/clg/ — Classical Languages General

[Anonymous No.19993065]

No Latin learners edition. Absolutely no discussion about Latin textbooks or how to learn Latin. I will not name them, lest they begin to ree, but there is a certain group of Latin learners that have no clue what they are talking about and continually shit up these threads.

Previous Thread: >>19975391

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

[Anonymous No.19993068]

first for zyzz

[Anonymous No.19993171]

Everyone raves about 19th century Russian authors, but what is good Russian Classical literature? I don't read Russian and imagine most others don't, so we will need translated recs.

[Anonymous No.19993173]

Iratus est

[Anonymous No.19993188]

What are good Ancient Greek dictionaries?

[Anonymous No.19993439]

>>19993188
LSJ: Commonly known as the Liddell, it comes in three forms, the Little, Middle, and Big.
Autenrieth: A Homeric dictionary
Cambridge Greek Lexicon: This one just came out in 2021. It started out as a rewrite of Liddell, but then, they just started from scratch.

There are other dictionaries in other languages, but I am not familiar with those. If you want to go from English into Greek, then I recommend the Woodhouse.
https://artflsrv03.uchicago.edu/efts/woodhouse/woodhouse_search.html (not as fancy as the version below, but I prefer it)
https://perseids-project.github.io/woodhouse-js/

If you want online dictionaries, I recommend Logeion and Perseus. For parsing info in Loegeion, click on Morpho at the top right. One tip for Perseus, they have a shit website. Their parsing info is generally less trustworthy, in my experience, than Morpho, but when you have a text pulled up, be it Greek or Latin, you can click on a word and get a definition in the next window. That's really nice. I like to have one screen dedicated to the text and another screen dedicated to the dictionary. To navigate Perseus, don't use their website. Go to Google. If you want Xenophon's Anabasis, google "Xenophon's Anabasis Perseus Greek". They also have English translations, so you might want to do the same, except substitute English for Greek in your search. For anything on Perseus I don't trust, I check Logeion.
https://logeion.uchicago.edu/
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph

[Anonymous No.19993444]

>>19993439
Oh, I almost forgot. You can find the Cambridge dictionary on Libgen. It was posted there right after it came out and is high quality.

[Anonymous No.19993571]

>>19993439
Thank you very much, anon!

[Anonymous No.19994165]

What's your favorite poem by Horace?

[Anonymous No.19994190]

Does anyone know good resources for learning classical Persian? I've figured out modern Farsi for the most part, but the only stuff worth reading seems to be pre-1400AD.

[Anonymous No.19994658]

>>19994165
I was translating Odes 1.11 today. The editor is awful, and my professor's reliance on the editor makes the class infuriating. In 1.11, there was not a single useful comma. Certain vocab suggestions were retarded, especially when compared against the translations I checked.

[Anonymous No.19994673]

>>19994190

If I were you I would research methodologies on how people translate and read Hafez and Rumi poetry.

[Anonymous No.19994758]

>>19993065
Couldn't wait until the other one hit bump limit? Good way to get jannies to nuke both retard

[Anonymous No.19995072]

Anyone learning Gothic?

[Anonymous No.19995112]

>>19995072
Do they have many texts? How good are they?

[Anonymous No.19995143]

>>19993065
Why can't I read classical arabic texts without the vowel marks? Is it my vocab?

[Anonymous No.19995147]

>>19995112
As far as I know, only the gothic bible survived, there's not much of a literary tradition for goths

[Anonymous No.19995165]

>>19994190
"Introduction to Persian" by Thackston has a short section on classical and archaic Persian. Then just get some classical Persian text side by side with good English translation and study it thoroughly. I have the Gulistan with a good 19th century translation by Francis Gladwin. Thackston also has a bilingual Persian-English Gulistan.

[Anonymous No.19995177]

Finna gonna pay bald man for Lucian pronunciation.

Should i tho frfr tho

[Anonymous No.19995191]

>>19995143
I don't know Arabic, but I do know Hebrew/Aramaic. I was once like you, but then, I learned how to read without pointing (vowels). It's just a matter of familiarity. It will definitely come to you eventually. It won't happen all at once, but you'll find yourself looking up things less, being puzzled less. I'm not perfect, but like I said, I used to think I would never manage without vowels, and now, they aren't that big of deal, although they are important enough that there are scholars dedicated to them.

[Anonymous No.19995252]

>>19995143
Practice reading the Quran until you've drilled it in. It may seem like a boring text but there isn't a better way to learn Classical Arabic. You've got resources like https://quran.com which gives you the text with full diacritics and audio.

[Anonymous No.19995266]

>>19995143
>vowel marks

Those are called diacritics and, yeah, it is basically a vocabulary thing. As you pick up more words you need fewer diacritics.

[Anonymous No.19995358]

>>19993065
I'm older than you, I have achieved more than you, I have more self control than you. That means I'm right and you're wrong.

[Anonymous No.19995974]

gm /clg/

[Anonymous No.19995984]

>>19995358
Is Cato the Elder the original incel?

[Anonymous No.19996170]

>>19995191
Can you read Classical Arabic texts from the Middle Ages by learning only modern Arabic?

[Anonymous No.19996278]

New Catullus for you guys: Carmen 12. This one's not too hard, but there's a few grammatical features that hopefully filter some plebs. I will post my translation in a few hours if anyone wants it

Proper names in case your dictionaries don't have them:
Asinius Marrucinus: one of the targets of the poem, brother of Pollio
Asinius Pollio: actually a relatively famous soldier/writer of the era), brother of Marrucinus
Saetabus: "from Saetabis", a town in Hispania known for its fine linen
Hiberes: Greek name for the Iberians, Catullus often uses Greek terminology, a feature of the neoteric poets in general
Fabullus: a friend of Catullus', also mentioned briefly in Pliny, notably, his name cannot be diminutivized in the last line as it's already derived from a diminutive of Fabius
Veranius: another friend of Catullus'

[Anonymous No.19996773]

>>19996278
I just translated it for class a few weeks ago. Here's what's in my notebook.

