/lit/ - Literature

>>22852411
Fuck it. Kannada script supremacy.

>>22852407
>Classical Languages
thought that said celestial languages. i am disappoint

Does Arabic have a bigger literature corpus than Persian, specially if we don't count religious texts and commentaries? I had the idea it was the other way around. How do they both compare?

>>22852608
Arabic is the prior/influential tradition I think but in the West it seems like Persian poets have more of a reputation. I don't really know though, I'd like an answer too.

>>22852608
I don't know much, but here's a sonorously perfect line that haunts my mind

I'm going to try and teach myself ancient Greek at age 25. I don't know any language other than English. Is this a fool's errand, or do I have a chance of succeeding?

I'm honestly curious about what Classical Chinese learners read. Like, Old Zhang bought 3 chickens from me with 10 copper coins. Something like that? lol.

>>22852955
It will be worth it. Read LOGOS by Santiago Carbosomething (forgot his last name) and Athenaze if possible.

>>22852608
Lots of Arabic stuff is actually foreign green and Roman stuff which only existed outside antiquity because they copied it down. Much of Galen’s commentaries on Hippocrates for instance only exist in Arabic since the Greek originals have long since been lost.

>>22850542
>Omnis anonymos, qui, uno lecto libro Orbergensis, sese student
omnes anonymoi ∨ studet
>>nec librum unum latinum nec Caesaris nec enim Syrae legabunt.
legent; legare != legere fucking lmao
>saltem declinationem nominum verborumque coniugationem meminisse decet, ne
the irony
deceat, omni anonymoi/omnem anonymon ... saltem ... deceat
>nugas, quae propriae sunt illis,
illorum

Is there any texts worth learning Ge'ez for?

>cum lectura grammaticae intensivae, studere
>LLPSI, legere
>Colloquia Desiderri Erasmi, etiam legere
>Grammatici Latini, Latina Scriptus, etiam legere
>Vitae vostrae loquimini cogitateque

>>22852955
Are you already familiar with the alphabet at all? The alphabet is a big hurdle, it's annoying to revert back to the reading speed of a toddler but it's necessary with Greek as a beginner

>>22852967
What do you mean by "reads like"?
>Old Zhang bought 3 chickens from me with 10 copper coins
This just confuses me more, as aside from the name, it's the sort of declarative sentence that might appear in any language.
What I can say is that Classical Chinese prose is often terse and allusive, leaving very much to the reader. There are exceptions. In poetry timeless images are prominent, in no small part because the language is tenseless. Again, there are exceptions.

>>22852967
Oh, I guess what's somewhat notable is that even prose often takes on poetic rhythms, parallelisms, even rhymes. Again, this is not universal. There is no universal "reads like" for any language, since they all encompass many different styles and genres.
If you really want to know, then you can pirate How to Read Chinese Poetry and/or How to Read Chinese Prose by Zong-qi Cai, which seem to be made to answer your question.

>>22852967
Maybe this will help?
https://pages.ucsd.edu/~dkjordan/chin/LaoJuang/JoyOfFish.html

>>22853419
>legent; legare != legere fucking lmao
Et tu, quot libros latinos "legavisti"?

How the hell do you learn vowel length in Latin if there are zero texts that use macrons to read?

>>22854353
There are some basic rules and poetry uses the length.

>>22854353
beginner texts + poetry grinding

>>22854353
just listen t o people speak it

>>22854487
At least 70% of spoken Latin is garbage, stress on the wrong syllables, no respect to vowel length, etc

>>22854503
Nobody spoke with consistent vowel length to begin with. The whole thing was made up in the preindustrial. That's the first pill you have to swallow.

>>22854544
Then how do you explain the consistent vowel sound changes from Latin to proto-romance?

>>22854503
>At least 70% of spoken Latin is garbage
who are the other 30%? please share

>>22853955
Unus liber apud me legabatur. Nunc servit!

>>22854574
people who spoke latin in their past life and thus know how to speak it correctly

>>22854353
unironically start slow like you have brain damage so you can respect the syllables individually. at a certain point, you'll respect the length out of habit and not consciously as before.

>>22852126
ἰζ δὶς σέντενς νὸτ ἰν ἴγγλις;

>>22852440
Hey, if you wanna go make your own Enochian general feel free, though /x/ might be a better fit for it than here.

>>22852967
There were a few primer texts that students read historically. A popular beginner text these days seems to be Han Feizi.

>>22853895
Hey, I've met the guy whose webpage this is!

>>22854568
Or the length-based meter, for that matter?

How do the various ancient greek textbooks compare, anons?
Which of them do you think are the most effective? I was thinking about trying Greek: An Intensive Course + maybe Athenaze as a reader, is that a good idea or do you think there are more effective combos? What resources should I use?

>>22854574
Even Luke Ranieri isn't that great... At least he tries hard, but his inflection is awful and sounds very unnatural most of the time. I think Latin would sound better with the singsong quality of modern romance languages. His tonal inflection sounds random to me.

That said, he is excellent about respecting syllable length and is autistically focused on historical accuracy in his pronunciation, so he's among the best.

I think the best Latin speakers would be native Italians who use the ecclesiastical pronunciation and respect vowel length. Their Latin bibkes usually have accents on stressed syllables, so even if they don't know vowel length, they still sound decent.

The worst I ever heard is a recording of the Vulgate Bible by a Texas priest, who reads everything according to the rules of Mexican Spanish pronunciation... Also the most based though, ngl

Second worst is a heavy American accent with no respect to the phonetics of Romance languages.

>>22854818
>who reads everything according to the rules of Mexican Spanish pronunciation
Traditional regional pronunciations of Latin are cool, honestly. (And ecclesiastical pronunciation is just the Italian regional pronunciation.)

>>22854830
https://www.wordproject.org/bibles/audio/41_latin/index.htm

Enjoy

>>22854818
>Second worst is a heavy American accent with no respect to the phonetics of Romance languages.
By that do you mean actual English traditional pronunciation or just Classical pronunciation mangled into the nearest available approximation in English phonology?

>>22854728
Wouλd be betteρ iφ Γρeek keπt θe amount oφ λoweρ caσe λetteρσ diφφeρent φρom Λatin to a γρeateρ minimum.

Were client states considered independent countries? Would something like modern Belarus have been a considered a client state of Russia by Romans for example? Would it be inaccurate to claim that the Herodian kingdom of Judea was part of the Roman Empire? Was Pontius Pilate, the governor of the province of Jude a superior of Herod Antipas, a tetrach of the Herodian kingdom, or an equal?

Asking here because it's too niche for /his/

>>22854818
>with the singsong quality of modern romance languages
such as? Romance languages sound flat and monotone since they're syllable timed, as opposed stress timed

r8 my Roman handwriting

>>22854799
Any Ancient Greek anon can help?

>>22855289
idk I used only Italian Athenaze for the most and then started reading(modern reader first, Morice's, then Xenophon)
few online resources as well for the accent system

>>22854799
I wouldn't overthink it too much. Hansen and Quinn is harder than JACT 2nd edition. I like JACT 2nd ed better, but it's 3+ interrelated books so it's slightly more clunky to use. However, it feels a lot more like a Wheelock or Cambridge type Latin course, a smoother ride than Hansen and Quinn.

That being said, H&Q works just fine if you want to just scale the learning curve a bit. I don't remember enough of my experience with it (I think we did 80% of the book?) to recall specifics but I do remember the beginning being more demoralizing than the middle, and then being especially demoralized by the sheer weight of morphology being dumped on my head, especially when athematics were introduced.

