/lit/ - Literature

>>12535075
I have the Italian version, pretty good so far.

>>12535075
UNDENIABLY BASED AND IRREVOCABLY REDPILLED

>>12535075
It's great!

Italian Athenaze is super good. I learned Attic Greek with it. The learning curve becomes rather steep around chapter 7, when they introduce the oratory style, but overall it's excellent to learn.

It is a good but not sufficient method of learning a language. Supplement it with a grammar text book.

How long does it take to go through one of these books? 1 month? 2 months?

>>12535841
Yes, one month each then you will be fluent in Latin

Yes, fluent Latin in 2 weeks.

>>12535841
>How long does it take to go through one of these books? 1 month? 2 months?
lol i guess if you really take your time with it

>>12535841
it takes until you finish dickhead

>>12535075
Support it 100%. Let me repost a longer comment I typed out last time this was brought up for the people who may have any doubt about this. If anyone has any questions I will be happy to answer them.

>Ignore these posters telling you to use Wheelock OP. The best textbook, by leaps and bounds, is Hans H. Orberg's Lingua Latina Per Se Illustrata.
>The methodology espoused by books like Wheelock's is antithetical to the learning of Latin as a language. Rather than read and understand Latin as Latin, these books encourage one to decode the text and translate it, either in one's head or on paper, as slavishly literal English.
>LLPSI on the other hand teaches one to read Latin as Latin. It employs the natural method, starting you with sentences like "Roma est in Italia" and gradually increasing the complexity in each chapter, explaining new words and concepts in Latin that you have already learned. In this manner you will learn to read Latin as Latin, not as a code that you will break by translating it into English.

>If the theoretical felicity of this method does not convince you, I point to the actual results of the different methods. >Those who have learned by the "grammar-translation" approach of books like Wheelock's display an embarrassing lack of proficiency in the language. You have university professors of the classics who would struggle to string together a sentence in Latin. Those who have used the natural method to learn, however, display a vigorous proficiency with the language. Exempli gratia, consider the following video depicting a speech by American university professor Dr. Terence Tunberg:

https://youtu.be/VgVc0t9yOHg

>In this video, as you can see, Dr. Tunberg demonstrates an obvious command of the language that far outstrips that of many of his peers at the university level. He is able to use Latin as a language because he learned it as a language.
>Now consider a contrasting example. This video shows Dr. Richard LaFleur, the editor of the most recent editions of Wheelock's Latin, doing a reading from his translation of "Where the Wild Things Are" into Latin:

https://youtu.be/AVpRn0aVMwo

>Notice how he reads from his text rather than speaks fluidly, and notice his approach to the language. He over-emotes, reading dramatically and emphasizing to a almost ridiculous degree the sentences he is reading. For Latinists such as Dr. LaFleur (who, by the way, Latinizes his own surname as "Illa Flos"—an absurd barbarism), speaking Latin is at its core a performance. It is telling that the greatest Latin-language output of Dr. LaFleur has been a translation of a children's book. He has composed nothing original and nothing of length.
>Posting muh Wheelock's is a shitty meme, and it does a disservice to anyone who actually wants to learn Latin.

>>12535713
Luckily for LLPSI, there is such a supplementary book: Latine Disco. It expresses explicitly the grammatical concepts implicitly demonstrated by Oerburg.

>>12535075
It's shit, don't waste your money. Get a good grammar book and learn via the tried and tested classical method. This method only works (sometimes) for languages that have a similar grammar to your native language (e.g. French for an Italian speaker). I'll tell you what will happen if you buy this book. You'll read the first few short chapters, feel like you made progress, then be forced to drop it when the book introduces grammar that you can intuitively grasp because it's unlike anything you've ever dealt with before (this instead of the rule just being explained to you in clear English before you go about observing examples, translating, etc.) It's a meme shilled by very very gay low IQ faggots.

