/lit/ - Literature

First for
I want to FUCK Dionysus

jannies will just send us to int where it'll die

Primum responsum. Nuper eius fili hymenem rupi.
Quisque qui scribat post me sordida reliqua accipit, residua mea.
Memento primum responsum specialissimum est et nunquam experietur hoc filum ut ego expertus sum atque id nunquam sentiet te ut sensit me.
Finita est.

>>20076780
>jannies
PEREANT OSTIARII

si sapiens fieri vis, necesse est stultia carere

>>20076870
Stultitia innata homino est, simpliciter "carere stultitiam" non potest

Qui sunt aliqui auctores faciles latini? Caesar non tam facilis est.

>>20076851
>experietur
experieris

>>20076640
is there anything more comfy than reading Catullus?

>>20076910
immo, discendo, legendo, et ratiocinando stultitia carere possumus. si maioritas hominorum haec facerent, sicut infantes non manerent.

valete

>>20077038
Nunc comprehendo. "Carere" verbum non intellexeram.

>>20076640
Can we talk about French, Italian, and Spanish in this thread?

>>20076956
Eutropius
Cornelius Nepos

>>20076640
>Familia Romana Fluency Chad sub-edition
Medieval Jewish Statues edition more like

>>20077259
Gratias tibi

>>20076640
Cur nos fratribus graecis distinguis? Janitoresne odiosi filum pro linguis antiquis everterunt?

>>20077326
Quot idolum calvum adoramus et fidem nostram continere volent.

>>20077030
Post some cool verses you've read recently.

>>20076361
Fuck off, I was never abused and I still turned out bi. There goes your "theory".

>>20077555
Illi numeri... inspecti

>>20076956
Lege bibliam vulgatam ex Hieronymo, valde facilis est!

>>20077714
Tibi gratias, id agam! (aut 'faciam' digitur? [I will Do It])

>>20077597
>so angry he posted it twice
This is a thread for learning classical languages, not posting your deranged fetishes

>>20077968
He started the argument. I couldn't let that go. Only posted it again because I didn't realize the old thread had hit bump limit when I posted it.

>>20078009
>I couldn't let that go
This is a thread for learning classical languages, not posting your deranged fetishes

>>20078043
Blame him for starting it.

>>20078046
Instead of continuing to blather about your sexual proclivities and lust for anuses why don't you read Latin then discuss it here as is the intention of the thread.

>>20078051
Si latine dicam?

Proof Latin language threads are homosexual are how many of them are constantly fucking each other in the ass fighting, instead of actually talking about the learning.

>>20078077
I love this thread so much. This will finally clean up /clg/.

why not just call it clg?

>>20078208
Cacascriptores et autismi Ranierii LLPSIque continendi sunt.

>>20078232
>Ranierii
Is this how it would be conjugated?

>>20078309
most male names are in the 2nd declension so i made a guess. also, please excuse my autism, verbs are conjugated and nouns are declined. vale, amice.

Can we actually talk about Latin instead the bald guy?

At what chapter of LLPSI were you guys able to start reading the Vulgate and how did you go about it?

>>20078980
>instead the bald guy?
no one knows latin here they only know that they can pretend to learn latin by reading his book

Where do you guys obtain your latin texts to read? I usually use the bibliotheca augustana or Wikisource.

>>20078359
You're right about >conjugation. I made a guess too, but -ii makes more sense, since that's more consistent with -ius words, and Ranieri himself uses -ius for his name on his Twitter.

>>20079076
>Ubi scripta latina ad legendum reperitis? Bibliothecam Augustanam aut Wikifontem uti soleo

>>20079099
Oops. Idk why my gimmick name was up.

>>20076640
New here, what's some good places to read the early rationalists in Latin? Descartes, Spinoza, Malebranche, Pascal

>>20078980
I'm at chap 27.
I'd like to think that I know enough grammar so that all I need help with when reading the Vulgate would be acquiring new vocab.
Reading it alongside the Douay-Rheims is quite fun, which I'd recommend you should also do as well.

>>20079157
none of them are in latin

>>20078980
>>20079167
forgot to mention
I'm honestly not sure what chapter I was on when I was able to start reading the Vulgate. It was definitely the 20s. I think if you don't want to have too much trouble with the grammar, you should be up to at least chap 20/21, which is when you learn the future and perfect tenses.
>>20079157
>http://thelatinlibrary.com/neo.html
I know they have some of Descartes and Spinoza, but I'm not sure about the rest.

>>20076640
Anyone read Fabulae Syrae? 136 pages of Greco-Roman mythology entirely in Latin, very comfy.

>>20078980
I left LLPSI at Ch.15 for the Vulgate, and I do run into things that require consulting a grammar, but it’s enough to go off of really. My only purpose in learning Latin is for the Vulgate, so it works. Maybe a higher chapter as others have said would make it easier for you. I doubt you’ll need to finish the book before being ready though.

>>20079205
>Ad usum discipulorum
That means those are adapted/dumbed down, no? How hard are they?

Just starter the gospel of Matthew.
>autem

>>20079076
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/collection?collection=Perseus%3Acorpus%3Aperseus%2CLatin%20Texts

https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/home.html

https://www.thelatinlibrary.com/index.html

>>20079571
easy since unknown words have glosses to the side w/ pics or latin equivalents or definitions
the grammar used is the later chapters of familia romana so it's extra input for the subjunctive, ut clauses, gerunds/gerundives etc

>>20079205
I used to be in the LLPSI discord and a lot of zoomers were triggered by the rapes. A lot of people there hate it and don't read it kek

>>20079852
>δὲ

>>20079349
How often do you refer to a dictionary?

>>20080206
Why do that people even learn Latin? Do they expect to find critical gender theory in Cicero?

>>20080746
They've made a concerted push into all the Humanities. Easier to spread their ideas than in hard sciences. Classics has been getting hit hard in the past decade because it is the realm of old white men by default. Departments are bending over backwards to show how not *ist they are and conferences are as well. It is a sad state of affairs but that's the world we live in. Classics was already suffering due to low enrollment and going woke is considered the key to righting that, with predictably embarrassing results.

