Greek reader reviews

Greek Learning Greek
1

Some readers that I have used or come across. For the readers that I really like, I’ve either purchased a copy, or had one bound at lulu.com (only a few dollars), rather than reading them online.

Greek Boy At Home by W.H.D. Rouse
Text: https://archive.org/details/greekboyathomest01rousuoft
Vocabulary: http://www.johnpiazza.net/greek_boy_vocab

The Greek is good and idiomatic. Parodies from very diverse sources (the Onomasticon, Philogelos, and many more common sources). The story is the best told of anything here, partly because Rouse is communicating his philosophy about learning and childhood as much as teaching the language. [See his essay “Body, Soul, and Spirit” for a direct formulation.] The stories are graduated, but it remains extremely hard to use for self-study. Lightly Atticized, but like Farnell, he does not shield the reader too much from non-Attic vocabulary. Probably my favorite reader.

A Greek Reader by W. H. D. Rouse
https://archive.org/details/greekreader00rousuoft

Lightly Atticized selections from the Greek classics. These are fun, but there is no help in the way of notes or vocabulary, making it a challenge for self-study.

Stories and Legends by F. H. Colson
https://archive.org/details/storiesandlegen00colsgoog

Highly Atticized stories and parodies, similar to Morice, but the content and spirit is Greek. Very easy to read with the included notes and vocabulary. Highly recommended.

A First Greek Reader by Charles M. Moss
https://archive.org/details/afirstgreekread00mossgoog

I haven’t read this one yet. I would love to hear other people’s reviews.

Tales from Herodotus with Attic dialectical forms by G. S. Farnell
https://archive.org/details/talesfromherodot00herorich

Very well done. He doesn’t try to change Herodotus too much. Presents notes and vocabulary just like Morice or Colson, making this very readable. And Herodotus makes it fun.

Thrasymachus by C. W. E. Peckett
http://www.amazon.com/Thrasymachus-Greek-Through-Reading-Language/dp/0862921392/

Extremely well done. Peckett was a student of Rouse, and Thrasymachus is a combination of graduated reader together with a Greek course. The stories are not as good as Rouse, but are much more graduated. Less re-reading value there, but the presentation of accidence and syntax is extremely well done. In fact, the appendix is probably my favorite discussion of Greek syntax, nicely illustrated with example sentences (what a concept!). If I could add anything to this great text, it would be to mark vowel length, especially in the grammar tables.

Stories in Attic Greek by F.D. Morice
https://archive.org/details/storiesinatticg00unkngoog

Wonderful set of Attic stories across a number of subjects. All interesting, but more Victorian in spirit than Greek. Very useful for expanding your vocabulary.

Giving a reasonable instead of one's best effort at reading unadapted Greek?
Useful Threads
2

Thanks for this list. I just wish the format of these readers was like this Latin reader: https://archive.org/details/juniorlatinreade00sanfrich with the notes and vocabulary at the bottom of the page, I think that is the best format for self-learners.

I agree with you completely about Thrasymachus. I’m using it to improve my Attic because I almost exclusively read Koine. I’m at chapter 20 right now and I love it. The syntax section at the back is great also, like you said. It’s short and to the point and uses simple examples with translations right below them. It’s the best overview of the Greek constructions I’ve seen. The one fault with the syntax section is the lack of depth on case usage, but I’m pretty comfortable with Latin and know how the Latin cases map onto the Greek cases so I don’t need that section.

3

I didn’t get on at all with this at all. The early bits were tedious to me. He describes a visit to the Acropolis that seemed to me as inspiring as an architects report. Athenaze does a much better job of describing such a visit.

Later on it does get a little less tedious but a lot harder - just as hard as real Greek for me which rather spoils the point of reading a reader rather than the real thing.

Just started on this. My first impression is that they are well told simple and original stories.

The notes are really excellent - the lack of notes is what makes many other readers far less useful.

Way, way better than Rouse IMO. I especially like the way each story focuses an some point of syntax or accidence so that aspect of Greek is reinfoeced.

The stories are a bit Victorian but to me that is a plus - it gets a bit tedious reading another version of a legend that you have read before. Whether the Greek is fully in the spirit of the language I don’t feel qualified to comment. I too like the fact that the vocabulary is not very restricted though that could be seen as a negative. The vocabulary is not as extensive as that of a typical Ancient Greek writer so it doesn’t slow you down that much and, as you say, is one of the points of reading a reader.

And thanks for posting such a full list - I knew of most of them but not all.

4

Completely agree. Facing/bottom page format is for me a game changer on these types of resources.

Agreed. Rouse is too hard. His paraphrase of the Persians, which comes early in the book, is all in indirect discourse! What makes Rouse special of course is his monolingual glosses.

