/lit/ - Literature

>>20499656
qui is correct
Relative pronouns take their case from their function in the relative clause.
Your question is a little unclear. All verbs have a subject, either explicitly stated with a nominative noun, pronoun or adjective (or participle acting as noun or adjective) or implicit in the verb ending itself.
Here is a quick one with cuius. Note that there is still a subject for the relative clause, an implicit ego.
Rex cuius uxorem cupio bene se gessit.

Threadly reminder that there is little to no difference between Classical and Ecclesiastical Latin grammar.
A dictionary is absolutely necessary, even for experienced readers of Latin.
> I need to put someone right who posted a bullshit claim in English!
>Do it in that language.
I just did, thank you

Okay roll call everybody!
List all the greek and or latin texts you've read in their original languages!

An exercise for /clg/. Post your translations and see how they compare with others.
This is from Cicero's De oratore, Book 2 section 85. Marcus Antonius is speaking of the various qualities of orators.

>>20499774
De Viris Illustribus Urbis Roma, Lhomond
Bunch of biographies by Nepos
Commentarii de Bello Gallico, Caesar
De Catilinae Coniuratione, Sallust
Germania, Tacitus
Book I and II of Livy's History of Rome
Book I of the Aeneid
Vita Karoli Magni by Einhard

partially read: De Vulgari Eloquentia by Dante, Aeneid book II, Livy's history of Rome book III, some Vulgate books from the pentateuch, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus

>>20499736
>Rex cuius uxorem cupio bene se gessit.
Ah so its:
The king [whose wife I love] conducted himself well.
So a nominative is always necessary either explicitly or implicitly for a clause to function that makes sense. Don't know how I didn't see that.
So this would be:
Rex cuius sororem Romae vidi bene se gessit.
The king whose sister I saw in Rome conducted himself well?
Rex quem amat justus est
The king whom we love is just?

Thanks for help

>>20499774
I know that "salvete" means please. (the v is pronounced as a w, not many people know that)

>>20499827
How long has it taken you to get this far in your latin learning also how quickly/fluently are you able to read what you area currently reading?
I want to read the Aeneid and Metamorphoses someday since they're some of my favourite ancient classics

>>20499873
>Rex quem amat justus est
Should be amamus for 'we love' but otherwise yes.

>>20499945
ah i meant to say whom he loves in the english
gratias tibi ago

>>20499919
all in all I started some 4 years ago with intermittent effort, lately I've been spending much of my time with Greek so I haven't read much Latin and what I did was the medieval stuff which is generally easier e.g I'm reading Gesta Francorum and I can read much of it fluently on the go
I stopped reading the Aeneid about halfway through the second book but I was kinda getting used to the style and understood mostly on first read with a vocabulary, thinking about getting back to it
of course going through some text for the first time makes a second read much easier e.g Germania by Tacitus was quite hard on first read

>>20499774
Plato's Ion

>>20499890
Your Latin ability surpasses that of my own.
I kneel.

>Circum castra fossa et vāllum longum et altum est.
This is from familia romana CAP. XII. Why not sunt?

>>20499890
Wrong. Ecclesiastical pronunciation is closer to the original than the made up pseud nonsense. Every authority that teaches Latin says as much too. Only stupid Americans and Bongs and some germans think they used a W. Meanwhile, all inheritors of Latin, use a phoenetic V, funny how that works.

>>20500697
garbage bait

>>20500697
Based. I use Italian pronunciation for Latin. The "reconstructed" pronunciation makes you sound like a boy with a speech impediment.

>>20500697
>Meanwhile, all inheritors of Latin, use a phoenetic V, funny how that works.
Imagine saying that language pronunciation does not change over 2,000 years. What kind of pseudo-italian nationalist crap is this shit?

>>20500700
>>20500714
Pseuds will out

>>20500734
Projection. You have to be a fucking braindead chimp to argue that a language will not change over 2 fucking millennia.

The worst part of it is that there's no reason for it. You can love and enjoy the Ecclesiastical pronunciation and use it to your heart's content. It doesn't have to be scientifically proven as the "authentic" or "right" way to do it. You are a fucking autismo if you think otherwise. Enjoy what you want, stop trying to make it the only way.

>>20500714
>>20500751
Stop replying to him already. It's the same shit every thread, and he doesn't even vary his bait.

If you just have to reply to him, do it in Latin at least, like I wrote in OP. He normally ignores those Latin responses, presumbely because he doesn't know any.

>>20500817
Is that the guy who always argues with people over random shit? Yeah, we should probably not engage with him anymore. As a matter of fact, I remember now, he's always arguing about Ecclesiastical Latin. He's the Catholic from Scotland. Whatever it may be, pronunciation, grammar, you name it he will argue about it in favor of his beloved church latin.

>>20500734
>senatbs popblbs romanbs

>>20500833
I wonder if he and the two retards that argue nonsense about inpoot vs grammar and translating vs reading are all the same person.

>>20500833
> Is that the guy who always argues with people over random shit?
Yes, nobody took his bait earlier in the thread, so he tried again by latching on to the Apu post.

You can tell by how he just ignored the
> I know that "salvete" means please
since correcting that wouldn't rile people up. Or he just doesn't know better.

>>20500697
>Ecclesiastical pronunciation
"Ecclesiastical Latin" is just Latin words pronounced using the orthography of some other language. Spanish, Italian, French, German, Russian, English, and Mandarin "Ecclesiastical Latin" sound nothing alike.

>>20500885
>>20500817

>>20500871
>>20500877
I think he's just some lonely trad-cath from another board that doesn't actually read or post on any /lit/ threads, but heard people talk about Latin here and he desperately wants to sound authoritative on this for religious reasons. He obviously gets very shy and embarrassed when people reply to him in Latin. I feel kinda bad for the Scottish fellow.

>>20500902
But our guy never argued about religion.

>>20500929
I never said that he did. But every argument he has ever started has had something to do with vehemently defending Ecclesiastical Latin from any 'perceived' slight. I don't know why any person would take everything so personally on this issue unless they were some kind of devout traditional catholic.

For example some guy earlier commented on the grammar of Ecclesiastical texts not being as intricate as Tacitus and the guy flipped the fuck out, obviously trying to defend the complexity of Catholic texts as "high art" same as Classical authors.

Then today he tries to justify using the Ecclesiastical pronunciation by saying it's the original pronunciation from 2,000 years ago instead of just using the system he wants and living with it.

He is always trying to defend the authenticity and validity of the Church's Latin in an emotional way. And this is why I think he's a tradcath.

In fact (call me schizo if you want) I suspect there's a couple of tranny faggots posting here trying to "appropriate" Latin, as part of a greater "war" for cultural hegemony.

>>20500949
I think it was also him, who some threads ago became very worked up because someone suspected an error in the Latin of the Vulgate.

But I don't think he's the Scottish guy. That one had a very idiosyncratic way of writing.

Why is Latin such a schizo magnet?

>>20500949
I still don't see the connection with Catholicism.
Also, that thing of putting each sentence in a paragraph with an empty line in between is annoying, like writing all in caps.

>>20500974
>I think it was also him, who some threads ago became very worked up because someone suspected an error in the Latin of the Vulgate.
I completely missed that one.
>But I don't think he's the Scottish guy. That one had a very idiosyncratic way of writing.
Oh fair enough.
>Why is Latin such a schizo magnet?
It attracts some very lonely people who want to focus all their energy in a logical language that doesn't require them or order coffee or as a girl out.

Also the three largest factions happen to be:
1. Tradcaths who are trying to cling to a medieval theocracy that no longer exists
2. Far left Uni activists who are trying to rewrite the humanities
3. Romaboos who are larping


>>20500994
>I still don't see the connection with Catholicism.
Found him.
>Also, that thing of putting each sentence in a paragraph with an empty line in between is annoying, like writing all in caps.
Oh yeah that's definitely him.

>>20500885
>"Ecclesiastical Latin" is just Latin words pronounced using the orthography of some other language
Other languages to which Latin is the progenitor, smoothbrain.

>>20500902
I don't believe in God and I'm not a tradcath.

Anyways, has anyone read Latin translations of Arabic or Chinese texts?

Here is Confucius.
>https://archive.org/details/confuciussinarum00conf_0/

If anyone has a PDF scan of the Tao De Ching in Latin, I would appreciate a link!

>>20500714
It changes but obviously the languages that followed from it are going to be closer to their parent language than rigid, phonetically unrelated, Anglo-Germanic nonsense. You're missing a few square centimeters of prefrontal cortex.

