/lit/ - Literature

Πρῶτος ὑπὲρ τοῦ Σνῆδος τοῦ ἀυτουργοῦ

is there any good digitalization of Lambdin’s Introduction to Sahidic Coptic? the only one I’m able to find is shitty, although I can probably make it with it

>>19861350
>>revive Middle Egyptian!
Revive a language with no written vowels and zero audio recordings to reconstruct the phonology? Just revive Coptic ffs. At least we know what it sounds like.

>>19861375
https://gnosis.study/
>Scroll down on the left side
>Click Coptic
>Click textbooks
Godspeed comrade

>>19861382
b-but we can reconstruct some words of it!

>>19861393
Most people use:
1. Egyptological pronunciation - which is dogshit
2. Greek pronunciation of names (which is what we use in English) - also dogshit
3. OR Coptic pronunciation. In which case, why not just revive Coptic? At least we can have Coptic keyboard and it's easier to write.

>>19861405
well, I know reviving Middle Egyptian is nearly impossible. was just a joke, you know. but no one can deny the fact that hieroglyphs are much more SOVLFVL than an alphabet derived from Greek’s
btw, writing it would be quite easy if we had keyboards like Chinese/Japanese

>>19861418
Classical Maya has better hieroglyphs in my opinion and would be easier for a keyboard because they are all roughly the same shape and there's less of them.

>>19861350
>>revive Middle Egyptian!
revive Akkadian/Babylonian!

>>19861951
equally based

>>19861951
You'll never have a ziggurat

>>19861951
hello martin worthington

To the anon who recommended me that Classical Chinese textbook: you are very based

>>19862119
It's good when we are able to help eachother

Started the Gallic Wars and it’s super easy for me to read. Feels good bros

>>19862284
Really? A lot of dudes on here say it's brutal despite feeling like they made progress up until that point.

>>19862372
It really isn’t. Caesar for the most part uses relatively simple and straightforward sentences compared to say, Cicero or Livy. Besides vocabulary, if you understand relative clauses, the various ut clauses, indirect statement, cum clauses, and participles, there’s not trouble to be had. And maybe to a less far along person this sounds like alot, but once you get going it slowly gets easier. I’ve been trying to read naturally and not scan.

>>19862412
It's funny because most of the people I've seen who say they struggle with it are LLPSI purists who refuse to touch a grammar

Reminder to Middle Egyptian autists that there is a good version of the hieratic text of the Shipwrecked Sailor by William Clay Poe.
Reminder to Akkadian autists that there are computer-generated and commentated editions of Standard Babylonian literary texts in the State Archives of Assyria Cuneiform Texts series, and some of them are on libgen.

>>19862441
That’s incredibly foolish, if you ask me. I learned with Wheelocks. I believe that you need very strong understanding of the grammar, moreso than anything. And from this when you go to read, you’ll be able to more easily discern what each construction is without having to skip to the end of the sentence. And the meaning of things like the datives and ablatives that come in the beginning of a clause will easily be clear. I have LLPSI but I’ve barely used it. If anyone is struggling, i’d say get Wheelock’s and grind your grammar, verb forms, and vocab

>>19862451
>autists
IT’S NOT OUR FAULT!!! SOCIETY DOESN’T UNDERSTAND US!!!!!

>>19862458
>tfw Sumerology is so autistic that there are few to no commentated cuneiform editions of any Sumerian literary texts

>>19862441
I struggle with it after using LLPSI and grammar texts.

Vocabulary is a big problem for me. And getting lost in these run-on sentences with clause upon clause upon clause until I forget what the sentence is even about.

I still run into bits where I can look up every single word, stare at it, and not make sense of it.

>>19862496
After awhile you get used to that

>>19862456
I have both but I fell for the INPOOT meme and quit around chapter 16 even though I understood everything and was enjoying it. I was being told that I was learning the wrong way and would never be able to read anything and it discouraged me.

I've been sluggishly trying to get through LLPSI. It took me months just to get from chapter 3 to 11 because it's so fucking boring and I don't understand what the hell is happening grammatically. I can read it fine enough, this was never my issue, but I don't feel like I understand how to use the language at all. And I reread over and over just in case I'm missing something and then I get sick of the chapter because I've read it so many times.

And the worst part of all is that if you try to have a rational conversation about these issues with LLPSI fans they just accuse you of "not using the book the right way" or being "filtered". Or they say use a grammar after you finish Orberg, which defeats the fucking purpose.
>use a grammar to teach you the language after you complete the textbook that is supposed to teach you the language
aight bet

>>19862570
This ‘learning the wrong way’ nonsense is ridiculously. If you are intelligent and consciously apply yourself, you can take the technical knowledge of the language and use it to read naturally. The LLPSI stultii who are always posting in these threads are being dogmatic for no reason. In my opinion, that book is meant as a supplement for a grammar book. Or to accustom yourself to reading fluently after learning grammar.
Latin isn’t a math equation or a puzzle, it’s a meaningful language. I went from having to look up tons of words and scanning autistically, treating it like an equation, to just reading it. But to get to this point you need to have a very thorough understanding of grammar minutia. I don’t even remember most of the subjunctive endings, for example, from the top of my head. But through context I know the meaning nonetheless.
Also, when it comes to vocabulary, you need to think of each word as itself, in latin, rather than with an english definition. Most words can have multiple english definitions, so having the wrong one in mind can trip you up. for example, ‘acer’ can mean sharp, bitter, pungent, ardent, active, strong, brave, valiant, fierce, etc. so it’s better just to know it as ‘acer.’ And I think this is the key to reading well, along with consciously trying to wean off translating into english in your head. Like after you read a sentence, think about it with the Latin rather than considering the contents in English. I hope this make sense

Greek is so hard bros I want to ἀποκτενοῦμαι

>>19862772
Thanks dad.

>>19862818
Being a Latin student and constantly seeing Greek students on suicide watch in these threads is like when the next door neighbor is beating his wife, and then the next day you check the mail at the same time and pretend you have no idea what's going on over there.

I just want you guys to know that I am praying for you, but I don't want any part of what's going on over there.

>>19862846
Latin to Greek is rough

>>19862855
I might be a pussy and just skip it for Coptic, then go back to Greek. But that's probably stupid. I'll have to bite the bullet eventually.

>>19861382
I 100% support the expansion of coptic.

>>19862873
Be sure to check out the resources I mentioned here: >>19861387
And also this Egyptologist has multiple complete courses using the most popular textbooks 100% free.
>https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjLuQOYWne-pi9MmIf2T8JA

Does anybody have recommendations on where to begin with Sanskrit?

>>19862883
>An Egyptologist Plays Assassin's Creed Origins (Part 1)
Kek. I must watch it, unironically.
Nice channel, anon.

>>19862891
From another thread a few days ago:
>Samskrta-Subodhini: A Sanskrit Primer, Madhav Deshpande
>Cambridge Introduction to Sanskrit, Ruppel.
>https://arshaavinash.in/index.php/books-on-sanskrit-grammar/

I have no idea if these resources are shit, but the people who posted them seemed to know what they were talking about. Best of luck man.
>>19862909
His vids are pretty cool. His specialty is in Egyptian linguistics so he teaches, even rare shit like Late Egyptian.