>>20079179
Then what did they write in?

In the vulgate Genesis we see:
"creavitque Deus cete grandia"
this was the first time I encountered a Greek-type second declension. what the fuck is this shit

>>20080820
it's bizarre watching an intellectual dark age begin in real time.
>>20080206
it's also bizarre watching kids react to wrongthink. legitimate brainwashing, they believe it's virtuous to just shut down and avoid thinking any further on a topic. it's just
>omg cringe. omg I can't even... *terminate process*
what the fuck is going on lads.

Serious question about LLPSI. It obviously is a way in for the less disciplined, with its somewhat natural method (but important vocalizations separate), but how many people do you think it's actually helped become fluent readers, compared to if it didn't exist?

I feel like even though it's now a standard textbook, it's only increased a small fraction to living Latinists.

>>20079349
what's your reason to read the VVLGATE? you religious??

>>20080991
It doesn't do the "natural" method, please just fuck off with that term, it teaches Latin through grammar while pretending to teach like that

>>20080969
Dis nigga just beginin ta larn dis so e is

>>20080969
it's a third declension neuter actually, very common in Greek, kinda like some Latin nouns in -us which are actually third declension e.g vulnus
the plural should be in -a but because the root ends in -e, by crasis you get final -e

>>20080991
There's only going to be so many people actually interested in learning Latin.

>>20080991
If it didn't exist no less or more people would learn Latin since it only attracts people that would never put in the effort to learn it in the first place.

>>20081030
No, I don't think so. LLPSI helps bring people into the halfway point that forces them to commit more, rather than give up all their hours learning it.

>>20080591
Probably like 20 times a chapter, but there are around 4,000 words in the New Testament, if you consider the Dictionary of the Latin New Testament as a guide. Too bad it’s sorted alphabetically and not by first appearance. Once I finish the NT I’ll probably move to the Old Testament but it’s a lot of work.

>>20080993
I honestly don’t know if I’m religious. I don’t even know if I believe in god. I want to learn some Latin and learn about god so I thought I’ll learn the Vulgate and get both done. It’s a fun little project that will take a few years but it’ll be worth it.

>>20080746
>The need for this project is, for many, manifestly evident. In Latin, as in many gendered languages, a need has become more and more prominent for inclusive ways to address folks of all genders. The historical precedent of defaulting to the masculine gender is, in our view, based on unacceptable patriarchal views of male superiority.
https://www.lupercallegit.org/post/a-style-guide-for-gender-inclusivity-in-the-latin-language

So they can burgerize Antiquity with a myriad of their mental illnesses

>>20081360
If you wanna use Latin in the modern day, that does include being able to express all the things in it you can express in a modern language.

>>20076640
Translated the first 4 verses of the aeneid for my latin workbook. Currently trying to make some alexandrines out of it, but it's hard.

>>20081457
What are alexandrines?

>>20081436
how about demens, cerebrosus, insanus
>>20081360
>we believe that inclusive language is necessary in order to have an inclusive space
lol
lmao

>>20081465
I've known plenty of level-headed LGBT people.

Do we have any ancient/medieval lookalikes for the (((Homo))) Calvus? I want to make a meme that proves he's an immortal wandering the earth for centuries.

>>20081360
>The historical precedent of defaulting to the masculine gender is, in our view, based on unacceptable patriarchal views of male superiority.
But that's false. This is typical burgers being unable to understand grammatical gender, and if course ignoring how it developed.

>>20081501
>mentula, -ae (fem): penis, cock
>folx, this is proof of transgender identity in Roman society. I'm going to write my doctoral thesis on it.

>>20081501
Why are there far more languages with default masculine than default feminine even outside the IE family?

>>20081459
Traditionnal french poetic verse. It has 12 syllabs and an accent on the 6th and last syllab.

>>20081473
There's already words for gay people in Latin. There's also "hermaphroditus" and the entire neuter gender.

>>20081533
So how do you talk about a non-binary person without misgendering them? The neuter gender is generally reserved for inanimate objects.

>>20081537
>So how do you talk about a non-binary person without misgendering them?
None issue. I don't know any burgers.

>>20081539
Non-binary people have always existed. I know some from plenty of places other than America.

>>20081551
>I know some from plenty of places other than America.
Because you purposefully hang in circles that would have them. I don't.

>>20081564
Sure, they aren't going to hang out with people who hate them.

>>20081537
>The neuter gender is generally reserved for inanimate objects
so what, use it anyways.

>>20081551
then find the words Romans used for them and use those.

>>20081537
Easy. It depends on the grammatical gender of their name in Latin.
Do you think Romans believed mentulae (femenino gender) were actual women? When are burgers going to understand that grammatical gender is not the same as gender identity?

>>20081537
Why do the words have to change to accommodate the feelings of non-binary people? If they have the power to decide that Latin needs a new declension (as if it didn't have enough already), why don't they have the power to simply rename "Masculine" as "Non-binary" and be done with it?

Plenty of languages mix genders in this way - Danish, for example, merged Masculine and Feminine into one gender and retained Neuter. There are other ways to go about this that don't involve a manifesto and a new declension table and forcing your identity onto a whole community of speakers who don't care.

But of course, it's not actually about communicating in Latin, is it?

>>20081600
I don't want to do the equivalent of calling my friends "it".
>>20081605
That they existed doesn't mean they acknowledged them, not every society does though many do.
>>20081609
Not in all cases, but when talking about human beings it is pretty closely semantically tied to gender gender.

>>20081615
I don't know, let them figure out what solution works best for them, preferably discussing it in Latin.

>>20081586
Why don't you hang out with bronies? Do you hate /mlp/ or do you simply not care for it?

