/clg/ - Classical Languages General

[Anonymous No.19587057]

Previous thread: >>19534926

All dead languages with a literary tradition are welcome.

[Anonymous No.19587090]

Am I fucking myself over if I overlook all the long/short vowel autism in Latin or is it not that important?

[Anonymous No.19587099]

>>19587090
it's over

[Anonymous No.19587110]

>>19587057
weni weeeene weece

[Anonymous No.19587144]

>>19587090
I don't get people who say not to bother with them. I've never heard anyone say not to learn how English words are pronounced, even though English pronunciation is just as autistic as Latin vowel lengths.

[Anonymous No.19587162]

>>19587144
but wouldn't it be only relevant in poetry? I assume most people won't be speaking much Latin.

[Anonymous No.19587170]

>>19587090
>>19587144
I want to add, that doesn't mean you have to learn all of them by heart. Just as someone who learns English primarily by reading, there will always be words that you'll mess up. The important thing is not to be thrown off when encountering the correct pronunciation/vowel quantity, otherwise reading Latin poetry will be a chore.

[Anonymous No.19587189]

>>19587144
But I mean, what's the expectation. Should I be able to know which vowels are short or long without diacritic signs? The book I'm reading only gives these rules

>short before vowel
>short before -nt, -nd. final -m, -t
>long before -nf, -ns

Or do most texts provide diacritics?

>>19587170
Okay yeah I guess that makes sense, it's probably something that mainly comes from osmosis. Most of the accentuation comes naturally to me since my native language is Spanish

[Anonymous No.19587292]

>>19587189
There are some rules on where long or short vowels can appear, but unfortunately you won't be able to infer all vowel lengths on the fly without knowing them by heart. Stress can be inferred from the vowel length, at least.

There are cases where there's even a semantic difference like legit vs lēgit. Having a text without macrons is like, in English, seeing "I read a book". Without context, you have no idea whether that sentence is in the past or in the present.

> Or do most texts provide diacritics?
Beginner texts and poetry typically do.

> Most of the accentuation comes naturally to me since my native language is Spanish.
I don't know Spanish, but at least in Italian there's a similar problem with the accentuation, since native speakers learn the correct accentuation by heart, so (as opposed to today's Latin) it's never indicated in written texts.

So, as you said, best to learn it by osmosis. If you learn a new word, try to remember its pronunciation. Then, even if you get a vowel length wrong later on, it'll be something that doesn't sound too bad, and not something really grating like putting the stress in the wrong syllable.

[Anonymous No.19587319]

I have yet to see a good explanation of long and short vowels. I can't tell the difference. I understand it is important for poetry, but I don't understand poetry anyway.

[Anonymous No.19587338]

>>19587319
What do you need explained exactly? Did you try the Scorpio Martianus recordings? Long vowels are simply roughly twice as long as short ones.

(There's some disagreement whether the quality of the vowel also changes, but that matters less than the quantity.)

[Anonymous No.19587358]

>>19587338
>long vowels are long
I know this logically, but I can't hear it. They all just sound like vowels to me.

[Anonymous No.19587372]

>>19587358
https://voca.ro/1o4jE8wyoasu

[Anonymous No.19587383]

>>19587358
In surviving romance languages, vowel length is tied to syllable stress, as far as I know. Latin is different in that regard, so maybe that's why it takes a while to recognize that there's a difference between these two things.

[Anonymous No.19587617]

>>19587372
don't get it

[Anonymous No.19587650]

>>19587090
It's better to learn them, but, honestly, you can kind of ignore them. At first I only bother learned the crucial ones, like the ē for second conjugation. It wasn't until my 3rd year of Latin that I actually gave a shit about macra in general

[Anonymous No.19587670]

Gotten to the point were I can easily read most latin texts. Spent last 3 hours in my university library sight reading a bunch of shit. Feels good man

[Anonymous No.19587675]

>>19587670
what do you do to retain vocab (to the extent you do)? do you do flashcards? do you reread texts? if so, how often?

[Anonymous No.19587690]

>>19587670
how long did it take to get to that level?

[Anonymous No.19587731]

>>19587675
this.

I can't understand a lot of stuff but retaining vocab is hard.

[Anonymous No.19587748]

>>19587675
It depends on where you are. I used flashcards to get a working base of vocabulary. When I first started reading real texts, I tried to memorize every word I didn't know with flashcards too, but eventually decided on rereading a text every now and again in between new texts (no set time frame, but I'd say it was about 1-1 between rereading and reading new texts). If there is a particular word that I notice I keep seeing but never remember the meaning, I make a flashcard for it.
Another important component is learning who latin words are made from other latin words, like prefixes on verbs. If you have a latin grammarbook, there should be some sections on that stuff. It helps when you see currere, obcurrere, succurrere, accurrere, etc.

[Anonymous No.19587754]

>>19587670
Just a shame there's nothing in Latin worth reading.

[Anonymous No.19587756]

>>19587731
What's your native language? If it's English, look into the etymology of English words, there's often a way to tie a Latin word to an English one, even if it's not obvious at first.

[Anonymous No.19587804]

>>19587748
>it depends on where you are
I'm not sure how I would describe my Latin level. I've taken all the way up to 4th semester Latin formally, and on my own have gone through LLPSI Familia Romana and some of the supplements (e.g., Fabulae Syrae). I'm currently going through Epitome Historiae Sacrae (the Hackett Publishing version). I think I have a solid base, but sometimes when I go back to LL and the other supplements I find that there are a decent number of words I don't remember. there are a lot of words that are taught each chapter, and I haven't been as consistent in my reading as I could be lately, so maybe those are my main problems (to the extent that they're problems).
>if there is a particular word that I notice I keep seeing but never remember the meaning, I make a flashcard for it.
I should really start doing this. I don't plan to go too crazy, maybe 5-10 flashcards a day, but I think that would help a lot.
>another important component is learning which Latin words are made from other Latin words
I do try to recognize suffixes and roots when I see new words with familiar roots or new roots entirely, but I could probably actively study the more common roots and affixes to improve my recognition even more.

[Anonymous No.19587806]

>>19587690
Well, i took latin in high school for 3 years, and 3 years in college, currently on my 4th, but I never achieved much progress (i plateued in my 1st year of college) until I did the LLPSI series desu, which I started near the end of the 3rd year of college. It took about 3 months after starting LLPSI to get to where I am now. Along with LLPSI, if I was reading some poetry for class, particularly the Aeneid or Horace, I would go to the library and check out the Latin commentaries, such as Servius for the Aeneid or the Pseudarcon for Horace. It 1) double the amount I read 2) gave me some easier reading (because the commentaries are easier) 3) made me more infromed about what I was reading. It was pretty chad to be able to mention something I read in one of these Latin commentaries in class, when everyone one else is relaying on an English commentary. You just have to keep in mind that the Latin commentaries may not be in line with current scholarship.
After finishing Familia Romana, i was able to just about sight read Caesar so I read all of his commentaries. Then moved on to Cicero, with some medieval stuff interspersed.

The main take away is that i read A LOT. Not only was I reading Horace/Vergil/Seneca or someone else for class (though it was barely reading; we were only assigned like 50 lines of poetry or 3-4 paragraphs of prose per class), but I was also reading Latin commentaries on these works, while at the same time reading LLPSI and then Caesar and then Cicero.

[Anonymous No.19587814]

>>19587806
thanks for the info anon

[Anonymous No.19587819]

>>19587804
I know this is kind of sacrilege for LLPSI, but the vocabulary you find in LLPSI is exactly what you should make flashcards if you can't remember desu. They are specifically chosen because they are so common. Well, perhaps not so much the body parts chapter.

[Anonymous No.19587832]

>>19587819
>>19587806
>>19587804
>>19587756
LLPSI teaches vocab too fast. Way too many words per chapter. Instead of 1,800 words in 34 chapters, it should have been 1,500 words in 40 chapters.

[Anonymous No.19587843]

>>19587144
what about learning ecclesiastical pronunciation instead

[Anonymous No.19587856]

>>19587832
That's true. That's why I think LLPSI is best for someone who has already been studying Latin.

