I am also slowed down mainly by vocab, but most texts I can get the gist without looking up vocab (particularly Homer, since I reckon I can recognize about 5,000 words from Homeric vocabulary in context on sight, and the Homeric corpus only has a vocabulary of roughly 10,000 words). As I read more widely in other eras, I expect that the ‘gist’ I get from cold-reads will become more detailed and lucid.
It’s vocab for me as well. I still work with graded readers…taking a paragraph, page, or chapter at a time, depending on how much new vocabulary is containted within. I always write the new vocabulary in the margins or at the top of the page but never with the English definitions, so as to encourage myself to memorize the word. Once I’ve got the section mastered, I move on, but do come back at some point and reread the section to try to keep myself from forgetting any vocabularly that I’ve learned that isn’t subsequently reinforced.
Zipf’s Law very roughly suggests that in any natural text we read, approximately 50% of the vocabularly contained therein will be repeated at least once. This also means that approximately 50% of the vocabularly is unique within that work. Since it’s unique, it’s not repeated, and consequently not reinforced within that particular text. Readers of Latin and Greek, I imagine, have the odds against them, as the corpus we have to draw from is specialized and fairly unnatural (in the sense that others, not us, have determined which of the ancient works would survive and which would not).
Chris
I’m new to Greek and Latin, but I have spent a fair amount of time studying literature and philosophy. Is it possible to read through all the works of all the great ancient philosophers and poets in English in one year? Surely. What would you get out of it? Next to nothing.
This is no slight to your ability to assimilate languages. The value of great literature goes much deeper than anything you can pick up on a quick pass. I’m a fairly serious student of English literature, but it would be pointless for me to try to cram all the greatest novels into a short space of time… not to mention the poetry. I’d rather someone never read a line of Shakespeare than try to read all his works without stopping to reflect on each one. Frankly, I think too much haste ruins the whole point of reading literature in the first place. Why speed read “Moby-Dic k” when all you’ll remember is that it was about a white whale? In other words, even reading in one’s native tounge requires one to take time and read critically.
If you are trying to reach fluency I suggest that you follow the advice others have given: set aside a specified amont of time each day in which to read. Read as much as you can in that period of time, and keep coming back to it day after day.
As do I. In fact, I prefer them to the Loeb and similar editions, primarily for their (potentially) informative notes. Vocabulary is less of a difficulty for me now, but I’m always in need of background information. I’ve even come to prefer certain editors (Sedgwick rules!).
I’m coming to the end of Dunmore’s Selections From Ovid, and I’m now reading large chunks with no vocabulary or other grammatical aid. The other day I read Rimbaud’s Jugurtha, again without benefit of included vocab. I think I looked up two words, the rest I could read at sight. I also keep a small book of annotated prose and poetry selections with me at all times, you never know when the opportunity for practice might arise. 