/lit/ - Literature

>there isn't anything as unequivocally beloved as LLPSI
nothing wrong with Athenaze
t. Athenaze enjoyer

How do you practice writing, /clg/? I've been so focused on just reading Latin that I would have no clue how to express myself. How can you get practice writing and composing if you have no teacher to correct your mistakes and give feedback?

>>19604036
I haven't even started with Greek, but I think the problem is that Athenaze isn't enough to be able to read authentic texts. What do you say? (Assuming you're already done with it.)

LLPSI otoh has excellent supplements, and Latin is just easier overall.

>>19604039
>How can you get practice writing and composing if you have no teacher to correct your mistakes and give feedback?
Start a journal written entirely in Latin. You'll make tons of mistakes, but it doesn't really matter.

>>19604039
As a beginner, stick to model sentences and replace a few words as you stick to the correct case.
>Arma virumque cano
>Mentulas uberaque cano

Over time and more input, you'll be able to stray away from the models and be more original. What I did when I started out was, as I was going through wheelocks, writing my sentences based off the ones provided in the textbook.
Example: Chp XXIII on participles
Textbook Sentence
>Graeci nautae, visuri Polyphenum, timuerunt.
Mine
>Hostes barbari, oppressuri Romam, gavisi sunt.

>>19604039
You can always post in Latin here and hope someone corrects you.

>>19604039
I found the North & Hillard Greek composition very useful and I'm sure the Latin one is just as good.

>>19604074
>Start a journal written entirely in Latin. You'll make tons of mistakes, but it doesn't really matter.

Won't this just reinforce bad habits and non-idomatic Latin?

>>19604064
guess that could be the case, I'm maybe 1/4 through the second book, I'll report back when I try to tackle Anabasis which IIRC is basically like the de bello gallico of ancient Greek
but I still find it quite enjoyable

>>19604039
I'm still learning and what's been helpful for me is using the workbook that goes with my text (LLPSI). I also found a website where I can do the exercises from the book and it tells me if I'm correct or not.

>>19604003
From previous thread:
>There isn't a 1:1 Greek equivalent to LLPSI. Some have tried though. The closest thing that comes to it is Seamus Macdonald's LGPSI which begins very similarly to the Latin version with sentences such as: "ἡ Ἑλλὰς καὶ ἡ Ῑ̓ταλίᾱ εἰσὶν ἐν τῇ Εὐρώπῃ." [Only the first four chapters have gotten illustrations and margin-notes] so learning purely from it would be impossible. There is also 'Alexandros to Hellenikon paidon,' a book that does have margin notes and illustrations similar to LLPSI. I've only read the first few pages before losing interest but from what I've heard from others is that it is not as efficient as LLPSI but works as a decent reader for beginners with some experience. The third option is the Italian expanded version of Athenaze with more text, illustrations and margin notes. I don't speak Italian but remember being able to understand about 80% of the text without looking at any of the vocabulary back when I was only starting so with the help of the English Athenaze it might be an excellent way to learn Greek.

>>19604036
>>19604212
also I am using indeed the Italian version, which from all the people praising it I guess is kind of an improvement over the english one, which I haven't checked

>well you are zeuss didn't know anything about ancient Gaelic

>>19604256
Ocus was said as ogus

שָׁלוֹמ׃
הֲיֵשׁ בַּבַּד תַּלְמִיד־לָשׁוֹן הַקֹּדֶשׁ׃

>>19604036
I FUCKING HATE ATHENAZE! I DON'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT DICAEOPOLIS AND PHILIP! THEY SUCK SO MUCH ASSSSSSS!
I had to read about them for the past year-and-a-half. If I had Greelock (Greek Wheelock), there would be no problems. Wheelock is my perfect textbook. I believe LLPSI is a significant thing, but I never heard about it irl, and I have had multiple conversations about ancient language textbooks. Therefore, I think the depiction of how good the LLPSI is skewed if you only look at this board. However, if this board represents you very well, then it might be a good pick for you. All I can really say with certainty is death to Athenaze.