[Anonymous No.19998209]

.

[Anonymous No.19999240]

>>19998209
Thank you for keeping this most based thread alive.

Isn't it interesting that the Catalogue of Ships is highly prized by scholars, but it is hated by general readers? My first exposure to the Iliad was in a long car ride when I was in high school. I was listening on my iPod, and the Catalogue of Ships filtered me. I kept listening because there was nothing else to do, but I didn't listen to it again until taking a class in college, and now, I'm nearly done with my Classics BA, although I might not apply for graduation, but that's for different reasons.
I'm sure there are a lot of people here who hate this section of the Iliad. I'm interested if there are any people who like it on literary, not historical, merits.

[Anonymous No.19999291]

helo

[Anonymous No.19999361]

>>19993171
Anything by Leodor Tolstoyevsky. Death and Punishment is a good start.

[Anonymous No.19999419]

>>19999361
>Wow. That's so great. I'm glad you recommended something I specifically did not ask for. I cannot believe it. I simply cannot believe it.

[Anonymous No.19999426]

>>19999419
LOST

[Anonymous No.20000595]

Is it worth learning Sanskrit pronunciation?

[Anonymous No.20000772]

>>20000595
do you want to speak it or listen to things in it? if yes, then you have to learn it. if not, then not really.

[Anonymous No.20001263]

>>19993065
But Latin is the classical language that most of us are in the process of learning.

[Anonymous No.20001399]

>>19993188
I'd go with the new Cambridge one. The intermediate L&S is very outdated.

[Anonymous No.20001572]

>>20001263
Yea, and there are other things you can talk about besides INPOOOT. For just this one thread, you can't talk about textbooks and learning strategies. Dictionaries are allowed. The point of this is to take momentum away from non-genuine people who shill a particular pedagogical approach because it has become a meme. It would be considered unfair if I just prohibited discussion relating to this one approach, so I decided to scrap all of it. It's not like there was any constructive discussion about learning Latin in these threads. Feel free to talk about Ovid or ask about how to learn Classical Chinese.

[Anonymous No.20001587]

>>20001572
>Feel free to talk about Ovid or ask about how to learn Classical Chinese.
Via lots of input, obviously. Check out Stephen Krashen.

[Anonymous No.20001759]

>>20001587
Lmfao

[Anonymous No.20001802]

>>19996278
>Marrucine Asini, manu sinistra
>non belle uteris in ioco atque vino:
>tollis lintea neglegentiorum.
Oh Marrucinus Asinus, you use your left hand poorly in jest and in wine: you take up the linens of neglectful ones

>hoc salsum esse putas? fugit te, inepte!
Do you think this is salted? It flees (to?) you, oh inept one

>quamvis sordida res et invenusta est
>non credis mihi? crede Pollioni
>fratri, qui tua furta vel talento
>mutari velit; est enim leporum
>disertus puer ac facetiarum.
Whatever the dirty and unattractive thing is
you don't believe me? Believe (your) brother Pollionus,
who would like your theft to be changed in weight;
for he is a much discussed boy of charm and wit

>quare aut hendecasyllabos trecentos
>exspecta, aut mihi linteum remitte,
>quod me non movet aestimatione,
>verum est mnemosynum mei sodalis.
Whether you wait for three hundred hendecasyllable lines
or return to me the linen,
it matters not to my opinion,
it is a true memorial of my friend

>nam sudaria Saetaba ex Hiberis
>miserunt mihi muneri Fabullus
>et Veranius: haec amem necesse est
>et Veraniolum meum et Fabullum.
For Fabullus and Veranius send Saetabian hankerchiefs from Hiberes to me as a favor:
It is necessary (that?) these I would love
My dear Veranius and Fabullus

Still a few things I'm uncertain about.

[Anonymous No.20001811]

>>19993065
You're about 40MB short of the meme number on your mega zip file, buddy.

>>19993068
RIP

[Anonymous No.20001939]

>>19995266
Doesn't it also help if you start picking up on the morphological patterns?

[Luke Amadeus Ranieri, Polymath(...) No.20002723]

Bumping, for I hate Latin and all Latin students.

[Anonymous No.20003535]

>>19999291
Akkadian?

[Anonymous No.20003653]

>>19999291
>>20003535
Akkadian is a most based language, but it seems to be very difficult to learn. By that, I mean there aren't many schools that teach it and those that do are highly prestigious. I actually wanted to learn it, but when I found out that the field is already oversaturated, I decided to stay in my own lane of Classics and Biblical studies.

[Anonymous No.20003751]

For Latin, do I go with Shelmerdine or Wheelock? What's the difference between the two?

[Anonymous No.20003970]

I made a cross-board thread here >>>/his/12944081

I'll continue to bump this one for OP for his good initiative. We'll see how the different boards habituate with the threads.

[Anonymous No.20004381]

>four threads
dumbassesb

[Anonymous No.20004483]

Q-Celtic is better than Latin
Less nonsense in conjugations. Only one conjugation.

[Anonymous No.20004527]

>>20004381
I know, what's the point?

[Anonymous No.20005732]

Why are Latin learners so autistic? Never seen another language where people are so obsessed with meticulously taking apart grammar structures and trying to give them some kind retarded name like "2nd person active imperative singular present".

[Anonymous No.20005760]

>>20005732
Because if you want to understand Latin you need to understand grammar and vice versa. These generals have given us a million reasons to hate Latin learners but this isn't one of them.

[Anonymous No.20005782]

>>20005760
>Because if you want to understand Latin you need to understand grammar
Yes, but my point is that an intuitive understanding is more than enough. Do you really think Latin the average Latin speaker back in the day was even actively thinking about this stuff? All you need to know is how a tense is used in context. You don't need to be able to name it.