>>22852955
>>22852986
>>22852407
https://www.reddit.com/r/AthenazeEnglishGloss/comments/132tkxk/athenaze_it_with_english_gloss/

>>22854568
Stress has nothing to do with vowel changes in any language.

>>22852967
Sorry, I misread your question early in the morning and sperged out.
The traditional introductory reader in China is 古文觀止, whose first section, taken from the 左傳, is somewhat comparable to Caesar.
Beginner beginner readers are mainly composed by necessity of maxims

>>22855395
That is just demonstrably false.

>>22854799
Here are my experiences with textbooks, for whatever it's worth.

I did not like the Reading Greek grammar book at all. It's poorly structered and is frustrating to navigate and learn anything from. However, having stopped using that textbook around 2/3rds of the way through, I've come to appreciate the actual texts from the reading book, which are really quite good at introducing common idioms and constructions. Without using the grammar book to actually explain these constructions, though, I don't think it would be as helpful.

For learning grammar, I think Greek to GCSE and Beyond GCSE by John Taylor are really good. I went through the books just reading all the sections, doing the English to Greek exercises, and reading all the Greek passages. It felt like I was learning Greek in the most balanced fashion, by being introduced to the grammar piece by piece in a clearly laid out and unconfused manner, embedding the grammar with exercises, and further embedding grammar, vocab, and reading skills by reading passages.

Now, I haven't had the fortune of being assigned Greek An Intensive Course; however, whenever I've looked at it in the past it's seemed really good as a tool to thoroughly learn grammar. My only caveat would be that it's certainly aimed at people who already have a good knowledge of Latin.

But aside from a textbook, my belief is that it's absolutely vital to commit noun and verb morphology to memory through rote memorisation. In fact, I think memorising Greek verb morphology is more crucial than anything else in either Greek or Latin, but it's incredibly painful.

In terms of readers, Athenaze is obviously highly recommended, but I've not used it myself due to both my textbooks being pretty full of reading material. Just so long as you push through the barrier of reading consistently despite how slow and tiring it is (even though you're essentially reading children's material kek), any beginner reading material should help.

>>22854818
>autistically focused on historical accuracy in his pronunciation
He's given to novelties. The retracted s is his worst offense. He even looks for that mistake in others.

>>22855289
Mastronarde is good but his reference section could be cleaned up and he just machine guns information out. There are whole pages dedicated to grammar you would already have understood by the time its presented but it blends into useful sections so you will get half way down a page before you realize it's superfluous.

>>22855400
If it were you would demonstrate it.

>>22855411
>In fact, I think memorising Greek verb morphology is more crucial than anything else in either Greek or Latin, but it's incredibly painful
I agree! Nouns can be caught but verbs must be taught and it makes it frustrating because in the Germanic languages we can just jump in. But- at least Greek is prepositional. With Latin you can stare at a sentence and if you do not know the words you are not getting context clues. People get worked up over the definite article but its handy for reading, if a little frustrating for writing.

>>22855411
I agree with you on most things however I think rote memorization needs one qualification: you can get by in your first year or two with 80-90%. What I mean is, by all means yes just brute force the rote memorization, do nothing but write paradigms for 20-30 minutes a day until that shit is seared into your mind forever. But also don't worry about memorizing it all perfectly so that you could take a 100%-or-nothing test on it.

Remember, MOST of the time in the wild, in actual reading of texts, context is going to help you "cheat." MOST of the time in the wild you can fudge your way to success by various means. And when in doubt, you can just.... look it up in the fucking paradigm or in the dictionary.

So yes, embrace the holy power of rote memorization, learn the power of your own memory (it's way more than you think - there's a reason memory palaces work), BUT also look at it like going to the gym. It's a fuzzy process. Are you gonna get up to your target OHP weight in two months? 3.5 months? Who cares. You'll get there. Keep going every day and doing it. Are you gonna do 5x5 of your target OHP weight the first time? The fifth time? The tenth time? Who fucking cares. Just keep doing it. Embrace the process. You are getting stronger and better.

>>22855424
All I have to do is prove that stress has some effect on vowel quality in some language? Explain the presence of the ue/o alternation in Spanish verb paradigms, for example, without reference to stress.

>>22855438
>explain

I don't know Spanish. Explain it to me. I have no idea what you are talking about.

(Spanish is the language of plebs)

>>22855438
I'm still confused. You know we are debating the evolution of languages, not stress effects within a language?

>>22852955
I started self learning Latin around 25 and 2-3 years later started with Greek. You can do it green fella.

>>22855229
Dialects of Italian and Spanish mostly. French also can have pleasant intonation

>>22855413
Exactly. He presents the features of his pronunciation system as if we absolutely 100% know for a fact that it was how it was used, when in reality the consensus on these things changes every 20 years. It's an ancient language, he should be more honest about saying that it is what *some* research supports, but also that it is a dead language and we cannot be 100% sure in most cases.

Even if he was completely accurate in his reconstruction, there are going to be accents from other Italic language speakers, colonies, regional variation, temporal variation, and personal preference

>>22854918
Honestly, both

>>22855869
I feel like the former at least has the advantage of being from a continuous living tradition.

>>22855865
>the consensus on these things changes every 20 years

Holy shit it's refreshing that someone else gets this.

>Even if he was completely accurate in his reconstruction, there are going to be accents from other Italic language speakers, colonies, regional variation, temporal variation, and personal preference

Exactly

>>22855229
>Romance languages
>flat and monotone
Out of all the shitty takes in this general this might be the worst

>>22855928
Relax, he's referring to cholos.

>>22855928
it's true though
compare it to stress timed languages
or even North Germanic languages, which are not only stress timed, some are also tonal
Romance languages are just robotic in comparison

>>22855473
Stressed o in Vulgar Latin > ue in Spanish. This is most visible in verb paradigms. See attached. Where an o would be stressed in V. Latin, we find /ue/ instead. Nor is it exclusive to verbs: Latin focum > Spanish fuego, bonum > buen are other examples. This does not ever occur with an unstressed o in Latin.
Note that stressed o is possible in Spanish.

>>22855473
I don't understand how one can make a distinction. Features in a language had to enter it somehow. What is language change other than the cumulation of many different changes within a language/languages? How does Latin even become Spanish other than through a series of progressive changes?

Think of what an odd proposition this is: we know that phonemic stress exists in language, and we have plenty of examples of practically every other phonetic feature conditioning sound changes, yet stress is special and "has nothing to do with vowel changes in any language"?

I don't know why I'm wasting my time, frankly. It feels like I'm dealing with people who base their views on language at large on their views of people who speak certain languages, and are intentionally obtuse in order to push this.

Anyone use Introduction to Old Norse by E. V. Gordon?
The grammar section seems minuscule to me

>>22857232
Also I'm wondering
1. is translation helpful to learn how to read the language when you don't have a text like LLPSI?
2. what exactly did these people do when they 'read' a language and what did they consider to be reading?
Are they sitting there with a dictionary and grammar and painfully translating each passage on paper? Are they identifying the parts of speech, the declension and the conjugation of a sentence mentally and then hoping that the meaning suddenly dawns on them? Or are they reading it as if it were a modern foreign language with the occasional dictionary look up or perhaps grammar consultation for a particularly difficult phrase?