>>19604089
>>Mentulas uberaque cano
I sing of dicks and tits, kino

>>19604426
why did 4chan fuck up my סוֹף פָּסוּק, reeeee

Reposting here since I didn't realize the old thread had hit bump limit:
>>19602788
It's as much a phonemic distinction as the distinction between o and u. Differences between specific consonants don't matter much to meter either, should you learn those?
>>19603014
So? Why the hell WOULDN'T you read it in a way that actually lets you hear the meter instead of treating it as a written abstraction?
>>19603145
Sure, a lot of Roman literature is lost. But what we have gives us a pretty good idea how Latin sounded. Especially when we have some Roman inscriptions that literally use macra/apices.
>>19603146
Natural languages are not math.
>>19603323
Er, no, Latin C is a voiceless velar stop. The only glottal consonant in Latin was H (glottal fricative).

does anyone know of any Latin readers for post-classical works? I'm interested in eventually reading Descartes and Spinoza (among others) in Latin and was curious whether there were Latin readers for their Latin works like there are for Cicero, Virgil, Seneca and the like.

>>19605052
You could try Toronto medieval texts or I Tatti (who publish Renaissance Latin stuff). The first one just publishes stuff in the original Latin with English footnotes and makes them accessible to people who can't read Medieval script. The second one is like Loeb with Latin on one side and English on the other.

Does any latin anon know what pulchritude means,
>>19605662

What's pulchritude and how common is it? And more importantly, who uses it?

>>19605670
>>19605676
comes directly from latin pulchritudo which means beauty in latin. It's not common in english but you'll find it in authors with high diction or a thesaurus

>>19605685
>>19605670
>>19605682
>>19605683
Thank you.

So this word is basically like a fancy way of saying beauty? Can you recommend me articles or short pieces of works that uses this word?

>>19605709
you should check out the OED if you have access to it.

>>19605709
>>19605735
here i gave you the OED on it article

>>19605741
forgot the pic oops

>>19605747
>>19605735
Thank you so much.

anybody else find the bald youtube fag insufferable

>>19606070
yep. I'm certain he's full of himself

>>19605779
Not that guy, but you often can get access to OED with your public library or university library account. Also Wiktionary has a lot of the word origin stuff that is similar to OED.

>>19605685
>comes directly from latin pulchritudo which means beauty in latin.

Pulcher is the simple form of "beauty" in Latin. Slapping the -tudo onto the end of it would make it more akin to "Beautifulness" I suppose.

>>19604740
If he means to say "Sing of," then wouldn't mentula and uber be in the genitive form though? Wouldn't "Mentulas uberaque cano" literally translate to "I sing penises and tits"? Someone correct me if I'm wrong here.

>>19606081
pulcher = beautiful
pulchritudo = beauty
are you ESL?

>>19606081
>Wouldn't "Mentulas uberaque cano" literally translate to "I sing penises and tits"
Yes, but in Latin, canere takes the accusative for the sense of "i sing of +accusative." Simply a difference between English and Latin.
Trying to translate things so literally can often lead you down the wrong road.
An example of a Lat -> Eng mistake is always translating "cum" as "with."
Cum clauses for example, are translated more idiomatically as "when, as, because, although" depending on the use/force of the clause, while in Latin, a Roman would have only understood it as "with ..."
"Mentulas uberaque cano" is a direct play on "arma virumque cano" which is the first line of the Aeneid

>>19606109
> while in Latin, a Roman would have only understood it as "with ..."
rereading that didn't seem so clear.
A Roman would have heard a cum clause as "with this sentence being the case, blah blah blah" and they would understand whether the clause had a temporal, causative, circumstantial or concessive force intuitively.

>>19605052
I don't know of any Renaissance/Neo-Latin readers (renaissance latin specialists are Latin chads who have transcended the need for a reader), but there if you want a medieval anthology, check out the "Primer on Medieval Latin"

>>19605374
I will be sure to check them out. thank you.