>>20501019
> Arabic
Do you know by chance, did a translation of The Incoherence of Incoherence survive somewhere?

>>20500997
I'm definitely not him and in fact I prefer to use the pronuntiatio restituta simply because it's easier to read.

>>20499747
>>20500697
>>20501045
Cotifilana commemoratio testium qui adhuc tibi lingendi sunt.

>>20501080
https://archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22Averroes%22

>>20501146
I don't see a Latin version, unfortunately.

>>20501167
You might have to try different Latinization conventions for the author's name. There's probably more than one way to write it in the Roman alphabet. But anyways if it's not on Archive, the only other place I would think to find it is on Google Books.

>>20500688
it's because the verb est applies to circum castra which is singular. It's the same as in English:
around the town there is a moat and a high and tall wall; not 'around the town there are a moat and a high and tall wall'

>>20499806
quite liberally
>I shall thus begin to procure you an orator by first exploring his capabilities, as much as I can: he shall come forward to me as drenched in letters; he'll have heard, read some, these very precepts understood; I will check what he's suitable for, what he's capable of with voice, strength, spirit, tongue. If I should understand he can reach the heights (of the discipline), I won't just encourage him to apply himself, but I'll even, if he appears to me a good person, implore him so; so much I believe is a mark of honor to the whole state to have an excellent orator and good man; but if he should instead appear, though having greatly performed so far, to be destined to become a mediocre orator, I'll have him do what he pleases; I won't be particularly grievous; if furthermore he'll shudder and be silly, I'll advise him to restrain himself and seek another subject.

bump

Why couldn't I have been taught greek and latin at school? Why did prior generations make the retarded decision to scrap it all?
I could have already read all this shit decades ago as a child
No matter where I go I am always reminded of the sorry state of the world we live in and how much better it was barely 100 years ago, an imperceptibly small span of time in the grander view of history. I wonder if this how the Romans felt during the crisis of the third century

>>20502914
had the option to choose latin in school but i picked japanese instead

>>20502968
at least japanese is a fun language

If quintus means five, that implies he is the fifth child of Julius
Julia is younger than Quintus and Marcus is the only other son, meaning that Quintus is the second child, not the fifth... unless..

>>20502969
If there is a kind of language learner that constantly complains about their chosen language, japanese learners are it, they cannot shut their mouth, doubt Is fun.

>>20502914
I know someone who did like 6 years of Latin lessons in German school
They can't read any Latin text, all they can do is translate and very slowly

>As a young man he competed for the hand of Agariste, the daughter of Cleisthenes, the tyrant of Sicyon. By the end of the competitions, only Hippocleides and Megacles remained. According to Herodotus (6.129-130), Hippocleides became intoxicated during a dinner party with Cleisthenes, and began to act like a fool; at one point he stood on his head and kicked his legs in the air, keeping time with the flute music. When Hippocleides was informed by Cleisthenes "Oh son of Teisander, you have just danced away your marriage," his response was "οὐ φροντὶς Ἱπποκλείδῃ", ("Hippocleides doesn't care" or literally "No care for Hippocleides"). The phrase, according to Herodotus, became a common expression in the Greek world.

Has anyone here learnt classical Chinese?
I downloaded a book that was apparently highly recommended but it basically works by providing a line of text from classical chinese and then giving definitions of each character and their place in the sentence and that's it
I don't see how it'd be that useful

>>20499715
I bet they smelled of sweat and olive oil after that

>>20503131
That's because weebs are retarded. They don't actually want to learn the language, they just want to know how to hit on Asian girls because they heard they have tighter pussies.
If you know what you're doing Japanese can be a lot of fun

fresh oc

>>20503131
but i love japanese
only newbie scrubs complain about muh kanji and i would hardly call those people "learners"

>>20503166
Imaginare odorem.

>>20503006
This is mentioned somewhere in LLPSI, but it's implied that that's only where those names come from. At the time the book is set in, the praenomina had lost their literal meaning.

>>20503281

Only the reverse would be funny.

Ok I finished chapter 1 of Lingua Latina
This was interesting and I'll probably keep on reading it
I'm worried because I know a tiny bit of grammar and noticed that the ending of a noun changed depending on whether it was the object, I know that happens sometimes but I could potentially miss other things later on
I'm not sure if I'm observant enough

What do you guys think is more important for the successfulness of familia romana
1. doesn't make you explicitly study grammar so students are more interested in reading the text and experiencing the story and thus complete their studies
2. you have to intuitively work out the grammar which is better than explicitly studying grammar exhaustively and better for memorisation
3. you read a lot of relatively easy Latin that builds up as you go along and that's the absolute best thing you can do
I kind of had the idea that maybe it was the 2nd one and therefore avoided looking up grammar but I was watching some videos by Stephen Krashen on extensive reading and I'm wondering if i was wrong and it was just 3?

Thoughts about this bloke?

>>20503648
I don't understand why he angers some people

>>20503673
He knows his shit, he's just creepy

>>20499715
>>20503166
> Anonyme, quid semper domi lates apud libros tuos?
> Quin foras accedis ad ludos nostros?
> Scimus te pilae discoque non placere, sed adhuc caremus aliquo, qui nos oleo ungat.
> Pro hoc beneficio lavare nobiscum tibi licet, hahae.

>>20503673
Guess some people see him as just an American that's entitled with certain knowledge on the Greco-Roman subjects.

>>20503648
He learned Latin by memorising declension tables, translating sentences, writing things in Latin and so on but he doesn't recommend anyone else should do this and instead teaches people with a way he never used.

>>20503799
Well llpsi has declension tables.

>>20503629
Chapter 1 is too easy. You are going to hit a wall around 8-13

>>20503799
You forgot to mention that he studied Italian for 7 years and lived in Naples prior. And then he gives advice to monolingual Americans who failed high school Spanish saying it's exactly how he learned.

I picked this book up for £1 a few weeks ago and strongly recommend it (or atleast something similar) for learning latin

This book doesn't cover any latin, but it does cover english.
Prior to learning latin I had no knowledge of the existence of pluperfect tenses, active and passives, infinitives, gerunds, participles, subject, direct object, etc etc.
This book covers all of those things as they exist in english.

By learning these grammar structures in english first, it becomes easier to learn them in latin

>>20503640
i think it's 3. Extensive reading is an important step. You wouldn't teach maths like a lot of courses teach Latin. You can theoretically introduce someone to the theory of addition, let him perform 10 exercises, move on to all the other operations, show some examples for each and then introduce him to derivatives and make him work on differential equations, but the student will take a whole day to solve a single one despite knowing all the theory. All those operations need to be like second nature through being repeated 1000s of times, otherwise you can say the student is proficient in diff. eq. from a theoretical standpoint, but he will not be able to actually use them in solving problems efficiently, so what's the point. Like with all languages, there is no way around repetition and calculating only the one very hard math problem without also doing 100 simpler ones will not lead you to proficiency.
2) is an overhyped aspect of LLPSI. The grammar is taught by induction, meaning you are incentivized to find the general rules by means of the particulars yourself. If you are trying to find one but you are struggling to do so, you should look it up. Not to mention that in the Exercitia Oerberg spells each of them out for you and makes you repeat them individually.

People recommend you to memorise all the grammatical forms before reading llpsi, but I think this is a bad move.

Prior to reading llpsi, words like marcus, marci, marcorum, marce, etc meant nothing to me. They were just different letters with no associations with forms such as nominative, genitive, etc. There was no feeling behind them.
But after reading llspi I now see Marcorum and get a feeling that this word is genitive. I do not feel like I am memorising the form, it just feels natural because I have seen it used.

I think it would be better to stagger your memorisation exercises with llpsi. Do some memorisation work, then some llspi, then some more memorisation, and then back to llpsi.

Doing one in its entirety without the other is inefficient. You need to do both
basically... you shouldn't pick between Orbeg or Wheelock (or natural vs grammar method), you should be doing both at the same time!

>>20504018
His Italian is kind of meh, even if his pronunciation of individual words/sounds is almost perfect. Weird thing.

>>20504346
Oh no I'm not saying it's good. I'm just saying if you study Italian for almost a decade and live in Italy for a time, you are not starting from the same point as a monolingual American.

>>20504374
Ah ok. Anyway, his Italian is good. Maybe he's a fellow autist too concerned with pronunciation?

