only my "gaydar" is erroneous when Lucus is the only one who voted "no", I voted, consuetudine of course, for whiteoctaves mor, meaning that already 6 people give credit to my argument of Lucus' patent affinity to Hans. Good day.

~E
phpbb

User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2019
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Contact:

Post by Lucus Eques » Fri Dec 02, 2005 9:27 pm

L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS

User avatar
whiteoctave
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:42 pm
Location: Cambridge

Post by whiteoctave » Sat Dec 03, 2005 1:06 am

as under the influence of scholars' Harris '77 port as i may be, the rogue praise of Orberg (i do not deign to write the ligatures) is an embarrassment. furthermore, the repeated use of Dr. in that link (with the rather bizarre point after the word) only adds to my disappointment at Lucus' words. Latin is to be learnt from truly Latin texts. quid aliud?

~D
phpbb

User avatar
edonnelly
Administrator
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
Location: Music City, USA
Contact:

Post by edonnelly » Sat Dec 03, 2005 1:53 am

whiteoctave wrote:Latin is to be learnt from truly Latin texts.
What is a "truly Latin" text?

User avatar
nostos
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 12:30 am
Location: Montréal, QC

Post by nostos » Sat Dec 03, 2005 2:36 am

Episcopus wrote:Well, don't say that only my "gaydar" is erroneous when Lucus is the only one who voted "no"
I guess that's one more vote for the 'no' then, E. If I recall correctly you were bashing Americans for having killed off Latin pronunciation. Lucus Eques, an American, pronounces Latin quite remarkably. I doubt his sexual preference matters much to the subject matter at hand. :P
whiteoctave wrote:with the rather bizarre point after the word
Though I prefer British to American spelling, the 'bizarre point' is standard trans mare.

I read that johnpiazza link a few days back. I highly recommend it, especially Llewellyn's article, Krashen's article, and the newsbyte on the Cambridge Brain Study. All of these are not a strongly articulated defence, but it doesn't really matter: the modern languages are not taught like Latin, even if they be inflected. So why insist on grinding gerunds as the only possible way? If learning is lived, however you learn, then Latin becomes a living tongue.
edonnelly wrote:What is a "truly Latin" text?
Precisely. whiteoctave, if you haven't yet, I recommend reading the play 'The Invention of Love' by Tom Stoppard. He takes up this point rather starkly; and one of the protagonists (if I recall correctly) is Housman, though you might dislike Stoppard's free interpretation of his life.

I have a proposition for Jeff: there are several people here who have taken a liking to the methods of Lingua Latina. We should have a new board devoted to it, just as there are boards devoted to Wheelock and D'Ooge.
Last edited by nostos on Sat Dec 03, 2005 5:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
phpbb

User avatar
whiteoctave
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:42 pm
Location: Cambridge

Post by whiteoctave » Sat Dec 03, 2005 1:23 pm

i have read Stoppard's TIOL thrice, seen it twice and the poster hangs above my computer. it is quite good. the spelling Houseman is as inexcusable as doctor; for the latter the American 'spelling' should not be described as a variant but simply an error. for the use of the point in abbreviations is derived from late Latin ms practice, in which the point marks either suspension or truncation of the word. the use of the point for suspension is now outmoded in English, but we still retain the point to mark truncation. dr is, like mr, purely a suspension, and the r represents the final letter. to follow it with a point cannot be defended by the (wholly true) fact that most people in the world have for many, many years put a point there and will continue to do, pace the plea of the pedant.

'truly Latin' is a text that was conceived in Latin and then so written.

~D
phpbb

User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2019
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Contact:

Post by Lucus Eques » Sat Dec 03, 2005 3:13 pm

Wow, our whiteoctave David hasn't made me laugh so much in a long time.

Let's talk about this "Dr." with a period after it, which seems to bother you so much. I'm not sure where you've been, M David, but English literature for quite a few centuries has been published from newspapers to novels with just such spelling conventions. Among other elements in English orthography, we find the personal pronoun "I" always capitalized, letters majuscule at the beginnings of sentences, periods to mark their end, spaces between words, and a whole set of other punctuation marks and styles.

And according to the above rules, you seem to err quite frequently in your own posts! Not that informal writing ought to be constrained by law to these however essential conventions.

