What's the point?

[Dominus]

Woo, I'm one of the last few teens who write in cursive out there, plus I teach myself Latin, history, and many other archaic languages and historical entities and I'm said to be one of the most academically gifted 16 year olds in the area.

You see, Latin is useful. I can't say why, and I won't, I'm just going to say it is very good for you. Improve your mental health, your memory, your English, most things somehow will be improved in some way, shape or form. You have to eat healthy right to keep physically in good form, well you have to do just as much to keep mentally in good form. Not just with Latin, but French, Italian, Japanese, Celtic, algebra, navigation, art, design, literature, chemistry, philophosy, religion, et cetera... These things may never be practical for certain people, but we still do them, because either we enjoy it, the imagery of it, the outcomes of it, the benefits of it, et cetera.... And we do Latin here because Latin is great for us, it what works for us, the imagery of the glory of Rome, 2500 years of usage in the western world, and because of this modern lack of theoretical practicality (the belief that Latin or anything traditional theoretical or without practise is useless), it is dying, and we want to keep a 2500 year old tradition, and reminder of the greatness mankind was able to achieve going.

[procrastinator]

Do you readers out there think that Latin is a good language in which to write down our culture? Modern languages are subject to change, the vocabulary and grammar will change, so a few hundred years from now perhaps only scholars versed in the "old English" of today will be able to read the literature of our time (and "English" as we know it may not survive in the future). However given that Latin's grammar and vocabulary are fixed (although neologisms need to be added to describe modern things that didn't exist in Roman times) Latin scholars in the future will always be able to read and clearly understand what life was like in our times.

[Baker]

Woo, I'm one of the last few teens who write in cursive out there, plus I teach myself Latin, history, and many other archaic languages and historical entities and I'm said to be one of the most academically gifted 16 year olds in the area.

You see, Latin is useful. I can't say why, and I won't, I'm just going to say it is very good for you. Improve your mental health, your memory, your English, most things somehow will be improved in some way, shape or form. You have to eat healthy right to keep physically in good form, well you have to do just as much to keep mentally in good form. Not just with Latin, but French, Italian, Japanese, Celtic, algebra, navigation, art, design, literature, chemistry, philophosy, religion, et cetera... These things may never be practical for certain people, but we still do them, because either we enjoy it, the imagery of it, the outcomes of it, the benefits of it, et cetera.... And we do Latin here because Latin is great for us, it what works for us, the imagery of the glory of Rome, 2500 years of usage in the western world, and because of this modern lack of theoretical practicality (the belief that Latin or anything traditional theoretical or without practise is useless), it is dying, and we want to keep a 2500 year old tradition, and reminder of the greatness mankind was able to achieve going.

Your argument that Latin will improve English is defeated by your own syntax.

Eliot

[Sceptra Tenens]

Your argument that Latin will improve English is defeated by your own syntax.

I'm willing to assert that it has at least helped me with mine.

...

Or perhaps it has just my English more Latinate made.

[paulusnb]

Your argument that Latin will improve English is defeated by your own syntax.

Eliot

Well, there goes my argument about Latin improving politeness.

[paulusnb]

Do you readers out there think that Latin is a good language in which to write down our culture? Modern languages are subject to change,

It is a fool's game to predict the future, but I think English's place in history is firmly established. It will become one of THE dead languages to know. Granted, the dust has not settled yet, but English has had a pretty dominant century. Shakespeare alone guarantees English's popularity for future generations. English is learned and spoken everywhere.

I am not looking for an argument or trying to be a cheerleader for the English language. I am giving my opinion of English dominance. I think it has surpassed anything Latin ever did. We have not surpassed latin in terms of length of influence, however. But in terms of the grip of influence, it is pretty solid. Now, the ancient world did not have many alternatives. So, what happens when the East rises or American influence wanes? I do not know. I think English is safe. But who knows. Maybe something better is coming.

[Scribo]

Do you readers out there think that Latin is a good language in which to write down our culture? Modern languages are subject to change,

It is a fool's game to predict the future, but I think English's place in history is firmly established. It will become one of THE dead languages to know. Granted, the dust has not settled yet, but English has had a pretty dominant century. Shakespeare alone guarantees English's popularity for future generations. English is learned and spoken everywhere.

I am not looking for an argument or trying to be a cheerleader for the English language. I am giving my opinion of English dominance. I think it has surpassed anything Latin ever did. We have not surpassed latin in terms of length of influence, however. But in terms of the grip of influence, it is pretty solid. Now, the ancient world did not have many alternatives. So, what happens when the East rises or American influence wanes? I do not know. I think English is safe. But who knows. Maybe something better is coming.

Well I think given the entrenchment of English in India for example I think over all its safe.

I think playing the "Latin makes you smart/moral/humanist/western civ!!oneone!!!" cards in order to defend the teaching of Latin is a bad idea, not least because you'll get Classicists like me slapping you down on all those accounts.

Latin ought to be learnt....because it is a worthwhile thing. A world that cannot see that...well I think that world definitely needs more Latin scholars. I don't even like Roman literature, in fact I vehemently detest most of it, but I can still see its worth.

[paulusnb]

I think playing the "Latin makes you smart/moral/humanist/western civ!!oneone!!!" cards in order to defend the teaching of Latin is a bad idea, not least because you'll get Classicists like me slapping you down on all those accounts.