Morice’s syntax is very simple but his vocabulary is unnecessarily rare. Intermediate students will improve their vocab this way, but I think it is better to use more common words for beginners.

I will stand by my contention that the Phillpotts simplified Anabasis is the best reader for beginners. Bedwere’s audio is outstanding.

καλον εστι. εν τουτωι ευδοκησε Μαρκος. γελοιον εστιν ωστε γελαν με. ουτε λιαν ευκοπον ουτε λιαν δυσκολον εστιν. τα σχολια ουκ εγνων, μονον τους μυθους.

5

He describes a visit to the Acropolis that seemed to me as inspiring as an architects report.



φαίνεται καὶ ἐνθένδε ἡ πόλις ἡ τῶν Ἀθηναίων· λέγω δὲ τὴν ἀκρόπολιν· ἡ γὰρ ἀκρόπολις πέτρα ἐστὶν ἐν μέσῃ τῇ πόλει, καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς ἀκροπόλεως ναοί εἰσι πολλοί, τῆς τ’ Ἀθήνης καὶ τῶν ἄλλων θεῶν. ἦν μὲν τὸ πάλαι δῶμα βασιλικὸν ἐπὶ τῆς ἀκροπόλεως· νῦν δὲ δημοκρατίας οὔσης ἐπαύσατο μὲν βασιλικὸν ὃν τὸ δῶμα, οὐκέτι μὲν οὖν ἔστι δῶμα· ἀλλὰ ναοὶ ἔνεισιν ἀντὶ τούτου. ἔστι μὲν ναὸς τῆς Ἀθήνης μέγιστος καὶ κάλλιστος, ἔστι δὲ τῆς Νίκης, εἰσὶ δὲ καὶ ἄλλων θεῶν, ὧν τὰ ὀνόματα διηγήσομαι ὕστερον, ὅταν μάθῃς κάλλιον τὴν ἡμετέραν γλῶτταν. οὐ γὰρ ῥᾴδιον διηγεῖσθαι τῷ μὴ ἔχοντι ἐπιστήμην. περιέχει δὲ τὴν ἀκρόπολιν τείχη, ἅπερ μετὰ σπουδῆς ᾠκοδόμησαν εὐθὺς μετὰ τὰ Μηδικά· ἴδοις δ’ ἂν ἐν μέσοις τοῖς τείχεσιν καὶ ἐρείπια ἀρχαίων ναῶν καὶ στήλας τῶν ἀποθανόντων. ὕψος δ’ ἔχει τὰ τείχη πήχεις μάλιστα τριάκοντα.

I didn’t find it too bad. Of course, the next story is how those walls were built, and how Themistocles tricked the Spartans.

Agreed. Rouse is too hard. His paraphrase of the Persians, which comes early in the book, is all in indirect discourse!

That was one of my favorite parts! But Rouse’s reader is probably an efficient use of time only with an instructor who understands it. Maybe it would be worthwhile to add notes.

6

No it is just as dry as the first time I read it and, as well as that, it is quite hard

That does sound a bit less dry but I assume that it is an adaption from Plutarch’s Themistocles. I have two sets of notes to help me with Themistocles plus there is the translation to help me if I get stuck. With the Rouse version I am on my own.

I now see that the bit on the Acropolis is exactly what a teacher would say to his pupils if he was showing his pupils round the Acropolis, speaking Greek. That would be quite cool. On the page, not spoken, without the réalité of the Acropolis itself, it is just dead.

7

Not sure what you guys are talking about. I thought a reader was the real thing with vocabulary and syntax notes on same page, like Goffery Steadman http://geoffreysteadman.com.

There are simple sections of real authors which are still real greek. Seems kind of counter productive to read made up sentences. But I have never done it so cannot really evaluate the benefit.

I looked at a book breifly called Learning Greek with Plato, wasn’t really a reader, more of a text book. But it contains plenty of samples of simple material from Plato. I didn’t read all of it since it was Greek 101.

Learning Greek with Plato: A Beginner’s Course in Classical Greek (Bristol Phoenix Press - Classical Handbooks)

8

Well it is true that reader is also used also cover real Greek texts with a grammatical commentary. All those in the list, however, are either made up Greek or simplified from real Greek texts.

The advantage of reading easy texts is

  1. You can read a lot more and so through repetition will better learn the words and constructions you encounter.
  2. You can read them without having to look everything up so you can actually read them rather than decoding them.

These advantages, of course, assume that the reader is the right level of difficulty for you.