How exactly should one pronounce these consonant clusters?
>ⲉⲧϩⲛⲙⲡⲏⲩⲉ
>ⲧⲉⲕⲙⲛⲧⲣⲣⲟ

>>19862496
If vocab is an issue, starting with Caesar or any other classical texts will just fuck you over. I don't know why Classicists hate reading past Ovid but there is a ton of good Latin from the Middle ages that will be easier for you to read and build a vocabulary. I recommend picking up Beeson's Primer of Medieval Latin. It has simpler texts with simpler vocabulary. If you can read through that fluently, then maybe you can start looking at ancient prose. But just diving into Caesar is retarded imo.

>>19862451
I am, unfortunately, not an Assyriologist. Could explain the computer-generated and commentated part? What is the computer generating, the commentary?

>>19862496
>>19863008
Thoughts on the Vulgate?

>>19862930
i didnt like samskritasubodhini, i thought the exercises were badly designed & didnt have enough to read. there was stuff like "correct the mistakes" but not enough stuff to read that didn't have mistakes in it

imo best books for sanskrit are Killingley (very hard to find), Assimil (only from french base), and Stiehl's Sanskrit-Kompendium (only from a german base and without continuous reading, just disconnected sentences). most of the english-base sanskrit book just dont have enogh sanskrit in them

Can we ban Latin in the next /clg/ thread? I hate the LLPSI debates and shilling. It's so low-level and stupid, the same conversations again and again by people who will likely never read real Latin, and if they do, they will never learn another ancient language, like Greek.

>>19863007
As they are. No other help there just something new you need to practice.
>>19861350
Of ffs its turning into the autistic /lang/ op.

>>19863038
The Vulgate is good for easy and familiar reading. But it is bad for getting a sense of Latin syntax. Almost no Latin prose preceding it uses the language the way Jerome does (the reasons for this have to do with how J translates from Greek which has a far richer participial and verbal system than Latin). Latin prose after the Vulgate does sometimes mimic it but I find this is more common in patristic texts, homiletic literature, or texts directly commenting on/using the Vulgate. As a source for practice with vocab and easy reading it's pretty great. Just don't get the misimpression that Latin syntax and prose usually looks the way it does in the Bible (think of how the KJV doesn't really read like regular spoken English even for the time at which it was produced).

>>19863064
I’m sorry sir but I do believe Latin is a classical language

>>19863064
Thread has been pretty civil so far until you started typing.

>>19863073
>Of ffs its turning into the autistic /lang/ op
what are you talking about? i’ve never created a /lang/ thread

>>19863089
>if you complain about a problem you cause it
Just fuck off and don't reply

>>19863117
Um…erm…who are you quoting?

>>19863111
>’ve never created a /lang/ thread
I never said you did. I said it looks like a stupid lang thread.
Stop posting random nonsense jn the op that doesnt help anyone

>>19861382
I thought we actually knew quite a bit about the vowels, between Coptic reflexes and borrowings/name transcriptions in languages that did write vowels.

>>19862119
Glad I could help. (I think it's me you're talking about? Unless someone else recommended a Classical Chinese textbook to someone while I wasn't around.)

>>19863007
Doesn't the mark above letters indicate you should pronounce an "e" before it? At least in liturgical pronunciation.

>>19861375
>>19861387
>>19862883
>>19862909
>>19862930
Lexicity and Lexilogos also have a good deal of resources for Coptic.

>>19863038
I've found the vulgate to be pretty easy reading (if dry and dull). But it feels dumbed down compared to other 'real' latin I've read (Eutropius, Caesar, Nepos). I'm picking up vocab from reading it, but I don't feel like it's training me to parse more complicated grammar.

>>19863008
>Beeson

Looks like texts are about the right level for me. But I'm wary of just plowing through without a translation to check myself against.

>>19863080
>>19863089
I am referring to all previous threads. This thread is still new. Watch it devolve. Also, the Latin conversation is not at all constructive. It's just posers who have yet to achieve any level of fluency telling people why learning via Wheelock or another commonly taught textbook is wrong. These morons try to make a moral crusade out if it. They are not here to talk about Caesar but some other bald guy, except that guy hasnt done shit, other than bring Scientology-speak and alternative medicine terminology to Latin.

>>19862891
>>19862930

thank me later

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKoKKjOAZ2U&ab_channel=dekaglossai

>>19863220
But I want to talk about Caesar

>>19863125
Nope. We don't even know how to say the name of the country. We only know KMT and the language we only know as RKMT.

We say "Kemet", but most of our pronunciation comes from Greek and like you said, Coptic. But using Coptic pronunciation from 1 or 2 thousand years ago to recreated pronunciation 5 thousand years ago is a fool's errand. If we understood it, then we would stop transcribing without vowels and create a vowel system like Hebrew and Arabic has added later on.

>>19863220
I'm the original guy you were replying to and I fucking hate those people too, but you are manifesting the thing you were worried about. Let's get back to talking about languages bro.

>>19863257
Wiktionary claims it's reconstructed as /ˈkuːmat/ in Old Egyptian, shifting to /ˈkuːmaʔ/ in Middle Egyptian and /ˈkeːmə/ in Late Egyptian.

>>19863216
You might be able to find translations of the Beeson texts online but I would bet a lot haven't been translated. They should be simple enough for you to work out with a grammar. But if you don't trust yourself to be able to read them it sounds like you need to just dive in and learn to trust your abilities. You can't use translations as a crutch forever.

>>19863267
I like Wiktionary for grammar charts and for the most part, definitions, but I have never used it as a source for pronunciation. I don't think I would recommend that either. You should buy a book on Egyptian phonology and you might be surprised how many people disagree with eachother.

>>19863237
I can confirm, this channel is based af.

>>19863250
That's fine, but we ought to take measures to curtail the thread shitters. The way I see it, if we can just disrupt the LLPSI cultists for one week, they might lose their fervor. And in the meantime, I can happily discuss a subject related to the other classical languages I know. Do you have a different solution to the annoyance of LLPSI shilling and debate?

>>19863275
For the languages I'm familiar with its pronunciation information has been pretty good so I've tended to assume it's good for other languages too. I guess I should have figured reconstructions would differ, though, like they do for Old Chinese.

>>19863287
I wouldn't use it for ancient languages in particular. If you just need to look up a Spanish or French word, you should be fine. But like Wikipedia, the person who edits is making an editorial decision. With ancient languages you have multiple options to choose from and it's not clear why the person who made that edit chose that source over another. Egyptian phonology is absolutely not set in stone.

>>19863298
For Old and Middle Chinese they report multiple reconstructions, maybe they just haven't gotten around to adding that for Egyptian.

>>19863321
can trust someone copying a grammar paradigm on Wiktionary, but when it comes to studying thousand year old phonology, I would want a clearly sourced text written by someone with a PHD. That's just myself personally.

>>19863339
I think they do cite a couple sources actually, I'll have to check them some time. (I'm also assuming for more recent values there's a bit more confidence.)

>>19863216
>the vulgate isn't real latin
Ehhhh

>>19863286
Just actually discuss languages and not textbooks about languages

>>19863352
I think he misspoke. We understand what he was trying to say.

can't find the aorist of ἐμποδίζω, is it unattested? if I'm making my own custom Anki set should I leave it empty or make it up according to standard forming rules?(e.g ἐνέπόδισα)?

>>19863286
The only solution I can see working is to make the posts you want to read, and ignore the shitters entirely

>>19863377
>making my own custom Anki set
I get so frustrated with Anki. You actually like making cards?