Unrelated, but has anyone else found LLPSI incredibly boring? It was a slog to get through because I wasn't really interested in the story. The only interesting chapters to me were the military ones and the one about the pirates

[Anonymous No.19587867]

>>19587819
>but the vocabulary you find in LLPSI is exactly why you should make flashcards if you can't remember
yeah I should probably just go over the Familia Romana flashcards again
>>19587832
>LLPSI teaches vocab too fast
I like LL on the whole, but I agree. I haven't gone through all of Roma Aeterna yet, but there's a *huge* jump up in the vocab taught each chapter (some showing 100+ new words). I guess it depends on how long you plan on studying each chapter, and the specific chapter you're studying, but most people go through each chapter within a week, which I think isn't enough to retain all those words. realistically you're going to forget some number of words, and the amount of input LL offers helps with retaining them, but I do think adding a few more chapters and spreading the vocab across them would make things a little better. (I don't think there's a perfect way of going about it, though)

[Anonymous No.19587878]

>>19587856
I wasn't indifferent to the main story, but I really liked the mythology chapters

[Anonymous No.19587880]

>>19587843
Doesn't help you with classical poetry.

And ecclesiastical pronunciation isn't a silver bullet either. Even if you disregard vowel lengths, you still need to know which syllable to stress. If you know a romance language, you can guess, but otherwise you'll have to learn it either way.

>>19587832
I like LLPSI, but this is true. At least there's supplementary material that help in that regard, because it hardly introduces new words.

[Anonymous No.19587882]

>>19587878
I mean I was indifferent to it

[Anonymous No.19587908]

>>19587878
Did you read Fabulae Syrae? It's a spin-off designed to be read alongside Familia Romana, and it only contains Greco-Roman myths.

[Anonymous No.19587919]

>>19585944
>>19586080
Any recommendation for a book that teaches Biblical Hebrew? I'm aware of Aleph with Beth, but I think I need something more explicit. Most Hebrew stuff seems to be geared towards modern, or teaching a weird mix.

[Anonymous No.19587921]

>>19587908
yeah I've gone through it once already. easily my favorite supplement. I plan on reading it again soon, maybe after I'm done with Epitome Historiae Sacrae

[Anonymous No.19588068]

latinbros always hijack these threads. where are my fellow greekchads?

[Anonymous No.19588108]

>>19588068
I think Greek is way cooler than Latin, but I'm learning Latin first because it's basically a requirement

[Anonymous No.19588138]

>>19587856
I actually find the chapters without dialogue the easiest to reread. Like I can read Pastor et Oves a million times, but if I have to read "Marcus Iuliam pulsat" one more time I'm going to throw this book out the window.

[Anonymous No.19588153]

>>19587919
I bet if you leave a comment under their videos they will gladly point you to the best resources.

[Anonymous No.19588168]

>>19588108
This.

Latin's vocab is so small that these words have too many uses and meanings. Also Latin syntax is fucking retarded. And NO I don't mean the fact that the verb is at the end. I mean that the word order is inconsistent. I can deal with different and new word order as long as it is consistent. But Latin authors try to be clever and "suspenseful" with everything in between the subject and verb and it's fucking bullshit.

[Anonymous No.19588170]

>>19588108
>it's basically a requirement
nah, i was never that good at languages but decided to have a go at greek because i had some time in my hands and ended up falling in love with it. it is definitely possible to acquire this language from scratch, but it requires a lot of patience and commitment, though i agree the smart mans choice to begin with latin and sometimes i regret not starting with it myself.

[Anonymous No.19588203]

>*blocks your path to latin fluency*

[Anonymous No.19588444]

>>19588068
I'm going to start reading through Anabasis soon. What should I read after/along with that? I was thinking Lysias because I enjoyed some of his translated speeches. Are there other beginner friendly text I should read?

[Anonymous No.19588732]

>>19587090
You should pay attention to it. It's pretty much like the difference between 'bit' and 'beat' in English, or 'bought' (provided you don't say it the same as 'bot') and 'boat'. Imagine trying to speak English without understanding the difference between those words.

[Anonymous No.19588751]

>>19588203
haven't tried to get into Tacitus: what's the problem with him? is it his word order? his vernacular?

[Anonymous No.19588754]

>>19587319
The long vowels were also realized differently than the short vowels. For instance, short i sounded more like the vowel in English 'bit' whereas long i sounded more like the vowel in English 'beat', at least by a certain point though we're not entirely sure when. (And the vowel in 'beat' is also usually realized longer in English.) If you have any experience with Japanese (since this is 4chan) it has vowel length too, though they don't vary noticeably in quality unlike those in Latin.

[Anonymous No.19588839]

>>19587057
Spanish is literally just vulgar Latin without declensions, it's that simple: Amo amas ama amamos amais aman

[Anonymous No.19588856]

>>19588751
Apparently he is the hardest to read because his syntax is fucking maddening for literally no reason at all. It's not even poetry it's just history.

[Anonymous No.19588867]

>>19588839
Spanish is Arab-Gothic Latin
Italian is Lombard-Gothic Latin
French is Gaulish-Frankish Latin
Portuguese is Suebi-Gothic Latin
Romanian is Daco-Slavic Latin

[Anonymous No.19588873]

>>19588867
don't know French, and I don't know the history of its development, but why the hell is the spelling so fucked compared to other Latin daughter languages?

[Anonymous No.19588879]

>>19588867
That's an absolute myth: Arab and Gothic contributions are minimal. It's the least changed of a pre-Frankish-era romance continuum that extended from Callais to Cartagena.

[Anonymous No.19588892]

>>19588873
French is based on the Parisian standard, a highly artificial post-medieval construct that transformed something that sounded more like Catalan or even Spanish into a permanent singsong elite-defined poetic dialect.

[Anonymous No.19588895]

>>19588879
After Latin, the next biggest influence on the western Romance languages (not counting modern English load words), is Gothic. That's not up for debate. Italian by the Ostrogoths, Spanish by the Visigoths.

You can argue about Arabic, but I'm just stating what gives each language it's different flare in a simplified way. But I mean even shit like "hola" has nothing to do with Latin that's 100% Arabic.

[Anonymous No.19588902]

Does anyone know of a book about proto Uralic?

[Anonymous No.19588905]

>>19588895
'Hola' is not Arabic
>Probably from French holà (“hey! stop!”).[1] This is related to greetings in Germanic cognates such as Dutch hola, Old High German holā, emphatic imperative of Old High German holōn (“to fetch, used especially in hailing a ferryman”)[2][3]

[Anonymous No.19588912]

>>19588895
Clearly you don't know Spanish, it's literally just Latin with the declensional axis removed.

[Anonymous No.19588920]

>>19588905
I must have misread that somewhere else, but I knew it wasn't Latin. Anyways give this a read maybe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_language_influence_on_the_Spanish_language
>>19588912
I never said anything about grammar wtf are you on about mate. No shit the declensions are gone and the conjugations look similar. I'm talking about the regional differences in vocabulary and the foreign influences on how the language sounds you dipshit. You think I'm saing Spanish has Gothic grammar? What are you retarded?

[Anonymous No.19588931]

>>19588873
Because the French standardized their orthography centuries ago, and the language kept evolving. Dzongka, the principle language of Bhutan, is in a similar position: it standardized its orthography in the 6th century and has not changed it since. This isn't actually a problem, it works just fine, despite what some may think from from familiarity with English. English's problem is having words that obey multiple orthographies.

[Anonymous No.19588935]

>>19588902
Learn an Uralic language and watch Unna ja Nuuk I guess

[Anonymous No.19588940]

>>19588912
No, it isn't.

[Anonymous No.19588951]

>>19588920
Lots of Arabic words in English as well. Does that make English 'Arab-Germanic'?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_words_of_Arabic_origin

[Anonymous No.19588959]

'ate the bald LLPSI fag
simple as

[Anonymous No.19588970]

>>19588951
Are you actually trying to compare Arabic loan words in English(of which I can maybe name 3) to seven centuries of Muslim influence on the Spanish language?

Notice the difference between the link you posted and mine. Read the titles. No really, read them.

Yours
>words_of_Arabic_origin
Mine
>influence_on_the_Spanish_language

[Anonymous No.19588981]

>>19588920
So basically you said nothing then, what are you twelve?

[Anonymous No.19588993]

>>19588970
>Are you actually trying to compare Arabic loan words in English(of which I can maybe name 3) to seven centuries of Muslim influence on the Spanish language?
You can only name three? Seriously? Read the article. They're common English words used every day but you don't know they're Arabic. Coffee, alcohol, algebra, check, elixir, etc.

Also, "The influence results mainly from the large number of Arabic loanwords and derivations in Spanish, plus a few other less obvious effects." The influence basically boils down to loanwords, pretty much just like English. Also most of the Spanish words of Arabic origin are obscure, rare, or archaic. I mean "albudeca" means a "bad watermelon", no one says shit like this kek but words like hasta, alcohol, etc are definitely more common.

