/lit/ - Literature

New thread challenge, please use spoilers to avoid spoiling answers to other anons.

Easy
The horse is getting old.
He found his grandpa's old sword.
Come on, don't be so sad!
Some say the ship was never sunk.
Avoid that part of the forest!

Medium
He found out how the wolf kept getting inside the enclosure at his old uncle's property.
During the expedition through the desert they encountered animals they never knew to exist.
The Oracle of Delphi had foretold about the devastating plague that would ravage through the country.
King Snidas was informed about the presence of hostile pirate ships ravaging the coastal villages of Callinnēsos.
After leaving the city the women had gathered around the sacred oak and began celebrating the Quercalia.

Hard
Would you say you would've done it anyway, had you known the consequences of it?
He claimed that although the doctor recommended him this medicine, his distrust for the discipline got the best of him.
It is told that he who would attempt to enter the forbidden waters of the secret lake at the top of these mountains, would receive the gift of prophecy but in exchange of a dire curse.
The senate being gathered in good order and having formally began the session, a messenger suddenly entered the house and reported enemy troops gathered no further than 10 stadia/parasangs/[your favorite ancient measure of distance] from the southern wall approaching at considerable speed.
Tell me this: you say you regarded these matters as trifles, something one ought to not lose his sleep over, yet I see how they affected you, your mood, your willingness to participate even as things in this town get worse and worse, speak to me, what then should the better course of action have been by your own accord?

Bonus:
Write a short paragraph describing the synopsis/summary of the last or favorite non-/clg/ related book or piece of media you read/watched.

>>21770148
Does anyone have a recommendation list of some good post-classical Latin authors? Anything Late Latin, Medieval, Scholastic, Ecclesiastical, Renaissance, and even early Neo-Latin that someone could read after the Vulgate would be nice. I'm mostly looking for stuff between 500-1500, but as early as 200 or late as 1600 is still okay too. Basically post-Pax Romana and pre-Age of Exploration.

>>21770967
could be a good idea to start making one ITT
some musts for me I guess would be Dante, Ficino, Vico, it's not a time period I've explored much so far

>>21770967
>>21771532
I think it would be a cool project to self publish some of these texts with LLPSI type marginal notes and end of chapter vocab lists. Latinlibrary is cool, but it's not available offline and it doesn't have marons.

How difficult is Virgil and Horace? Can I read them if I read that one book that everyone recommends? You know which book I am talking about. The one that is entirely in Latin.

>>21771831
bump. Same here, I want to know how hard it is to read something like the Aeneid or the Metamorphoses... do I need to dedicate more than 4 hours a day in the study of Latin?

>>21771831
> Can I read them if I read that one book that everyone recommends?
Depends on what you mean by reading. It definitely won't be comprehensible input, but you can muddle through. The Orberg reader Sermones Romani that you're supposed to read after FR has some Horace, but I found him challenging. Virgil and Ovid are easier, I heard.
>>21771849
> do I need to dedicate more than 4 hours a day in the study of Latin?
No, just be consistent. If you study less, you'll get there slower, but you'll get there.

>>21771831
>>21771849
not easy to give a straightforward answer as for the "difficulty" of an author, it also depends on what sort of progress you expect to be making, e.g if you are ok and can bear "reading" e.g 50 lines a day constantly using the dictionary vs easily digesting 200-300 lines checking the dictionary only every now and then and knowing the meter by heart
when I started with Virgil I remember I didn't have an easy time after I had read Caesar already, so I guess with that book completed you could slowly go through it, but maybe the experience initially won't be thrilling

>>21771831
Didn't you ask this in the last thread? I think by now you would have looked up what "that book" is titled.

>>21771950
Yeah, he did. It's annoying bait. It reminds me of those spam comments on YouTube of people talking about their financial advisor.

>>21772115
Thanks, was getting déjà-vu from that.

>>21771950
>Didn't you ask this in the last thread?
>>21772115
>Yeah, he did. It's annoying bait.
He never follows up because he doesn't actually care about the answer. He knows there are some spergs in these threads that cannot help but explode if that book is even alluded to. Every time he posts the same thing with a different author's name. Just ignore him. If that doesn't work, in a few hours he'll post something like "recommend me some textbooks" or maybe tomorrow he'll post "how do I start to learn Latin". But for that he usually waits till the thread actually becomes productive and manages to stay on topic for the better part of a day.

What qualifies as a "classic"? Is Herman Hesse's Demian considered a classic because I need somewhere to dump my thoughts on the book because it left me reeling.

>>21772990
I suspect this is the same poster as >>21771831. I've only just arrived to these threads so can you kindly stop shitting them up with irrelevant questions?

>>21772997
Aight, fuck you I'm out.

>Nusquam est qui ubique est. Vitam in peregrinatione exigentibus hoc evenit, ut multa hospitia habeant, nullas amicitias; idem accidat necesse est iis qui nullius se ingenio familiariter applicant sed omnia cursim et properantes transmittunt.
I've been reading a little bit of Seneca, and there have been a handful of things that have tripped me up, but he's honestly not as hard as I thought he'd be; I feel like his write style is fairly straight-forward. I always heard that he's one of the harder prose writers, but maybe those people were just spouting what they heard elsewhere or just trolling. idk what do you guys think?

>>21773056
There are a lot of "myths" about Latin writers, propagates by students who aren't very good at Latin, to say the least.
Like that meme about Cicero hiding the verb or Vergilius having an "extremely" convulsed word order.
Just exaggerations made by students who haven't read them.

>>21773100
>There are a lot of "myths" about Latin writers, propagates by students who aren't very good at Latin, to say the least
yeah that makes sense. for the past year I've had a few girls in my Latin and Greek classes who take one thing a professor says in passing about an author - not intending to generalize it to every single little thing that writer has written - and constantly interpret their writings through that narrow lens. a couple of them I'm confident are actually two of the better students in my classes, but given the format of the classes that's not saying too much

to the extent that you do it, how do you guys verify that your understanding of what you're reading is accurate? of course there are the more obvious ways like reading commentaries or translations, but I'm moreso talking about ways that don't include those things, i.e. at most referencing a dictionary and/or a grammar. and I mean specifics, like are there ways you break up individual sentences, are there routine things you try to recall and go through when looking at a clause (e.g. "okay, this is a relative clause with a subjunctive main verb. so this can either be a relative clause of characteristic, relative purpose clause...")? I ask because I want to make the most of my study time. I don't imagine that my first or second reading of an author will necessarily be perfect, but I would still like to hone the way I study.

>>21771831
Probably not. Unless you 100% understood every bit of it and can read it like you can in English you will struggle through Virgil and Horace. By the time you're up to chapter 20 of that book you should honestly just move onto real Latin texts. The Vulgate is a great starting point, you should understand basically all the grammar and a good chunk of the words. It just helps you put it in a non organised environment to read, and honestly, it's a lot more fun to read actual Latin texts. Trying with Einhard's Vita Karoli Magni and Eutropius after you're comfortable with the Vulgate completely and then onto Caesar is what I think a good path is.

>>21773653
Unless I struggle with a sentence I will not deliberately think about the grammar. There will get to a point that you will just understand what the grammar is without needing a second thought, past and future tense is an easy example. You should obviously know all the terms related to grammar, but honestly if you read enough it shouldn't constantly be in on mind. If somebody put a gun to your head and you should be able to say all the relations and grammar but it's not like you need to actively think about it at a certain point.

>>21773714
yeah I guess I should've clarified that I typically try not to think about the grammar too consciously on my first read or reference a dictionary. also, I only try to justify my sense of what's going on grammatically when it's something I'm less sure of or something that looks familiar but I haven't seen in a while. even going forward I don't intend to firstly think about the new sentences I'm reading in terms of grammar, but being able to explicitly describe what is going on grammatically is of course useful when dealing with more difficult stuff; plus if I end up teaching Latin and or Greek having that knowledge is obviously useful/necessary there

I don't understand pic rel.
>Otho occiso
Otho having been killed
Then
>Nam cum isdem temporibus, quibus Otho Galbam occiderat,
For when at the same time in which Otho had killed Galba

How did a dead man (Otho) kill Galba? I don't know if I'm making a rookie mistake here. I'm sleep deprived and stressed because I'm having heart palpitations again.

>>21774048
Otho is nominative
occiso does not go with Otho
What is the other option for an ablative in that first section?

>>21774063
AH, OK!!
Galba having been killed, Otho invaded the empire.
Thank you.

