I am curious to know how others here have gained fluency in Latin. I know “fluency” is an ambiguous word, so let’s take it broadly to mean reading Latin at a comfortable level. By this I mean, the ability to open a book in Latin and read it smoothly, referring to a dictionary once or twice a page.
My path: I have gone through Wheelock once already, and am going back over it again with a slower and more determined pace. I have flashcards for grammar, I review vocabulary every day, I practice translating short sentences and am planning on going through the selections at the end of the textbook (and probably the Wheelock Reader after that).
Any feedback on what any of you have done to gain fluency would be much appreciated!
Hi Ryan, I’d suggest you try this experiment: open any page of a text which you think should be within your range. Start reading, and when you stall, immediately stop and figure out the exact reason you stalled: was is a problem with your knowledge of vocabulary? Morphology? Syntax? Subject-matter? etc. Then go on and do the same thing for the rest of the page. If any patterns emerge, you know what to work on next (in addition to all your other work, not as a replacement for it).
I think “fluency” (whatever that is) is an over-rated idea. Especially if it really means reading quickly and superficially.
I mostly read latin poetry and I have to work hard at understanding why the words are arranged the way they are what they might “mean” and then think about what the poet is really trying to say. Thats a lot of work. Some poets are obviously easier to read than others but because we have perhaps already read them several times before.
I remember struggling as an undergraduate with Tacitus. He makes it difficult to read because he wants you to think. He doesnt want you to read fluently with ease. He has a grim story to tell and he wants you to work at it, to suffer with him. This isn’t Caesar its more important. Its not that its more literary. Caesar’s apparent plainness is a pose, its a way of making contested facts seem like the truth. Tacitus is deeply affected by the idea of “Libertas” he wants you to care for it too. Fluency at a facile level is not something to be envied especially if it comes at the expense of “engagement” and “understanding”.
The few here who have any real fluency and understand the texts they write about have been studying them their whole lives. At your stage of Latin if you have read a textbook once then rather than thinking about “fluency” you should simply be thinking about what might be a good text to read next. Read Caesar if you think it would interest you. I have recently become impressed by LPSI Familia Romana perhaps that would be better than re-reading Wheelock.
Per cb’s suggestion, I will take that to heart. Sadly, it is most often “what the *$%# is this verb form?!” than anything else. But, once I feel ready to tackle a real text, I’ll keep your idea in mind.
Per seneca2008’s comments, it is grounding to hear that even a great classicist like Mary Beard doesn’t have the level of fluency I assumed she would have. The article was quite useful, thank you. I found her comment insightful about how people become experts in a few authors, not the whole canon. The example she gave makes a lot of sense too. I mean, learning English and learning Shakespeare are universes apart. It is like learning a different version of English altogether.
While I appreciate the effort to ground my expectations, I still find myself without a solid enough foundation to jump into a full text. I will continue with Wheelock, drilling myself on paradigms and vocabulary; but once I finish I think I will go a little easier on myself with my first translations (i.e. let myself peek at other translations as I go). To Mary Beard’s point, there is something satisfying about confidence coming from having re-read a text many times over.
Thanks again.
If I could ask of seneca2008, what kind of Latin poetry are you interested in? Do you have a feel for the Latin meter? That is on my “eventually” list when it comes time to translate Virgil.
Fluency on a facile level has to come before fluency on a deeper level. Anyone who has not made it to that facile level is only fooling themselves about their level of engagement and understanding (often with cribs and lots of mechanical work).
Comprehensible input is a thing, and can really make a difference. I have had experience with students who have prepared for their Ph.D. Latin exam using the Vulgate, and found anything outside the Vulgate quite difficult (and came to me for extra help). However, once Wheelock or the equivalent is completed, start with some easy Latin designed to work out your grammar and syntax acquisition – Ritchie’s Fabulae Faciles comes to mind, and there are plenty of other readers as well. Dr. LaFleur, the editor of the latest editions of Wheelock, also has several readers designed as supplements. Texts by Geoffrey Steadman have been found helpful by any number of students (I use it with my AP Latin students).
At the same time, pick an author you’ve always wanted to read, and give it a try. Just be prepared to to go quite a bit slower. If you can get a reader edition, it can really help at the intermediate level.
I recently completed a read through of the Iliad and the Odyssey in Greek. Now I’m on a prose hike, but combining that with a more formal contextual grammar-syntax review, since it’s been a long time since formal education, starting with Plato and Lysias as typical intermediate authors for a comfortable review. That and my daily GNT and LXX readings. It’s pretty easy to put together a similar strategy for Latin.