>>20503281
what if i'm both

>>20504110
>is perfectly fluent in english without knowing about grammar
>thinks he needs to learn about grammar to become fluent in latin
???

>>20504442
>>thinks he needs to learn about grammar to become fluent in latin
I think he just said he thought it was helpful. Once again, you guys need to differentiate between helpful advice and an ultimatum.

>>20504442
This is precisely my point
You may be fluent in English without knowing the grammar... but this just makes learning latin harder because you'll be learning latin through grammar explanations.
It's incredibly easy to learn these grammatical structures in english first, becuase you already understand them intuitively, you just need to be told the logic behind those intuitions.

Learning latin in this way is split into 3 parts
>learning vocabulary
>learning what grammatical structures even are
>learning what those grammatical structures are in latin
By reading the english book, you cut out that middle one, making your studying just that bit more manageable

>Originally latin was written without punctuation
How the fuck were they able to read this shit

>>20504521
being able to read that shit was considered a skill ontop of being able to read even to the ancient Romans

The concept of writing legibly for official texts is actually pretty modern.

>>20504521
OriginallylatinwaswrittenwithoutpunctuationHowthefuckweretheyabletoreadthisshit

>>20501002
Like English, Mandarin, Russian, and German?

>>20504521
wait til you hear about Roman cursive and boustrophedon

Are going to do a /clg/ read something?

>>20505672
If someone does, I think that because most people here are very low level, it should be done veeery slowly, like one page at a time, with anons explaining the grammar and vocabularly as we go along.
It sounds rather boring, but I think if we do just a regular read along like english threads, 99% of users will be left in the dust and it won't gain as much traction.

>>20504521
>>20504591
ITWASNOTTHEBESTTHINGINTHEWORLDBUTITWASDEFINITELYPOSSIBLEASHEPOINTEDOUTNOWYOUCANGOFORTHQNDCONTINUEPRACTICING

>>20505692
What could we pick? Caesar? One paragraph a day.

>>20504110
don't native English speaker learn grammar in school? In German class we went through all of the grammar from 2nd to 6th grade with all of the usual Latin terms for the concepts.

>>20505741
native english speaker here

I learned literally nothing of grammar, or at the very least, it was taught so poorly that I forgot all of it

>>20505727
I propose we start at the very beginning with Rooommmaa in Itaaaaliiaa est!

Now I know it would be a huge meme and shitfest but here me out.
We start at the very beginning, if people follow along, this gives them some structure, we go through a chapter a day, when we go to chapter 5 of so, we slow down as it gets more difficult. People ask questions in the thread to help them through it. supplement it with recommended things, like a declension list to write down for the respective chapter
Then once we're done with the lipsi books, we move onto caeser and the aeneid andso on up the difficulty spire.

It would take a long time but it would make it a community effort and many people would be on the same page, and so when we do eventually reach the real latin books, there will be many people who are now able to read it because we started at the beginning and carried everyone up together

>>20505741
we learned stuff like "i before e, except after c", but not much else.

>>20505842
I like the idea.

>>20505842
>>20505915
furthermore I think it would serve as a good resource for future users

By archiving the threads in which each chapter is read through and discussed, people will be able to read through them for a commentary on any chapter that should cover most questions they will have.

To avoid this being just an idea, we should start immediately.. assuming everyone likes the idea of course.
But not me.. because I have to go to bed right now lol

>Ζεύς ὅστις ποτ᾽ ἐστίν, εἰ τόδ᾽ αὐ-
>τῷ φίλον κεκλημένῳ,
>τοῦτό νιν προσεννέπω.
>οὐκ ἔχω προσεικάσαι
>πάντ᾽ ἐπισταθμώμενος
>πλὴν Διός, εἰ τὸ μάταν ἀπὸ φροντίδος ἄχθος
>χρὴ βαλεῖν ἐτητύμως.
>οὐδ᾽ ὅστις πάροιθεν ἦν μέγας,
>παμμάχῳ θράσει βρύων,
>οὐδὲ λέξεται πρὶν ὤν:
>ὃς δ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ἔφυ, τρια-
>κτῆρος οἴχεται τυχών.
>Ζῆνα δέ τις προφρόνως ἐπινίκια κλάζων
>τεύξεται φρενῶν τὸ πᾶν:
>τὸν φρονεῖν βροτοὺς ὁδώ-
>σαντα, τὸν πάθει μάθος
>θέντα κυρίως ἔχειν.
>στάζει δ᾽ ἔν θ᾽ ὕπνῳ πρὸ καρδίας
>μνησιπήμων πόνος: καὶ παρ᾽ ἄ-
>κοντας ἦλθε σωφρονεῖν.
>δαιμόνων δέ που χάρις βίαιος
>σέλμα σεμνὸν ἡμένων.
Tell me this isn't GIGA fucking Based.

>>20505938
I like it. If at some point there will be enough people, we could even organize by levels.
When can we start with lipsi? The first chapters will be boring but I believe I will be able to read each one in less than 10 minutes.
I started saving the thread both as pdf and html 3 threads ago, btw. I can upload them somewhere if anyone is interested.

>>20505946
this isn't GIGA fucking Based.

>>20505842
Good idea. I'm onboard.

Any one have a mega link with audiobooks on Ancient Rome the main one at the header of every thread is just text books

>>20506375
This thread is for language learning, not history. If you want free audio about Ancient Rome in English, then find a podcast.

>>20506375
"Legentibus" is an app that has audiobooks, you have to pay though, no idea if they can be pirated.

>>20505842
>>20505938
>>20506268
When do we start, then?

>>20506481
Never, they've talked about this in a few threads now and no ever starts or has any idea how to.

>>20504603
Reductionist moron. Romance Languages are direct decedents of Latin. The ones you mention are not, and only have remote influence on structure and syntax at best. Phonetically, it reasons it would remain most similar to its decedents.

>>20505842
>Then once we're done with the lipsi books, we move onto caeser and the aeneid
kek

>>20505842
This will work much better on Discord

>>20506775
I already tried to say this, but everyone is determined to die on the hill saying that it's for "trannies" and "fags".

>>20504013
Could you please describe this wall to me in detail? At least how it was and how it felt for you to encounter it?
>>20504283
Yeah that sounds right to me, thanks anon
Now I'm a bit worried about this wall but i'll try to persevere and hope that 'extensive reading' might smooth it all down and that I won't force myself to intuit everything

>>20506775
EVERYONE, and I mean E V E R Y O N E who uses Discord is a permanent, irredeemable faggot.

>>20506835
>Could you please describe this wall to me in detail? At least how it was and how it felt for you to encounter it?
1. Vocabulary dump: Too many words per chapter, less recognizable - even with context or images.
2. Grammar starts to become less intuitive. Alternative uses of the Dative case will probably throw you off the most.
3. Infodump on the Roman calendar in cap. 13 which is confusing as fuck and probably not all that necessary unless you are a researcher trying to date events.
4. All the noun declensions are introduced. The 4th and 5th can be confusing because parts look like the previous declensions you already learned and also remembering the gender is not easily determined like before.
5. Chapters are way longer and pretty boring. Cap 9 is very comfy, but the rest are pretty repetitive and uninteresting to reread over and over.

>>20506783
>it's for "trannies" and "fags".
you're right

>>20506846
t. discord user

>>20506783
The problem with discord is moderation. I don't want to be moderated. In fact I'm tempted to create a board in that infamous chan.
There's also a couple of faggots itt who must be prevented to get any moderation power at any cost.

>>20506962
>I don't want to be moderated
>There's also a couple of faggots itt who must be prevented to get any moderation power at any cost.
This is a paradox. Without moderation those very faggots would derail the conversation will troll arguments everyday unless someone muted them. And they could do it alot faster in a chat than an imageboard.

>>20506975
I don't care if they try to derail the conversation. I just ignore them. Messages should only be deleted if they are spam or flood, or nsfw in a sfw board.

>>20506975
>pro moderation
sounds like plebbit is right up your alley, faggot

>>20506982
>>20506985
You guys are such libertarian waterheads. You think all moderation is a conspiracy to oppress you, when in reality it would just obliterate autists who can't even read Latin and just whine all day long into oblivion so that everyone else could have grown up discussions.

>>20506990
you have to go back

>>20506990
>You think all moderation is a conspiracy to oppress you
I never said anything remotely similar to that, or anything that could imply that. I won't keep this conversation going, btw, so don't ever bother responding.