[Anonymous No.20005902]

>>20005782
>t. can't read Latin

[Anonymous No.20005934]

>>20005782
Nothing wrong with understanding grammar.
Also: >>20005902

[Anonymous No.20005990]

>>20005934
>Nothing wrong with understanding grammar.
Who said it's wrong? I'm saying it's unnecessary yet people pretend that you absolutely cannot understand Latin without doing so.

>>20005902
Project harder.

[Anonymous No.20005993]

>>20005782
>an intuitive understanding is more than enough
Not if you want to discuss it with others or explain it to new learners. It's useful to have names for things.

>Q: Hey, why is 'bono' dative in this sentence?
>A1: It just is, man. It feels like a dative, you know?
>A2: Oh, we call that a dative of purpose. When you want to express what something is for (i.e., it's purpose), you use the dative case. You can check a reference grammar for 'dative of purpose' and find more examples and explanation

Which answer is more helpful?

[Anonymous No.20006006]

>>20005993
>Not if you want to discuss it with others or explain it to new learners.
Fair enough if you care about these things.

[Anonymous No.20006148]

>>20006006
Most of us are learners and not native speakers, so such terms are helpful.

[Anonymous No.20006225]

>>20006006
Do you speak Latin?

[Anonymous No.20006237]

>>20005782
This is the type of person making LLPSI fans look bad with his immersion mysticism

[Anonymous No.20006263]

>>20006237
>picking up a language via context is mysticism
not that anon but that's an absolutely inane statement

[Anonymous No.20006290]

>>20006263
O master of context, divine thou with thine second sight from the context of my post that I was talking about excessive and exclusive reliance on immersion: "immersion mysticism," not "immersion"

[Anonymous No.20006304]

Not a single argument has been made as to why you *need* to be familiar with these terms and classifications to learn Latin. It's all moving goalposts, or name-calling.

[Anonymous No.20006362]

>>20006304
Because no one is making that argument. It's a strawman you brought up so you could continue baitposting about immersion good, grammar bad instead of actually discussing classical languages and literature.

[Anonymous No.20006375]

>>20006304
All language functions by abstracting universals (concepts) from particulars (individuals). Distinguishing your tools from your non-tool things is useful, distinguishing your wrenches from your hammers is useful, distinguishing your torque wrench is useful. Different levels of specificity and specialization will be appropriate for different people and different situations. Most people, including Renaissance humanists who lived and breathed Latin in a way that probably was only accomplished by a handful of people in the last century, made use of linguistic abstractions to guide their immersion.

The word "Latin" is itself a "term" and "classification." It's an abstraction that groups together various forms of languages spoken across many centuries, distinguishing them simultaneously from other Italic dialects, other Indo-European languages and their dialects, and from various forms of vulgar and late Latin, which some consider to be borderline cases but which generally fall outside what is learned in a "Latin class." Why learn any of this? Why not just show up to the first day of "Latin class" and go by pure feeling, without ever finding out you were actually learning a mix of Oscan and 8th century proto-Italian that won't help you read Cicero or Valla?

Same principle applies to learning the conventional minimum of useful terms of art for guiding your studies and enabling you to look things up, which you will need to do if you ever want to read classical texts without didactic annotations.

[Anonymous No.20006376]

>>19993065
>Two, not necessarily mutually exclusive, explanations have been offered:

>The first explanation was offered by Cicero (Orator §154), who believed that the normal word order of cum nōbīs "with us" would sound too much like cunnō bīs "twice in the cunt", so the words were reversed. This reversal was then applied to cum vōbīs, cum mē, cum tē, and cum sē.

>A modern explanation is that the word ordering comes from the fact that in Proto-Indo-European the word *ḱóm (from which cum derives) was an adverb, not a preposition that it became in Latin. As such the *ḱom could appear before or after the object pronoun since it was the object of the verb, not the object of a preposition. As these special particles evolved into prepositions this word order became archaic even though it was still commonly used. Thus the contraction nōbīscum (and mēcum, etc.) evolved into an adverb in its own right.

Which one is it fellas?

[Anonymous No.20007121]

>>20006376
Most likely the latter, as fun as the former is.
>>20006362
A lotta people are telling LLPSI supporters "you can't read Latin" or "you can't learn Latin with LLPSI". (Never mind that it DOES explicitly teach grammar, it just introduces the grammatical concepts by example first.)

[Anonymous No.20007339]

>>20005782
all latin learners are first year classics students and are being drilled boomer grammar into their heads which they parrot around in here like le based bois they are.
Math threads on /sci/ are comparable to these threads

[Anonymous No.20007350]

>>20007339
>beginner students outnumber intermediate students and intermediate students outnumber teachers, this pyramid is upside down

[Anonymous No.20007714]

>thread devolves into butthurt LLPSI mud flinging
>again
good job

[Anonymous No.20007840]

>>20007714
Next time I see the conversation devolve into pointless arguing and screaming, I swear a certain button will be used.

[Anonymous No.20007889]

>>20007121
>A lotta people are telling LLPSI supporters "you can't read Latin" or "you can't learn Latin with LLPSI". (Never mind that it DOES explicitly teach grammar, it just introduces the grammatical concepts by example first.)

Stop engaging with this stupid shit, you jackass.It ruins every single thread.

[Anonymous No.20008100]

>>19994190
>>19995165
Good suggestions, if you're going with a bilingual edition of the Gulistan, I would suggest this one though:
https://ferdosi.com/pages/product/?product=0&id=9649283420
It's a revised translation of Gladwin's, but with the original Persian first, followed by the definitions for every word, finally followed by the revised translation. I think it's far superior to the Thackston edition as an aid to students and the translation is decent as well. The only drawback is that there aren't any diacritics so the student will struggle with pronouncing the words as well as recognizing when words are linked in an ezafe construction. The latter should be easy if they look at the definitions and translation though.

