Importance of speaking latin?

Latin Learning Latin
21

It’s clear that we have different views about this, which is OK. :slight_smile:

Where does one go, to speak Latin? To the Vatican? Should I sneak into the papal cafeteria and hang out with the Bishops while they eat their pasta?

Ooh! that was a low blow. It’s a good thing we Italians have such a good sense of humor about ourselves, otherwise I might have been offended by that remark.

Don’t forget that a great majority of those Bishops, much like the Pope himself, are not Italian, but from other nations. And yes, they will use Latin as a common tongue, I’m certain. They have to pass rigorous tests in order to reach such a high station, so there is no reason why they would not like to excercise those skills.

Don’t miss the point – the point is, you cannot just sit down and join these people. If the language is Chinese, Italian, Polish, Spanish, German, then you have thousands of opportunities to melt into a world where people speak that language. Not everyone will welcome you, but the size of these communities is so large that you are very likely to find a niche for yourself, if you work at it.

It really makes no sense to pretend that the opportunities to speak Latin are similar to the opportunities to learn a modern language. They are not. In the case of Latin, opportunities are much more limited.

Some people who study Latin have no intention of attempting to master it.

Well that’s a pretty defeatest attitude. Why start doing something only to be mediocre at it? Why learn a > lingua > if you’re never going to use your > lingua > for it? Why study a > loquella > if you can’t be > locutus > of it?

It’s like studying math: Is it OK to study algebra and geometry, and stop there? Should we insist that everyone go on to learn multivariate calculus, partial differential equations and celestial mechanics?

Some people want to master Latin, which is fine.

But some people studying Latin do not want to master it, they just want to study it for a few years, with the idea that it will help broaden their overall education, and specifically help with their English grammar. Some people take a decidedly different approach to learning Latin vs. learning modern foreign languages. I don’t think we should maintain that such folks are not really studying Latin. They are really studying Latin, even if they hardly speak it at all.

If you walk into a high school, and say, “Gosh, you’re studying algebra, but you don’t want to study partial differential equations?? Why start doing something only to be mediocre at it?”, that will encourage some people, but it will be a big turnoff for some other people. Algebra is worth learning on its own.

Some people want to read a little Latin but don’t want to speak it. There’s nothing wrong with this.

22

I actually have a lot of friends who signed up for Latin BECAUSE they didn’t have to speak it. :unamused:
..and I thought Lucus Eques was like 55 by adding up all the languages he knows and giving him 2 years to learn each.

23

No one can ‘master’ a language. For every one has different definition thereof.

It is better to be comfortable within oneself and collect the greatest benefits of the tongue even if you do not dive into the intricate less important details. What happens if I do not see the benefit of not memorizing lists of latin words? I do not master it. Yet I remain content for I can write my crazy tales. I have the best dictionary ever: Collins Latin Dictionary. No one else for me speaks it so what is the point, and the literature bores me, I don’t know any of the history and so often can not relate or understand the meaning of the texts. It is also better to know many languages fairly than to know 1 very well. It adds colour to thought and life especially if they are some different languages. I want to get at least 1 language of mid to southern Africa and one from East Asia.

Raya said that she wants to concentrate on Greek that she might think in it. It’s dead. There is no point. Sample all the triangular bishop hats before you become a Pope.

24

It really makes no sense to pretend that the opportunities to speak Latin are similar to the opportunities to learn a modern language. They are not. In the case of Latin, opportunities are much more limited.

Granted. That doesn’t mean one should pretend that there is not a community who speaks Latin (for there are many, as we have seen, courtesy of the last previous posts).

It’s like studying math: Is it OK to study algebra and geometry, and stop there? Should we insist that everyone go on to learn multivariate calculus, partial differential equations and celestial mechanics?

Your analogy is entirely specious; a proper comparison would be learning how to do equations, but never being able to express in words what the heck you’re doing. And you didn’t answer my questions; they weren’t rhetorical, if you can find an adequate answer to them:

Why learn a > lingua > if you’re never going to use your > lingua > for it? Why study a > loquella > if you can’t be > locutus > of it?



