/lit/ - Literature

Latin has no place in the modern world and should be forgotten forever never to be written, spoken or read again

>>20090328
Latin is a language worth preserving for being very dense and a perfect written language. It's also quite complicated in it's syntax which sorts out the small brains and anglos

plebes necandae sunt

>>20090328
those who forget history will inevitably repeat it

>>20090360
Only Adamic can be called perfect and it has been dead for thousands of years
>>20090371
>people will invent Latin again
Hmm

I know that in some Western countries Latin is thought in high-school. How much does the average person understand it after they graduate?

>>20090381
I didn't claim Latin is a perfect language, I claimed it is a perfect written laguage, that's a difference. In fact it's a poor spoken language and has mostly been spoken in a simplified, "vulgar" form.

>>20090409
No one learns languages at any school from my experience

ἑλληνιστί ἀμείνων ἐστίν

>>20090409
Some AP nerds will take it in high school and the rich kids in private schools will also take it. As far as understanding Latin afterwards, it's on a case by case basis. Some people just take it to attain a higher vocabulary level for SATs and others are genuinely interested.

>>20090409
I talked to some Italians who took Latin in high-school. Basically end of LLPSI level but they mostly do reading and little writing.

>>20090148
If you announce in the OP that is is a containment thread, the ranieri posters will go back to clg.

>>20090363
Hoc si feceris, quis nobis laborabit?

>from last thread

I watched https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4d-YsD8zN88 and found it interesting, would studying grammar from another Latin book then LLPSI on the side for reading practice/vocab be better than just LLPPSI?

>>20090148
pic rel is Ranieri in a few years, except Ranieri isn't interesting or worth listening to.

>>20090503
I'm not worried. There are already several replies here, and if they do Ranieri post in /clg/, now with there being an established general for Latin, we can report them. The person who got /lll/ to take off did a very good service for this board. If I want to talk about Latin with a lot of people who will never learn the language and a few people who have, I can go to /lll/. If I want to discuss something in classics unrelated to Latin, then I go to /clg/.

>>20090503
>>20090773
You retards sperging about ranieriposters are more visible and disruptive than those fags

And once again failed to notice the thread had hit bump limit when I woke up...
>>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. He's capable of learning it but it's an extra barrier to entry.
>>20090326
60/30? What would the other 10 be?

>>20090360
>very dense and a perfect written language
There's nothing special about Latin.
>>20090410
>In fact it's a poor spoken language and has mostly been spoken in a simplified, "vulgar" form.
What? What does 'a poor spoken language' even mean?

>>20090421
I think I learned Spanish from high school alright, but I was genuinely invested in it and getting some practice outside of class.

>>20090940
>there's nothing special about Latin
Are you serious? Every language is unique and unironically special in its own way. Latin also has the weight of a two millennia written tradition.

>>20091291
Right, but I mean there's nothing more special about Latin than there is about every language- every language is special including Latin, but the way in which it's special is nothing particularly extraordinary.

>>20090148
>This thread is dedicated to Latin, Latin, Latin... language, literature.... and THE place for discussing the Ranieri Method (TM)

>>20090616
>>20090758
I'm taking it slow doing around 2-3 stages per day, after I'm done for the day I usually have a look at some real texts by Caesar, Cicero, Nepos, Horace, Boethius, the Vulgate, etc., picking out some sentences that are already within my grasp, which is fairly motivating by itself. It's been pretty enjoyable so far overall.

>>20090148
Can anyone help me decipher this? I can't work out what the backwards lambda looking letters are, they're either r's or h's or sometihng else entirely

>>20091466
Rs
It says Valeria

>>20091466
anon.. why is there a furry hand in there?

>using LLPSI
>also using New Latin Grammar (Allen & Greenough) (1903)
How is this such a debated topic? If you don't think you're getting enough from LLPSI just use a grammar book?

I'm a proponent of having /lll/ separate from /clg/, and I just got 100% on my Latin test translating Horace.

>>20090591
Do a third of Wheelock (or another primer), then start LLPSI. If you don't, then you are going to hit a wall around chapters 8 & 9 of Orberg.

>>20091532
no I mean the whole text

Genesis 3:20
et vocavit Adam nomen uxoris suae Hava eo quod mater esset cunctorum viventium
What is the function of "eo" in this sentence pls and thanks

>>20090148
An exercise for /lll/
This is the entirety of Catullus 1. Post your translations and compare with others.

>>20090591
>would studying grammar from another Latin book then LLPSI on the side for reading practice/vocab be better than just LLPPSI?
Absolutely

>>20091466
rest is on you

>>20092154
eo quod essentially means because
eo is the ablative of id, quod is the neuter relative pronoun. A literal definition would be something like
>for the fact that
This construction gets common in later Latin, especially Augustan onwards. Isidorus uses it all the time.

>>20092264
Ah thank you anon. I gathered as much but thought quod would have been sufficient on its own.

>>20091592
I'm using a grammar book that was written for the French dauphin in the 1600s. There a lot of good tips and the way the writer explains stuff is very intuitive.

>>20092229
This is what I've managed to come up with so far, I've spent enough time staring at these scribbles now my eyes hurt

Valerius Canico fratri salutem
a marino neru condo centum exclicabo
e quo tu __ hac re scri__a n_ me
nerionem mihi fecit aliquotiens
tibi scric_eram me emesse
croce modos quinque milia colle
quod mihi necessare sunt nisi
mittis __ aliquit minime quingentos
futurum est ut quod arremdedi
lerdam circa crecentos et erubescam
ita rogo quam crimum aliquit mi
mitte loria quem scribis esse

cataractonio scribe dentur mi et
kamum de quo scribis et qu__ sit cum
eo__arro mi scribe iam illec cetissem
nissi iumenta non curavi aera??re dum
uiae male sunt vide cum tekeio? de VIII
saum? a fatale acce__t non illos mi
cavaccectro?? tuit moneinium??
cum audio magnos licere cro cor
atone quem hic comcarauit? quinos
saluta spectatum et firmum
erisulas a gleucone acceci? vale

It doesn't make any sense to me at all

>>20091592
Dunno. Maybe those people got filtered by LLPSI and are now assmad when someone praises it as the easiest way to learn latin.

>>20092620
People don't dislike the book itself because they got filtered by it. What they dislike is the cult around the book.

Also people get filtered immediately after reading it by actual texts and get stuck reading intermediate readers and the vulgate forever because they refuse to read any grammar explanations in English. Because that's "totally normal" when learning a foreign language. /s

>>20092679
>and get stuck reading intermediate readers and the vulgate forever
>and the vulgate
lol you're full of shit

>>20090148
How do I learn Greek and Latin?