9

Stirling, you’re correct about the use of the term “reader” as pertains to Latin/Greek, but the way it’s being used here is in the sense of a “graded reader” which are popular with learning modern foreign languages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graded_reader

Not to be silly, but all sentences are made up. Of course it’s important to distinguish between Ancient Greek written by native speakers and any modern attempts at reproducing it, but if it’s “passable” and a modern classicist can’t discern any errors in syntax or idiom then I can’t see how it could be counter productive. The goal with texts like that is to let students get more comfortable with the grammar/syntax/vocab of Greek before jumping into unadapted Plato. Steadman’s readers are excellent, and we definitely need much more of this type of resource, but many of us think there is a real need for “graded readers” of Ancient Greek also, which necessitates some “fake” Greek. But that’s enough of me sidetracking the thread. :slight_smile:

10

Apart from the educational value of using readers -I don’t want to spark another one of those discussions-, what about the motivational side? I study Ancient Greek to read Ancient Greek authors, that means nothing is so motivating, even at an early stage of learning the language, as reading texts and sentences in real Greek, because it’s the very thing I’m doing it for. To be honest, I don’t like reading made up/ graded Greek. I understand it’s unavoidable to a certain extent certainly in the earliest stages of language acquisition, but to me it’s more like a necessary evil. I’m no schoolboy anymore and made up Greek just bores me. I couldn’t bring myself to go through an entire book of fake Greek, or even worse, several of them, as most of you seem to have done. For the same reason I have almost zero interest in things like Harry Potter translated in Greek. Why spend time on that when there’s Homer to be read (and reread) and Plato, Herodotus, etcetera? Just my thoughts of course.

11

One answer to that is children learning the languages. I’m teaching my 7 year old daughter Latin and will start Greek next year. The goal is to read the ancient authors, but for now she loves the simple stories in Lingua Latina. We’ve just finished chapter 33 and are moving on to reading the gospels in Latin. The “fake” Latin stories in LL that she enjoyed reading have gotten her to a level where she can read the Latin of the gospels pretty easily. There are quite a few people that want to teach their children Latin/Greek, and readers are a great bridge to the ancient authors.

12

Given that the aim for all of us is to read real Greek it is a big motivational boost to be reading the real thing. Set against that is how long and drawn out reading real Greek is at the intermediate level. It is most certainly disheartening to pick up a play by Sophocles and to realize that there is no immediate prospect of you getting through more than a small extract let alone read the whole play.
Reading Aristotle is for me so laborious that I forget the point he is trying to make before I get to the end of the sentence so lost am I in decoding the individual phrases.

Easier Greek allows you to actually allows you to enjoy the story without be being overwhelmed by the syntax and accidence. On the downside, it is harder to write a good story when you restrict yourself in how much of a language you use but good writers are able to do this.

This all assumes that the reader is on a subject that you would find interesting in any case. I do enjoy the Harry Potter films but can never quite justify the time to read them in English so the Greek edition seemed like a good excuse to indulge myself. As it happens, the Greek of the Greek Harry Potter is far just as difficult as Lucian (who the translator takes his model) so I will stick with Lucian. If you are someone who would never consider reading Potter in English then it would be demotivating reading it in Greek even were it an easy read.

There are pros and cons with easy made up Greek. People will differ in how important those pros and cons are so arguments aren’t going to change peoples minds. The case for easy Greek readers is worth putting as the people who are probably best able to write good made up Greek are like as not those who took to Greek so easily to not need them.

13

Well, that doesn’t work for me. I know next to nothing about Harry Potter, but I’m a big fan of Chekhov. However, the idea of reading him in Greek offers no attraction to me at all. Most of all I would like to be able to read him in Russian, but I’m not, so - faute de mieux- I turn to Dutch translations. For me there would be no surplus value in reading him in English, German, French, Italian or Greek.

Look, I’m not trying to convince anyone, just stating my perspective and perhaps my mild surprise that it doesn’t appear to be shared by quite a few people on this forum who have the same interest as me, namely reading real Greek. But that’s just fine of course.

14

If we are going to review these readers, then it’s absolutely appropriate to discuss whether they do us any good.

I think that the number one way that many people go wrong with Greek is to forget that they are learning a language. There are examples at all levels. If you are learning a language, the primary problem is “How do I consume ~1,000,000 sentences of that language and become fluent?”

One way to give up on fluency is to make the texts your goal instead of the language your goal. The reason being that there are too many ways to read the texts inefficiently (from a language learning perspective). It’s far too easy to start relying too much on commentaries and dictionaries out of a quest for the level of understanding of a text that can really only come out of fluency.

The real question to ask yourself isn’t “what Greek is best for me to read?”, it’s “am I reading 10 pages of Greek a day and listening to an hour of audio a day (that I comprehend decently)?”