If you walk into a high school, and say, “Gosh, you’re studying algebra, but you don’t want to study partial differential equations?? Why start doing something only to be mediocre at it?”, that will encourage some people, but it will be a big turnoff for some other people. Algebra is worth learning on its own.

Equally specious. A more accurate notion would be that Algebra, Geometry, Differential Calculus, and Celestial Mechanics are all different languages. Let’s say basic Arthmetic is our native English. In primary school, we refine this basic mathematical knowledge and come to understand more of its underlying properties and uses, just as we refine our comprehension of English during the same years. Then we move on to Algebra, and start extrapolating our basic knowledge to forms more abstract, just as we take what we know of English and apply it to, say, Spanish. Then we can learn and understand very closely related realms, like Geometry, akin to French or Italian, applying what we’ve learned to something more challenging. Then perhaps we may move on to glorious Latin, or Ancient Greek : Calculus and Differential Calculus. And further still, we then may tackle Celestial Mechanics, the Sanskrit which awaits any so willing to achieve its divine beauty.

Learning part of Calc isn’t going to be as good as learning all of it. That is the ultimate point.

..and I thought Lucus Eques was like 55 by adding up all the languages he knows and giving him 2 years to learn each.

Hehe, no, but that’s sweet. I just discovered a little under a year ago that languages are what I’m good at. Good thing too; I almost became an astrophysicist. :wink: I would have been a pretty mediocre one too.

25

Haha, that’s what I and Episcopus were going to be. I wonder if there is a connection between astrophysics and linguistic aptitude?

26

Ooh! neat! Huh, maybe so … But astrophysicists are idiots anyway; we don’t wanna be associated with them. :wink:

27

And you didn’t answer my questions; they weren’t rhetorical, if you can find an adequate answer to them:

Why learn a > lingua > if you’re never going to use your > lingua > for it? Why study a > loquella > if you can’t be > locutus > of it?

I stand by my original comments. Some people may very well wish to learn to read a language without learning to speak it. You can say that you don’t approve of this, if you want, but there it is.

In the case of Latin, I understand very well why someone might want to pursue this strategy. It’s not the only learning strategy, but it may be worthwhile for some people.

If you walk into a high school, and say, “Gosh, you’re studying algebra, but you don’t want to study partial differential equations?? Why start doing something only to be mediocre at it?”, that will encourage some people, but it will be a big turnoff for some other people. Algebra is worth learning on its own.

Equally specious. A more accurate notion would be that Algebra, Geometry, Differential Calculus, and Celestial Mechanics are all different languages.

I’m not buying that. :slight_smile: This is not a specious analogy at all, it’s on target.

I think you need to spend some time as a teacher, and then you will understand why I have said these things. One of the important things that you learn is that students (or people) are all very different. Certain strategies work well for some students but don’t work at all for others. Partly this is because of different aptitudes, but it’s also because of different interests, different priorities, and other differences that are hard to describe. Not everybody wants to learn the same things, in the same way.

28

This is not a specious analogy at all, it’s on target.

It is indeed sophistic, and overly generalized. If your analogy is more properly aligned, you discover that each field of mathematics is like a different language. To say that all the branches of mathematics are equal to just one language (like Latin) is horribly inaccurate, and ultimately meaningless.

I think you need to spend some time as a teacher, and then you will understand why I have said these things. One of the important things that you learn is that students (or people) are all very different. Certain strategies work well for some students but don’t work at all for others. Partly this is because of different aptitudes, but it’s also because of different interests, different priorities, and other differences that are hard to describe. Not everybody wants to learn the same things, in the same way.

Though I am not (yet) by profession a teacher, I have taught before, in a range of subjects, in particular languages, especially Italian, German, Elvish, and also Latin, to many different people. I know well the differences that different people possess in their modes of learning.

But you’re suggesting that, if a part of a subject is just too hard for a student learn, or that a student doesn’t want to learn about that part of a certain subject, he shouldn’t have too. That is nonsense. By that logic, one could learn about triangles but forgo squares, study the planets but ignore the stars, learn to write in lowercase print but never in fluid cursive, study the circular system but not the respiratory system, learn to make love but abstain from foreplay. The essential meaning is lost when only part of the complete whole is obtained. The easy way out is not the answer. To invoke John F. Kennedy, one strives for his goals, his dreams “not because they are easy, but because they are hard.”