Guys, you forgot something important... these threads need to be numerated. Don't forget to add the number to the next one (in Roman numerals ofc)

>>20092751
Like any other language, vocabulary, grammar and tons of input. llpsi is good for starters.

>>20092740
Usually when someone makes points that address your question and you respond like that, it means you have no argument. Go read something with pictures kiddo.

>>20092550
it's a furfag comic, most likely written by someone with a cursory knowledge of Latin. Probably intended to be the writing of someone uneducated in the language.
Not sure why you would spend time on this, it is one step up from Lorem Ipsum. There are enough authentic Latin works to last you a lifetime, don't waste time on trifles like this.

>>20092796
you're trying to lump in the vulgate with fucking graded readers to what else needs to be said here

>>20092803
>you're trying to lump in the vulgate with fucking graded readers to what else needs to be said here
In terms of difficulty. Are you a Christian or something so you are completely missing the point and are assuming I mean in terms of quality? Come on man, you are just looking for a fight over nothing.

Tell me something about Latin grammar that I don't know (it shouldn't be hard)

>>20092043
>>20092201
>hit a wall around chapters 8 & 9 of Orberg.

Got to 11, decided a change of approach was best. The video recommended Collar-Daniels so i'll look into that.

>>20091592
Some people like to check their ideas with others Anon.

>>20090360
>anglos
retard.
More like anyone who speaks a caseless "language"

Where can I find good editions of classical texts WITH macrons? I want to memorize vowel quantity and the easiest way is probably to be exposed to it every time I read a word.

>>20093003
Yeah see what I mean. I'm at 12 right now and not loving the lack of English explanations.

I can understand what's being said, so I'm not being filtered, but I have no concept of what the fuck is going on grammatically in parts and I certainly would not know how to use the same constructions in my own writing or speech. It's just like a game of charades, where yeah you get the point, but you don't want to play charades forever. At a certain point, you want to be clear and precise in both your output and your understanding of the input.

I ordered the companion book and I'm thinking about jumping back into Wheelock, which I was enjoying before I stopped halfway through because I fell for the inpoot meme.

>>20093091
Macrons are usually only present in graded readers, textbooks, and annotated student editions.

>>20093094
Same, I understood the content of cap 12 but the grammar was tricky.

>companion book

Good idea, I might look into the one with additional exercises.

>>20092196
To whom should I give my witty little book polished just now with dry pumice? To you, Cornelius: for you always used to think my jokes were worth something even then, when you dared (the one Italian) to strip down all of history into three volumes learned, O Juptier, and laborious. So take this little book for what anything that it is; it which, my patron virgin may keep alive for more than one generation.

>>20092550
The gamma looking symbol is a p

>>20093333
I mean the squared "c", is actually a p.
Pro, not Cro
Accepi, not acceci
Etc.

>>20093091
You can't

>>20092196
A chi dono il lepido nuovo libello con l'arida pomice mo polito?
Cornelio, a te: infatti solevi considerare che i miei scherzi fossero qualcosa già allora, quando osasti, uno tra gli italici, l'intero evo spiegare in tre carte dotte, Giove, e laboriose.
Perciò abbiti ciò quant'è del libello, qualunque ne sia; il che la vergine patrona mantenga perenne più d'un secolo.

>>20092196
A chi dono il lepido nuovo libello con l'arida pomice mo polito?
Cornelio, a te: infatti solevi considerare che i miei scherzi fossero qualcosa già allora, quando osasti, uno tra gli italici, l'intero evo spiegare in tre carte dotte, Giove, e laboriose.
Perciò abbiti ciò quant'è del libello, qualunque ne sia; il che la vergine patrona mantenga perenne per più d'una generazione.

>>20092196
A chi dono il lepido nuovo libello con l'arida pomice mo polito?
Cornelio, a te: infatti solevi putare che i miei scherzi fossero qualcosa già allora, quando osasti, uno tra gli italici, l'intero evo spiegare in tre carte dotte, Giove, e laboriose.
Perciò abbiti ciò quant'è del libello, qualunque ne sia; il che la vergine patrona mantenga perenne per più d'una generazione.

>>20090148
Is the link correct?
I can't seem to enter due to invalid key.

>>20093947
same

Why did the medievalists use Latin differently than the classical authors? They had their texts like Vergil, Ovid, Horace, Cicero etc and studied them to learn Latin. Why did they change it up?

>>20094974
Because being able to read a certain style is not the same as being able to reproduce said style. Also it was more influenced by Church Latin and the modern vernacular languages.

Actively using a language that is frozen in time is very difficult, because over time it becomes more and more removed from the reality of changing present. It becomes more alien to the living people at the time and thus has to be modified to retain it's legitimacy as a useful means of communication and documentation.

Modern romance grammar had simplified significantly and continuing to use constructions and word order that was alien to your native tongue was just not plausible at a certain point. You have to remember they didn't really think of Latin as a different language, but more like the eloquent register of their own language. You didn't write things in Spanish or Italian. You spoke Latin and wrote Latin, but the Latin you spoke was getting more and more removed from how you were told to write.

I actually think attempts in the Renaissance to "purify" Latin to a more Ciceronian style actually accelerated the decline of the language by creating even more rigid parameters for what classifies as "good Latin" and it turned the language into a specialized field for elites, as opposed to the only language worth writing anything down in, as it was in the middle ages. It was no longer practical for business, science, or politics - it was niche hobby.

>>20094974
as this anon >>20095182 explained very well, the users of Latin changed with the times. even in the 300/400s AD, the style loosened up quite a bit and they made no effort to write 100% like golden age writers, except within a few phrases here and there.
it would be like thinking keats is dogshit because he doesn't write exactly like shakespeare.
the medievalists knew the classical literature very well and copied a lot of rhetorical techniques and ready made phrases but they didn't strive to imitate them 100% like the humanists who thought that if you didn't write in verse like vergil or in prose like cicero you were dogshit. erasmus has a great dialogue about the autism of ciceronians if you can find it.

>Vix ea fatus erat, cum circumfusa repente
>scindit se nubes et in aethera purgat apertum.
>Restitit Aeneas claraque in luce refulsit,
>os umerosque deo similis; namque ipsa decoram
>caesariem nato genetrix lumenque iuventae
>purpureum et laetos oculis adflarat honores:
>quale manus addunt ebori decus, aut ubi flavo
>argentum Pariusve lapis circumdatur auro.