>I think he misspoke. We understand what he was trying to say

What do you guys thinks of
>Nuntii, missi qui pacem peterent, redierunt.
Valid use of the relative clause of purpose or not?
The original sentence is
>the messangers, who were sent to seek peace, have returned

>>19863377
>anki
Just recite it like a normal person
Flashcards sre what I expect a teenage girl to expect to work

>>19863399
I'm a keeper of the peace, not a soldier.

>>19863391
>>19863407
I find it instructive to build it in the first place, I'm doing Athenaze, when I'm done with a chapter I build a set for it from scratch with an example phrase for each card(usually directly copied from the chapter).
I think re-reading a phrase multiple times with the noun/verb/etc... in context is the most important part

>>19863377
>>19863391
>>19863407
Make flashcards for conjugation is retarded. Only use flashcards for vocabulary. You learn conjugation rules by repeated writing out the different forms from memory or construction in your head.\
Personally, i find anki extremely helpful. It's also quite nice because I can use a program i stitched together that get's the dictionary definitions of every word below a certain frequency threshold in what ever text im reading and have it automatically generate an anki flashcard deck.

>>19863407
Spaced repetition really is effective though, it's founded on research about memory.

>>19863428
>dude science
Yeah bye

>>19863403
feels off to me. i cant figure out why though. i think should just use ut pacem peterent or ad pacem petendam

>>19863435
Are you saying that science isn't an effective way to know things about reality? You should probably give up that computer and the Internet, then, we have them thanks to science.

>>19863428
> it's founded on research
Ughhh well there goes the thread. They're here now.

>>19863445
What, exactly, is your problem? Do you have some objection to the scientific method?

>>19863445
people who are nerds about spaced repetition dont have a large overlap with people who are nerds about comprehensible input, if thats what you mean

>>19863437
Yeah, that's why i'm not sure if i should rephrase it. It feels a little off to me too, which i think is because it is a relative clause of purpose dependent on a participle rather than a "true" - if you will - verb, and I don't recall ever seeing that in my readings. I guess i'll just rephrase it to the more expected layout.

>>19863444
Not the same guy, but it's kind of crazy how tonedeaf you guys are.

These people who promote this stuff are mostly STEM nerds who know absolutely nothing about the humanities or linguistics and are just trying to cram (and immediately forget) for med school exams.These are the same people who think its moral for algorithms to make decisions for them because it's more "efficient".

>>19863427
obviously I record only the principal parts, Ancient Greek can be quite irregular with those and you can't always deduce other principal parts from the present root, which is why in principle you need to know 6

>>19863457
I just mean this argument of "Old method. If ain't broke, don't fix it" vs "New data has shown that actually..."

>>19863469
But spaced repetition is specifically optimized for maximizing long-term recall, not just temporary recall.

>>19863490
>specifically optimized for maximizing
Jesus Christ, how do you people even end up in debates about the humanities?

>>19863490
Language learning isn't about "optimization" or "maximizing". You must be a naive college student.

>>19863487
i think in both cases its important to note that the old method doesnt work for most people. the number of people who take latin or whatver in school and dont learn shit is extremely high.

also yeah we can say well all these old german classicists in the 19th century memorized their paradigms and shit, but thats a small selection of people already and all of them were doing latin for like 20 hours a week from the age of 10. no one does that anymore.

that said i dont want to shit up this thread with more pointless arguing just wanted to share some stuff that i dont really see most people mention

>>19863352
That is not what I said. In fact, I referred to the Vulgate as 'real' Latin, but wanted to convey that it felt simplified compared to other classical texts I had read.

What I mean by 'real' Latin is simply any text not written for beginners learning the language, but a text written by Latin speakers to convey information to other Latin speakers.

>>19863274
>You can't use translations as a crutch forever

I probably will.

also re: spaced repetition, my personal experience was that i learned a fuckload of latin vocab that way in high school and still remember most/all of it, but its kind of mind killing and i would prefer to just read nowadays

>>19863506
I'm not taking sides on old vs new method. I was merely bemoaning the imminent derailing of another thread.

How difficult is it to read modern authors that used Latin compared classical ones. I want to learn how to read Latin, so I can read Descartes, More, Spinoza, etc. in the original language.

>>19863512
Takes up all my study time making cards

>>19863519
reasonable stance. unfortunaely that seems to be what has happened.

anyone here read much medieval latin? I want to read some more esp after reading Curtius' European Literature and the Latin MIddle Ages. Might start with Alan of Lille.

>>19863527
I would think Renaissance and Neo-Latin authors would be harder than Medieval Latin since they attempt to "purify" the language to be more Classical. But I can't comment beyond that.

>>19863533
Have you tried any Late Latin?

>>19863548
Not really. I kinda want to read Martianus Capella which I know is not something any unergraduate ever says. Might check out some of the late antique poets too like Claudian and Ausonius.

>>19863552
No Augustine?

>>19863533
>medieval latin
only poetry: Carmina Burana, Archipoeta, Walter of Chatillon, De contemptu mundi (all mostly pretty easy because they use simple grammar, had a field day with Walter tracking all his quotes of classical authors)
the only difficulty is they sometimes use nonstandard spelling
iirc there's also a late medieval erotic novel written by a prelate who later became pope

>>19863565
historia de duobus amantibus? I read a piece of it and it was pretty cool, might try to find a full copy. And thanks for the poetry suggestions

>>19863564
Good idea. it wasn't an exhaustive list just a handful of people id been thinking about.

i don't come from a christian background but theres surely a lot of interesting stuff in what augustine wrote anyways

Is it a classical conlang?

>>19863574
>historia de duobus amantibus
yes
also another late latin poem which I like is Pervigilium Veneris

>>19863037
Sorry, I should have clarified: by computer-generated I meant computer-generated signs, which is ideal for students still learning the 'paradigmatic' Neo-Assyrian sign forms; by commentary I mean that some of the editions have philological notes for difficult/reconstructed lines.

>>19863591
Interlingua is better. Just modern Latin without the shitty German endings and Slavic grammar.

>>19863591
conlangs are autistic and one shouldn't waste his precious energy on them but rather should focus on studying real languages.

I’m that guy who is only learning Latin solely to read the vulgate, and I must say it is fun. I can see when reading other earlier authors that it is totally a different register in comparison, but it’s also a translation, so Jerome tried to stick as close as possible to the original languages. (This sometimes made questionable Latin). Sebastian Castellio’s bible translation into a “Ciceronian” style is really cool, albeit harder for me, as it’s written from the original languages into Latin without conforming to foreign idiom. It’s “pure”, or as close as can be in a translation. My opinion is the vulgate is not a model to follow for Latin composition, but it is a style and work of art to be admired by itself.

>>19863611
I disagree. I think studying a conlang is worth it as long as it has content to go with it. For example if you are hardcore into Tolkien and you read all the extra books like the Silmarillion and History of Middle Earth, then why not learn Quenya or Sindarin?

Esperanto? Hello no.

>>19863624
I'm the guy who's always talking about Sebastian Casellion's translation. Hi, hope your studies are going well.

>>19863636
Some very generous and nice person has transcribed the gospels and Genesis from google scans into macronized and pretty files on wordpress. Check it out if you haven’t already.

>>19863627
The only people who don't like ConLangs on principle are losers from second-rate failure Empires like Russia or France and academics butthurt that languages change.

Having said that a given community can be terrible and unless you're learning a ConLang for the fun of it, as part of some linguistic purism scheme, or as an exercise in linguistics I have to ask what the fuck you're doing.