[Anonymous No.19588994]

>>19588931
He means more than that, he means the actual language itself: phonology, because otherwise it's just vulgar Latin in much the same way Spanish is; ditto Portuguese, once you account for its hyper-syncopated morphology/phonology.

[Anonymous No.19588998]

>>19588981
If you think the only way that one language can influence another is by radically changing the grammar, then there is really nothing else to be said in this conversation. I was listing languages that influenced each Romance language. Sorry this somehow doesn't compute.

[Anonymous No.19589000]

>>19587057
Romance languages that are closest to Latin:
1. Sardinian
2. Italian
3. Spanish
4. Romanian
5. Occitan
6. Portuguese
7. French

[Anonymous No.19589001]

>>19588951
Absolute nonsense to call it Arabic influenced, it's hardly Arabic speckled: that was Mozarab, not Castilian.

[Anonymous No.19589010]

>>19589000
what determines the degree of separation? because last i checked italian didnt have any cases or latin-tier word order

[Anonymous No.19589013]

>>19588959
the guy seems a little full of himself. a year or so ago I watched a video of him talking about being able to speak "proper" Latin in order to "truly" understand it. I disagreed with what he was saying, but I could care less about that. the really notable thing was the way in which he spoke about it (and the way he speaks in general about language) - it just felt so pretentious.

[Anonymous No.19589021]

>>19589010
Well, for starters, vocabulary. Spanish has a lot of Arabic and Germanic influence.

Spanish has actually gone through several "purification" attempts, trying to replace Arabic and Germanic rooted words with Latin ones. In the most extreme of cases, you end up with a Germanic based word, an Arabic based word, a Latin based word, and another Latin based word, which all mean the same thing and are used across the Hispanosphere.

[Anonymous No.19589024]

>>19589010
The study was about phonology.

[Anonymous No.19589028]

>>19589021
I think the Arabic and Germanic influence is overstated. It's just some vocabulary.

[Anonymous No.19589035]

>>19588970
Do you understand most of the population under Arab occupation during all those centuries spoke Mozarab, which became extinct. Do you understand that the average Spanish uses zero Arab words during their day, do you understand that the overwhelming majority of Spanish words have cognates in French and that essentially Spanish is French and French Spanish apart from the radical lexical morphology of French, which leaves a fossilized spelling that makes more sense to a Spaniard than to your typical run of the mill French speaker saddled with the radical non-phoneticness of it?

[Anonymous No.19589048]

>>19589021
You have no clue dude, you should be embarrassed for talking about a language you know nothing about, let alone speak. Is this just trolling?

[Anonymous No.19589057]

>>19589028
The same could be said of conjugation and declension. The Romans themselves seemed to want to drop most of the complex case system and just do something like what English pronouns do, with a nominative, oblique, and loose genitive.

[Anonymous No.19589068]

>>19589035
>Do you understand that the average Spanish uses zero Arab words during their day
Hola.

[Anonymous No.19589081]

>>19589068
>>19588905

[Anonymous No.19589251]

>Deinde dīmīsit eōs, praeter Simeōnem, quem retinuit obsidem.
this is from Epitome Historiae Sacrae. I understand that 'obsidem' is describing Simeon and the way in which he was kept: it's saying that the subject, Joseph, kept him *as a hostage*. but what would you call this construction? is it just an instance of apposition, or something else?

[Anonymous No.19589370]

>>19588912
I agree Spanish has quite a lot in common with Latin, but that's still an exaggeration.

[Anonymous No.19589379]

>>19588970
>Arabic loan words in English(of which I can maybe name 3)
http://zompist.com/arabic.html

[Anonymous No.19589423]

>>19589251
I myself have been trying to figure out what this is called in English. We have a term for it in Swedish, which is "predikativt attribut", but I haven't found the English term for it, despite doing a lot of searching.

[Anonymous No.19589447]

>>19589370
But it demonstrably is: ego pater tuum sum
Yo padre tuyo onions.
Amo amas ama Amamos amais aman

It's that simple, that's Spanish, etc, etc.

[Anonymous No.19589449]

>>19589251
I'm fairly sure that's the "instrumental" ablative if that's what you're asking. English obviously does not have an instrumental case of any kind. If I'm wrong about this my bad.

[Anonymous No.19589454]

>>19589370
But it demonstrably is: ego pater tuum sum
Yo padre tuyo onions.
Amo amas ama Amamos amais aman

It's that simple, that's Spanish, etc.

[Anonymous No.19589458]

>>19589370
But it demonstrably is: ego pater tuum sum
Yo padre tuyo soi.
Amo amas ama Amamos amais aman

It's that simple, that's Spanish, etc

[Anonymous No.19589460]

>>19589449
not a single right there my friend

[Anonymous No.19589473]

>>19589449
I appreciate the help, but I think >>19589460 is right. 'obsidem' is the accusative plural of 'obses'

[Anonymous No.19589478]

>>19589460
Not sure what you're saying. Is it not the ablative?

[Anonymous No.19589479]

>>19589473
accusative singular I mean (fuck)

[Anonymous No.19589487]

>>19589458
how do you say 'fuck me in the ass' in Latin and Spanish, respectively?

[Anonymous No.19589488]

>>19589473
Well then I'm a retard sorry. I dont really understand the grammar of the sentence in that case

[Anonymous No.19589500]

>>19589447
You can construct similar cherrypicked phrases in any two related languages. There are still some typological differences, like usage of the subordinator 'que' instead of indirect infinitives (or whatever it's called- 'dices que voy' vs. 'dicas me ire').

[Anonymous No.19589501]

>>19589487
Pedicar in culo. From the Greek παιδος, u homo!

[Anonymous No.19589511]

>>19589251
probably 'object complement'
which is what it is really, noun describing predicatively what the object is like

[Anonymous No.19589519]

>>19589423
Attribut appears to refer to modifiers.

[Anonymous No.19589520]

>>19589478
no ablative can end in -m in the first place

[Anonymous No.19589528]

>>19589501
I thought 'pedicare in culo' would be redundant because 'pedicare' already implies anal sex. That is, it would be like saying 'to sodomize someone in the ass' in English.

[Anonymous No.19589536]

>>19589528
Technically no, as to sodomize can also include the mouth.

[Anonymous No.19589558]

>>19589488
>Deinde dīmīsit eōs, praeter Simeōnem, quem retinuit obsidem.
"He then dismissed them, besides Simeon, whom he retained as a hostage." The meaning of obsidem here is not just "(a) hostage" but "as a hostage". Cf. "Consul in Hispania pugnabat." We could interpret 'consul' as a regular noun, which would give the translation "The consul fought in Hispania." But more often than not the correct interpretation would be "He fought in Hispania as a Consul." I.e we have to translate the noun adverbially, which is the case here

[Anonymous No.19589567]

>>19589558
>as a hostage
That's why I thought it was ablative because I think you can use it to mean that.

[Anonymous No.19589572]

>>19589423
>we have a term for it in Swedish, which is "predikativt attribut"
as soon as I saw >>19589511's post, I looked in the back of my "Essential Latin Grammar" for 'object' and found a section talking about to two accusatives. here is part of what it says:

>The Predicate Accusative may be an Adjective as well as a Noun; as -
>hominēs caecōs reddit cupiditās (covetousness renders men blind)
>Apollō Sōcratem sapientissimum jūdicāvit (Apollo adjuges Socrates the wisest man)

so, an equivalent phrase *does* exist in English (though I don't know how common it is), even if it may only be used for non-English languages. interesting.

[Anonymous No.19589586]

>>19589558
This exact use of the noun can be found in English too in some cases. E.g. "He died a hero." And I suppose to some extent also in the sentence that anon posted. "kept him hostage" (I'm ESL though so correct me if I'm wrong)

[Anonymous No.19589598]

>>19589586
>though

[Anonymous No.19589616]

>>19589572
In Swedish this would be called 'objektiv predikatsfyllnad'. I guess English grammarians simply don't make this distinction?

[Anonymous No.19589618]

>>19589598
Imagine being Mexican.

[Anonymous No.19589623]

>>19589572
hominēs caecōs reddit cupiditās

hombres ciegos rinde cupididad

[Anonymous No.19589628]

>>19589616
>English grammarians
No such thing. English is a retarded rollercoaster.

[Anonymous No.19589675]

>>19589616
You mean an object complement? Could be that the English terminology leans toward more simplification than Swedish ones.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_complement

[Anonymous No.19589692]

>>19589623
mentulam meam fella pinguem

[Anonymous No.19589763]

>>19589692
Suck your own penguin!

