/lit/ - Literature

Apologies- I forgot to include the link which the CSCP no longer includes in their new-fangled website.

http://www.cambridgescp.com/ws2_tlc/catena/catena.html

Apparently there are no Latin c/lit/s. Perhaps I would be better off on /b/?

>>3770125
/lit/ is a really slow board

>>3770147
What this guy said. Just give it some time and people will come.

On the game itself...
The game seems to have inconsistent rules for declination of verbs. It takes declined forms in some cases, and not in others. Pic related.

I spent 4 years studying Latin during high school, but have forgotten a lot since I haven't been using it.

>>3770153
>declination of verbs
That should be conjugation of verbs.

>>3770155
Sorry, I lost the post. Thanks for playing.

I'm been studying it since October and really love it.

I've been studying Greek and Latin for years. Latin is ok, but Greek is more pleasurable to me.

Fortuna bona tibi, frater.

>>3770158
I also enjoyed learning it. It's interesting studying a language with a different structure from yours. I think I learned more about English sentence structure from Latin classes than I did from the English classes.

It's also a lot faster to learn than most other languages, since the focus is on written work with little to no verbal, unlike modern day languages, which focus at least as much on teaching you to speak them. With Latin you can be assumed to have a dictionary within easy reach, and have plenty of time when translating, which reduces the amount of memorization you need to do.

>>3770167
What do you like better about greek?

From sophomore middle school to junior highschool so six years (highschool is three years long in my country). But I haven't practiced since, so I have become quite lame at it. Sweet memories of the time when I could do a decent translation of Ovid.

>>3770167
ego sum soror, sed ego tibi gratias ago. fortuna bona tibi.

>>3770170
I don't know really. Greek is more difficult, sure, but it just 'feels' like a nicer language. Perhaps due to its relative difficulty, I like it more.

Latin texts just seem more mechanical or rigid than Greek texts. I do love Latin, and think it's a great language and the best start to anyone's education, but one should always follow Latin with Greek, just to experience it.

The best English education begins with Latin. This has been known for centuries, and yet modern education has forgotten it - and look where the state of education is now...

>>3770179
Best thing about my secondary school is the Classics department.

>>3770196
You are lucky to have such a good school then. We were offered the option of it, but obviously not many chose it.

Reading, writing, arithmetic in English and Latin until 16. Then specialise. No exceptions. That would be a perfect education.

>>3770179
>The best English education begins with Latin
While I think a large number of the benefits could be achieved through learning another language, I agree. Latin being a precursor for a lot of English makes it great for understanding lots of stuff about it.
>This has been known for centuries, and yet modern education has forgotten it - and look where the state of education is now...
I'm not sure that can be blamed too much on dropping Latin from the curriculum. That seems to be more a symptom of the current push for applicable learning rather than learning for insight. English classes seemed to focus too much on writing essays as we needed a pass mark for higher education, while Latin was a interest class so could teach less to the exam. It made it much more interesting as well.

>>3770196
Every teacher in our Latin department was awesome.

>>3770201
>no algebra
>no geometry
>no experimental sciences
>no foreign languages
>no literature study
>until 16
Do you want to raise a generation of virpueri ?

>>3770206
Also
>no history

>>3770201

This school is great in most areas, now if only it was as good in the Mathematics and English departments...

I'm making the most of Classics while I can, my parents ship me off to Indi and subsequently Indian schools in July but I will continue to learn Latin through the CSCP's online tutoring service.
I spelt India wrong but am too lazy to change it now.

>>3770201
> Learning arithmetic at 16
That's not even retarded, that's full-tilt illiterate.

>>3770244
You do realise that 20% of all people are functionally illiterate and innumerate even after 16 years of education?

>>3770207
>>3770206
History and everything else is irrelevant until one can read and write properly.

>>3770249
Common sense, huzzah!