>>22853682
Since you're asking that question, I'd advise that you probably shouldn't learn Ge'ez. However, there are worthwhile texts. Enoch and Jubilees are the most famous. There's also the Miracles of Mary, Kebra Negest, Fetha Negest, Ascension of Isaiah, Book of Noah, and Anqasa Amin that exist only in Ge'ez (some have fragmentary attestation in other languages). There are tons of other books in Ge'ez, but you could read them in the original language or Arabic. Ge'ez is also invaluable as a tool for Semitic linguistics. I am grateful that I learned Ge'ez, and I'm going to have my weekly meeting with my friends from the Ge'ez class I took in a few hours.
t. Ethiopianon

I've just been reading Caesar, reading over 4-5 chapters a time and rereading it over 3 days and I think it's going well. Hardest part is just vocabulary I think, only once I saw a bit of a weird word order but I mostly got it at the end. Reading in Latin is infinitely more engaging, mostly because it takes longer and I have to think about what the fuck is being said.
Thank God for Perseus Latin word study or else I would be lost. But I feel like a lot of the words I learn in a section I'm going to forget about because they won't appear all that often.

>>22856151
Linguist here. Well done in summing up the diachronic effects of stress in Latin-to-Spanish.

>>22855424
>>22855395
In Armenian dialects which changed their stress pattern from a hammock system (has primary stress on the final syllable and secondary stress on the initial syllable of the prosodic word ([σ̀… σ́]ω)) to a penultimate system predictably lost middle unstressed schwas and even other vowels, depending on dialect.

Old French went from being a highly stress-timed, word initial-stress language which caused massive amounts of phonological erosion at the end of words (hence all those "silent letters" at the end of most modern words).

Brazilian Portuguese vs. European Portuguese - stress is one of the main differentiating factors and it's changing the vowel quality system in subtle ways in both varieties.

Old East Slavic to Modern Russian - again, stress had a huge effect on vowel quality.

I can go and on...

why is there like 10 different words for "arrow" in homer?

Opinions on Quintilian's description of Latin's pitch accent? Why do most contemporary sources describe Latin as having a stress accent?

>>22857815
idk, why are there different shades of a color?

>>22857752
The argument is that stress did not carry over in the evolution of vowels over time and you gave me five examples of how this is true. Did you mean to do that?

>>22857831
>Quintilian's
Sorry I meant Priscian

What's some good mid level Latin to read? Medieval is appreciated if anybody knows any.
>pic is a 5th century manuscript of the Aeneid

>>22857837
there's a difference between pink and burgundy, but can you tell me what separates βέλος from ὀιστός or κῆλον or ἰός?

>>22857815
Same reason there are three for “soul” and why they didn’t have words for certain colors. Because it’s an ancient language far removed from us.

>>22857943
>>22858024
>they don't know

>>22857943
having different words broadly meaning the same thing can be quite useful for a poet/bard singing in meter
βέλος I'd guess comes from the a-grade root of βάλλω, so that which is thrown(there's also βόλος ofc), ἰός apparently should be from the proper PIE word for arrow specifically, maybe the others could have similar original etymologies but come from the unknown pre-Greek substrate

>>22857815
Poetry tends to use a lot of obscure and metaphorically-extended terms.

>>22852955
It's literally just motivation and willpower, so you are the only one who really decides whether you have a chance of succeeding or not. Unless you're actually retarded, that is. Otherwise you'd just go a bit slower than someone else.

>>22852608
Arabic's corpus is like an order of magnitude larger. Naturally, since it was the language of literature and philosophy in a much larger area for a longer period of time. Persians themselves mostly wrote in Arabic, until around 1300-1400.

>>22855390
>requires app because might be spooky scary :^(
reddit is a gay

>>22858209
Just change url to old.reddit and you'll be able to view it

>>22858219
thanks anon

>>22857899
https://la.wikisource.org/wiki/Gesta_Romanorum_(Oesterley)

a bunch of short stories that will keep your interest

>>22857899
Colloquia Desiderri Erasmi

>>22857899
St Augustine's confessions. You'll be surprised how easy they are.

>>22857858
You didn't express that very clearly, but then Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian also a great example of stress patterns from Vulgar Latin being preserved over time, imperfectly but identifiably, though the vowels themselves change. What are you trying to argue?

What's your favorite piece of classical pseudophilology and/or pseudolinguistics? Mine is the recent PRC crackpot who claims Aristotle didn't exist.

>>22858916
That Russian mathematician who claims that all Roman history is made up and all the evidence (from buildings to texts, including the Latin language itself) is fabricated by benedictine monks if I remember correctly.

So did Latin have a pitch accent or what

What would you guys say are the most important Latin suffixes to know? -alis, -que, that sort of thing.

>>22858884
>You didn't express that very clearly
>*Writes a post arguing
>What are you trying to argue

Holy shit

>>22859023
I think you're mixing up Fomenko and that Serbian guy.

>>22859062
I think -que is actually an enclitic, not a suffix.
Maybe -iter and -e? They're used to form adverbs from adjectives depending on their declination; they may be confusing because one of them looks like an ablative of the "wrong" declination
>latinus, latine
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-e#Latin
>celeris, celeriter
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-ter#Latin

>>22859111
I didn't remember correctly, then.

>>22859141
>an enclitic, not a suffix
What's the difference?

>>22859154
A clitic doesn't care what it attaches to, while an affix attaches only to the word it's semantically connected to.

The possessive 's in English is a clitic. It can attach to the right side of a whole noun phrase:

The man I saw's horse

The plural affix -s, however, only attaches to the word it's semantically connected to:

'The books of the man', not 'the book of the mans'

>yes I use Japanese TTS to scan my hexametres how could you tell
https://voca.ro/1b4WRo6VS28n

>>22859374
The scariest part is that it nailed all the accents by itself. I just adapted the text to fit the kana syllabary while preserving the number of morae (ぽふぐす "pofugusu" instead of profugus, for example.)

>>22859374
holy kino this just opened a brand new world for me

>>22859154
Enclitics are more word-like, but still not full words, and a suffix is even less word-like, that is, more dependent on a host (closer to pure [grammatical] function).

does anyone understand what the difference is between thematic and athematic verbs in ancient greek is? for example δεικνυω vs δεικνυμι. Why does my dictionary have both listed? is δεικνυμι the correct form? or when would i use either of them?

>>22859717
the tendency historically was towards thematization, so basically you are looking most likely at the same verb semantically but from different periods assuming a more "regular" thematic form; athematic verbs are in some way archaic in formation and in fact they are relatively few compared to thematic ones

A bunch of questions
>Which one should one learn first, Greek or Latin?
>What is the learning process like, I'm assuming it differs from "normal" language learning since you're learning a dead language?
>What possible use cases there are for these two languages outside of old books?
I'm a bit worried about whether I'll be able to learn dead languages properly as all of the living languages I've learnt, I've done so by just grinding words and reading random stuff without even a single glimpse at a grammar guide, or any other guide actually.

>>22859833
1. for most, Latin then Greek, unless particular interest in the latter specifically
2. not that different except the only resources you really have are essentially written ones, no full immersion with native speakers, but otherwise, git good with grammar at least to the level required to start reading something and begin the long process of grinding for lexicon which is the real great filter, especially since often you'll be dealing with target literature separated by multiple centuries
3. idk I like the hobby and who knows maybe I'll teach it privately alongside other material

>my biblingo app bugged out and is now stuck at chapter 9.1
its over

>>22859833
The other anon's response is good I'll just add my perspective
1. Probably Latin unless a specific interest in Greek as the other anon said but also an interest in poetry should tip the scales a little towards Greek.
2. Everything the other anon said. Latin has excellent low-level materials for inpooting; Greek used to have very few but now has some decent ones. Both are vastly lacking in mid-level materials for inpoot. Vocabulary acquisition is more difficult than with a living language.
If you already know a Slavic language/anything heavily inflected, you probably already have a mental schema for the basics of Latin and Greek grammar. Even in this case, however, you will need to study grammar more explicitly than you ever have before. This is due to the almost universally rich, complex writing style that prevails in both languages.
3. If use-cases concern you, you should not be learning classical languages. It is a solitary and meditative hobby. For all genres other than religion or poetry (which, granted, abound), classical languages do not even readily offer extra insight.
The real benefit is as >>22857556 says. Classical languages slow you down and force deeper analysis/engagement with the text than almost any readers readily perform in our speed-addicted age. No wonder they were considered essential for moral education in a different time.