>>20093947
>>20094371
>>20090148

The link is missing a trailing 'g'.
( mega dot nz/folder/9o4QEIIK#P3piz8Bfw-z7jgb7Q8NWDg )

Vulgate question:
Genesis 4:13
dixitque Cain ad Dominum maior est iniquitas mea quam ut veniam merear

What kind of ut clause is this? Having a hard time with the syntax and meaning of this verse. "My crime is greater than the mercy I deserve"?

>>20095182
>>20095357
Gratias vobis ago. Makes a lot of sense. Thanks for clearing it up.

>>20093546
Why was Italian so much easier for me to learn than Latin?

Does anyone feel schizo when they've been doing Latin for an extended period of time? If I focus, I'm almost able to think entirely in Latin, which is what I have been doing for the past hour in the public library. From thinking about why those highschool kids are making so much noise to deciding in Latin that its now time I take a shit.
After doing this for an hour, now as I'm coming back to English, I feel absolutely schizo.

>>20097204
Why would thinking in another language make you feel mentally ill? Are you American and under the age of 21?

>>20090421
Nah, some kids do actually learn languages and soak them in like a sponge, just give them a proper teacher and study materials. In my poor (Eastern European) school we used to study english. Some children got it well, others - who were the vast majority though - just didn't care at all, and same could be said for the entire curriculum. Yet I wish I learned Latin or ancient Greek instead. That would be way more useful for kids' further education than what they imply to be 'must have' for their future career.

>>20092196
To whom should I give my new book, polished with no more than a rough pumice stone?
To you, Cornelius: and that because you used to think my jokes were worthy even then, for you are the one among the whole tribe of Italians to write down their learned and laborious history, O Jupiter.
Therefore take this little book, however worthy it may be; may my patron virgin keep it alive for more than one generation.

>>20096504
Thanks dude.

What do we think about HADESTOWN?

>>20097122
Both the grammar and the vocabulary are more similar to whatever language you speak.

>>20097812
>>20093309
>To whom should I
Why the modal aspect of should? Couldn't it be just a rhetorical question to open the dedicatory?

>>20097315
Could be weird if you're not used to it? I know it was a strange feeling when I first managed it.

>>20098753
It could be also that you tend to read more complex stuff in Latin than in Italian.

>>20097568
English is way more important than Latin for everything, including studying the classics. A Turk in my Greek class had to learn English to learn Greek because Greek isn't taught in Turkish. Likewise, how many Greek dictionaries are there in Turkish? Probably not too many. I bet the same could be said about your native language. Furthermore, if you just learned Latin and not English, then you wouldn't be able to do anything with the Greek work that's out there. Also, there's lots of scholarship on Latin and Greek you couldn't read if you don't know English.

>>20098868
>because Greek isn't taught in Turkish
Really? Even though they've been spoken right next to each other for all those centuries?

>>20092196
¿A quién ofrezco este mi reciente y gracioso librito, recién acabado de dar los últimos retoques?
A ti, Cornelio, de echo eras tú quien solía apreciar mi frivolidades ya entonces, cuando te atreviste, el solo de entre los itálicos, a desarrollar en tres cartas doctas y, Dios mío, laboriosas, toda nuestra Historia.
Por ello, de este libro ten para tí lo que sea que pueda valer, lo cual puedan las musas salvarlo del olvido al menos por una generación.

>>20092196 #
¿A quién ofrezco este mi reciente y gracioso librito, recién acabado de dar los últimos retoques?
A ti, Cornelio, de echo eras tú quien solía apreciar mi frivolidades ya entonces, cuando te atreviste, el solo de entre los itálicos, a desarrollar en tres cartas doctas y, Dios mío, laboriosas, toda nuestra Historia.
Por ello, de este libro ten para tí lo que sea que pueda valer, y que puedan las musas salvarlo del olvido al menos por una generación.

>>20098893
That's what he told me. He isn't some moron either. He is by far the best student in my Homer class. One funny note, his accent is hard to understand sometimes. One time, he was talking about gerunds in Latin class, and both the teacher and I thought he was talking about Jerome, which would make contextual sense because we were just reading the Vulgate.

someone pls help >>20096552

>>20098930
Did he mean Ancient Greek or Modern Greek? Presumably Modern Greek is.

>>20098947
We were only talking about Ancient

>>20098768
What do you mean? "Cui" is dative and he is dedicating the book to someone.
More literally I guess it would be "To whom dedicate this book..." but it sounds weird.

>>20098911
Checked and best translation so far, even if not the most literal.

>>20098967
>to whom do I dedicate this book?
>to whom am I dedicating this book?

>>20098967
>"To whom dedicate this book..." but it sounds weird.
Yes, I was asking that, why the modal verb "should" was included in the translations. Thanks.

>>20096552

>>20096552
ut + subjunctive should give you the hint, my iniquity/crime is greater than (subordinate clause), in this case "in order to be worthy of mercy"
hence also the use of quam for a more generic comparison vs the ablative which would require some sort of more explicit subordination e.g iniquitas mea maior est eā, quam mererer

>>20099063
addendum: here's how Sebastian Castellio translated it in his classical/Ciceronian rendition of the bible

>>20099063
*quam mererer veniam, pardon

>>20099051
>>20099063
>>20099067
Great, thanks.

How people read and write Latin but not speak it I don't understand

>>20093546
That’s a literal translation. No Italian would write like this or any translator would translate like this

>>20096552
Maybe «my crime is grater than the forgiveness I could possibly deserve»

>>20099124
The phonology is different from many of its descendant languages spoken today

>>20099124
different skills, even in modern languages if you practice exclusively reading/listening you will improve also writing/speaking but only to a slower extent, output is also important
and even more importantly, when you write you can take your time to recall words or check dictionaries, while speaking requires instant operative recall of many words, which for dead languages is harder to practice

>>20099124
Speaking is another skill that must be trained. I may be able to read complex English texts, and write more or less correct sentences, but I speak English like an absolute retard.

>>20099180
>>20099176
>>20099163
Ah okay, so if you're only practicing two fo the skills (reading/writing) does that make Latin easier to contemporary languages?

>>20099193
depends entirely on the language, for a westerner probably no, the amount of resources for modern language alone makes immersion easier

>>20099193
It's just something that you don't have to spend time with.
>easier to contemporary languages
It depends on to which language you compare it.
It also depends on what you mean by learning Latin. Latin students usually target literary and rhetoric texts. Compare them to similar texts of contemporary languages. Most people that consider themselves, not only being able to speak English, but also "fluent" on this language, wouldn't be able to read Shakespeare, for example.

