Via Nova

Latin Learning Latin
1

Readers of this forum who enjoy “Lingua Latina” and “Piper Salve” for teaching/learning Latin (I’m a learner) with the direct or conversational method might like to know that WHS Jones, Via Nova or The Application of the Direct Method to Latin and Greek (Cambridge, 1915) may be found at http://www.archive.org/details/vianovaorapplica00jonerich in the Internet Archive site. I was continuing my search for Latin Colloquia and came across it. It has nice teacher-pupil conversational latin models.

The archive has other Latin materials recently put online, for example http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=subject:“%20Latin%20language”. I know some will be pleased to find there Lindsay’s The Latin language; an historical account of Latin sounds, stems and flexions (Oxford, 1894).

2

I’m reading it right now. So far, so good! :smiley:

3

I’m still reading Chapter I, but it has already given me ideas on how to liven-up the “Composition Board” and “The Agora.” The key is self-expression, not translation (which was my previous proposal). I’ll keep reading… :stuck_out_tongue:

4

Salve, Amadee
I thought it (Jones, 1915) was an interesting read, especially about the origins of the Association for the Reform of Latin Teaching around 1911-12 (re-addressing problems in institutionalized latin teaching I know were articulated as far back as the 16th century and possibly further back).

On page 70, Jones mentions the greatest need for a basic Latin-Latin dictionary. Oddly enough, I’ve been searching like mad for a Latin-Latin dictionary to use within an immersive program I’m writing. I feel Jones’ “greatest need”. But what I find are either much too specialist (Blatt’s Gesta Danorum), too archaic (for example Galfridus’s mid-15th century Promptorium Parvulorum – and by “too archaic”, I mean it’s geared to 15th-century contexts), or too serendipitous (definitions in Vicipaedia) to be broadly usable tools for language learning and reinforcement. Using Whitaker’s Words as a starting point, I had started to build one myself as an additional way of learning the Language (as in tackling a meaningful project). But, having expanded Whitaker to 60000 words, creating a 60000-word Latin-Latin dictionary is a near impossible task for an individual (especially one with low-level and highly-questionable Latin). Does anyone know of a usable source for a basic Latin-Latin dictionary? Does anyone else feel the need?

5

Salve, Adriane!

Yes, it is a very interesting read; in fact, I’m getting excited again about the direct method, by far the best method for Latin and Ancient Greek. I’ve been using Ørberg’s Lingua Latina and it has worked wonders for me. I feel, however, that I didn’t quite apply the method to its fullest extent, because, as of yet, I still can’t think in Latin outside of reading the texts. A few phrases here and there pop into my mind, but nothing complex. :cry: What I realise now, thanks to Jone’s persuasiveness, is that I need to start reading out loud more frequently AND begin the arduous task of free composition or self-expression in Latin. The latter I had almost completely neglected. But it is, apparently, an essential part of the method. Thank goodness we have a composition board in this forum, and that there are very good latinists out there who can provide much good help.

As to a Latin-Latin dictionary, I couldn’t agree more with you. It is essential! One should identify Latin words in Latin only. However, you don’t need a dictionary of that sort at the basic levels of learning, because descriptions can only go so far. What you need is a text the words of which can be deduced by context and direct acquaintance with the objects those words signify (i.e., with pictures embedded in the text or with the actual objects used in the classroom). What level are you teaching?

(Btw, someone proposed to make Textkit a Wiki. If that were made a reality, maybe we could make our own Latin-Latin dictionary…)

Vale!

6

Does anyone else feel the need?

i dont anymore. since ive learnt the existence of lewis & short at perseus which, though it defines the word by several english words, it gives examples of usage to each, whose source, and this is the best of all, one can consult immediatly by the links provided. furthermore it also has a list in each entry of latin words with similar meanings. thus why bother?

7

Tertie Roberte Amadeeque, salvete.

I’m not teaching at all, Amadee, but just writing software as a means for ME to learn Latin. (I write educational software so why not try an uncommissioned experiment for my own amusement and benefit.) “[M]aybe we could make our own Latin-Latin dictionary” is a lovely idea.