>>22859833
>What is the learning process like, I'm assuming it differs from "normal" language learning since you're learning a dead language?
50% rote memorization of pic related, 50% memorization of grammar rules like subordination of tenses, 50% pain, 50% joy

>>What possible use cases there are for these two languages outside of old books?
They teach you how language works, including your own language, and enable you to learn any other language much more easily

>>22859935
>They teach you how language works, including your own language, and enable you to learn any other language much more easily
Latin does, since and only since most of our grammatical terminology comes from Latin. That aside, living languages too can give you that benefit if you engage very deeply with their grammar and other underlying systems. The only difference is that Greek and Latin force you to.

>>22859949
For me it had nothing to do with terminology and everything to do with the fact that it made me notice how logical language is and how everything is governed by rules. It transformed how I see language in general.

>>22859951
Yes, as it did for me, and that's a valid reason. It sounds however like that anon may be uninterested in or even averse to reading old books, in which case we shouldn't encourage them to put so much time into Latin or Greek. They can have a similar experience with, say, German if they are disciplined enough: the only difference is that German will not force them to be so disciplined.

>>22859866
>>22859916
Do you think there is any sort of necessity to utilize grammar guides and other forms of modern "introductions" into the language or would you say that just learning the alphabet, grinding vocabulary like a fucking retard and then just endlessly reading and winging the rest would be fine? That's how I've always done it and it's worked just fine up until now, but I'm worried it might not pass this time.
The question regarding use-cases was merely out of curiosity, I just wanted to know if there are any unexpected uses I can have for the languages. Two things that come to mind now are the fact that even in the modern world a decent amount of books were written in Latin, at least partially, and that learning Latin proper would also help tremendously with Romance languages.
>>22859935
That picture is disgusting. Spoiler it.
>>22859960
>It sounds however like that anon may be uninterested in or even averse to reading old books, in which case we shouldn't encourage them to put so much time into Latin or Greek.
To the contrary I do not read any new books, as they are all shit. The youngest book I have ever read was from 1962 or so. Right now I am slowly reading through Cicero's letters to Lucilius in English, as a way to pass the time and to seek general advice. It's been very good so far.
I've also rushed through Japanese, getting N1 in a year and a half. But before that, only 9 or so months into the language I started reading the 万葉集 with the original text, despite barely understanding normal Japanese. I don't think there's a single man under the sun that's more autistic than me.
>They can have a similar experience with, say, German if they are disciplined enough
I'm actually going through German right now. I was planning on only starting Latin or ancient Greek a few months from now.

>>22860058
>To the contrary I do not read any new books, as they are all shit. The youngest book I have ever read was from 1962 or so.
Unfathomably based

>>22860058
Yeah, you sound as if you'll enjoy Latin. Use both volumes LLPSI and complete *every* pensum.

>>22860122
LLPSI is a pile of shit for retards.

>>22859935
The conjugation cases memorization shit is overrated. Highly inflected languages are condensed so instead of learning a bunch of modal bullshit and their grammar rules like you would in english you just learn a bunch of word endings that you can apply to all the other verbs and such. It's like if i make a graphic with lists of
I untie
you untie
he untie
we untie
we will untie
we will untie ourselves
ect ect
and saying "wow such grammar such hard!"

How do you learn to immediately recognise the declension and conjugation form when reading?
I want to learn Old Norse and I'm not sure how I should approach it

>>22860219
Doing the same right now. I have much more experience in Latin and a bit in Greek, with enough modern German fitting between the two from college.

Norse seems superficially to have the features of Latin but instead of going to Greek and facing more of everything it is like having less of everything. My favorite thing is that the pronouns and demonstratives make sense and are easy to remember compared to all of those illes and hocs.

I would brute force the tables. Actually, that's what I am doing and it is going well. The only downside is that we have so few materials and the premier dictionary for the language sucks (Zoega's).

The verbs are not so crazy, the definite article is WAY better than Greeks (and the neutered singulars match the strong adjective endings- there are tons of parallels in this language you will find when doing the tables). It is still funny to me that the genitives in the Scandinavian languages are almost always -s related, so it keeps you in the pattern of English. There is one exception where -ar shows up as a genitive but for the most part things look and feel familiar. Not just viking either, but half the time I feel like Gandalf in LotR reading some of it aloud.

>>22858024
Could also be that people have at times been defficient at adequately rendering terms into a target language when deeming a single word to stand for multiple and not sufficiently considering ways to improvise with substitute phrasing or the sort instead.

>>22857815
why do (you) only have one word for arrow, arrowlet

How the fuck does an imperative work in the third person? Shouldn't it only work in the second?

>>22860401
verbs are imperative, the person or voice doesn't matter

>>22860401
someone open the door

I can feel the ancient priests trying to possess me as my proficiency with hieroglyphic egyptian grows

>>22860122
Do you know where I can find answers for the pensums? Unfortunately the answer page for exercitia latina doesn't have anything for it, and its hard to tell if I'm doing things wrong. For example, I wrote:
"Medus discedit, quia nummi Iulii in sacculum tuum habet."
to answer the question:
"Cur Medus discedit?"
but something feels wrong about it. I'm not certain about when to use tuus and when to use tuum, and would sunt be better than habet?

>>22860815
Alright retard you're lucky I'm drunk and in a helpful mood

You are suffering from the downside of the natural method, which is that you have no fucking clue why the language works the way it does.

First off, you need to know that nouns change their forms depending on how they function in the sentence.

>When to use tuum and when to use tuus
Use tuum when it refers to the object, use tuus when it refers to the subject

Also, why are you using tu/tuus/tuum? Are you talking directly to any of these characters? Use the third person, not second person. Suus/suum (meaning "his/hers/its") not tuus/tuum (meaning "yours")

Nummi should be "nummos" because it is the object of the sentence.

Your sentence, corrected, is as follows:
"Medus discedit, quia nummos Julii in sacculus suus habet"

Learn grammar, retard

>>22860815
>>22860839
Habet or sunt both work fine, but the grammar changes significantly depending on which you choose.

nummi in sacculo suo sunt = coins are in his bag
nummos in sacculo suo habet = he has coins in his bag

Also correction of my corrected sentence:

"Medus discedit, quia nummos Julii in sacculo suo habet"

Sacculo suo has to be in ablative case.

>>22860815
>pensums
THEY ARE PENSA, PAY ATTENTION TO THE GRAMMAR RETARD

>>22860839
Thanks, I was using wheelock's alongside llpsi but it's a lot faster to get ahead on llpsi so I think my grammar fell behind.
>>22860847
thanks
>>22860851
fuk

>>22860851
OPPIDUM -> OPPIDA
PENSUM -> PENSA

>>22860839
>in sacculus suus
>Learn grammar, retard
stuff like this is the only reason I keep coming back to this general

>>22860857
No problem man. I'm being harsh because I care. You can understand a lot (superficially) with LLPSI, but you have to be careful not to let your understanding of the grammar lag behind, because LLPSI does a poor job of teaching it
>>22860861
Kek. Don't latinpost while shitfaced

>>22860864
Thanks, I know we're just strangers on the internet but I like the harsh but ultimately helpful way you answered my question. You sound like you would be a very respectable teacher irl.