[Anonymous No.19589847]

>>19589536
I mean, historically maybe, but I rarely hear people use it in that sense anymore.
>>19589623
I've never heard a sentence structured like that in Spanish, I confess.

[Anonymous No.19589858]

>>19589847
It's an imitation of Renaissance-style hyper-classicizing Spanish.

[Anonymous No.19590251]

I want to respond to this question from the other thread.
>>19587919
>Any recommendation for a book that teaches Biblical Hebrew? I'm aware of Aleph with Beth, but I think I need something more explicit. Most Hebrew stuff seems to be geared towards modern, or teaching a weird mix.
But I don't have a good answer. Books are the way to go for everything except learning the letters, in my experience. That's if you can't find yourself a good teacher. I took Hebrew and Aramaic at university. First we started with the friendly but somewhat incorrect book by Cook and Holmstead. I was told they argued for Hebrew being SVO, which is bullshit, for theological reasons. Towards the end of the semester, we made the switch to Weingreen. I'm quite sure the Weingreen is on Internet Archive and Cook is on Z-Library--you might be able to find Weingreen there too. From what I was told, Weingreen is the standard for learning BH. However, Cook makes things pretty simple, especially in the beginning. I would suggest learning the basics with Cook and then filling any holes in your BH with Weingreen. There are many resources for learning BH and BA. For the moment, I'd recommend 2-Letter Lookup and STEP (a free Bible site with different language options that is incredibly helpful)

[Anonymous No.19590259]

>>19590251
>Books are the way to go for everything except learning the letters, in my experience.
Why would you not learn the letters from a book? A good book would use IPA.
>I was told they argued for Hebrew being SVO, which is bullshit, for theological reasons.
I'd be curious what their theological reasons were lol

[Anonymous No.19590309]

>>19590259
I suggest not learning letters from a book because it can be difficult to learn how to write them and recognize them without an organic, talked through explanation. "This is Aleph. It makes no sound. It is called a guttural. See, in cursive, you make it like this: a "c" and then a line." I would have Syriac down (very experienced with Aramaic) by now if I spent more time or had someone to walk me through the letters. All I need is to learn the script, from what I have been told. Learning a new alphabet or a foreign script is doable from a book alone, but I think a teacher or a video would help out a lot.

I was told the theological reasons were due to wanting to make Hebrew closer to English, thereby making it more similar to the KJV. I was told they were conservative, KJV-only guys. If you're not aware, there are some people who think the KJV was divinely inspired, making it as good as the real thing, despite obvious flaws, and is the only acceptable translation in English. IIRC, Cook or Holmstedt might have gotten in trouble with a student or at a conference.

[Anonymous No.19590926]

Hi guys, I'd like to ask your opinion. I studied Latin and Greek for five years in high school, unfortunately without paying too much attention or exercising much (especially in Greek). We focused especially on translating from L/G to Italian, instead of just reading and understanding like with modern languages. Now about four/five years have passed, during which I have not studied or read anything in Latin or Greek, and I would like to start again at least with Latin. What do you suggest, should I try to read something like Caesar straight away? Or maybe start again from LLPSI? I think I still remember most of the syntax, and with a little study I could easily refresh declensions and conjugations, but maybe it is not useful to dig straight away in a "real" classic text. As far as Greek is concerned, the situation is far worse, I feel I don't remember anything so I'll delay it one or two years (if I still have the will to study it), after I have got better at Latin. Thanks anons.

[Anonymous No.19590970]

>>19590926
I'd advise you to go with the extensive reading approach (reading a large volume of easy texts) via LLPSI first to get rid of the cobwebs. After that, you should review grammar by an active approach, i.e. don't memorize the rules alone but compose sentences or short stories that use that specific grammar over and over again. This active approach will speed up all the passive gains from reading. Only translate if you find it fun.
After that, continue doing more extensive reading but also start with a small amount of intensive reading (reading difficult texts that will constantly have you looking up words and puzzling out advanced Grammer structures etc).
Some second language acquisition scholar said that reading 10k sentences gives the brain enough examples to understand simple texts, 100k to read literature comfortably, and 1m for mastery.
LLPSI pars prima gives 10k sentences.

[Anonymous No.19591059]

>>19588959
>>19589013
he also tries to name everything after himself.

[Anonymous No.19591062]

>>19589251
Its called the predicate accusative

[Anonymous No.19591105]

>>19590970
I see, thank you very much. The problem is now finding the time to do this, but I'll try!

[Anonymous No.19591442]

Some good resources to learn ancient Greek Attic pronunciation, in particular pitch accent?

[Anonymous No.19591467]

>>19591105
> The problem is now finding the time to do this, but I'll try!
You'll have an enormous head start by having had a few years of Latin before (even though you think you don't remember anything) and being an Italian speaker. You could probably do LLPSI in a month or two.

[Anonymous No.19591534]

>>19590251
I have since found out that Aleph and Beth have their own Grammar guide at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YOqzlPQasM8BSLMSKVKvdV-1NUZMnAIg5Mic2C20a98

I think I'll follow that and look into Weingreen later, or into a straight grammar reference like Genesius (which is in German, however).

> For the moment, I'd recommend 2-Letter Lookup and STEP (a free Bible site with different language options that is incredibly helpful)
Thanks, this looks very nice indeed.

[Anonymous No.19591564]

>>19591442
Keep watching and re-watching that musical Iliad recitation

[Anonymous No.19591627]

>>19591564
I love that one so much. I would give $100 right now to a project for the completion of the story.

[Anonymous No.19591639]

>>19591627
Set up a crowdfund and I'd put money into it

[Anonymous No.19591661]

>>19591639
That doesn't sound like a good way to ensure a quality product. I'm very wary of these things after Star Citizen

[Anonymous No.19592221]

Here's how it be, anons. I just finished Latin 2 after not taking it for a year with a 99.5%, and I just finished Greek 3 with a 79.2% If I got 5 points more on the final or wasn't marked down for a few absences, I would have a B in Greek, so I'm not feeling too good. I'm not quite pissed or disappointed. I'm tired, and I want to improve. I learned Latin with Wheelock and Greek with Athenaze. I hear everyone on here raving about the LLPSI. I might work on that over this holiday, but what I really want is something to help me with my Greek. Any recs?

[Anonymous No.19592254]

>>19588138
>Pastor et Oves
loved that chapter. i was genuinely worried for the black sheep as it roamed through the forest.

[Anonymous No.19592294]

>>19591467
Thanks for the encouragement!

[Anonymous No.19592351]

>>19592221
Didn't use Athenaze myself but another similar grammar translation book. As a companion I have used Quinn & Hansen, From Alfa to Omega and North & Hillard. I have heard some good things about Ancient Greek Alive but it doesn't seem to be very useful outside of a classroom.

[Anonymous No.19592674]

Anyone know some resources for learning the Old English of Beowulf? I'm looking for grammars and lexicons but I can't find anything.

[Anonymous No.19592730]

>>19589035
Alcohol/alcool and most Az/al words in both will be Arab, anon. They have a history with the Maghreb, if you understand. Words for stuff like sugar and oil are Arabic in origin.

[Anonymous No.19593037]

>>19592674
just randomly found this website: https://heorot.dk/beo-links.html.. maybe some things here will help you

[Anonymous No.19593102]

>>19593037
I'm definitely bookmarking that. There's a lot of good stuff there, I appreciate it.

[Anonymous No.19593391]

>>19592221
The Italian version of Athenaze is similar but inferior to the format of LLPSI. The downside is that grammar explanations and exercises are in Italian. Maybe you should look into that. I used it purely for extra reading practise.

[Anonymous No.19593415]

>>19592221
>>19593391
There's also a LGPSI in the works, but it's not complete yet. Probably worth a try after you read Athenaze.

[Anonymous No.19593454]

>>19593415
>>19593391
>>19592351
Perhaps, I should have specified this in my original post. I've already started reading Xenophon's Anabasis. I enjoy it and can read it with heavy dictionary use, but I want to get my Greek down to an instinctual level. Also, I have already finished Athenaze, if that wasn't already clear.

[Anonymous No.19593492]

>>19593454
what's going to get you to an instinctual level is extensive reading at or slightly above your level. It's best to find some graduated reader, which is what the Italian Athenaze is.
It's not clear whether you used the British Athenaze or the Italian Athenze - they're very different.

[Anonymous No.19593628]

>>19591442
PodiumArts has some I think.