Your criticism of the American mode of spelling is ridiculously laughable, miselle Davidule. An "error," you say. The founders of our country were extraordinary classicists, and took great care in the restorations of the spellings which followed. Indeed, there is no conceivable reason to opine for extra 'u's over their absence, among other isms associated with the British dialect. However, there is a certain justification which arrives to us by tradition, and therefore retaining an historical spelling is always justifiable. However, among other British conventions, the most ridiculous is "honour" with a 'u'. The French Normans never spelled it with a 'u', nor did the American settlers. Its addition came quite late to England, based on an assumption by one too many unfortunate authors that "honor" was of a part with "colour" and "glamour;" and, moreover, simply to distinguish themselves from those uncivilized Americans. This is an optimum example demonstrating where the true error lies.

And also, as Benissimus and I have discussed recently, the most advisable orthographic course is to allow those words of ours cognate to Latin to resemble the ancient language's spelling as closely as possible. Though there are some American examples like "license" and "connection" that stray from the rightward path, we deliberately altered our spellings in order to honor the orthography of the very same language whose vocabulary enriches our literature so profusely.


Thank you humbly, Nostos, for your kind remarks. I would like to add that the existence both of the British and American standards of spelling enhances and beautifies our common tongue. We all ought to have the option, truly, the right to use either in whatever manner pleases us best. Such is to enrich our language, not to denigrate it, as much as the numerous dialects of Greek have served to broaden the hellenistic pallet quite far. Nor do I mean to accuse directly the British orthography as an "error" — such pride and prejudice ought never to pass.

And wholeheartedly, I second the motion to commence a new Lingua Latina forum here at Textkit. I've had in mind the very same thought for a few months, but I wanted to wait upon my return to the States before mentioning it. Nevertheless, I volunteer to moderate for such a forum.

'truly Latin' is a text that was conceived in Latin and then so written.
When I write and speak Latin, I think in Latin, and then so write and speak it.
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS

User avatar
whiteoctave
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:42 pm
Location: Cambridge

Post by whiteoctave » Sat Dec 03, 2005 5:39 pm

i was unaware about the use of capitalisation in continuous prose but your comments, as ever, L., have cleared up for me an otherwise impenetrable web of scriptural confusion.

that the founders of your country were 'extraordinary Classicists' must account for their singular absence in the annals of Classical scholarship.

honour is of course taken from the French not the Latin. you are no doubt familiar with the ME variant anour and AF (h)onour, whence Mod.F honneur. the rogue restoration to -or does not deserve honour.
what the significant difference in form between OL colos and honos is, only a greater mind can say.
an 'optimum' example indeed. i wish i were able to say that honour were a late English development, but Robert of Gloucester (1297), Robert Manning of Brunne (1320), Gower (1390), St. Cuthbert (c.1450), Elyot, Coverdale, More, Hall, Marvell, Lovelace et al. would beg to disagree, opting for -our as they did.

being a twat correlates ill, i fear, with being a competent Classicists.

~D
phpbb

User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2019
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Contact:

Post by Lucus Eques » Sat Dec 03, 2005 6:21 pm

a competent Classicists
?

How many Romans?!
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS

User avatar
nostos
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 12:30 am
Location: Montréal, QC

Post by nostos » Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:20 pm

whiteoctave wrote:i have read Stoppard's TIOL thrice, seen it twice and the poster hangs above my computer. it is quite good. the spelling Houseman is as inexcusable as doctor; for the latter the American 'spelling' should not be described as a variant but simply an error. for the use of the point in abbreviations is derived from late Latin ms practice, in which the point marks either suspension or truncation of the word. the use of the point for suspension is now outmoded in English, but we still retain the point to mark truncation. dr is, like mr, purely a suspension, and the r represents the final letter. to follow it with a point cannot be defended by the (wholly true) fact that most people in the world have for many, many years put a point there and will continue to do, pace the plea of the pedant. . . .

honour is of course taken from the French not the Latin. you are no doubt familiar with the ME variant anour and AF (h)onour, whence Mod.F honneur. the rogue restoration to -or does not deserve honour.
Language like life is fluid, not frozen. It is very tempting to attempt to present what is correct or no in a living tongue based on one's knowledge of etymology, but there are very many examples of words and conventions which have changed over time, often losing sight of their original etymological raisons d'être, and which are now considered standard (by even pedants) on both sides of the Atlantic. But pedants quite often miss the point: language is change; to attempt to make it static is to attempt to kill it outright.