>>20507031
you realize there's jannies on this very site, right?

ironically, the people who are most against the idea of moderation are most likely reddit refugees themselves.

>>20506990
The sole benefit to 4chan is the relative lack of moderation
You don't belong here
Let me guess - everything would be great if only YOU were in charge

>>20507094
No shit. They are election tourists that came here because they thought this was the free speech platform.

I've been here since 2012 and I use Discord
I like the LLPSI discord server even though some of the people there are plebs and women

>>20507123
>Let me guess - everything would be great if only YOU were in charge
Holy projection

>>20507123
>all of 4chan is /b/
The main benefit of imageboards is anonymity.

>>20507123
>The sole benefit to 4chan is the relative lack of moderation
>relative lack of moderation
please be quiet

>>20506962
The solution is to create your own discord. Then you can be the petty dictator you've always wanted to be
You won't, of course, chiefly due to laziness.

>>20507135
I don't want to be in charge nor do I want moderation

>>20504325
>Doing one in its entirety without the other is inefficient. You need to do both
basically... you shouldn't pick between Orbeg or Wheelock (or natural vs grammar method), you should be doing both at the same time!
This has always been recommended as the best way to learn Latin (not necessarily with Wheelock but any grammar textbook) but autism makes anon’s here either only do one or the other.

>>20507293
Seconding this method.

>>20507144
Why do you shill discord so insistently? There are more tools and platforms you can use.

>>20507293
Sounds sensible.

>>20506486
>Never
I'll start then. I've just read the first chapter of lipsi. If you're new you can find it in the link in OP.
What can I say... let's see...
>Grammar
You can start memorizing your first grammar notions if you want to be able to do the pensa (singular - plural: a - ae, us - i, um - a, est - sunt; those words ending in ā is something called ablative, as you could see, you have to use it with some prepositions.)

>>20507406
Then start your Latin empire on one of them.
Again it is simple and requires little effort but you won't out of sheer laziness.

>>20507953
No thanks I'm fine shitposting here.

What's the objective behind having an all-day-long every-day thread about languages that have no living native speakers?
I could understand just having an occasional thread every now and then whenever somebody wants to ask about a few different recommended resources and suggestions on how to learn, but what would be the point of having to have a thread about a topic that, by its very nature, can never bring forth any new, fresh discussions?

>>20508019
Circlejerking and autism

>>20508019
Indeed. Why did you enter this thread again? Feel free to ignore the next one.

ubi iverunt omnes nuntii qui scripti in latine fuerunt? Puto illi utilior sunt quam controversia perpetua de llpsi, sed sententia mea solum est

etiam abhoreo araneae dicantes, semper mihi susurrant res stultissimos

>>20508209
araneas*

Okay I'll give it a go, I'll go one chapter a day, which will be boringly slow at first but will probably be too fast once we get to chapter 8 so lets just figure it out as we go along.
Will post in series of two pages instead of the standard one so as to not clutter the thread too much

LLPSI Read Along Chapter 1

>>20508231
Also this will be the most shitposty chapter, please forgive me for what I have brought upon this thread

>>20508233

>>20508238
That's it! Chapter 2 tomorrow

I encourage you all to discuss this chapter even though you're already familiar with it.
What concepts does it introduce? what areas of difficulty are there? what interesting trivia about it do you have to offer? (One thing I noticed is the macrons that change depending on the sentence rather than being permenantly fixed to the word)

>>20508209
>>20508209
utiliores*
puto usually takes infinitive+accusative, not an indicative
>puto eos (ipsos) utiliores esse
If by nuntii you mean posters scriptaverunt is better. scripti fuerunt is 'have been written'

>>20508231
The most difficulty you may have with this chapter is simply not being aware of the borders of the Roman Empire. It's highlighted in grey on the map but it's not immediately obvious imo.

By the way I have no intention of including the supplemental LLPSI books in this read along, lemme know if that's a problem for people

>>20508231
I think it's interesting how some adjectives match the end of the noun they're describing
I feel like that could have some grammatical purpose, idk if it's gender or number

>>20508266
my mistake, scripti fuerunt is 'had been written'
Minor point of contention but I think it should not be subjunctive. Subjunctive relative clauses are 'one who is the type to do something' as opposed to indicative 'one who does something'

Can someone help me out? What did Ar-Razi mean by this??

>>20508231
Yesterday I started writing an elaborate shit post in the style of an ancient commentary on "Oer. FR Cap. I 1". Just for the first line. I was writing a huge paragraph going into Aristotle's categories and so on but sadly my phone died half-way through.

>>20508306
why are you reading lame arabic shit

>>20508231
Decided to do the second chapter today also since it's definitely too easy even for someone reading it the first time.
I'm going to see if I can gradually increase the reading time as we go along to adapt to the difficulty, giving people adequete time to digest the chapter

For those of you who have gone through some or all of the book, how long did you spend on any given chapter? I know for myself once I hit around chapter 8 I couldn't read daily anymore and needed a few days, and now currently at 25 I need about a week to properly digest it.

Nevertheless, here is LLPSI Read Along Chapter 2

>>20509309

>>20509312

>>20509314

>>20509315
This chapter introduces the genitive form, it indicates possesion, the english equivelent is 's ie Jack's dog, Jack's table, Jack's gun

Also a confusing thing for some people is the Roman writing system of using I's instead of J's and V's instead of U's. His name isn't Ivlivs, it's Julius

>>20509309
I'm personally imagining it something like this

>>20509256
>lame
I'm unlocking the secrets of Allah's word, but I guess the banal opinions of old men in togas are what you niggers are concerned with

>>20508231
I did all the questions but will only post the C questions since it's too long

>C
>Ubi est Roma?
Roma in Italia est.
>Estne Sparta in Italia?
Sparta non est in Italia, sed in Graeca.
>Ubi est Italia?
Italia in Europa est.
>Ubi sunt Syria et Arabia?
Syria et Arabia in Asia sunt.
>Estne Aegyptus in Asia?
Aegyptus non est in Asia, sed in Africa.
>Ubi sunt Sparta et Delphi?
Sparta et Delphi in Graecia sunt.
>Ubi est Brundisium?
Brundisium in Italia est.
>Quid est Brundisium?
Brundisium oppidum est.
>Num Creta oppidum est?
Creta non oppidum est, sed Insula.
>Estne Britannia insula parva?
Britannia non insula parva est, sed insula magna.
>Quid est Tiberis?
Tiberis fluvius est.
>Quid est D?
D littera graeca est.
>Num ^ littera Latina est?
^ non est littera Latina, sed littera Graeca est.
>Estne II magnus numerus?
II non est magnus numerus, sed paucus numerus

Will do the chapter 2 questions later

>>20509502
am confused on the difference between Graeca and Graecia

>>20509544
It's the difference between the country Greece and the people Greeks or Grecian I think

>>20509544
Graeca: Vir Graecus, Insula Graeca, liber Graecus, oppidum Graecum
Graecia: Graecia in Europa est. In Graecia multae insulae Graecae sunt.

>>20508209
Morti sunt. Maleficium loquentium latine... Cur putas Imperium Romanum caesum esse?

>>20508270
Kek

>already struggling on chapter 1
uh oh ranieri bros??!

>>20509309
Question: isn't «quis» supposed to be both masculine or feminine?

>>20509672
https://www.online-latin-dictionary.com/latin-dictionary-flexion.php?lemma=QUIS100

Sounds about right

>>20509682
I don't trust the Olivetti too much even if in this case seems to be right
>http://micmap.org/dicfro/search/gaffiot/quis
>https://latinitium.com/latin-dictionaries/?t=lsn40242,lsn40243

>>20509729
I've been using the Olivetti one from the beginning and haven't felt any struggles with it. I'm still a beginner and do not wish to fall into any bad habits, are there any notable flaws with it?

>>20509502
D est littera Latina, non est stulta Graeca littera!

>>20509309
I spend seven days on every chapter.

>>20509777
digits noticed

While very thorough, did you feel it necessary to spend 7 days on the earlier chapters? and do you feel it difficult to spend only 7 days on the later chapters?

>>20509787
>did you feel it necessary to spend 7 days on the earlier chapters?
absolutely not but i'm not in a rush and whenever i feel like i still want to do some latin that day after i'm done with my llpsi work i pick up a loeb and search for sentences that i can already comprehend at my current level
>and do you feel it difficult to spend only 7 days on the later chapters?
the only real "difficult" one that takes a lot of time is stage 2 and for the later stages i tend to split that up over two days - though then i'll still do stage 3 on the same day as the second part, so i end up with 7 days nonetheless

>>20509740
I use it too, I don't remember having found any evident mistake other than some errata, it's just I don't fully trust it so usually I like to compare if I'm not sure.