[Anonymous No.19593638]

>>19593391
Are Athenaze grammar explanations and exercises good if I am Italian? Or should I also get a different grammar textbook?

[Anonymous No.19593777]

>>19593638
i don't know. I only used it for reading practice and don't speak italian unfortunately

[Anonymous No.19593870]

>>19593492
The only modern language I know is English, so I'm pretty sure that makes it the British version. I fucking hate Dicaeopolis. I would reminded myself of Acharnians to get myself through those bullshit stories. I don't think I can handle more stories like that.

[Anonymous No.19594280]

I guess this thread is a good place to ask this. I want to know what the opposite for "o lente lente, curite noctis equi" would be. I gues replace lente with whatever quickly would be in latin.

[Anonymous No.19594284]

>>19594280
Festina?

[Anonymous No.19594292]

>>19594284
Is that the proper inflection? I don't know a lick of Latin

[Anonymous No.19594293]

people preserved "proto-gaelic" for at least 3 centuries after early gaelic became spoken
an entire language only known orally with no help of books for teaching it

[Anonymous No.19594302]

>>19592730
Yes and no: Spanish uses both aceite & oleo
Azucar, sugar, sucre are obvious cognates. Nearly 90% of the words a Spanish speaker uses on. day to day basis are of Latin or Greek origin, very few are Arabic or Germanic.

[Anonymous No.19594307]

>>19594292
Probably not.

[Anonymous No.19594357]

>>19594280
*currite
opposite of lente could be celere/celeriter/festinatim/velociter/cito , etc...

[Anonymous No.19594374]

>>19594357
So "o cito cito, currite noctis equi" would keep the dactylic hexameter while also correctly being the opposite phrase?
Thanks for the help.

[Anonymous No.19594483]

>>19594374
mmh don't know much about Latin meter but I guess that would break it due to the different syllabic quantity, len-tē is long-long, citō is short-long
maybe someone who knows meter can confirm

[Anonymous No.19594575]

working my way through Athenaze, but what should I go to afterwards? I've heard Xenophon is a common choice for people's first "real" ancient Greek, but at what point could I start reading him? could I start after finishing Athenaze (books 1 and 2)? are there any other suggestions for one's first read of "real" ancient Greek?

[Anonymous No.19594723]

>>19594575
The Memorabilia is probably his most important work. If you're going to pick one thing of his, that should probably be it although he has a lot of great stuff. You really should just go with what interests you the most because it's going to take you a long time to work through whatever you choose, but that's what it takes to become fluent.

[Anonymous No.19595210]

>>19594723
I'm interested in philosophy, and subsequently Socrates, so I am very interested in reading The Memorabilia. have you read it yourself? have you read other works of Xenophon? I hear a lot of Greek learners recommended Anabasis. have you read it yourself? how does it compare to The Memorabilia?

[Anonymous No.19595219]

>>19594575
just read xenophon with the help of a loeb and then read the greek text over and over until you can read it without glancing at the english side

[Anonymous No.19595227]

>>19595219
Okay, guy who doesn't know Greek.

[Anonymous No.19595236]

>>19595227
https://youtu.be/AelM2zyv5Us?t=553

[Anonymous No.19595275]

>>19595236
I don't give a shit about bilingual books. I'm talking about your retarded advice being indicative of somebody who isn't fluent of fuck all. Now you just want to link Youtube videos because you know you're ignorant, and that if you talk too much it'll be exposed.

[Anonymous No.19595851]

.

[Anonymous No.19595852]

>>19595219
That's what I will do. Thank you for the direction. I have the Loeb open on my computer right now, though a hard copy would be nice too for the amount of work I have ahead of me, which I might soon get. I already have the Greek-only book by Mather and Hewitt, required for class, but the English component is essential to my learning, so I probably won't use it much.

[Anonymous No.19596299]

>>19588170
What's the LLPSI of Greek?
Also, are you learning Koine or Attick and is it even that much of a difference?

[Anonymous No.19596369]

>>19596299
I used the expanded Finnish version of Grekisk läsebok för nybörjare. There are some extracts from Homer and Matthew but the focus is on Attic, mainly to prepare the student for Anabasis.
>What's the LLPSI of Greek?
There isn't a 1:1 Greek equivalent to LLPSI. Some have tried though. The closest thing that comes to it is Seamus Macdonald's LGPSI which begins very similarly to the Latin version with sentences such as: "ἡ Ἑλλὰς καὶ ἡ Ῑ̓ταλίᾱ εἰσὶν ἐν τῇ Εὐρώπῃ." There are no pictures though so learning purely from it would be impossible. There is also 'Alexandros to Hellenikon paidon,' a book that does have margin notes and illustrations similar to LLPSI. I've only read the first few pages before losing interest but from what I've heard from others is that it is not as efficient as LLPSI but works as a decent reader for beginners with some experience. The third option is the Italian expanded version of Athenaze with more text, illustrations and margin notes. I don't speak Italian but remember being able to understand about 80% of the text without looking at any of the vocabulary back when I was only starting so with the help of the English Athenaze it might be an excellent way to learn Greek.
I myself did the grammar translation way and as much shit as it get nowadays it worked for me.

[Anonymous No.19596378]

>>19596369
Spoke too soon, looks like some has done an illustrated version of LGPSI!

[Anonymous No.19596401]

>>19596378
Do you have a link? Thanks

[Anonymous No.19596408]

>>19596401
Search for LSPSI Kirkos/David Ring Version

[Anonymous No.19596413]

>>19596408
LGPSI*

[Anonymous No.19596443]

Ossianic Gaelic
A classical language source

[Anonymous No.19596445]

>>19596408
Thank you very much.
>>19591467
You were absolutely right, I've just read the first seven chapters without effort and understanding everything. I expect it to become harder when we get to more complex sentences, but I didn't think I had retained so much from high school.

[Anonymous No.19596468]

How to learn language
Revise declension
Revise conjugation
Learn rules of sentence making
Translate into language
Repeat until language is known

[Anonymous No.19596519]

>>19596468
Did you ever stop to think about why no one ever engages with your posts in a meaningful way? Why it is that people on /int/ can talk about niche stuff like Yiddish and Syriac and Inuit languages with no issues, but you, just yesterday, have (again!) been told to fuck off and choke in your sleep by two people independently? Why it is that we can sniff you out even here where there are no country flags? Did the idea that something is wrong with you ever cross your mind?

[Anonymous No.19596527]

>>19596519
I never was on 4channel yesterday

[Anonymous No.19596530]

>>19596527
you're not fooling anyone, you Scottish freak.

[Anonymous No.19596549]

>>19596530
I'm welsh but what ever

[Anonymous No.19596819]

Read this if you need some simple stories in latin
the image has examples of them for you
https://archive.org/details/easylatinstories00benn/page/n10/mode/1up

[Anonymous No.19596965]

>>19596549
You guys are great. Hope your language doesn't go extinct though

[Anonymous No.19597920]

bump

[Anonymous No.19598015]

>>19589251
predicate accusative, Allen & Greenough 392-3

[Anonymous No.19598085]

>>19594575
Thucydides.
Herodotus. Fairly straightforward though you'll have to get used to Ionic. Dialects aren't all that dissimilar.
Read whatever interests you. If you really want to read something then do so. Don't let yourself be confined to "beginner" works. My first Latin reading was Virgil, my teacher's was Tacitus. Some may be more difficult than others at first but you will learn rapidly if you arw interested in the subject matter.
That said jumping straight into Pindar is probably not optimal.

[Anonymous No.19598105]

>>19594302
Oh come on half the time the way you tell what the Catalan word is you put the full Al in front of the related Spanish word when it comes from Arabic. Sure there are Latin or Greek alternatives sometimes, but for lots of things, there's Arabic only. Basically, if it happened in the middle ages, then you probably need Arabic words for it.

[Anonymous No.19598234]

https://www.latinum.org.uk/shadowing/interlinear-method

Take the interlinearpill

[Anonymous No.19598414]

>>19598234
This is interesting
Can you elaborate on what you know?

[Anonymous No.19599014]

Can someone please tell me if this book is in some Ancient Greek dialect, be it Attic or Koine, or if it’s Modern Greek.

The description simply says “graeca versione“.

[Anonymous No.19599030]

>>19599014
look like koine

[Anonymous No.19599073]

>>19599030
Cool, didn’t want to waste £350 and God knows how many hours only to find out that I was learning a completely irrelevant language, rather than that of Plutarch and Aristotle.

