/clg/ — Classical Languages General

[Anonymous No.19937916]

Formerly: >>19913351

https://mega dot nz/folder/9o4QEIIK#P3piz8Bfw-z7jgb7Q8NWDg

[Anonymous No.19937932]

>>19937916
Another Mega with more language stuff
>x4VG3DRL#lqecF4q2ywojGLE0O8cu4A

[Anonymous No.19938066]

An exercise for /clg/
This is the entirety of Catullus 36. Post your translations and see how they compare with those of others.

[Anonymous No.19938406]

χαίρετε

[Anonymous No.19938425]

>>19938066
Bro are you giving out homework??

[Anonymous No.19938427]

>>19938066
No, I'd prefer to face-fuck you instead.
I'm actually translating Catullus 16 for Latin class. I have to come up with a creative translation. I'm doing a Ben Shapiro style translation and reading it in front of the class, except Ben Shapiro, considering that he is defending his poem to a pair of sensitive, SJWs, is in the position of Cardi B. I have been destined to translate this poem since I heard female classmates in Greek rant about how some guy chose to translate this filthy poem and read it to the class when he could have picked anything else. I was trying to go for something awkwardly formal and autistic, and when finished, I found that it bore the voice of Ben Shapiro. I wanted to go for the awkwardly formal because it would be interesting on its own merits, and I thought it might insulate me from complaints and disciplinary action. Last semester, there was a girl who demanded we translate in full offensiveness, basically saying anyone who doesn't is a pussy who has no place in academia. She said this frequently, but she was particularly forceful on a day where we were translating some Martial poems (walked in late and was basically stuck with book 1, poem 90). I didn't even make it through my translation, so when the instructor was going over my poem, I asked if a word Martial used could be taken as "dyke", considering this is a rude poem about a manly lesbian, and she lost her shit. I was pissed, but I couldn't say anything, lest I make it worse. I'll see how it goes this time. Wish me luck.

[Anonymous No.19938436]

*pisses all over luke ranieri's bald head*

FUCK YOU YOU BALD FAGGOT!!!!!

[Anonymous No.19938474]

>>19938427
stop being autistic. do you take joy in the fact that nobody likes you?

[Anonymous No.19938576]

>>19938474
It's fun bro
I myself composed a love poem addressed from Donald Trump to his daughter. Presented it to the class in his voice. It was a hit and I got an A+.

[Anonymous No.19938618]

>>19938576
definitely autistic, your peers as well

[Anonymous No.19939142]

Do gentives work with adjectives. So if I was describing somethings colour would I say (colour) (thing, gentive)

[Anonymous No.19939755]

>>19939142
i thought ive seen this rule before but now i cant find it in my textbook. lets guess so.

[Anonymous No.19939813]

>>19939142
not exactly sure I get the question
you can use a genitive to specify the nature of something, which it's its purpose after all
"color vasti pelagi", the color OF the vast open sea

[Anonymous No.19939820]

>>19939142
If you were to say, for example "the blue of the sea," then "blue" would be a noun.

[Anonymous No.19939840]

>>19938066
Tu é mal, Cornifício, teu Catullo.
mal és, meu Hércules, e laborioso,
e mágica em dias e horas mágicas.
quem é tu, com a mínima facilidade,
que fala sozinho?
meus amores te irritam tanto?
um pouco me gosta de falar,
lágrimas mestras de Simonides

[Anonymous No.19940018]

>>19939142
Colors are adjectives. They are usually predicates to a noun and thus take the noun's case
>Ganymede flavo
>argentum album
Colors are also often used with an ablative of specification or respect, 'white in respect to the color of his legs'. In this usage the thing affected/colored is in the ablative while the color itself is usually in the nominative.
>cruribus albus
>>19939820
This is also an option though a much more poetic one and not as common as the above.

[Anonymous No.19940305]

>>19937916
Isnt this in colorado?

[Anonymous No.19940345]

>>19938066
Κακῶς, ὦ Κορνίφικε, σὸς Κατύλλος
ἔχει, νὴ τὸν Ἡρακλέα, ἐπιπόνως τε
καὶ μᾶλλόν γέ τε μᾶλλον καθ' ἡμέραν.

Ὅν σύ, οὐδὲν γάρ τε καὶ ῥᾷστα
τίνι παρεμυθήσω ῥήματι;

Ὀργίζομαί τινι, ἥδε ἠ φιλία;
ὀλίγον σοι ἀρέσκον ἤρκεσε,
λυπηρότερον ὑπὸ δακρύοντος Σιμονίδου ῥῆμα

[Anonymous No.19940415]

How do you all learn your latin vocabulary ? I am learning through a textbook and LLPSI and I am not sure about which method to use. Should I create an alphabetic vocabulary notebook ? Thematic lists? Should I simply keep the chronological order in which I learn words ? Should I even makes lists ?

Is using Anki or spaced repetition in general necessary ? Can I juste learn through Reading ? Am I overthinking this ?

[Anonymous No.19940435]

>>19940415
read a dictionary

[Anonymous No.19940449]

>>19939142
>>19939820
>>19939813
>>19939755
>>19940018
Please stop discussing grammar.

[Anonymous No.19940829]

>>19940449
Why?

[Anonymous No.19940924]

>>19939142
Adding on since no one else mentioned it.
Latin does sometimes have a genetive of characteristic, though it would be the color in the genetive, not the object.

So you could do the regular noun-adjective pair, "vestis caerulea," a blue robe.

Or you could do a genetive of characteristic, "vestis caeruleae," a robe of blue. Means the same thing.

[Anonymous No.19940965]

>>19940924
Your second example doesn't look correct.

[Anonymous No.19940967]

>>19940924
Edit: I mixed up the name. It's called Genetive of Description, not Genetive if Characteristic. Rules still the same though.

[Anonymous No.19941032]

>>19940449
but thats the best part, ranieri. quit lurking these threads, you bald bastard

[Anonymous No.19941046]

>>19940965
From Wheelock:

GENITIVE AND ABLATIVE OF DESCRIPTION A noun in either the ablative or genitive case plus a modifying adjective may be employed to modify another noun; both the ABLATIVE OF DESCRIPTION and the GENITIVE OF DESCRIPTION (already encountered in the readings) might describe a noun by indicating its character, quality, or size, although the ablative usage was especially common in describing physical traits. Like adjectives, these descriptive phrases usually follow the nouns they modify:
fēmina magnae sapientiae, a woman of great intellect
pāx in hominibus bonae voluntātis, peace among men of good will
cōnsilium eius modī, a plan of this kind

The examples here have both an adjective and noun pair, but I remember my professors giving the example of "a car of blue," though you could also say "a car of blue color" and it would then exactly match the textbook.

[Anonymous No.19941081]

>>19940415
Usually multiple methods are good. I do both thematic lists and Anki.
Here's a recommendation: whenever you look up a word in a dictionary, put a little checkmark next to it. Once you have three checkmarks, it means you're losing too much time to that word and you should make a flashcard for it.

[Anonymous No.19941091]

>>19941046
Then the example your teacher gave is incorrect, if he didn't use the word color.

Your example means "the robe of the blue female".

It should be "vestis caeruleo colore". Genitive would be strange here, even if technically correct, as your Wheelocks quote says.
https://dcc.dickinson.edu/grammar/latin/genitive

[Anonymous No.19941240]

>>19941091
Other anons already mostly explained how you would use a color, I just brought up the genitive of description since no one else had. You might as well know every way to say something even if it's not the most common or idiomatic way to do it.

[Anonymous No.19941257]

>>19940449
shut up faggot

[Anonymous No.19941296]

>>19937916
book4you.org/book/19207535/7a0aad
I’ve just uploaded it. A nice book for beginners in Ancient Egyptian, though it may be a little bit obsolete—nothing to worry THOUGH.

[Anonymous No.19941301]

>>19939142
That would be the color as a noun. Blue in "the blue of the hat" is not the same as in "the blue hat." One is a noun the other is an adjective.

This is also distinct from saying just the adjective in Latin, "the blue," so that it's understood that you're saying "the blue (thing)." In English we can't do this, but we do say "the blue one," when all the info we are providing is the adjective.

But in Latin the adjective used substantively like this still isn't the same as the noun meaning "the color blue." Just like in English, "blue," as in "My favorite color is blue," is not the same as "blue" as in "My favorite car is the blue one." The former is a predicate nominative (X is Y), the second is an adjective supplying additional information to the object "one."

Adjectives match the case of the thing they are modifying, whether used normally or used substantively. So if you said "The bone of the big dog," you would put "dog" in the genitive, and because big is an adjective modifying dog, it would follow and become genitive too. And you could also say "the bone of the big," meaning in Latin "the bone of the big (one)" or "the bone of the big (thing)" since the noun is implied when the adjective is used substantively. But that still wouldn't be the same as saying "The bone of bigness."

Color is the same way. You can say "the beauty of blue," or "the beauty of the blue (thing)," but those are two different things. In the first case you would use the NOUN for blueness, in the latter case you would use the genitive form of the adjective because it is being used substantively to refer to an absent but implied noun that WOULD be in the genitive. Even though it's missing, the adjective still belongs to it implicitly.

As far as I know, the Latin nouns for colors are simply the adjectives treated as nouns, which again, is slightly different from the adjective being used substantively for an implied but absent other noun. You can use a genitive of material in the direction "noun of (some) color":
>[*] 344. The Genitive may denote the Substance or Material of which a thing consists (cf. § 403):—
>talentum aurī, a talent of gold.
But for non-material, abstract qualities (genitive of quality) it's apparently more restricted:
>[*] 345. The Genitive is used to denote Quality, but only when the quality is modified by an adjective:
>vir summae virtūtis, a man of the highest courage. [But not vir virtūtis.]