>>20509309
C questions

>Quis est Quintus?
Quintus est filius Julii.
>Qui sunt Medus et Davus?
Medus et Davus sunt servi Julii.
>Marcusne quoque servus Julii est?
Marcus non est servus Julii, sed filius Julii.
>Cuius filia est Julia?
Julia est filia Julii et Aemiliae.
>Quot liberi sunt in familia Julii?
in familia Julii sunt tres liberi, duo fili et una filia.
>Quot servi in familia sunt?
In familia Julii sunt centum servi.
>Num Syra domina est?
Syra non est domina, sed ancilla Aemiliae et Julii est.
>Quae est domina ancillarum?
Aemilia est domina ancillarum.
>Estne Cornelius vir Graecus?
Cornelius non est vir Graecus, sed vir Romanus.
>Num 'puella' vocabulum masculinum est?
'puella' non est vocabulum masculinum, sed femininum vocabulum.


Why is it "Qui sunt Medus et Davus?" and not "Ques sunt Medus et Davus?" unless both are valid

In "Quot servi in familia sunt?" is it "centum servi" or "centum servorum?" I'm not sure if the slaves should be genitive if they're just listing them "he has 100 slaves" or "there are 100 slaves in his family"

>>>20509757
ah fuck

>>20509829
>Why is it "Qui sunt Medus et Davus?" and not "Ques sunt Medus et Davus?" unless both are valid
>Ques
Do you mean quis? Anyway, qui is plural

>>20509829
>In "Quot servi in familia sunt?" is it "centum servi" or "centum servorum?" I'm not sure if the slaves should be genitive if they're just listing them "he has 100 slaves" or "there are 100 slaves in his family"
I have no idea about this one. I know mille can be both an adjective and a substantive so you can have mille milites and mille militum, tria milia militum etc, but I'm not sure about centum, but I believe the answer is "centum servi". "Centum servorum" would mean "of 100 slaves" instead imo

>>20509878
I think the question in english is
"who are medus and davus" and it uses qui. I guess qui is plural so it's fine yeah

>>20503648
I like some of his videos.

>>20509309
Holy shit is that really how easy LLPSI is?

>>20510362
The first 4 or 5, yes.

>>20510362
It ramps up in difficulty pretty quickly but yes the early chapters are very easy. It's mostly just getting you used to the feeling of the latin vocabularly and sentence structure

Do you think that writing stuff in your target language may be useful for learning, or is it better to spend my time just impooting?
Putasne res scribere, in lingua ad discendum, utile esse; aut sola immisssio melior esse?

>>20509777
Lol this guy is still going.

>>20511130
I think it's literally insane to spend so much time on lipsi but I admire his dedication.

>>20510823
>in lingua ad discendum
Is this correct? Shouldn't it be something like "linguā discendā" or "linguā quae discitur"? (My autism can't cope with the fact that there isn't a passive present participle)

>>20511179
I would have written it as "linguā discendā", though "linguā quae discitur" would also work. Not sure whether "linguā ad discendum" is outright wrong, but it doesn't sound good to me.

>>20511241
Gratias, amice

>>20510823
Inter initia, immissio pura melius mihi videtur.
Cum satis peritus sis ut pleraque ipsius menda animadvertas (eg, post LLPSI FR), libere scribere (eg, huc nugas mittere) certe non necat.

>>20511130
Reverendum est, non mentiar.

>>20511261
> necat
"nocet" scribere volebam.

>>20509777
> Explain to a child
Feminae intestabiles, non intellegitis! Ludum introire debeo ut tabellam meam consummem! Abstinete manus a me, reee!

>>20511290
Certe ne quidem necat

>>20511339
Risi. Cave ne includaris carcere! Nemo dixi discere Latinum esset facile

I made a pass at LLPSI several months ago, got to about the sixth or seventh chapter (wherever the locative is introduced). I was thinking about picking it back up, starting from the beginning again, but this time at a much faster pace. How fast do you think it's possible to get through this book if you've got all the time in the world? I want to go at three chapters a day, finishing within two weeks. If I need three hours for each chapter, then a nine-hour day should do it. But how well can one retain all that information going at such a fast pace? I've studied Ancient Greek before, as well as German, French, and some Italian, plus I was progressing very smoothly my first time through, so I have plenty of confidence. My main worry is that the vocabulary will pile up and become unmanageable.

>>20511660
>I want to go at three chapters a day, finishing within two weeks.
I guess if you just want to read to the end and get the gist of stuff maybe an insane autist with too much free time could do that, but you will get a lot of definitions for words wrong just based on guessing without looking them up and you won't retain any of the words you learn past like chapter 15 because the vocabulary gets less intuitive. 2000 words in 30 days is too much.

>>20511660
> I want to go at three chapters a day
No way I can see that working, except for the chapters you already read. Even a chapter a day will quickly get overwhelming, even if you already know Italian. Why the hurry?

>>20511660
>I want to go at three chapters a day,
this is retarded and won't work
as the other anon said, even one chapter a day gets hard later on

>>20511686
Well, part of those 3 hours would be spent looking up words, because as you say, it is not always clearly what the words mean from context alone. I was also referencing Wheelock a lot for more grammatical detail before. I generally leave no stone unturned, I quiz myself on new vocabulary and make sure to do all the exercises before moving to the next chapter. I guess you're saying three hours is not enough time to do all that, then.
>2000 words in 30 days is too much.
*14 days, lol. That's 142 words a day. Does that 2000 include conjugations and inflections?

>>20511687
>Why the hurry?
I just graduated and am looking for something to put my time into while job hunting. Once I'm employed I definitely won't be able to do this.

> Does that 2000 include conjugations and inflections?
No, just headwords. So things like ferō, tulī, lātum still only counts as one.

>>20511806
> Once I'm employed I definitely won't be able to do this.
If it's a normal 9 to 5 job, then I don't see why not, if "this" refers to reading through LLPSI in a normal pace. I like the book, but the ugly truth is that even reading each chapter only once will probably not be enough.

>>20511660
> I've studied Ancient Greek before
How fast did you learn Ancient Greek, that learning Latin in 2 weeks seems reasonable to you?

Mementote non audire neminem qui nec simplices sententias potest latine scribere.
Imperitus sum, sed imperitiores illi sunt.

>>20511883
DUO HEBDOMATA

>>20511935
HEBDOMADA HERCLEEEEE!!!!!

>>20511883
But it's not really learning Latin in two weeks if only 2000 words are covered. I learned Greek in the classroom, so the pacing was out of my hands, and I also didn't have as much free time back then. I only mentioned it because the grammar is so similar, which I know will give me a huge advantage. Seriously, from the handful of chapters I studied, Latin looks like a more readable version of Greek with Romance-like vocabulary. German was more difficult. The one thing that made it kind of exhausting was the lack of articles, which made the sentences more difficult to parse. But so what, with practice I'll get over that.

Anyway, no one has convinced me that this plan won't work, so I'm just gonna go ahead and try it. Even if it turns out I can only do two chapters a day, I'm still gonna come back here at the end and call you guys a bunch of fags for doubting me. Expect a report in three weeks at the most.

>>20511987
>I'm still gonna come back here at the end and call you guys a bunch of fags for doubting me.
Make sure you do it in Latin to really show us who's boss. btw we were just trying to help you, not hinder your progress, asshole.

>>20499715
If you don't run into people on the streets daily whom you can talk to in that language, it is a waste of time learning it

>>20512002
I'm sorry, I just got a little carried away. Have a nice day.

>>20511987
good luck but yeah you're going to fail miserably

>>20511987
I know Italian and German, and they sure helped with Latin, but it still seems way too optimistic to me. The hours spent is the important metric with learning a language, sure, but only up to a point. You need to give your brain time to rest, to process the things it learned.

> Anyway, no one has convinced me that this plan won't work, so I'm just gonna go ahead and try it.
You do you.

> I'm still gonna come back here at the end and call you guys a bunch of fags for doubting me.
Please do it in Latin.