>>20099240
Could you elaborate
>>20099260
I'm referring to contemporary languages that remained relatively stagnant over the years

>>20099315
>I'm referring to contemporary languages that remained relatively stagnant over the years
Then take any modern language and give to a fluent non native speaker a piece of elaborated literature, and see what happens. Or do the same with English an a contemporary work.
Learning Latin has higher requirements than learning other modern languages because you're supposes to use it to read highly rhetorical texts.

>>20097122
Latin is highly condensed whereas Italian is more explicit. Latin requires you to fill in the gaps and Italian, or any other modern European language besides German, spells it all out for you. Plus, having articles and a straightforward syntax helps you read the sentences in a more linear fashion.

>>20098868
>English is way more important than Latin for everything, including studying the classics.
False. Anglophones, if they are pursuing the classics seriously, have to pick up German in grad school because they still have the best philological scholarship. For an example, an early 1900s grammar book on Classical Arabic is in German and not translated into English. It is still considered the best book for westerners.

>>20098868
English is way more important than Latin for everything, including studying the classics.
False. Anglophones, if they are pursuing the classics seriously, have to pick up German in grad school because they still have the best philological scholarship. For example, an early 1900s grammar book on Classical Arabic is in German and not translated into English. It is still considered the best book on the subject for westerners.

Chapter 8 of LLPSI was the first minor challenge but after reading through it 5 times I got the hang of it.

Surprisingly decent thread so far, at least in comparison.

Is there proof LLPSI has brings more success to Latin students?

>>20090148
Thread theme https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LW0Nw7asoE

>>20099260
I would not call someone fully fluent in English if they cannot even read early modern English.

>>20090940
>There's nothing special about Latin.
Just a completely ignorant thing to say, it always amazes me how people who know damn well they know absolutely fuck all on a subject will weigh in with such authority. Latin is well known for its clarity, that's why it was lingua franca for so long and the default language in science and philosophy. Great English writers have even tried to be "Latinate" and emulate its superior clarity and effect.

>>20100205
Not really, no. That's not how it works. Literally talk to any actual linguist.

>>20100205
>Latin is well known for its clarity, that's why it was lingua franca for so long and the default language in science and philosophy.
And not because of, you know, the fucking Roman empire?

>>20092196
Whom shall I give this charming little book,
Polished and dried as if with pumice stone?
To you, Cornelius: for you always thought
Something of these slight verses, and because
Of all the Italians you alone dared write
The whole of history down in three volumes--
O Jupiter!--most laborious and learned.
Consider then, whatever this book is;
O virgin patroness, let it remain
For generation after generation.

i think im finally starting to understand the subjunctive bros...

>>20098802
Most people are miserable because no matter how hard they try, they never achieve this. If anything people are jealous of you.

>>20099463
I'm at 13. 9 is very easy and comfy to read. 10-12 is a bit of a hurdle.

>>20099794
>proof LLPSI has brings more success to Latin students?
Students in a classroom with teachers, yes definitely. Self study? I have seen no evidence of this.

All the people who are fluent and used LLPSI in a self study environment either:
1. Are native Spanish/Italian/Portuguese speakers.
2. Speak another inflected language like Russian or German
3. Studied Latin for years using a different book before picking up Orberg
4. Used another book simultaneously or relied heavily on asking for explanations on Reddit/4Chan/Discord for every chapter
5. Used the official Companion Book or Latine Disco.

I have never seen a native English speaker who doesn't speak another language before studying Latin, and hasn't gone through another grammar book previously or simultaneously with Orberg and then came out fluent.

I am using the book, I like the book, but people need to stop making ridiculous claims about it. For example Bald Guy spent 7 years studying Italian and his family is from Naples and he lived there for a while during his study - and he did that before he ever tried Latin. That is not starting from the same point as his viewers on YT.

>>20101498
Congrats man. Keep studying and don't give up!
Te esse velim

>>20102167
>10-12 is a bit of a hurdle
yeah, it seems pretty common for people on these threads to complain about LLPSI around chapters 10-12.

>>20102187
I mean tu* lol

I forget esse is intransitive

>>20102167
>>20102189
You won't have that much trouble if you use the 7-step Ranieri Method.

>>20102189
I had to read chapter 12 more times than any other chapter. 2nd place probably 8 I read the most times before that.

>>20102192

>>20102178
Sounds good to me. Who made such claims about it being all one needs?

>>20102239
The people I mentioned who tend to already know Romance languages. All this despite the fact that they know much of their audience is English speaking. I couldn't tell you if this is intentional or just negligence, but it's not helpful and I think that's why so many people get filtered by this book.

>>20102197
Lolus

>>20102460
Iulia ridet quia laeta est.

u guys like my poem

Nimis longa, non legeo

What's the etymology between Spanish ser/estar and Latin esse?

>>20102632
>From Old Spanish seer, from two sources by suppletion:
>Latin sedeō, sedēre (“to sit, to reside”), from Proto-Italic *sedēō, from Proto-Indo-European *sed-. The infinitive, gerund, imperative, past participle, and present subjunctive come from this verb.
>Latin sum, from Proto-Italic *ezom, from Proto-Indo-European *h1ésti. The forms that derived from here are the present tenses, the imperfect, the imperfect and future subjunctives, and the preterite tenses (although the preterite tense, future subjunctive, and imperfect subjunctive come from a different root, Proto-Indo-European *bʰuH-).


You need to learn how to go to Wiktionary and just type the word in the search bar bro.

>>20102640
>looking things up
man if I wanted to look things up I'd look things up

>>20102640
WIktionary is ran by trannies who scramble all a bunch of info together. It's among the worst dictionaries you could use man.

>>20102632
ser
>esse
>sedēre
estar
>stare

>>20100098
Then a lot of natives aren't fluent in their own language.

What's some easy Latin content, not excessively boring, to increase semipassive exposure to the language?

>>20104247
Isidorus has a huge variety of topics, something has to interest you there
Gellius also had a wide range of interests and everything is in brief sections not requiring you to read them in any particular order
Some of Catullus is fairly simple but not all
Plautus has a ton of comedies that are written very colloquially so once you get the feel for casual speech they are quite enjoyable
Caesar's De Bello Gallico is the standard entry level text

>>20104247
https://www.stepbible.org/?q=reference=Gen.1|version=VulgJ|version=ESV&options=VHNUGV&display=INTERLEAVED

>>20104247
Nepos

https://streamable.com/9b477j
What's his problem?

>>20104489
wtf i'm fluent now

>>20104489
Stop talking about your boyfriend for a second

>>20104278
>>20104280
>>20104286
Thanks!