But since you just want to say "the color (substantivised adjective with nominal meaning), of the thing (regular noun)," I would imagine the case is even simpler since it's basically a possessive of an ordinary noun (it's just "the dog's redness"). Anyone think this is wrong?

[Anonymous No.19941309]

>>19941296
An illustration of the book.

[Anonymous No.19941382]

>>19940305
>Ὀργίζομαί τινι
ὀργίζομαί σοι

[Anonymous No.19941596]

>>19941382
σοιquote fail
>>19940345

[Anonymous No.19941749]

>>19938066
I have no idea what this means.

God, that's depressing.

[Anonymous No.19941927]

how intellectually impressive is it to know ancient greek at a decent level compared to knowing latin at a decent level, decent level being the final chapters of LLPSI. All those funny letters make it look real comblicated

[Anonymous No.19941940]

>>19941927
like 20% more impressive

[Anonymous No.19941984]

>>19941927
some people think you're a genius and some people think you're a loser

[Anonymous No.19942012]

>>19941984
well im a bit more inclined to the view that theyre pretty smart but both of them are faggots

[Anonymous No.19942425]

>>19941927
Most people won't realize that modern and ancient Greek are different, so from a phrely flexing standpoint most people will be more impressed by Latin.

[Anonymous No.19942501]

>>19941927
The alphabet is like the easiest part.

[Anonymous No.19942742]

What's the meaning of τὴν? I can only find the meaning of την and τήν.

[Anonymous No.19942767]

>>19942742
grave accent ` only appears in the last vowel of otherwise acute ´ ending words if they are immediately followed by another noun, but the meaning doesn't change, the meaning is the same as τήν and the same is true for any word ending in an acute accent

[Anonymous No.19942784]

>>19942767
Okay, thanks. I'm not sure if my textbook covered this but I should know it by now. Welp.

[Anonymous No.19942940]

>>19937916
Barely practiced and I only got 21 out of 40 right on my cue cards... Feels bad bros.

[Anonymous No.19942987]

>>19937916

Is there a good grammar book for biblical hebrew? I have had bad luck taking shots in the dark trying random stuff I found for free off libgen and google search. I want something systematic with a linguistic approach like Hansen & Hardy. Pls no Aleph and Beth, I'm not wasting like 500 hours learning language like a toddler just for an intermediate understanding. I plan to do a deep reading of the old testament with commentary and an etymology dictionary once I get a hang on the grammar & basic vocab

[Anonymous No.19943064]

>>19941301
Not the asker, but thanks for the detailed explanation.

[Anonymous No.19943565]

>The singular of the Imperative Mood of deponent verbs has the form of a regular infinitive

[Anonymous No.19944311]

bald guy video series on ancient greek seems good. anyone watched it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoYBnFZLiZo&list=PLU1WuLg45Six4gYLaBrTAIvfjXWKJ1EkN

seems to provide a good introduction

[Anonymous No.19944508]

What is this? Can a non-deponent verb's passive form take an object? I expected "id quō ego interrogor nimis difficile est" (That by which I am asked, is too difficult) and "id quō vōs interrogāminī facile est" (That by which you are asked, is easy)

But here it feels like the quod is the object of interrogor and interrogāminī in the relative clauses. How should this be analyzed?

[Anonymous No.19944596]

>>19941749
Don't get down. Read more, study more, use a dictionary, use a translation. Going into authentic Latin from a textbook is a big jump. Let it motivate you rather than discourage.
>Cornificius = tu
>Malest = male est = things are going poorly
>poets often drop ali- from indefinite relatives
>poets often drop est and sunt as well

[Anonymous No.19944669]

>>19938066
*38

It's bad, Cornificius, for your Catullus
It's bad, by Hercules, and toilsome,
And more and more each day and hour.
You, though that is the smallest and easiest thing,
What have you comforted him?
I am angry with you. (Do you treat) my love thus?
(Send) anything small you please of a comfort,
Sadder than the tears of Simonides.

Troubles: the quem, quod, qua combo is really hard to wrap my head around. the second-to-last line is clunky in English but very elegant in Latin

[Anonymous No.19944691]

>>19942987
Beginning Biblical Hebrew by Cook and Holmstedt and Weingreen's textbook.

[Anonymous No.19944695]

>>19944508
>that which you have been asked about is easy
Short answer is yes, sometimes passives can take objects. This varies from word to word. Generally in the passive the thing being asked is in the nominative while the person asking is in the ablative with a preposition
>Caesar ab eo rogatus est
>Caesar was asked by him
But with passive forms of rogo, verbs of teaching and a few others the thing can remain in the accusative
>fuerant hoc rogati
>they had been asked this

The last example above is straight from Allen and Greenough's new Latin Grammar. Input fags will gnash their teeth at this but I keep saying that is one of if not the most important books for a student of Latin. It is in the Mega or available online for $20 or so and well worth having. Almost more useful than a dictionary.

[Anonymous No.19944776]

>>19944695
Ah thank you very much how could I not see it's a double accusative verb. When the sentence is folded in passive structure it became obscure

[Anonymous No.19944933]

>>19944311
can't watch is because of the pronunciation

[Anonymous No.19944941]

>>19944933
What's wrong with it?

[Anonymous No.19944956]

>>19944311
>>19944941
He sounds like he's nasalizing everything. I can't be the only one hearing this

[Anonymous No.19945017]

>>19944941
φ = f rather than ph
x = h rather than kh
I'm learning attic pronunciation rather than his "Lucian (c)" -shit.

[Anonymous No.19945019]

>>19945017
Isn't it rather hard for most Europeans to distinguish aspiration?

[Anonymous No.19945289]

>>19945019
I think it's mostly English speakers who have a hard time.

[Anonymous No.19945338]

>>19944941
The same guy who spergs out about hidden quantity and reconstructed pronunciation in Latin, going so far as to say anyone who does not pronounce words exactly as he does is flat out wrong, pronounces Ancient Greek in a completely incorrect way and has no qualms about it. see >>19945017

[Anonymous No.19945368]

>>19944596
I looked up every unfamiliar word, and still can't make heads nor tails of it. I've worked through Eutropius, much of Caesar, and other prose authors. Poetry is just cryptic nonsense.

>bad(?) of Cornificius, to/from Catullus
>bad, by hercules, and laboriously
>more and more in days and hours
>that you, because it is little and easy,
>were comforted here by kind words
>I am angry with you. thus you to my loves?
>little that of kind words please
>sad to/from the tears of Simonides

I've been working at Latin for years and have nothing to show for it. Why do I even bother?

[Anonymous No.19945387]

臨水縱橫回晚鞚。歸來轉覺情懷動。梅笛煙中聞幾弄。秋陰重。西山雪淡雲凝凍。
美酒一杯誰與共。尊前舞雪狂歌送...

[Anonymous No.19945425]

>>19945387
Any textbook recommendations for ancient Chinese?

[Anonymous No.19945653]

>>19943565
ikr i did the same fucking thing dude

[Anonymous No.19945663]

>>19944596
>>poets often drop est and sunt as well
latin already lacks a word for the. now youre telling me that sometimes itll lack is/are. great.

[Anonymous No.19945729]

>>19945338
According to him he's attempting a 1st century pronounciation reconstruction. It would be incorrect to call that outright wrong, unless the system itself is incorrect for its reconstruction.

[Anonymous No.19945749]

>>19945017
Strict adherence to the prescribed classical pronunciations sounds too unnatural. The reality is probably something in between that and Koiné for the periods in which the most notable writers lived.

[Anonymous No.19945765]

>>19945425
no idea
I just borrow my taiwanese friends chinese textbook

[Anonymous No.19945778]

>>19945749
That is what he did, maybe even he thinks the reconstructed Attic sounds too cringy. But now seeing he has named this tweaked late Attic pronunciation after himself, I can imagine more people, repulsed by him, will go back to the standard archaic system.

[Anonymous No.19946013]

>primo ante christum natum saeculo
sorry for the stupid question, but im a bit confused about the construction here.
Is primo saeculo a temporal ablative and ante christum natum a temporal adverbial? (i learn in german so the terms may slightly differ?

[Anonymous No.19946045]

>>19945368
see>>19944669
Work backwards. Try to understand how the poem works.
Poetry is much more dynamic than prose. You have to think less literally and allow for wider interpretation of meaning.
Don't give up and knock off the negative self-talk. You have the basics, just apply them to small sections, bit by bit.

[Anonymous No.19946068]

>>19944933
>>19944956
Yes. The pronunciation sounds weird to me so I'm sticking to my own. I like the videos for the approach only.

My native language is a romance one. I think if I pronounce letters as they are written I won't be too far off

[Anonymous No.19946101]

I'm starting a classics degree next year and want to get a head start in Latin, so what's the best book(s) for me to go through casually in the evening and weekends?

[Anonymous No.19946114]

>>19945749
It sound pretty natural to me as I speak a finno-ugric language. Only trouble are words with a "φθ"-sound but you can just roll over the phi.