>>19863657
https://la.wikisource.org/wiki/Biblia_Sacra_interprete_Sebastiano_Castellione
More books, but without macrons. Still more legible than the scans.

https://discord.gg/xSZktAf5
This is a discord for the interest-takers or believers of ancient and classical beliefs. Everyone welcome.

>>19863694
go back

>>19863694
cringe discord trannies

Since some people started talking about Anki, is there any easy and quick way to make a deck from almost 1,000 these words?
https://dcc.dickinson.edu/latin-core-list1

>>19862818
sry but αποκτεινω is not a verbum vocalium and does not take the medium to mean kys. it's βούλομαι ἀποκτείνειν εμαυτόν. now go and do it.

>>19863819
You don’t get pussy. Not him btw

>>19863769
No. Shit takes forever

>>19863455
Yes, it's gay

>If you trust a woman, she will steal everything of value and leave you for dead in the middle of nowhere
>Get revenge by giving her leprosy

Based medievals.

>>19863980
>he hasn't read Schopenhauer yet

>>19863495
>>19863500
Do you wanna learn things the most effective way or not? You only have so much time in your life and infinite oceans of knowledge before you.

>>19864112
You need to feel the language within yourself

>>19863529
You could use a premade deck. Or just make cards of words you don't know as you encounter them while reading; that will only take a few seconds for each one.

>>19863591
Kvankam ja lerninda, ne, Esperanto ne estas klasika lingvo; kiel tiun nomon povas meriti lingvo ekzistanta jam de nur la 19a jarcento?

>>19864112
>You only have so much time in your life and infinite oceans of knowledge before you.
in other words, attempting to autistically ''optimize'' learning is a fool's errand

>>19863608
Unfortunately nobody speaks Interlingua, even compared to Esperanto.
>>19863627
But there's a bunch of content in Esperanto.

>>19863769
>>19863887
Given anki's open source I wouldn't be surprised if there's some plugin that will do that. You might have to write some code yourself to extract the contents of the list, though.

>>19864118
How does using spaced repetition preclude that? I don't think it suffices all on its own, but it can be very helpful as a supplement.
>>19864132
Why? There is a fact of the matter about what works.

>>19864163
Well anon, I think that whatever works for you is good and that there isn’t much use in arguing about the specifics

>>19864178
I suppose, though I think it's a shame some people don't use spaced repetition when it would work very well for them.

>>19864163
optimizing learning by deeming a language 'useless' because of a limited range of texts, that is

>>19863538
I imagine the best way to learn it would be best to stick to classical Latin. I also wonder how much variation there is between them. Do explicitly Catholic authors like Erasmus and More incorporate more from medieval Latin than secular writers like Hobbes and Spinoza?

>>19864284
The utility function is not up for grabs. What you want to learn is what you want to learn, unless there's some other thing that's your ultimate goal and you're mistaken about how to accomplish it. But presumably nobody values taking longer to learn what they want to learn, provided they don't sacrifice depth or quality of learning.

>>19863769
I found it!
https://ankiweb.net/shared/info/180623737

Has anyone here studied Pali? If so, have you read the Pali Canon, and would you suggest any translations of Theravada or Early Buddhist texts? I've read translations by Bhikkhu Bodhi, Thanissaro Bhikkhu, and Bhikkhu Sujato, among others.

>>19863678
Holy fuck, this is actually amazing. I can’t thank you enough. I was writing it out at a snail’s pace and only just finished Acts in a month lol. Cheers!

>>19864325
I only know the basics, but any translation by a monk is good in my experience. Thanissaro has good footnotes for when his translation needs explanation. I've only read the other two on suttacentral and there's no footnotes.
Learning the original terms used for important concepts will help a lot though. For example, I was surprised to learn that the term for rebirth is "punnabhava" or "becoming again" and doesn't contain the word "jati" or "birth". Some translations will render "jati" as rebirth.
The only translation to steer clear of is anything connected to is anything related to puredhamma.net. He's Sri Lankan and makes connections between Pali and his native Sinhala language that lead to errors.

My professor of Greek says that Homer is about one or two months of difficulty,* cramming in "building blocks" or the epithets which reoccur each hundreds of times throughout the poems. Then that after that, he becames so easy you can read him on the train. An exaggeration?

*assuming a pre-existing knowledge of the elements of classical grammar and vocabulary

>>19863552
Martianus Capella is not easy Latin at all. Ausonius is great. I'd also recommend reading Prudentius.

My Latin professor was a dyke and more than half of the people in the class were women. And I'm more certain than ever now that most people in classics programs are women. Classics is for fags and women and therefore dead.

>>19865041
Based anon
We're doomed, everything is lost
Can't even study anymore without women being everywhere, life is a consonant struggle with demonic transgender attacks on my mind, 1984 mind manipulation, feminist doublespeak, 'diversity' resulting in the destruction of europe
I weep, stay strong brother

>They didn't even name their women

>>19864477
Ah, thanks for that. I've been starting my practice with "Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammasambuddhassa." Just thought I'd inquire. :-)

>>19865066
ceterum transexuales censeo esse delendos (neque delendas)

What are some cool untranslated Latin works I can read?

>>19865559
Any of George Buchanans works
Poems plays and political tracts

>>19865559
Google books has hundreds of Neo-Latin books from the 1500s through to the 1900s that aren't translated. Pree cool actually

Quid agitis amici?

>>19861350
I started Illiad today (it is a translation, unfortunately). This shit is awesome. I cannot comprehend why no one I know has ever told me to read it

>>19864551
οἱ δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ὀνείαθ᾽ ἑτοῖμα προκείμενα χεῖρας ἴαλλον.

>>19864335
Vale amice

>>19866438
linguae latinae disceo, et tu?

>>19864306
you're quite right about that
but the original anon (you?) opposed learning conlangs because ''one shouldn't waste his precious energy on them'', which seems an attempt to 'optimize' the amount of 'real'
literature one gets access to while, as (perhaps) another anon said, time is limited but knowledge to be gained is not

>>19867034
Quid est "disceo"?

>Docere = instruere
Magistri docent

>Discere = Studere
Discipuli discunt

>>19867034
Bonam fortunam! Vinum bibo cum amicis

>>19867059
He mistook disco for a second conjugation verb, c'mon, professor.

>>19867059
"Discēre" significat linguam Latinam simul et docēre et discere. Docendo discimus.

>>19867034
>linguam latinam disco
Disco/Discere takes the accusative, not the genitive

>>19867236
>>19867236
I can appreciate the fact that he's trying. I think he confused it with studeo/studere which takes the dative.

>>19867165
Disco (Discere) is 3rd conjugation. It means to learn, to study; to get to know, to become acquainted with. Only in a few late Latin examples does it resemble 'to teach'. Equating it with doceo is folly.
Doceo (Docēre) is 2nd conjugation and means to teach, to instruct
Discēre is an alternate 2nd person passive indicative future form of discere. It has nothing to do with doceo.
>Docendo discimus
means 'We learn by teaching' which is a nice sentiment that often fails in reality.
>>19867296
I do too, which is why I corrected him.
The above is a much larger problem and the problem with this general in general. Anons who do not know Latin attempt to teach others Latin. This doesn't even begin to get into the atrocious English word order of that 'explanation'.
This is why input and grammar are important. Neither is superior, both are necessary. Without them you end up making nog-tier pidgin sentences and leading beginners astray.

is there some way to get the audio books of Ioannis Stratakis for free in Minecraft?

