/lit/ - Literature

Nemo?

This thread is for

Latin
Ancient Greek
Sanskrit
Old Chinese
Hebrew
Arabic

>>19705487
What about Persian and Koine Greek?

Why does everyone hate Fulgentius?

>>19705197
I want to learn Greek but it apparently takes upwards two years to read it in its original language

I am learning the first two speeches of In Catilinam by heart.

I learned many paragraphs by heart already last year, but now I want to be able to recite them in (hopefully) entirety.

I just cant find any good poetry that would be more worth to memorize.
The only poem I have found truly profound is Hadrians Animula.
It'd be cool to hear if you guys have any favorite latin poems.

>>19705534
It's easier to read than Latin. The first year and grammar are what make it harder overall. Latin is a bitch to read because the syntax is fucking retarded, but the grammar is half as hard as Greek. I mean Greek has some 240 verb forms for Latin's 120.

Where to start with Koine Greek?

>>19707283
Ask Jesus

>>19705534
>but it apparently takes upwards two years to read it in its original language
BWAHAHA. Way longer than that. You're lucky if you can start reading literature in an easy language like French after 2 years of study.

>>19707714
This is completely untrue, unless you are spending a very small amount of time studying. Besides, reading literature literally is study, even if it isn't necessarily efficient. You can start on day one with l'Etranger and look up every word - French uses the Latin alphabet, has simple vocabulary, and the mostly relies on the same grammar as other indo-European languages.

>>19707714
I know a guy who did it in a year and he only studied it for a couple hours everyday

>>19707734
Reading actually means a fluid movement of the eyes across the page without stopping to look up every other word. And l'étranger is an an exception to most literature, which is written with a high level vocabulary.

>>19707694
κεκ

How long should I expect to take to get through Lingua Latina?
I'm about 20 days in and just reached chapter 12
>pic unrelated, just wanted to get your attention

>>19705197
I'm working on a python3 app for declensions. After the declensions section works, I'll add verb conjugations. Been having a hard time staying motivated though.

>>19708525
The intention is for it to be studied in classroom about 1 chapter a week (3 lessons per week), so about 2/3 of a year. Self-study can take that as a reference.

>>19708756
based

>>19708525
>How long should I expect to take to get through Lingua Latina
It shouldn't take long to burn that rubbish

>>19705512
Koine is covered in Ancient Greek. It is merely a dialect. Modern Persian is obviously excluded, but older forms of Persian are included.
I could have reacted to this writing, "Oh no, there's no Aramaic or Syriac." However, Hebrew was included. I'm pretty sure no one would mind me talking about Ahikar or Daniel.

>>19708525
I'm taking 3-4 days on chapters, reread, understand everything. The companion recommends one a week with an hour done everyday

>Some "emperor" cuts his wife in half then fucks a goat
>fast forward 2 millennia
>Holy shit the ancient romans were based, let's refer back to them for convenient deviance

>>19707752
No it doesn't. Reading can mean using a dictionary every step of the way. All ancient language scholars I know, some of whom are famous worldwide and known to the general public, rely on dictionaries, obviously not looking up every word. If they want to read an ancient book and chill, they read in English. If they want a bit of a challenge or are in the process of writing something professional, they read in the original.

Is Athenaze really just an introduction?

>>19710384
Lmfao at the "scholars" you know when my grandad is better than them

>>19711064
by the end of book two you should be dealing with nearly unmodified passages of ancient greek authors so once there it should at least be a good place to start delving into the easier authors directly, with a good vocabulary

>>19705197
Χαἰρετε ὦ φίλοι καί fuck jannies

>>19705534
Should take you 6-4 months to get familiar with all the grammar found in Xenophon and Lysias. The rest is just grinding vocab and building up from there.

>>19710384
>If they want a bit of a challenge, they read in the original
No what the fuck. There are people who know Iliad by heart. Who are these "world famous scholars" you know?

.

>>19710384
Checking a dictionary every 10 seconds is something a tourist does.

>>19708756
Ritalin

>>19705534
Depends on how intensively you study.

>>19707714
Pretty sure I could read literature in Esperanto after less than a year.

>>19710384
I'd be surprised if there's nobody who can just sit down and read Ancient Greek or Latin like a modern language.