>>21771636
> I think it would be a cool project to self publish some of these texts with LLPSI type marginal notes and end of chapter vocab lists. Latinlibrary is cool, but it's not available offline and it doesn't have marons.
This would be highly welcome, but it's a lot of work to do it properly. There's a recent edition of the Passion of Perpetua, which is Late(ish) Latin, but there's so much more stuff that, not being part of any school curriculum, never gets a second glance by publishers.
My personal suggestion would be to NOT do a selection, but an entire work. Hate that shit, I want to have read X and not just a Best of X.

>>21770152
Easy
Senescit equus
Invenit priscum avi gladium
Age pol ne sic contristatus sis!
Ducunt nonnulli navem illam numquam submersam esse
Caveto ab illa luci parte!
Medium
Patefecit quo pacto lupum identidem sese intra fines agri avunculi recipere
Trans deserta iter facientibus animalia apparuere antea ignota
Vates Delphicus vaticinatus erat letiferam luem adfuturam per agros perniciem dilaturam
Certiorem fecere Snidatem regem classem infestam piratarum ora maritima Callinnesae depopulantem adesse
Urbe relicta mulieres prae sacra quercu congregatae Quercalia celebrare
Hard
Ain id tandem fecisses si eventus praenovisses?
Autumavit etsi a medico admonitum medicamenta istaec sibi sumenda ob artis suspicionem recusavit
Aiunt quemvis gressum in sacris acquis illaturum summis in istis iugis conditis hariolum factum iri ac prorsus tamen dira a dis accepturum
Senatui frequenti ac iam de quibuslibet rebus relaturo nuntius repente in aedibus sese receptus nuntiavit manum hostium congregatam esse haud amplius ac decem milium pedum ab muris ad meridiem spectantibus atque magnis itineribus approprinquantem
Age sis cedo sententiam: ais haec tibi haud aliter ac minutias fuisse, nullo pacto somnos aversura, verum ut dicam tamen palamst quantum tibi animum excrucient necnon iracundiam foveant ac vires defatigent ad res agendas cum oppidum magnis in difficultatibus sit, aperte verba exprome, ecquid potius agendum fuisset tuapte sententia?

Nunc oppido haud in animo habeo pensum adiectum perficere, praecipue quod vera sententia nescio in promptu quae sint operae non ad /clg/ pertinentes quarum unam exoptans mihi dilectissimam de ipsa verba referam. Tamen confitear istis super pensis delectatum.

volo parvulam felem puellae degustare

Μεν ὁ Τροονιακοσ οὐ γυνη εστι, δε ὁ Κιοδοσ ανδροσ εστι. Ου Κιοδοσ ουδε Τροονιακοσ γυνη εστι.
Ὁ Κιοδοσ φιλει τον Τροονιακον

>>21775897
>ου...ουδε
would it not more likely be οὐδε...οὐδε? also
>Κιοδοσ
I know Τροονιακοσ is meant to be 'troon', but wtf is Κιοδοσ meant to be? and stop putting the wrong sigma at the end or I'll rape you

>>21776014
Chudos and the keyboard autocorrects it to the wrong one

What is the rationale to write the English ch sound as κι in Greek?

>>21776680
Rationale?

>>21776680
they're racist against χ

>>21776680
none I guess
t͡ʃ is kinda far from Greek consonants I wonder how they would've rendered it, IIRC the ʃ of Hebrew was just transposed as simple σ so even going for τσ would be far off

>>21776680
I guess Κὑδος or Χὑδος could work better

>>21776680
maybe they thought writing kappa iota would autocorrect to chi. maybe far-fetched

>>21776714
That's an aspirated velar stop /kʰ/ or a voiceless velar fricative /x/ depending on your pronunciation.

>>21776892
right, and it's transliterated as 'ch' in English. it's a spelling rationale, not exactly a phonetic one

what are you noggs currently reading. I'm going through book one of Plato's Republic and some of Seneca's moral letters. it's pretty fun and rewarding to see my progress, I just need to stay consistent

>>21777294
Iliad + Thucydides for Greek and largely just the Aeneid for Latin, trying to speed up with the latter
all are going to keep me busy for a while

>>21777396
>Iliad, Thucydides, Aeneid
how are you going about reading them? readers? loebs? are they main interests of yours or just stepping stones for larger goals? how are you finding them in terms of difficulty?

>>21776401
Chudos? The operating system for chuds?

>>21778284
That would be ChudOS
He is incorrectly using the plural accusative of chudus, -i, m.

I studied Latin for 5 years in high school, but that was 10 years ago and I want to brush it up a bit. I'm looking for suggestions on what to read.

I was hoping I could read Augustine's Confessiones, but I can only understand about 70% without looking things up. I can probably read Caesar, but I'd rather hit my head against a brick wall.

I was thinking of reading the Vulgata, but the grammar being very easy I'm wondering if it would be any use at all for reading any earlier text.

I've tried lingua latina, but I found it trivial.

>>21778379
Stick with Confessions if that is your goal. Your vocab is probably rusty, that will get better with time.
Don't force yourself to read Caesar if you don't want to.
Vulgate is fine for shaking off the cobwebs.
Wouldn't hurt to review some grammar once in a while.

>>21778413
>Stick with Confessions if that is your goal
Not really my ultimate goal, just one of the things I'd like to read eventually.
The hardest ones I want to read are probably the Golden Ass and De Rerum Natura.

>>21776908
Why would you transliterate based on spelling rather than pronunciation when the origins of those spelling conventions (ch for /tʃ/ in native and French words vs. transliterating χ in Greek loans) are separate?

>>21778379
If you just need to practice Confessions there is no point going to the Vulgate, it's too easy compared

>>21778052
Iliad: interlinear edition(found in the MEGA) with short definitions of every word; useful especially for the rare lexicon at the first read, then I use https://hypotactic.com/latin/index.html?Use_Id=iliad9 to re-read it more metrically, I know the meter by heart but every now and then it's a useful resource to look at the hexameter for every line
Thucydides: bilingual Greek-Latin edition
Aeneid: monolingual Teubner + Annibale Caro's XVI century Italian translation if I get filtered but I'm largely doing fine

Aeneid and Iliad genuinely interest me, Thucydides is more of a stepping stone to really get used to top Attic prose.
As for difficulty, I'm not finding the two epics too-too difficult, even the Iliad aside from the lexicon has relatively simple and comprehensible sentences. The Aeneid's syntax can be more complex but still doable. Thucydides is the real punch in the stomach especially in the speeches, the narrative not so much and it's fairly pleasurable.

>>21778726
>Thucydides is more of a stepping stone
Pretty much everything else will be a step down. Good on you for tackling him right away though. Will make everything else easier
>Thucydides: bilingual Greek-Latin edition
details on this pls?

>>21778852
here https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k28227w.r=.langFR

>>21778877
thank you

I'm a bit confused as to what language to begin with. My choices are Sanskrit and Latin.

>goal
to read ancient texts without translation, both
>head start
can understand hindustani languages (and read in devanagari script too)
no prior experience with latin or romance languages

>>21779014
mmh interesting case, typically for westerners latin is the obvious choice due to being easier and most importantly already knowing lots of roots through english and the local language, whereas in your case it would seem the balance is shifted more in the middle
but since you know english, maybe Latin would still be a somewhat easier venue, depends on what texts you are most interested in as well, motivation means a lot

>>21775145
Very cool.
How long have you been studying it?

>>21779129
thx about 4-5 years give or take with periods of more or less effort(I also spent lots of time with Greek in the last two years)

The MEGA doesn't have Aristophanes?

>>21779547
so it seems....
the based anon who manages the MEGA lurks/lurked here so maybe that could be an addition to consider

>>21778379
read something easy about Roman history to get back to speed e.g
http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/lhomond.viris.html
http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/eutropius/eutropius1.shtml

>>21779547
>>21779611
Check again, just for you
Tip for the future, as a last resort always check the Delphi folder. Aristophanes has been there for a long time. Have many other Delphi on the to-do list. Delphi are mildly inconvenient to use and I personally prefer other formats but they are better than nothing and file sizes are small.

My backlog of things to update is hovering around 8GB. Considering deleting the Osprey folder. They are of dubious value at best and other Megas have complete collections.

>>21781184
bless you anon

>>21780797
Are these going to be harder than the Vulgata? I mostly want to avoid getting bored with something too easy.

>>21782345
They are both considerably harder than the Vulgate, just not up to Caesar. Seriously, the Vulgate is on the bottom of the totem pole when it comes to real Latin texts and difficulty.

>>21782481
Thank you. Eutropius's book looks like something I'd actually enjoy judging by the first paragraph.

est verum

>>21782764
>ludores

>>21781184
Thank you βασιλευσ

what did romans mean by this?