>>20081616
fine anon
xis
eius
ei
xum
eo

>>20081616
>when talking about human beings it is pretty closely semantically tied to gender gender
Citation needed, my παιδίον/barn/Mädchen

>>20081623
>preferably discussing it in Latin
NO NO NO having to discuss/explain it could trigger them, we need to force new pronouns from the top down into every students' education at the earliest possible levels to accommodate their socio-biological delusions

>>20081626
I actually do have a good friend who used to be a brony and still ocassionally does MLP-related stuff. I'm not into it myself, but I don't mind.
>>20081639
Pretty closely. There are words that have fixed grammatical gender regardless of the gender of the referent, but by default, an adjective describing a female human will be feminine and an adjective describing a male human will be masculine, except in immediate agreement to such a word. That's how it is in the Indo-European languages I have familiarity with anyway.
>>20081645
I mean among themselves to figure out how to handle it. Probably introducing a new declension would be impractical- I know some Hebrew-speakers will alternate or just pick one arbitrarily.

Question

-What's a dictionary that has usage notes by author and time period?

I finished reading the excerpts of Cicero's orations against Verres in this textbook. The first few sections were painfully slow-going but by the magic of inpoot I was cruising (relative to my initial speed) by the end. I think next I'm going to try translating it section by section.

>>20081682
the spqr app is pretty good for this

>>20081702
Does it include Medieval and Neo? That's the real problem source for me.

>>20081697
I recommend his dialogues. Very easy going and not puffed up like his speeches, although some idiomatic phrases may filter you like me.

What's wrong with Wheelock's? The grammar method is actually pretty smart, provided one is smart, because it gives real classical reading ability faster than LLPSI. It literally takes half the time than LLPSI's inefficient and highly redundant reading approach to start reading.

>>20081808
There's a difference between learning to decipher Latin into English and learning to understand Latin as Latin.

>>20081715
ah, not so much, primarily focused on classical latin in my experience.
>>20081721
Thankfully the wheelock's text is pretty good about glossing idioms, I think I also would have been filtered pretty hard trying to read the text alone. I think his letters come next, but I might take a break and read some Caesar. I got picrel at Christmas and it's been tempting me ever since and seems pretty manageable.

>>20081808
Can you FAGGOTS stop talking LLPSI vs WHEELOCKS every GODDAMN THREAD you fucking IMBECILES? Go to REDDIT to talk this you subhuman retard

>>20081682
Rewriting

#Question

-What's a dictionary, word book, or app, that has usage notes by author and time period, and I guess etymology?

>>20081836
I just use wiktionary on computer and phone.

>>20081808
I dunno I loved Wheelock's. I started reading LLPSI but after Wheelock's it felt totally unnecessary.
>>20081819
That's what the sententiae antiquae and excerpts in Wheelies are for. It has you reading actual classical Latin from chapter 1, it's not pure translation autism.

>>20081808
The philological method is a turn off for the brainlets. They think that, if you can just get a feel for the language, you can understand highly literary texts in a profound way because we all know a native speaker can pick up all the subtleties of their nation's literature without technical knowledge of their language.

>>20081831
>NOOOOOOO NOT WHEELOCKS VS LLIPSI AGAIN WHAT ABOUT THE DISCUSSION ABOUT TRANNY PRONOUNS

>>20081858
I mean... if you have native competence in a language, explicit grammatical knowledge won't really help you understand texts, no, unless they're in a very different form of the language than you speak natively. Native speakers' knowledge and usage is the thing that formalized grammar rules are created to describe just like the behavior of objects is the thing that the laws of physics are created to describe.

>>20081869
>native competence
lmao at thinking that's how LLPSI works. they literally teach you grammar after every chapters' reading, but without reference to a language you (actually) have native competence in. anyways fuck, this anon >>20081831 was right after all, this is a gay and tired discussion. LLPSI is fine but its students have to stop smugly jerking off about the superiority of the "method" before they've even finished the textbook.

>>20081819
LLPSI shitposters are funny but we can all agree the completely serious LLSPI cultists who use the "decipher"/"read" dichotomy, because their brain runs on buzzwords, they get from youtube videos are bonafide retards

>>20081895
Does LLPSI teach si clauses and their logical implications?

>>20081895
I didn't say that, I said that a native speaker doesn't need explicit grammatical analysis, and it's not obvious to me that a second language speaker needs it in all cases either.
>>20081907
I mean, I won't say no one has ended up actually reading Latin by other methods, but I do think too many people are essentially deciphering.

>>20079349
you probably have enough skill to just skim over any chapters in shelmerdine that explicitly cover topics you haven't mastered yet, then you only have to use the grammar for rare things

>>20081869
>Native speakers' knowledge and usage is the thing that formalized grammar rules are created to describe just like the behavior of objects is the thing that the laws of physics are created to describe
People tend to forget this. Grammar is an abstraction, usage is the rule.
>[...]si uolet usus,
>quem penes arbitrium est et ius et norma loquendi.
>ib4 anything is valid
I never said that, quite the opposite

Jesus christ, PPH on steroids when LvW gets mentioned.

Every time.

Like clockwork.

Fucking Latin larping barbarians.

>>20081869
>In any case there is a grammatical beauty just as there is a moral, dramatic beauty, etc. It is to this kind of beauty to which Flaubert labourisly had to give birth. Undoubtedly this beauty could hold sometimes with the way of applying certain rules of syntax. And Flaubert was delighted when he found in the writers of the past an anticipation of himself like Montesquieu.
Public education was a mistake.

>>20081954
Grammar books are based on usage, not vice versa, as >>20081931 said.

>>20081948
you know you can scroll and just reply to anything else that might please you. it's hard to say what takes up more space - lelipsi vs wheelocks, or anons bitching about the former

>>20081967
>it's just a coincidence that languages with a written tradition and plenty of grammar studies have far more complex and developed grammar than spoken languages like piraha

>>20081967
>usage
Up until recently, on literary usage, not plebian.

>I will personally rape anyone who does not use LLPSI
How the fuck does he justify saying things like this?