[Anonymous No.19946170]

>>19945425
reposting from another anon
>https://archive.org/details/introductiontoli00branuoft
>https://scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/2022/23480/Wenyan-Primer->Index.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y
>https://web.archive.org/web/20190301225355/http://www.invisiblebooks.com/CGCC.htm
>http://pds11.egloos.com/pds/200901/16/93/Classical_Chinese_Grammar.pdf
>Lexicity also has an Old Chinese section, and Lexilogos has some Classical Chinese materials mixed in with its Mandarin materials.
I am about halfway in the Eno book and like it so far, I use it with Rabinovich for extra grammar explanation. It has good exercises and starts immediately with real texts, the Brandt book seems okay for extra reading and vocab but seems to explain grammar kind of poorly. Eno doesn't give you translations, but you can find these on ctext.org usually (or in Mandarin or Japanese on other sites if you know them). Pulleyblank is a big autistic tome of grammar explanations that's more of a reference work.

All of these books pretty much assume that you can cope with reading and writing Chinese characters and know some kind of pronunciation. Personally I know Japanese so I just butcher everything in on'yomi (Japs themselves use a super autistic system of converting it to classical Japanese by changing the word order which for a westerner isn't really helpful and relies on Japanese annotations). I don't really know a good guide on characters and there's a lot of nonsense guides, so if you are unfamiliar with them I would suggest you read the following Wikipedia articles in their entirety:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_characters
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_character_classification
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_(Chinese_characters)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroke_(CJK_character)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroke_order
Then pick a regional standard you will follow (Chinese, Hong Kong, Taiwanese, Korean, Japanese). They're all pretty similar but make sure you learn the traditional forms and not the Chinese or Japanese simplified forms. Then find some list of common characters, and grind like 200-300 characters with correct stroke order and decomposing into radicals, and learn how to use a dictionary, until you know the meaning (and sound) of most radicals. With radical knowledge it's much much easier to learn new characters. Heisig method is okay in principle (make up mnemonics using the radicals) but the books suck, there's 0 point in assigning a single English meaning to a character because especially in classical Chinese the correspondence between characters and English words is very vague, and their presentation of radicals is confusing and too restrictive, just make up your own shit. For pronunciation, I don't know which is best—Mandarin is most common but hard to pronounce for me, southern Chinese languages like Cantonese preserve more distinctions so they're probably more powerful—it may be worth it to take a course.

[Anonymous No.19946187]

(cont) Of course Cantonese is likely even harder to pronounce—I have never taken a Chinese course so it's hard to say how much time you need to pronounce stuff intelligibly. There are also some reconstructed pronunciations which seem pretty easy to pronounce but they're pretty speculative, there's few resources and literally no one will understand you. Japanese traditional pronunciation is easy on the mouth, but requires you to know classical Japanese and is completely estranged from the actual language. My method (on'yomi everything) is easy to say and look up, but poorly comprehensible because so many words blend together and afaik no one uses it. Of course you can just ignore pronunciation completely and pretend it's an autistic way of writing English or some other western language like the Japs do.

[Anonymous No.19946210]

>>19945778
what's more cringy
this https://youtu.be/dzv7e4ACfxc
this https://youtu.be/tHIGHELlnns
or the sperging native Greeks in the comments under every reconstructed AG youtube video?

[Anonymous No.19946530]

>>19946210
You'll never speak to another human in ancient Greek. You should use whichever system is convenient for you. Prioritize pedagogy. Ignore anyone who tells you that one pronunciation is "correct" and another "wrong".

[Anonymous No.19946533]

>>19946101
Wheelock's + LLPSI. If you already have another romance language or some linguistics under your belt Moreland and Fleischer.

[Anonymous No.19946538]

>>19946101
>>19946533
You don't need to get Wheelock when LLSPI has its own supplementary volume that explains the grammar and everything.

[Anonymous No.19946545]

>>19946013
Christum natum is just acc because of the preposition ante. Ante Christum natum just means "B. C."
And yes on the ablative.

[Anonymous No.19946560]

>>19946538
The more tools at your disposal, the better.

[Anonymous No.19946572]

>>19946560
Sure, but if you're telling him to use a book that will explain the grammar rather than just learning it entirely deductively, LLSPI already has that. The companion volume is 400 pages, it goes chapter by chapter and explains everything, includes all the grammatical tables, vocabulary, etc.
https://www.hackettpublishing.com/lingua-latina-per-se-illustrata-series/lingua-latina-a-companion-to-familia-romana-second-edition
There's one for LLSPI 2 as well.

[Anonymous No.19946607]

>>19946572
Wheelock's explains grammar and has plenty of example sentences and readings. It does not hurt to view different sources when learning new material, which is why I recommended both as well as a third. No one textbook is entirely comprehensive.

[Anonymous No.19946638]

>>19946607
You didn't recommend a "third," you just told him LLPSI and Wheelock's. When most people think of LLPSI they think of the Familia Romana book. If you're telling him to use more than that you should have said so.

[Anonymous No.19946651]

>>19946638
>If you already have another romance language or some linguistics under your belt Moreland and Fleischer
oops

[Anonymous No.19946710]

>>19946170
>>19946187
thank you very much anon

[Anonymous No.19946917]

>>19946651
good job

[Anonymous No.19946976]

>Genitive of Value
>Predicate Dative
>Double Accusative
>Ablative of Cause
fucking kill me

[Anonymous No.19947156]

>>19945338
I am the only person who spergs out about hidden quantity I think (because it's useless), and I use the ecclesiastical pronunciation. I do agree it's funny to see our master of the Trve Roman Pronvnciation not followed the prescribed reconstruction of ancient Greek, though.

[Anonymous No.19947686]

>>19947156
To be clear I was referring to the bald faggot, not you. I agree with you on hidden quantity. He put out a video about suspiciously right after threads where you made a point of discussing it and as usual he gayed it up.

[Anonymous No.19947694]

>>19947686
I saw a link to the video and skimmed through it but didn't notice the part about hidden quantity.

[Anonymous No.19947738]

>>19947694
He took one passage from Gellius and claimed that it was concrete evidence for the necessity of lengthening vowels in hidden quantity. He missed the part where Gellius himself says many educated men don't do this. He also missed the part where Gellius, as interesting as he is to read, is highly unreliable as a grammarian or historian. I say this as someone who loves Noctes Atticae and recommends it to beginning readers for its subject matter, brief passages, interesting material and quality Latin. Great to browse through for a laugh or two, interesting tidbits on ancient thought and culture, quotes from long-lost works, etc., but by no means a guide to pronunciation, grammar or philology. More interesting as a way to see how men at that time thought rather than what.

[Anonymous No.19948172]

>>19947738
I think it's fine if people want to follow him or use the reconstructed pronunciation, but this idea that it's the only correct way, or it's the only pronunciation used by the Romans, or that people *must* do this extra work to legitimately know Latin, that's what I do not like. Also thank you for reminding me of Aulus Gellius, I wanted to read him in the past but he eventually slipped my mind.

[Anonymous No.19948252]

>>19946976
shit like that was made up by 19th ce autists to give a category to every single possible usage

[Anonymous No.19948424]

>>19940449
Please deeply ponder on the thought of suicide. Much appreciated, thanks Tyler.

[Anonymous No.19948443]

Is there any point in learning Latin or Greek if all I have is some interest on reading the Vulgate, Septuagint and Greek New Testament as a Catholic? Or should I just read translations instead? I mean, I'm not really a humanities guy, so I guess translations would be better than any awful interpretation I'd make, right?

[Anonymous No.19948894]

>>19948443
I'm not catholic, but Latin is not just Vulgate, but also hymnody, liturgy, theology and various papal documents etc, Greek is also church fathers and early councils

[Anonymous No.19949988]

Based thread

[Anonymous No.19950091]

>>19945368
>>19946045
Translator of >>19944669 here. Wanted to give some insight if you're struggling.
First, when you have a third-person form of sum with no declared subject, it's pretty reasonable to translate it one of two ways: either 'it is' or 'there is/are'. Either probably works in this case, though I find it more likely that the first word is a contraction of 'male est' than anything else. In that case, 'there is badly' doesn't really make sense. Next up, it looks like you forgot that the vocative ending for 2nd declension nouns ending in -ius is -i, e.g. o Juli Caesar. This is a big part of the poem, without the vocative you wouldn't really know who all the 2nd person verbs are referring to.

'In diem/horam' are idiomatic expressions that mean 'daily' and 'hourly'.
Quod doesn't always mean 'because', in this case it's concessive- 'although' or 'despite'. This is just something that you have to look at context for.

Take 'qua' as an ablative with 'allocutione', I believe: 'by what comfort'. I'm not sure how the rest of the line grammatically works. If someone could help out I'd appreciate it.

'Meos amores' is in the accusative, so we know it's the direct object of some verb, which is obviously omitted. My book's commentary says the omission of the verb suggests Catullus is trying to show he is impatient, but you don't really need to worry about that. Any verb like 'treat' or 'deal with' makes the most sense in this situation.

'Paulum quid': poets often omit 'ali-', as someone said earlier in the thread. With that, you get something like 'something little of a consolation that pleases (you or me)'

[Anonymous No.19950389]

how bad/smooth is the transition to Homeric Greek once you have a good command of Attic?

[Anonymous No.19950410]

>>19945289
What European language distinguishes aspiration?

[Anonymous No.19950429]

>>19946170
>>19946187
I do have a friend who reads it in reconstructed pronunciation (Middle Chinese). It seems to work for him.

[Anonymous No.19950445]

>>19946530
What if you do want to speak it with other people in real life as a hobby?

[Anonymous No.19950473]

>>19946530
>tfw ywn have classical language obsessed friend/gf to mess around with and make inside jokes in latin or ancient greek in public

[Anonymous No.19950580]

>>19950445
Then pursue your hobby. There's nothing wrong with that. But that doesn't mean that it is the *only correct practice* and that everyone *should* follow it. That's the problem.