>read a piece of the Bible in some weird pidgin "language"
>laugh
>realize my Romance language is to Latin what that thing is to English
shiiiieeeet

>>20104113
How do I know if I'm fluent in English?

>>20104796
The Vulgate itself is strange Latin. Lots of rare words or archaic forms, employs unnecessary prepositions and omits words when they might actually be expected, and full of weird cases and syntax.

>>20105024
Does this vary by edition?

>>20105091
Somewhat, depending on the manuscripts they're drawn from, but not significantly.

>>20105024
>>20105091
>>20105130
They're all extremely similar. Do not learn Latin from Vulgate, it would be like speaking peak ornate Shakespearean/Spenserian English, instead, consider it an endpoint.

>>20105213
I'd say it's somewhat analogous to KJV English - simultaneously crude and ornate, unconventional but still generally simple. It's not a bad learning aid as an intermediate level text if you're familiar with the bible in your first language, and if you keep in mind that it isn't standard for any era of Latin. But I agree that it has a bit of an undeserved reputation in that regard.

>>20105213
>it would be like speaking peak ornate Shakespearean/Spenserian English
not really relevant comparison for latin unless you actually plan to speak it
yeah it'll read a bit differently from classical texts but it's not a big deal and you can always adjust by just, you know, reading more classical texts afterwards

>>20105213
What is better? Caesar?

>>20105024
Jerome translated the Old Testament based on the original Hebrew and the New Testament based on the original Greek. He also tried to render it word for word so that is why they differ from normal golden age Latin syntax/grammar.

>>20104247
Lots of nice bite-sized excerpts (with glossary) in Keller and Russell's Learn to Read Latin

>>20105498
Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres
Yeah, Bello Gallico is the best unadapted/unabridged intermediate text by far IMO

>>20105353
No it's not. At all. KJV defined the style for future English, Vulgate is more of an ornate oddity in Latin lit.

>>20105647
I just started the Matthew's Gospel and it doesn't seem ornate at all.

>>20105740
different writers use a different register. check out the schizo prophets of the old testament if you want something more ornate

>>20105638
>tfw Caesar calls wypipo dumb and stinky

>>20090148
"Decrypt key is invalid."

>>20106188
it should be https://mega dot nz/folder/9o4QEIIK#P3piz8Bfw-z7jgb7Q8NWDg but OP missed the last letter when he copied the link.

>>20105498
I've enjoyed this book as an intermediate reader. Text is on the right hand page with glosses and notes on the left. All words used in the book are defined in a complete vocabulary in the back pages. Roma Aeterna also seems ok from what I've heard.

>>20092196
What the fuck did you just say about my little book?
I'll have you know I graduated top of my pumicing class
I've been involved in numerous secret thoughts on Cornelius
and I have over 300 confirmed verses.
I am trained in gorilla warfare and I'm the top wordsmith in the entire Italian peninsula.
You are nothing to me but just three more volumes.
I will write you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been learned before on Jupiter, mark my fucking words.
You think you can get away without considering what this shit is in the senate? Think again, fucker.
As we speak I am contacting my secret virgin patron
Your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for this book to last, maggot.

I didn’t like the difficult grammar of the Vulgate with its close following of the original languages' grammar and word order, etc., so I have begun learning the Castellio version. It’s hard coming from the general ease of the Vulgate (word order, recognizable vocabulary), but it’s nice to see all the Hebrew names fully declined and lexicon found primarily in the classical age. People are saying online that it’s "Ciceronian", so that can’t be a bad model to follow. I was reading a text compiled in the 20th century with all the grammar of the vulgate and thought if they have to make a text for all of the exceptions to regular Latin grammar I’m out. Latin is hard enough without having to learn a bad version of it.

>>20106492
Funny - I never thought the Vulgate would actually be bad Latin

>>20106502
Because it’s a translation.

What is the best interlinear version of the Aeneid? I'm looking for something I can download off of Z-Library or Libgen.

>>20106374
kek

>>20106374
Masterpiece

>>20106289
Thanks.

>>20106502
It's not bad Latin. It's high literary style.

>>20106502
It isn't

I like this chapter

When am I supposed to trill my Rs?
>r: irritata canis quam homo quam planius dictat

>>20103753
>It's among the worst dictionaries you could use man.
I wasn't using it as a dictionary, I was using it for etymology.

>>20106319
I heard the Wheelock reader is better and less of a slog.

>>20106492
>so I have begun learning the Castellio version.
Based

People have tried to transcribe it, but no project is complete. Here's 2 attempts.
>https://la.wikisource.org/wiki/Biblia_Sacra_interprete_Sebastiano_Castellione
>https://bibliasacracastellionis.wordpress.com/

>>20106999
Even so. Trannies fucked everything up. Can't trust much of it.

>>20106999
>>20107018
Among dictionaries, it's a third or fourth pick.

>>20107023
Good thing I wasn't using it as a dictionary.

>>20107018
Use the citations where it says "further reading". You should never take anything from a wiki without looking at the sources. As long as you do that, it's harmless.

If most actual latin text don't use macrons, are there rules are there for determining if a vowel is long or not, or is it a sick game of having to memorize long/short vowels for each word?

>>20107040
The only way is to memorize each word.

>>20107040
Write them by hand with macrons. Also if you use Anki, use type in the answer cards.

>>20107040
If you use the 7-Step Ranieri Method you will automatically acquire perfect Macronization for every Latin word.

>>20107090
Listen to this man, he is very wise.

To people here who have learned some Latin and then went on to learning Greek:

>when did you decide you were ready to jump from latin to greek? Like what was the most difficult bit of latin you could read at your level at the time? or how many years in were you?
and
>how did this affect your latin learning?

I'm near the end of Lingua Latina and I don't feel nearly ready to start with Greek though I want to learn it as well. I'm worried it'll make it harder for me to memorise pronounciations and inflected forms

>>20107408
>I'm near the end of Lingua Latina
How long did it take you and were there any chapters you struggled with?

>>20090409
I took Latin in high school for about 4 years but our teacher was shit and we learnt nothing. However, by our final year we were translating Ovid and Virgil with only minimal reference to dictionaries. I can't stress how bad our teacher was, but hanging out with students at other schools in our district it was clear that they were 100x more capable so I would suspect that they all graduated with a very solid understanding of the language.

>>20107408
>I'm near the end of Lingua Latina
You haven't started with Latin yet

>>20107040
>for each word
For each lexeme. Prefixes maintain vowel quantity, and so do roots and suffixes. Just think of Latin having 10 vowels.
Also if you do know some Romance language, it will give you clues about the accentuation of words.