>>21783665
mix of newer and archaic forms as they appear especially in poetry or older authors

>>21775897
>ὁ Τροονιακοσ γυνη εστ --- *ACK*

>>21783687
is it sorted newer to older?

>>21783704
yes sort of, e.g for ablative/dative pl. should be something like *deois > *deeis > deīs > diīs > dīs
it should be dīvom not divom, though I'm not sure why it gets short -om instead of old -ōm

>>21783665
the variations are natural langauge (phonetic) changes
>nom. & voc. pl. 'dei' > 'dii'
>dat. & abl. pl. 'deis' > 'diis'
vocalic assimilation
>nom. & voc. pl. 'dii' > 'di'
apocope
>dat. & abl. pl. 'diis' > 'dis'
>gen. pl. 'deorum' > 'deum'
syncope
I don't know enough to explain 'divom'

bump

>>21785313
st!

>>21783739
>I'm not sure why it gets short -om instead of old -ōm
ok I was thinking about this and found this quite interesting resource http://plomlompom.github.io/IndoEuropean/latin.html
quite impressive it shows the various changes step by step from PIE to Latin
this phenomenon is reported as "Proto-Italic or Proto-Latino-Faliscan vowel shortening before -m"; so at some stage it would be like Greek genitives but it shortened

why do you people study greek or latin in general?

Has anyone tried picrel? (a republication of some somewhat novel-like twentieth century Latin reader.) any reviews? has anyone a copy (epub or pdf) they'd be willing to share? gratias tibi ago.

has learning latin greek whatever improved your command and understanding of english at all

>>21787333
yeah. part of it is just general language learning that gets you to think more about how your own native language(s) work(s) and broader grammatical rules, part of it is an increased ability to predict the meaning of novel words. Latin has been more beneficial for the latter certainly, as (at least from one estimation I've seen) ~56% of English words can be traced back to Latin directly or indirectly through French. Greek cognates make up only about 10% of English words afaik, and of them a large number, maybe most, are academic (medicine, physics, mathematics) which I don't personally see a whole lot of

>>21787333
Not at all really.

I prefer horace's "civil" odes (3.1-6) over anything else he wrote. I think they're all masterpieces. Agree?

does anyone know the origin of relative adverbs like ᾗ, ᾗπερ or ὅπῃ, specifically why they assume the feminine gender? Latin has similar words like 'qua' and 'hac' which mean "in which way" and "in this way" respectively, but idk the explanation for them either

>>21788405
to add, my guess would be that they are abbreviations of once longer phrases (e.g. ᾗ ὁδέ or 'qua via'), but I have no idea

>>21788405
interesting one, the more I dig the more confused I get because it seems other IE languages(I checked Sanskrit and Gothic) have similar ways of expressing the generic idea of "by what|by which manner|how" through a construction involving the basic pronoun for "what" i.e *kʷós, and although in Greek and Latin they resemble a dative/ablative feminine pronoun I'm not sure if that's a convergence or not

>>21788727
>I checked Sanskrit and Gothic
where did you see the similar constructions? not implying I doubt you, just curious to see it myself

>>21788809
similar in the sense of building upon the generic relative pronoun *kʷós
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%F0%90%8D%88%F0%90%8C%B4
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E0%A4%95%E0%A4%A5%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%8D
but e.g the Gothic one supposedly comes from a neuter instrumental, whereas I'm not sure exactly how is the Sanskrit one built

>>21787333
No

>>21786965
It is possible that, having lasted for so long, and being the oldest western literature, they will continue on. They may outlive whatever is written now, or whatever was written last century, or even in the last 1000 years. What is more, the commitment to learn a language in order to understand them guarantees that whoever learns these old texts will be committed to their survival.

After all, one or two books is enough to base a civilization on. A few thousand latin and greek books is enough for a lifetime.

>>21788831
interesting. I'm pretty confused on it too. hopefully some other anon can shed some light on it
>is it possible
no

>>21788975
>no
meant for >>21788931

>>21787152
I read it a couple of years ago, can't remember much of anything, but it wasn't hard after finishing LLPSI.

>>21787152
The original version is freely and legally available in archive.org and many other places
Latinitium version changes are minimal

Finished Wheelock's. Now I'm reading the Vulgate. Feels good to be progressing, bros.

>>21789881
good stuff. don't know how familiar you are with the bible/which version(s), but as relatively simple as it might be, it might be a good idea to get a grammar specific to the vulgate. depending on your background some of the grammar, despite it's simplification from standard Latinitas, might not be completely straightforward. just a word of advice, but no worries either way. what book are you going through?

>>21789881
>Finished Wheelock's
Congrats for completing a textbook! So many people can't even do this.
>Now I'm reading the Vulgate.
Check out Plater & White's "Grammar of the Vulgate Language" and also Nunn's "Introduction to Ecclesiastical Latin". They both assume you have finished a classical course and just give you a shortcut to understanding post-classical texts which will be easier to read if you want to keep going after the Vulgate. There's also a book called Shortcut to Scholastic Latin by Dylan Schrader which is a similar short grammar guide to some differences from classical texts.
>Feels good to be progressing, bros.
Thank you for sharing your positivity.

pretty impressive, have some of you tried talking in Latin with ChatGPT? this stuff could change Latin self-learning if it keeps improving this much; the Latin is not optimal and it makes some mistakes but still quite good (I don't think it understood euscheme, and the last answer is not specifically what I asked for)

>>21790128
No, but I saw they completely overhauled the Google Translate for Latin. A few years ago it was absolute garbage and had virtually no understanding of the case system and couldn't differentiate between things like the subjunctive or future indicative based on context. Still not reliable for accuracy though.

>>21787333
no, it isn't.

Guys I have a question about input vs output. I'm almost done with my textbook, but I'm considering going back and doing a thorough review, but I'm not sure if it's a waste of time or not. Basically I can read all the Latin exercises perfectly fine without translating in my head or peeking at the answer key, but I cannot for the life of me do the English-to-Latin exercises accurately. My word order is ALWAYS the different than the answer, I often pick the wrong verb than the one it wants me to use, and I may just use a completely different construction like it wants "propter" with the accusative and I'll write "quia" instead etc stuff like that.

My 1st question is: Is this just a feature of composition exercises that the word choice and order in the answer will never be exactly the same or am I just bad at writing?

And my 2nd is: Should I keep progressing and just finish the book as long as I understand the grammar and can read the end of chapter Latin without issue? I am planning on doing the English-to-Latin exercises, not skipping them, but I wanna know if I should strive for perfection with them and keep reviewing or just press ahead as long as my reading is competent. I do want to complete some composition textbooks in the future, but I just don't know how important this is at this point for finishing the course.

>>21790744
>Is this just a feature of composition exercises that the word choice and order in the answer will never be exactly the same
yes
>Should I keep progressing
Yes, absolutely
review once in a while, go back over points that are still unclear or perhaps hazy, but never stop progressing. You will gain more from reading authentic Latin than any textbook can offer.
Time to take the training wheels off and ride. you can do it, go slowly and never give up.

>>21790775
>Yes, absolutely
>review once in a while, go back over points that are still unclear or perhaps hazy, but never stop progressing. You will gain more from reading authentic Latin than any textbook can offer.
>Time to take the training wheels off and ride. you can do it, go slowly and never give up.
I felt like I was going too fast because every single E2L composition exercise was too hard for me, despite the fact that I know all my forms and other than new vocab, I can fly through several chapters in a day with no issues reading. I'm trying to finish this book by the end of the month.

>>21790744
>Is this just a feature of composition exercises that the word choice and order in the answer will never be exactly the same or am I just bad at writing?
depends on the exercises. some I've seen want the standard SOV word order, others are more particular. the particular ones ime tend to be more advanced that assume a decent degree of knowledge coming into the excercises. that said, you're ability to output will always be less than your ability to input, even in your native language(s)
>Should I keep progressing and just finish the book as long as I understand the grammar and can read the end of chapter Latin without issue? I am planning on doing the English-to-Latin exercises, not skipping them, but I wanna know if I should strive for perfection with them and keep reviewing or just press ahead as long as my reading is competent. I do want to complete some composition textbooks in the future, but I just don't know how important this is at this point for finishing the course.
depends on your goals. if you don't care about being "perfect" in your output right now, respectfully, as much of those exercises you do now you won't achieve it. if you primarily care about your reading comprehension, and feel that you understand what you are reading, then just keep reading your textbook and go on to the next step (whatever that is for you).

obviously output practice is important for being able to properly output, but, again, at best (and unrealistically) you can only output what you know, so getting input is the #1, especially if you're in the earlier stages. writing out declensions and conjugations are definitely good in the beginning imo, but unless you have to write proper sentences for a class or something and know that you understand most of the material you're reading, there's no need to do writing exercises atm

>>21790786
If your goal is to compose Latin then you need to focus on doing them
If your goal is to read Latin they are less important. Still a good way to cement concepts but not essential.