Well, classicists like me disagree. Plus, a true education is a moral one. If education has nothing to do with happiness or virtue or morality, then what is it good for?

[adrianus]

Plus, a true education is a moral one. If education has nothing to do with happiness or virtue or morality, then what is it good for?

This is an example of an argument begging the question, I think, paulusnb. The adjective "true" introduces a skewed definition.
Petitionis principii exemplum tuum argumentum, paulusb, ut opinor. Iterùm, usus veri adjectivi definitionem vocabuli depravat.

[MatthaeusLatinus]

How is it skewed? Can't people accept anything as truth anymore? Does everything have to be relative and argued over?

[adrianus]

Is it not good to point out perceived weaknesses in an argument, MatthaeusLatinus? If you can listen to criticism and it is valid, will you not be able to argue better as a consequence? That's not relativism.
Nonnè bonum est, MatthaeeLatine, defectus argumenti conspicatos demonstrari? Nonnè meliùs futuro arguet qui emendationes validas accipiet? Non relativisticum sic censere.

[Baker]

Is it not good to point out perceived weaknesses in an argument, MatthaeusLatinus? If you can listen to criticism and it is valid, will you not be able to argue better as a consequence? That's not relativism.
Nonnè bonum est, MatthaeeLatine, defectus argumenti conspicatos demonstrari? Nonnè meliùs futuro arguet qui emendationes validas accipiet? Non relativisticum sic censere.

It is relativistic if you only look at arguments in terms of validity and not in terms of truth. Would your statement work if you replaced "valid" with "true"?

I think Paul's point is a good one because he is implying that there is a good for humans. Only if we admit such a thing can the word "education" mean anything. If there isn't a good way to live, how can we educate at all. Education implies leaving a state of ignorance behind and going toward some state that is better.

[adrianus]

Would your statement work if you replaced "valid" with "true"?

Yes, although the English would be less tight (poorer, even).
Ità, at minùs elegans sit modus loquendi.

[MatthaeusLatinus]

Is it not good to point out perceived weaknesses in an argument, MatthaeusLatinus? If you can listen to criticism and it is valid, will you not be able to argue better as a consequence? That's not relativism.
Nonnè bonum est, MatthaeeLatine, defectus argumenti conspicatos demonstrari? Nonnè meliùs futuro arguet qui emendationes validas accipiet? Non relativisticum sic censere.

da veniam, potesne dare exemplum propositi tui?

[adrianus]

Jam dedi. Fortassè non validum esse credis quod scripsi.

[paulusnb]

As far as begging the question, I was stating my thesis, not my argument. I was simply offering a counterpoint to the following

I think playing the "Latin makes you smart/moral/humanist/western civ!!oneone!!!" cards in order to defend the teaching of Latin is a bad idea, not least because you'll get Classicists like me slapping you down on all those accounts.

I am a classicist, and I buy into the moral education, though not the idea that it makes one a good little boy. But, to play my card...... The study of the humanities, and Latin has traditionally been at its center, is centered on the questions of goodness and virtue. Socrates is the father of this field. Socrates brought philosophy out of the clouds and into the cities. We all know where to go to learn the art of computer programming.. We all know where to go to make our bodies better. But what about our souls? Where do we go to learn the art of the soul? Can a man be happy without this art? Maybe in some pre-philosophic kind of bliss, but Pandora's box is opened. Is their an education besides this one that is true? Or best?

[MatthaeusLatinus]

Magis tibi assentiri non possum. Recte dicis.

[metrodorus]

One compelling reason to learn Latin, is contained in this graphic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Incun ... nguage.png

There is a lot of material written in Latin. Most has not, and most never will be translated. Many of these books have not even been read at all for over 200 years. The work of cataloging the Latin language literature of Europe is still in progress - we don't definitively know how many titles there are.
There are many projects dealing with this extensive literature ; here is a selection
http://www.ucc.ie/acad/CNLS/index.html
http://www.h-net.org/~rhetor/internet/nordic.html
http://www.philological.bham.ac.uk/

[rapotensis]

Woo, I'm one of the last few teens who write in cursive out there, plus I teach myself Latin, history, and many other archaic languages and historical entities and I'm said to be one of the most academically gifted 16 year olds in the area.

You see, Latin is useful. I can't say why, and I won't, I'm just going to say it is very good for you. Improve your mental health, your memory, your English, most things somehow will be improved in some way, shape or form. You have to eat healthy right to keep physically in good form, well you have to do just as much to keep mentally in good form. Not just with Latin, but French, Italian, Japanese, Celtic, algebra, navigation, art, design, literature, chemistry, philophosy, religion, et cetera... These things may never be practical for certain people, but we still do them, because either we enjoy it, the imagery of it, the outcomes of it, the benefits of it, et cetera.... And we do Latin here because Latin is great for us, it what works for us, the imagery of the glory of Rome, 2500 years of usage in the western world, and because of this modern lack of theoretical practicality (the belief that Latin or anything traditional theoretical or without practise is useless), it is dying, and we want to keep a 2500 year old tradition, and reminder of the greatness mankind was able to achieve going.

Your argument that Latin will improve English is defeated by your own syntax.

Eliot

It doesn't. His/her English might have been a lot worse without the benefit of Latin. We can conclude justly, that the study of Latin has not yet led to the perfection of syntax for that individual.