>>20511987
>looks like a more readable version of Greek
top kek don't judge that by LLPSI, from what I've seen it's common consensus(and I can start seeing it myself since I'm learning Greek right now after reaching good mastery of Latin) that Latin kicks ass harder in real ancient authors due to the syntax they can employ even if Greek is harder in terms of e.g conjugation and such, LLPSI absolutely doesn't prepare you for it, certainly not the early chapters
don't want to discourage you

On the topic of dictionaries does any here own any? I know they're completely useless in the age of the internet but idk, maybe you lose something with the loss of physicality
>>20512031
>that Latin kicks ass harder in real ancient authors
Well the type of latin that LLPSI teaches you is found in a lot of 'real ancient authors', it's just that some 'real ancient authors' wrote in particularly difficult latin and I'd say those are the exceptions
Granted I can't read proper latin yet so far I can only translate passages with a dictionary so I could be talking out of my ass

>>20499774
I'm in the middle of reading an ancient text called "Lingua Latina Per Se Illustrata," which is by some writer named Orberg, who I assume was a Germanic slave of the Roman family whose activities the text describes.

>>20512007
>talking to people
ngmi

>>20511806
>Once I'm employed I definitely won't be able to do this.

Leaving grad school for a 9–5 gig had no impact on my Latin work.

>>20512120
>On the topic of dictionaries does any here own any?
Cassell's is the best affordable one. Oxford is the best expensive one.
>I know they're completely useless in the age of the internet but idk,
Relax your eyes or you will be blind at 60. Stop staring at a screen all day reading PDFs and online dictionaries. Buy physical books at used bookstores. You support a local business and save your eyes from long term damage.

>>20512120
>On the topic of dictionaries does any here own any?

I own a Cassell's. I bought it after someone recommended it in one of these threads. I like it because it has an English to Latin section where I can quickly look up English words and see the Latin equivalents. Also sometimes it seems as though online Latin dictionaries don't nail all the uses or connotations of a word, so it's nice to have an actual dictionary that sometimes includes extra meanings.

>>20511806
>Once I'm employed I definitely won't be able to do this.

Once you're employed you might actually have more time because you won't have course work or assignments that need to be done in the evenings or the weekend. Depends on the job of course, but I was surprised at how much more unstructured time I got one I left school, got a job, and didn't have midterms/finals/coursework constantly looming.

>>20512168
Hoc at inironice

On the topic of dictionaries, which one would you recommend in Italian?

>>20512211
>Relax your eyes or you will be blind at 60.
screens damaging your eyes is a myth, boomer

>>20512285
>screens damaging your eyes is a myth, boomer
Nowadays in your average highschool already 25% of a classroom has glasses and another 50% is secretly wearing contacts out of embarrassment. These kids will need lasik before they turn 45.

>>20512120
>Cassell's
best cheap dictionary, well organized and good content
>Lewis and Short
Old but still pretty good. There is a free app with the entire dictionary available. Some definitions are outdated and vowel quantities can be a problem but overall not bad at all.
>Oxford Latin Dictionary
Huge and expensive but has everything you need for classical Latin.
Avoid dictionaries that do not provide examples from authentic texts and authors. They aren't worth your time and money.

>>20512211
CRTs definitely cause damage to eyes. LCDs don't have the same risk factors. As far as I know, and I've looked into studies and having talked to optometrists and ophthalmologists about it, LCDs do not cause any eye damage. I think the problem might come from viewing at a fixed distance for hours at a time; your eyes don't get the exercise you need, and thus, you become myopic. Lasik and night time correction therapy are the only ways to correct it on a physical level, but I think taking breaks to look outside are probably helpful.
That brings us to books. Readers can look at books at the same distance for hours every day, which is just as bad as looking at LCDs. I think the reason why myopia is increasing is because fewer people work outside. They look at screens all day, but they'd be equally impacted if they looked at paper all day too.

>>20512486
You made good points to counter what I said and I don't like that. So I'm just going to say you are a POOPY HEAD

So I'm a monolingual anglo and being monolingual makes me feel bad, I think learning another language would enrich my life and I want to stop being monolingual
Now I have a lot of interest in Ancient Greek literature and history, I've read all the main 'authors' and have read history books on Ancient Greece and so learning Ancient Greek to read this literature that I've only read in translation would be something I'd be excited to do
I have a much weaker interest in Ancient Rome, it's almost entirely historical and I haven't actually read any Latin literature, only history books on Rome and Virgil's eclogues
Having discovered that Latin is considered to be a much easier language than Ancient Greek which is considered to be an extremely difficult language and also that the learning resources for Latin are better than Ancient Greek I feel like I should just try to learn Latin instead and perhaps pursue Ancient Greek in the far future
Any thoughts?

>>20512486

>>20512682
I think you should start directly with Greek, I don't know if the time you will spend learning Latin will be helping you that much.

>>20512718
Ah shit, maybe my 'in the far future' line made my post give the wrong message
I'm more thinking about abandoning any plan or intention of learning Ancient Greek at least for the next 20-30 years

>>20512682
I think they're both comparable in difficulty when it comes to actually reading them. Latin is a bit easier to start out with because it has so many more textbooks and the initial morphology is easier. But once you're out of textbook town and reading either Xenophon or Cicero, the initial difficulty curve is about the same and actually levels out for Greek more quickly. If you love Greek the most, I say just do Greek like the other anon said.

I wouldn't put either off for 20-30 years, it is much much much harder to learn these things when you're older, and there is an additional benefit to learning them while young (and thus an additional downside to NOT learning them): they teach you how to learn a language, and they teach you the structure of language in general. Your English reading and writing will improve as a result of learning a classical language. I "know" (can read) like half a dozen languages because I just applied a bootleg version of the same learning process I originally encountered in learning Latin and Greek. People who talk about "input" would be a lot closer to being correct if they qualified it by saying that an initial knowledge of grammar + an initial skim of a language's grammar, THEN followed by a lot of input, is the key to learning any language (at least for reading). And learning Latin and/or Greek will make you a master of the first two of these.

So that's a hidden benefit of learning at least one classical language while young. It will make learning to read Germanic, Romance, and even Slavic languages a hell of a lot easier subsequently. It demystifies languages and language acquisition, and saves you from becoming one of those people who spend 20 years "learning" a language and never really learning it.

You can be fairly lazy and still learn. Just do 30 minutes a day of Greek from an easy-ish textbook like pic related and don't bother caring about progress. After a year you'll be surprised how much you've advanced.

>>20512780
Ah ok. In any case I'm not sure how useful will be learning Latin first.
People who studied both usually say that Greek is harder it the beginning but gets easier once you reach a certain level because of the way Latin writers wrote. I've only studied Latin btw.

>>20512682
If you want to learn Greek, learn Greek
>muh difficulty
just study and keep studying.

>semper age contrarium quod /biz/ dicit
Istuc adagium, salvum me fecit saepe. Estne verum etiam de /clg/?

>Tertium capitulum libri "lipsi" hodie
Estisne excitati? Hic est capitulum in quo Iulium stuprat et pedicat Aemilia.

>>20512928
Estne Aemilia femina improba?

>>20512820
is that true about greek? im just starting with Latin but my plan is to study greek down the road, and im not gonna lie, im afraid of it lol, so i hope what you say is true.

>>20513103
It's a pain to learn the morphology but honestly it's not even that hard. It's all the same shit after a while. You learn sequences of tenses, a few funny rules, you swap a few things around (oh the Greek uses the genitive for this because it has no ablative). The morphology sucks but here's my advice, just do your best with it and drill it, don't try to be perfect before you can read real Greek. Do the best you can, accept you're going to make mistakes and need to fill gaps or refresh your memory later, but just get through the textbook and start doing real reading.

https://geoffreysteadman.com/xenophon-anabasis-i/

>>20513047
Non si hae consuetudines placent Iulio.

LLPSI Read Along Chapter 3

Marcus begins his unending rampage against humanity

>>20513191
This chapter introduces the Accusative case.

It indicates something being acted upon.. the object of the sentence

>>20513194
While this is simple and you should be able to figure it out pretty quickly, one thing that makes it even more simple is to reorder the words to more resemble english, a language you're more familiar with

Marcus Quintum pulsat
becomes
Marcus pulsat Quintum

It is the same sentence because of the inflections, but the latter will be more intuitive to you and allow you to learn the accusative case without undue confusion

>>20513195
However, you should learn the traditional sentence structure of latin as well, it's just better

>>20513197
also one thing that confused me for a long time is the mistake of assuming eam and eum are related to iam. They are not, iam is actually jam and just means something like "and now"

>>20513197
Also on page 23 it says "puer qui ridet est marcus" I might be mistaken but imo this is a poor sentence because while Marcus was indeed laughing in the beginning, he soon stopped laughing and it was then Quintus who was the one laughing.