[Anonymous No.19950589]

>>19950410
Most of the celtic languages do

[Anonymous No.19950605]

>>19946068
>My native language is a romance one. I think if I pronounce letters as they are written I won't be too far off
what do you mean "as they are written"?

[Anonymous No.19950622]

>>19945289
I mean if anything they often have trouble unaspirating them since in many pronunciations they are de facto aspirating them, this happens also when they pronounce latin

[Anonymous No.19950763]

>>19950589
Oh yes, the widely spoken Celtic languages.
>>19950605
Probably 'according to their native language's orthographic values'. Which is basically how Latin was read everywhere until not that long ago.
>>19950622
Sure, the point is they have trouble making the distinction.

[Anonymous No.19950784]

>>19950091
>First, when you have a third-person form of sum with no declared subject, it's pretty reasonable to translate it one of two ways: either 'it is' or 'there is/are'.
I'm familiar with impersonal constructions. But I don't see any verb in the first sentence.

>I find it more likely that the first word is a contraction of 'male est' than anything else. In that case, 'there is badly' doesn't really make sense.
Is this a common contraction? How else would you translate 'male est', if not '[something] is badly'?

>Next up, it looks like you forgot that the vocative ending for 2nd declension nouns ending in -ius is -i, e.g. o Juli Caesar.

Yes, I was expecting vocative to end in -e. I did forget about i-stems.

>This is a big part of the poem, without the vocative you wouldn't really know who all the 2nd person verbs are referring to.
I assumed all the second person verbs are directed at the only person mentioned besides the author

>'In diem/horam' are idiomatic expressions that mean 'daily' and 'hourly'.
Sure, I got that sense.

>Quod doesn't always mean 'because', in this case it's concessive- 'although' or 'despite'. This is just something that you have to look at context for.
I know it can have multiple meanings. I just have no context to judge here.

>Take 'qua' as an ablative with 'allocutione', I believe: 'by what comfort'. I'm not sure how the rest of the line grammatically works. If someone could help out I'd appreciate it.

>'Meos amores' is in the accusative, so we know it's the direct object of some verb, which is obviously omitted. My book's commentary says the omission of the verb suggests Catullus is trying to show he is impatient, but you don't really need to worry about that. Any verb like 'treat' or 'deal with' makes the most sense in this situation.
I was confused here because intuitively after 'sic', I want to fill in the previous verb, irasceris, but that clearly takes dative and not accusative.

>'Paulum quid': poets often omit 'ali-', as someone said earlier in the thread. With that, you get something like 'something little of a consolation that pleases (you or me)'
>poets just omit important words
Is it even possible to read poetry without already knowing what it means?


Putting this all together, I still can't figure out what he's trying to say.

[Anonymous No.19951095]

>>19950763
>Probably 'according to their native language's orthographic values'. Which is basically how Latin was read everywhere until not that long ago.
i assumed their post was about greek. but i didnt watch the video so im not surprised i got confused.

[Anonymous No.19951440]

>>19946538
These people are so insufferable. Even if you do recommend LLPSI they get mad if you recommend a second book to go along with it.

Holy shit it's a textbook you fucking lunatics.

[Anonymous No.19951512]

Why is this PASSIVE participle ACTIVE in meaning? It's literally "eaten (as lunch/breakfast)". But the meaning is "having eaten (lunch/breakfast)"

The verb prandeō, prandēre, prandī, prānsum is not deponent

[Anonymous No.19951516]

>>19951512
It's a tranny

[Anonymous No.19951981]

>>19950784
'Male est' is just much more likely than an equivalent adjective, i.e. 'malus est'. If there's a sort of adverbial sentence, it's generally fair to translate it as an equivalent adjective in english. They just used adverbs in that way in latin. maybe comparable to flat adverbs in english, not sure.

>I know it can have multiple meanings. I just have no context to judge here.
Well, there is ample context to judge, but it requires knowing what the words mean and judging the whole sentiment.

>'Paulum quid': poets often omit 'ali-'
>poets just omit important words
this isn't some arcane impossible-to-supply concept, it's basically just that poets often leave off 'ali-' for metrical reasons, where in prose you'd expect 'aliquid' or something. It really doesn't even require any knowledge of the context to fill this in.

[Anonymous No.19952096]

>>19950389
having to look up 3 new words every line smooth

[Anonymous No.19952206]

I am already learning Latin, yes. But how do I at the same time thoroughly learn about Rome? History, culture, religion, geography, military and wars, arts, laws, politics etc? What should I read/avoid?

[Anonymous No.19952212]

>>19952206
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLp5VE4P1YBhc05cDqiOazzTTu1WSh8MHg

[Anonymous No.19952463]

>>19951440
I am simply saying that, if you want a grammar textbook that explains everything to, and you are going to use LLPSI, it has its own grammar textbook that is keyed to its main volume, so you won't be getting shit out of order. The lunatic is you for not understanding my simple point and reading some schizo shit into it.

[Anonymous No.19952467]

>>19952096
Is this true? Should I be focusing only on Homeric for now instead of mastering Attic?

[Anonymous No.19952484]

I use my own pronunciation of Latin that I made up.

[Anonymous No.19952679]

>>19952467
the problem lies with poetic language, you'll run into similar problems trying to read Attic poetry and tragedy. There are hundreds of words that occur just once in one line of the Iliad for example and then never again in the whole Canon of ancient greek literature. Grammar-wise Homer is fairly easy to read compared to Attic. You should continue learning Attic while memorising some frequently used Homeric vocabulary on the side but don't expect it to be a fluent experience once you jump into Homer

[Anonymous No.19952731]

>>19952484
Let's hear it

[Anonymous No.19952767]

>>19952731
I don't have a microphone. But it's a modified version of the English pronunciation (using its method of dividing syllables) but brought closer to the classical pronunciation. Basically I wanted something kind of close to the classical but that was very comfortable and natural to pronounce as an English speaker.

[Anonymous No.19952848]

Ranieri says his Greek pronunciation is called "Lucian" after Lucianus Samosatensis.
Shouldn't it be called "Lucianic" then?

[Anonymous No.19952882]

>>19952848
I wonder if he named the Ranieri-Dowling method after Marcus Ranieus too.

[Anonymous No.19952937]

>>19952848
Rule of arrogance #1
make it sound as pompus as possible
Lucian and Ranieri have a pompus ring to them.
Calling it Lucianic would be too humble

[Anonymous No.19952960]

>>19952463
>you won't be getting shit out of order
kek
What is the 'order' for learning a language, o wise one?
Also do you read Latin? I highly suspect you don't. I bet you are partway through Familia Romana with visions of fluency dancing in your head. Why would you tell others how to learn when you don't know youself?

[Anonymous No.19952967]

>>19952960
I mean that the grammar will be presented in the same order in your reader as in your grammar textbook. Are you so mentally unbalanced that the obvious, normal thing that I mean is impossible for you to understand?

[Anonymous No.19952969]

>>19952937
It also leaves a not-so-subtle hint towards his own name while giving him plausible deniability that he would ever take credit for someone else's work.

[Anonymous No.19952991]

>>19952967
Can't imagine anything worse than learning new grammar out of order. What an awful thing to subject oneself to. If only other textbooks had exercises and readings to make grammar points clear.
Also I see you dodged the second half so let me repeat it in a different way: you don't read Latin, you haven't finished a single textbook, why are you telling others how to learn a language you don't know?

[Anonymous No.19953001]

>>19952991
Personally I would things to go in the same order. For example Moreland & Fleischer introduces the subjunctive early. I'm talking about a matter of simple practicality. If you want to do something else, good for you. But the LLPSI boogeyman is living in your head at the moment, it seems, if you're having such a tantrum over someone recommending the textbook supplement that it has.
>You don't actually know Latin so there
I'm not going to dignify this with a response as it has nothing to do with anything I've said.

[Anonymous No.19953010]

>>19953001
Mate just stop
You've been totally proven an imbecile already by him

[Anonymous No.19953030]

>>19953010
He has not addressed a single thing I actually said, but only nonsense he made up. The only thing I said, you don't need to get Wheelock's along with LLPSI becasue LLPSI has its own grammar textbook that explains everything chapter by chapter in the same order it comes up in Familia Romana and Roma Aeterna. That's it. If you simply just want to use another textbook, knock yourself out, but I think many people simple don't know that LLPSI has this textbook supplement, so I recommended it. If you think there's something objectionable about that statement you need to get your head checked.

[Anonymous No.19953472]

>>19952848
He's lying. He calls it Lucian because his first name is Luke.

[Anonymous No.19953773]

How do you guys write down your declension stuff?
I'm trying to do it but it's really confusing. Is there some elegant way to format it all?

[Anonymous No.19953826]

>>19953030
>If you simply just want to use another textbook, knock yourself out
Why all of the sudden are you acting like you don't care? You're the one who got your panties in a bunch when someone said the W word.
>many people simple don't know that LLPSI has this textbook supplement
Ah yes the 30 dollar textbook you have to buy to explain the other 30 dollar textbook you already bought.

People know. They don't care. Accept this and move on with your life. Learn how your YouTube guru tells you and leave the rest of us alone ffs.

You obviously have never learned a language before based on how ardently you promote inefficient, fringe methods from online scam artists trying to get patrons and audiobook sales.

[Anonymous No.19953975]

>>19953773
I live in a 1st world country where you can just buy this

[Anonymous No.19953983]

>>19937916
I hate this trend of heavily edited landscape photos

[Anonymous No.19954000]

>>19952767
How does it differ from each?