That path sounds pretty close to spot-on with what I am lining up for myself now. Initially, I think I went too quickly through Wheelock the first time around and then jumped right into a Steadman reader. While I loved what he had to offer, I didn’t let myself “peek” at translations, so it became quite a steep mountain; which created diminishing returns.
This time around I am going slow-and-steady through Wheelock. My goal is to not only have the vocabulary down, but also to gain a high degree of confidence with noun declension, verb conjugation and the like. From there I do think I will be looking at readers designed for a post-Wheelock reader.
After that, who knows? I feel a strong draw toward Seneca. His “Letters from a Stoic” are compelling, especially because I can take it in chunks.
I think I have come to develop a new vision for my Latin and French fluency. Instead of a “mountain” I am now beginning to see it as something closer to “weaving”. By this I mean that each time I move forward, I need to make sure I work my way back to the basics to keep the whole tapestry in tact. Otherwise I risk becoming an accidental Penelope!
I recommend the Vulgate also. If you would like to see a more classical approach, you could try the Nova Vulgata, which is a newer (mid-1970’s and mid-1990’s) Latin edition. According to its Wikipedia article, it is pitched toward Classical Latin. The print edition has footnotes showing the earlier Vulgate readings when it follows a different text in the original languages. I am reading through the NT in it along with the Greek in the Nestle edition (Novum Testamentum Graece-Latine). It is also available for online reading at the Vatican’s website
(http://www.vatican.va/archive/bible/nova_vulgata/documents/nova-vulgata_index_lt.html). The online text lacks the footnotes.
In line with the goal of fluency, I would focus less on translating and more on developing comprehension. Listening comprehenison, reading comprehension both are important. As Dr. Seumas Macdonald points out on his excellent blog, The Patrologist, translation (at least, good translation) is a high-order skill, not a low-order skill. It has its value and place, certainly. But it is a different skill than reading. And, though many teachers don’t seem to get it, skill at translation comes best after the student has good comprehension and communication skills in a language, not before. This, at least, is my experience in learning modern languages (French, Spanish, German, Portuguese).
On my first trip to Mexico, while in college, I went with a church group and served as an informal interpreter for those who did not speak Spanish. I was able to do this because I had already had two years of Spanish training in high school that stressed conversation as well as reading. We did little or no translation exercises. We also learned grammar. By the time I went to Mexico, I was at ease in comprehending the language and in communication with it. So, serving as an interpreter was relatively easy. My college work in Spanish also stressed communication and reading. We read Spanish literature and discussed it in Spanish. We did term papers on literature and essays, in Spanish. I did not have any translation exercises in college Spanish work until my final course, an advanced grammar course. This came after much work with communication and comprehension, both in speaking, listening, reading, and writing.
While admittedly it is not as easy to do this with an ancient language, the more you can do so, the better. I listen frequently to John Simon’s audio of the Vulgate NT and find that I understand most of what is said. This in turn reinforces my comprehension when I read. One approach I recommend is tryng to ask and answer questions of a Latin text you are reading to help comprehension. I recently did this as an experiment with a Biblical Hebrew text, and found it helpful. I plan to try this with Latin also.
Rather than repeat Wheelock consider working through North and Hillard, or perhaps do it alongside. Doubting yourself seems like a better position to be in than simply blundering on and overestimating what you can do.
If I could ask of seneca2008, what kind of Latin poetry are you interested in?
I read most poets with a great deal of pleasure. Ovid’s games appeal me to a lot. Naturally I love Seneca’s plays which are of course in verse. Horace I still find difficult to get much out of. Thats my failing.
The first poet, apart from Virgil, I read was Catullus and I am very fond of him. Although it can be tricky to understand the latin at times it is usually fairly straightforward. The problem (or the advantage?) is that he writes in such a variety of metres. There have been very many discussions on textkit of the importance of metre in appreciating poetry and I suggest you look at them. I think its an important part of reading a text but what weight you attach to it will depend on what your interests or motivation are. If you get stuck (as I do) you can look at this site, although I am sure it is not error free: http://hypotactic.com/latin/index.html?Use_Id=about
Dont think of learning Latin or reading it as some kind of virility test. Use as many cribs, translations, dictionaries, commentaries (and “lots of mechanical work”) as you want or need. I dont think it is necessary to act like Stilbo.
The Romans were not like us and so dont neglect reading some secondary literature to give context. On Virgil I recommend Philip Hardie’s “the Last Trojan Hero, A cultural History of Virgil’s Aeneid”.
See Seneca Noster’s most recent response above; it’s good. What I would do is skip going through Wheelock again but keep him handy for regular review of paradigms and syntax (especially) and vocabulary if you feel the need (although you can reinforce vocab better through your reading). At this stage, review should be integrated with texts that you are reading. Additionally, Seneca prime would be good – authors that you are actually interested in are great motivation and have extra added value in engaging the language.