>>19705725
Aeneid

>>19713856
There are, however when reading a new author or work or time period there are often odd phrases or words that need to be looked up. Hapax legomena exist. Languages changed over time and vocabularies did as well.
This is not to say 'experts' need to stop and look in a dictionary every 10 words but they definitely have one handy as well as a reference grammar. To put it another way you speak English fluently yet when reading you are bound to come across words you don't know. Why would an ancient language be any different?

>>19713916
I mean, it depends on what I'm reading, but in most of my day-to-day reading I very rarely come across a word I don't either know or can easily figure out by context.

>>19713928
perhaps you should try something a little more challenging than Cat in the Hat

>>19713944
No, I mean actual books for grown-ups. I didn't say it never happens, but it's reasonably infrequent.

>>19713944
>>19713953
Though I will say it depends on the subject matter obviously.

Learning latin is boring

>>19715377
Then stop. With that attitude you will not succeed anyways.

>>19715377
Why?

>>19705197
I'd like to get started learning ancient greek and/or latin and I'd like to hear your suggestions. What learning resources (books, websites, applications, etc.) have you used and which would you recommend?

>>19716724
For Latin, there are some books people use. I've heard good things about these:
>Lingua Latina Per Se Illustrata
>Wheelock's Latin
>Ecce Romani

>>19716732
There's an Ancient Greek equivalent to LLPSI called Athenaze. I don't know if there's a name for this genre. Poco a poco is one for Spanish.

>>19716732
>>19716755
Thanks, I'll probably start with Athenaze and check out some of the Latin courses later.

>>19715377
Well if you don't want to, you don't have to.

>>19716732
Wheelock's Latin is not particularly good, it teaches you to painstakingly 'decipher' Latin into your native language and vice versa, not to actually speak or read Latin.

So how does one learn classical Arabic? I bought an Arabic Quran in the UAE as a souvenir and thought about maybe learning the language in my free time.

>>19710343
Modern Persian appeared in the 10th century, and the majority of classical Persian poetry is written in it. I wonder if we’re all on the same page when we mean classical in the literary or linguistic sense since Chinese and Arabic writers were still writing classical poetry and prose right up until the 20th century.

So apparently everyone needs a dictionary to read any language they've learned anymore.
I'll go back in time and tell all the medieval scholars that they weren't actually able to read the languages they wrote in because dictionaries didn't exist commonly then.
>>19717349
>So how does one learn classical Arabic
Steps
1.Buy exercise book
2.Work through the book

>>19717237
you are a mentally ill nutcase

>>19717638
Which exercise book
Plus I've heard classical Arabic is really hard and you need a teacher, is this true?

>>19705197
Is learning Latin hard?

>>19717762
not anymore than any other european language

>>19717847
Reddit says it isn’t worth my time because it’s a myth that it makes learning other European languages easier and it will never increase my salary pay

>>19717878
>and it will never increase my salary pay
The richest oil merchant of the 20th century exclusively hired Latin or Ancient Greek speakers.
Reddit exclusively hires freaks.

>>19717878
>itoddler
>utilitarian
>redditor
holy cringe

>>19717930
Only emasculated men care about another mans phone. Women also see androids as poor.

>>19717974
>Women also see androids as poor.
Ah I see you are a burger as well. Lmao

>>19717237
Why do people copy and paste that bald guy's Reddit posts and then pretend they are original thoughts? I'm not even trying to be cute, you guys literally just quote Scorpio Martianus verbatim, you don't even try to put it in your own words.

>>19718120
Not that guy, but I'm new to latin and have found bald guy

What's wrong with his advice?

back then I used sites like
http://students.open.ac.uk/arts/a276/OU_Interactive_Latin/
https://funarg.nfshost.com/r2/code/languages/declensions.html
to help hammering down Latin conjugations and declensions, are there similar projects for ancient Greek?
I'm enjoying learning it through the natural method(I'm about 1/3 through the second Athenaze book) but I feel I could use some hammering down of verb forms

>>19717644
Because I think grammar translation doesn't work? The evidence seems pretty unambiguous.
>>19718120
Criticism of grammar-translation does not start with him, nowhere close kek

Jānitorēs futuere.

>>19717762
Not inherently. The way it's usually taught, yes.

>>19718710
To fuck (vaginally) the doorkeepers?

>>19718741
Etiam cinaedi

>>19718769
Do you mean 'etiam cinaedos'? Pretty sure it should be accusative, unless you mean the bottoms are doing it too rather than having it done to them.

>>19718782
If it’s a sub clause in the same sentence it would be accusative even if the verb isn’t in that clause, yes. But I didn’t care pay close enough attention because it seemed as though the joke went over the head of the person replying anyways.