>>21789911
>it might be a good idea to get a grammar specific to the vulgate
Didn't know those existed. Do you know of any in specific?
>what book are you going through?
Gospel of John
>>21789965
>Check out Plater & White's "Grammar of the Vulgate Language" and also Nunn's "Introduction to Ecclesiastical Latin".
Thanks for the recs. I'll try to find them.

>>21790794
> if you primarily care about your reading comprehension, and feel that you understand what you are reading, then just keep reading your textbook and go on to the next step (whatever that is for you).
>>21790800
>If your goal is to read Latin they are less important. Still a good way to cement concepts but not essential.

Thank you both for your advice! I will keep going!

>>21790809
>Thanks for the recs. I'll try to find them.
They are both public domain on Archive dot org if you want a PDF. The first book is hard to find in print at a reasonable price, but Nunn's book has a good cheap copy on Amazon for like 5 or 6 dollars. I have a lot of scans from that publisher and they are printed on-demand in pretty good quality for under 10 dollars.

>>21790809
>do you of any in specific?
aside from what >>21789965 said, no
>gospel of john
nice. I feel like the Latin of John, at least the sections of it I've read, flows nicely and is pretty straightforward. good luck in your studies anon
>>21790814
hope your studies go well anon

>>21789876
daaamn he's right of course, don't know why i didn't think to check that
i'll try working from that version
though latinitium version does look more nicely typeset than these grotty old scans, to be fair.

>>21773001
What addon is that? 4chanX?

>>21779456
On your own or in school?

I don't think there is a english translation on the web of this, so this is rather impressive.

>>21792097
on my own, I could've studied some in high school(though especially where I live the quality of education isn't great) but regrettably I chose a more technical path with no Latin or Greek in the curriculum; eventually I picked Latin up from around 25

>>21792190
Seems to struggle quite a bit with Thukydides though.

>Iulius id quod in herba iacet manu tangit atque "Fui!" inquit horrens, "Est parva bestia nuda."
what did julius mean by "fui!"

>>21792437
atrocious, whatever nu-Latin book that came out of should be thrown in the trash

>>21792437
looks like an expression of pain/surprise, like argh, wow, etc...

>>21792437
>>21792458
yeah the 'horrens' seems to tip us in that direction

>>21792474
ngl the fact that it's also the perfect first person of sum at first made me think of Plautinian expressions like 'perii', which are often used in the sense of "I'm fucked/done", but it doesn't seem like fui is attested used this way

>>21792457
specifically what's wrong with it?

>>21792523
>fui
non-existent in this usage.
The whole passage reeks of English translated into Latin. Word order in every phrase is stilted and ugly due to this.
>iacet manu tangit atque "Fui!" inquit
Poor Quintilian is retching in his grave
Reading tripe like this is Winnie Ille Pooh tier. Even crappy Wheelock sentences make a feeble attempt at approximating Classical Latin. This is flat out ugly. For comparison look at any random sentence from any book of Suetonius, Seneca, or Cicero, even his philosophical ones.
You can write simple sentences elegantly and beautifully without compromising comprehension. What was posted is barf, lacking in style, refinement and taste.

>>21792620
it's meant for learners, you don't need to hit them straight away with Ciceronian prose, they'll meet it when the time it's right, no reason to hurry, they are going to get sooner filtered by lexicon anyway before they get there

>>21792620
based elitist
Do you mind demonstrating the sentence in a more idiomatic style for comparison?

>>21792638
>it's meant for learners
>so it's OK to be ugly and tasteless
This is why reading comprehension levels are plummeting among younger generations.
You missed this in your cope
>You can write simple sentences elegantly and beautifully without compromising comprehension
"Ciceronian prose" is good prose, it need not be complicated and most of Cicero is not. See pic related - edited classical sentences from a chapter on relative pronouns. None are any more difficult than what was posted above, all are better in terms of style and elegance. Why would you not strive for that? Even Wheelock's can do it and that book is mediocre.
If 'it's meant for learners' is a good reason to not use pseudo-English word order then why not just use English word order? Maybe because 'it's meant for learners' is a terrible excuse in any subject and any time you find yourself saying it you should stop and reevaluate what you are doing.
>>21792728
Here is how I would phrase that train wreck of a sentence.
>Iulius manu id quod in herba iacet tangit atque horrens "Parva," inquit, "bestia nuda est."
Not any more difficult yet much closer to authentic Latin. No fake words thrown in for giggles. Actual word order, not English, and could possibly be even more so by switching manu and id. Embedded clause which Latin absolutely loves. Inquit postpositive in direct speech. Horrens before the main verb, as a subject should be.
Sinking to the lowest common denominator hurts everyone. Rise above and demand the same from others.

>>21792750
good reason to use*

>>21792750
What are your thoughts on Medieval Latin?

>>21790744
Whatever you do, do not reread your textbook. That would be demoralizing and a waste of time because it won't help you at this point. I know some professors and grad students that look at their old textbooks from time to time so that they do not forget things that aren't common in their genre of expertise. That's obviously not your situation.

>>21793600
>Whatever you do, do not reread your textbook. That would be demoralizing and a waste of time because it won't help you at this point.
What do I do?

>>21793906
Read a book in Latin, real Latin. Don't go for something really hard like Tacitus.

>>21794304
>Read a book in Latin, real Latin. Don't go for something really hard like Tacitus.
Do fables by Hyginus or Phaedrus count?

>>21794329
Yes

Bump.
This board is super slow.

>>21790128
Is hites Latīnus ǣniġ gōd? Iċ cnāw mīn experientiam wiþ ChetGPT in Spērāntum hæfs bēon þæt hit "sprics Spērāntum" būtan reāllīċ hites "Spērāntum" is Ænglisċ þynnlīċ reskinnode eallswā Spērāntum.
Eallswā, iċ eom experimenting wiþ Ænglisċ in maximāllīċ ἐτυμολογικal spellung būtan iċ eom nāwiht sēcūrum hwæt tō dō wiþ sum of þē γραμματικāl fōrmas. For inhērēditode Frenċisċ wordas obviuslīċ ēow ūsum þē accūsātīvum būtan hwæt fōrmas dō ēow ūsum for leornod borgungas? Dō ēow ūsum þē nōminātīvum? Þē accūsātīvum? Þē ablātīvum? Oþþe dō ēow iūstum dropa þē endung on þē grundas þæt hit simplexlīċ wæs nāwiht borgode andlang wiþ þē restō of þē word? Certānlīċ many of þeim earon unambiguuslīċ fram þē oblīquum stemn, e. g. eall þās endung in -tion

>>21796238
Iċ will addō iċ habba similārem exitas wiþ sum nātīvus wordas- iċ eom sum tīmas nāwiht sēcūrum hwæþer ān fōrma in Eald Ænglisċ is antecessorālem tō þē modernus fōrma oþþe hwæþer hit is simplexlīċ ān extīnctus fōrma þæt wolde habba ān differente reflexum hæfde hit supervīvode. (Eald Ænglisċ computas eallswā ān classicālem dinguāticum, riht?)

Fuck Latin. What the fuck kind of language is Latin with its ablatives and its genitives and its datives? No wonder the language went extinct. The majority of the grammar is completely unnecessary. Why employ the ablative case when you can just use prepositions or adverbs? Why needlessly make things more difficult by including endless conjugations of verbs in all their tenses and numbers when you can just use auxiliary verbs? Why impose a gender to nouns on top of all of it and make people memorize these along with all the other stupid fucking grammatical constructions?

Completely useless language. It actually somehow makes German look sane.

>>21796655
i in crucem angluncule

>>21796655
>Why employ the ablative case when you can just use prepositions or adverbs? Why needlessly make things more difficult by including endless conjugations of verbs in all their tenses and numbers when you can just use auxiliary verbs? Why impose a gender to nouns on top of all of it and make people memorize these along with all the other stupid fucking grammatical constructions?
clarity

>>21796655
One shasn't but begin to pensate upon the imponderable precision of our tongue before himthinks wise if not to bear it to mastery to have never been born at'al.

How do I transition, in the most efficient way possible, from artificial/easy textbook Latin to real Latin?

There is such a giant gap between where I'm at right now reading Ovid Met. painfully slowly for classes by looking up vocab and trying to figure out the syntax, and being able to read textbook translation passages relatively fast/fluently

I've already given up the bullshit academic translation method of 'just find the verb bro' that I got shoved down my throat, and deliberately read the sentence from start to finish.