Hi Ryan,
I’m currently reading the Cambridge Green & Yellow edition of Seneca’s Selected Letters which features an excellent introduction and very thorough commentary by Catherine Edwards and find the Latin not at all daunting; however, as Chad (CB) has pointed out in his prior post, to appreciate the nuances of Senecan diction, it is essential to learn “antiquities” elements: 1. Stoic philosophy, 2. Early Imperial Roman History (Seneca was very close to Nero). 3 Military, Commercial and Legal parlance-Seneca loves to use words or expressions that are commonly used in these areas to give his points emphasis and colour. The commentary is a great help. In using it, I follow mwh’s precept; read and understand the text first (one letter at a time), then read the commentary to enhance my understanding and correct any misconceptions. Edwards’ commentary does a nice job of identifying words that have meanings specific to Stoic philosophy, as well as military, commercial and legal terminology that Seneca uses to illustrate his points. Seneca also loves maxims-he loves making them and he loves citing those of others. For me, that’s one of the most attractive aspects of his style.
It is a strange thing to go from quietly working on a dead language during one’s break at work in a government building (sharing it with almost no one for fear of sounding pretentious) to then have a heap of strangers provide you with kind advice from around the world! For all of the faults I find with the internet, this is surely one of the advantages.
Seneca2008, I will take a look at the North and Hillard; thank you. Per your comments on Latin meter, I value verse quite a bit. I consider myself a strong student of Milton. I have read “Paradise Lost” about twelve times now, and write formal verse (don’t worry, I won’t be sharing any here!). I don’t know if there is anyone, even Shakespeare, who so commanded the art of meter than him, in English. I have read in many places that Virgil holds a similar distinction, which is why I am aiming to translate him someday. All in good order. Thank you, also, for the comments about Latin not being a “virility test”. I confess that, looking back on it, I really should have let myself peruse as many translations and aides as needed when I jumped into translation after Wheelock. However, I am happy to be re-establishing my foundation, and I am excited to get into translation with a new perspective!
Barry, I’ll take your advice to heart and may start “peeking” at something by Seneca. A while back I translated his first letter to Lucilius and was enchanted by his perspective on time. I am excited to read more by him.
Aetos, thank you for the insight about the commentary you are using. I have read Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius and some of Seneca. I think I like Seneca the most! Tell me, if you like, what have you found most satisfying in your work so far with his selected letters?
My path: I started by going through a coursebook (Moreland and Fleischer’s “Latin: An Intensive Course”). When I was about 30% - 50% of the way through, I also started reading on a daily basis, using the Vulgate and a highly annotated version of De Bello Gallico. With hindsight, the LLPSI series would probably have been a better choice than Caesar,.
After finishing the textbook I also attended the online course of the Schola Latina Europaea et Universalis, designed by Avitus. This gave me the chance to practice Latin writing, which I had already been doing on my own.
Apart from this, over the almost 4 years since finishing the textbook, I have made an effort to read at least 800 words or so in Latin every day. I try to read different authors, and sometimes read the same passages again, with varying levels of difficulty. From my experience if you read only Caesar, or Cicero, then you will probably struggle when tackling different authors. I remember being completely baffled by Tacitus’ Germania when I picked it up for the first time: so many words in the first chapter were completely unknown to me. Same with Apuleius. I also found it frustrating to find, after finishing the textbook, that I was struggling with Suetonius. Last month I picked up Germania again and was surprised to find out how easy it was to follow… almost like reading English.
For me, what is most satisfying about reading Seneca’s letters is their relevancy. Seneca’s precepts bear just as much consideration today as they did when Seneca penned them almost 2000 years ago. Every single one of his letters has a message that is just as meaningful today as it was then. In Letter 1, you read his thoughts on procrastination. In letter 7, the danger of losing one’s way under the influence of the crowd. In letter 12, facing old age and death. In 18, facing the fear of poverty. In 21, the ethereal nature of common pursuits (riches, fame, position). In Letter 24, which is what I’m reading at the moment, fear of the future. Perhaps you remember Roosevelt’s famous line, ‘all we have to fear is fear itself’. Imagine my delight when I read Seneca’s observation: ‘scies nihil esse in istis (rebus) terribile nisi ipsum timorem.’ , where he is advising Lucilius on how to deal with the elements of his situation which are beyond his control by stripping away the attendant confusion and looking at their essence, which is fear.
There is obviously a lot more being said in each of these lettters, much of it consisting of maxims, anecdotes and quotations from other philosophers, most notably Epicurus, and poets (he cites Vergil and Horace on occasion) that help support his arguments. The informal nature of the letters also appeals to me: It’s as though Seneca is giving me some personal advice on how to improve my outlook on life.