Can someone link me to that "Latin only" online dictionary?
pic unrelated

My goal is to be done with 23 lessons by Monday... Gettting there bros!

>>19865195
Yeah, as a woman I would not want to live in the Roman empire. Or most historical periods for that matter. Though even as a man, a lot of them don't seem very pleasant.

>>19866557
What translation? Is it a prose translation or metrical?
>>19867045
That wasn't me.

>>19868084
Rooting for you. Enjoy this cat

>>19868054
I don't know if it's the one you're looking for, but Latin Wiktionary has definitions in Latin though it's not very comprehensive. There is another but I can't think of it right now.

For those of you use Wheelock's Latin, how quickly do you think I can go back through this book? I did about 1/3 of the book before stopping a few months ago. Is a chapter a day too fast?

>>19868220
You won't be able to read Latin when you finish so what does it matter

>>19868225
I'm not reading Wheelock so I can fluently sight-read the Tacitus without using a dictionary. I'm just trying to learn the base grammar of the language.

I use Orberg too, but I honestly want no part in your stupid back and forth of picking teams over textbooks. It's fucking retarded and you people are embarassing.

>>19868054
lexica.linguax.com

>>19868248
The one who will be embarassed in you when in five years you can barely read a sentence without deconstructing it grammatically.

>>19868220
I learned with Wheelock initiallly. Took a three year break from Latin and went through the whole thing again, took about two weeks. If you have already done the first third, then a chapter a day for the stuff you're reviewing isn't unrealistic at all.

>>19868220
Yes that is too fast. This is why you burned out. Also, you should have active knowledge of the grammar and vocab being taught. Write your own sentences or stories using the grammar and vocab à la LLPSI. Make sure it becomes a daily habit and start small.

Ex:
Chp XX teaches 4th declension nouns and then ablative of place from which and separation. Instead of going through the entire chapter in one day, split it.

Day one, write some sentences using 4th declension nouns in different cases with the vocab in that chapter (supplement that with previously taught vocab)
Day two, write some sentences using the new ablative concepts.
Day three, review 4th declension paradigms and the ablatives. Etc.

If you get confused on anything look up different explanations on grammar points on Google/yt.

Finally, it is not worth it to try to go as fast as possible if you are just going to burn out and abandon it for weeks/months. Start small and once it becomes a daily habit, the snowball effect will activate.

>>19868288
There are some people who seem to be able to go from "translating"/deciphering to actually reading but it's far from a guarantee.

>>19868318
Best to spend years laboring at it on the off chance it will work lol

>>19865216
If you're interested in learning, http://www.buddha-vacana.org has many suttas side by side with english translations, and some of them you can move your move over the pali to get an instant english translation. Sutta central also has this functionality for Ajahn Sujato's translations
Memorizing the refuge in the triple gem might be worth looking into. "Buddham saranam gacchami" etc.

>>19868288
You are in a cult. I said I'm not using Wheelock to learn how to read you fucking monkey.

>>19868305
Thank you!
>>19868306
Well I was doing a chapter every 3 days, I stopped because I took the INPOOT meme and started using LLPSI instead. I'm really frustrated with Orberg, so I wanted to go back and finish Wheelock. But I will take what you said into account. Thank you for your advice.

>>19868448
>I'm not using Wheelock to learn how to read
No one is

>>19868318
>>19868329
>>19868470

I. Don't. Translate. Latin. I. Don't. Decypher. Sentences. I. Use. Wheelock. To. Learn. Grammar. And. Then. Read. A. Graded. Reader. Why. Is. This. So. Complicated. To. Understand?

I USE LLSPI
I USE LLPSI
I USE LLPSI

Am I cool yet?

I literally cannot say it any slower for you people: I USE LLPSI. I am reviewing grammar in Wheelock for fucks sake. I hate owning this book if it means I have to be associated with you cultists.

>>19868464
What is the INPOOT method? I learned Latin the normal (proper) way, so I've never heard of this.

>>19868485
learning to read by reading

>>19868485
'Comprehensible input' simply refers to the notion that the brain acquires a language by reading/hearing it in use.

>>19868505
Since when does this mean that you shouldn't combine input with grammar? You guys seem to think there are only 2 ways of learning a language

1. NEVER READ THE LANGUAGE!!!!! "Just do grammar paradigms, please don't read you will die!"

OR

2. DONT USE ENGLISH EVER!!!! "If you get your grammar explanations in English you will die!"

>>19863427
>I can use a program i stitched together that get's the dictionary definitions of every word below a certain frequency threshold in what ever text im reading and have it automatically generate an anki flashcard deck.
Is the program able to put the obscure words into their infinitive form? e.g. debeo into debere

>>19868485
The weeb approach to acquiring a language by reading manga and watching anime so they can understand plebian Japanese. In the Latin context, this is done by watching ytbers and reading llpsi, then getting filtered by Livy in Roma Aeterna, and finally giving up.

>>19868520
I mean, there's not only two ways and explicit explanations of grammar can have some role (which is probably why LLPSI does discuss grammar), but I think it's better to focus on input, because merely understanding a grammar point theoretically doesn't enable you to actually understand/use it on the fly. 'Knowing' a language in the sense of actually speaking it and 'knowing' a fact are rather different sorts of 'knowing'.

>>19868544
I'll just keep repeating myself since you don't get it. I am focusing on input. I'm reading Wheelock's on the side along with LLPSI and other graded readers.

>>19868554
Then you probably will end up reading Latin. Just try not to translate in your head when reading.

>>19868542
>then getting filtered by Livy in Roma Aeterna, and finally giving up.
Doesn't get mentioned enough. That "gap" that between Familia Romana and Roma Aeterna is literally just grammar. Wheelock gives you read sentences so you can get familiar with the syntax of actual writers.

It shouldn't be the only thing you read, but having a grammar along with your graded reader is important.

>>19868571
Not doing that. Wheelock doesn't teach that. Nobody teaches that anymore. I don't believe you have even read the book since in the earliest chapters he says "don't translate in your head and don't jump to the end and look at the verb". People who shit on the book would know that if they actually read it.

>>19868483
>Am I cool yet?
You can't be cool when you are seething like this.

>>19868084
what's with the hurry?

>>19868571
>"First, always read each sentence from beginning to end aloud; read for comprehension"
Wheelock's Latin 6th edition, Chapter 1, Page 5

>>19868571
>try not to translate in your head
Only people who have never read this book say stuff like that. I've yet to hear from someone who actually used it. If you got your opinion of the book from a YouTuber who didn't read it either, then you should probably stop advising people who are using it.

A couple of questions on Greek

-Do we have a lot of greek poetry, or just fragments and quotations by others?

-Is it true that the old testament/septuagint/ the translation o the 70, is a bit weird to read because it's a very literal translation from Hebrew sometimes with Hebrew word order?

>>19868579
I used Wheelock as my first primer to Latin and it was perfectly fine. The trick is to repeatedly read increasingly Latin texts until you're comfortable with whatever author you were aiming to study (Cicero, Tacitus, anyone really). Having a philological perspective on things can be good sometimes, as demonstrated in >>19867331. And classicists themselves will sometimes encounter sentences that they have to carefully translate in order to understand them better.