[Anonymous No.20008421]

>>20007889
And that's why it's banned in this thread.

[Anonymous No.20008737]

>>19995147
A lot of texts were destroyed due to their Arian contents. This sad fate has met all old Germanic languages apart from Old Icelandic and English.

[Anonymous No.20009368]

>>20008100
Thanks senpai, that's a fantastic resource

[Anonymous No.20009444]

>>19993171
19th century is classical for Russia. There barely was a literary scene before that. There were a few books of piety and religious poetry of note, but those were mostly in Slavonic rather than Russian.

[Anonymous No.20009471]

>>19996170
Short answer, not really. Of course it's much easier for an Arabic speaker to learn Classical Arabic but that's not an argument.
Never ever under any circumstance learn a related language instead of the language you actually want to speak/read.
Modern Standard Arabic is a bit of a meme btw.

[Anonymous No.20009501]

>>20005782
From our information of ancient times, Latin and Greek speakers actually were autistic about the grammar of those languages. Being a grammarian was seen as prestigious. The amount of texts related to grammar that have survived is surprisingly large. Same is largely true of Sanskrit btw.

[Anonymous No.20010325]

Which classical language to learn if I intend on becoming the ubermensch to save Evropa / the West? Latin? Avestan? Sanskrit?

[Anonymous No.20010332]

>>20009501
This. Philology is an essentially holy practice

[Anonymous No.20010335]

>>20010325
greek latin and chinese

[Anonymous No.20010353]

What's a good Latin dictionary? As in, in Latin. Not a Latin-English dictionary.

[Anonymous No.20010572]

After 2 months of Cambridge's Sanskrit i gonna start the assimil method because i'm bored of grammar, grammar, grammar.
I'm retarded and finally i accepted it.

[Anonymous No.20010924]

>>20010572
Literally everyone learns a little differently

[Anonymous No.20010983]

>>19993065
Anyone know where I can find this pirated?

[Anonymous No.20011015]

>>20010983
https://a.cockfile.com/BcodiO.zip

[Anonymous No.20011027]

>>20011015
Damn, thank you anon.

[Anonymous No.20011040]

>>20011015
ecce basedus anonus

[Anonymous No.20011261]

>>20010983
Latin learning discussion is specifically prohibited, particularly to stop LLPSI shills and devotees of the bald fag from starting shit. You have yet to fling shit in this thread, thanks for that, but please don't discuss Latin textbooks or pedagogy here. We're trying to keep it clean for at least one general. Good luck with your Latin journey.

[Anonymous No.20011272]

>>20009444
Slavonic. Cool. Thanks for the help.

[Anonymous No.20011437]

>>20011261
Obsessed

[Anonymous No.20011524]

>>20011261
Latin.
Lingua Latina per Familia Romana。
Dowling.

[Anonymous No.20011629]

>>20009471
A meme in what sense?

[Anonymous No.20011635]

>>20010353
The only one I know off the top of my head is Latin Wiktionary but if you go to r/latin and search 'monolingual' I think there are some relevant threads.

[Anonymous No.20011736]

>>19993173
quem putas iratum esse?

[Anonymous No.20011891]

>>20006376
cunno bis holly fucking kek cicero

[Anonymous No.20011978]

>>20011261
>atin learning discussion is specifically prohibited
By whose authority?
You have no power here, faggot. Though I agree that those kinda people often come across a bit weird if you just learned Latin in school and university.

[Anonymous No.20011987]

>>20009471
I don't agree with that unless you're talking about self learning. Going into classical Arabic with a year of in person classes with a native speaker you're gonna be much farther ahead.

[Anonymous No.20012020]

>>20010353
>>20010353
Thesaurus Linguae Latinae is the most thorough though it only goes up to P
Wagner's Lexicon Latinum though there is a bit of French
Forcellini's Lexicon Totius Latinitatis is quite good, see below
http://www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu/25_90_1688-1768-_Forcellini_Aeg.html

[Anonymous No.20012061]

An exercise for /clg/
This is an excerpt from Cicero'd De Oratore, Book 1, 221-222. Post your translations and see how they compare with those of others.

[Anonymous No.20012237]

>>20012061
Translating Latin into German is much easier, English feels way too limited due to the lack of grammar so it's more difficult and often impossible to give a precise translation, though I guess you can often do a lot less wrong in terms of the minutiae of grammar since you're forced to take more liberties in translating things anyway.
The orator however, does those things, which are considered to be bad and bothersome and (/or) things that should be avoided in general practice/habit/custom/consuetude(if you're Scottish) with much greater and harsher words.
Likewise he makes those things, which are generally seen as desirable and things one should strive towards, greater and embellishes them by speaking.
And he does not want to be seen as so smart among idiots that those who listen (I'd just write the audience if I wouldn't try to be precise to make it easier for beginners to understand here, any Latin teacher would accept that), either think him incompetent and a little Greek (he means "smartass") or even though they very much approve of his talent (and) admire the wisdom of the orator get upset (because) they think themselves stupid (in comparison).

Words in parentheses added by me, obviously. Latin is too elliptic not to if you want a readable translation sometimes.
I'll leave the other half to others.

[Anonymous No.20012241]

>>20012237
>does
Forgot to add, pretty sure he means "describes" or something along the lines here, I just stuck to does for facit because no context is given.

[Anonymous No.20012286]

>>20012241
>>20012237
Actually I'm retarded.
Facit is make, not does here. In German in works out but the difference in English confused me.
>much greater and harsher
Describes the things mentioned before, obviously, since it's grammatically congruent to those. Not "words."
So it should be:
>The orator however, makes those things, which are considered to be bad and bothersome and (/or) things that should be avoided in general practice/habit/custom/consuetude(if you're Scottish) much greater and harsher with words.