>>12537941
*can't intuitively

>>12537941
This is moronic. Using the grammar and translation method is first of all hardly "time-tested." It was largely introduced by the efforts of a group of 19th-century German philologists, and it has no foundation in any sane principles of pedagogy. Time and time again, reviews of pedagogical methods have shown that teaching students with an active method produces actual proficiency. Teaching students to decode a language like some kind of puzzle doesn't teach reading at all.

And again, you don't have to take my word for it. Look at the videos I posted above yours. Which method produces desired results?

Here is another example of the end result of using the active method for learning:

https://youtu.be/_OyhWKTmJBo

Which result would you rather end up at? Doing a painful recitation of your translated children's book or being able to use the language to express your thoughts fluidly and coherently?
To me, it's an easy choice.

>>12537941
>>12537950
Cont. This is a pretty solid grammar book. It contains tons of translation exercises. Basically you have the rules explained to you AND THEN you translate and read. It is not easy AT ALL. You might get discouraged but you can master any grammatical principle with time and practice. There are other grammar books out there. There is one of very high esteem that has been used in England for a long time called Kennedy's Revised Latin Primer. This is another good option. Just don't try some stupid intuition based method if you 1.) have never learned a foreign language to fluency before 2.) have no experience with a foreign language that has a case system and 3.) don't want to waste your time and money (LLPSI is costly if you really want to invest in the whole shebang). It's a serious fucking meme. It could however be useful once you've already got a good grasp of Latin grammar as a nice series of books to read. Although by the end of any serious grammar book you should be able to read any Latin text with a vocabulary gloss.

>>12537972
>>12537930
Embarrassing levels of (((shilling))) for a totally unfounded method of foreign language learning. Shill this garbage at plebbit.

>>12535075
yep. I read it yesterday and now I'm fluent in Latin reading Ovid and Plautus. very effective. buy the whole series!

>>12537974
Aaaaaand now you've just outed yourself as a total meme. I'm sorry but come on. Moreland & Fleisher is a total joke to be recommending to a beginner. It's literally the Latin version of Hansen & Quinn. And again you expose that your goal is to learn to translate and not to read.

This is what happens in grammar-translation methodology:

>Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra?

D. Ok, let's find the verb. "Abutere," that's the second person singular future passive form of "abutor." Better remember that it's subjunctive, so it has active meaning but passive form. Ok, so "you will abuse." What's the object? Right, "patientia nostra" because abutor takes the ablative. So "you will abuse our patience." Now he's addressing Cataline, so "Cataline, you will you abuse our patience." What's quo usque? Better check the notes. Ok so "for how long?" Ok professor, so all together it's "for how long, O Cataline, will you abuse our patience?"

M. What about "tandem"?

D. My mistake. Let me check my dictionary. Ok, so... in a question it's something like "pray tell."

M. Good.

Whereas in the active method you just read the fucking sentence.

>>12537991
So how do you explain the disparities in outcome between the two methods? Why is it good that most university professors of the classics can't read without a dictionary, and even then it's not really reading?

>>12538012
Nobody is saying you're gonna be proficient overnight. But if you put in the work you WILL come out with a much better knowledge of Latin than with another method.

>>12538012
this. and if u use promo code "imanNword" you can get the whole series for only 300$ !!

>>12538041
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHHAHAHA bro tl;dr fuck off, faggot. go shill this garbage somewhere else. 99% of people who bought LLPSI didn't learn shit and can't speak a lick of latin. get a grammar book you fucking pleb.

>>12538060
Potesne tu Latine loqui? Haud credam.

>>12538041
I just got here so I don't know why they're acting retarded, but I appreciate your posts.

use LLPSI and Wheelock (or any other grammar-based method) for maximum Latin gains. That way your reading intuition will be solid and your understanding of grammar airtight.

>>12538086
LLPSI+Latine Disco
>>12538075
Thanks, I don't know why this guy is so mad about actually learning Latin.