Read lots of crap. It’s quantity not quality that matters for teaching your brain to think in Greek.

15

I almost entirely agree with that. The “almost” is because what we remember is what we find stimulating, Everyone remembers what they were doing when the twin towers were hit. (If you are really old you remember when JFK was assassinated :blush: ). That was because it was a dramatic event. Ten pages you find as tedious as watching paint dry is likely to go in one eye and out the other.

So if someone finds a reader simply boring it may well be that they will learn more reading a smaller quantity of something that you find stimulating.

But there is a reason that watching paint dry is proverbial for boredom - it takes a very long time for anything to happen. Sophocles is packed with drama but the speed I read him it, while it isn’t actually as bad as watching paint dry, it is almost that slow.

Quantity is the most important think but if it is a stimulating read that is big multiplier. So reading a lot of crap really needs to be fun crap, ie fun for you.

But there have been great writers, Hemingway for example, who wrote great literature using a very simple style. Hence it doesn’t follow that readers using simple language needs to be crap.

16

There is also A Patristic Greek Reader: http://www.amazon.com/Patristic-Greek-Reader-Rodney-Whitacre/dp/080104801X
All the lexical and grammar notes are at the bottom of the page, and at hte end of the book, there is a basic vocabulary for beginners.

17

@Vladamir – Here are more, inspired by Steadman: http://patristicreaders.com/ I haven’t used any of them, so I don’t know the quality.

Steadman I have used. He’s very good and appreciates feedback: http://geoffreysteadman.com/

18

It’s funny, Calvinist, but I don’t find your statement silly at all. To the extent that it reflects a certain approach to Ancient Greek that I happen to share, I see it as profound. Although I will never forgive you for resurrecting that thread, (“Sometimes dead is better.” --S. King) I am happy to see you back on the Forum.

Neither do I. Is it enough to say that the same people who don’t like made up Greek don’t like monolinugal resources or speaking Ancient Greek? Do the three go together? They tend, to, I think, but not always.

Look, if there is one thing that we know, it is that different people learn Greek in different ways, and different things motivate us. Motivation is huge in learning. Love Greek, and do as thou wilt.

I AM trying to convince people, but not here, not now. There are many people, Bart, who share your perspective. Michael Palmer wrote an on-line textbook in which all the examples and exercises are straight from the Greek NT. I actually think that more people than not would agree with you that fake Greek is a necessary evil.

That’s an interesting way to put it. I would say that the texts were my goal, but I realized at a certain point that I did not want to read (decode) the texts without learning the language, and so, yes, that became my goal.

A new pedagogical term Joel has here coined. In a sense Doukas is crap. Sophocles is not. Having them on facing pages works for me. I for one think we need more crap.

Daivid, have you tried to read Sophocles via Doukas’ paraphrase?

19

Sophocles has a reputation of being especially difficult and the odd sentence that I’ve sampled confirms this. Doukas, however, I imagine would be as hard as someone like, say, Plutarch for whom I can just about manage if I have the help of a good commentary. If I were to read Doukas it would be without the help of a commentary so for now I don’t intend to try him.
When I can read Plutarch without help then I will look at Doukas.

20

I’ll put in my two cents on this, since I’m of a generation taught almost completely on “fake” Greek and Latin at the elementary level.

The way I see it, there are two different approaches to teaching students through fake sentences and passages (for lack of a better adjective). The approach that Athenaze’s authors take for most of the first book is one that I found helpful. As simple and silly as the stories were, they made a lot of grammatical concepts come naturally to me (μέν…δέ, etc.) with which I otherwise may have had difficulty. When I moved on to actual Greek texts with commentaries, especially ones produced several decades ago, I noticed that the editor’s comments often attempted to explain concepts that Athenaze taught within the first few chapters.

The other approach is that of “adapting” original ancient Greek & Latin texts to make them easier for students. While I don’t think this is a terrible practice, I think it’s worse than simply creating new sentences from scratch. Wheelock’s Latin textbooks and readers might be the most notorious in this regard, though Athenaze relies on it heavily for the second volume. My problem with this is how the editors try to pass it off as being “as real as possible” when it simply isn’t. The Wheelock texts are most annoying with this since they put the name of the original author in parentheses next to each sentence. Even if they include an asterisk to show that it’s adapted, on some level they’re still trying to pass it off as the author’s material when it simply is not. Even writing in the parentheses something like “Based on Cicero, De amicitia 45” would be a more honest approach. Otherwise students are misled into thinking that the editor’s “adaptation” is a real representation of Latin prose when the actual text is miles apart.

I hope I didn’t sound too belligerent, but I just think it needs to be said.