Simple fix, I hate English.

[Anonymous No.20012303]

>>20012286
>Simple fix, I hate English.
then post a German translation instead of bitching about it for half your post

[Anonymous No.20012311]

>>20012286
(With that correction I'd also add in a "seem" in parentheses somewhere there since that's obviously the intended meaning.)

[Anonymous No.20012327]

>>20012303
What would be the point of that you massive retard?
Are you some kind of egocentric negroid subhuman who gets off on sollipsistic masturbation?

[Anonymous No.20012372]

Anybody know Classical Japanese? I’m trying to figure out the order of verb suffixes. My textbook says they go 人為・自然+完了・存続+推量・記憶・否定, but doesn’t really give specific examples.

What I’m looking for is a bon-exhaustive list of common combinations of suffixes or just conjugated verbs with multiple suffixes, as in 食べただろう、食べなかっただろう、食べられなかっただろう

[Anonymous No.20012464]

>>20012327
Other posters in previous threads have posted translations in several languages. You are the only one to not do so yet bitch about English
The greatest irony is that you accuse others of solipsism* yet seem to believe you are the only German speaker here
You're welcome for the spelling correction. Please feel free to seethe about this in English

[Anonymous No.20012522]

>>20011978
By the OP and 4chan's rules. I'm the OP btw. The topic of the thread is everything /clg/ except stuff related to learning Latin. That means it was an off-topic comment, and off-topic is against 4chan's rules.

[Anonymous No.20012525]

>>20012522
You might be the most retarded and egotistical anon I've ever seen.

Can I get that in Latin?

[Anonymous No.20012543]

>>20012522
ἀγαθόν
>>20012525
κακόν

[Anonymous No.20012553]

>>20012464
>Other posters in previous threads have posted translations in several languages.
Doesn't matter what others do when the whole point is for people to understand it and English is the lingua franca of our time, retard.
>You are the only one to not do so yet bitch about English
So? How pathetic are you to get so triggered by people pointing out the disadvantages of English lmao
>The greatest irony is that you accuse others of solipsism*
Solipsistic was the adjective niggerboy.
>but muh second L
Are you gonna cry about that too as if you never have a typo in your posts? What a hypocritical kike you are.
>yet seem to believe you are the only German speaker here
No I believe that most don't speak German, which is what matters. Your entire worldview is so focused on yourself that you must either be a genuine autist or a jew.
>You're welcome for the spelling correction. Please feel free to seethe about this in English
Holy shit that got you mad.
Hey, guess what nigger:
English is the most common language today for historical reasons, but also because it got dumbed down repeatedly to communicate with foreign overlords.
That makes it very useful, but also incredibly shitty for translating works from ancient languages with less simplified grammar to the point where a good english translation of any ancient Greek or Latin work is basically impossible if you measure it by the standards of languages that conserved much more of the grammar that indo European languages used to have in common.
Cry some more about it now and then accept your inferiority, subhuman.

[Anonymous No.20012560]

>>20012522
>By the OP
So nothing then
>and 4chan's rules
¿?
>implying you can just take over an established general and get people banned for not following your rules based on butthurt
Kek, off-topic refers to the board not the thread.

[Anonymous No.20012568]

>>20012464
Imagine getting this booty blasted over somebody being honest about the drawbacks of English. Go talk to any anglicist about the english writing system. The one we're both using right now. It's trash, objectively so.
Will you sperg out about that as well now?

[Anonymous No.20012590]

>>20012560
4chan's rules:
Step 1. To find 4chan's rules, click Report Post.
Step 2. Click the drop down menu.
Step 3. OPEN YOUR FUCKING EYES AND SEE RULE NUMBER 1.
If you have any further questions, please raise your hand and wait for one of the staff to come and assist you. Thank you for choosing 4chan for your stay.

[Anonymous No.20012599]

>>20012590
Enjoy reporting every single post about Latin in /cgl/ then.
Protip: You'll either get banned for abuse of the report function or you'll lose your ability to report for the same reason.
In short: You have no power here, bitch.

[Anonymous No.20012609]

So I actually am using the Dowling Method and it's working so far, though I'm still on the nouns. 30 pages of nouns brute force memorised. So far it's worked better than any other language learning method I've tried but I am still at the start. You just have to be autistic enough to not mind writing the same table over and over again.

[Anonymous No.20012649]

>>20012599
No, I'm not going to do that. It would be unreasonable and spam the jannies. But so far, there has been no LLPSI shillery or arguing with the approach I have taken. I have no problem if you want to use a certain textbook, just realize that that one is a divergence from the norm and that people have successfully been learning Latin following the norm.

[Anonymous No.20012669]

>>20012649
>No, I'm not going to do that.
Because not even you're so retarded to think any of those on topic posts would be deleted.

[Anonymous No.20012704]

>>20012609
Autism is a superpower if handled right.
>>20012649
>"I have no power to enforce my demands"
>>"I also realize those who do won't care so I won't bother them"
So I guess we're back at the beginning. You have no power here, anon.
>LLPSI
I really don't care about it, your attempts to police people into not talking about Latin at all are what's so ridiculous. Not that you'd have any more success with any other kind of attempt at censorship the mods don't care about here.
>but it worked until now!
I'd bet more on a happy coincidence causing it since I can't see anybody caring what some weirdo who says Latin isn't allowed in the general that mostly talked about Latin for quite a while now says.
Believe it or not but thread-hijacking isn't that rare for generals and it never works. The only times it has worked in my 14 years of experience was when the OP or somebody else also made another thread solely focused on the banned topic and the people who cared about it ended up liking it more than the original since it seemed cozier.
/lit/ seems way too slow for that to have a chance though.