>>20082003
pbuh, his followers will hunt down and punish anyone who disagrees

>>20081831
Hoc

That said, what are the other modern textbooks, and what makes them work or not?

I don't consider LLPSI a real textbook, because it doesn't have the regular kind of format, questions, and exercises.

>>20082078
LLPSI is basically a normal textbook, it teaches you declension/conjugation paradigms and includes exercises at the end of every chapter. It's fine.
Wheelock's is also fine, my only complaint is that it teaches you the jussive subjunctive like it's the only naked use of the subjunctive that matters, while in actual readings you'll encounter potential/deliberative/potential subjunctives more often. But it's very much a "regular" kind of textbook.

#Question

-What are the other textbooks and grammars besides WL and LLPSI? What makes them work or not comparatively?

-What's a dictionary, word book, or app, that has usage notes by author and time period, and I guess etymology?

question
I've noticed Cicero seems to apply "omnis" to nouns in the plural (rather than "omnes"). IIRC he does this with some other adjectives as well but I'm too lazy to go back and confirm. Is this normal or am I misreading?

>>20081975
Navajo was incredibly complex grammatically before it was written. If anything, it's tiny languages spoken by one tribe in the middle of nowhere that are more likely to be absurdly complex, because there's no non-native learners to wear down the complexities and pass on that imperfect version to children.
>>20081991
Those are two different varieties, you can describe both.

>>20082124
Check them out again, sometimes -is stands for -es (accusative)

>>20082130
What is it complex for? I'm not really sure why it would need to be, since it's from a desert people, no offense.

>>20082124
happens in the Aeneid and Sallust as well as far as texts which I've personally studied, the alternative -īs(long i) ending is something you should keep in mind, I find it's not something textbooks tell you about

>>20082146
Languages don't really have a reason to become complex, they just accumulate grammaticalizations. There's not really much relation between grammatical complexity and civilizational complexity- Classical Chinese has very simple grammar, for instance.

>>20081975
Chinese has been written for more than three thousand years and has almost no inflectional forms.

>>20081819
No there isn't.

>>20082182
How is there not?

>>20082003
He says them in Latin so his followers don't understand enough to be offended.

>>20082187
Read Derrida

>>20082187
If you are a native English speaker and can understand Latin, deciphering Latin into English is seamless. It is the same skill.

>>20082195
You can't explain it?
>>20082198
Er... not really, no? I've read texts in other languages that I understood the meaning of perfectly but would have a hell of a time expressing remotely idiomatically in English, especially if they make important use of grammatical devices or lexical distinctions with no real equivalent. I think you're just proving you're monolingual.

>>20082207
>I've read texts in other languages that I understood the meaning of perfectly but would have a hell of a time expressing remotely idiomatically in English, especially if they make important use of grammatical devices or lexical distinctions with no real equivalent. I think you're just proving you're monolingual.

Of course a one-to-one perfect translation is rarely possible. But if you read a sentence in a foreign language and can't explain the meaning to an English speaker, I think you are the one who is monolingual.

>>20082217
I can explain the meaning if I can understand it (unless my brain isn't quite running at full capacity at the time), but that's not exactly the same thing as producing something that would be passable as a translation.

>>20082225
But more to the point, genuine understanding of TL qua TL is prior to translation.

>>20082157
>>20082145
Thanks. I found two examples. He does also use omnes at times, any ideas why he would prefer one form over the other?

>>20077030
Reading Catullus 64 for class right now, it's got some of the most beautiful poetic diction of any writing I've ever read.

>>20082242
Catullus is top tier in sound devices/sonics, his poems are like lollipops or birds or some other tidy analogy of a small beautiful thing. I'm always surprised by how modern his work seems in its humour and concern for formal aesthetic

>>20082289
It really gives you a sense of how much writers from 476-~1960 drew from classical sources; it's pretty easy to see how someone like Yeats draws so directly from Catullus. It's a relatively new phenomenon for highly-educated writers to be ignorant of classics.

>>20082225
>>20082232
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what is meant by translation, then. It's hard to describe subjective mental processes. I'm not trying to put together a polished english translation while reading. I don't think anyone, especially a beginner, would try to do that.

>genuine understanding of TL qua TL is prior to translation.

If you have genuine understanding, translation is trivial.

>>20082309
Sure, but it's also not required- if you actually understand the language, you can understand it without actually thinking of words in your native language. Anyone who think this isn't the case is monolingual.

>>20082164
But the complexity shifted to its writing. Khoisan language is extremely simple because they didn't have much input to respond to. East Asian phonetics are homogenized, because of coopting culture, and a lack of competition to spread more phonetic variety.

>>20082237
That's just the editor's choice, we have no way to know if Cicero originally used -īs or -ēs

>>20082130
>Those are two different varieties, you can describe both.
>Those are two different varieties, you can describe both.
Yeah as in this is how the language works for the educated and this is how it works for hicks

>>20082322
>But the complexity shifted to its writing.
What? What do you mean?
>Khoisan language is extremely simple
Which one? It's not even clear that it's a single family at this point, it's probably a sprachbund.
>East Asian phonetics are homogenized, because of coopting culture, and a lack of competition to spread more phonetic variety.
What? What does that even mean? Most of this is either wrong or meaningless as far as I can tell.

>>20082309
> If you have genuine understanding, translation is trivial.

I’m a professional translator. This is false, or at least not always true. I work in a very technical field and still every document has at least one phrase that is impossible to render into satisfactory English. The density of such phrases is much higher in literature (and in conversation).

>>20082337
sorry, hanzi complexity

>>20082322
>East Asian phonetics are homogenized
>Meanwhile in China they can instantly tell if you come from a farm
>Meanwhile in Japan they can instantly tell if you come from a farm
Lmao. Bro just stop.

>>20082344
I think they mean 'translate' as in 'explain in your native language' not necessarily 'produce an adequate idiomatic translation'.
>>20082354
That's not how it works. And hanzi isn't even all that complicated, it's just a lot of memorization.