Tertie Roberte, “Why bother?” inquis. Just because I think a basic Latin-Latin dictionary (carefully composed) would help in a supplementary way to improve my (one’s) expressive abilities in the language by supplying model explanations, simultaneously obliging me (one) to creatively work at interpreting the definitions while helping in memorizing words and reinforcing meaning and usage within the target language. Isn’t that the value of the direct method? It’s more about organic language practice, conditioning and memorisation than atomic word translation. How many times do you look up the meaning of the same word in a Latin-English dictionary, because you can’t make the definition stick in your head, and ‘knowing what it means’ doesn’t mean you can employ it in a meaningful sentence? I frequently find myself looking up the same word many times. Using that word to express an idea, say, is an extra task. Anything to cause you to engage with and deconstruct a definition helps a little, and it is an authentic way of using the target language. Wishful thinking, of course, because I don’t see that dictionary out there.

8

Amadeus omnibus sodalibus salutem plurimam dicit,

As you know, I’ve been reading W.H.S. Jone’s “Via Nova” (or The application of the direct method to Latin and Greek) with much delight as it has re-acquainted me with some already forgotten notions of the Direct Method, and has also re-kindled my desire to think, speak and write Latin with the fluidity of any other second language. I owe a debt of gratitude to Adrianus, for making me aware of the book’s existence.

With the new information I was able to gather, I’m scrapping the old translation project I posted on the Composition Board (which is now dead anyway), and am proposing new learning methods based on Jone’s book:

  1. Revival (or creation, in the case of the Greek board) of the Audio thread. For my part, I’ll commit to recording one brief passage every week. Oooo, this is scary! But the oral part of (self-) teaching is very important and I have neglected it for too long.

And if we want to help beginners, instead of going for complicated poetry, we could read simple fables and stories with special emphasis on intonation and on the pronunciation of Latin vowels.

  1. Make a new thread (or section) for the intermediate students to ask questions about Latin grammar in Latin, and get responses in that same language. This way we avoid the intrusion of translation, which should be left to the advanced students tackling difficult literary works.

Perhaps there is no need to make a new section, but, in that case, the moderators should make it known that these kinds of questions should only be answered in the language in which the question was asked, sub capitis poena! :laughing:

  1. Post images without text that tell a story and challenge textkittens to write it in Latin (or Greek).

  2. Make a new section for discussing all things ancient: the life and times of the Greeks and Romans.

  3. Create a wiki dictionary of Latin-Latin and Greek-Greek.

These are some of the half-baked ideas I’ve been going over my head for some time now. Maybe not all can be implemented, but at least one should be feasible. What sayest thou?

Valete!

9

Amadeo Gundisalvus plurimam salutem dicit,
A Podcast would be useful to such an aim, not? I think a Latin-Latin dictionary might be, in fact, the same Latin Wikipedia (http://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usor:Gundisalvus_Xerezensis :sunglasses:) or Wiktionary. A lot of people usually forgets that it is not a primary source of in_formation_, but…
My opinion leans towards incorporating a sort of Podcast service, I would be very interested in that activity. I do consider not useful creating a new dictionary here but I would collaborate.

Nesciebam Viam Novam de Latinae Lnguae eruditione, et id erudiabitur cum temporem habeam. Longam et bonam vitam ad Adrianum (desideramus)!

10

I knew of Vicipaedia’s existence, but not of Victionarium’s. So, Latin-Latin dictionary: check!

:smiley:

11

Hi, Amadee!
Here it is the nexus to your (with all my considerations, of course) most loved Latin-Latin dictionary ;
http://la.wiktionary.org/wiki/

12

Amadeus, take a look to what I have just found:
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/CadresFenetre?O=NUMM-93055&M=chemindefer

13

Amadee, Terti Roberte, Gonzalo et alii, salvete. Voluntates tuas dulces, Gonzalo, mihi enuntiatas tibi correspondeo. Complures dies apud cognatos in hiberniâ occidentali in Dooras villulâ, propè Cinnmharam vicum, in Gallivense (Galway) comitatu aberam. Bellulam requietem!

Amadee, as a learner, I’m very excited at how useful your proposals would be to me and, if even one or a few of them were realised, that would be of benefit. I support them all. And I would be happy to support them with action to my (limited) ability.

Let me give an example to illustrate how I envisage a useful learner dictionary, Terti-Roberte Gonzaloque, and why it should be a Latin-Latin dictionary. I had already started work on this, and reading the Jones’ book (pp.70-74) reinforces the conviction that it is a good thing (still a daunting task, though).