>>19868622
archaic poetry (before 500 BCE or so) we only have fragments other than homer and hesiod really. later though we have a very large number of poems, both long and short, especially from the hellenistic period (after the death of alexander in 323bce)

>>19868622
yes Septuagint can be awkward and sometimes translation details can be questionable with regard to mainstream understanding of the Hebrew text

>>19868887
Isn't the Septuagint taken as evidence for how the OT would have been understood at the time in some cases?

>>19868579
>That "gap" that between Familia Romana and Roma Aeterna is literally just grammar.

I feel like the toughest part of Roma Aeterna so far is vocabulary, not grammar. But then, I supplemented LLPSI with actual grammar textbooks.

Honestly, the toughest part of every latin text for me has been vocabulary.

>>19868912
>>19868887

The septuagint is written awkardly (probably because it was translated by Alexandrian Jews form Hebrew)
But the Pentateuch of the Septuagint is the oldest old testament text we have, as old or older than the Dead Sea Scrolls, and in some few parts, where the Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls agree, but the Masoretic text disagrees, scholars pick the Septuagint as the most correct original version.

The best example is deuteronomy 32:8
dead see scrolls have sons of god, septuagint has angels of god, basically the same (sons of god is generally understood to refer to angels, divine beings), but the Masoretic text has sons of Israel which makes no sense.
Scholars think Jews tampered with their scripture there to "protect" God, since it could be read in a non monotheistic or confusing way

compare this

When the Most High divided the inheritance among the nations,
when he separated the sons of men,
he established the boundaries of the nations
according to the number of the sons of God.
9 The Lord’s own portion was his people,
Jacob his allotted inheritance.

When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance,
when he divided all mankind,
he set up boundaries for the peoples
according to the number of the sons of Israel.[b]
9 For the Lord’s portion is his people,
Jacob his allotted inheritance.

it's basically saying that after the Babel tower incident, God divided nations according to the number of angels and put an angel in charge of them, but he kept Israel for himself

The masoretic text says God divided nations according to the number of the sons of Israel, but kept Israel for himself, which makes no sense.
So it isn't a surprise the both septuagint pentateuch and dead sea scrolls, the oldest texts we have, have sons of god/angels

>>19869090
>Scholars think Jews tampered with their scripture there to "protect" God, since it could be read in a non monotheistic or confusing way
Did they think of themselves as changing it or did they think "oh, this must have been miscopied, I'll correct it"?

>>19868622
>is a bit weird to read because it's a very literal translation from Hebrew sometimes with Hebrew word order?
In one way yes. It would be like translating "j'ai faim" to "I have hunger". The idea comes across just fine but the translation isn't idiomatic English. In this way, some Hebraisms are made in the Greek.
Another reason why it is weird is that the Greek language had simply evolved from its classical form in 5th ce Athens. With the new discoveries of secular papyrus (papyri?) from the time period of the Septuagint, it has been proven that some of these oddities were simply the norm for Greek at that particular time.

t. subscribed to biblingo where they have podcasts with biblical scholars and linguists

>>19869123
The idea that there was a singular "Judaism" is a meme that the three Abrahamic religions prop up to justify their own legitimacy. The simple fact is that "Judaism" is the result of centuries of redacters and editors knowingly editing, and in some cases just outright making shit up (see: David's entire existence, Solomon's entire existence), existing texts in order to justify their faction's political aims. Remember that around the same time that the Greeks made it illegal for Jews to perform human sacrifice in the Temple, the most popular deity in Palestine was still Asherah.

>>19863403
wouldnt it be quos

>>19863403
it's an older use of "qui", pic related, basically equivalent to ut

can a man be so brave without being cocles?

>>19862862
I have heard from multiple people irl that Coptic is insanely hard, and I happen to know one of the foremost Coptic scholars in the world. One prof who Egyptian and Greek (and more) is filtered by Coptic. That says something to me. Nonetheless, I'm thinking about studying Coptic with that prominent scholar, but I probably have more language experience than you, so I'd say go with Greek, which has tons of texts.

>>19869490
I would be interested to hear from someone that has learned Hebrew and Coptic. I have a hard time imaging is that much harder.

>>19861418
The Greek alphabet comes from Phoenician, which is derived from Proto-Sinaitic. Proto-Sinaitic is derived from Egyptian hieroglyphs. I think the return to Egyptian is beautiful, not ugly or wrong.

>>19869490
Isn't it mostly agglutinative?

>>19869506
Actually, I know 4 people who have attested to the difficulty of Coptic. 3 of them know Hebrew, Aramaic, and Syriac. One of those 3 guys also knows a bunch further niche Semitic languages, like Moabite and Ugaritic. I know Hebrew and Aramaic, and I have learned the basics of Syriac over winter break.

>>19869534
What do they say makes it so difficult?

Which pronunciation should I learn while learning classical chinese?

>>19869490
>>19869534
Eh, that might come down to them being Westerners more than anything. They simply cannot understand the Mediterranean soul.

I am a second year Greek and Latin student. One of my professors believes that θ and φ are aspirated. He cited Latin's use of ph in philosophia when there is the perfectly good f, if it is supposed to actually be pronounced like an f. I don't think he is wrong necessarily, but I want to investigate this matter. My inclination is that Romans used an aspirated th anyway; therefore, I think φ is my best bet. I'm looking for PIE words that go into Greek and Latin separately, i.e. not Greek loanwords, but are rendered with an f in Latin. What's a good resource to look into this question myself, not just take some scholars word for it?

>>19869610

I have never heard of Latin having aspirated stop consonants, but I think Ive read the latin F may have simply been bilabial, not labiodental, like a person blowing a birthday candle

>>19869610
>I'm looking for PIE words that go into Greek and Latin separately, i.e. not Greek loanwords, but are rendered with an f in Latin.
PIE *bʰéreti
-> Germanic *beraną ----> English to bear
-> Latin fero
-> Greek φέρω
like this?

>>19869509
>I think the return to Egyptian is beautiful, not ugly or wrong.
That’s literally what I said.

>>19869517
I'm not familiar with that term, nor am I all that familiar with Coptic. But from what has been confusedly described to me is that Coptic is word salad, far beyond that of any English learner's difficulties with Latin syntax.
>>19869542
Basically what I said above. I won't even try to explain what they told me about Coptic. Even for the people who do get it, it sounds like they came back from an experience with the white light.
>>19869606
That sounds like some bullshit to me. Like I said, one of the people who has attested to Coptic's difficulty is one of the best in the world. Ask any Coptologist, and they will know him. The guy who can't understand it is an archeologist who has a dig in Sicily and did his PhD at Oxford. Another one of the 4 is also an archeologist, famous from the History Channel and more, and he digs in Israel. I'd say these people have plenty of plenty of "Mediterranean soul", whatever the fuck that is.

>>19869677
>one of the people who has attested to Coptic's difficulty is one of the best in the world
Is James Allen your professor?

>>19869677
I'm not even going to ask how hard Middle Egyptian is.

>>19869534
How is Syriac?

>>19869676
No, you said
>but no one can deny the fact that hieroglyphs are much more SOVLFVL than an alphabet derived from Greek’s
It is literally the opposite what I said, which is a return to Egyptian via Proto-Sinaitic to Phoenician to Greek to Coptic. Not just straight up go back to hieroglyphs.

>>19869641
Yes, this is exactly what I'm looking for.
Quick question: if Latin and Greek are so different from Germanic and PIE when it comes to "to bear" yet so similar to each other, where does that root come from?