>>12537930
>>12537972
>>12538041
yes! yes! buy LLPSI, goy! also buy the supplementary reading book, goy! also buy the "grammar" book, goy (because our intuitive method is so effective that we also had to introduce not one, but 3 books explaining the grammar of the book we said you could read without recourse to a grammar book)! also buy the recordings on CD and digital, goy! also buy the vocabulary book, goy! also buy the second installation of the reading series, goy! also but the third installation of the reading series, goy! also buy the exercise book, goy! and the second exercise book! and the answer keys! also buy the companion book, goy! and the second companion book, goy! buy the teacher's materials book that goes with the exercise book, goy! buy the short stories book too, goy! yes, yes, yes, buy the other ten books too, goy! i promise we are not just a greedy company that shills a subpar product in dozens of overpriced books to really milk you for your precious shekels! don't forget to buy the interactive course too, goy! we promise our method is effective, you'll just need to make sure to buy all the books we sell! don't buy grammar books, goy! will the publisher also sell you a companion to your grammar book explaining what extra stuff you should understand in order to understand the grammar book that should stand alone, goy? didn't think so!! how else are you going to waste all your money, goy?? buy LLPSI!

>>12538109
No don't buy it, pirate it on libgen. They're on there.

>>12538109
If spending money on books to learn Latin bothers you that much, you can just pirate the thing - at least to see if you like it/the method.

>>12538109
Epic reddit meme! upvote, Upvote!

>>12538109
Write in latin already, fag. At this point you look more like a shill than him.

>>12538074
ugh yeah, i think you need a grammar book LOLOLOLOLOLOL but you probably don't even know what's wrong with your shit sentences cuz you never read a grammar book

>>12538114
>>12538115
Book 1: http://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=156B2B209D0E1353A2DD287E36BB93FF

Book 1 grammar manual: http://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=CB3E667411C897AB3A3D5F7ECD03D7DF

Search for "lingua Latina oerburg": http://libgen.is/search.php?req=Lingua+latina+orberg&open=0&res=25&view=simple&phrase=1&column=def#

>>12538121
So that's a no then on being able to use Latin? And no specific critiques on the sentences? I'm willing to admit I'm wrong.

You're criticizing me for agendaposting, and it's true: I do have an agenda. It's to stop people from going down a path where they spend years studying Latin and can't speak a whit of it. It's what happened to me. I spent 5 years doing G-T Latin and came out on the other side knowing a whole lot about Latin and knowing basically no actual Latin. I just want other people to take the fruitful path so they don't run into the same issues I did.

>>12535075
only effective for people that have already done the grammar based method and have found it wanting in building reading skills. if you're an absolute beginner, pair it with a grammar book so you don't develop bad habits.

>>12538074
>>12538120
Nōn volō scrībere linguam latīnam ut satisfaciam hunc plēbēium, sed complēbō tuam voluntātem, amīce.

>>12538140
Friend, let's call a truce and admit that both methods have pros and cons. We obviously take hard positions on the question but I think we can both admit that a little bit of grammar and a little bit of intuitive reading can be beneficial for those who take a hard stance either way. This is pretty much a given from the fact that grammar books always supplement with reading, and reading methods always supplement with grammar. People can choose which of the two foci are more effective for them personally. I've always preferred heavy grammar at the start, and then reading later on. Some prefer to start with reading. I've been trolling you pretty hard, but let's call a truce. As you can see here >>12538164 I do know /some/ Latin, though I can't claim to be any kind of master. Also, you also know /some/ Latin. We both want to reach the same end goal, but have different paths of getting there. Many lamps, but one light. Pic related is us if you accept my truce.

>>12538181
Are all classicfags this fucking gay?

>>12538192
A classicsfag is a priori gay, just like any X-fag, where X is some quality attributable to the fag or else something said fag takes an interest in, is a priori gay. In other words, basically, yes.