29

It’s indeed nonsense, and it is not what I said. :slight_smile:

This debate is no longer interesting. I think you are having a debate with a straw man, not with me. So, I will leave you to it. Go get him! :wink:

30

:slight_smile: No need to be insulting. Of course, I’m sure you realize I’ve been feeling the same frustation trying to communicate with you, and believe a fortiori that yours is the argument of the straw man.

31

Another interesting link:

http://www.asu.edu/educ/epsl/LPRU/newsarchive/Art1231.txt

While Latin has not been spoken casually for over a
thousand years and only its grammar and literature are
typically studied today, the sounds of Cicero and Virgil
are resurging among an increasingly wider audience, largely
because of schools like his.

“I don’t like certain methods, memorizing and jamming it,
treating the language like a dead frog, or something like
that,” Foster said. Instead, his students learn sight
reading, listening comprehension and Latin conversation.

Other schools using a similar approach include the
University of Louvain in Belgium, a high school in Campania,
Italy, and the University of Notre Dame and the University
of Kentucky in the United States.

Dirk Sacre, a professor and neo-Latin expert at the
University of Louvain, said spoken Latin is growing in
popularity, citing an increase in the number of high school
teachers signing up for courses.

Whoda thunkit.

32

A few resources I found:

http://artemis.austincollege.edu/acad/cml/jjohnson/ACL/PrintMaterials.html

Several interesting books on spoken Latin on this page: http://www.aclclassics.org/tmrc/catalog.asp?category=19&c=

  • Quomodo Dicitur?
    Conversational Latin for Oral Proficiency, by John Traupman
    Latin in Motion: A Handbook for Teachers

That book by Traupman looks pretty cool. It’s the first time I personally ever noticed it, although it’s been mentioned on textkit many times before.

Excerpts from reviews:

For all those of you tired of endlessly having to translate sentences like “famous consuls, don’t use all your wealth to fill the forum with statues of impious men” – and of not ever learning how to say “yes” and “no” [!!] – this book is it. it shows how latin would actually have been spoken [or at least as best as the author can reconstruct].

there are sections on every conceivable aspect of daily life: greetings, basic colloquial expressions, food, clothing, animals, the weather, the calendar, family, emotions, etc. etc. there also a number of useful sections that i would have loved to have seen in my latin textbooks – general vocabulary [“get”, “put”, “must”, etc.], numbers, colors, proverbs,

Here’s one complaint. But this comment makes me more interested in this book, not less.

I have one major complaint about this book–why are there modern words in an ancient language?! Yes, that’s right–the author of this book apparently made up words for modern day items or something because there are words for toaster, television, and bus, plus a whole list of “computer terms”.

There’s also an older book by Carl Meissner called “Latin Phrasebook”. Don’t know much about this book.

33

Have you looked at his page http://www.geocities.com/frcoulter/latin.html?

I started to go through it but didn’t finish. I listened to his clips and I have to admit that I was underwhelmed. Is it me or does he sound very stilted?

  • Tim
34

As far as I know, Meissner is not a conversational phrase book. I’ve got an old Dutch copy, from 1887. It’s provides you with more ways of translating sentences like “famous consuls, don’t use all your wealth to fill the forum with statues of impious men” :slight_smile:.
It has topics like: nature, space and time, the human body, commerce, the human mind, etc. It does do greetings, but, as my copy is very old, not in a colloquial manner. I don’t know how modern English versions compare to my old Dutch one, though.

Ingrid

35

The Meissner was translated by Christ’s scholar H.W.Auden in the late nineteenth and it retains the layout. Auden also produced a Greek phrase book on the same principles, but it is rather smaller. It does have the advantage, however, of having an appendix of Greek proverbs. For perhaps the most interesting list of Greek and Latin proverbs, see perhaps the appendix to Christ’s scholar Rouse’s Stories in Latin or a chapter in Whitfield’s Classicl Handbook for Sixth Forms.
Both the phrase books are very much advised for prose compers,

~D