>>19869706
You said that returning to Egyptian is beautiful, and I said that, despite being almost impossible, hieroglyphs are better than an alphabet derived from Greek’s. How exactly is it different?
>inb4 b-but Coptic alphabet ultimately derives from hieroglyphs

>>19865195
How did we fall so hard?

>>19869181
>David's entire existence
Doubt was lifted in 1993, there was a king David around 1000BC in the region.

>>19868622
There are Hebraisms in the LXX, it is however a moderately free translation.
The post-temple anti-Christian rabbis were butthurt about it, Akiva ordered a much more literal Greek translation in the second century, that church fathers laughed at since it was a ridiculous word equivalence translation (as in dressing a one to one correspondance between words, even prepositions). This is in sharp contrast to the targums that just outright removed and added entire paragraphs.

>>19869724
>reviving hieroglyphs is better than using an alphabet
Fixed. Sorry.

>>19869721

f and b are similar, look at the place of articulation of the consonant
iirc arabic doesn't have p (the voiceless version of b) and transcribe all foreign words with p using an f

>>19869721
not sure I follow, in this particular case, one may say both Latin and Greek are more innovative in that PIE bʰ changes in both and goes to a full 'f' in Latin, while it seems it turns to just 'b' in most other descendants, or even remains bʰ in proto-Indo-Iranian
another similar example is φεύγω vs fugo in Latin and reconstructed initial bʰ for PIE

>>19869677
All of that is super vague and not very helpful

>>19869592
That depends- why are you learning? Do you have prior experience with a Sinosphere language? If you do it's probably most practical to use its pronunciation.
>>19869610
It's not really disputed that φθχ were originally aspirated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greek_phonology#Reconstruction
>>19869640
It didn't in native words, only in Greek loans.
>>19869677
Agglutinative just means it mostly forms things like conjugations and declensions by tacking on bits that each have a meaning of their own rather than one ending that means, say, "masculine dative singular" or "second person singular perfect indicative". Turkish, Japanese, Korean, and Tamil are examples of agglutinative languages you may have heard of.
>>19869721
It's a matter of regular sound change. Look up Grimm's Law.

>>19869692
No, and I will not provide his name here. I will say that he works in Middle America, and you should expect to see a documentary in a couple years about his participation as lead Coptologist in a major project. There is going to be a HUGE change to the study of ancient texts before too long. Hypotheticals and project goals have already been covered in the news, but I don't want to talk about it here. The discovery has been discussed openly in the department and was supposed to be released to the public by now but hasn't for some reason.
My knowledge of his status is mostly based off of a couple of qualified people in the department.

>>19869698
I can't really say since I've only learned a couple scripts and haven't tried reading any texts. However, I am experienced in Aramaic, which I love. Syriac has gone from frustratingly meaningless squiggles to recognizable symbols. The r/Assyria discord and Mark Francois' worksheets have both been helpful. I wish I found Mark Francois sooner because learning the script would have been SOOOO MUCH easier. He has both a YouTube channel and a website.

>>19869804
Yes, because my understanding is very vague. I have no idea what Coptic is other than an Egyptian language that is a surer way to give people a case of PTSD than a tour in 'Nam.

>>19869859
>There is going to be a HUGE change to the study of ancient texts before too long.
Does it have to do with aliens?

>>19869859
>There is going to be a HUGE change to the study of ancient texts before too long.
I don’t believe you.

>>19869956
He's talking about the Anunnaki

>>19869956
Isn't machine learning already doing wonders in these NLP fields?

>>19869948
>>19869956
>>19869964
>>19869967
It has nothing to do with aliens or any fringe theories. It's a discovery regarding the texts themselves, how to read unreadable manuscripts. It will mean that hundreds of manuscripts that were off-limits will now be accessible. The HUGE thing I was referring to is that there will be a big influx of manuscripts that we've been sitting on for decades.

>>19869948
Gonna be super-awkward when it turns out the undecipherable manuscripts talk about aliens.

>>19870105
It'll talk about Archons which some people equate with the Anunnaki or "ancient aliens".

>>19869859

Is this a kind of x ray thing that lets you see things that were written originally on a scroll or parchment, before being overwritten by something else? I think they were very recicled

>>19870117
Realistically it's just going to be enormous amounts of Christfag gibberish that is only interesting to academics. We already know that the myth of Christian "orthodoxy" is just that, a myth, and that the West was packed to the gills with whacky sects using their own special texts, and that this continues to this day (that's where Protestantism comes from). The East was even worse, and the only thing that even remotely unified Eastern Christianity was Islamic rulers coming in and propping up the most sane sect leaders so that they could tax the shit out of them. Everyone who disagrees does so purely so that the can keep LARPing.

If you want to prove me wrong copticanon, then give us something concrete.

Things I hope get discovered one day

A bilingual Mesopotamian-Indus Valley language cuneiform tablet, something that at least lets us know if it was Dravidian or something else from the cognates

The Latin Etruscan dictionary of Claudius

Old Greek poetry, like that of Archilochus or Sappho

>>19870220
>Things I hope get discovered one day
Are things like this possible to be discovered? I mean, where would they be? What location is secret enough for them not to be discovered until now and sufficiently safety for them to survive thousands of years?

>>19870249
>safe

>>19870249
Memeing? Vatican archive. In reality? It'd be like the actual Rosetta Stone, just fucking lying there. Alternatively, it'd be buried. There's tons of cool shit buried in Italy and Greece (well it's all over Europe but thus far no huge literary works have been found outside of Greece and Italy).

>>19870249

The first one could be buried in Southern Mesopotamia or former Elamite Iran
new shit is still being discovered
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiroft_culture

>>19870220
>The Latin Etruscan dictionary of Claudius
I wish

Learning Latin.

Is there any easy way to learn the difference between a stressed syllable and a long syllable?

My native language is Swedish, so I don't really have the notion of unstressed long vowels, like in dō-MI-nus.

Are there any minimal pairs somewhere?

Here are my some attempts, which are, quite frankly, not very good:
https://vocaroo.com/1kLat7CMMhGi

You do have a household shrine dedicated to Greek or Roman dieties right /clg/?

>>19870386
I've thought about the idea but it's hard to convince myself any of it is actually true.

>>19870270
How well are the digs going? Are we likely to find any of the lost works ever again?

>>19870415
Unlikely anything in Latin, because it won't be in a desert preserved on papyrus, it would have been copied repeatedly by monks in Europe in which case something worth copying would have been mentioned. You're not going to find Claudius' Etruscan dictionary, because we know that nobody in medieval times was copying it and any of his copies would have degraded by now.

>>19870386
I practice Buddhism, but how would one go about worshipping the gods of Olympus?

>>19870440
Probably I would go back to Indo-European religion since Celtic, Germanic, Roman, & Greek gods are all just versions of the same IE gods.

>>19870447
I think there's some guy who's actually trying to reconstruct PIE religion.

>>19870434
What about the parts of the Roman Empire in Africa or Asia Minor?

>>19870475
It would likely be written in Greek, Coptic, or Syriac if it was Roman in origin in that part of the world.

>>19870447
What about Hindu practices too?

>>19870475
Maybe. The problem with anything in Africa or Asia Minor is that it was subjected to Christianity and then Islam, and in these regions the purges and active destruction of pre-Christian literature (I'm not using "Pagan" here because that implies that there was any religious unity or monoculture here) were the most fervent. As in "burn down the entire library to make sure that we got everything, we can rewrite Gospels if necessary" tier purges. So what we do find tends to be stuff like the troves that lead to the Greek Magical Papyri (they're written in Greek, the magic itself is mostly Egyptian barring the stuff about using Homer for divination), which were literal garbage dumps covered over with rocks (many of them were duds or had grammatical or spelling errors and were discarded by their producers as such). Even then, if it's not in Greece or Italy it's most likely going to be Semitic or Egyptian in nature.