[Anonymous No.19954001]

>>19953826
>Why all of the sudden are you acting like you don't care?
You misread what I was saying the entire time. I tried to clarify what I meant earlier in the thread but no one was having it.
>Ah yes the 30 dollar textbook you have to buy to explain the other 30 dollar textbook you already bought.
You're already telling him to buy another book so I don't know what this whining now is about.
>Learn how your YouTube guru tells you and leave the rest of us alone ffs.
I don't follow anyone about this subject on Youtube. This is what I mean. You've purposefully misread everything I said in the most negative way possible because you've got some stick up your ass about LLPSI, or apparently someone on Youtube. I don't give a fuck.

[Anonymous No.19954007]

>>19953826
>Ah yes the 30 dollar textbook you have to buy to explain the other 30 dollar textbook you already bought.
>have to buy
>not using libgen

[Anonymous No.19954091]

>>19954001
>You're already telling him to buy another book so I don't know what this whining now is about.
No I'm not telling anyone to buy anything. Another guy said to use Wheelock with LLPSI as a reading suppliment, then you freaked out on him and I chimed in.

> because you've got some stick up your ass about LLPSI,
I, like the guy before use LLPSI with Wheelock.
>Oh you think I may need lunch and dinner to go with that breakfast, well then you must hate breakfast.
This is like the most retarded argument in the history of arguments and you chimps have it in every single CLG thread. YOU guys are the ones who misread purposefully. You misread a criticism that LLPSI alone is not a one-size-fits-all magic pill as somehow meaning we hate the book or don't use it ourselves. It's a graded reader - NOT a textbook. And the people who use it *EXCLUSIVELY* end up spending twice as much money on supplement materials when they could get a used copy of Wheelock (an actual course) for like 12 bucks. And every single one of you hits a wall after this book trying to reading Roma Aeterna because you have the grammatical understanding of a kindergartner because you think it's profound to "learn as a child learns". And no, not even the companion book is as wide ranging grammatically as Wheelock or Moreland & Fleischer.

[Anonymous No.19954130]

>>19954091
There are two companion books, one for Familia Romana and another for Roma Aeterna.

[Anonymous No.19954147]

>>19954130
Didn't address anything I said.

If you read an actual beginner primer, then the grammar of intermediate Latin like Roma Aeterna wouldn't be such have such a difficulty gap in the first place. If you are reading about some of these grammatical points in the 2nd year/intermediate phase for the first time then you just wasted a year only to not be able to advance without going back over the basics and again getting more books to explain the books you already have.

[Anonymous No.19954290]

>>19941296
book4you.org/book/19216778/1ba57c
Just uploaded this one as well. This is actually more didactical than the previous one—and somewhat funny.

[Anonymous No.19954320]

>>19954290
library.bz/main/uploads/6D8482C98E012F4E44CB9166BABE576A
Also on Libgen.

[Anonymous No.19954346]

>>19952212
go back to bothering /his/ with your lame videos, gorilla

[Anonymous No.19954358]

>>19953773
i dont i just practice the tables over and over for hours until(like, 2-3 sessions of practicing for an hour) i can just pull any inflection out of my ass, which is how i assume everyone does it

[Anonymous No.19954571]

file:///home/chronos/u-ef8d4e34539a9b81d2f657362549835f9f19ab7d/MyFiles/Downloads/Classical%20Latin%20-%20An%20Introductory%20Course.pdf

hows this textbook

[Anonymous No.19954574]

why did i think that would work? shame

[Anonymous No.19954633]

wait or does that link work? idfk bruh

[Anonymous No.19954645]

>>19954633
meds now

[Anonymous No.19954654]

>>19954633
The link is to local files on your own computer. So if you yourself try to open it, it will open the file. It won't work for anyone else.

[Anonymous No.19954762]

I'd like an elementary knowledge of Latin. I don't have much interest in studying the classics, but I'd like to be able to read the Vulgate some, understand ecclesiastical references, prayers, etc. It's not something I have a huge amount of time to dedicate to, unfortunately. What would be a good way to achieve this?

[Anonymous No.19954765]

>>19954762
Honestly, I know it's cliche to say this but LLPSI.

[Anonymous No.19954784]

>>19954765
Which books specifically? There are quite a few of them.

[Anonymous No.19954806]

>>19954571
they weren't kidding when they said /lit/ is tech illiterate

[Anonymous No.19954833]

>>19954645
>>19954654
so i realize.

[Anonymous No.19954836]

>>19954806
leave me alone.

[Anonymous No.19954854]

>>19954784
Start with Familia Romana.

[Anonymous No.19955554]

>>19954762
A Primer of Ecclesiastical Latin by John F. Collins

[Anonymous No.19955572]

>>19954571
that's a cute mistake, i'm glad you didn't accidentally post something that revealed anything about your computer and it was just a harmless goof

don't be embarrassed, what book is it btw? can't tell from the filename

[Anonymous No.19955586]

>>19955572
Looks like "Latin: An Introductory Course".

[Anonymous No.19955736]

>>19955572
>i'm glad you didn't accidentally post something that revealed anything about your computer and it was just a harmless goof
I cant help but be suspicious of your tone anon

[Anonymous No.19956388]

Grammar-translation doesn't work. Source:
https://magisterp.com/2018/07/02/studies-showing-the-ineffectiveness-grammar-instruction/
https://books.google.com/books?id=HrhkAwAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&dq=Approaches%20and%20Methods%20in%20Language%20Teaching&hl=es&pg=PA7#v=onepage&q&f=false
https://books.google.com/books?id=_udVA--sg4kC&lpg=PA251&dq=grammar-translation%20latin&pg=PA250#v=onepage&q&f=false
https://doi.org/10.1017/S2058631020000513
https://eidolon.pub/why-students-of-color-dont-take-latin-4ddee3144934

[Anonymous No.19956463]

>>19956388
>why students of color don't take Latin?
Leave to Americans to make everything about race, even Latin.

[Anonymous No.19956472]

>>19956463
Leave it to a 4channer to dismiss an article without even reading it based on the title.

[Anonymous No.19956474]

>>19956388
What's recommended then, bro? Inpoot method? Grammar + Inpoot? Is bald man right?

[Anonymous No.19956483]

>>19956474
Pretty much, look up the research on second language acquisition.

[Anonymous No.19956551]

>>19950091

Do you have any recommendations for learning how to translate Latin poetry while still in the beginning stages of learning Latin?

I'm in the second semester of an "intensive introduction" class at my college and, given your explanation here, I can follow along, but I wouldn't be able to get to that point on my own. Should I just wait until I've finished the course and gotten a more solid foundation, or should I jump in now?

We're using Sidwell and Jones if it matters; we also occasionally translate poetry but it's usually with *heavy* assistance from the prof.

[Anonymous No.19956697]

>>19956463
>>19956472
as an american i agree with him, these niggas always do too much and i hate it. school here, especially in US history class, is a nightmare. its literally all WHITE POOPLE ARE BAD!!! and my teacher started off the year by saying she moved here to NYC(probably the most race mixed city in the western hemisphere) because she relates to black people and minorities or something.

anyway the article is trash "dem brown kids dont be wanna studying gramma"

[Anonymous No.19956708]

>>19956388
>>19956463
I saw quite some blacks learning Latin.

[Anonymous No.19957073]

>>19956551
Go for it if it interests you. Don't get discouraged if it seems difficult, it is. Start with a small poem or section at a time, read through it, look up words you don't know, try to understand as much as you can, look up various translations, work out how the translators got what they did from it. Poets are very loose with grammar and vocab. Like anything else it just takes time.
Start with something relatively simpler, some of Catullus, some of Horace, maybe selections from Juvenal, Virgil, epigrams of Martial. Some will seem impossible, some will be almost readable. The key is to keep reading and learning. Getting better at prose will definitely help your poetry reading as well.

[Anonymous No.19957091]

>>19956388
That's nice. Why don't you read Latin then?

[Anonymous No.19957111]

>>19956551
>Sidwell and Jones
not a very good series. Which books are you using? Grammar + Exercises, Reader?

[Anonymous No.19957291]

FUSIONAL BEATS AGGLUTINATIVE
AND AGGLUTINATIVE BEATS ISOLATIVE
may every language EVOLVE to the point of sanskrit level inflection!
the harder for outsiders to learn the better!!
must have at least FIVE cases!
just fucking put four or even FIVE meanings inside one morpheme case!
DO IT!

[Anonymous No.19957315]

>>19957291
wait until you find out this thing called polysynthetic...

[Anonymous No.19957320]

>>19955554
I always thought it was strange that this book doesn't teach the correct ecclesiastical pronunciation but some amalgam of it and the reconstructed pronunciation.

[Anonymous No.19957357]

αὗτις

Was this where the word autism came from? “Back” or “back again”?

[Anonymous No.19957457]

>>19957357
No, it came from αὐτός, "self."

[Anonymous No.19957568]

What meter is this?

[Anonymous No.19957744]

>>19957568
Read to the end of this section, it reveals the meter. Not very intuitive with all those variations of the feet

[Anonymous No.19958271]

name a piece that would make good toilet paper?

[Anonymous No.19958279]

>>19958271
Wheelock's Latin

[Anonymous No.19958743]

>>19958271
Gwynne's latin

[Anonymous No.19959886]

>>19957091
If I'm going to be honest, because I'm lazy and haven't spent enough time working towards it yet.