Jones describes the teacher using paraphrases with illustrations to explain the word “animal” in a class. The teacher shows a picture of a bird and says “Avis est animal quod per aera volat. Nonnullae aves canere sciunt.” and so on. This is in the context of talking about vocabulary acquisition and dictionaries. Here’s how I think of a definition in the learner dictionary (along with an illustration):

"Avis, avis (N.3.F: N?men tertiae declīn?ti?nis fēminīnī generis).
“Avis est animal vertebr?tum quod pennīs (n?n capillīs) saeptum est. ?l?s du?s, crūra duo, caudam beccumque habet. N?nnullae avium speciēs vol?re n?n possunt sed plērumque avēs per aër? volant. N?nnullae avēs canere sciunt.”

My latin may be wonky (please correct), but it’s fun to attempt (I’m not saying I’ve succeeded) a clear, simple natural-language verbose definition that broadens one’s vocabulary with closely related terms and allows verbs to be introduced in a way that is otherwise hard to illustrate. (“Lingua per se illustrata” is Orberg’s nice way of expressing this approach.) If I can’t guess what ‘beccum’ means, the definition of ‘beccus’ in the dictionary rectifies this. But what if I can’t guess ‘beccus’ from ‘beccumque’? The ideal interactive dictionary tags each word with the correct link, of course. :wink:

Data storage is one thing but verbal expression of the interpreted data is another. Shortcuts store up trouble. We do not (normally) speak in abbreviations. A learner’s dictionary should unpack them.
Also, humans do not speak numbers but letters. I read out loud “decem” (or “unus zerum”), not “10”. I know otherwise-fluent speakers of second-languages who falter when expressing numbers through lack of practice (we get used to skimming written numerals and dates). Verbose is best (possibly numerals plus the word should be given).
I also know fluent first-language speakers of gender-specific languages who can’t tell you right out if a word is masculine, feminine or neuter but will know by ‘listening to themselves’ as they use the word in a revealing context. In other words, they (we) draw on an aural memory of what ‘sounds right’ (acquired by repetitious recital or spoken use in context).
Also, when I read a text it’s a source of frustration that proper names are treated very differently in dictionaries from other words, and possibly not even dealt with at all by my dictionary, except in a very few cases. I know why it is so, but I also know it could be better.

Electronic text is cheap in overhead, so interpreted definitions can be verbose and, for learners, I think they should be verbose.
The marking of long vowels is particularly useful, of course. Lack of their notice restricts the learner’s confidence in reading out loud. Of course, until all operating systems are wholly Unicode compliant, it’s with a certain nervousness that we use these diacritics online.

[Nothing to do with the above but a friend rang last night to say he had seen some Latin books in a local charity shop. I went first thing this morning to rescue 60 Latin books from the skip behind the shop where they had been dumped for shelf space. Some useful texts and fantastic bindings, --a deceased priest’s library. Sad to think they were considered no longer marketable. It happens to us all, I guess, in the end, so best to put what currency we have now to good use.]

14

Let me give an example to illustrate how I envisage a useful learner dictionary, Terti-Roberte Gonzaloque, and why it should be a Latin-Latin dictionary. I had already started work on this, and reading the Jones’ book (pp.70-74) reinforces the conviction that it is a good thing (still a daunting task, though).

good thing? certainly! feasible? hardly. if it be a begginer work that you want, it is done already in lingua latina. though scattered in it many pages, to do such a job would only require to collect the occurances and cite them as example.

please correct

sciunt indicates knowledge over something, but the bird merely has the ability to sing, thus potest would be a far better choice.

but it’s fun to attempt (I’m not saying I’ve succeeded) a clear, simple natural-language verbose definition that broadens one’s vocabulary with closely related terms and allows verbs to be introduced in a way that is otherwise hard to illustrate. (“Lingua per se illustrata” is Orberg’s nice way of expressing this approach.) If I can’t guess what ‘beccum’ means, the definition of ‘beccus’ in the dictionary rectifies this. But what if I can’t guess ‘beccus’ from ‘beccumque’? The ideal interactive dictionary tags each word with the correct link, of course.