>>20513191
>>20513194
>>20513195
>>20513197
What an absolute chad

>>20513214
iam = ya or già of you speak Spanish or Italian.
--------------------------
If you're a romance speaker, you'll be able to easily understand the accusative when you'll realize you already use specific pronouns for this case:
>lo la li le
io vidi Giulia > io LA vidi
Marco lesse i libri > Marco LI lesse
>el la los las
yo vi a Julia > yo LA vi
Marcos leyó los libros > Marcos LOS leyó

I'm just waiting to the "asses cum sex" part, the only good part of this book

>>20513191
Chapter 3 questions
C

>Quis Juliam pulsat
Marcus Juliam pulsat.
>Cur Julia plorat?
Julia plorat quia Marcus eam pulsat.
>Quintusne quoque Juliam pulsat?
Quintus Juliam pulsat non est.
>Quem Quintus pulsat?
Quintus Marcum pulsat.
>Cur Aemilia venit?
Aemilia venit quia Juliam eam vocat.
>Quis Julium vocat?
Quintus Julium vocat.
>Cur Julius Quintum non audit?
Julius Quintum non audit quia eum dormit.
>Quem audit Iulius?
Julius Marcum ploram audit.
>Cur Marcus plorat?
Marcus plorat quia Aemilia eum verberat.
>Ridetne Julia?
Julia ridet non est.
>Num 'Marcus' accussativus est?
'Marcus' accusativus non est, sed nominativus.
>Num 'Juliam' nominativus est?
'Juliam' nominativus non est, sed accusativus.
>Quid est 'dormit'?
'dormit' verbum est.

>>20513286
>Quintus Juliam pulsat non est.
Quintus Iuliam non pulsat.
>Julius Quintum non audit quia eum dormit.
eum is accusative, you need the nominative for the subject of the verb dormit (is, ea, id or simply Iulius); you said "J. doesn't hear Q. because he's sleeping him"
>Marcum ploram
You made up that word.
>Julia ridet non est.
Same mistake as before.

>>20512320
post the study
oh wait you can't

>>20513308
>Quintus Iuliam non pulsat.
Ah I see, the est is not correct in this sentence, thanks.
>eum is accusative, you need the nominative for the subject of the verb dormit (is, ea, id or simply Iulius); you said "J. doesn't hear Q. because he's sleeping him"
My mistake was thinking "he's" should be accusative, but I see now that is incorrect
>You made up that word.
fug benis, I thought something looked wrong, can't make verbs accusative.
>Same mistake as before.
I don't understand where this one is wrong
Julia non est ridet - Julia is not cry
Would the correct form be "Julia non ridet" - "Julia not cry"?

Thanks for the critique!

>Julia non est ridet - Julia is not cry
It doesn't make sense in Latin, "est ridet" doesn't mean anything.

>>20513351
>Would the correct form be "Julia non ridet"
Yes

>>20513286
>Julius Marcum ploram audit.
you tried to do something that will come up some chapters down the road. You need the infinitive for that (crying - plorare), so that it would be
>Julius Marcum plorare audit.
>Julius hears Marcus crying. usually translated as: J. hears that Marcus cries.
or it could be a participle (Latin bros help me out here because I don't know if that is as common as in Greek)
>Julius Marcum plorantem audit.
>Julius hears the crying Marcus.
here the verb can actually take the accusative and act as an adjective to describe Marcus.
These constructions will be some of the most common grammatical constructions you will find later on. The one is called AcI (Accusativus cum infinitivo (acc. with infinitive), the other is the handy description of something with participles. Greek tends to use a lot more participles than Latin does, most Greek sentences have at least one or two participles.

>>20513440
>(Latin bros help me out here because I don't know if that is as common as in Greek)
Extremely common. For example, in the gospels you read continuously stuff like respondens Iesus ait

>>20513440
Is there a difference between a gerund and a participle?

>>20513447
But that comes from a Greek translation so probably isn't the best example

>>20512780
>20-30 years
why wait for so long? what's stopping you from learning the alphabet right now?

>>20513447
I know the participle is common but I don't know if something like AcP is common, so something like J. Marcum plorantem videt. In Greek it is not only common but there are some verbs you can't do AcI with, where you have to use AcP, usually verbs of knowing and perceiving.
>>20513448
the gerundivum is basically a future passive participle

>>20512820
Ah cool
So how would you compare the difficulty of say reading Caesar or the Aeneid to reading Herodotus or Hesiod?
Like idk how you would rank the greek and latin authors but does the point where the difficulty curves meet occur before you're even able to comfortably read Latin? Or is it more once you get past the easier Latin authors to read? I do plan on reading the more difficult latin authors so I'm taking that into account.
Honestly maybe I'm just naive but I figured if I started learning Latin I could start reading latin authors like caesar or maybe even the vulgate within 2 years of 1-3 hours of daily study with LLPSI.
That's why I'm considering learning Latin first so I can have a language, read in that language and show myself that I can actually learn a language. I feel more motivated to do that than the thought of making myself get stuck in an ancient greek quagmire when I could have been progressing with Latin.
>>20512827
Yeah ok
>>20512869
I find it hard to motivate myself desu and I definitely do not want to dedicate myself to Ancient Greek as a lifelong thing just so that I can read it if it's actually like that.
>>20513549
Idk, if I ever get the feeling of wanting to learn Greek one day .

>>20513596
the earlier to start with Greek the better. The main longterm hurdle to overcome after the morphology is the vocabulary. Latin shares a huge amount of cognates with English, Greek almost none, so there's a lot of grinding involved.

>>20513103
Yes
Greek's difficulty is front loaded. Get over the hump and it is much smoother than advanced Latin

>>20513596
Ranking authors by difficulty is a fool's game, even more so when trying to compare them across languages. That said some are easier than others.
Generally speaking Greek leaves less room for ambiguity. This is due to several factors such as the articles, aorists, optatives, particles etc. This is not always the case especially in poets though.
Caesar and Herodotus are good authors to begin reading in their respective languages due to the relative simplicity of their works. Tacitus and Thucydides are quite difficult. Poetry tends to be more difficult than prose.
>where the difficulty curves meet
This has no meaning. Difficulty has to do with syntax and vocabulary, maybe prosody. Both languages have fairly straightforward and simple authors, both have ones that will have you banging your head against the wall. I still shudder to think about Pericles' funeral oration.
To sum up: if you really want to read Greek and are inspired by Greek authors start learning now. it will not be any easier to start later. Dive in and get to it. 2 years of dedicated study will do wonders for you

>>20513740
I think it's pretty easy to have a loose ranking of authors by difficulty. One can comfortably say that Tacitus and Plautus are harder than Caesar and Catullus.

I'm being filtered by Lucas after having read Matthew and Mark. What's going on.

>>20513898
I've only read Mark in Latin, but I heard Lucas is the hardest one.

>>20513910
Good to know I'm not totally retarded.

>>20513803
See this is the problem with 'ranking' authors. I found Plautus easy, much more so than Catullus. Then again I read Catullus long before Plautus.
At most I could see an easy, medium, hard type of list. Even then where does, for example, Cicero go? He was prolific and his writings vary in difficulty. What about Tacitus' Germania? It is nowhere near as difficult as the Annals.
Bottom line is if you want to learn Greek or Latin then do so. There is no reason not to. If you want to read a particular author do so. Might be a challenge but everything is when it comes to Classics. I've said this before but my first real Latin class was Virgil, my friend's was Tacitus. They were not easy but were entirely doable and helped both of us grow immensely.

are there good estimates of the sort of "functional size" of ancient Greek and Latin vocabularies? i.e the amount of most common words you approximately need to comfortably «approach» any text(i.e still using a vocabulary but with reasonable direct understanding of the text)
I remember reading/hearing that Greek's vocabulary is vaster than Latin's in this case

>>20514224
The only one I know about is from The DCC Latin List:
> The Latin list contains about 1000 of the most common words in Latin. These are the lemmas or dictionary headwords that generate approximately 70% of the word forms in a typical Latin text.
But that's still WAY too little to understand a text, you'd need to be closer to 95%.

> I remember reading/hearing that Greek's vocabulary is vaster than Latin's in this case
That I can believe. There's just a greater gulf between Greek authors than between authors of Classical Latin.