[Anonymous No.19959963]

For studying Plato, is going into zlibrary and/or LibGen, typing (dialogue name) and downloading everything I can find a good method to find good commentary for understanding? too much?

[Anonymous No.19960571]

>>19958279
Obsessed

[Anonymous No.19961135]

>>19957111
Yeah we're using both the Text & Vocabulary book and the Grammar & Exercises one. Both my professor for last semester and the one teaching it this semester don't like it, so I'm not even really sure why it got picked.

[Anonymous No.19961196]

>>19957073
Thanks so much!

[Anonymous No.19961208]

You VILL subscribe to bald man
you VILL donate to his Patreon
You VILL buy his audiobooks
You VILL inpoot
You VILL read LLPSI
you VILL shit your pants when you reach Roma Æterna
You VILL give up as soon as you reach Livy
You VILL shill LLPSI in every CLG thread
You VILL like it

[Anonymous No.19961272]

>>19961208
reminder that reading LLPSI is practically useless unless you pair it with his audiobooks and The Ranieri Method

[Anonymous No.19961318]

>>19961208
PBUH

[Anonymous No.19961532]

Just created an Anki deck on the uniliteral hieroglyphs of Ancient Egyptian.
anonfiles dot com slash pa96p0Jbxe
That’s not spam.

[Anonymous No.19961545]

My index cards and Argonautica arrived. What am I in for lads?

[Anonymous No.19961611]

φωτῶν is a cool word…

[Anonymous No.19962085]

>>19961611
OwO

[Anonymous No.19962091]

I barely get participles
I dont get gerunds
I dont get gerundives
What the fuck is a supine

[Anonymous No.19962345]

>>19962091
Study has to be gradual, why are you asking for all those terms at once? How are you studying? Remember that grammar books are for consulting, not for learning.

[Anonymous No.19962400]

>>19961208
what is the hardest latin book to read ever composed?

[Anonymous No.19962412]

>>19962345
because up until this point learning this way has been working quite well actually and i am afraid that i have finally reached a plateau. ive made consistent progress with nearly no halting until now. god dont let it be true.

[Anonymous No.19962467]

Τιν᾽ανδρα, τιν᾽ηρωα, τινα θεον
I translated it to:
"Anyone’s man, anyone’s hero, anyone’s God"
Is that correct?

[Anonymous No.19962483]

>>19962400
Hardest is a relative term. For most probably Tacitus or Flaccus

[Anonymous No.19962511]

>>19962483
theres no way the most convoluted difficult author is someone famous like tacitus, it's surely some relative noname from 1600s germany or something

[Anonymous No.19962580]

>>19962511
Clearly you know better than I. Feel free to post it when you find it.

[Anonymous No.19962696]

>>19962400
wouldn't it be cicero?

[Anonymous No.19963202]

>>19962696
Certainly not. Cicero's Latin is relatively clear. There is a reason his contemporaries as well as successors considered him to be the greatest speaker and writer.
Cicero is difficult for beginners. Once you get his style he is remarkably smooth and easy to follow. Ranking authors by difficulty is a pointless endeavor but were you to do so Cicero would be soundly in the middle, possibly even at the lower end.
Not that the above comment on style applies to all Latin authors. Even Tacitus isn't too difficult once you get used to him.

[Anonymous No.19963254]

>>19963202
>Even Tacitus isn't too difficult once you get used to him.
What about Livy?

[Anonymous No.19963414]

>>19961208
I'm new to Bald Man (PBUH). Should I buy this to achieve full enlightenment?

[Anonymous No.19963481]

>>19963414
No, not really.

[Anonymous No.19963542]

>>19963414
I bought it and read it thoroughly. Not very information-dense. The main idea is you break down the text you want to memorize, then rote (lol ) from the end, increase the content towards the beginning.
e.g. material: AB CDE FGH IJK LMNO P QR STU VWX YZ
and he says you should rote (repeat the current section indefinitely) thus:
YZ
VWX YZ
STU VWX YZ
QR STU VWX YZ
P QR STU VWX YZ
LMNO P QR STU VWX YZ
IJK LMNO P QR STU VWX YZ
FGH IJK LMNO P QR STU VWX YZ
CDE FGH IJK LMNO P QR STU VWX YZ
AB CDE FGH IJK LMNO P QR STU VWX YZ
And he gives some texts for you to practice with. That's pretty much it. But it also includes stories of his life (how he chatted two Greek cuties, how he had a crush on a polyglot teacher in his highschool so he was interested in languages, how he traveled to his grandfather's hometown in Italy and upon seeing an Ovid's statue there he took out his notebook written with the verses from Ovid's Amores he first read in LLPSI and memorized them in front of the statue using the RANIERI REVERSE RECALL method, how he excelled his Latin and Greek school study in Italy and going back to the US to study Geology which I think is kind of based, how he learned Spanish in 2 weeks to get a Spanish teacher job, how he memorized military code of conduct when he served in the aire force, how he with the RANIERI REVERSE RECALL method became "fluent in Japanese in threes months living there"(sic) and made his own Japanese class for others at the military base. cont.

[Anonymous No.19963596]

https://youtu.be/krNKKZa6VP4

uh oh bros... he's become too powerful... is this is the potential of INPOOT?

[Anonymous No.19963667]

>>19963414
>>19963542
*in three months
Word count exceeded limit.

The exact words within context:(Chapter 9, page 70): "My previous language experience combined with Ranieri Reverse Recall proved sufficient to become fluent in Japanese in three months of living there. its grammar is actually fairly simple, I discovered, if bizarre to Westerners. After a year I had organized my own Japanese language course into night classes for Americans living on the military base, a part-time job that I adored. It was enormous fun."

It also includes this very important anecdote, which, if not fabricated, disproves the common claim in this thread that he is a homosexual.

[Anonymous No.19963682]

>>19963667
Fūfae! Why is my image turned?

[Anonymous No.19963705]

>>19963667
...

[Anonymous No.19963790]

>>19963596
I have to believe that you guys are shitposting when you worship this guy. I cannot believe anyone unironically thinks this guy is cool. I can't believe it.

[Anonymous No.19963842]

>>19963542
>>19963667
>>19963705
Thanks bro. I'll just end up buying it. Seems cheap enough and I don't mind supporting bald man (PBUH) considering all the free content he puts out

[Anonymous No.19963898]

>>19963254
Same applies. Once you get used to an author's style he becomes much easier to read. If you were to challenge yourself to read through all of Ab Urbe Condita by the 3rd book or so you would be noticeably quicker and by the end you would be whizzing through it.
There is always the matter of vocabulary but that becomes less of an issue once you get a feel for the style and syntax.

[Anonymous No.19963912]

>>19963790
ofc nigga take your meds i dont think anyone here is actually a fan of him. hes reddit tier but the thing is there isnt anyone else producing any digestible latin continent on yt or any other classical language for that matter so some people might settle for this walking mediocrity. ancient greek seems like it should command more attention online as well

[Anonymous No.19963914]

>>19963912
*content

[Anonymous No.19963930]

>>19963667
Thid and the above are bullshit.
Don't fall for hucksters

[Anonymous No.19964036]

>>19962467
i don't know which passage you're referring to, but if it's Pindar 2nd olympian then no it's τίνα with an accute on the first syllable which first of all is the interrogative and also accusative, so it matches the ανδρα θεον ηρωων. so it's "which god, which hero and which man (we do something to)"

[Anonymous No.19964042]

>>19963930
Did you get that Japanese girl at the end, Luke?

[Anonymous No.19964123]

>>19937916
Is Ancient Greek translation of the first Harry Potter book okay?

[Anonymous No.19964198]

>>19964123
Haven't heard many bad things about it but unless you're one of those people who have read it a thousand times already and know it by heart I don't really see a reason to learn Greek with it. The hours spent on nu-ancient Greek is time away from reading Diodorus Siculus, Xenophon and Lysias.

[Anonymous No.19964275]

>>19963414
Why does he have to name everything after himself. I know he can name things whatever he wants but he looks desperate.

[Anonymous No.19964317]

Luke's the kind of guy to fuck his girl in a slightly different way and call it the Ranieri Position™.

[Anonymous No.19964357]

>>19964036
It’s from Ezra Pound’s Hugh Selwyn Mauberly.

[Anonymous No.19964392]

>>19964123
see>>19964198
Why read translations of modern lit when you can read authentic authors?
HP is trash

[Anonymous No.19964408]

>>19964317
I mean yeah, in academia we call it The Ranieri Finish when you cum in Latin

[Anonymous No.19964495]

can someone post it in anoter way i can't download it because of the maxium of download

[Anonymous No.19964521]

>>19938066
another exercise in the next thread would be great. actually created some useful discussions and i learned a few things myself.

[Anonymous No.19964659]

>>19964521
Planning on it. Don't want to make them too frequently, one per thread as early as possible should do it. Maybe next one prose, will alternate.

[Anonymous No.19964990]

>>19962400
Manilius has a reputation for being extremely difficult. To a lesser extent, also Vitruvius. Tacitus is the most difficult writer read on the regular by students of Latin.

[Anonymous No.19965516]

>>19953773
You can find all necessary declension patterns in the back of Wheelock.

[Anonymous No.19965565]

>>19962580
i'm not trying to be a dick, i've definitely heard that about tacitus. I suppose i just meant that it's a dumb question.

[Anonymous No.19965607]

>>19964392
How late counts as authentic? Does, say, Medieval Latin count?