>>22860124
say it in latin

modo Ciceronis de natura deorum primi libri capitulum ultimum perlegi, censebam difficilius lectu immo vero minime scabrum, fortasse propter comminus inter duos verbis armatos duellum explicans
relegam sane

>>22860215
>english morphology is dogshit easy therefore this applies to latin

>>22860525
Like they'd recognize Egyptological pronunciation as their own language.

>>22860851
In Latin, sure, but we're discussing it in English here.

>>22861769
yes, grammar of all languages is dogshit easy because everybody is human and has brains that work the same. These are not alien languages. Inflected languages like latin and greek just condense all the grammar you are supposed to know so it becomes more apparent if you don't know it, languages like english just let you get away with more but are no easier if you actually want to learn english grammar properly.

>>22861957
You're supposed to think the glyphs, not the sounds

>>22862699
>has brains that work the same
lmao

>>22862699
>just condense all the grammar
grammar can't become liquid you fool

>>22862805
The glyphs stand for the sounds.

>>22862864
Obviously human brains aren't all identical, but they're all built on the same basic groundplan with a few tweaked variables here and there. Complex adaptations in sexually-reproducing species are necessarily universal.
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Cyj6wQLW6SeF6aGLy/the-psychological-unity-of-humankind

>>22862919
>he doesn't know that the sounds are a just a crude and incomplete substitute for the glyphs when convenience is necessary

>>22861568
unus saltem qui hoc in loco legat est

>>22862994
Spoken Egyptian existed before the glyphs did, and most of them are just being used as rebuses to stand for a particular sound or sequence of sounds. For example, a picture of an owl stands for an "M" sound because the Egyptian word for "owl" (pronounced something like "moo-lodge") begins with an "M" sound.

>>22863064
Why are you debating in earnest with somebody who is clearly in an esoteric pit? Are you autistic?

>>22863115
Mostly hoping to be informative to other people reading the thread.

>>22862864
barbarians don't know how to read or write so obviously they don't apply

>>22862936
Expone igitur nobis qua de causa orientales limulas habent vaginas nec ulla altera cum gente reseminere possunt et bingbong illud sine sensu chingchongque linguam esse veram credunt.
QED

Greekchads, what is the best way of literally and autistically breaking down the modern Greek word:
>τίποτα (nothing), e.g. "thank you!" "it's nothing.", and "what's the matter?" "nothing."
into its ancient Greek predecessors:
>τί
and
>ποτα
?
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CF%84%CE%AF#Ancient_Greek
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CF%80%CE%BF%CF%84%CE%B5#Ancient_Greek

Like it seems like it's questioning that it could be at one time or another, as if it means "why, any time!" As if you could expect generosity at any time. Or perhaps "why bring it ever" for when you have a problem but think it's not worth bringing up at all.

>>22863237
>>>/pol/

>>22863489
you're on good track, it was an expression in ancient Greek itself even all the way to Homer syncopated as τίπτε, it fundamentally strengthens the question, like "why ever..."

>>22862936
The 1970s shitmobile is as good as any other car because it shares the same fundamentals lmao

>>22863534
I said they're not identical. But barring actual deficiency, they share the same basic mechanisms.

>>22863517
Sed totam dico veritatem! Uxor mea filipina est et se dicit propter hoc mecum convenire non posse.

How are the wiktionary entries for latin and greek?

>>22863643
Generally excellent for Latin. Generally excellent for those Greek ones that exist, but not nearly comprehensive for that language. Use lsj.gr

Vae me castum aeterno, et verbum graecum mihi est!

>can't look up cases like future tense in online greek dictionary unless i look up the root word first and look at its table
>can't guess what the root word is from the case
its over

Give me your hot take.
Do you think competence in a classical language (probably greek or latin, or both) should be a requirement for a bachelor's degree?

I've heard people argue this before and I'm not sure how I feel about it.

>>22863952
Mandatory Latin for all forms of degrees in all countries, for the sole purpose of making sure people with less than 100 IQ don't get a degree.

>>22863973
You should be able to reach c2 in latin within 4 years of university and if you fail you should be sent to a trade school with no possibility of parole.

>>22863973
Only with massive expansion and state subsidization or even state control of the trade school system, such that it become an equal or better option to university. That would leave university for those who really, truly had an interest in the life of the mind and all that, and then indeed would Latin be a reasonable requirement. The US, my country and probably the majority country here, seems comfortable enough letting its broken education system implode, so this will never happen.
I also suspect that the enduring sense of the eternal present in this country makes Latin an odd fit. But there will always be Americans in Paris too.

>>22857899
vulgate

>>22863525
>even all the way to Homer syncopated as τίπτε, it fundamentally strengthens the question, like "why ever..."
Could you explain a little more? I'm interested and a bit confused by the end.

>>22855396
aka the 3 character classic, which has lines more like
"if jade is not polished, it cannot become useful"
than what >>22852967 thinks

anyway I had my classical exam a week ago, honestly it wasn't that hard, we just had to translate a small passage from Zhuangzi, which I had actually read in my revision (which included reading all the parts of the Zhuangzi and Hanfeizi that I thought they might make the exam on lol)

for anyone interested this was the text

莊子與惠子遊於濠梁之上。
莊子曰:「儵魚出遊從容,是魚樂也。」
惠子曰:「子非魚,安知魚之樂?」莊子曰:「子非我,安知我不知魚之樂?」
惠子曰:「我非子,固不知子矣;子固非魚也,子之不知魚之樂全矣。」
莊子曰:「請循其本。子曰『汝安知魚樂』云者,既已知吾知之而問我,我知之濠上也。」

anyway I think I smashed it

>>22864869
kinda like in english how you can say "why something something?" in a very neutral way but also stronger "why the hell something something?" or specifically with an object "what exactly/precisely/the hell did you do?" likewise pote does something very similar, strengthens the question, I guess in the sense of adding originally the nuance of indefiniteness
τί λέγεις; what are you saying?
τί ποτε λέγεις; wtf are you saying?
in the apology
>ταῦτα γὰρ ἐγὼ ἀκούσας ἐνεθυμούμην οὑτωσί: ‘τί ποτε λέγει ὁ θεός, καὶ τί ποτε αἰνίττεται;...
>For when I heard this, I thought to myself: “What in the world does the god mean, and what riddle is he propounding?

ADESTE FIDELES!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_z_bE6b-WiA&ab_channel=FriarAlessandroVEVO

thoughts on peter pringle?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6adj7Xoo9Us

>>22863643
I routinely find mistakes. The declension tables are decent but the literal translations are piss poor. In some cases they are so bad I am convinced it is on purpose.

>>22863578
>Uxor mea filipina est
Your kids will hate Latin and your grandkids will speak Tagalog.

I've just recieved Bible in Church Slavonic for Christmass, any Slavonic anons who can recommend me other works that are valuable to read in this language. I'd prefer them to be original works and not translations.

Declensions are hard.

>>22866584
Non enim me invidebunt nepotes neptesque, qui certe plures erunt, sed uxorem meam lupam limulamque vaginam suam.

>>22866579
aren't they usually taken from LSJ? they look good to me.