>>21797373
the most efficient imo would be to get a reader of something relatively simple syntactically and whose subject matter you enjoy. as you know word order is much more flexible in Latin than English, say, but prose is much more strict/consistent than poetry. there is certain syntax found in prose that might be difficult to understand, say nested relative clauses or ellipsis, but if you have a good reader they should help you out with that (and writers have their tendencies, so once you read a little bit of how one tends to ommitt certain words, you can more easily predict it). if Caesar or Cicero interest you, look on amazon and find a reader that has good ratings and looks interesting. aside from that you would probably benefit by finding (or making, if you're really that enthusiastic about it) a vocab list of the most common words and studying them regularly. idk if you know anki, but that's a great source. there are plenty of tutorials online for how to set it up, find decks, customize your decks, etc. dickinson has a webpage of most 1000 common words I think. also, whatever you choose to read, you should try to get a commentary of it that not only explains some of the context around what is said but describes what is actually being said so you can double check that you understand how the words and grammar are working

>>21797373
You want my advice? Just read. Literally that's all you have to do. Force yourself to read. Masturbate yourself a little bit so your brain is more energized and motivated to keep reading. Asking for the "most efficient" method is meaningless because you don't even know at this point what works best for you. The only way you can discover that is through reading. You will find what's most efficient for you.

That's it. That's the way.

>>21796655
Nunquam mulier eris

>>21797579
Und du wirst auch nie eine Frau werden, du laecherliches Arschloch.

>>21797373
feels like you jumped lots of steps together; one doesn't jump from textbook Latin to Ovid and expects to read the latter fluently, you should build your muscles up to that through easier yet authentic ancient authors

>>21770148
I finished an online free intro course (latin for mountain men), & was wondering if anyone could point me to a (free) intermediate course to continue my learning.
I've Lingua Latina & have been working through it daily, but it's not really enough alone

>>21797601
Any suggestion for an easy starting Ancient author?

>>21797663
Also Lingua Latina I'm finding disappointing and a slog to get through. The stories are so boring and the sentences too repetitive and easy to read that I get bored & don't remember anything.
I like the idea of working from easy Latin up, but just wish there were something similar with more interesting subject matter.
In the Latin for Mountain Men course for example, the practice phrases are all drawn from Ancient Authors and are actually interesting, which makes them stick in my memory more.

>>21797670
The quintessential first author most have always read first is Caesar, but check out Eutropius, Phaedrus and Nepos as well.

>>21797705
Tibi gratos do
I've downloaded De Bello Gallico and will try that first. With some help from wikitionary hopefully it won't be too hard.
Think I'll give up on Lingua Latina for now, a bit too boring.

>>21797755
wiktionary is great, but if you don't know about it you should check out logeion as well. there have been a number of words, prefixes and other morphemes that wiktionary doesn't have but logeion does.

>>21797663
>>21797683
The book deceptively makes you feel like your Latin is at a higher level than it actually is because you are often relying on pictures or just memorizing the plot rather than really internalizing the grammar or vocab. Unfortunately it's marketed as a magic tool. Pair it with a primer like Latin For Beginners, Wheelock, or Latin: An Intensive Course. You can also read Latin By The Natural Method which has shorter stories in each chapter that are actually about Roman History and not kids hitting eachother. There's also a new book called Via Latina (not the William Collar reader of the same name from 100 years ago). It similarly is written like LLPSI but it's actually Roman history like Romulus and Remus as opposed to a random fake family.

>>21797775
That looks quite helpful, thank you.
>>21797779
Via Latina looks more up my alley, though I'm really looking for something at a slightly higher level. I've already completed a beginner / intro online course (Latin for Mountain Men), so I have a decent grasp of grammar and some vocab.
Really would like some kind of intermediate online course that would build off the one I just completed.
I think I'll just try and force my way through "De Bello Gallico" using translation when I have to.

>>21797834
Via Latina is more advanced for sure so I would use that as a reader and try Latin: An Intensive Course for your grammar resource. It's only 18 chapters and you can do it in a few weeks to sharpen your grammar. Good luck! We are close to the same level, so I am rooting for you bro.

>>21796238
>Is hites Latīnus ǣniġ gōd?
our favorite baldman seems to have read your mind
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNTEW0PNqjU
tl; dr meh, you can't rely on it to give you accurate translation but it writes and understands fairly comprehensible Latin

you can grammar from this book only if you aren't retarded

dont feed him

bump

Are there modern games (videogames, tcg, board, rp or anything) in Latin?

>>21796655
>Why employ the ablative case when you can just use prepositions or adverbs? Why needlessly make things more difficult by including endless conjugations of verbs in all their tenses and numbers when you can just use auxiliary verbs? Why impose a gender to nouns on top of all of it and make people memorize these along with all the other stupid fucking grammatical constructions?
Þē λογικālem conclūsiōnem of þis is classicālem 秦ēnsem

>>21799300
Comprehēnsibilem- būtan is hit ἰδιωματικός?

>>21800648
that seems one of the main issues, the use of english-y romance-y words and way of speaking, overuse of prepositions, etc..., makes up for great comprehensibility but at the expense of idiomatic expression

>>21800635
The adventure game Nicolas Eymerich seems to have a complete Latin localization.
There's also an abandoned Skyrim mod for Latin, no idea how far they got.
Haven't played either.

How should I read in G/L when I have to look up half the words? Will I just eventually pick them up?

>>21801213
Writing down new words and using them in novel sentences will help you remember them. There's no secret formula or easy method to language acquisition. It's a slog and you will fail if you aren't willing to put in the work.

>>21801213
the goal of learning techniques at the end of the day has always been to make the process of absorbing core vocabulary more tolerable
if you are hacking at something and find yourself needing to check the dictionary so often, too often perhaps for your taste, maybe you went too fast for your own good and limits, so you could consider reverting back to easier texts and building up more core vocabulary, depends on your will to persist, at the end of the day you should be having fun
it's important in the phase of building core vocabulary to read and reread and maybe help yourself with tools of spaced repetition

>>21801251
>maybe help yourself with tools of spaced repetition
I hate this stuff. Is there a good notebook method like >>21801229 describes? But like a more in depth system.

>>21770148
Why did Petronius start his book with a boring lecture on Homer and greek poetry that says nothing of value and goes nowhere?

>>21770148
>You are forced to take two semesters of a foreign language to graduate
>Your parents pressure you to take Latin because it looks good on college applications
>Counselor tells you that it will help you with your SAT scores
>Older students say it's better than French of Spanish because you don't have to speak
>Carla Hurt is your teacher (Found In Antiquity)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9a-xcIe9hk

Yeah, so basically there's no fucking way to memorize all the different Latin conjugations. Nope, I'm fucking out. Dumbass language that only pseuds learn.

>Yeah, so basically there's no fucking way to memorize all the different Latin conjugations. Nope, I'm fucking out. Dumbass language that only pseuds learn.

Look he's trying new bait since no one replied to the first 3 attempts

>>21802054
I have posted this before
>prepare text, notepad, pen or pencil
>read
>when you come to a word or phrase you do not understand or recall write it down
>keep reading
>try to comprehend as much as possible
>stop at end of section (length determined by you)
>now go through dictionary and define all the words on your list
>also look up grammatical terms, consult references, review textbooks if necessary
>reread section referring to notes only when necessary
>repeat
You may have to read a section 5 or 6 times but eventually you will not need notes and will comprehend the language itself.
The above method is guaranteed to work. It separates Greek/Latin from English as much as possible and keeps you focused on one aspect at a time. It also provides a handy reference of your progress over time and illustrates your weak points. If the same word keeps showing up in your notes then you should focus on learning it.

>>21802510
Jeet

>>21802280
Do you know her irl?

>>21802549
>>21802547
You responded though, didn't you? Can you please tell me why Latin resorts to mutating the same word over and over again for different tenses and moods when it can just use an auxiliary verb that's more easily memorized? Useless and impractical language, no wonder it went extinct.

>>21802935
No. She teaches grade school Latin in Australia. If you are required to take the class, then you have to participate in her theatre larp and watch her minecraft videos in class. Not a joke.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7cNF-Iq19k
Speak of the devil. New kino just dropped bros

>>21802998
Less than half a minute in and I can already tell she's an annoying bitch.

>>21802998
>>21803002
>30 seconds in
>muh wheelock writing tables
Why are these people so obsessed with whining about Wheelock? They literally bring it up and nobody else does. Most people who even use this method prefer Moreland & Fleischer, D'ooge, Collar & Daniell, or even Kennedy's Latin Primer.