>>20082356
per east asian nation, duh

>>20082358
its very complicated. alphabet lets one quicker and easier llpsi into a language, and search with dictionaries. for hanzi, you have to learn thousands of characters and their groupings for words before similar levels of penetration

>>20082370
oh i thought you said 'where you're from' not from a farm

>>20082370
True, but that's not really complexity, just a lot of memorization. Complexity would be something like Thai orthography.

>>20082379
dont classical chinese/big four novels have a lot of characters that arent even cognates from simplified? its like going from hs english to shakespearean. its complexer man

>>20082396
What are you talking about? Simplified and traditional characters are just two variants of the same character set. Any language you can write in one, you can write in the other.

>>20082325
really? I was under the impression that Cicero wrote these orations for publication

>>20082396
You should probably stop talking about languages you don't know anything about.

>>20082416
ive studied modern, and theres so many different hanzi even in Scholars that arent equivalent to the basic hanzi sets.

>>20082344
Yes, producing a polished, idiomatic translation is non-trivial, but that's not what I mean here.

>>20082319
But the meaning is there in both languages.

I take issue with this attitude of 'if you ever even think about translating, you must be a monolingual brainlet who will never understand Latin'. Especially self-teaching a dead language, it seems like the only way to check my understanding.

If I know that 'dico' is equivalent to 'I say', I can't flush that association out of my brain. Maybe the first few times I see 'dico' I have to stop and think 'say', but the more often I encounter it, the faster this process becomes until it becomes unconscious. I've learned other languages to conversational, if not native, fluency and the experience was the same. If starting by thinking of an English equivalent was just internalizing bad habits, no one would ever use flashcards.

>>20082554
I mean, you don't forget it, but it's not actively in your mind once you actually know the language. I've definitely had cases where the first word that came to mind for me was one in a language other than English and I had to wrack my brain for the English equivalent. One time it took me a whole day to remember how to say "ruza" in English- at some point the next day I was just like "oh right, CUNNING!"

>>20082109
>What's a dictionary, word book, or app, that has usage notes by author and time period, and I guess etymology?
Lewis and Short

>>20082808
Guess I'll have to edit it to EN-LAT

>>20082561
shoo shoo tranny
you don't read Latin and make no effort to learn it, why are you even here

>>20082823
I am learning, actually, but I have a lot else going on. I'm taking it at university but it's hard to motivate myself for class when they insist on outdated methods.

>>20082887
LMFAO

>>20081909
No they'll be filtered by anything unraveling an argument, especially Cicero in his orations.

I'm going to read LLPSI... AND... Wheelock!

and then after that.. I'm going to read both the Cambridge AND Oxford latin courses

Quiver before me

>>20083113
>>20083129
Sasukekun...

What I don't get is why people think Wheelock's should be promoted over LLPSI. As other anons said, it's clearly more readable, and reaches more people in its easiness. Wheelock's is okay too, but too difficult for most. Why WOULDN'T you want more enthusiastic Latin students?

>>20083366
Kill yourself subhuman spammer no one gives a shit about your retarded feud

My understanding of Ablative cases was that they were basically all prepositions but when it's used together with a name or much else I'm not sure what it's trying to communicate

>>20081911
>I do think too many people are essentially deciphering.
How the fuck would you know what is going on in another person's head while they are reading, other than because a youtuber told you they are deciphering in your head?

This is like when conservatives are asked about pro lifers and they say they hate babies and when you ask a leftisits about conservatives they says they hate women. You have clearly never talked to a person who enjoyed a different method and disagrees with you from a position of open minded curiosity.

>>20082109
>What are the other textbooks and grammars besides WL and LLPSI?
Latin an Intensive Couse is a nice alternative to Wheelock and I guess the closest thing to LLPSI that is actually used in schools would be Sidwell & Jones' Reading Latin or Cambridge Latin Course.

I've also heard about Ecce Romani and Henle Latin, but I don't know much about then other than they are popular with homeschool Christians in the US and also Catholic schools.

>>20083533
I say that because of how Latin is commonly taught and how people talk about it. They say things like "it's like a crossword puzzle".

>>20083548
>and how people talk about it.
That's how professors talk about it in academic circles. What does that have to do with me or how I read a text. Does the way that an English professor talks about English grammar mean that you read English just like he describes it?

This is the most tonedeaf circular logic I've seen in a while.

>>20083537
Should I stick through to the end of LLPSI? Or am I wasting my time? I'm at Cap XXVII.

>>20083575
I'm at XII and getting sick of this already.

>>20083572
I mean people who have taken Latin talking about their experience.

>>20083580
I don't know a single person outside of the LLPSI Reddit/Discord combined cult that has ever said anything remotely close to that about Wheelock's Latin. You are in an echo chamber and I'm honestly not even trying to attack you, I feel bad for you.

>>20083586
I'm pretty sure I have actually heard someone say that though.

>>20083587
I didn't say that you haven't. I'm saying I've never heard that, unless it was someone on Reddit/Discord who's doing an advertisement for LLPSI.

The only difference between the false dichotomy reading/deciphering is the speed at which you do it.

>>20083668
Not really, 'reading' implies understanding Latin directly as Latin, 'deciphering' implies translating it to your native language as you go and not understanding it until you do.

>>20076760
dionysus and his satyrgang will gangrape you

Huh, it seems the separation into two generals actually worked.

>>20083899
Segregatio necesse erat. Nigri linguarum classicarum sumus.

>>20083899
hell yeah! the new /clg/ is the best thread we've had in weeks

>>20083529
Essentially Ablative covers from, with and in.
>in - locative
>from - separation
>with - instrumental
Prepositions probably came later to clearly distinguish the uses.
Can you be more specific about 'used together with a name'? Give an example if you can.

>>20083586
You're wasting time arguing with a demented tranny who brags about knowing Esperanto but can't pass Latin 101

>>20083977
Meanwhile this is possibly the worst Latin thread yet.