>mfw my brother learnt about bullshit 'PSCHE' at nursery before they learnt multiplication tables

>>3770249
But it shouldn't take you fucking 16 years to learn basic arithmetic and elementary writing and reading skills. Even in our shit western education system most people can read, write and do baby arithmetic by 12.

>>3770266
Judging by the standards of 'most people', they can barely do both. Ask anyone to divide two large numbers by long division, and they'd more than likely stare at you blankly. Or then convert a sentence from the active to passive voices.

Everyone should have a full grasp of English (preferably via the vehicle of Latin) before commencing on other learning; it'd make the job of teaching/learning, say, history that much easier for teacher and learner.

I'm a science teacher and I would say perhaps 50% of my time in lessons is taken up literacy and numeracy, or I have to take a tangent on how to 'use a calculator' or 'how to take a percentage' or 'how to form a basic sentence'.

I love science, and it would best serve the children – and the children would best serve science – by coming into science with a solid foundation in reading, writing, and 'rithmetic.

>>3770286
Well it depends on what you call "large numbers". I don't expect a 12-years old to be proficient at making calculations with numbers of the order of the billion (and by that, I mean number who are harder to remember and handle because they are long, not number who are simple but simply long like 10^10).

Judging from the people I know (and I know people from various background), though it's true that many have trouble building complex sentence or handling non-trivial arithmetical operations, they have (or had) definitely the potential to achieve what I'm describing by age 12. Academic standards may have dwindled over the years, and that's a reason students have trouble doing what should be considered easy. But that doesn't mean you should wait until 16 to discover algebra, geometry, or even history. I remember having history lessons when I was six, and while they were simplified for our understanding, most of the class still got something from it.
Expecting less from students that already don't do much won't make the system any better. I'm good with more Latin in class, but seriously, as another anon pointed, confining yourself to arithmetic reading and writing until 16 will not improve the state of education.

>>3770316
I agree.

As a (former) scientist and now teacher, I form my opinions on evidence; and although there is strictly no causative effect, the end of Latin and 'didactism' have coincided with the fall of Western education relative to the rise of everyone else.

Independent schools, who are free to form their own curricula, often keep Latin and Greek, sometimes teaching it to 3-4 year olds, and they traditionally have large focuses on proficiency in reading and writing well. They have enviable rates of success, and state schools should learn more from them.

I wholly agree that other subjects should be taught or 'tasted' before 16, but something like 80% of the curriculum should be reading, writing, and arithmetic. Teaching algebra or geometry to children who can't add up two numbers below 10 is useless (happens a lot).

I was met with blank stares just this week when I asked a class of supposedly bright 14 year olds: 'what percentage of 100 is 50'.

That is clearly unacceptable.

I've been studying Latin for two years. So, I guess I can join in?

>>3770286
>Ask anyone to divide two large numbers by long division
There's no reason to ever do long division. It's a mechanical operation best done by computers. Learning long division in 2013 is like learning to ride a horse; i.e., only ever useful in a 'zombie apocalypse' or 'stranded on a deserted island' scenario.

>>3770341
> knowing a useful technique is useless
You'll be saying Latin is useless next.

>>3770341
Understanding the mechanics of long division has helped in me in more daily life situations that I can remember. Maybe if you left the basement you would understand. Such things as MPG, breaking down costs on the grocery bill, etc.

>>3770206
>no experimental sciences
please tell me how creating a chemical reaction between 2 elements is any relevant in its usefulness in people's lives.

>>3770365
inb4 you strawman this and say 'herpdep without chemistry there would be no <insert any product used in household for hygiene>.'

Gosh, I come back from shopping and this thread hasn't 404'd yet.

On peoples' anecdotes of secondary school pupils being inadequately versed in the 3 Rs, I have to say the west doesn't do too well in that regard with the exception of private schools. That is the main reason for my cross-country shipment.

>>3770115

that game is pants on head retarded. wont acept "Sator", "Operas" "tenet" "accipio" as words. fuck that with a knife.