There doesn’t seem to be any Greek version of the book online. I was hoping to get it online somehow and archive it somewhere for other Anons to use as well.

Would still appreciate as many Anon opinions on the book as possible though.

[Anonymous No.19599108]

>>19599073
from the spiritus aspers I can immidiately tell that it is not modern greek

[Anonymous No.19599165]

>>19599108
It's not modern Greek because modern Greek didn't exist in published form when that book was published.

[Anonymous No.19599185]

>>19599165
Modern Greek is 16th century going forward. Just like Modern English starts in the late 17th century. This edition of book was published in 1665, the original was written just a few decades earlier.

[Anonymous No.19599218]

>>19598234
Here's a problem with interlinear. you can't guess idiom.
>>19599030
>>19599014
no idea but in medieval times they would often mix koine, ancient and modern greek because people didnt properly understand it until later due to similarities so the book could be like that

[Anonymous No.19599361]

>>19598414
The article and books linked in it will do a better job but basically:
1) You won't get filtered by vocab
2) You can get mass INPOOT
3) You can get a sense of how the target lang differs from your own with comparison

>>19599218
>Here's a problem with interlinear. you can't guess idiom.
Yeah you can.
1) nomen mihi est -> The name to me is
2) J'ai faim -> I have hunger
All you need is common sense and >100iq to understand the idea it is expressing and the certain form this idea takes in that language.

[Anonymous No.19599378]

>>19599185
That's incorrect, the Greek found in published form in the 16th century was a continuation of Byzantine koine and could be quite classicizing

[Anonymous No.19599421]

What about the rhaeto-romance languages?

[Anonymous No.19599431]

>>19599421
What about them? They're not dead, and there's hardly any literature.

[Anonymous No.19599435]

>>19599218
>you can't guess idiom.
With time, you'll be able to understand how the idiom works literally and how it translated to make sense in your tongue.

[Anonymous No.19599454]

>>19599435
>With time,
or you could just learn it instantly by opening a language book instead of guessing over years

[Anonymous No.19599487]

learning a language by "translinear" is almost identical to trying to learn a language by deciphering it like the rosette stone
why is the internet so desperate to avoid just putting in effort to learn something?

[Anonymous No.19599501]

>>19599487
>by deciphering it like the rosette stone
No it wouldn't retard. That would be the case if you are learning Ancient Greek via an Aramaic translation dumb fuck.

[Anonymous No.19599516]

>>19599501
curious
its funny how everyone coming out with these methods is always very angsty when they are even slightly criticised and they also are monolingual
curious

[Anonymous No.19599529]

As latin students, what's some media that you guys would like to see produced in the vein of books, videos, shows, games etc.

[Anonymous No.19599534]

>>19599516
Your criticism would carry more weight if it didn't rely on a smooth brain comparison that bears zero relevance.

[Anonymous No.19599540]

>>19599534
ive already explained it and your answer was essentially "after a few years you will understand everything"

[Anonymous No.19599541]

>>19598234
interlinear method has it's place but it's inefficient without actual time spent learning the paradigms/syntax.

[Anonymous No.19599545]

>>19599516
Or they can learn Spanish first, which is vulgar Latin minus the declensions

[Anonymous No.19599554]

>>19599541
yes the only reason interlinear texts existed in the past was so people would know better how to translate things or for textual analysis
its something for a person thats already fluent in the language
once again /lit/mongs dont know anything about anything

[Anonymous No.19599611]

>>19599540
That wasn't me but I'll push back for him.
>after a few years you will understand everything
Another dishonest retort. You exaggerated the original meaning to fit your argument. As for learning idioms, which way to you think is better? Getting them piecemeal in a textbook or finding them in original texts in context?
Pic related, Wheelock's

[Anonymous No.19599641]

>>19599541
>Reading, wrote Hamilton, “is the only real, the only effectual source of instruction. It is the pure spring of nine-tenths of our intellectual enjoyments. . . . Neither should it be sacrificed to grammar or composition, nor to getting by heart any thing whatever, because these are utterly unobtainable before we have read a great deal.”
It is not replacing studying paradigms or syntax but merely a way to get the brain accustomed to the "foreignness" with a ton of examples.
>>19599554
Just leave the thread if you are going to continue to talk out of your ass. A person who is fluent in a language would never need interlinear texts. They are for students.

[Anonymous No.19599648]

What is your favorite Latin text and why? What was the piece that made you feel like all the effort was worth it?

[Anonymous No.19599862]

>>19599529
Anything, but only if I can be sure that I won't pick up bad Latin from whoever produces the content. A half-assed effort is worse than nothing at all.

[Anonymous No.19600833]

bumpus

[Anonymous No.19600992]

>>19599648
Virgil is the most magical

[Anonymous No.19601652]

>>19596378
I thought it wasn't yet complete or only went up to a few chapters.

[Anonymous No.19601658]

>>19596468
Ahaha no. That's a great way to learn to produce your native language reskinned as the target language.

[Anonymous No.19601661]

>>19599073
I'm not sure if 'completely irrelevant' is accurate, my understanding was that Koine is essentially the same language as Attic but with some of the rough edges ground off from being mangled far and wide by non-native speakers.

[Anonymous No.19601666]

>>19600992
You know, I actually know a guy named Virgil. Or maybe he spells it Vergil? I forget.

[Anonymous No.19601687]

>>19601652
yeah it's still only four chapters but that's better than nothing

[Anonymous No.19601863]

>>19601658
Oh yeah
Let me tell every language teacher since 3000bc that

[Anonymous No.19601865]

>>19601687
>>19601652
Ahah maybe you should get a real language learning book haha

[Anonymous No.19601873]

>>19601863
Every language teacher since 3000BC has not advocated a method that ignores input, what the fuck are you talking about?

[Anonymous No.19601900]

>>19601873
>that ignores input,
No idea what this means
All language teachers have taught by having the student memorise some part of grammar then mostly translate from latin then into latin straight afterwards

[Anonymous No.19601905]

>>19601865
yeah no shit. nobody was claiming you could learn greek purely from it.

[Anonymous No.19601915]

>>19601905
>nobody was claiming you could learn greek purely from it.
So... Why not just buy a book that you can learn a language from?

[Anonymous No.19601921]

>>19601915
as you should. LGPSI is still a good supplementary material

[Anonymous No.19601987]

>>19601921
>supplementary
Or just stop pissing about and putnin effort instead

[Anonymous No.19602374]

>>19601865
>>19601987
You will never know Latin.
You will never know Greek.
You might know Gaelic, but no one will ever want to talk to you about it.

Get lost, you Welsh abomination.

[Anonymous No.19602388]

>>19602374
If he's Welsh, he already knows a fair amount of Latin and Greek words (and people in Wales speak Welsh, because Gaelics are the Goidelic ones).
Hilariously, Gaelic speakers are why we still have classical Latin pronunciation, because they were isolated while Romance languages were creating Church Latin.

[Anonymous No.19602400]

>>19602388
I'd think we'd still have plenty of evidence to reconstruct it from, like explicit descriptions from Roman grammarians, borrowings to and from Latin, Indo-European sound changes, spellings and misspellings, poetic meter...

[Anonymous No.19602450]

>>19602388
> he already knows a fair amount of Latin and Greek words
Sure. He also pushes Gwynne all the time, so I assume he read it and knows something about Latin grammar, but still he can't even compose his shitposts in correct Latin. A good example for what happens when you completely disregard inpoot when learning a language.

> and people in Wales speak Welsh
I know, but he likes to talk about Gaelic. That's why I thought he was Scottish until >>19596549

[Anonymous No.19602541]

>>19587090
exclusively reading, probably not. but u cant ever call yourself 'i know latin' without it. if u dont know vowel length, u will fuck up most words' accents, and thus, not actually 'speaking latin'.

also, u cant read any line of poetry without it.
vowel length is a usual feature in these ancient languages, btw.

[Anonymous No.19602571]

less arguing, and
more posting posts in your target language

[Anonymous No.19602690]

>>19602571
Sīve discordāre opus est, linguā dēstinātā id facimus.

[Anonymous No.19602711]

>>19602690
You're not meant to write with the macrons

[Anonymous No.19602725]

>>19602388
Gaelic Latin was done in Gaelic speech
So
Iterum in Macedonia Pseudoperses, qui se Persei filium esse dicebat
Would be said in Gaelic as if it was like in English spelling
Itherum in Machethonia seuthophershesh ci she pershei filium eshe dichevat

[Anonymous No.19602757]

>>19602690
>dēstinātā
>caring about hidden quantity
Retarded. The teaching of hidden quantity proves that the "classical pronunciation" is just a stupid archeological LARP.