>>20083366
If you are so stupid that you can't learn out of Wheelock then you will never actually learn Latin.

>>20084072
>Can you be more specific about 'used together with a name'? Give an example if you can.
I'm almost sure he refers to the ablative absolute.

>>20083529
if you see an ablative with a noun it may be an ablative of description. i.e. magna virtute homo, similar to the genitive magnae virtutis homo

I'm getting filtered by all the negatives in the last two clauses of this selection out of Cicero against Verres.

nunc vero cum loquar apud senatores populi Romani, legum et iudiciorum et iuris auctores, timere non debeo ne non unus iste civis Romanus illa cruce dignus, ceteri omnes simili periculo indignissimi iudicentur.

I'm getting something like "I ought not to fear that that Roman citizen alone should not be judged to be worthy of that cross, and that all others should be judged to be most unworthy of a similar danger" but I'm still too much of a brainlet to understand. Is he asking the judges to crucify Verres?

>>20084871
in the previous paragraph he seems to be talking about crucifying a Roman citizen to be something that is undescribably terrible, so it would seemingly follow that he's saying "I don't have to fear that you will consider this one single Roman citizen worthy of the cross, while the rest you'd judge absolutely unworthy of a similar danger"

>>20084871
I think it may be something like
>I'm certain that, not being this one citizen worthy of that cross (implied: sit), all the others are not worth of a similar danger.
'ne' affect the second preposition (iudicentur) in my opinion.
Like, "don't worry, senators, if this one is not guilty, you shouldn't be worried".
Does it makes sense?

>>20084948
though actually since he seems to be condemning the actions of this guy, he does seem to be saying that this terrible individual IS actually alone in having deserved the cross among Roman citizens for what he did, in fact that one "non" in "non unus" seems to be saying this, so I change what I said

never even read a word of latin. how long until i can read ovid's metamorphoses and would it be worth it just for that?

>>20084871
In short, yes
ne non with verbs of fearing is the same as ut, that is negative, in English 'I fear that this will not happen.
Subordinate clause alone
>unus iste civis Romanus illa cruce dignus, ceteri omnes simili periculo indignissimi iudicentur.
That one Roman citizen alone (Verres) is judged worthy of the cross, all the others undeserving of a similar fate
Simplified - Verres is judged worthy, the others aren't
now add the negative fear clause
>timeo ne non unus... iudicentur
I fear that Verres is not judged worthy, the others are
then negative debeo
>timere non debeo...
I have no need to fear that Verres is not judged worthy, the others are
See pic related from Allen and Greenough for details

>>20085105
perfect, thank you

>>20084992
We need to know a lot more than that. Are you retarded? Will you be using something like the LLPSI, only to give up at Caesar? How much time will you put in each day to run through declension and conjugation paradigms? DO YOU HAVE WHAT IT TAKES?

>>20085189
that all sounds very gay so no, i'll just read a prose translation to dab in you fags

>>20085194
it's ok, you can take solace in the fact that you're obviously too retarded to make it through an elementary course anyway

>>20084871
timeo ne faciat: I fear that he will do
timeo ne non faciat: I fear that he won't do
non timeo ne non faciat: I'm sure (I don't fear) that he won't do

Are any of the LLPSI supplementary texts worth it?

>>20083575
if you can't fly through the rest of the chapters and understand literally everything you should probably work through it

these threads are so bizarre to me because people tend to treat latin (and ancient greek for that matter) like languages that you can only understand via transliteration into english/some other modern language and careful dissecting of grammatical constructs for whatever reason
instead of being able to understand latin like, you know, other languages you might be fluent in
i gotta say it feels great to be able to read any given latin text as if it were my native language without knowing what the fuck an ablative is but keep on trucking guys lol

>>20085695
How did you learn Latin? Where are you from?

>>20085695
>ayo its cool that i can rap in english without knowing what tf a "predicate" be but yall nerds keep on trucking lol

>>20084074
I've been getting good grades in Latin 102- mostly off of having read LLPSI rather than anything I've learned in class.

>>20084079
Even the stupidest ancient Romans spoke it fluently, short of some severe disability. You don't have to be smart to speak a natural human language.

>>20085778
even the stupidest ancient Romans grew up surrounded by fluent Latin speakers. Meanwhile today pretty much all mature students learn a language with some explicit grammatical study and reference to their first language.
>>20085771
why is it that the lelipsi fanboys flooding these threads almost never have more than 1/2 semesters equivalent experience lol
>I swear it works so well I'm already on chapter xxiv it's easy
>>20085695
lol this stinks of LARP. respond in Latin or fuck off.

>>20085828
Because once they've been studying a while they don't feel the need to go on threads like this, they just keep reading things that interest them, presumably.

>>20085695
Is this bald man or one of his disciples?

>>20085834
lol and they never want to discuss what they've read? they're just so enraptured by inpoot that they leave /lit/ forever?
I suspect it's because people who are drawn to LLPSI are averse to hard work or struggle and get filtered hard as soon as they step out of their curated sandbox

>>20085838
if he was llpsi person he'd at least have to acknowledge that llpsi does explicitly teach cases and declensions. instead he seems to be pretending that he learned in an immersion environment

>>20085862
Or they find better places to discuss it.

>>20085878
>n-no they just spam their presumptions here until they Acquire the language then they stop hanging out with you losers
nah, pretty sure they get filtered

>>20085877
>llpsi does explicitly teach cases and declensions.
Depends on how you use it really if you just read the stories there's no "explicit teaching" most people just ignore all the other shit like the exercises

>>20085895
well that explains why the troons on the llpsi discord recommend shit like this as "intermediate" level reading lmao

>llpsi discord
didn't even know that exists
didn't want to know that it does

>>20085895
if you read enough of these, one day you'll be able to read a Latin translation of harry potter!

>>20085920
llpsi fag here i recommend this

>>20085862
>I suspect it's because people who are drawn to LLPSI are averse to hard work or struggle

Or its because everyone says to use it. Even websites advocating a strict grammatical method to start will tell you to go to LLPSI after you memorise your declensions and conjugations.