So "maybe", but don't hold your breath.

>>19870472
>some guy
There's far, far more than just one guy. Indo-Europeanism is alive and well in academia (if you know where to look). This is to say nothing of stuff like Asatru and the like.

>>19870440
Vajrapani Puja.

>>19870491
Indo-Aryan religion seems to deviate a little more. There may have been 2 major sects(for lack of a better term) and just like how a dialects of the same language separated by geography can become new languages, religions separated by geography can change as well.

Honestly the Indian religions are way more interesting overall. Most interesting on this side of the world is Gnosticism.

>>19870386
didn't i tell you to go back earlier?

>>19870486
Yeah, but a translation of a lost work is still a lost work, no?
>>19870501
The Dead Sea Scrolls were buried too, no?
What about something like Cypria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypria)), or any of the other poems in the Trojan Epic Cycle?

>>19870504
I have a few translations of Vedic hymns, the Gita, and Upanishads on my shelf. Vedanta is most fascinating to me.
>>19870501
Why Vajrapani in particular? Because of the association with Herakles?

>>19870501
Proto-Indo-European specifically?

>>19870386
Quomodo hoc factus est?

>>19870409
Practice breeds belief.

>>19870378
I am also very new to Latin. Dough, me-news. In prosody the long vowel lasts twice the time of a short one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7kwvJpbAvI..

>>19870722
Can't tell if some of the long vowels are actually supposed to be pronounced differently or not but... I think I just don't care idk

>>19870735
according to wiki long and shot vowels are different

long o is like the german o of auto
short o is like the english vowel in caught

just google latin phonology wikipedia vowels

Do you need to buy specific editions of works with annotations? I remember in high school Latin we used an annotated version of part of the Aeneid

>>19868169
I sure am glad that we just happen to live at the pinnacle of morality & convenience!
>>19870779
>ā sounds identical to ŏ
Absurd.

>>19870779
>>19870826
Sounds very wrong to me. The quality should stay homogenous. Also I think long vowels are important because it gives a whole different rythm to the language. This should be helpful: (although im not sure anglophones are hopeless) https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXi1m1_th92rafQhTaKUv2WvPdcj9rS_b

>>19869750

The Greek is an aspirated 'p' or whatever it's called in linguistics. Phi is a p sound with a express burst of air since in Greek these sounds differentiate words, instead dof emerging out of context as aspiration of stops occurs in English

>>19868483
i feel bad for ya man but you may have come to the wrong site for advice

>>19868542
rec some good latin youtubers, and not the bald guy

>>19870378
idk bro just pay attention to how italians speak, it should flow and be sing-songy. i dont think the longer syllables should be emphasized so much but the stress goes on the first syllable of dominus, your first pronunciation is the closest to being correct

you guys do know about https://www.magistrula.com/latin/charts, right?

>>19870948
Satura Lanx

>>19870987
I built my own.

>>19871011
thats fucking cool dude, im assuming you code?

ive been thinking theres gotta be some program like this with vast capabilities, since that website is pretty limited imo. hell it doesnt even use comparative/superlative adjectives and not the widest vocabulary, but its certainly useful.

>>19870948
https://youtube.com/c/AlexiusCosanus

>>19871027
Yeah, I code for a living, though javascript is not my forte. So I'm building little Latin quiz things as a hobby. So far I have one to drill noun declensions, one to drill verb conjugations, and I'm going through a couple of old, public domain composition textbooks and making similar quiz tools from their questions. I also want to add drills for all the different pronouns (hic/is/ille) and qui and all its forms.

I'm less than ten lessons into the textbooks, and they number into the hundreds, so it will be a long project.

https://doctor-mobius.neocities.org/latin/index.html

>>19871038
good luck with that. ill be using this.

^i typed this 40 minutes ago and forgot to post but i am here to post picrel. you put iauna instead of ianua

>Deponent verbs are passive in form, with the same passive forms as verbs that you have already
learned, but they are active in meaning.
so why the FUCK do they exist, just to be another pain in my ass?

>>19869856
>>19869786
>>19869750
>>19869641
Recommend me a good PIE resource, like a dictionary or something.

>>19871174
oh fugg :DDD

Fixed that one. Please post any more errors you find. Most of the data I scraped automatically from cactus2000 or latindictionary.wikidot.com, and the rest I input manually. So mistakes are possible.

>>19871207
Also currently the verb list is pretty short, so I will flesh it out more in the future. Also I will add an option to select verb conjugations (1,2,3,4,irreg.) the same way you can select noun decelensions.

>>19871222
yeah i noticed that. i need to learn more verbs, yet i learned so many nouns and adjectives recently. how long have you been doing this?

>>19871199
https://academiaprisca.org/en/resources/modern-indo-european-self-learning-guidebook/

>>19871248
>oppodum
That is embarrassing. Somehow only the dative singular was wrong.

Originally, I was learning Italian (circa 2015) and built the first version of my conjugation app (http://erk52.github.io/Italian-Vocab/web/ital_verb.html))

Then I took up Latin maybe 2016ish and built the noun declension drill. I wanted to make a verb version, but then lost interest for a while. It is only recently that I came back to it.

My interests in Latin and javascript come and go, but right now they are aligned again.

>>19871266
Also I should add my scraping script is pretty simple. So adding more verbs won't be hard.

>>19871273
ive seen people say that being able to code good doesnt constitute intelligence and im inclined to believe them but this pic is making me doubt that. that shit looks really hard.

>>19871292
Nah. I'm a big dummy. It just took a bit of trial and error. Anyone with an interest could read the beautifulsoup docs and do the same

>>19870504
Our religion doesn't deviate a bit more, it's probably the closest to the actual PIE religion.

If you're talking of Hinduism as it's practiced today by most Indians, then obviously there are many changes. But that's very natural. Mycene Greek religion was very different from Hellenism of Antiquity. The thing is the Greeks and Romans died out, and their religion went extinct.

Our religion kept on evolving for 2 millenia more, like polytheism does. If Hellenism had survived in the modern day, it would look very different from Greek religion of antiquity as well.

>>19870987
now I do, thanks

>>19871195
because originally they had a middle voice meaning, if you pay attention, you'll see many of them have an apparent meaning whose action implies an effect/benefit on the subject as well, so something halfway between a fully transitive and reflexive/intransitive verb
but at some point Latin lost the distinction of middle vs passive entirely, while in Greek for instance this distinction remained at least in some tenses

>>19871195
Deponent verbs also existed in old Gaelic

>>19870475
You wouldn't need an etruscan dictionary or whatever in cyrprus

>>19862119
which one

>>19871038
Based af. Please keep on the great work.

Is the latin language option in minecraft any good? or is it google translate tier?

>>19870386
reported for heresy

>>19872603
Touch grass incel

>>19870805
Bought an annotated edition of Περὶ ´Ὑψους, a decision I don't regret. Much more helpful than a bilingual edition.

>>19872617
take your gay internet lingo somewhere else

>>19872637
>>19872637
>internet lingo
>uses "gay" as an insult
I don't think it's self aware yet

>>19872790