[Anonymous No.19965622]

>>19965607
i assume (and perhaps i'm being generous) that they just mean stuff originally written in the language rather than translations.

that said, i think there's also an argument to be made for focusing on earlier stuff as a basis for understanding the incredibly self-referential tradition that develops. like medieval authors (despite what renaissance clowns would have you believe) fucking loved the ancient roman authors. there's nothing wrong with reading medieval authors earlier, it certainly won't make you worse at latin like some people will claim, but a lot of it makes much more sense when you're familiar with their own source material.

[Anonymous No.19965641]

>>19965607
Yes. Authentic in those terms means originally written in Latin. Joke books like HP or Winnie Ille pooh or whatever dumb shit they have now are a complete waste of time. One has access to Ovid, Cicero, Virgil, and hundreds of others yet chooses the dumbest, most banal crap possible. By buying those books you encourage more to be made too.
Put it this way - if you were learning Russian and wanted to read Russian literature to further your understanding would you rather read War and Peace or Twilight translated into Russian by a non-native speaker?

[Anonymous No.19965657]

>>19965641
What about translations from the ancient world, like the Vulgate?

[Anonymous No.19965664]

>>19965607
I don't think the broad label "authentic" works as well for Latin as it does for Ancient Greek. Nobody wrote anything of significance in AG in the time of Leibniz.

[Anonymous No.19965671]

>>19965641
And what if your skill level isn't up to reading Ovid or Virgil? Modern compositions aimed at beginners seem perfectly reasonable to me.

[Anonymous No.19965677]

>>19965664
I thought some people still were, and for that matter weren't a lot of works in Greece still done in a heavily archaizing/Atticizing form rather than the modern spoken language?

[Anonymous No.19965726]

>>19965657
Vulgate might get a pass due to its historical significance. If you are truly interested in the Bible itself you should be learning Greek though. Can't be a Biblical scholar while only reading Latin.
Vulgate is a good bridge for beginners due to its simplicity. IMO you would be better off reading ancient authors. Again, works originally written in Latin by Latin speakers are far superior to those not.
>>19965671
People have been learning from Virgil and Ovid for well over a thousand years. The 'skill level' isn't as high as you might think and would be covered by any decent textbook which you should finish before attempting a second language anyways. If you think they are too hard read Caesar, or Isidorus, or Gellius, or Catullus.
I bought HP in Latin long ago on a whim. Have regretted it ever since. It is not suitable for beginners. It is not worthwhile for advanced readers. It has no redeeming literary value. It serves no purpose. If you are deadset on reading it then go ahead, but you would be much better off reading an ancient or medieval work intended to be written in Latin.
Let me repeat the question you ignored - as a learner of Russian would you rather read War and Peace or a translation of Twilight by a non-native speaker?

[Anonymous No.19965769]

>>19965726
>The 'skill level' isn't as high as you might think and would be covered by any decent textbook which you should finish before attempting a second language anyways

Suggest such a decent textbook that will adequately prepare me for Virgil and Ovid.

>Let me repeat the question you ignored - as a learner of Russian would you rather read War and Peace or a translation of Twilight by a non-native speaker?

I'm not interested in Twilight, but I would definitely try a translation of a work I am familiar with before attempting War and Peace.

[Anonymous No.19965802]

>>19965664
You are right of course, but just as an aside in case anyone is interested, there exists works like Laonikos Chalkokondyles' Histories as late as the 15th century, which I believe write in a language which closely imitates the ancients. I don't know how common this was. picrel

[Anonymous No.19965832]

>>19965769
>LLPSI
>Wheelock's
>Moreland and Fleischer
>Gildersleeve
I learned through Wheelock's. My first upper level Latin course was Virgil. Difficult but not nearly as hard as you might expect. By the middle of the semester it was much, much smoother. My friend's first course was Tacitus. Same experience.
The problem is not the textbook. The four above I have direct experience with, both in learning and in teaching. There are a dozen others I did not name of various qualities. Regardless of which you choose after finishing any textbook you should understand the basics well enough to begin reading any author on your own. Understanding the basics of grammar and vocabulary, a good dictionary and a reference grammar will carry you through almost any author you encounter.
If you can't then the problem is you, not the textbooks.
>I would definitely try a translation of a work I am familiar with before attempting War and Peace
That wasn't the question, but it doesn't matter, because with that attitude you will not succeed.

[Anonymous No.19965856]

>>19965802
More like a bastard child of Koine and Attic but it is fairly close to Ancient Greek, relatively speaking.

[Anonymous No.19965881]

>>19965832
>after finishing any textbook you should understand the basics well enough to begin reading any author on your own. Understanding the basics of grammar and vocabulary, a good dictionary and a reference grammar will carry you through almost any author you encounter.

I must be a special kind of stupid, then. This has not been my experience.

[Anonymous No.19965933]

>>19965881
Possibly. The solution is to read more Latin. Don't give up even if you have to look up every word on a page. Pick an author, pick a book, then pore over a section until you have it down.
Do you have a good dictionary and a good grammar? Good dictionaries should provide example sentences with definitions. Good grammars should as well.
More importantly do you have a good grasp of the fundamentals? Declension, conjugation, moods, tenses, subordination, clauses, conditionals, syntax? You don't have to have them mastered yet but you should have a thorough understanding of how they all work and how they work together. Latin loves subordinate clauses, especially relative ones. If not get a copy of Allen and Greenough's New Latin Grammar - cheap used or free from the Mega - and make it a mainstay of your reading. Not cover to cover but as a reference for constructions you will come across and as a review tool.

[Anonymous No.19966039]

>>19965933
>The solution is to read more Latin
Which is why I'm always looking for more beginner friendly reading material.

>Don't give up even if you have to look up every word on a page. Pick an author, pick a book, then pore over a section until you have it down.

If I'm doing that, I don't consider it reading. Isn't this the crossword puzzle approach everyone says to avoid? Besides, there are plenty of times when I can look up every single word and still not get the meaning of the whole.

>Declension, conjugation, moods, tenses, subordination, clauses, conditionals, syntax?
This stuff is usually easy enough. Or at least, textbooks make it seem that way.

>Allen and Greenough
I don't really understand how to use this

>Dictionary
I mostly use Lewis and Short via perseus

[Anonymous No.19966352]

>>19964495
use a free vpn to change ips

[Anonymous No.19966426]

aorist? in MY latin?

[Anonymous No.19966896]

Today I read about Egeria's journey to Mount Sinai, anons. It's a comfy Latin travel story by a cute nun. You should read it.

[Anonymous No.19966977]

>>19959963
You might want to be a bit more surgical. You might want to get 2-3 books, see the bibliographies, and then look for promising commentaries that way. Wikipedia's bibliography and bloggers may also be helpful.

[Anonymous No.19967422]

Today I went to a Catholic church in whose wall there was a Latin inscription. It was something like “… sponsa mea…” and “… veni coronaberis…”. Does anyone know where it is from (and of course the translation)?

[Anonymous No.19967527]

>>19967422
The bible, Songs of Songs, chapter 4, verse 8
>Veni de Libano, sponsa mea : veni de Libano, veni, coronaberis : de capite Amana, de vertice Sanir et Hermon, de cubilibus leonum, de montibus pardorum.
>Come with me from Lebanon, my spouse, with me from Lebanon: look from the top of Amana, from the top of Shenir and Hermon, from the lions' dens, from the mountains of the leopards.

[Anonymous No.19968028]

>>19966039
>If I'm doing that, I don't consider it reading. Isn't this the crossword puzzle approach everyone says to avoid?
Nevermind, you clearly know better than me. Keep doing what hasn't been working for you. If a bald faggot on youtube and nigger and women blogposters recommend it it must be good even if you aren't getting results, even if you still don't know how to use the most fundamental reference grammar of the language after years of study, even if you say things like
>I can look up every single word and still not get the meaning of the whole
>I must be a special kind of stupid, then. This has not been my experience.
>I'm always looking for more beginner friendly reading material.
Don't stop to question why you are still looking for beginner friendly material. The pedagogy is infallible, it's the authors who are wrong. Go ahead and buy Harrius Potter - even though you won't be able to read that either. Most importantly never stop to listen to what others have to say or consider other methods. The key to learning a language is to have a closed, one-track mind and never to deviate from the path you assume is right.

[Anonymous No.19968039]

>>19968028
lots of malding in this thread. condolences for your feelings.

[Anonymous No.19968183]

>>19968028
Jesus, dude. I'm clearly not an expert and I'm open to all sorts of advice.

I guess I'll just go fuck myself then.

[Anonymous No.19968477]

Cessate bella fratrorum.

Una via solum est.

Una lux solum est.

Sequimini sapientiam Lucii, viri magni calvique (PBUH)

[Anonymous No.19968655]

>>19963930
>>19964042
>hucksters
People our age don't use "huckster", it's quite old fashioned. And the defense was pretty direct for something of obscure interest. Is it really you Luke?

[Anonymous No.19968665]

Also guys, don't expect Luke to do a tone video for Japanese. Different regions in Japan use different tone patterns, so it's actually stupid to expect one man to do a video set on what would require around 60 videos to do properly, for a comprehensive set of intro vids, when he already is very invested in two languages.

[Anonymous No.19968667]

>>19968665
Tone/pitch accent

[Luke Amadeus Ranieri, Polyglot No.19968718]

Yes, it is I, the one true Luke Ranieri, creator of classical content for the learning pleasure of many a young internet scholar. AMA.

[Anonymous No.19968933]

>>19968718
Are you going to start teaching Arabic on your channel?