>>20085935
hey just want to apologize and say I shouldn't shit on anyone/everyone who learns with llpsi, I just find the militant faggots particularly annoying/disruptive.

>>20085935
agreed
https://www.stepbible.org/?q=version=VulgJ|reference=Gen.1&options=VHNUG

>>20085935
>>20085972
Between the Vulgate and Epitome Historiae Sacrae, I've been reading a lot of bible stories. I really can fathom why they appealed to people for two thousand years. Everything about them is weird and utterly alien to me.

>>20085988
*can't

Shit is weird and I would have dropped it if not for the great language practice.

>>20085947
Going by this thread I'd say the anti-llpsi are much worse

>>20086007
I disagree but ok

et fecit Deus llpsium et videt quod esset bonum

>>20086126
sed et serpens erat callidior cunctis animantibus terrae quae fecerat Dominus Deus qui dixit ad mulierem cur praecepit vobis Deus ut legeretis de llipsium?...scit enim Deus quod in quocumque die legeretis ex wheelockis libro aperientur oculi vestri et eritis sicut dii scientes bona grammatica ab mala

>>20086126
>>20086145
You are the cancer of this board and the reason why Latin has been confined to a containment thread.

>>20086153
>sic anglice respondet

>>20086153
now write that in latin

wheelockis libro lol

>>20086161
>>20086169
Possum sane, nec autem faciam; nullo modo enim mutaretur veritas quam dixi si latine dicerem. Itero autem vos et mimemata esse quae hoc filum destruunt. Necate vos ipsos.

>>20086193
bene dixisti, tibi congratulor!

>>20086193
what's a mimemata/mimematum

>>20082822
Smith & Hall is EN-LA. They're both free on latinitium and work well with each other.

Juilius in foro est. Emit rosas. Formasae sunt.

>>20086153
>nooo you're the reason Latin has a containment general and we aren't sharing another containment general

Juilia mentulam Marci osculat.

>>20086277
>Juilius

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4d-YsD8zN88
Is he right about Latin?

>>20086299
Iulius irrumat Iuliam. Sucsop, sucsop.

Canis latrat. Baubau. Canis laetus est. Cur canis laetus est? Quia semen eius in vagina Aemiliae est.

>>20086355
i can read this
llpsi works

>>20086355
wait, is the dog called Aemelia? I'm confused

>>20086413
spotted the wheelcuck

>>20086414
lmao wheelock's readers have already abandoned this shit thread to read catullus instead

>wheelock's readers
>implying

>>20085935
wanna buy this as physical but they're so expensive

>>20086441
lmao get a credit card

Pastor in agro est. Pastor plorat. Cur pastor plorat? Quia amica eius abest. Amica eius Romae est. Ergo, pastor ovem quaerit. Ove inventa, pastor eam irrumat. Deinde, pastor ab ove pedicatur. Pastor non iam plorat sed laetus est.

>>20086456
That's the extent of written Latin that most LLPSI readers achieve.

>>20086462
>scribit Anglice

>>20086453
u bought the same book three times bro

>>20086482
no, retard, one is small, one is perfect, and one is a facsimile text without modernized spelling

>>20086482
It's a good book.

>>20085828
>why is it that the lelipsi fanboys flooding these threads almost never have more than 1/2 semesters equivalent experience lol
Probably because a first year Latin course using LLPSI will finish around Cap XXVIII. On the Latin library website, they've posted course materials from Latin 101 and 102 which finishes at Cap XXVII.

>>20086248
I think it's greek for copy/imitation; a nice word to say memes?

>>20086453
>Vulgate
>3 copies of KJV
>No copies of the Douay-Rheims
?

Lucium Amadeum Ranierium Romae heri in taberna vidi. Allocutus sum eum mirans quam laetissime eum comminus incedere, at minime in animo habui eum sciscitari quibuslibet de rebus seu quodammodo molestare.
Respondit "Oh, ut modo fecisti?"
Obstipui, sed nil potui nisi "quid?" dicere, is vero pergit me pedibus contraire iactitans "huh? huh? huh?" atque manum suam me contra stringens. Abii perrexique mercatum, audivique eum ridentem cum decesserim. Pecuniam cum accederim mercatrici datum, eum vidi ex taberna exientem quindecim fere eosdem de grammaticis libros evehentem nulla pecunia reddita.
Mercatrix eum quam benigne et humane reprehens ait "Domine, vos oporteret pecuniam pro eis reddere". Primo se simulavit fessum et in eam neglegentem, tandem terga rursus vertens libros ad eam retulit.
Unum cum illa iterum ac iterum librum enumeraverit, interfatus est eam atque mandavit ei ut unosquosque numeraret "ne quid wheelocki impedimentum adsit", tum denique me acriter intuens nictavit. Reor id ne quidem verbum esse. Libris singillatim inspectis atque in sacculo eius insertis, mercatricem pretium dicturam continenter obstrepebat oscitans.

>>20086728
why does this nigga live rent free in your mind? Who fucking cares, why must you shit up every thread with this.

>>20086728
Can you stop talking about this guy for one second
It's honestly tiresome (and gay).

>>20086728
lol
what's lol in latin btw

>>20086651
Also the etymology of 'meme'.

>>20086784
Maybe just 'risi'?

>WOAH! Latin! I hecking love the Classicerinos!

>>20085621
No not really.

>>20085695
>instead of being able to understand latin like, you know, other languages you might be fluent in
THERE. ARE. NO. LIVING. NATIVE. SPEAKERS.

LLSPI. IS. NOT. A. SUBSITUTE. FOR. A. NATIVE. SPEAKER.

>>20085935
Clementine Vulgate is better.

>>20086313
Don't show this the the larpers

>>20087931
Doesn't mean the principle of comprehensible input doesn't apply.

>>20087931
You typing in all-caps doesn't magically make your point relevant. You can achieve fluent comprehension without ever speaking a word in the language you're learning.