>>20091326
>Recite aloud with imagination
You fucking autist

>>20091326
How the fuck is a human capable of enduring such torture?

I don't really have much to add to this thread. Interested in Medievalism, and in my second semester of college Latin, 17 chapters into Wheelock. I conjugate every verb and decline every noun in the Vocabula fully, etc, and make frequent visits to previous chapters. Very, very much enjoying myself (note that I also enjoyed drafting truth tables in my introductory logic course, lol). People dunk on rote memorization and grammar-translation approaches but I feel like you can't help but know something after writing it 500 times and reviewing daily. Am I in for a rude awakening when I start trying to work my way through the Vulgate, Etymologiae and such?

Parvum sicula Hannibalorum timent meus magnum gladius!

>>20090360
Ah yes, I love finding a new word in latin and having to memorize all of its conjugations, as well as whether its a fucking masculine or feminine word

Sheer genius, bravo latinbros.

Latin's only use is preparing your anus for Greek or other romance languages. It has next to zero use in medicine at this point.

>>20092679
>because they refuse to read any grammar explanations in English.
you can't improve reading ability with "grammar explanations" lol. you're still learning to translate instead of to read and that's why you're stuck and angry at people making real progress. oh no, they're reading the vulgate!!!

We need translating and writing challenges to filter retards. Don't accept the opinion of some random autist without seeing his Latin first.

>>20107408
maybe a couple of years into learning Latin, taking it bit by bit not rushing, I'm a bit foggy but I'm positive I had finished translating Caesar and was I think translating some Sallust when I finally decided to slowly get into Greek, and meanwhile I eventually made it through some Tacitus and now I'm slowly reading Livy and Virgil
depends entirely on how fast or relaxed you want to go, I try to do some Athenaze daily at least half an hour or more, though when I'm building the Anki deck I can take some hours, if I'm not in the mood for that, I jump into Latin and do some of it, I think being constant is the key, even if bit by bit
of course, time taken to learn one will not be used to learn the other, depends entirely on your drive, nothing stops you from doing 2 hours of Greek a day and then 2 hours of Latin, I wish I were that diligent

>>20108035
Zoomers are adapted to the medium. If you try to do that, they'll just call you a faggot and keep shitting the thread, like they did to the original /clg/ thread maker in his attempted no latin edition.

>>20107956
Idiot

>get into latin thinking it's super unknown dead language
>wow I'll be super cool, I'll know this language that nobody knows and everyone will think I'm a genius
>cut ahead a few months
>have literally found like 5 people in my town who all speak latin
>they all learned it in school
>they've all read the classics
>one lady even speaks greek too
>it's not special at all, it turns out I'm the retard who couldn't speak latin

It's not fair bros

>>20108046
Then you deride them until they kill themselves. Pretty easy.

>>20108046
One of my friends is a master at latin and has been since high school.

You know what he does for a living? He fucking teaches latin and greek.

Your obsession with such an objectively useless skill is as hilarious as it is sad.

>>20108050
Anon you still have a chance to cut off your dick and become the first tranny in your town.

It will make you very special!

niger homo

>>20108079
They didn't show you all the cool untranslated works, because you're clearly a faggot

>>20108093
Ah yes - that's the thing I'm missing out on, untranslated works.

If only I knew how to translate latin, then I could spend all of my free time translating the diaries of a homeless chronic masturbator to prove to everyone how useful my skill is.

>>20108126
Only because that's all you're capable of, faggot.

>>20108141
stop giving (you)s to such low quality baits

So do we all agree that Wheelock's has been overtaken, and LLPSI is the future of Latin education for both formal and fringe Latin circles?

>>20107408
Start now. If you want to learn something now is the time to begin. Don't rush it. Don't be too hard on yourself. The sooner you begin the better.

>>20107807
no, you will be fine. New vocab of course. There are some grammatical concepts not covered in Wheelock. A good grammar is useful for looking things up when you encounter them.

What did you learn today?
I learnt about the construction of habere + past participle (habere obstrictas), and its difference with the perfect aspect (obstrinxisse)
>obstrinxisse
Completed action
>habere obstrictas
Lasting effect
>Et quam plurimas civitates suo beneficio habere obstrictas volebat

>>20107805
The 7-Step Ranieri method makes Latin a joy to acquire. There is no torture involved.

>>20108615
I'm using Familia Romana too, but that book is so boring I need to alternate with other stuff, even if way above my level, to not die of boredom.

>>20103753
What do you mean, scramble a bunch of info together?

>>20104796
Yeah, and Latin is that to Proto-Indo-European. Language is always changing.

>>20106749
I thought it was not necessarily the highest-falutin' Latin because it was meant to be intelligible to the average Roman.

>>20107734
What's wrong with that? Seems useful to associate words in the original language directly with mental images as far as you're able.

>>20107816
"A little thing, the Sicilian woman of the Hannibals my sword they fear a large one"? That's the most sense I can make of this.

>>20107996
I wouldn't go that far- explicit understanding of grammar CAN be helpful, which is why LLPSI includes sections on grammar, but it's often unnecessary and should generally take a backseat to using the language and practicing.

>>20108175
For anyone with sense, but Classics as a field is quite conservative.

>>20107816
What are you trying to say, so we can correct you?
Hannibalis parva sicula magnum gladium meum timet?

>>20108836
>for the troons in my discord server
ftfy

>>20108872
Calling me names does not change the scientific facts about language acquisition.
>>20108864
Doesn't sicula mean Sicilian woman? (Or Sicilian things, I suppose.) 'Sickle' seems to be 'secula' or 'sicilis', at least if Wiktionary's right.

>>20108899
>scientific facts about language acquisition
lmao I'm gonna need to see a source. I've never seen any data on the learning outcomes of students using LLPSI.

>>20108899
Sicula is also the diminutive of sica, dagger. Supposedly slang for penis but I've never seen it in a text.

>>20108899
shoo shoo Esperanto tranny
you will drop Latin and blame it on your professor's and textbooks but never acknowledge that the problem is you

>>20090148
Anybody knows what's the technical term for balconies, guys?

>>20108899
For people extolling the virtues of immersion and input you LLPSI folkx sure do shit up these threads with a lot of english-language meta discussion about textbooks and methods. Immersion has been proven to help with language acquisition but LLPSI is not immersion. Input helps but LLPSI is not the only textbook that provides inpoot. In fact many textbooks provide input that is actually grounded in ancient Roman texts, not fabricated grammar exercises. I don't understand why you fanatics are all so convinced of LLPSI's superiority after finishing 12 chapters that you decide you can disregard the experience and discredit the methods of all the academics who disagree with you. I think LLPSI is a fine complement to grammar study, especially as a confidence-building exercise, but unfortunately that confidence and sense of mastery seems to go to straight to your heads before you've ever read any real Latin.