[Anonymous No.20012715]

I am taking ancient Hebrew and Greek eventually and I have to do it online and the semesters are really short (two months)
How screwed am I? I really want to learn the languages well

[Anonymous No.20012746]

>>20012704
Regardless of what you think, it's worked. They have lost their rhythm. Success.
The theme of this thread is not no Latin but no Latin pedagogy. You are mischaracterizing the situation. For instance, someone prompted the thread to translate Catullus 12, and a couple people submitted translations. I think you're just salty because you know that your preferred instructional mode, which has become like a religion or political cause for you and others, is nothing more than a meme and a fad, the Latin equivalent to Pokémon Go or the Icebucket Challenge.

[Anonymous No.20012767]

>>20012715
I'm not quite understanding. Are you saying that you will be taking Hebrew and Greek at the same time over the summer? That will be very hard. Personally, I found Hebrew much easier than Greek to learn, and both languages require lots of drilling, at least with my approach. I would not suggest starting two languages at the same time. They should be staggered. And if you're doing intensive courses, each class is meant to be focused on solely. If possible, I'd cut one of them out. If you have a manageable but rigorous schedule, I think you can look forward to a good time.

[Anonymous No.20012779]

>>20012609
>calling The Ranieri Method the Dowling method

[Anonymous No.20012832]

>>20012746
The issue is entirely is that you don't know how 4chan works.

[Anonymous No.20012845]

>>20012779
I'm not using his audio.

[Anonymous No.20012847]

>>20010983
Wtf you are supposed to pay for that.

[Anonymous No.20012911]

>>20011015
is this safe?

[Anonymous No.20012928]

Why is it (in my course book)
>Ars libros recte legendi difficilis est
instead of
>Ars libros recte legere difficilis est

The gerundium is in genitiv, but this to me implies that it would mean "books of the right reading".

[Anonymous No.20012974]

>>20012746
>I think you're just salty because you know that your preferred instructional mode, which has become like a religion or political cause for you
1. I told you I don't care about it, I learned Latin properly.
2. If I would care I'd have just ignored you and did some kind of effort post about it so people talk about it and to trigger you because that would really be funny.
Frankly, I kinda feel like doing it now just because you're such a sperg but it's not worth reading up on it so I could actuallydo that.
Do try to reread that post now that some time has passed and consider how fuckibg dumb you look to anybody not caught up in your paranoid obsession.

[Anonymous No.20012981]

>>20012928
It's the art of reading properly not the books of reading properly, anon.

[Anonymous No.20012987]

>>20012981
i understand that. But why is the genitive form of the gerundium working like that. Why isnt it "recte legere" in accusative just as libros is

[Anonymous No.20013102]

>>20012987
Difficult to explain in English since there's no equivalent but the accusative and genetive have different functions.
Ars legendi = the art of reading
Locus idoneus ad legendi = the perfect place to read
The 3 most common gerundium forms are genitive ("of reading"), accusative ("to read"), and ablative ("by reading").
>Ars libros recte legendi difficilis est
The art of reading books properly is hard.
Accusative doesn't make sense here, it kinda does in English "the art to read" but that's the infinitive as you pointed out here >>20012928 and not actually the accisatobe gerundium.
>so why not infinitive
Because the book's trying to teach you about nd forms there.

[Anonymous No.20013320]

>>20011629
It isn't really the language spoken spontaneously by the vast majority of Arabic speakers form Morocco to Iraq. Every region has its own strong dialect. Standard Arabic was an attempt to flatten all of this. Even after two generations of it being mandated in schools people don't really identify with it. It's a weird school/journalism/administration form of the language. The vast majority of people in those countries will understand you if you speak it but that isn't their language. It isn't like there is a great literary scene in it either.

[Anonymous No.20013323]

>>20012522
Fuck off, bastard.

[Anonymous No.20013329]

What’s the best method to learn Latin, /classicallatingeneral/bros?

[Anonymous No.20013379]

>>20013323

[Anonymous No.20013402]

>20013379
Your thread will be mostly people discussing about Latin just because you didn’t want it to be discussed here. You’re a very egocentric faggot. Your only purpose is to corrupt /clg/. I bet you cannot nor decline the declensions, neither conjugate the conjugations.

[Anonymous No.20013515]

>>20013402
>I bet you cannot nor decline the declensions, neither conjugate the conjugations.
First of all, your English grammar is completely fucked. Second, take a look at my current Latin grade. Want to see last semester's? It's even better! For reference, I am currently attending a large, publicly-funded university in the United States. This isn't University of Phoenix, nor is it Ranieri's School for Retards. I'm actually good at Latin, believe it or not.

[Anonymous No.20013539]

>>20013515
kek if you had any self-awareness you would realize how embarrassing this is
Keep up the good work on your scansion though

[Anonymous No.20013557]

>20013515
small dick energy

[Anonymous No.20013581]

>>20013539
I am aware that I am still learning Latin and am not that far along. Is that what you are getting at? Nonetheless, this screenshot does answer the question relating to my ability to decline and conjugate Latin. I think my opinion on the /clg/ threads devolving into shit slinging is entirely valid and has nothing to do with my Latin experience. I think, if anything, my status as a Latin student lends credence to my stance on keeping Latin pedagogy and homework help out of this particular thread, since I could receive some benefit if I asked a question. However, I see greater benefit to good discussion by steering people away from the pedagogical holy war.
Thanks for your encouragement.

[Anonymous No.20013584]

>>20005732
Because Latin has an autistic amount of grammar

[Anonymous No.20013593]

>>20013581
>and has nothing to do with my Latin experience
Of course it does not have to do with it! Let’s ignore the fact that you bitch about people who wants to learn Latin following a different method from what you’ve used. Like previous anons said, you’re selfish af: stealing a thread and prohibiting discussions about a said theme just because you don’t like it. 4chan is really a place for you. Just don’t ruin /clg/ ffs

[Anonymous No.20013726]

Incelorum sexus non habent

[Anonymous No.20013757]

How can a single book be so based and cause so much butthurt?