Thank you for your insight. Your comments make me reflect on the fact that all of my imaginings of Latin (either through Wheelock or Latin texts) are geared toward translation; however, simply reading a text, with helps, should be part of my learning process as well. It is certainly less demanding, and allows for me to get a “sense” of the text on a first read, followed by more clarity on additional attempts. Sometimes these things just slip through the cracks!
I am at a similar stage. I have worked through both LLPSI and Wheelock but still feel very slow and confused when I hit a new piece of text. My strategy is to work through Wheelock again but this time I don’t write anything. I have the workbook from the library (which I didn’t use the first time around) and work through the exercises mentally and vocally. As someone else noted this can be a good diagnostic tool to identify what sort of tasks I have the most trouble with.
I have noticed an unhealthy tendency that the more I work with grammar-translation materials like Wheelock I start to reach for translations rather than just taking in the Latin as it is and grasping it immediately. LLPSI is excellent for gaining this kind of fluency but alas as subjunctives, participles, ablative absolutes etc pile in on one another the temptation is to reach for the dictionary and dissect the sentence. For this reason I have enrolled in a conversation class with Seumus Macdonald at the Patrologist (https://thepatrologist.com/) which starts at chapter 12 of LLPSI. My goal is to get my conversational skills closer to my level of grammatical knowledge.
Another thing I am doing is rote learning all the paradigms. It’s excruciating having to swim through tables in my head to comprehend each word of the passage. I learnt the paradigms for nouns and active verbs before LLPSI which made reading a joy but noticed a big crunch in comprehension once the subjunctives and participles came in (which I hadn’t drilled). So now I’m pretty determined to get through all of Latin by the Ranieri-Dowling Method (https://luke-ranieri.myshopify.com/) before I move on to more complex texts.
Finally I am taking the advice about comprehensible input and do reading each day that fits your version of fluent e.g. William Most Latin by the Natural Method, Cambridge and Oxford latin courses, Ritchies Fabulae Faciles, Fabulae Syrae (a bit more difficult), Wheelock 38 Latin Stories etc.
I know I could or should be doing more substantial texts by now but I’m one these people who doesn’t feel comfortable being out of my depth.
Thank you for detailing your method. Since I have a five-year-old, my free time is significantly impaired right now. I wish I had time to work on the kinds of things you are working on! It sounds fun!
I think keeping strong with Wheelock is good, especially mastery of paradigms. I mean, if someone were to fully grasp full noun, adjective and verb paradigms, with a sound knowledge of the top 5,000 words in Latin; I think they would be pretty far along. Seems to me like that is what you and I are really focusing on.
I am taking this year to really establish that “foundation”, and then I think my next step will be to find an author I like and jump in. I’ll start with my own translation of a text, but then I will allow myself to see other translations after I have given it a go. I mean, there needs to be some balance between the rigor of drilling and the pleasure of reading worth-while texts.
I began with a short Latin grammar-exercise book, I forget which one. Then I worked my way through Wheelock, and after that the four volumes of Henle. This took me from one to two years. During this process I read a good deal of the Vulgate and a lot of Thomas Aquinas, and then I found some easy medieval texts such as the Gesta Romanorum, easy saints’ lives, etc, all of which served as “comprehensible input”. My primary scholastic interest shifted from Aquinas to Bonaventure and I ended up reading the bulk of his writings, many thousands of pages. During this time I also read a number of the Clarke-Hamilton Interlinear volumes and some other classical texts with commentary, as well as a good number of Loebs, using the translation extensively, but I never felt truly comfortable with classical texts compared to medieval and scholastic Latin. I tried some patristic Latin too, reading Latin-only versions of Augustine’s De Trinitate, Gregory’s Gospel Homilies, and the Sentences of Peter Lombard, but I found these quite difficult.
After several years of this I discovered the Lingua Latina Per Se Illustrata series, and spent a lot of time and effort going carefully through the two main volumes twice, doing every exercise, and then all of the supplemental volumes at least once. In the course of this program my “fluency” skyrocketed and my ability to read any Latin text I picked up increased vastly. I had to read a truly vast amount of untranslated Latin text for my Ph.D., but most of it was fairly simple (the language, not the content!) and the lack of a safety net forced me to improve. For fun I also read a great number of novels, stories etc translated into Latin by moderns. Now classical and patristic texts, at least in subjects I’ve encountered before, are no serious problem and I fairly recently, for instance, read through all of Virgil and Gregory the Great’s Moralia in Job in their critical editions without consulting a lexicon more than a handful of times.
tl;dr:
Comprehensible Input
Complete review of grammar at different stages of learning
LOTS of casual reading rather than perfect, intensive reading