>>20514224
Depends on comfortable. Probably in the range of 2-4000.
See Paul Diederich's Basic Latin Vocabulary in the Mega under References. That will cover a huge swath of Latin. It covers ~80% of common words. Not counting them but roughly 1440 words there.
Pharr's edition of the first 6 books of Virgil has an excellent vocabulary in the back based on frequently used words. While based solely on Virgil and those 6 books in particular knowing them all is a good start.
Below are two links to the top 10000 most common words in Greek and Latin. Unfortunately it used raw data and therefore does not account for conjugation nor for declension.
Essentially you will need a dictionary to read any Greek or Latin text. This won't change any time soon, no matter how much you read, probably ever.
https://kyle-p-johnson.com/assets/most-common-greek-words.txt
https://kyle-p-johnson.com/assets/most-common-latin-words.txt

If anyone would like to avoid the nonsense that is read here and really go to the advanced level, read this...oh, it's in german...

>>20514394
I wish people would recommend more resources in languages other than English. A good part of the people in this thread speak one of the other major European languages, it would seem.

I mean, I also wish you'd state what makes that book so good, instead of just shitting on
> the nonsense that is read here
(whatever that is supposed to mean), but it's a start.
Sell it to me! What makes it better than, say, Pinkster, or even the old public domain German Menge?

>>20514394
you don't even know english, kraut

>>20514394
it's incredible how much reading this post resembles reading a greek text

>>20514421
I do apologise for my english. I am not able to go into detail, but Hof.-Szan., alongside with K.-Stegm. (Kuhner-Stegmann, Ausfuhrliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache) are the two most complete Latin grammars that exist. And forget the nonsense of the Ørberg method

>>20514750
honey, we wall it The Ranieri Method nowadays

>>20514750
the fact that you think "orberg OR grammar" is a thing proves that you have no clue about language acquisition

and is probably the reason why you don't know english lol

>>20514750
I consider myself more of a grammarfag than an impootnigger, but this is one of the occasions where you need to prove your method is good by writing some simple Latin. There's too much nonsense itt already.

I read orberg then wheelocks and the Oxford grammar, then through orberg again. Then I started reading Caesar and Cicero. This is the real Chad method

>>20514750
Please, anon, post in Latin to back up your argument. If your Latin is as bad as your English, why should I even trust your advice?

>>20514394
Can someone help out an ESL and explain me why this post is wrong?

>>20515078
germans = gay

>>20515078
>explain me
explain to me

>>20515078
>>20515097
Thanks. I suppose I should have said "why is that post wrong", too.

>>20513191
nice going

>>20515120
No, you shouldn't have. You only invert the verb and subject for the main clause when forming a question.

>>20499715
Which is easier to learn, Greek or Latin??

>>20515199
Tell me, do you know what the most onerous and time-consuming task will be, whenever you decide to learn a new language?

>>20515144
Thanks fren

>>20515238
I've never learned another language, so no, I don't know. I just stepped into this thread whimsically asking this question.

>>20515199
All things being equal (so, you're not a native speaker of modern Greek), Latin, hands down.

>>20515266
It is the acquisition of vocabulary. There are three main reasons why learning new words is much more difficult in Greek than Latin:
1) English is full of Latin borrowings and Latin-inspired words (sometimes via French as well). Greek influenced our language too, but not nearly as much.
2) Classical Latin encompasses a single dialect over a period of, say, 300 hundred years. Classical Greek encompasses a handful of dialects over a much longer span of time, about 1,000 years. As such there are far more words to learn if you want to become acquainted with every dialect, plus you have to account for the semantic development of words over time. Of course, if you only care about Homeric Greek, or Attic Greek, then your task is simplified.
3) The script is different. This makes it very easy to make spelling mistakes and mix up words that look similar. People often say that they got used to the Greek alphabet very quickly, but what they really mean is that they quickly got used to being hindered by it.

This is all just about vocabulary, but the second point actually comes into play a lot in grammar as well.

>>20515347
>Classical Greek
I meant ancient, not classical, which I think only covers a couple hundred years

>>20515078
>>20515078
He lacks Sprachgefühl. "that is read here" sounds very awkward, although it is technically well formed. It is better to replace it like something like "that is/gets posted here". It's just a strange choice to emphasize that the nonsense is read, rather than written. There is also something a little weird about the phrase "go to the advanced level". I prefer "get to an advanced ", switching out both the verb and the article. This poster seems to have spent too much time on grammar, and not enough on immersion.

>>20503648
Cur non habet capillos?

>>20513191
Should I use A Companion to Familia Romana alongside the textbook or is the exercise book sufficent?

>>20515370
Thanks fren

>>20515418
Don't know about the Companion, but I read Latine Disco, which should be similar and found it helpful in later chapters, because it pointed out all the things Ørberg did, that I might have otherwise missed.

>>20515440
The Companion is a completely rewritten version of the Latine Disco with vocab lists and definitions per chapter.

>>20515418
If you want, personally I can't be bothered because I've had to figure out which chapter corresponds to what and also go through the enormous effort of having to open more than one pdf. But it probably would help.

>>20514750
you remind me of the Grammatikfagotts in my classes who lack every bit of Sprachgefühl and sense of prosody while throwing around the names of grammatical phenomena left and right. You can read a grammar after having reached fluency in reading. Grammars are overrated for reading itself and mostly useful for learning proper composition.

>>20515502
>which chapter corresponds to what
Nigga they are numbered the same as Familia Romana

>>20515370
maybe he's trying to prove a point. He learned English by internet immersion without studying the grammar and now he's going to whip out his perfect Latin that he acquired by reading Leumann

>>20515532
But his English isn't grammatically incorrect, just off.

>>20515532
> now he's going to whip out his perfect Latin that he acquired by reading Leumann
I wouldn't hold my breath. It's always the same shit, no matter what's written in OP.

>>20515505
If you're referring to Latin, please prove your learning method is better than the one used by "Grammatikfaggotts" by posting that same explanation in Latin. I'm a beginner and still "picking a side". Thanks.

>>20512928
>>20513047
Risi.

>>20508233
In a couple places a form of esse is placed between the adjective and its noun, e.g.
"In Gallia et in Germania multi sunt fluvii"
"In imperio Romano multae sunt provinciae"

Which of the two translations is more literal? Does ordering the words like this put emphasis on one of the words, perhaps multi/multe ?

1) In Gallium and Germania many are the rivers
2) In Gallium and Germania (there) are many rivers

>esse me
>imperitus linguae latinae
>petere ab omnibus discutientibus ut loquantur latine
>nemo respondet
>omnes tacent

>rursus CCCX responsa
magni prorsus momenti est filum hoc nuper, nonne?

>>20515739
as a declarative with the preposition
2) many rivers exist in Gallium and Germania

>>20515759
>use infinitives incorrectly
>use English word order
>make no attempt to learn or use Latin idioms
>post on a forum where the rules specifically state to speak English
>blabber pidgin broken Latin anyways
>get ignored
>cry

>>20515606
Non sum quem respondisti, sed consentio cum illo. Immo peius est quam dictum, quia saepe nuntii Anglici huius generis in hoc filo apparent (scripti, ut censeo, ab eodem auctore), nec umquam postulata defensio in lingua Latina sequitur. Ergo non solo sensu linguae caret, sed etiam ulla scientia linguae.

>>20515812
>use infinitives incorrectly
>use English word order
He's emulating English greentext in Latin. Using the infinitive for that might as well be a convention by now.

>post on a forum where the rules specifically state to speak English
Point me to that rule, I can't find it.

>>20515812
Ordo verborum nuntii mei anglicus non potest esse cur anglicus non sum, sed hispanicus.

>>20515812
Etiam, potesne quod dixi emendare? Gratias tibi agam si hoc facias

>>20515823
Sed multi qui opinionem contrariam defendunt (inpoot), numquam latine respondunt. Ergo postulo ab omnibus.

Fīlum novum:
>>20516113
>>20516113
>>20516113
>>20516113
>>20516113

>>20515797
Etiam! Latinifratres, vicimus.

>>20513194
>Marcus iratus pulsat Quintum
Is this an adjective modifying a proper noun in the subject? So literally "Angry Marcus hits Quintum", or is "iratus" an adverb here?

>>20516147
Adjective, if it was an adverb it would be "irate" I believe.
>Angry Marcus
It sounds so weird in English for some reason.

>>20515924
Cur, Ligurine, cur emendare verba mea non vis???