[Anonymous No.20013794]

>>20013757
Good book, retarded fanbase. I've never seen anyone get so butt blasted about learning grammar as diehard LLPSI fans. Imagine a pianist getting angry at someone for learning music theory.
Let's not derail the thread any more though, we've had this discussion a hundred times already.

[Anonymous No.20013801]

>>20013794
But LLPSI teaches grammar, although in a very slow-paced way. Learning grammar and ignoring practice is retarded.

[Anonymous No.20013845]

Interestingly enough in my university's library there's some books on ancient philosophy fragments. The ones with the English title are in Latin (with the fragments of course in greek), and there are some German versions of the same book.

[Anonymous No.20013915]

>>20013845
Do you know Latin?

[Anonymous No.20014034]

>>20013915
Mine is shitty. I've been working on it but rn my main thing is greek.

[Anonymous No.20014038]

>>20013726
of the incels sex don't have?

[Anonymous No.20014407]

>>20014034
You should try Lingua Latina per se illustrata then.

[Anonymous No.20014434]

>>20012372
try again in /djt/
As far I know before start to learn kanbun you need a SOLID ground in (modern) japanese and classic chinese.
At least there you'll find people with the first requisite.
I failed the JLPT2 this december btw.

[Anonymous No.20014484]

>>20014434
>kanbun
what's that?

[Anonymous No.20014493]

how do I go about Old English

[Anonymous No.20014602]

If I copy a text in Latin, should I use GLORIVS LATIN ALPHABET or simply cursive

[Anonymous No.20014606]

>>20014602
why would it matter?

[Anonymous No.20014627]

>>20013329
It really depends on what you want to do.
To translate? To read? To write? To speak?
Anyway I unironically will say that for all of the above except translating, Lingua Latina per se Illustrata is indeed the best method.
And before the obsessed autist of this general tries to shit on me for my choice, no, I don't like the bald YouTuber, I hate him, and yes, I know how to speak Latin.

[Anonymous No.20014646]

>>20012911
Yeah. It's just audio files and a spreadsheet.

[Anonymous No.20014667]

>>20014493
You already have. Unless of course you mean Older English?
https://zerohplovecraft.wordpress.com/2021/07/07/dont-make-me-think/

[Anonymous No.20014677]

>>20014602
What are you used to? Use the one that makes writing more natural, so all your efforts are towards learning the language, not towards writing in a strange way.
>>20014627
>except translating
Why?

[Anonymous No.20014696]

I just performed Catullus 16 in front of my class in the voice of Ben Shapiro. They laughed throughout my reading and seemed to enjoy it, but my comments afterwards were too wordy. The situation was pretty ballsy and fully autistic, and wasn't turn out half bad. Previously, I got in a little trouble for an offensive poem that was assigned to me.

[Anonymous No.20014736]

>>20014493
>>20014667 must be a bot. I started an Old English class a few years ago but dropped after the first class. I remember that there was a website that had homework exercises and grammar tutorials. I think that it is free for independent learner's, but when I tried sending the admin an email, I got no reply about gaining access. I don't have the link atm, but I'll look around for it.

[Anonymous No.20014769]

>>20014736
>bot
How rude, just because you don't have a sense of humor.

[Anonymous No.20014803]

>>20014769
This OP is autistic. Take it easy.

[Anonymous No.20014805]

>>20014677
>Why?
Because in order to learn how to correctly translate, you need a method that shows you the standard translation into a certain language. Traditional methods do this, LLPSI on the other hand is written entirely in Latin.

[Anonymous No.20014808]

>>20014805
>how to correctly translate
this post was written by an american

[Anonymous No.20014814]

>>20014808
Colloquium lege totum antequam nugas scribas, asine.

[Anonymous No.20014835]

>>20014814
「correctly translate」が出た時点で完全にアウトだ、バカタレ

[Anonymous No.20014843]

>>20014493
Old Saxon isn't a classic language it was just the Saxon vernacular

[Anonymous No.20014864]

>>20014736
>>20014493
I can't find the website used by that class I dropped, but here is what I could find.
https://oldenglish.info/
https://lrc.la.utexas.edu/eieol/engol

[Anonymous No.20014872]

>>20014864
thank you anon, appreciated

[Anonymous No.20014915]

>>20014407
I'm actually working through that book rn.

[Anonymous No.20014952]

>>20014915
Based af. (autistic) haters gonna hate

[Anonymous No.20015028]

>>20012372
Wouldn't it be easy enough to pick up from exposure? For that matter, isn't it fairly similar to that of modern Japanese?

[Anonymous No.20015036]

>>20012553
You can perfectly well express any meaning in any language, regardless of grammatical complexity. Some of the greatest poetry in history was written in Old and Middle Chinese.

[Anonymous No.20015039]

>>20012746
The specific book LLPSI is just one book, it's not inherently special, but the evidence for comprehensible input as the most important factor for language acquisition, in general, seems pretty strong to me.

[Anonymous No.20015044]

>>20013320
Sure, I'm aware people don't speak Standard Arabic natively, but they're still familiar with it aren't they?

[Anonymous No.20015045]

>>20013584
Something like Russian is similarly complex, why aren't Russian learners the same way?

[Anonymous No.20015050]

>>20014434
They didn't say kanbun, they said Classical Japanese.
>>20014484
It's the method by which Japanese speakers traditionally read Classical Chinese, by glossing it in Japanese.

[Anonymous No.20015057]

>>20014805
Isn't it enough to understand the meaning of the original text? You already speak English, which implies being able to express a meaning in English if you have it in your head.