LLPSI is all you need to learn Latin. If you disagree, you're just a low IQ pseud trying to gatekeep.

>I saw you read that Wikipedia article about Proto-Greek and Proto-Italic case systems! Looks like someone needs another raping!

made it to chapter xx on llpsi and i tried out cicero for the keks. turns out i can read him fluently. thank you based ranieri and llpsi and the 7 step ranieri method

>>20109290
Stop trolling the newfags

>>20109356
I literally read straight through Lucretius almost perfectly after about the same number of chapters. So many assblasted wheelcucks itt

I just ordered LLPSI. It hasn't arrived yet but I'm already able to read Ovid fluently.

>tfw going from 'Iulius in foro est' to 'Qui autem, si maxime hoc placeat, moderatius tamen id uolunt fieri, difficilem quandam temperantiam postulant in eo, quod semel admissum coerceri reprimique non potest, ut propemodum iustioribus utamur illis, qui omnino auocent a philosophia, quam his, qui rebus infinitis modum constituant in reque eo meliore, quo maior sit, mediocritatem desiderent.'
LLPSI > Wheelcucks

Quód nón uidet oculus, cor nón dolet.

>only has one black sheep
>it's nowhere to be seen
>still counts all the white sheep to confirm that the black sheep is indeed missing
romans are fucking retarded

>>20109469
"Baubau!" Cur canis laetus est? Quia semen eius in rectum Iulii est.

>>20109469
Filtered. He was being ironic in front of the dog, he didn't really counted them, he skipped form 5 to 99. Do retards per se cucked really?

>>20109500
I need to start doing graffiti of this in towns near volcanos

>>20109503
Good luck. Me, I need to stop.

>>20109503
Iulius Iuliam irrumat. Sucsop, sucsop. Iulia plorat. Aemilia videt et irata est.

>>20109529
>irrumat
thanks nice word

I just found out that the Romans believed they were Trojans that sailed to Italy and then adopted the language and name of the Latins they conquered

>>20109529
https://voca.ro/1aicjjIQjHKj

>>20109554
Everyone in the ancient world believed that shit because half the time it was half true anyway, the Phoenician and Greek ages of colonialism are early as fuck and major "important" Greek cities are often colonies of another city and perfectly cognizant of it. If the Greeks can go from the Aegean to Iberia, Cyrenaica, and Marseilles who knows what else happened?

Large population movements aren't that rare either, remember these were smaller cities more like towns, and it was normal to wipe out and enslave entire historic cities and regions in some wars. If you knew you were going to get fucked, what's the difference between a mass migration of a few tens of thousands of people over a year via boats and refugees hopping from sympathetic town to town until they get where they're going (probably half not making it and settling elsewhere), and a "colonization?" Colonizations probably resulted from overpopulation or getting rid of political schisms half the time too, "instead of killing eachother why don't you go mass settle that nice barebones trade settlement we have in the Tyrrhenian Sea, we've been meaning to upgrade it and fortify it anyway and your weird penis worshipping sect is about the right number for the job."

oppositis debilitat pumicibus mare Tyrrhenum

>>20108813
That anon has never actually read the Vulgate. The Latin in it is for the most part very simple for the reason that it was intended to be read by all sorts of people. It's nothing like Cicero or Livy.

>>20109593
Audible kek

>>20109500
>in rectum
LLPSIbros...

>>20109792
What an idiot. It's clearly supposed to be in recto.

>>20105807
they were barbaroi

>>20106374
top kek

>>20109469
This is how he knew *only* the black one was missing. You are the retard.

Salvete amici!
Anon polonicus ex /lang/ in /int/ sum. Advenio ut quaerere. Estne mea lingua latina bona aut stulto sum?
Queso in lingua latina respondete. Multas gratias vobis ago

>>20110415
Salve, quod latine rogaris, iuxta respondeam: nonnulla menda fecisti. Primum, coniunctio "ut" pertinens ad propositum modum contiunctivum adhibet, id est, "advenio ut quaeram", atque "quaeso ut respondeatis ..."
Secondum, "stultus", non "stulto".

>>20110415
should be stultus or stultum

>>20110415
>Advenio ut quaeram
Necesse est hic coniunctivum uti. Anglice dicitur 'purpose clause'
>stultus sum
Nominativus, non dativus

Minime stultus es.

>>20110415
>>20110472
>>20110502
>>20110512
It should be stultum

>>20110570
Because he's an inanimate object?

>>20110570
minime, ipse est vir/homo, non quoddam animal sive res inanimata

>Subjunctive by attraction
>When a subordinate clause is nested inside of another subordinate clause, the nested one usually uses a subjunctive verb, even if it normally doesn't.
>For example, clauses introduced by 'quamquam', 'quod', 'quia' usually use an indicative verb, but, if it is nested inside another subordinate clause, its verb uses the subjunctive.
o socii, demum e gehenna mediocritatis decedo...nunc sententia Ciceronis Caesarisque intelligere possum!

>Subjunctive by attraction
>When a subordinate clause is nested inside of another subordinate clause, the nested one usually uses a subjunctive verb, even if it normally doesn't.
>For example, clauses introduced by 'quamquam', 'quod', 'quia' usually use an indicative verb, but, if it is nested inside another subordinate clause, its verb uses the subjunctive.
o socii, demum e gehenna mediocritatis decedo...nunc sententias Ciceronis Caesarisque intelligere possum!

>>20110579
In the context of the sentence, it's accusative case, not inanimate

>>20110622
Predicate nominative takes the nominative, it isn't an "object" of the verb esse

https://web.archive.org/web/20101211204733/http://users.erols.com/whitaker/words.htm

Just found this offline Latin dictionary program. (Which I've sought out because none of the dictionary PDFs I've seen have been OCR'd.) There are bits of the website still up, but the FTP servers seem to be down— but I'm sure they'll get better soon. With macrons, it writes amō as am.o and I've see already that some are neglected.

>>20110804
>OCR
What's that?

>>20090360
Latin isn't perfect.
Sanskrit is perfect.

