Do you have any similar critiques of Hansen & Quinn? Theirs and Mastronarde’s seem to be the two most popular grammar books of the past few decades (correct me if I’m wrong about this) so I’ve been wondering which one I’d like to use. I’m leaning towards Hansen & Quinn, in part because of the available video explanations, by Amy Cohen first of all but also those of Leonard Muellner (despite the poor sound quality). So I’d like to hear if you have any major critiques of Hansen & Quinn. Is there anything I should be aware of before jumping into it?
It depends on how you learn languages, I guess. For me, H&Q seem like a very good way to expend years of effort in a way that does not seem exactly efficient. I could be wrong. Or I could be right for myself, but not for others. Or I could be right in general.
Here are the two things that I think: 1) The faster that a person gets to some sort of basic, tenuous, creeping, doubtful, reading comprehension of unadulterated texts, the faster that he becomes his own judge of what works for him and what does not. 2) Language learning is not about memorizing rules, but about sensitizing oneself to distinctions.
The way these two principles work out for me are that I like to find the trimmest most basic grammar that I possibly can in order to start a language. And I avoid anything that tends to deaden sensitivity. I endeavor to become a pure context learner as soon as I can possibly get to the point where information begins to flow in from the bare context.
Fletcher,
I tried to use H&Q as a beginners textbook and gave up after three or four chapters.
Like almost every introductory ancient Greek textbook I’ve looked at, I felt that (at least compared to modern-language textbooks I’d used for French and Spanish) it goes in to far more detail than necessary for an introductory textbook.
What also didn’t work for me was that it introduced a lot of new vocabulary in each unit and you have to know all of it before you can do the exercises. So I had trouble applying all the new grammar and all the new vocab at the same time. YMMV.
I plan to go back to it to deepen my understanding, but it’s really jumping in the deep end.
If it’s important to you to start with Attic Greek, Shelmerdine’s Introduction to Greek (3rd Edition) or From Alpha to Omega (which has a reader that supplements it) seem like better places to start. By this I mean they break the material down into more chapters, so you have less vocab and grammar to learn at a time and they have more readings/exercises along the way.
But if you want CI, the textbook I have been working though, Clayton Croy’s Primer of Biblical Greek, is what I would recommend.
The textbook itself is a manageable grammar translation textbook. The real gem is the reader that Mark Jeong put out last year to go with that book. Titled “A Greek Reader: Companion to A Primer of Biblical Greek”, it is written with CI principals in mind and there are are usually several stories for each chapter of Croy’s book.
I have found it very useful. I agree with what this reviewer says of it and would recommend it on its own even if you stick with H&Q.
I always agree with Chad. I don’t always agree with Joel, but I do agree with him that learning these languages is about sensitizing oneself to distinctions. Developing such sensitivity takes experience and self-control.