>>19705197
>Are you studying a classical language? Which one?
Latin, and Middle Egyptian much more casually.
>Have you read classical language works in their original or in translation?
Not yet. I recently got a Dhouay-Rheims + Clementina Vulgata Bible which I've been going through a little bit as practice. Aside from drilling vocab and grammar with Anki and Wheelock's, I use LLPSI.
>What interests you about classical literature or the language it's written in?
Latin is both beautiful and useful. I like the look and sound of the language a lot, and want to access both Roman and Medieval literature in their original language. I also intend to use it as a stepping stone for learning other Romance languages. I'd say I'm in the low-intermediate range with Spanish, and it has helped me a lot when memorizing latin vocabulary and grammar, but studying Latin has also helped me learn Spanish more effectively too. If anyone says it isn't a useful stepping stone into other Romance languages, they're wrong. Too many cognates and grammar derivatives.

>>19711461
Jannies deserve the rope

Noli mori

In pace requiescat Robertus Sagetus.

>>19718344
He's very pretentious and self absorbed, names everything after himself. He's a geologist, but acts like he's a fucking linguist. Also what I was critiquing was how people just regurgitate whatever he says. He's like the Latin Jordan Peterson basically.

>>19718675
I said you people quote him verbatim and can't even put it into your own words. Also there is not such thing as "grammar-translation method". Grammar is an aspect of all languages and translation is a task that you can choose not to do if it doesn't interest you. If you are using Wheelock's at home, who the fuck is going to kick in your door and tell you to stop reading the sentences without translating them into English? Nobody, you fucking dumbass.

>>19719640
>reading the sentences without translating them into English

For me, doing LLPSI has been good for this. Often times I'll read a word, mean to say the English equivalent to myself, and simply say the Latin word instead of my brain translating it to English.

>>19719628
Yes but is what he says wrong in any specific way? I'm not trying to fight you, I'm just asking for knowledge. I'm new to latin and am unable to know what the best method is or whether a specific method is bad

>>19719640
It's better to internalise the definition of the foreign word, not the translation of it

>>19719847
Wheelock's is not a bad way to start at all. It covers essential grammar and vocabulary well with lots of examples and good explanations. Not exhaustive by any means but after finishing the textbook you will be able to read basic Latin and have a good foundation for improvement. The Wheelock Reader is an excellent companion book.
I have not used LLPSI, only read through it a bit. It gets a lot of praise.
If you want to learn Latin don't worry too much about the 'best' method. Pick a book and start. Study every day, even if only for 20 minutes. It seems daunting but once you get the hang of them things like declensions and subordinate clauses become second nature.
See link below for a ton of resources and various textbooks.
https://mega.nz/#F!9o4QEIIK!P3piz8Bfw-z7jgb7Q8NWDg
>>19716724
For Greek I learned through Groton's From Alpha to Omega. Decent but not great. Several years later I picked up Mastronarde's Introduction to Attic Greek and found it superior in almost every regard. Would have been nice to have had that as my initial textbook. Both have their ups and downs.
The main problem I find with Ancient Greek textbooks is the low number of example sentences and readings. Wheelock's has tons, LLPSI is all Latin, there are plenty of supplementary readers for both. When it comes to Greek however there are very few available. Greek textbooks tend to have a set number of sample sentences at the end of chapters, like 8-10 and maybe a reading. Greek is also a little harder to dive in to reading actual texts than Latin generally speaking.
On a side note, for native English speakers at least, Greek and Latin tend to have opposite learning curves. Greek is a pain at first but becomes easier fairly rapidly after the initial hump. Latin is easy at first but becomes difficult with more advanced readings. I think this is because the Greek usage of articles and Latin dumping virtually everything into the subjunctive. Takes a bit more effort and study to master.

>>19719847
Wheelock is a traditional grammar primer that gets absolutely bashed by the bald guy's fans on R*ddit and D*scord. Many of them used it and hated it and so now they are on a rampage to tell everyone it's the worst thing ever created in human history.

Objectively is just a textbook that teachers grammar in the old style systematically. It's flaws are that it doesn't teach enough vocab and it has little reading material. This can be supplemented by combining it with a graded reader like LLPSI instead of choosing between them.

The bald guy's cult says you have to pick between them and if you get Wheelock pages on your skin that you don't actually know Latin and you are a fraud. I wish this was a joke, but go to the Latin subr*ddit and search "wheelock" and try not to cringe.