>>12538164
this nibbas really disappeared when you whipped out them superior latin skills dayum

>>12538164
>non volo
Ut grammatice scribas, melius scribendum est "nolo." Ceterum Latine non linguam Latinam scribas.
>satisfaciam hunc plebeium
Quamquam nemo sine errore scripsit, scito verbum "satis facere" casu non accusativo sed dativo utitur, nam "satis" est id quod fit. Etiam fit te esse plebium.
>>12538181
I'm not trying to have a big blowout argument here, but the actual research just doesn't support the grammar-translation paradigm for learning a language.
>Meaningful input is crucial. We should provide engaging material for our students to read and hear, right from the beginning. As one of the founders of the Conventiculum Bostoniense, whose Latin immersion program focuses on SLA and Latin pedagogy, I am a strong advocate for the use of oral Latin in the classroom to whatever extent the instructor is comfortable. I can attest from my own experiences that exposure to spoken Latin transforms reading ability, and here I mean Latin that is communicative, not oral drilling of declensions or recitation of forms or even the reading aloud of passages for translation, but rather exchanging ideas and sharing information. Reading is a more difficult and less natural skill than listening, and there is no quicker way to familiarize students with common vocabulary and simple grammar than engaging them in using the language they are learning.
http://tcl.camws.org/sites/default/files/Carlon_0.pdf
>The general concept of second language acquisition as an internal, self-regulating process is, of course, an old one. Howatt points out how, as long ago as 1622 (in the context of teaching Latin), Joseph Webbe had argued that ‘no man can run speedily to the mark of language that is shackled and ingiv’d with grammar precepts’ and ‘By exercise of reading, writing, and speaking after ancient Custom . . . all things belonging to Grammar will without labour, and whether we will or no, thrust themselves upon us’
http://www.rcampus.com/users/relvacaroline/upload/file/prabhu_s_chapter_1_the_context.pdf
Here are more links with academic citations that deal with what I'm talking about:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4386627
https://startingtoteachlatin.org/links/communicative-approaches-to-teaching-classical-languages/
My issue with your stance is that there is basically no peer reviewed research that would suggest that a grammar-translation approach is going to be better for acquiring Latin.

>>12538229
Immo

>>12538268
cringe and bluepilled

>>12538268
*uti non utitur.
Ut dixi, nemo sine error scribit.

>>12535075
cringe thread

>read through the whole vol 1.
>DUDE I AM A LATIN PRO NOW LMAO
>try to read Virgil's Aeneid
Boy that was a rude awakening.

>>12535075
Its shit

>>12538467
nibba read book 1 then read colloquia personarum then read book 2 which has selections from the aeneid

>>12535075
The most important thing is that you pick something and stick with it. Everyone up above is arguing over details. Just make sure you practice every day. In 3 months, you won't believe how far you've come, and in a year, you'll probably have a reasonable handle on it.

>>12538508
good bost

>>12538464
>>12538471

>>12538450
*sine errore

>>12538508
Fucking this. The worst advice is to 'keep looking until you find a way that suits you,' it opens you up to infinite possibility which is stifling. Stick to something, pretend you're in school pre-1960 and you don't have a choice.

The pitfall of using Wheelock, as pointed out itt, is real. However, it is easily overcome by focusing on reading the example sentences for comprehension before translating them to English. Then after the grammar chapters there are longer adapted excerpts and finally unadapted excerpts which should likewise be read for comprehension (and left to right without skipping around searching for subject, verb, object, etc) before translating. This is clearly stated in the textbook, but it is easy to ignore and immediately jump around translating parts of the sentence.
For either method a good deal of self discipline is required to make any ground beyond the absolute basics.

>>12539950
Thirding. The kids you meet who can say
>Hello I sure am a fagot
in dozens of languages are exactly that. Choose one style for a while (a few months at least) and then reconsider. If there isn’t something royally fugged about the one you’re using you should do it to the end. All ways of learning will leave you with certain strengths and weaknesses.

This method is actually quite known in France, it is good, but you need to study grammar (and know the tables of declensions and conjugations by heart). Studying vocabulary can also help you progress faster (less time spent searching in the dictionary).