[Anonymous No.19969154]

The second stanza of o fortuna from Carmina Burana. Why is this translated as "to your villainy"? tuī sceleris can only be genetive right? But then it makes less sense. "I bring my bare back of? your wickedness"??? Can anyone explain please

[Anonymous No.19969235]

If I were to focus my energies on learning one language should it be classic Latin or Greek?
I have no experience in learning another language in any fashion and I would like to try it.

[Anonymous No.19969254]

>>19969154
Okay I think I can make tuī sceleris linked with lūdum ("now through the game of your wickedness I bear a naked back"), a lot better.

But now in the third stanza, why is corde translated as "string"? That should be "chordam"(acc.). corde can only be the abl. singular of cor, cordis, MEANING HEART, NOT STRING. I checked the translation in French and Italian and both give "string" in this line. Please help

[Anonymous No.19969294]

>>19969254
Finally a translation that confirms my speculation. I know no German grammar at all but I can see it's translated as "heart" here. Fuck all those other sloppy translators, I doubt they didn't even looked up the Latin texts, they probably just translated from English.

So now this makes enough sense. "feel the expelled with the heart"

[Anonymous No.19969297]

>>19969294
*look up

[Anonymous No.19969547]

>>19969254
Most likely the translator went by corde = medieval spelling of chordae

[Anonymous No.19969563]

Is there a website or an app that asks you to conjugate or decline a word? There ought to be one for every major language. It seems to be a no-brainer.

[Anonymous No.19969655]

>>19969563
https://cooljugator.com/

[Anonymous No.19969716]

>>19969655
I clearly asked if there was a website or an app that asks you to conjugate or decline words, not a website that just gives you conjugation tables.

[Anonymous No.19969926]

Can anyone give me some basic pointers on the different grammar points for reading the Vulgate? I know there are texts for Ecclesiastical Latin, but they also contain all regular Classical grammar as well. It helps to know that it is a translation of the Greek and Hebrew texts, but other than minding that, is there any other source for differences?

[Anonymous No.19970351]

>>19969154
you should maybe read fero in the sense suffero, "to bear or put up with, to suffer, tolerate, endure"
>>19969547
I think this reading makes more sense, pulsus as a noun meaning "striking, playing of a musical instrument" is attested, otherwise you have a very awkward reading of tangite as an intransitive

[Anonymous No.19970386]

>>19969926
A lot of the case structures weaken, so you see ablatives where you'd expect accusatives and stuff like that. Some words weaken: tamen becomes a weak conjunction, the demonstrative pronoun ille starts to look like a definite article, habeo loses its literal meaning "to hold," etc. There are a few new constructions, like an infinitive on its own to express purpose, but most of them are quite intuitive to English speakers.

Generally, it's like classical Latin with a lot of loosening of the rules. If you know classical Latin, you'll be able to read much Late Latin and Medieval Latin with little trouble.

[Anonymous No.19970472]

Why are people who study this stuff so gay? I literally did a Classics major and was driven away from Latin/Greek and historical linguistics/philology by the sheer h*mosex you people exude. Literally just learn the language. The bald man is a con.

[Anonymous No.19970587]

>>19969926
Instead of accusative + infinitive for indirect speech, you see many instances of quod + finite verb (subjunctive).

[Anonymous No.19970845]

>>19970386
>>19970587
Thank you, I'll keep an eye out for this stuff. Cheers

[Anonymous No.19971357]

>>19970472
If you actually liked Classics you would've stayed in it, no need to project
t. Classical Languages major

[Anonymous No.19971363]

>>19970472
Did you consider that perhaps you are the homosex?

[Anonymous No.19971444]

>>19968665
Aren't most people teaching Japanese just teaching the standard language?

[Anonymous No.19971458]

>>19969655
Why does it have Thai? Thai doesn't have conjugations, it's isolating. Same goes for Hawaiian. And Esperanto conjugation is so regular it's stupid to give it separately for every word.

[Anonymous No.19971842]

>>19970472
I've noticed a lot of gay people in linguistics too. (I mean, I'm bi too...)

[Anonymous No.19972439]

Is being able to read ancient greek comfortably in 2 years a reasonable goal?

[Anonymous No.19972440]

>>19969926
in some middle evil anglo Latin texts they used habere as an auxiliary for the perfect past which reflected how they used it in their vulgar language (and how it still works in modern English) instead of using the classical perfect conjugation

example
English
>I have written

Middle Anglo Latin
>Habeo scriptum

Classical Latin
>Scripsi

[Anonymous No.19972457]

>>19972440
>middle evil
medieval* kek

[Anonymous No.19972701]

>>19972440
This is not an "Anglo" thing. It happened in Latin in general and it survives in Romance languages.

[Anonymous No.19972925]

What are the best supplements for LLPSI

[Anonymous No.19972974]

>>19972925
Sermones Romani, Epitome Historiae Sacrae, Fabulae Syrae

>>19972439
With or without a dictionary every couple minutes?

[Anonymous No.19973647]

>>19972925
https://libgen.li/edition.php?id=138881477

https://libgen.li/edition.php?id=138881658

There are two companion books literally designed for LLPSI, with explanation of grammar and history in English

[Anonymous No.19973696]

Can we maybe put some more resource links in the OP next time? For Wheelock, LLPSI, supplements, etc. It seems like this general gets alot of entry level questions we could preemptively address with more info in the OP.

[Anonymous No.19973718]

>>19973696
yeah I agree. I wasn't the previous OP and the thread was about to be archived. So, add links for Wheelock, LLPSI, what else?

[Anonymous No.19973806]

interesting video about contemporary greeks trying to read ancient greek https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qe0_BKkfg6g

[Anonymous No.19973812]

>>19973718
Maybe a couple readers (38 Latin Stories and things like that), and some Greek stuff. I learned out of Alpha and Omega, but some people seem to like Athenaze. The last thing off the top of my head is that some dictionaries might be good.

Honestly I feel that this general has enough interest from new people that at some point it might be worth making a /clg/ wiki with recommended reading orders, audio recording, other resources (like books on meter or theory), that sort of stuff. People can collect stuff for their own languages. A couple threads ago someone linked a YouTube channel that was doing tutorials for Coptic, and I couldn't help but think it would be nice for a resource like that to be easily findable by a potential Coptic-learner.

[Anonymous No.19974176]

>>19973696
>>19973812
Pretty sure all of that is in the mega. Do you mean specific guides?

[Anonymous No.19974653]

>Feminae filios sospites e bello redituros esse sperabant

The women hoped, that their sons would return home safe from war.

Die Frauen hofften, dass die Söhne heil aus dem Krieg heimkehren würden.

I dont understand why sospites functions the way it does. Its an adjective related to filios, so it should be "that the safe sons return home" I just dont understand how it can be in accusative.

[Anonymous No.19974679]

>>19974653
It is accusative because it is related to filios. It is a predicate adjective. This is especially common whenever you have esse or any of its forms. For example 'the dog is happy' vs. 'the happy dog'
Consider 'safe sons'. Safe from what? How does 'e bello' come into play? wouldn't the translation then be
>the women hoped that their safe sons would return home from war
This is as confusing in English as it would be in Latin. Again, safe from what?
Look at how close 'sospites' and 'e bello' are. That is intentional.
>their sons, safe from war,
The phrase is embedded within the main subordinate clause, the the sons would return. This embedding is very common in Latin and was considered the sign of a good writer. See the attached image color coded for your convenience.

[Anonymous No.19974687]

>>19974653
the women hoped the sons as safe ones (predicative use of the adjective) to be returning home from war. I don't understand much latin only greek but this is how it usually works. Also known as AcI (accusativus cum infinitivo) where you have the accusative object as seeming to be the object of a subclause with the infinitive.
the difference between predicative and attributive position of the adjective is hard to detect in Latin because you don't have articles, but it has to be guessed from context. predicative describes the subject doing something as something of this or that kind, while the attributive use only describes the subject in itself. examples (i use English because i don't kniw latin like i said and you don't know greek) :
predicative: Alexander (being the) first (to do so) conquered Persia.
attributive: Alexander (the) first conquered Persia.

[Anonymous No.19974693]

>>19974679
>>19974687
thanks, stupid me forgetting about predicativum

[Anonymous No.19974753]

Found about 100000 various LLPSI's at libgen and b-ok. Which are proper?

[Anonymous No.19975131]

>studying latin since early january
>wheelock chapter 4

[Anonymous No.19975215]

>>19975131
Going to assume you are lazy and unmotivated rather than stupid
Set a schedule and stick to it. Create a routine
Study daily, minimum 20 minutes. 20 minutes a day is better than 3 hours once a week
Short review to begin a session then new material
Don't give up
Stick to the routine

[Anonymous No.19975336]

>>19974753
"Familia Romana" is the only one you need. All the rest are optional.

[Anonymous No.19975345]

>>19974176
Yes. The point would be so that newcomers have an easy resource to answer common questions like "What are good supplements to LLPSI?" and "What is a good dictionary I should buy?" Most of those people won't see the mega and think, "Oh, whatever I want is probably in there," they'll just ask a question in the thread first. But if we have something akin to an FAQ they can look at, that might handle it ahead of time.

[Anonymous No.19975353]

>>19975345
We can't have a FAQ because Sola LLPSI tards will throw a fit if anything other than that series gets mentioned while not actually having finished it or reading Latin themselves

[Anonymous No.19975372]

>>19975345
This thread is nearing bump limit, I'll make a new one and have that be the topic, brainstorming for a FAQ

[Anonymous No.19975394]

New Thread>>19975391
New Thread>>19975391
New Thread>>19975391