[Anonymous No.19602779]

>>19602757
>classical pronounciation isnt real
Really mate?

[Anonymous No.19602788]

>>19602779
Why would you be concerned about the long e in dēstinātā? It's in a closed syllable (des) so the syllable is long regardless of the length of the vowel. So whether the e is short or long has no relevance to anything. It's just an archeological fact that has no bearing on anyone learning the language, yet the textbooks ask you to memorize it.

[Anonymous No.19602808]

>>19602788
>It's in a closed syllable (des)
Should clarify I mean a closed syllable followed by a consonant in the same word. If a syllable like this were at the end of a word it would not be hidden quantity because the vowel length would be relevant to poetic meter if the next word began with a vowel.

[Anonymous No.19602813]

>>19602690
macra scribere DESISTE

[Anonymous No.19602818]

>>19602711
>>19602757
Opīniō Anglicē scrīpta nōn valet, ergō pergam.

>>19602788
>>19602808
> yet the textbooks ask you to memorize it.
Quī liber? Nōmina eum, quia liber meus id certē nōn iubēbat.

[Anonymous No.19602855]

>Ac ne principum quidem virorum insectatione abstinuit; siquidem ignotus adhuc cum iudicio frequenti testimonium diceret, interrogatus a Varrone diversae partis advocato, quidnam ageret et quo artificio uteretur, gibberosos se de sole in umbram transferre respondit; quod Murena gibber erat.

BASATUM

[Anonymous No.19602857]

Quoque:
>Vixit prope ad centesimum aetatis annum, amissa iam pridem memoria, ut versus Bibaculi docet:
>Orbilius ubinam est, litterarum oblivio?

[Anonymous No.19602870]

>>19602818
>Quī liber? Nōmina eum, quia liber meus id certē nōn iubēbat.
It's implied in the text. If they mark hidden quantity with macrons and then tell you that long vowels are pronounced whichever way, then they are in effect telling you to memorize and pronounce the hidden quantities the way that they are marked. But marking them to begin with has no purpose.

[Anonymous No.19602889]

>>19602818
>scrīpta
There's another one by the way

[Anonymous No.19602890]

>>19602870
>vowel length has no purpose
Durrrr

[Anonymous No.19602906]

>>19602890
That's not what I said. I said hidden quantity has no purpose. Do you not understand what that is? I explained it here >>19602788 >>19602808
In the word dēstinātā the 'e' has hidden quantity. Whether the 'e' is long or short has no usage, not even in meter, because the syllable it is in will be long no matter what. So the quantity cannot be determined via meter, so it is 'hidden' and has to be derived through some other means, which is often speculative. There's no reason to learn it.

[Anonymous No.19602908]

>>19602906
>said hidden quantity
?

[Anonymous No.19602912]

>>19602908
Reread my posts which explain the issue and then formulate an actual question.

[Anonymous No.19602914]

>>19602906
Tldr
>err ugh im smarter than the linguists

[Anonymous No.19602920]

>>19602914
Then tell me what the practical value of memorizing hidden quantities is.

[Anonymous No.19602932]

>>19602914
This is a real thing by the way, I'm not making it up if that is what you are implying.

[Anonymous No.19602980]

>>19602932
But how is the e in dēstinātā a hidden quantity? It only is if you robotically apply the rule in the pic you posted, but they obviously meant words that are not further decomposable.

The dē- in dēstinātā is the same prefix as in dēsinit, so it is long.

[Anonymous No.19602982]

>>19602980
Because it has no possible metrical usage.

[Anonymous No.19602997]

>>19602980
>>19602982
THIS STUPID DISCUSSION DOESN'T MATTER.
JUST DONT WRITE MACRONS NIGGERS
LITERALLY TRAININGWHEELS

[Anonymous No.19603003]

>>19602997
You should also not use the classical pronunciation, then you will only have to worry about quantity in the penultimate syllable so you can determine stress.

[Anonymous No.19603005]

>>19603003
THAT'S RETARDED. CLASSICAL PRONUNCIATION IS NEEDED FOR ROMAN POETRY, AT THE LEAST

[Anonymous No.19603014]

>>19603005
People didn't normally read the Latin poets that way until the classical pronunciation started being taught everywhere in the late 1800s.

[Anonymous No.19603021]

>>19603014
OK, AND?
NO ONE IS INTERESTED IN KNOWING HOW JOHNNY WELLINGTON III READ VIRGIL.
WE ONLY CARE ABOUT HOW VIRGIL INTENDED IT TO BE READ.
IT'S THE SAME WITH MEDIEVAL POETRY. THEN IT'S STUPID TO USE CLASSICAL PRONUNCIATION.
IT'S NOT WHITE OR BLACK
STOP BEING AUTISTIC

[Anonymous No.19603029]

>>19603021
Right, the people of the past who were actually fluent in Latin as a literary language didn't use this, but all the people today who can barely read it do use it. We're the ones that know better lol. Like I said to begin with it's an archeological project, and not about pedagogy and making people fluent in the language.

[Anonymous No.19603036]

>>19603029
JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE OF THE PAST, WHO WERE FLUENT IN LATIN, USED A DIFFERENT PRONUNCIATION, DOESN'T MEAN THAT PRONUNCIATION SHOWED BE APPLIED TO ROMAN POETRY WHEN THERE IS PLENTY OF LINGUISTIC EVIDENCE SUGGESTING A DIFFERENT PRONUNCIATION.
YOU'RE AN INSUFFERABLE CUNT

[Anonymous No.19603041]

>>19603036
There is no "should" or "should not" here. Everyone who spoke the language natively is dead and we can do whatever we please. Priority should be given to actually getting people fluent in Latin, which is an extreme rarity today. The biggest hurdle is this retarded pronunciation that calcifies Latin and ensures it remains in the grave.

[Anonymous No.19603048]

>>19603041
Before you criticize me giving a directive after saying we can do whatever we want, what I mean is that we are not obligated to the Romans to do a specific thing but should rather follow what will be the best practices for us to learn and use the language ourselves.

[Anonymous No.19603051]

>>19603041
THE PRONUNCIATION IS NOT PREVENTING PEOPLE FROM BECOMING FLUENT IN LATIN.
IT'S THE AUTISTIC RELIANCE ON GRAMMAR-TRANSLATION BY LATINLETS STARTING FROM THE 1850s ONWARDS.
JUST STOP WRITING MACRA AND THIS RETARDED DISCUSSION WOULDN'T HAVE HAPPEN.

[Anonymous No.19603054]

>>19603051
It is. It's extremely unnatural to English speakers especially because we do not make quantitative distinctions in this way. In other languages like Japanese, which are alive, you would have to do it, but with Latin you do not.

[Anonymous No.19603059]

>>19602982
I take it you agree that the long e in dēstinātā is technically not incorrect, but making the e short in dēsinit would be an error in a text with macrons.

Just before you were worried about being pressured to learn hidden quantities by textbooks that mark them, but just ignoring whether the quantity is hidden is literally easiest way to always be correct when using macrons: just make the e long in the dē-prefix, done.

>>19602997
Eōs scrībere pergam, et nūllam contrā hoc agere potes.

[Anonymous No.19603069]

>>19603051
Also it sounds like shit.
>>19603059
>I take it you agree that the long e in dēstinātā is technically not incorrect
Why would I? Hidden quantity can be determined in plenty of instances. I'm talking about pedagogy. Many other words with hidden quantity can't follow a simple prescription like yours either.

[Anonymous No.19603073]

>>19603059
TE VOCARE CINAEDUM POSSUM

[Anonymous No.19603079]

>>19603054
>>19603069
JUST SOUNDS LIKE YOU GOT FILTERED, LATINLET

[Anonymous No.19603084]

>>19603059
QUOQUE
>EOS
PUDENDUM

[Anonymous No.19603085]

>>19603079
I accept your concession of defeat.
WAAAYYNEEE WEEDEEE WEEEKIII

[Anonymous No.19603093]

>>19603085
IT'S NOT A CONCESSION OF DEFEAT, LATINLET.
PRONUNCIATION DOES NOT SEVERELY HAMPER A STUDENT'S ABILITY TO LEARN LATIN.
WE FUNDAMENTALLY DISAGREE ON THIS POINT.
IT'S THE SAME WITH OTHER LANGUAGES WITH PRONUNCIATION DIFFERENT FROM ENGLISH (ALL LANGUAGES)
THE ONLY CONCLUSION I CAN DRAW FROM YOUR INSISTENCE OF THIS CONTENTION IS THAT YOU GOT FILTERED

[Anonymous No.19603097]

>>19603084
Please explain, so that there's at least one thing I gained from this useless discussion.