The example you give is not entirely correct: OF was '(h)onor' or '(h)onur', earlier 'enor'; The Anglo-Norman was 'anur' or 'anour' - this is a blend of both forms of the OF, in which all three spellings do not include '-our', as with words like 'col-our'. The Angles got their forms confused. That authors were using it as early as 1297 is irrelevant. 'Honor' is not ignoble.

That being said, I do respect your vast knowledge.

I can hardly believe I've made such a gross error in my spelling of a proper name :oops: It has, however, been corrected. I'm glad you like the play; my opinion of it remains high also.
Lucus Eques wrote:Thank you humbly, Nostos, for your kind remarks.
You're most welcome, Luce. I also would like to see you as a moderator in the (subjunctive :P ) LL forum.
How many Romans?!
Indeed.
Last edited by nostos on Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
phpbb

bellum paxque
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 718
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 2:29 pm
Location: nanun Hanguge issoyo (in Korea sum)
Contact:

Post by bellum paxque » Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:21 pm

I will be the first to admit that I am prone to excessive enthusiasm and to venemous sarcasm: prone in fact is an apt expression, since it indicates the fall (cf. ruina) of the conversation. Being myself guilty of this weakness, then, I hesitate to accuse others of it. However, I cannot help being dismayed by the recent turn in this thread, and I am obliged to speak.

mi whiteoctave et mi luce, nostrum sermonem haec scribendo foedatis.

Surely it is more appropriate to address the core of another's arguments - especially when we violently disagree with them - then to poke at his solecisms or sneer in our superiority? If outright disgust with another is the real motivation for writing a post, then, as we value honesty, we are obliged to express that disgust candidly (and, as we value propriety, privately). Draping ourselves in the righteous robes of the Pedant or the Populist is never enough to ennoble spite.

Intellectual prowess, no matter how accomplished, does not justify sardonic abuse; common sense, no matter how comprehensive, does not justify dismissive ridicule.

Sincerely,

bellum paxque

User avatar
Bardo de Saldo
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 392
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:34 pm
Location: Newer Mexico

Post by Bardo de Saldo » Sat Dec 03, 2005 11:00 pm

There's an old saying that goes: He who smells it in his undies will find it.

Perhaps it's time for you to perform an introspective wedgie on yourself, Mr Prancing Pecs.

I don't think we need to worry (no offense meant, gay textkittens) about Lucus until he starts color-coordinating his Orbergs and placing them diagonally on the shelves.

User avatar
Kopio
Global Moderator
Posts: 789
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Boise, ID
Contact:

Post by Kopio » Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:03 am

whiteoctave wrote:that the founders of your country were 'extraordinary Classicists' must account for their singular absence in the annals of Classical scholarship.~D
I gotta admit....this comment send me reeling with laughter. I am sure my wife thinks I am insane, sitting in front of my computer chuckling so hard.

You know when you're watching that stupid kid down the street do something really dumb, like try to balance on a handrail with a skateboard, and your watching him, just know he's gonna get it, and sure enough....he slips and lands with a major nut-cracker....and you go oooooooooohhhhhhh!

That was the sound I made when I read the aforementioned comment!

Thank you dear whiteoctave for insulting my fellow countrymen in such a way that I thank you for it :)

BTW, I like spelling colour with a u just to tick off my english profs :twisted:

Oh....and I must say, although we might not be so well known for our classics profs....I'd stack up our Koine guys against most any in the world.

Señor Boethius
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 5:06 am
Location: Mexico

Post by Señor Boethius » Sun Dec 04, 2005 7:27 am

The founding fathers of the USA did have a classical education; i.e., they knew their Latin and Greek. They were not scholars; that was not the point. And we must thank the gods that Jefferson and Adams did not spend their time worrying so much about the etymology of some 12th century word; instead, they set out to make and form a country.
The founding fathers of the USA ought to be a source of motivation and inspiration for us all in what we and our children can accomplish with a proper classical education.