>>21803007
For me it's the clickbait-type nature of the title and the whole video in general. If you want to learn a language, you're going to learn it. I don't see how spending 50 minutes watching a dumb video like this will be any more helpful to me than me just memorizing Latin paradigms or something.

>>21803082
This is basically the /clg/ equivalent of those 3 hour video essays where people explain why the Last Jedi was a bad movie or the Star Wars prequels were actually good.

>>21803007
>these people
What people exactly?

>>21803588
>What people exactly?
The people who love arguing about books.

They pick a universally disliked book and then they argue that this book is somehow promoted as the gold standard for Latin textbooks. This isn't 1983. Even teachers today openly dislike that book so I don't know why it has to be constantly be mentioned as if it is the Joker to Orberg's Batman. If you have to pick such low hanging fruit to be the strawman for your argument, then it must not be a strong argument. I think everyone agrees that we should prioritize reading longer passages of more natural sounding Latin that isn't filled with new words like WL does. I just don't understand what dead Edwardian professor these people think they are arguing with. Maybe it's because I'm learning on my own and I'm not in academia, but it just seems like they are arguing with a kind of person that doesn't even exist anymore. It comes across as intellectually lazy to start every single conversation on this topic with a random "muh wheelock grammar".

It reminds me when people on the political left accuse conservatives of wanting to go back to "muh 1950s housewife". They don't actually listen to what the opposition is arguing for and just pick the most dramatic example from the past and assume the opposition hasn't evolved over 50-100 years.

Let's just all agree that more reading is needed and we should make better materials in the future instead of playing this silly game like it's a team sport.

>>21770148
>Persian literature was considered by Goethe as one of the four main bodies of world literature.
Is anyone learning Persian here?

>>21786965
Bible
I don't study latin

>>21802938
ask me how I know you're american

>>21801213
Mæġ bēo 𐍄𐌹𐍂 暗記

>>21802909
Dōs hit maca sensum tō dō þis wiþ ān μονοlinguālem dēfīnītiōnem dictiōnārium hraþor þonne ān bilinguālem trānslātiōnem dictiōnārium?

>>21787333
yes, as a native speaker, in weird ways

give it to me straight, should i learn greek or latin first?

>>21805527
hebrew

>>21805527
- if native Greek speaker => Greek
- if not and equally interested in both => Latin then Greek
- if not and strongly more interested in Greek => Greek then Latin
else Latin

>>21805604
i'm interested in both but Latin much more so and i've read that typically greek is learned first in classical education. honestly just looking for someone to tell me that learning Greek first isn't some kind of magic trick that will make Latin much easier afterwards

>>21805689
>i've read that typically greek is learned first in classical education
wut, I doubt that
Greek for the most has all the initial difficulties of Latin plus a more complex verb system and lesser known roots(if you know english, you already know much more Latin roots than you know Greek)

>>21805719
Don't try to dissuade me from learning it with talk of a "more complex verb system." If babies can learn any language just from farting and drooling, so can I.

>>21805689
>i've read that typically greek is learned first in classical education

Totally wrong

Latin always comes first and is then used in the learning of Greek. This is evident from the terminology used in Classical language learning, which derives grammatical jargon from Latin.

>>21805940
yeah but your brain isn't spongy like an infant's anymore and your parents and community aren't speaking Attic Greek to you every day for 15 hours.

>>21805981
Good. The languages I love most are the ones I didn't grow up speaking, which are basically all of them save one. You understand it better that way, more scientifically and logically and comprehensively.

>>21805940
I don't get why people make this shitty comparison all the time, babies are super language learners and enjoy constant input and output for years from their surrounding, they have it literally baby-mode; you are a grown ass man living 2500 years apart with no native speakers to talk to, that's much harder than it is for a baby, still totally doable.
In any case, Latin generally comes before because it's less challenging for someone with no experience with any classical IE language.

>>21806021
What I mean by that comparison is to emphasize the issue of time. That's really all it takes. A baby gets exposed to that language for 15 or so hours a day, I can maybe spare a couple hours or so a day listening to YouTube recordings and studying texts. Of course I won't ever be up to that baby's level, but so long as I can understand it and have passing conversations in it and hopefully read advanced texts at some point with ease, I'm good.

>>21806044
>>21806021
if you think about, an adult puts 15 times less hours than a baby, has much organized resources (instead of a clusterfuck of words, you go from easy to hard), and manages to acquire a basic handle of the language in just 1 year, even reading and writing, can a baby say the same, even after 15 hours of constant inpooot for his first 2 years? no

now imagine if an adult spent as much time stoooodying languages as a baby spends hearing?

>>21806093
This: it's about exposure. And when it's a dead language we're talking about, then it comes down to resources. If I had the time, money, and freedom I'd fly over to Italy right now and take Latin courses at a college, go to churches who use Ecclesiastical Latin, speak to people in Latin, etc. And I'm sure there are people in Greece who speak Attic Greek or can get by in it, or there are courses there for it. Hélas, I'm stuck in the South with no means of communicating with anyone in Latin, but that doesn't deter me one iota. It's an issue of time and nothing more: a baby, like you said, has less organized resources and its language-learning is largely passive and unconscious. We at least have the power at our age to *actively* perform in the language, analyze it intentionally, study the grammar, meaning we have a mixture of conscious and unconscious epiphanies happening simultaneously. It's quite honestly the grandest thing.

>>21806145
>Hélas, I'm stuck in the South with no means of communicating with anyone in Latin
The internet exists

>>21805940
1. Babies don't read
2. Babies take up to 5 years to read
3. Babies still can't read Charles Dickens after 10 years of English, let alone read Homer after the 3 months of Ancient Greek that you are planning on dabbling in and then abandoning before you finish your textbook. Maybe if you buy the Italian version of Athenaze and buy the premium Patreon audio recordings you can be fluent in 6 weeks as an English monoglot. Good luck!

>>21806576
I can speak German and I know French and Spanish as well. Get fucked.

b·v·m·p

>>21807348
Ok, but who

Came across this while hunting for old books. It’s incredible this used to be normal. You’re educated, so we expect you to read the sources in greek and commentaries in latin.

Would the first syllables of χώρα and χορός sound similar to each other? I was wondering if the two words could have the possibility of even the slightest etymological connection to each other.

>>21807729
in Attic the quality would be different as well, open vs closed
but considering the phonemic distinction in ancient IE languages, they ought not to be related

>>21805604
Ġif ān nātīvus sprecārium of modernus Γραικός scolde leorna Γραικός fyrest, bī þē sama λογική scolde nāwiht ān nātīvus Rōmānicē sprecārium leorna Latīnus fyrest?

>>21806576
>Babies still can't read Charles Dickens after 10 years of English
Iċ eom prættiġ sēcūrum iċ hæbbe cnāwen sum 10-ġēar-ealdas hwā cūþe, būtan gredentode hit is nāwiht commūnem.
>>21807729
In classicālem Ἀττικός þeir wolde bēo /kʰɔ̌ː.raː/ and /kʰo.rós/ respectīvlīċe.

>>21809150
What the fuck is this language? Sapphic Greek?

>>21809127
yes, it's a matter of history at the end of the day, Latin was far more important for the average westerner in the last 1500 years and so ceteris paribus less effort is needed to learn Latin due to so many cognates being in our heads today, especially native Romance speakers of course
a native Greek speaker is the exception because after all albeit Greek changed a lot too, there's an impressive continuity in lexicon so for them ceteris paribus I think it makes much more sense to start with ancient Greek

>>21807430
What book is it?

>>21809164
Þē dinguāticum iċ eom wrīting in? Hit is iūstum modernus Ænglisċ in maximāllīċe ἐτυμολογικālem ορθογραφία.

What does an apostrophe mean in a Latin dictionary entry? I am using Collins Gem Latin Dictionary and keep encountering this. For example:

mā'ne n. (indecl) morning. ad. in the morning, early

>>21810847
that looks like the accent, I guess they mark it which is unusual for most dictionaries as Latin's accent is largely predictable as long as long vowels are marked

>>21810866
okay, thank you. yeah it is weird i've never seen it before

martial is based
>Quārē nōn habeat, Fabulle, quaeris
>uxōrem Themisōn? Habet sorōrem

>>21807430
I've come across quite a few books like that. Up until 1987, the only Ge'ez dictionary, at least as far as I'm aware, was in Latin. I honestly can't believe it was the first (published 1865) and remained the only one for so long, but that's another story.

>>21811263
>Fabullus, why isn't he married?
>Because he has a sister
Is this the main meaning?