>>19717237
>it teaches you to painstakingly 'decipher' Latin into your native language and vice versa, not to actually speak or read Latin.

I don't really understand how these two things are different. Every other language I've learned, I began mentally translating it into English. That process never went away, it just became faster as I practiced more.

Has anyone gone through Wheelock after doing Familia Romana? If so, would you recommend it, or would it be redundant?

>>19720252
I'm doing both at the same time. There are some words not in Familia Romana so it's great for vocab. Also it's nice to have the grammar explicit so you know how to discuss it.

>>19720145
Again, these people are in a cult so don't try to make sense of it. They talk about LLPSI like it's fucking magic. Wheelock does the same damn thing as every other language book on the market except you don't learn how to ask where the airport or train station are.

>>19720326
I mean, I started with LLPSI. It's a good book, but I was still translating the latin in my head. I don't see how there is any other way to understand it.

>>19720145
There's a difference between translating on the basis of actually understanding and 'translating' by identifying words and forms and 'construing' it into English.
>>19720469
It's simple, you understand the Latin directly just like you understand English. That's what LLPSI is specifically designed to be conducive to.

>>19720137
>go to the Latin subr*ddit
you have to go back
don't send anyone there
I couldn't give less of a fuck about what plebbit thinks on any given topic and neither should you

>>19720252
I did the opposite, Wheelock back in college and about a decade later LLPSI just to see what it is. Both would be great together as >>19720321 says. Wheelock does a good job of explaining grammatical concepts and laying them out. LLPSI is excellent for reading pure Latin from the get-go.
I went straight from Wheelock to Virgil as that was the first upper division Latin course I took. It was not an easy or smooth transition but I was equipped enough for it. A friend of mine went straight from Wheelock to Tacitus which he said was awful, though Tacitus is hard for pretty much everyone the first time they read him.
It would not hurt to go through Wheelock as a type of review. There are some things in it that aren't in Familia Romana and vice versa. In fact when reviewing, brushing up or just for the hell of it I recommend using different textbooks in general. You will probably breeze through the first half. Couldn't hurt.

https://eidolon.pub/teaching-latin-to-humans-4e6b489b4e17
http://blogicarian.blogspot.com/2019/03/argumentum-ad-ignorantiam.html

I'm guessing Duolingo isn't any good for Latin lol

>>19720321
>>19721431
Thanks for the help.

Anyone studying non-Western classical languages?

>>19722149
It only teaches the present tense for verbs, it only has 2 units so it's very short, and the sentences are pretty ridiculous like "I want to destroy the drunk parrots".

You can learn so words and get a nice initiation to the language if you have experience though. So it's worth doing for a few weeks just to kill time.

>>19723603
*no expereince

.

>>19717147

Athenaze sucks, you get overloaded with text well before you know enough grammar to understand basic sentences. It presents everything in a badly fragmented way, you will end up doing way too many lessons for too little new information. And it all trickles in out of order

>>19722149
Honestly, Duolingo isn't much good in general, having tried it.

>>19723273
妾乃學漢文者、以漢文筆談如何?

>>19724875
>you get overloaded with text well before you know enough grammar to understand basic sentences
That's the whole point- you learn grammatical concepts by repeated exposure first and then have them explained to you once you've already seen many examples, just like in your native language. There's a difference between acquiring a language and merely learning metalinguistic knowledge about a language.

>>19724910

>That's the whole point- you learn grammatical concepts by repeated exposure first and then have them explained to you once you've already seen many examples, just like in your native language. There's a difference between acquiring a language and merely learning metalinguistic knowledge about a language.

It's extremely tedious. Athenaze is a shift towards teaching Greek in a style normgroids learn foreign languages in during highschool. Teaching something like Spanish in a way that accommodates low ability and unmotivated students. And wahmen, who think less systematically about things

>>19724919
It's better than merely learning metalinguistic knowledge that enables you to "decipher" Greek into your native language instead of learning to actually understand Greek directly as Greek.

>>19724924
>metalinguistic knowledge
you don't read Greek

>>19724952
I read multiple languages other than English.

>>19724875
Well I already ordered the book since what I have read about it sounded pretty good. Honestly, the whole "overloaded with text" thing sounds good to me. Like >>19724910
said, it makes more sense learning a language through exposure than by strict memorization and application of grammar rules and such. I know more spanish from living and working with mexicans than I remember learning in all my years of grade school classes. I probably couldn't tell you the first thing about english grammar rules either despite being fluent in it my whole life.