>>19604190
With more experience you'll self correct anyway. Besides, it would be a good record of your progress going from 3 word sentences to sentences with 3+ subclauses using the subjunctive.

>>19606136
I'll giver 'er a look. azassu (thanks)

>>19606116
I got it, thanks. Translating “cum” in the literal sense still makes sense if you think about it as well though because when/with are also somewhat interchangeable. For instance “With mother gone, the girl plays,” also means “When mother is gone, the girl plays.” I imagine that this is basically what is occurring when sentences use “cum” to describe that one thing is happening simultaneously with another thing.

Can someone tell me how the infinitive versions of words in Latin differ in functionality from the present active infinitive form? When a sentence says canere rather than canit, what's the difference? It's like a gerund versus a past tense verb? Please explain like I'm retarded.

>>19606898
present active indicative*

>>19605683
That's not how it works. Literally talk to any actual linguist.

>>19606898
Infinitive is like the neutral state of the verb. It, usually, doesn't have a subject and exists on its own. However, once a verb is conjugated, it has a subject performing the action.

Example
Canere iucundum est. = To sing is pleasant. (Infinitive)
Vs
Puella canit. = The girl sings. (Conjugated)

In the second example, the girl is performing the action of singing therefore the verb's ending, i.e. its conjugation, must match the subject performing it, in this case 3rd person singular (-t).

The infinitive, on the other hand, exists on its own and can either be used as the subject of a sentence, like in example 1, or used as a complementary verb. However, I would recommend that you thoroughly learn what an infinitive is at its most rudimentary level before wrapping your head around it as a complementary verb.

There is a lot more to this and I recommend reading various articles or watching some yt vids on infinitives to get a clearer view on the concept because it gets tricky.

>>19605052
Erasmus.

>>19607185
Dante

>>19605052
George Buchanan
He wrote the best Latin

>>19607206
???

.

>>19606898
infinitive does not have a "person" who's "doing" a verb.
canere -(no person) to sing
canit - (he, she, it) sings

>>19607102
>>19608540
Thanks.

>>19607324
He wrote in Latin too

>>19604003
>Somebody has already made a decent flowchart on Latin
I'd love to see it anon.
I've been brushing up on my Italian and seeing latin it seems remarkably similar

>>19608678
So did Virgil and Cicero.

>>19608807

>>19608976
Something similar for classical arabic?

>>19609297
check the /lit/wiki

>>19608976
Thanks anon =)

>>19608976
Gratias tibi ago

>>19604003
Hello, I am fluent in Sanskrit and Pali. Ask any questions related to Sanskrit or Pali or even Avestan/Old Persian.

Feel free to also ask about Sanskrit literature and poetry.

Who knew Old French was so hard? I can't imagine learning it without knowing French and Latin.

>>19610138
What made Panini such an unprecedented linguistic genius?

>>19610211
It's not worth it, it's just a transitional language

>>19610239
Getting to see the full development of French is a bonus. What I'm actually after is chivalric romances and more broadly reading the major works of the Arthurian tradition in the original languages.

>>19610138
what is your learning history with Sanskrit and Pali? which did you start learning first? did you start learning them about the same time? what resources did you use?

.

How tough is the jump from Italian to Latin?
does Italian soften the blow?

>>19611914
No, basically no. In any case, your best bet would be starting from Spanish.

>>19611914
>>19611926
your best bet is to start with latin. Taking years to learn another language just so you learn Latin is retarded.

>>19612246
>>19611926
I already know some Italian, it's not fluent but i can read well enough. Im just curious how much of a help it would be.

>>19611914
>>19612259
I'm in the same boat, knowing some Italian but not being a native speaker. It was a big help for me! Many times while reading LLPSI I didn't even realize that a new word was introduced. Some of the grammatical constructs are also close enough that I understood them intuitively.

Protip: If you know the declension of a Latin noun, you can almost always infer its grammatical gender, except for m/f nouns of 3rd declension. But if you know the Italian cognate, its gender will match, so in practice you almost never have to learn genders.