>>21809164
Don't feed the faggot. He thinks he is being clever, just ignore and he'll move on

Generic question, but does anyone have advice on how to master the subjunctive? Writing them out worked for all the declensions and other verb forms, but the subjunctive forms are too confusing for me to memorize no matter how many times I write these out. When I read clauses I can't tell what tense I'm looking at without peeking at wiktionary or something like that to cheat. They look too much like other tenses for me to separate them in my head. Deponents and passives just cause even more confusion when they are in the subjunctive.

>>21812628
what language

>>21812666
>what language
Idioma Romana per se demonstrata

>>21812628
weird, I don't remember being confused by it, the imperfect is just the infinitive form plus standard endings, pluperfect the same except it's the infinitive perfect, perfect you basically add the future of sum(except the 3rd pl.); the present is maybe the one mnemonically requiring more work but still, if you know indicative forms well it's just a matter of changing the vowel regularly e. 1° -> e, 2° -> ea , 3° -> a, 3i° -> ia 4° -> ia
for the passive you even get two periphrastic forms for free for perfect and pluperfect

>>21812682
>weird, I don't remember being confused by it, the imperfect is just the infinitive form plus standard endings, pluperfect the same except it's the infinitive perfect, perfect you basically add the future of sum(except the 3rd pl.); the present is maybe the one mnemonically requiring more work but still, if you know indicative forms well it's just a matter of changing the vowel regularly e. 1° -> e, 2° -> ea , 3° -> a, 3i° -> ia 4° -> ia
>for the passive you even get two periphrastic forms for free for perfect and pluperfect
I know all the rules, but I can't just look at it and know what it is in the same way I can look at "amabant" and just know immediately where that "ba" is imperfect and that "nt" is immediately recognizable as "they". I can read the sentence fluidly, but when i look at "amāverint" I have completely stop my fluid reading and sit there looking at the root, the personal ending, then the tense sign etc and try to figure out what the stupid fucking rule is to form this subjunctive.

I'm sitting there saying to myself "is this the stupid fucking shit where you add the future endings to make it perfect or is this the imperfect or is it the infinitive or the perfect infinitive with the future endings except the singular stupid fucking bullshit." These rules are so goddamn arbitrary and too many forms are being reused or combined with forms that don't really make sense. The future endings make the perfect subjunctive????? that I can't recognize them at sight reading.

>>21812700
Be patient and keep studying. As >>21812682 said look for key vowel changes. Those will alert you most of the time. -erint is an odd case because it is both subjunctive perfect and future perfect, a distinction which is not as important as you might think at first.
>The future endings make the perfect subjunctive
Not really
Subjunctives are signified by thematic vowels and a few endings. Very, very few happen to end up looking like another tense. It happens in heavily conjugated languages. over time it will become easy, just keep studying, keep practicing. Subjunctives show up all the time in Latin and after seeing them a few hundred times they become easy to recognize.

>>21812700
idk you need time to get used to it I guess
the future perfect/perfect subjunctive could create confusion indeed but the context should help you resolve the ambiguity most of the time, the rest should really not be ambiguous; these two IIRC converged through separated ways, originally the perfect subjunctive was different

i could beat every one of you gay book faggots up

>>21812738
Post a pic of yourself with a timestamp.

>>21812866
i will but first you must denounce the talmud, a book

>>21812738
μολὼν λαβέ!

>learn classical latin
>try to read de rerum natura
>find out romans spoke an entirely different language

>>21813815
wdym

>>21814512
We need better second year or intermediate textbooks, because the massive cliff between the last chapter of your first textbook and the first page of a real Latin text is a massive leap. Obviously people say read more, but even the stuff that you are able to read doesn't really prep you well for high literature. You are mostly reading little one paragraph myths. When you try to read poetry or philosophy you will absolutely get blow the fuck out. With Ecclessiastical or Medieval Latin, I feel like you can get into authentic literature sooner than later. But in Classical Latin you are basically unqualified to read anything besides Nepos or Eutropius (who isn't even classical, he's Late Latin). And reading Caesar's commentaries is a pain in the ass that most people aren't even interested in consuming in English.

>>21814761
understandable I almost felt the same when I jumped onto Tacitus after having read only stuff like Caesar and Sallust(despite the latter somewhat acting as a bridge)
but it's almost inevitable, they can only hold your hand so far, though I guess there may be lots of readers graded in such a way that by the end of them you could also feel comfortable enough with real non banal classical authors, though of course and naturally most don't want to spend too much time reading modern primers

>>21814910
Any advice on building vocabulary

>>21814761
That's the funnest part though, it's like "here you go kid, you know how to start a fire, stay dry, and use a compass and map. Go get lost in the woods and don't die"

>>21815021
Fake it til you make it. You absorb vocab by caring about what you're reading. Translate something because you want to know what it says, not as an exercise. Your brain still stop noticing or caring that this is the 14th time you've had to look up carere or google an ending. You already know the fucking grammar, the rest is details. It's like asking how to get up a hill, just figure it out on the way and look for a trail when you hit any obvious total obstacles to progress. If you take a roundabout route or take 20% longer because you did things slightly nonstandard, it will just make it all the more memorable and make what you learned sink in even more.

>>21815033
Thanks dad. I'll do my best. I'm done with deponent verbs and trying to master the subjunctive right now and I should finish my textbook this week. It's depressing because I don't really feel like I achieved anything or like I can read anything well. I'll just keep reading and trying like you said.

>>21815048
>I don't really feel like I achieved anything
The only way that is possible is if you give up. The early stages of learning Latin are tough, keep going. You are making incremental progress whether you believe it or not. If you continue to study and try in a few years you will look back and be amazed at how simple much of what you are struggling with now really is.

>>21815332
I'm watching some Vulgate analysis videos for the Gospel of John on YouTube and it's clearing up the subjunctive a lot so that helps.

>>21814761
>We need better second year or intermediate textbooks
What second year/intermediate books are there? The only one I can think of off the top of my head is Ørberg's Roma Aeterna.

What are the best books for learning Old English? What are the best books for learning Old Norse/Icelandic?

>>21815987
>What second year/intermediate books are there?
Look up "Second Year Latin" or "Intermediate Latin" on Amazon on eBay and you will see the kind of books I'm talking about. They don't really prepare you for reading on your own.
>The only one I can think of off the top of my head is Ørberg's Roma Aeterna.
I would say this is a graded reader and not a textbook, but I'll be booed for being right.

>>21770148
Should I learn by focusing on classical or ecclesiastical latin? Also any resources worth mentioning that aren't in the mega?

I almost fell for it this time. I was this close to clicking "post".

>>21770148
Goycord dot gee gee slash K274Nt3F

>>21809164
>>21809150 #
>What the fuck is this language? Sapphic Greek?
more like pseudosapphic anglo-saxon, kek (it's the tranny)

Has anyone tried Peter Jones' Learn Ancient Greek?

>>21814761
>>21815033
There's very good reasons why 99% of Latinists learned Latin in a classroom or with a tutor. You're only now beginning to understand that.

>>21817582
the harsh truth

>>21817582
Are you trying to say that I can't become fluent with one textbook that doesn't even include a vocab list or an answer key????

How is the Latin in Augustine? Someone told me Confessions is not very hard, but City of God is rather difficult. Is this true?

>>21819327
Yes
Confessions is personal and closer to a novel. City of God is philosophical and technical.

>>21819327
>How is the Latin in Augustine?
do you mean if it adheres to the stylistic and grammatical structure of 1st ce BC writers?
>Someone told me Confessions is not very hard, but City of God is rather difficult. Is this true?
It's still very rhetorical and heavily pungent in relation to stylistic difficulty. At the end of the day, St. Augustine was well versed in golden age Latin but not afraid to go off the rails

Why do parseplebs always write in the first 3 chapters of their textbook and then quit Latin and sell the used book with writing and underlining as "very good" on Amazon and eBay?

>>21816327
Hit sæġs þē invītō is invalidum

>>21820385
Bī causam ēow cann nāwiht āctuāllīċe leorna ān dinguāticum bī tracting hit eallswā sum þing tō bēo dēصفرod intō ēower nātīvum dinguāticum hraþor þonne understōd dīrēctlīċe.

>iamque iter emensi turris ac tecta Latinorum
yo lil Publi, this line violates the hexameter

>>21817582
It's never been easier to learn on your own. There's a million websites and online resources.
Sure if you're a retard that thinks lingua latina alone is sufficient you're ngmi, but other than the communal benefit and for pronunciation I'm not sure how learning it in a classroom is necessary.