>>22866866
for you

>>22866975
for now

>>22867168
but then I have to learn Greek declensions once I'm satisfied enough with my Latin to move on. Like Sisyphus, my burden is unending.

how do you get the aorist inflections of a stem or do you just have to remember the aorist like its a new word?

>>22867168
you're a big guy

>>22852407
What's the consensus on ancient Greek pre-classical η pronounciation? I'm Greek and it is currently 25% ε and 75% ι, but sometimes it is 90% ι (π.χ. Ηράκλειτος).
Was it 50-50 before?

>>22863489
It's not
>thanks!
>it's nothing
But rather
>thanks!
>don't mention
This is the correct use
"Να 'σαι καλά" is also closer to "it's nothing" but not quite there either
t. Greek

>>22867218
always /ε:/, which can be deduced from multiple things like borrowings or the regular Attic-Ionic ᾱ -> η shift as well as being differentiated from ει = /e:/ appearing regularly where you expect lengthening for whatever reason

Does any gaytuber try to pronounce Latin with pitch accent as described by ancient grammarians?

>>22867206
first person aorist is one of the 6 principal parts of a verb, it will tell you which kind of aorist it is(1st, second or third) and thence which endings to use to conjugate all of the aorist

>>22867270
Maybe I should have specified, I'm asking abt post 500 bce. Browsed the wiki and found a mention from horrocks(?) Both saying that the ancient pronounciation had began to drastically change from 6-5th century bce onward. I'm not entirely sure how long did it take from η to become mostly ι. I'm aware that in Archaic times it's predominantly ε but info after that is sparse and online forums always devolve into autism, and funnily enough non-Greeks talking about Greeks allegedly claiming that Mycenaean was pronounced like modern Greek. I haven't seen anyone saying this and I always kek. Literally not even hardcore ultranationalists

>>22867553
browsed wiki + an additional mention*

>>22867206
same way you can tell the tense difference between run and ran but dont think that "ran" is a brand new verb

>>22867329
not what im asking, im asking how can you tell which stem an aorist word is coming from since some of them are spelt quite differently
>>22867573
so you just have to remember the new word? since there is nothing that indicates that ran is related to run or is a completely different word if you're seeing it for the first time

“Latin is not a natural language. When written, Latin takes up approximately half the space of written Italian or written French (or written English, German or any natural European language). Since Latin appears to have come into existence in the first half of the first millennium BC, which was the time when alphabets were first spreading through the Mediterranean basin, it seems a reasonable working hypothesis to assume that Latin was originally a shorthand compiled by Italian speakers for the purposes of written (confidential? commercial?) communication. This would explain:

a) the very close concordance between Italian and Latin vocabulary;

b) the conciseness of Latin in, for instance, dispensing with separate prepositions, compound verb forms and other ‘natural’ language impedimenta;

c) the unusually formal rules governing Latin grammar and syntax;

d) the lack of irregular, non-standard usages;

e) the unusual adoption among Western European languages of a specifically vocative case (‘Dear Marcus, re. you letter of…’).
>https://www.unz.com/article/how-fake-is-roman-antiquity/#the-mysterious-origin-of-latin
Thoughts?

>>22867673
>since there is nothing that indicates that ran is related to run or is a completely different word if you're seeing it for the first time
the problem with the inpoot method with ancient languages is that they expect you can find the same amount of coverage of the word in comprehensible material that would allow you to connect the tenses automatically, but in ancient greek, you have to supply for the lack of said material through sweat, being labriosus. you have to commit them to memory if you want to be competent in the skill of understanding the system of communication, ancient greek

>>22867731
sounds like complete bullshit, latin was meant to be spoken orally not purely read and write since many people couldn't read.

>>22867951
the same could be said for any language

>>22867856
shut the fuck up fag, ancient greek is just a language like any other

>>22855229
>Romance languages sound flat and monotone since they're syllable timed
Retard who doesn't know any romance language.

>>22857815
>why does a poet use different words for the same thing
Gee I don't know why could it be?

>>22867731
>When written, Latin takes up approximately half the space of written Italian or written French

Does this person have no understanding of inflection?

If PIE were written down, it too would have been even more concise than Latin. Simplification of morphology introduces more prepositions and particles.

Such a moronic stance to take.

>>22867731
it's preposterous to suggest that Latin grammar is artificial or some sort of shorthand
firstly Latin grammar can easily be traced back to its PIE roots and through comparative analysis with other Indo-European languages that weren't written until much later it's clear that these grammatical structures aren't at all unnatural

>dispensing with separate prepositions, compound verb forms and other ‘natural’ language impedimenta;
many other languages have these "unnatural" features, including other Indo-European languages

>c) the unusually formal rules governing Latin grammar and syntax;
what does this even mean?? unusually formal? anyway the word formal isn't said a single other time in the article so I shall assume the writer pulled it out of his arse

>d) the lack of irregular, non-standard usages;
again, not elaborated on at all

I'm not one to instantly discredit an author just due to lack of background but this "M. J. Harper" guy clearly has zero standing and is writing baseless pop-sci to make book sales

tldr fuck off

>>22867553
ah well you wrote pre-classical
in the post classical era η specifically at least in the standard learned language took a while to iotacize even simply considering, since it's 25 December after all, how the word Jesus comes from the Latin Iesus itself from Koine Ἰησοῦς indicating that at least to Latin ears centuries after classical you still had an /e/ type sound, albeit I think the consensus is that it had closed to [e:]
pic related is the relevant passage from Allen's Vox Graeca indicating it's not until the middle ages that it got iotacized fully, I added in red the IPA symbols

>>22868961
>If [unknown language] were written down, it too would have been even more concise than Latin.
This seems like a bad example. Wouldn't a better one be attic greek? How does that compare?

Quippe ubi se dicit meas nolle duo uncias,
Quare illa illius saepe novem fruitur?

>>22867731
Russian state endorsed conspiracy theories aimed to undermine European cultural hegemony.

>>22869197
attic greek is more wordy than latin

>>22869319
a prime example of increased 'wordiness' due to a reduction in morphological distinction.

O cinaedi cinaedaeque,
Quam ob rem duo uncias meas non satis arbitratur mea puella?

Vero uxor mea filipina moescha est. Quam crudelis est illa, quae mihi limulam suam vaginam ne dat ne quidem monstrat!

>>22869350
duas

>>22869358
Salve me o optime anonyme. Quare illa non accipit duas meas uncias splendidas?

Heri vesperi comes uxoris meae filipinae me pedicavit atque irrumabit. Salvete me, o anonymoi! Quare subito et illum volo?

cerritust
medicamenta non sumpsit

>>22869405
Et per anum sumpsi!

O amici omnes, vero magnam inventionem feci! Non est lingua latina. Reverta coniuratio est iudaeorum!

>>22867731
To be honest the fact that Italians humanists would be capable of such feat would be absurdly impressive, and every cultural achievement of any other civilization in the world would pale in comparison. Not even "da joos" would be able to pull off something like that. Total Italian supremacy or something I guess.

just realized German mag < mögen used to express possibility/likelihood is semantically the same as intransitive φιλεῖ < φιλέω

O amici mei
Penis meus aegrotat

>>22869337
How does that make sense according to your hypothesis? They arose at a similar time.

>>22869312
Actually it's the Jesuits
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Hardouin
>>22869472
Well 15th-16th century Italy was the peak of human civilization

Lads I want to get into ancient langs, especially reading about Indo-Euro evolution and such, but I need a retard-primer for phonetics and grammar. Been reading the Cambridge Ancient Hist (Vol 4) and I have no idea what their talking about sometimes

>as you can see, the palatization of the labial velars diphthong plosive fricative blah blah blah

O amici
Uxor mea fera dixit se, si penem praecidero, mecum convenire pensitere. Quod faciam, o optimi amici?