[/list]

User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2019
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Contact:

Post by Lucus Eques » Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:18 pm

Well put, Nostos. I like the subjunctive joke!

David o militiae domique, extremely well written and presented. Macte.

lol, Bardo! Yeah, I'm not quite at that stage yet ...

Well said, Kopio. lol

Hola, Señor Boethius! Your remarks speak the truth, and I think they are very generous considering that you are not from the United States; thank you kindly. I must admit without much honor that I know very little about your country's history, except when it intersected directly with mine.
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS

User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Post by Episcopus » Sun Dec 04, 2005 8:29 pm

...
Last edited by Episcopus on Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
nostos
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 12:30 am
Location: Montréal, QC

Post by nostos » Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:19 pm

Episcopus wrote:for I am a Stoic this means that I live with reason not gay passion
There is no real reason without passion. And you, amice, are one of the most passionate people to write on these boards; I mean that as a compliment: whenever you write, you keep these boards alive with passion (even gay passion as the term was initially defined).

As to whiteoctave's comment on the founders of the US, as el Señor Boethius pointed out, it is quite illogical: one (implying 'all') does not have to be in the annals of classical scholarship in order to be a competent classicist, among other things.
phpbb

User avatar
edonnelly
Administrator
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
Location: Music City, USA
Contact:

Post by edonnelly » Sun Dec 04, 2005 10:43 pm

nostos wrote:one (implying 'all') does not have to be in the annals of classical scholarship in order to be a competent classicist
Indeed. These self-proclaimed "experts" admire themselves in their inner circles, idly watching the interest in the classics deteriorate over the past several centuries. Meanwhile, someone like Hans comes around with some fresh ideas that help bring latin to thousands and is ridiculed. How ironic.
The lists:
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library

User avatar
Bardo de Saldo
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 392
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:34 pm
Location: Newer Mexico

Post by Bardo de Saldo » Sun Dec 04, 2005 11:58 pm

"you, Bardo, who formulate 'prancing pecs' call me gay?"

Amicus certus in re incerta cernitur.

". . . my 1/fiery Swiss girlfriend can elaborate fully on my flaming heterosexuality . . ."

Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifesta.

". . . I've only truly corresponded with my undies twice."

That should get you into the Annals of Stoicism all right.

"I love to read Seneca's letters to his dear Lucilius for I am a Stoic this means that I live with reason not gay passion as Lucus Eques does erga .D.r. Hans Ørberg."

Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt.

User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Post by Episcopus » Mon Dec 05, 2005 12:31 am

...
Last edited by Episcopus on Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
classicalclarinet
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 400
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:27 am
Location: Anc, AK, USA

Post by classicalclarinet » Tue Dec 06, 2005 7:29 am

Lucus Eques wrote:By the way, Epís, calling someone "gay" as an insult fell out of fashion in America five years ago. :-P
Mein Gott, your circles are fairly rarefied.

bellum paxque
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 718
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 2:29 pm
Location: nanun Hanguge issoyo (in Korea sum)
Contact:

Post by bellum paxque » Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:10 am

Lucus Eques wrote:
By the way, Epís, calling someone "gay" as an insult fell out of fashion in America five years ago.



Mein Gott, your circles are fairly rarefied.
"Gay" is certainly less popular than the exquisite dagger thrust of "fag," sometimes restored, with astonishing effort, to its pristine elegance, scilicet, "fagot."

-bpq

annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by annis » Tue Dec 06, 2005 1:26 pm

Great. Now I hear bassoons in my brains.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by annis » Tue Dec 06, 2005 1:40 pm

edonnelly wrote:Indeed. These self-proclaimed "experts" admire themselves in their inner circles,
They're not bloody self-proclaimed experts, they are experts!
idly watching the interest in the classics deteriorate over the past several centuries. Meanwhile, someone like Hans comes around with some fresh ideas that help bring latin to thousands and is ridiculed. How ironic.
Just let them vent. Every day my own studies rely on the work of people who occupy themselves with obscure points of scholarship. All of us benefit from their work. As Samuel Johnson said, "no man forgets his original trade: the rights of nations and of kings sink into questions of grammar, if grammarians discuss them." Arguing hotly about small matters is their job. If some want to grouch about teaching methods, listen politely, then go make up your mind later. I'm sure Hans is a big boy, and can handle it.