[Anonymous No.19603101]

>>19603093
"Filtered" is not an argument. I already accepted your defeat so the conversation is over. It's time to move on.

[Anonymous No.19603102]

can't we just get along?

[Anonymous No.19603107]

>>19603097
MACRON EST NOMEN NEUTRUM
"MACRA" EST FORMA PLURALIS
"EOS" IN "MACRA" NON CONVENIT SED "EA," I.E. FORMA PLURALIS NEUTRA

[Anonymous No.19603110]

>>19603051
>BY LATINLETS STARTING FROM THE 1850s ONWARDS
So please provide proof of what they used previously
You never seem to be able to do that

[Anonymous No.19603114]

>>19603101
HOW CONVENIENT TO IGNORE EVERYTHING ELSE I WROTE.
YOUR EGO TRULY IS FRAGILE
WOULDN'T EXPECT MORE FROM /LIT/

[Anonymous No.19603120]

>>19603110
I WOULD EXPECT SOMEONE ON /LIT/ TO HAVE BETTER READING COMPREHENSION.
I LET YOU FIGURE IT OUT SINCE YOU CLEARLY NEED TO PRACTICE

[Anonymous No.19603122]

>>19603107
Esto es la verdad

(Pardon my Gothic-Arabic neo-Latin)

[Anonymous No.19603129]

>>19603120
I asked for your proof that people didn't study grammar until the 1850s

[Anonymous No.19603135]

>>19603122
FRATER IN LINGUA ES

>>19603129
YOU'RE ACTUALLY FUCKING RETARDED
THERE IS NO HELPING YOU
SAD

[Anonymous No.19603145]

>>19602725
>Either a liar or a retard
K
>>19602450
I don't know about your personal history with anon, I'm just pointing out that P Celt languages are a different language group to Q Celts
>>19602400
We had to get evidence of some meters from combining British and Greek sources. There is a lot of Roman literature that's just not there. We know sex comedies existed but only because of oblique accounts, and not because any scripts survived. A lot of what we can validate from even Greece is because Arabic and Irish sources agreeing, so when you consider how much more Roman lit there was, you get a picture of how much could be lost, especially in a low status language like Latin.

[Anonymous No.19603146]

Im learning to be an engineer but I'm not studying it
Im just going to keep building things until they eventually stop killing the people living in the building
Trust me. The old mathematics-practice method was just made up in the 1850s

[Anonymous No.19603152]

>>19603145
Irish books wrote Latin as pronouncing it iN irish Gaelic

[Anonymous No.19603170]

>>19603146
is that really what you got from that discussion
anon, i...

[Anonymous No.19603194]

Utinam omnes qui adsunt pacem inveniant

[Anonymous No.19603195]

>>19603107
Alright, I concede that neuter would fit better because it comes from the Greek neuter of an adjective, and I will use it accordingly in the future. But it's not like that word was even used in classical Latin.

[Anonymous No.19603209]

>>19603195
>But it's not like that word was even used in classical Latin
>>19603170
Please just provide proof of the different way people learnt Latin in medieval times

[Anonymous No.19603216]

>>19603209
What are you trying to convey by quoting me?

[Anonymous No.19603250]

>>19603209
may do some reading into what the grammar translation method is faggot

[Anonymous No.19603264]

>>19603250
Okay so you don't know
Thank you for admitting it

[Anonymous No.19603266]

>>19603152
No, Irish books wrote Gaelic as if pronouncing it in Latin. It's how we know ocus in Latin sounds like agus in Irish, because monks educated in Latin phonetics would write ocus when trying to transliterate the word agus.

[Anonymous No.19603291]

>>19603266
It was pronounced with a g
The reason is a noninitial vocied stop in old Irish Gaelic was written with the voiced symbol to distinguish it from the fricative
Tldr
Acus said agus
Accus said acus
Agus said aghus
This only applies to old irish Gaelic

[Anonymous No.19603297]

>>19603195
>But it's not like that word was even used in classical Latin.
YOU FIND THAT A LOT. IT HAPPENS TO ME A LOT AS I LIKE TO WRITE MY MATH NOTES IN LATIN SO I HAVE TO USE A LOT OF NEO-LATIN VOCABULARY FROM AUTHORS LIKE GAUSS AND EULER

[Anonymous No.19603316]

>>19603194
IMPERFECTUM SUBJUNTIVUM SCRIBi DEBUIT QUOD NUMQUAM PAX ERIT

[Anonymous No.19603323]

>>19603291
They're both glottal (the hard classical Latin c). Glottal consonants cannot be voiced, since the glottis is closed for all glottal stops.

[Anonymous No.19603345]

>>19603323
Ocus comes from proto Gaelic aggostu
It was not C

[Anonymous No.19603353]

>>19603316
mentulam meam fella

[Anonymous No.19603372]

>>19603316
Bro
Thats cringe
Please stop using capitals like an idiot

[Anonymous No.19603388]

>>19603345
Ocus is a Latin phonetic transliteration of the Irish word agus. It's medieval, and from Germany. I don't see why you think you're plausible.

[Anonymous No.19603402]

>>19603388
It is from the works of every Gaelic scholar begining with zeus to macbain
You are wrong

[Anonymous No.19603414]

>>19603388
>>19603402
agus, and so Ir., O. Ir. acus, ocus, B.of Deer acus, O.W. ac, Br. hag; allied is fagus, near, O. Ir. ocus, W. agos, Br. hogoz: *aggostu-, ad-gos-; root ges, gos, carry; Lat. gero,

[Anonymous No.19603429]

>>19603402
You don't have to put in this much effort into being dumb. I assume you're lonely as well as dumb, and tell you there is a >>>/soc/ board for people who are lonely. You don't need to derail linguistics threads with your shit posting, especially when you've nothing beneficial to post.

[Anonymous No.19603435]

>>19603429
So please tell me what doctor zeuss and macbain did wrongly

[Anonymous No.19603440]

>>19603435
Too few cats.

[Anonymous No.19603454]

See, that's why the only way one should engage with him is by telling him to fuck off as in
>>19596519
>>19602374

[Anonymous No.19603463]

>>19603440
What?

[Anonymous No.19603466]

>>19603454
Mate
Hes utterly wrong
Ocus was pronounced ogus
Its not for debate

[Anonymous No.19603601]

>>19603388
>>19603440
As over memed as that source is for everything, great set up and execution.

[Anonymous No.19603680]

>>19603372
DONT CARE NIGGER
I WANT PEOPLES EYES TO STRAIN WHEN LOOKING AT THIS THREAD

[Anonymous No.19603921]

Ah I step away for a day and miss the entire thread.

[Anonymous No.19603983]

>>19603921
this has been the worst thread so far. you didn't miss anything

[Anonymous No.19604010]

Get in!
>>19604003
>>19604003
>>19604003

[Anonymous No.19604210]

>>19603983
So basically there was just a guy bitching about how you can't learn Latin from LLPSI and then a number of people asking whether Chinese/Arabic counts as a classic language?

[Anonymous No.19604949]

>>19602788
It's as much a phonemic distinction as the distinction between o and u. Differences between specific consonants don't matter much to meter either, should you learn those?

[Anonymous No.19604966]

>>19603014
So? Why the hell WOULDN'T you read it in a way that actually lets you hear the meter instead of treating it as a written abstraction?

[Anonymous No.19604989]

>>19603145
Sure, a lot of Roman literature is lost. But what we have gives us a pretty good idea how Latin sounded. Especially when we have some Roman inscriptions that literally use macra/apices.

[Anonymous No.19604994]

>>19603146
Natural languages are not math.

[Anonymous No.19604998]

>>19603323
Er, no, Latin C is a voiceless velar stop. The only glottal consonant in Latin was H (glottal fricative).

[Anonymous No.19605378]

>>19603601
>over memed
That's like saying dicks with wings can be over memed.
>>19604989
Generally what validates classical literature as actually classical is Irish and Arabic sources from the middle ages agreeing with each other which means you can place it to before 400AD. I don't think you understand there have been immense shift in how letters are pronounced since then.
>>19604998
That's the best you can expect from most people who have had it completely palatalized. The c/cc/X/k/Ch shift along with the k/j/g shift is mostly accounted for by Irish and Arabic sources with divergence from g/k ejectives.