>>22869472
>>22867731
It's completely asinine when you realize that sister Indo-European Italic branches existed in inscriptions in italy, where the main distinction was the shift of different sounds, but kept the same kind of grammar. How would you retroactively fake a language that just happened to have other ancient peoples using a similar thing but slightly different?

>>22869728
My knowledge of phonetics is incredibly piecemeal and it's a very good point that it would be good to actually read a primer just to make sure I actually know what I'm talking about.

>>22869759
I know nothing about Etruscan, but it seems silly to judge an entire language based on a few scattered inscriptions

I don't know any good phonetics and phonology primers since I learned that by taking a class in it. But I recommend everyone to read at least the introduction to Ferdinand de Saussure's Cours de linguistique générale. It should give you a good framework to think about language and language change.

>>22869769
>etruscan
You misread; it's not etruscan. Iguvini, Falisci, and Latini are all Indo-Euro languages while Etruscan is not. The first part of the top sentence is on the previous page.

>>22869781
I need to at least learn IPA. The wikipedia pages usually seem to bring more questions than answers

>>22869718
sorry, but period in time is not an indicator for the degree of inflection in a language.

>>22869846
Why did you use a hypothetical written PIE as the example then? I assumed you meant the inflection increases in complexity with the evolution of language

>>22869882
No, inflection tends to decrease as languages become more widespread, which happens to coincide with languages surviving for a long time.

Hence, Ancient Greek is more 'wordy' due to an increase in particles and prepositions to aid in distinguishing between functions which have been absorbed into fewer surviving cases compared to Latin. For instance, see how Ancient Greek has prepositions for 3 cases, while Latin has them for just 2.

>>22869903
greek particles are really their own subject and have little to do with the case system being more stripped down compared to latin. The prepositions are a good point, since latin can deal with movement even without them.

>>22869903
I'm confused; why then are modern languages wordier than Latin? Why would PIE be more concise than Latin?

>>22869903
>No, inflection tends to decrease as languages become more widespread
Source? Sounds like pseudoscience bullshit.

>>22869917
In PIE, and then in Latin, case endings did all the heavy lifting in terms of syntactical function. But, to grossly oversimplify, holding 8 (possibly 9 if the directive in Hittite is legit) distinct case forms in mind is more complex than learning 4 cases (plus vocative and locative for certain words) and making up the syntactic difference by using prepositions. This is called case syncretism. Basically, if you can get away with cutting down on case morphology by lumping functions into one case, then distinguishing them through the use of prepositions, you reduce 'redundancy' in the language. For instance, using prepositions with the accusative case to signify motion towards makes sense because the accusative already inherently communicates a verbal action being done towards something, and using a preposition clarifies that it's directive.

Just imagine if, say, you had to learn a locative form for every single noun in Latin. It would be totally redundant. The same is true for the other movement functions, and why Latin (and Greek) just decided to lump them into other case morphemes.

Then the same sort of process goes on in Romance languages. Why remember a genitive morpheme for a noun when you can use the Latin preposition "de", which already means deriving from, and use that instead?

>>22869976
Interesting hypothesis, but there are the slavic languages, which increased in inflection as they became widespread.

>>22869976
>holding 8 (possibly 9 if the directive in Hittite is legit) distinct case forms in mind is more complex than learning 4 cases
not for native speakers
>and making up the syntactic difference by using prepositions
why is a termination harder to remember for a native speaker than a preposition?
>and why Latin (and Greek) just decided to lump them into other case morphemes.
Don't know about Greek but it Latin cases began to merge due to phonological changes. This is maybe the most pop-sci post I've ever read on this thread.
>Then the same sort of process goes on in Romance languages.
Could you give me an example that is 'going on'?
>Why remember a genitive morpheme for a noun when you can use the Latin preposition
Because native speakers don't memorize declination tables.

>>22869976
One thing I've never understood is how PIE speakers had such a complicated language to BEGIN with, and then it simplified over time. I can understand complexity emerging and conversely I can understand things being simplified and assimilated over time, but what I don't understand is how tribal assholes tended toward extreme complexity rather than starting out basically simple and then reaching some kind of equilibrium over time.

I mean, I think Vico's theory of pre-literate, language is fundamentally plausible even if you are a materialist reductionist: primordial language was probably "ostensive" and "poetic," sticking close to analogies with the real world experienced by the primitives. How the hell do you get syntactical over-complexity from that? Either as a development of some initially simpler state, or as your INITIAL state? I don't get it.

Are there any philosophical anthropologists who dabble in linguistics and tackle this issue speculatively rather than handwaving it away as some materialist bullshit?

>>22870004
Native speakers simplify their languages all the time. Or have you not noticed the current trend in English of whose being regularised to who's? Or how we've entirely lost the use of lest in place of so that...not?

Redpill me on Ge'ez.
Worth learning? Does it have a substantial canon?

Is it worth learning Gothic as a side-project to Latin and Greek (once my Greek is beyond textbook level)?

I just think it looks neat, honestly.

>>22870030
>Native speakers simplify their languages all the time
They also "complexify" it all the time with processes like grammaticalization for example.

>>22870014
>to BEGIN with
PIE is not "the beginning", just the remotest stage linguistics are capable of reconstructing.

>>22870014
>One thing I've never understood is how PIE speakers had such a complicated language to BEGIN with
They were refugees from Atlantis who traveled east

>>22867731

>a) You mean to tell me that the dudes in Italy today speak something similar to the dudes in Italy 2000 years ago? Yeah, right, chud
>b) This language doesn't have the features of my own language, so it must not be a real language.
>c) You mean the language of which the study and teaching for 2000 years has literally created the field of linguistics has all these rules in it that have been accurately categorized and described?
>d) I genuinely haven't opened up a grammarbook on Latin

How is he not embarrassed by what he wrote?
The absolute state of modern "Catholics" (with a capital C)

>>22869759
you don't understand bro they predicted the development of modern linguistics then fabricated a bunch of inscriptions and then buried them everywhere trust me

>>22870014
>philosophical anthropologists
why would you want to read schizo ramblings with zero correspondence with reality

>>22870159
>they predicted the development of modern linguistics
What do you mean by this? Latin was in use throughout the middle ages

>>22870030
>whose being regularised to who's
purely an orthographical issue, nothing to do with the language in itself

>>22870193
I don't, that's why I said no "linguistics" (no computer tinkerer retards who enjoy drawing endless epicycles on epicycles on their fundamentally materialist reductionist theory that explains nothing and was already in principle completed 50 years ago). We need a return to classical morphological philology and a renewed interested in metaphysics and deep history. Another way of saying this is that we need scholars who aren't spiritless robots and utter pussies.

Is there anything like this but for any kind of Arabic (Quranic, MSA, Egyptian, whatever)?

I'm looking for a brainlet tier video "immersive" course.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y640-FIpxQs

>>22870338
She is so beautiful it pisses me off and I can't watch

>>22852407
Every fucking time i see greek I feel like my brain start to melt out confusion.
It's same for you like when you see тeкcт нa киppилицe. Hy тaм, блять, бyквы пoхoжиe, нo этo внeзaпнo дpyгиe бyквы и нихyя нe пoнятнo, нo yчить aлфaвит, чтoбы нaчaть пoнимaть - зaпaдлo.