>>20087931
>>20087961
And no one is claiming that you can do it *just* via LLPSI. You obviously need to work through a fuckton of other texts.

>>20087958
>Doesn't mean the principle of comprehensible input doesn't apply.
People here are not arguing principles, they are arguing strategy in language learning and practical resources to use. If your entire argument is that it sounds good on paper, then see yourself out of this discussion.

>>20087961
>You can achieve fluent comprehension without ever speaking a word in the language you're learning.
Who said anything about the student speaking? The point was that he asked why is learning a dead language any different and the difference is that there no native speakers and this affects how you can learn.

>>20087966
>And no one is claiming that you can do it *just* via LLPSI.
You haven't read enough of this threads.

>>20087974
So how if it's not in regards to speaking, how does the existence of native speakers affect your ability to be able to read a language?

>>20087973
I'm not saying it sounds good on paper, I'm saying the evidence for comprehensible input is strong.

>>20087976
You need to make sure you look at what I'm replying to and not just what I said out of context. The guy I was talking to was asking "why is learning latin any different" and I pointed out that it was a dead fucking language. He was just doing the typical anti-grammar rant and said something about how is Latin different. So I said how Latin was different.

>>20087978
Reading 30 minutes a day is not the same as living with native speakers and listening and speaking 24/7. Why is this so hard for you guys to comprehend? When you don't have access to native speakers, you learn how the language works and you COMBINE this with reading.

>>20087990
>The guy I was talking to was asking "why is learning latin any different"
Except he wasn't asking that? He was asking what makes Latin impossible to understand fluently, not how the learning process is different.

>>20087992
You still haven't explained why the existence of the native speaker is essential and why it is impossible to achieve fluent understanding of a language via reading, yet you continue to claim that it is.

>>20087994
>not how the learning process is different.
Then what the fuck are we arguing about?

>>20088001
>You still haven't explained why the existence of the native speaker is essential
I didn't say it was essential. He asked why Latin was different and I said it had no native speakers. Thus the process is going to different, harder, and take longer. Doesn't make it impossible, but he asked how it was different.
>why it is impossible to achieve fluent understanding of a language via reading
You are the only person here using words like "impossible" and "essential". I'm not sure why, but you seem to not understand what I'm saying at all.

>>20088047
I mean you literally quoted him right here >>20087931
>instead of being able to understand latin like, you know, other languages you might be fluent in
>being able to understand latin fluently
You responding to this with THERE ARE NO NATIVE SPEAKERS implies that you are saying that the existence of native speakers is essential to understanding Latin fluently.

>>20088057
Instead of other languages I might be fluent in....which have native speakers

>>20076640
What are some Latin hidden gem authors?

>>20088716
Gellius
Statius
Propertius

This is why you got kicked out from /clg/
What a mess of a thread

All llpsi and Wheelock discussion should be banned

>>20089050
And Ranieri-posting too
In fact, this is /lit/, we discuss literature. If you want a thread to discuss methods for learning languages, go to /int/.

>>20088716
>Dracontius
>Sedulius
>Peter Riga
>Prudentius
>Alcuin
>Third Vatican Mythographer

>>20089050
LLPSI is a series of books that I like to read, it belongs here.

>>20087931
>THERE. ARE. NO. LIVING. NATIVE. SPEAKERS.
Luke Ranieri essentially is one. He has a lot of Latin material on his channel including readings of LLPSI and a podcast. I listen to him everyday for hours.

>>20089305
based

>>20085862
>I suspect it's because people who are drawn to LLPSI are averse to hard work or struggle and get filtered hard as soon as they step out of their curated sandbox

nope, I just prefer it since I have a really fucking hard time with the moonspeak textbooks use to explain grammatics and stuff. It like as an english speaker, trying to learn greek by reading the textbook on greek in french.
Feeling out the rules of a language is horribly slow compared to other methods, but I find it still less frustrating than trying to understand the "explanations" you get from the experts, which you need a whole new dictionary for.

>>20089676
>t. retard

>>20089730
every brain is different. I am able to become quite good in a language, but more through absorbtion of examples than through the abstract technical terms of the standard text books.

>>20089954
>this filters the moron

What would you say the most efficient way to learn Latin is?

>>20090229
unironically the 7 step ranieri method

>>20086313
Interesting, i'm mildly stalling on LLPSI and was wondering if a more grammar focused method would be better. Currently doing 90 mins of Latin a day, maybe 60/30 grammar and LLPSI would be best.

>>20090326
I keep stalling on LLPSI too. I'm sorry, but I really don't think only using this book is a good idea. These chapters are repetitive and not in a good way. I'm getting burnt out.

>>20089954
>abstract technical terms of the standard text books.
"Verbs are actions. A conjugation is when the verb changes depending on who the subject is. A noun is an object or concept. A declension is when the noun ending changes depending on how the noun is being used."

If you got filtered by this, then just stick to videogames.

>>20090616
How far are you into the book?

>>20090006
>>20090624
I did not know we have so many smug Redditors in this thread.

So... Who's going to make the new thread?

>>20090661
I'm about to start chapter 13. Between chapters 8-11 I started to lose interest and went from reading a chapter every few days to every few weeks.

>>20090758
should have done the ranieri method

>>20089058
Who he hell on /int/ would be interested in Latin, though?

>>20087931
>THERE. ARE. NO. LIVING. NATIVE. SPEAKERS.
Are you sure about that?
https://www.youtube.com/c/LifeinLatin/videos

>>20089730
Nah, he just never learned the vocabulary for it so it's like a foreign language in its own right to him.

>>20090326
60/30? What would the other 10 be?

>>20090916
minutes you tool

Why is everyone in this thread a smartass

>>20090981
Where do you think you are?

>>20091078
A Language learning thread. This is not /pol/ let's not pretend that every board and every thread on 4chan are the same. Look at CLG without Latin and see how everyone is helping eachother.