>>19608976
the man that made this hasnt worked through those books

>>19612758
True or not it still has the right idea: working trough LLPSI while using textbooks and meta-literature as supplements, then dipping your toes into actual Roman literature with Loebs and essentially getting to a level where you can read OCT's with only infrequently referring to a dictionary.

>>19612259
"So how close is Modern Spanish to Latin?

In brief, quite close. The verbal conjugations in Spanish are very similar to those of Latin in some ways. However, in Spanish there are three conjugations whereas Latin has four. Latin seems to resemble Spanish in the first person plural of most verbs.

Classic Latin Spanish

Present Tense

amare amar

amo amo

amas amas

amat ama

amamus amamos

amatis amais

amant aman

Imperfect

amabam amaba

amabas amabas

amabat amaba

amabamus amabamos

amabatis amabais

amabant amaban

Perfect

amavi amé

amavasti amaste

amavit amó

amavimus amamos

amavistis amasteis

amaverunt amaron

Imperfect Subjunctive

amarem amara

amares amaras

amaret amara

amaremus amaramos

amaretis amarais

amarent amaran"

>>19612758
>>19612793
He said that it's only a draft, but disappeared after.

If I were to create a new one, I would drop the pedagocical stuff (since there's already a good course to follow with LLPSI, pic related) and restrict the chart to classical texts. Just assume that the reader is competent in Latin, and start out with Eutropius or Nepos or Caesar, introduce a poetry branch with Catullus, and introduce authors sorted by difficulty, up to Tacitus, or whoever the end boss is.

If someone wants medieval Latin stuff, it should be a separate chart.

>>19612829
Caesar and Nepos are really not good to jump into after a first year textbook. It's been a proven filter for a lot of people you will rely on a dictionary more than is comfortable. You should honestly read the Vulgate and some medieval Latin first, along with things like Fabulae Facilies, Aesops Fables, novellas, etc.

>>19613289
> along with things like Fabulae Facilies, Aesops Fables, novellas, etc.
When I wrote "assume the reader is competent in Latin", I meant he's above readers like those. That doesn't necessarily mean he's ready after a first year textbook.

You're right in that the Vulgate is easier than the authors I mentioned, and it's old enough to be considered an authentic text that could be included in the chart, but I would restrict it to some subset, because few people interested in classical antiquity appreciate being told to read through the bible first. What's the easiest part? Gospel of Mark?

Maybe also point them to the Nova Vulgata in specific, since it should be closer to classical Latin than the older translations. Then it's kind of a bridge from readers to authentic texts.

>>19610138
sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex sex

How much time does it take to learn sanskrit?

>>19613346
I would actually recommend reading the original Vulgate to competency and then reading Classical renditions of the same segments of the Bible afterwards as a way to level up your Latin. For example I read verses by Jerome and then read Sebastian Castellion's renaissance version, which is modeled after Cicero.

>>19604064
In the case of greek you can't just use one ressource (because there is no llpsi).
Ressources you should use if you can are: -assimil greek course (if you speak french, uitalian and maybe some other languages) they speak like faggots but still.
-The italian version of athenaze (if you don't undertand italian,you should at least come back to read the passages indivudally.
-Zuntz greek course (that might get you to mastery but if you're not a language veteran, say already fluent in latin, that will be pretty hard to use.He only throw original greek at you.Best used as a reader.
anything you find that you can read generally.

>>19613703
That's really smart, once i'm finished with the llpsi serie i'll do just that

>>19610138
Is it true that knowing sanskrit will get indians sluts thirsty for your dick?

>>19613703
>>19613911
There's actually a series of books that did this called Dolphin editions. They were out of print, but Paedeia Institute has brought them back.The Aeneid version is out already on Amazon. Each line is paraphrased in more simple less poetic Latin, no English. Supposedly De Bello Gallico was planned to be released around this time, but I haven't heard anything in a while about it.