Every classics scholar I have ever encountered has been enthusiastic about the field, and most have been more than willing to spend time with me when I have obscure questions, especially about their areas of study. Don't blame them because most people want to study business or law. It's not the classicists shutting down classics departments, but administrators trying to cope with a budget. They're not just watching the classics deteriorate. Every #@*#@*#@* classics book I own published in the last 200 years has some introduction bewailing the decline of classical studies (various reasons given). Every few months the classics mailing list gets a call to action email to help save some classics department from the chopping block.

The world has decided the classics are worthless, not classicists. We have common cause with them. I see no reason for this cod-egalitarian hostility.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

User avatar
edonnelly
Administrator
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
Location: Music City, USA
Contact:

Post by edonnelly » Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:02 pm

annis wrote:The world has decided the classics are worthless, not classicists.
Perhaps, but could one not also argue that the classicists have failed to convince the world that the classics are not worthless?
The lists:
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library

annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by annis » Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:32 pm

edonnelly wrote:Perhaps, but could one not also argue that the classicists have failed to convince the world that the classics are not worthless?
We are to hold contemporary classicists responsible for not changing cultural trends that started generations before they were born?! No.

The nature of education has changed. Even the basic understanding of why an education is important has changed radically since our imagined Golden Age of Classical Studies. Cicero just doesn't fit into curriculum ever more focused on getting a job (with time for sports, of course).
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

User avatar
edonnelly
Administrator
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
Location: Music City, USA
Contact:

Post by edonnelly » Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:32 pm

annis wrote: We are to hold contemporary classicists responsible for not changing cultural trends that started generations before they were born?! No.
Who said contemporary? The reference was to the "annals of classical scholarship" and I specifically referenced the past centuries.
annis wrote:They're not bloody self-proclaimed experts, they are experts!
They are experts in studying the classics, but that does not mean they are experts in teaching them. The two tasks are quite different. Doing one well does not necessarily make one an expert in the other.

My point was that I found it ironic that here at a site dedicated to learning latin it is suggested that these "expert" classicists (who, I would argue, bear a significant responsibility for the declining interests in the classics) are to be praised while someone trying to come up with modern and (apparently, from the testimonials here) effective teaching program is scorned.
The lists:
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library

User avatar
screamadelica
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 1:50 pm

Post by screamadelica » Tue Dec 06, 2005 4:37 pm

annis wrote:The nature of education has changed. Even the basic understanding of why an education is important has changed radically since our imagined Golden Age of Classical Studies. Cicero just doesn't fit into curriculum ever more focused on getting a job (with time for sports, of course).
Exactly. I think the Cold War killed the classics more than anything, when focus shifted to the sciences, mathematics, and engineering, and a little later to computers (all backed by billions of government dollars in grants) and left grammar and the classics behind. (There's also the split between past and present that a major war can do to you: I imagine a 1946 man no longer felt himself part of the world that existed in 1938. See the Modernists for an earlier example) I have no evidence at all to support this except that science and technology really took off after World War II and that traditional grammar and the classics were in decline at the same time. The shoe just seems to fit: promote the modern, real-world subjects over the purely cerebral ones from a bygone era. Do you know if there's any substance to this, or am I just making loose connections seem closer than they are?

In any event, Pharr's Homeric Greek, an old-style textbook, came out in 1921 or so, while my college ran an advertisement declaring that they still required students to take two years of a classical language in early 1968. So that's an incredible degeneration in just 47 years. I'd be cautious about anything from the late '60s because everything got shook up then, but if the ad is to be believed, a traditional curriculum was obviously a rare sight by 1967.

annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by annis » Tue Dec 06, 2005 5:28 pm

edonnelly wrote:Who said contemporary? The reference was to the "annals of classical scholarship" and I specifically referenced the past centuries.
So you did. I was proccupied with those currently ridiculing a teaching methodology.
My point was that I found it ironic that here at a site dedicated to learning latin it is suggested that these "expert" classicists (who, I would argue, bear a significant responsibility for the declining interests in the classics)
Oy. I'm lifting this out to a new thread, "Saving the Classics from Classicists."
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

Post Reply