>>21822924
>Sure if you're a retard that thinks lingua latina alone is sufficient you're ngmi
Why do people act like this is a fringe take? I agree it's a bullshit take, but it's way more popular than I feel like people here want to admit. This is like 3/4 of the people under 30 who've taken interest in the language over the past 5 years or so. It's also why they all quit and just fight with people online.

>>21815998
> What are the best books for learning Old Norse/Icelandic?
Crawford is currently writing one I have high hopes for.

bmp

>mfw just discovered καρχαρόδους is an Homeric expression and not just a neologism for the great white shark

grammar noob here. is there anything functionally different between my answer and the correct one?

>>21826055
No, your answer is correct as well. Latin doesn't make that distinction like English does.

>>21826076
Ok, thanks; it was confusing the hell out of me

>>21822944
>Why do people act like this is a fringe take?
It's not a fringe take , im just saying that those types who say that were ngmi anyway if they thought some beginner reader book would be enough alone.
You get out as much as you put it in.

is sanskrit welcome here

I'M BASICALLY DONE I JUST DID THE GERUNDIVE MUHAHAHA I ACTUALLY MADE IT!!! Latinsisters....there is hope

is there a lingua latina for greek

>>21827855
Because this has been asked and answered probably a million times, I'm going to assume this is bait. I'll answer this in case someone actually wants to know, but I have a feeling that you don't and you won't even reply.

>lingua latina for greek
No. Someone was making GPSI but it's incomplete and it's done by incompetent amateurs with no actual publisher or Greek scholars editing it for quality control. Most people say the closest thing that's currently published is Athenaze. They specifically shill the Italian version because whatever input reasons.

Greek is second to latin in works and people using it.

think twice before you learn it why go with silver when you can have gold

Today, I bought a Loeb. I was at a used bookstore in Washington DC. I bought a single volume of Hesiod, Homeric Hymns, and Homerica. It's a 2002 reprint in very good condition. I am on vacation and didn't want to spend a lot of money or lug around tons of books, so I wanted to buy just one or two books. I paid $16. That's $13 off the price on Amazon for new. Should I go back and buy De Finibus, their only single volume work by Cicero?
t. someone who almost entirely reads pirated books online

Why should someone learn latin or (ancient?) greek?

>>21828153
learn sanskrit instead

I speak in ancient greek so the roman commoners cant understand me

>>21827906
Bait

>>21827829
Of course.

>>21828260
yet what language is dominant in this thread and every thread? Latin. The recommendation if you dont care about either is to learn latin first for a reason you are just going to use it more

>>21827855
>>21827906
>>21828153
What is with all this shit-tier bait? Is this thread really that dead?

>>21828296
read >>21828291

can I read koine greek with this

For those who are planning on continuing to study classical languages after Latin & Greek, which path are you taking?

1. Magus of the Orient - Sanskrit, Pali, then Classical Chinese (Tibetan & Avestan for extra credit)
2. Christpilled Scholar - Hebrew, Aramaic, Syriac, Coptic (also Ugaritic for extra credit)
3. Royal Flush - Hebrew, Arabic, Sanskrit, Avestan, & Classical Chinese
4. Assyriologist Chad - Aramaic, Syriac, Akkadian, Sumerian, & Old Persian (Hittite for extra credit)
5. Egyptologist Normie - Coptic, Late Egyptian, Middle Egyptian (Hieratic, Demotic, & Hieroglyphic cursive for extra credit)

>>21828543
The paths you provided are weird.
If you're serious about Sanskrit (and if you're not Indian, how would you ever learn Sanskrit unless you're serious about it?), then you might just as well learn enough to be able to also read Pali and Avestan.
Likewise, if you're serious about Hebrew, then you'll surely learn some Aramaic as well, which nets you Syriac and some other dialects.
Classical Chinese on the other hand is so alien, it doesn't really fit anywhere.
And of course there's an unmentioned path that would be easily accessible to many people here, containing Old English, Old Norse and Gothic.

>>21827855
Yes, it's called Logos, published by Cultura Clásica, look it up.

>>21827855
>>21829000

>>21828952
>If you're serious about Sanskrit (and if you're not Indian, how would you ever learn Sanskrit unless you're serious about it?), then you might just as well learn enough to be able to also read Pali and Avestan.
Pali and Avestan are on the Orient path
> if you're serious about Hebrew, then you'll surely learn some Aramaic as well, which nets you Syriac and some other dialects.
That's on the Christpilled scholar path
>Classical Chinese on the other hand is so alien, it doesn't really fit anywhere.
It's on the orient path. People who are into buddhist texts will likely be interested in Taoism or Confucianism.
>there's an unmentioned path that would be easily accessible to many people here, containing Old English, Old Norse and Gothic.
Fair enough, but the rest of your criticisms don't make any sense. I was just listing some ideas it's not a rule book.

>>21827829
All classical languages are welcome here.

>>21828952
>Classical Chinese on the other hand is so alien, it doesn't really fit anywhere.
It does help with modern Sinitic and Sino-Xenic languages.

>>21829000
Why hadn't I heard of this before?

Does ξύσμα have an established etymology? Wiktionary is not getting me anything.

>>21830009
ξύω I'd guess

>>21828543
Sansrkit, Persian, Chinese, Arabic, Hebrew. Fight me.

>>21815998
I've been told to just learn modern Icelandic.

>>21828543
I'd say none of those specifically but if having to choose 1.

>>21807430
What's happening with that font?

>>21830029
Perfect, thank you!

>>21783665
In poetry and the like, certain forms of "deus" were suppleted by those of "divus". Of course, they come from the same PIE root "*deywós".
As for the vocative singular, there's a convincing paper (https://www.jstor.org/stable/40267093)) that argues that Latin has a phonetic constraint against two consecutive short e's, preventing the vocative from being "dee".

>>21828109
If it is reasonably priced sure. I never pay more than $10 for Loebs with a few exceptions for rarer ones.

what do you guys do about not recognizing irregular verb conjugations in Athenaze? I usually look stuff up in μόρφω from logeion.uchigaco, but this is really time consuming. Is there a list somewhere of the common irregular verbs and their principal parts? whats the best way to memorize these?
Also, im just curious about how common these irregular verbs are. Do most verbs have at least one irregular principal part? what is the frequency ratio of thematic to athematic verbs, and also to irregular athematic verbs(the ones I have the most trouble with)? I have heard somewhere that theres about 12 verb conjugations that mostly encompass all the athematic verbs, but I don't know if this is true. perhaps its in Smyth. Any help, resources, or ideas are much appreciated.

>>21832334
I also used Athenaze(Italian version) and idk frankly just reading through it taking my time and making Anki decks worked for me(reading mostly autonomously now). You need to read a lot tbqh, some irregular stuff is always lurking which you often can't expect(e.g τελέω and compounds not lengthening regularly in the non-present forms and keeping short ε for whatever reason, or weird perfects), I'd suggest to not ignore the rules of phonetic changes e.g the uncontracted forms as well as dropped sigmas and digammas from etymlogical forms which often help to recognize otherwise more obscure roots.
Thematic verbs in general are going to be much more, but athematic ones are often very common, you best memorize τίθημι, δίδωμι, ἵημι, ἵστημι by heart as much as you can since with compounds they appear extremely often, as well as those in -νῡμι.

>>21830538
Did you start learning any of those?

OP here, thoughts about the challenge? maybe this one was too hard for most? should I even bother making a translation challenge? maybe make a more open one(e.g talk about X or Y)?

>>21830538
>Sansrkit, Persian, Chinese, Arabic, Hebrew. Fight me.
Ok but why Persian? Avestan is better. Also which persian? Middle Persian or Old Persian?
>>21831731
>I'd say none of those specifically but if having to choose 1.
What's your own plan? You can write your own, those were just suggestions!

>>21834133
Not him, but if people just write "Persian" in here I'd assume they talk about Classical Persian, which changed very little since then, so maybe that's why the "Classical" is commonly dropped.
And if we're talking about Classical, I don't how Avestan holds a candle to Persian (unless you're Zorostrian, ofc). Persian has a huge epic poem, famous lyric poets, and since the language changed so little, you can just include modern Persian literature as well.

>>21834133
>What's your own plan? You can write your own, those were just suggestions!
I'm probably gonna take a big pause from learning another classical language after Latin and Greek, there's lots I wanna read in the latter two anyway before even thinking about adding another one, and maybe learn another modern language inbetween(or actually get my German up to genuine speed)
but if I ever come back to it, Sanskrit makes the most sense, and also I'm not particularly interested in semitic languages and religion/culture

NOVUM
>>21834540
>>21834540
>>21834540