>>19613964
This looks very nice, but it's abridged, isn't it?

Also, about DBG, their website says
> Coming winter 2022

>>19614095
I guess they pushed the date back. As far as it being abridged, I have no idea bud. But anyways, that's where I got the idea of reading 2 versions of the Bible from.

.

>>19604003
Alright anons, I'm determined to learn Latin. Recommend some books.

>>19613809
>they speak like faggots
What do you mean, specifically?

>>19615800
If your first stop for book recommendations is here, then you are not as determined as you think.

Just get Wheelock for your grammar and LLPSI for your reading - nobody here is going to recommend anything other than those two. Just get them both and stop being a faggot. If you really want to fry your brain then get Latin an Intensive Course, but it's not for pussies so you should probably stick to Wheelock for your grammar.

>>19609305
Where in the wiki? been searching but there's nothing for language learning like that one in the charts pages

>>19606898
can someone learning latin really make such a simple mistake? im assuming ur first language has no relation to latin?

>>19612806
>amavasti
I could be wrong, but shouldn't it be 'amasti' (which would be a syncopated form of 'amastivi')?

>>19612806
>amavasti
I could be wrong, but shouldn't it be 'amasti' (a syncopated form of 'amavisti')?

>>19608976
>no Allen and Greenough
come on now

>>19613289
Isidorus
>straightforward and relatively simple
>multitude of topics
>introduction and repetition of key vocab and grammatical phrases
>relevant to classicists and medievalists
>short passages that don't require one to read all previous passages
wish I had picked him up years ago when I first started reading Latin

Been having trouble with Lingua Latina.
Can't manage to translate these lines
>Iulius in villa est apid servos suos - neque is iam meus dominus est!
>Verba Medi a Lydia laeta audiuntur

I translate this as being
>Julius is at home with his slaves, and now is not my master!
>Lydia was happy to hear Mede talk

I'm a bit confused as to how prepositions work can anyone explain it for me?

>>19617303
Don't translate, just read it over until you can understand it directly.

>>19617306
I'm only trying to translate this because I really don't get it. Trying to think about these two lines in Latin just don't make any sense to me. I understand that the point is only to read and understand it in Latin.

>>19617311
Word for word:
>Julius in villa is with slaves his- and-not he now my master is!
>Words of-Medus by Lydia happy are-heard
In more grammatical English, a literal reading:
>Julius is in his villa with his slaves- and he's not my master anymore!
>Medus' words are heard by the happy Lydia

>>19617324
Thank you

>>19617303
>I'm a bit confused as to how prepositions work
ahha maybe you should buy a real language teaching book instead of that haha

>>19617489
LLPSI literally has sections explaining the grammar, it just introduces grammatical concepts by analogy first.

>>19617498
I mean by example, not by analogy, fuck.

>>19617498
>, it just introduces grammatical concepts by analogy first.
obviously it doesnt work but of course because learning by looking at a bit of grammar requires effort you then hate it

>>19617501
It doesn't work? How does anyone learn their first language if you can't learn a language by examples in context?

>>19617514
>learn their first language if you c
because they are a child and learn languages differently
as far as i am aware most people in this thread are above the age of 12

>>19617514
Stop replying to him already. Every thread the same shit.

remember the man that despeately tried to say ocus was said as /okus/ not /ogəs/
i do

>>19617527
Do you somehow lose the ability to infer the meanings of words by context at the age of 12?

>>19617718
>ocus
Typo? Do you mean like in locus?

>>19617303
>Verba Medi
The words of Medus
>a Lydia laeta
by a happy Lydia
>audiuntur
are heard

>Verba Medi a Lydia laeta audiuntur
The words of Medus are heard by a happy Lydia

It's called the passive. Active would be Medus hears, passive would be Medus is heard. It basically makes the subject receive the action of the verb instead of causing it.
>active
He loves - Is amat
>passive
He is loved - Is amatur

>>19617498
>>19617514
I think you guys overestimate how easy this book is to use without any help, teacher, or secondary resources.