>>22870326
>Another way of saying this is that we need scholars who aren't spiritless robots and utter pussies.
most scholars are already mere charlatans, why would you want even more of them

>>22870353
We are all very impressed that you can read both English and Russian. However I can read both, plus Greek, and I am certainly not the only one here who can. Get over it.

>>22870381
No you do not.
>yes I do I swears it
Show me his prepositional casings. If you cannot do it in ten minutes you better have an excuse.

>>22867951
>since many people couldn't read
What's the evidence for this? Pens and paper were household items ffs.

>>22870014
>tackle this issue speculatively
I'm part of a small community with zero interest in linguistics that has naturally come to develop a massive cacographic / errative lexical inventory which _also_ includes a kind of morphology where we prefix or suffix the words with various typos that have occurred in our conversations. Each of us knows or can very well guess the meaning of new inventions simply from the shared context of having been there. By my observations, this has the potential to grow arbitrarily complex due to small-network transmission unconstrained by having to teach outsiders.

Languages with larger communities get syntactically and morphologically simpler, the languages of small tribes are complex. This is not an original theory, I'm just convinced by it because I observed it in action firsthand.

>>22870405
And the origin of music is that we evolved to be attuned to rhythm because whenever our itinerant caveman ancestors marched to a new campsite they were attuned to adventitious noises in the brush just in case it might be a sabretooth tiger. Get behind me, Satan.

>>22870381
Yeah, yeah, fuck you. It still was about real feeling of dizziness and not to show off.

>>22870392
>What's the evidence for this?
this thread

>>22870411
wow are you a philosophical anthropologist? that sounds very morphological and deep history

>>22870443
I regret telling a "linguist" to get behind me. I know what you people get up to. Walk into the sea with your dissertation no one will ever read! Your code was slapdash and you didn't even write most of it!

how do i become a more clever philosophical anthropologist, a cunning linguist, if you will?

>>22870467
Start with Gehlen.

>>22870467
you put your lingua in the cunnus, duh

>>22870479
Quod est cunnus? Suum non monstrat mihi uxor mea moescha

Idk where to start with Latin literature.
Is there a suggested reading order for this?

>>22870865
are you asking for the easiest texts?

>>22870869
I guess I'm not really sure what I'm asking.

>>22870876
Have you looked at archive.org for classic readers and annotated editions like the Bristol series? Or looked at Dickinson College's website for their glossed, easy Latin texts?

>>22870392
The evidence is that books were written as something you would say out loud to people as if it were a story, rather than as novel or w/e. The middle/upper class were literate but poor people not so much of course

>>22870392
paper didn't exist anon. I mean they had papyrus from Egypt but wax tablets were more common for notes.

is reading the bible a good way to learn greek? since i can easily look up a translation to check my work. Going through reading greek can be frustrating because they don't provide any line by line translation if theres something minor i want to double check

>>22871309
Might be a good way to get introduced to some of the language's features and vocabulary. I spend a lot of time using Bible Hub and have picked up a lot of knowledge on the grammar and vocabulary over the years though I'm not someone who can string can string a single sentence together. Maybe if it wasn't much of an inflective language things might be different.

>>22871309
you could do it but reading a grammar will help a lot. Read as much as you can while you read the grammar so that you can understand things better.

Studium latinum meum neglexi quod hodie est nativitatis. Omnia anon gaudere, et multa dona eis spero.

>>22852955
Same here. I'm thinking whether latin or ancient greek would be better if I'm planning to start learning french as well in due time.

>>22852407
Anyone ever learn Old Irish? I'm fluent in modern Irish (bás leis an gcaighdeán) and have dabbled in Latin but I'm not sure if I want to go all in on Sengoidelc without a good understanding of at least one other classic IE language. Any advice?

Does anyone here have experience with Latin textbooks in other languages? I was thinking about giving a try to Frederico Lourenço Latim do Zero/Nova Gramática do Latim, but I'm not sure how they compare to the english textbooks I see recommended here

>>22872389
What's your mother tongue? I think it's always better to read grammar explanations written in your own language imo because those tend to be more specific to your linguistic background. For example, a romance speaker won't need the same kind of explanation to understand the preterite that an English speaker would, a German speaker may grasp the usage of cases intuitively a lot faster etc.

>>22872480
My native language is the same as those books, european portuguese. My only doubt is if the textbooks are as good as some others, even though the closer relation between languages could help in some aspects.
I've learned other languages from English, so for me it would just be a question of the more efficient route to learn Latin. The resource guides in this thread are useful but are pretty much just English based, it would be interesting if some resources in other languages are used, I'm sure Spanish/French/German/Italian for example must have a ton of good resources

>open Latin book
>critical edition
>introduction is in Latin
>open another Latin critical edition
>introduction is, again, in Latin
You faggots told me philologists didn't need or even know how to write in Latin, even after years of study. Why can't you stop lying?

>>22872608
LLPSI is equally good as a reader for native speakers of any Western language. Use that alongside your preferred grammar.

>>22872608
If the quality of those book is good, using them may end up being more efficient for you. I hope some other Anon will be able to give you a specific answer.
As for Italian, the manuals written by Alfonso Traina are held in high regard.
You have a couple dictionaries available online, too, this one
>https://dizionari.corriere.it/dizionario_latino/
seems pretty decent and include proper quotations, unlike
>dizionario-latino.com

>>22872623
who told you that?

>Puella mea me non amat. Vale, puella! Catullus obdurat: poeta puellam non amat, formam puellae non laudat, puellae rosas non dat, et puellam non basiat! Ira mea est magna! Obduro, mea puella---sed sine te non valeo.
We found him. The first incel.

>>22863643
Often shit (especially with the definitions) but they link to lsj which is useful

>>22863952
No. People would just grind it last minute and then instantly forget it once they no longer needed it.
It would only filter literal retards who can't do some rote memorization but most people would still get through.

>>22867731
>Fakes Lucretius, Tacitus and tons of Cicero as a non-native Latin speaker
based Italianx

>>22867731
>trying to disprove Caesar's existence
>ctrl f Plutarch
>0 results
Dropped

>>22872924
>Puella mea me non amat, amat virum Aethiopicum quia magnum habet phallum. Hitlerus recte dixit: culpa Iudaeorum!

>>22873279
That's called a reference my friend

>>22871309
The NT is barely even Greek, it's like reading the Hawaiian pidgin Bible to learn English. Start with Homer.

>>22857232
I'd rather recommend A New Introduction to ON, if you must use an English language resource.

>>22860219
Reading, or, if you, like me, like grammar, just memorize the word stems and verb classes. I find it pretty straight forward, and you'll feel the same with most word stems; the only thing changing things up in that regard is that, during the classical period, Old Icelandic started having gender-based declension alongside stem-based declension. It's a bit of a mess, but that's why normies seethe to this day about Scandinavian plurals.

>>22860240
>the premier dictionary for the language sucks (Zoega's)
Zoëga's is fully serviceable, and should not be discredited, but it's not my go-to, no.

>>22873392
>>22873392
>Puellae omnes me reiciunt, ita "invitus caelibatus", sed "incael" me voco. Ego alpha sim!

Is there a program which does the following
>I can open a text and read it
>I can highlight a sentence
>I can click on a word and I will be able to see the witkionary definition (or perhaps some other dictionary) and then I'll be able to save the words that I view for later

>>22873977
GoldenDict

>>22873464
homer isn't greek, its like reading Beowulf to learn english

>>22871309
eh, I'd say it's a good read when you want something relatively straightforward to read which is also of literary importance
but although it's easy to read if you know your Attic well, the opposite won't be as easy

NOVUM
>>22874387
>>22874387
>>22874387