>>19724975
you don't read Greek

>>19724990
No, because I haven't spent enough time on it. But I do read Esperanto fluently, and Spanish and Japanese decently- without analysis, naturally.

>>19724924

>>19724924
>>19724975

I don't perceive a gap between "translating" and reading. People who assert that are usually literally spergs or stupid people. Like you either have all the rules rigidly memorized in your mind that gets in the way of fluid reading (sperg) or you are reading in a way where you're trying to go as fast as possible without reflecting on the sound and flow of thought and referencing rules and definitions constantly. You can translate slowly, then reflect on what you've translated to understand the style and flow of thought. When there's a difference in basic perceptions I just lose interest. People having problems that shouldn't exist. Reality is usually on my side, the teaching style chose by Athenaze and the "problem" you are asserting here likely reflects a bad human quality and it's annoying to have to pore over it and solve what exactly is wrong with you

>>19724994
>doesn't read Greek
>arrogantly tells others how to learn Greek
>ardently recommends a book he has never used
peak midwit
protip: the first section of Athenaze is 5 pages long. It contains one (1) page with 'many examples' of Greek text - slightly more than 9 lines. The other 4 pages are all 'metalinguistic knowledge'.
You don't know what you're talking about. Go start an Esperanto thread.

>>19725026
>I don't perceive a gap between "translating" and reading.
Then you are monolingual.
>>19725028
I am speaking on the basis of all known scientific findings about language acquisition.

>>19725031

>Then you are monolingual.

It isn't difficult for me to direct words to concepts. I don't generally think in rigid rules, stereotypes, whatever. Linguistic preconceptions or something. My brain is not legalistic

>>19725031
>I don't read Greek
>I am speaking
Your posts summed up.

>>19725042
Again, I am speaking on the basis of all known scientific findings about language acquisition. What goes for French and Mandarin and Irish and Bengali and Korean goes for Ancient Greek because they're all natural human languages.

>>19725074
You are in a discussion about textbooks for learning Greek. Not only do you not know Greek but you have not even used the text in question.
You don't know what you're talking about.

>>19725074

"Science" regarding pedagogy is really dodgy. You know it all revolves around how to trick blacks into retaining material?

>>19724888
爾爲何學書古文? 學讀足也。

>>19713105

But that's adderall, say no no to addie cat! Ritalin has far less neurotoxicity than adderall!!

>>19725238
欲與人交筆談也。惟能讀而不能用之者、豈可為識之?

>>19725130
>>>/pol/

>>19725130
False
t. I work in education

>>19724994
>No, because I haven't spent enough time on it. But I do read Esperanto fluently

>>19725922
Don't be mean

>>19725922
I do, though. Do you have some reason to disbelieve me?

>>19710380
what? remind me who the fuck did that?

>>19718120
agreed, ranieri is annoying imo but as a balding man im gonna have to ask you to refrain from slandering us

>>19726147
Thats what makes it funny anon we know that you really are that much of a faggot

>>19726333
Why is that funny? Esperanto's a perfectly good language.

What do you guys think about memorizing the latin paradigms? i started about 5 days ago and ive mostly been doing that i guess as a precursor to really applying it. is this a good strat? i enjoy it too much, ive stopped playing games on my phone and spend more time writing and typing out the tables.

>>19724994
>Esperanto
I can't believe somebody would actually learn this stupid ''language''

>>19726360
Would probably be more useful to just read LLPSI but if it's what works for you.

>>19726372
In what sense is Esperanto not a language? It's spoken by one to two million people, including one to two thousand native speakers, and used for every purpose that natural languages are used for.

>>19726345
lol fag

>>19726532
Not an argument.

>>19726374
LLPSI is fucking annoying imo. i read the first 3 or 4 chapters. is that really the best way?

>>19726541
What's so annoying about it? It seems pretty painless to me.

>>19726545
cuz i wanna go at my own pace, not read along some faggot ass children's story. i guess it would lay a solid foundation but im an impatient person. maybe as it goes on it becomes more bearable but from where i read up to, i thought it was shit.

>>19726564
I don't think there's any shortcut to language acquisition. Comprehensible input is always the most important thing.

>>19726575
so im doing it wrong?

>>19726593
I mean, how are you doing it? LLPSI seems like a good first step.

This thread was moved to >>>/int/157953832