>>20110919
>Optical character recognition
turning the text on a PDF into a text document

>>20108943
https://books.google.com/books?id=HrhkAwAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&dq=Approaches%20and%20Methods%20in%20Language%20Teaching&hl=es&pg=PA6#v=onepage&q&f=false
https://magisterp.com/2018/07/02/studies-showing-the-ineffectiveness-grammar-instruction/
https://books.google.com/books?id=_udVA--sg4kC&lpg=PA251&dq=grammar-translation%20latin&pg=PA250#v=onepage&q&f=false
https://doi.org/10.1017/S2058631020000513

>>20108951
Oh, I didn't realize.
>>20108961
Nah, I feel like I've got a good foothold at this point, I have no intention of dropping Latin.

>>20110930
No language is perfect. The whole concept is silly.

>>20110612
Etiam. Gratias tibi ago

>>20109529
>Sucsop, sucsop
? I got the rest of it, but what is sucsop?

>>20111035
onomatopoeia

>>20111035
Onomatopoeia, I assume, similar to 'tuxtax' used in LLPSI to mimic the sound of beating a child with a switch.

>>20110612
>>When a subordinate clause is nested inside of another subordinate clause
what does this even mean?

>>20111042
Ok. I was thinking that might be it but wasn't sure, especially since I haven't seen that one in English.

>>20111055
first you need to know the difference between a main clause and a subclause.
if you do, in this example, we have an oratio obliqua (i.e. indirect statment, i.e. subclause) dependent on existimabant. within this oratio obliqua we have a nested subclause with quod and as such its verb is in the subj imp (viderentur)
inpootlet

>>20111094
Noooo this isn't input this is grammar translation, it has no place in an inclusive classroom, this is instruction intended for elite males!

>>20111094
Except existimo is 1st conjugation and not subjunctive in this example

>>20111334
existimabant is not in the nested subordinate clause so it is indicative. If it were in a nested subordinate clause then the subjunctive by attraction rule would apply.

>>20111334
kek you don't know what a subordinate clause is. you probably don't even know what a clause is

>>20111381
>>20111383
I'm not the inpoot troon I just misread/misunderstood the rule.

>>20111094
They expected that they would be persuaded by the Allobroges because they seemed to be ill disposed to the Roman people?

>>20111414
"Existimabant" is the main clause verb. "Persuasuros" is the indirect statement's verb. "Viderentur" is the nested subclause's verb. Hence the indentations.
In regular English syntax, that sentence would be arranged, "existimabant Allobrogibus sese vel persuasuros, quod nondum bono animo in populum Romanum viderentur ..."
In the original, Caesar starts with indirect statement -> nested subclause -> main clause and keeps going with more subclauses.

>>20111490
Very close. persuasuros is active (they would persuade) and it takes a dative object so "they believed/thought that they themselves would persuade the Allobroges..."

>>20111555
>it takes a dative object

aha, that is the key point I missed. Now it all makes sense. Gratias tibi ago.

Also, he just omitted the 'esse' that would go with 'persuasuros', right? It seems common to drop that.

>>20108175
No. One of the reasons I'm learning Latin is to learn grammar in the process. The great thing about Wheelock is he gives the Latin or Greek words for the basis of grammar terms that confused me in the past.

>>20111564
Yup. They often drop the 'esse' because it is implied, at least to native Romans.

>>20110472
>>20110512
>coniunctivum
Non possum coniunctivum agere, hanc partem gramaticam adhuc non didici

>>20111094
Post the entire thing, it becomes much clearer why the subjunctive is used and what is doing vel there
>Allobrogibus sese vel persuasuros, quod nondum bono animo in populum Romanum viderentur, existimabant vel vi coacturos ut per suos fines eos ire paterentur.

>>20111755
Quae est lingua materna tua?

I can read alright but making sentences with the words and grammar I know is fucking impossible for myself.

>>20111817
language is seperated into four different skills
Reading, Writing, Hearing, and Speaking.

You have to practice all of them individually

>>20111833
That's probably why any sentence I make comes out disjointed. I got the words but not the sense of where it should properly go, even if I think it's right.

>>20111817
I am working to turn some composition textbooks into web-based exercises so I can repeat the exercises and learn to write fluently.

It is a work in progress, but you can start with North and Hillard: https://doctor-mobius.neocities.org/latin/nh_2.html

>>20107996
>you can't improve reading ability with "grammar explanations" lol
The point of reading grammar explanations is not to improve your reading ability.

1. You read to improve your reading ability.
2. You read grammar explanations to improve your grammar.

Why are you people so dense?

>>20107996
>still learning to translate
Learning to translate means you translate. Nobody here is translating.

They are reading and then looking at grammar. Stop acting like this isn't how hundreds of millions of people learn languages in respectable institutions around the world just because a faggot on youtube gave you some copy-and-paste quotes to regurgitate ad nauseum.

>>20111805
Ego polonicus

>>20108175
>>20108836
>LLPSI is the future of Latin education for both formal and fringe Latin circles?
It's the norm in fringe circles, not in any private schools, public schools, colleges, universities, or religious organizations in any country I am aware of besides some private latinist groups that only operate in Italy.

Henle Latin is very popular with homeschool and religious groups and Wheelock is the standard for High Schools and Junior High Schools in the US. The UK & Australia mostly uses the Cambridge course for older kids and Oxford course for younger kids.

I know that this is hard for you to understand, but you can read all the "bulletproof" arguments about how Wheelock's Latin is the worst thing since the Third Reich on forums, but literally no one outside of Reddit and Discord that actually makes decisions about school curricula believes this. I am unironically telling you to touch grass or at least check the syllabus for every single university with a Latin program in your state/province and find at least one that uses LLPSI.

Just because the subreddit and discord server are echo chambers that make this look like some kind of closed case with no refutation doesn't mean shit outside in the real world.

>>20108744
>I'm using Familia Romana too, but that book is so boring I need to alternate with other stuff
Same, I've had to add more grammar resources, because re-reading this shit 50 times seems so inefficient, when you can just read a paragraph of grammar that explains what the fuck is going on.

>>20109356
>>20109371
>>20109397
>>20109290
Now that we've severed Latin from CLG, I think it's time to give LLPSI it's own cancerous containment thread which hopefully gets immediately blown away by the jannies.

>learn Latin from LLPSI
>become faggot who doesn't know latin

>learn Latin NOT from LLPSI
>become proficient in Latin, not faggot

How can LLPSI retards possibly respond to this?

>>20111919
Aemilia in horto est.

>>20111935
Caecilius in Iulia est.

>>20111973
ohh la la

>>20111909
Maior pars eorum merdamissus est. Noli hamum vorare.

NOVVM FILVM
>>20112534
>>20112534
>>20112534
NOVVM FILUM