see what i have said above…

anyway, though everything you say thereafter is truth, these things are done already, i see no point to redo a work that has been done already.

i dont want to denigrate the effort you have put already on this, however i must say that you could be applying your time in a work that would be far more enjoying for you, far more rewarding and much more usefull for the kittens, or any learner for that matter, a work that, albeit not new, it still remains to be done to certain books: which is to write a begginers edition to this and that work with the lexica in latin. see our annis’ aoidoi for instance, in its documents, besides the commentaries which do not concern this topic, each word has its meaning given in a friendly layout. see osberg’s edition of caesar which give the meaning in latin for those not introduced in the 1st volume. - it remains yet to be done a complete edtion with a lexica in latin, this is much like a merging of thse two approachs aoidoi gives the meaning in english, osberg do not give all of them.

this something feasible [in fact is almost done already at perseus you would have to see each entry of each word, at least those which you dont know the meaning, as you would anyway, and collect the proper manings and then translate them into latin] , and would be more fruitful for you, becaseu, as yuou say, you are a learner yourself, and there is no great learning them to see them in the proper context. (that is why i think perseus’ tool is so great) (well, there is the copying of text, but this is a subject matter for another rant :unamused: )

notice that the process involved are very much those which you would have to perform to create a dictionary. should you want to, someday, carry through the project in a more complete manner - like a pro dictionarist - the foundations would be laid out already. just as a tree does not grow upon weak roots and slight trunk, you should not lay your work upon badly worked concepts, which this would be without the proper knowledge of the possible meaning of the words. futhermore such work certainly produces fruits more rapidly, since the socpe is limited to the words in the work.

im just suggesing this because, as i said, it involves the same proccess and you can do this as you read the works - and not waste time in two different activities. i dont know whether this is something that pleases you, but let the suggestion stand.

15

Thanks, Roberte. You give very constructive comments and suggestions. [I don’t get the point, though, about the work not being feasible if it’s been done already(?).] I haven’t been deflected from my folly, however, precisely because I think it is great fun and helpful to me, at any rate, to do what I’m doing. Sometimes you can love the journey as much as arriving. And I do pillage far and wide from different sources and use foundations laid by others. But I completely take your point that other things (Latin lexica for certain beginner works) might be of more benefit to some.

16

I don’t get the point, though, about the work not being feasible if it’s been done already(?)

well i have omitted several things :blush: the latin-latin is not feasible to do by one own - too great a work to do- in case you are striving for completeness on the entries data, a single entry would require you to hunt for several texts and to compare in them the usages [unless of course you should want to translate liddel scott into latin]. but in the case of a base vocabulary for begginers with entries in latin, with the output you have specified it is done already (in lingua latina) not only for a base vocabulary, but also for abstract concepts, and many other things, [including names of towns and cities with those cute maps].[the count is more or less 5000 words the 5000 most important ones with its most important meanings] etc

17

Here is a sort of Latin-Latin dictionary I stumbled across. It’s not classical Latin, but it provides both French and Latin definitions:

http://books.google.com/books?id=YTK7AAAACAAJ&dq=Lexicon+manuale+ad+scriptores+mediæ+et+infimæ+latinitatis

Author Maigne d’Arnis, W. H
Title Lexicon manuale ad scriptores mediæ et infimæ latinitatis : ex glossariis Caroli Dufresne, D. Ducangii, D. P. Carpentarii, Adelungii, et aliorum, in compendium accuratissime redactum : ou, Recueil de mots de la basse latinité, dressé pour servir à l’intelligence des auteurs, soit sacrés, soit profanes, du moyen âge / par W. H. Maigne d’Arnis … Publié par m. l’abbé Migne … Tome unique ..

Publisher Info Paris : Garnier et Migne, 1890
Publisher Info Paris, J. P. Migne, 1866

18

Can’t access that book with or without proxy. :cry:

19

1977
Olms

it is still under copyright…

and avaible at amazon http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/348706426X

20

This guy:

http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/

in his “Medieval Works Available for Download by FTP” page claims to have the 1848 edition available as a pdf for download, but his ftp info didn’t work for me. If you are interested, though, it may be worth dropping him an email and asking nicely…

Of course, he ought to upload all that stuff to the Internet Archive and give it to the whole world, but that’s easy for me to say…