[Anonymous No.20015078]

>>20005732

>"2nd person active imperative singular present"

Which is accurate and necessary information to learn the language you fucking loser. Latin maintains a relatively developed declension system

[Anonymous No.20015086]

>>20015078
the name isn't necessary information
you just need to know what the form does

[Anonymous No.20015125]

>>20015086

...which is signified by the name. Latin and Greek are not taught in the style of public school Spanish dude. You probably need at least an above average IQ and work ethic to get anywhere in classical languages. With some exceptions, based retards

[Anonymous No.20015130]

>>20015086
so you're saying if it wasn't called that it would have a different function? based retard

[Anonymous No.20015137]

>>20015125
>...which is signified by the name.
Signified, but not defined by. The name is just a way to express the function, it's not the reason the form functions the way it does.

[Anonymous No.20015155]

>>20012372
This guy >>20015028 is right, the order is the same as modern Japanese.

[Anonymous No.20015164]

only retarded americans who have never learned a foreign language to proficiency believe that meticulous grammar study and memorization of forms and declensions is required in order to learn a language

[Anonymous No.20015179]

>>20015125
>Latin and Greek are not taught in the style of public school Spanish dude.
And why shouldn't they be?
>You probably need at least an above average IQ and work ethic to get anywhere in classical languages.
Why? You don't need an above average IQ to learn a modern language, and there's nothing qualitatively different about ancient ones.

[Anonymous No.20015190]

>>20015155
I'm not actually a guy, but I understand the assumption, there aren't many women on 4chan.

[Anonymous No.20015223]

>>20015125
How has that worked for you so far? Can you speak Latin?

[Anonymous No.20015242]

>>20015190
You are beautiful, m’lady.

[Anonymous No.20015253]

>>20015242
いと美しき姫なり

[Anonymous No.20015271]

>>20015039
What you've said is perfectly reasonable. The input method certainly works for plenty of people. I think the more textbooks the better, honestly. I even made the Hebrew to Aramaic jump inductively. I do oppose the stupid arguments I see in these generals instigated by devoted students of the LLPSI, and I would say I have caused some stupid ones in this thread. Since you sound like a reasonable guy, I'm sure you'd agree that textbooks like Wheelock have their place and work for many people too. It might not be a bad idea to scrap this thread and start fresh with a new one, since this one is pretty rotten. My only goal was to see balanced discussion about various classical languages and texts. There's a lot more to classics than the way one learns Latin.

[Anonymous No.20015292]

>>20015271
The butthurt about LLPSI is entirely about redditors being upset that they can't be edgy contrarians anymore by pointing out that AKCTHYUALLY the V in latin sounds like a W, so now they're swinging to the opposite direction.

[Anonymous No.20015410]

>>20015292
what the fuck are you talking about? personally my butthurt about LLPSI is that latin study groups are all now run by discord trannies who seem threatened by any other textbook/method

[Anonymous No.20015429]

>>20015242
No I'm not lol.

[Anonymous No.20015444]

>>20015045
Why does /lit/ have such a problem of people shooting from the hip about things they know nothing about?

I learned Russian way faster than the other people learning it with me because I already knew Latin and could just apply the same grammar structure. It's not "Latin" grammar, it's just Indo-European grammar. Or just grammar, since even other language families entirely are similar enough and you only have to adjust most concepts.

It's sometimes hard to keep in mind when "debating" on /lit/ that 8 of the 10 people in the "debate" have no idea what they're talking about and just wanted to participate.

[Anonymous No.20015449]

>>20015444
I didn't say it's like Latin, I said it's a comparable level of complexity.

[Anonymous No.20015476]

>>20015449
It is a lot like Latin grammatically, but it is not comparable in complexity because it's a living vernacular language. Even despite the fact that it's better to learn through a lot of input and immersion you should still study the grammar extensively if you ever want to have a hope of writing in it or being fluent. Romance languages are easier to learn through pure immersion since so much is idiomatic anyway, but Russian has a lot of grammatical quirks that you simply have to know if you want to write in a native way.

So it still proves the utility of grammar autism despite not being as complex.

[Anonymous No.20015523]

>>20015476
>but it is not comparable in complexity because it's a living vernacular language.
That's not how it works, there's nothing special about the present day for languages.

[Anonymous No.20015537]

>>20015271
>scrap this thread and start fresh with a new one
every thread devolves into shit-flinging over LLPSI and inpoot, pro or con. Every thread. This one is no exception. Little to no discussion of authors or works, of alternative readings, of textual criticism, of grammar, of syntax. Mostly just strong opinions from anons who don't know what they're talking about.
66 IPs and i would be shocked if 10 could actually read Latin.

[Anonymous No.20015562]

Just stop. replying. to. trolls.
It's that simple. I'm pretty sure one of the shitposters is the Scottish schizo who derails any discussion of Celts, Picts, or Scotland on other boards.

[Anonymous No.20015564]

>>20015523
I didn't say present day, I said living vernacular language. Latin is a classical literary language and can't be learned through immersion, or learned "well enough." It's like saying there's no difference between classical Arabic and the Egyptian dialect.

[Anonymous No.20015588]

>>20015523
>there's nothing special about the present day for languages.
Other than the massive anti-prescriptivist stance that the global financial empire uses as an attack on White people which prevents the mechanism that keeps fusional languages from falling apart from being used.

[Anonymous No.20015600]

>>20015564
Can't be learned by immersion? Why not? Just read a shitton, and listen to audio materials. Talk with other learners if you like.
>>20015588
That's not how it works. Literally study basic linguistics.

[Anonymous No.20015618]

>>20015562
I think OP has the right idea, we should establish a rule that /clg/ has no discussion of Latin pedagogy basics, with the understanding that anyone talking about it is almost certainly being a troll since obviously nobody else would want this shitshow.

There is enough cohesion and interest in this general that good faith posters could regularly dissuade people from responding to the trolls, without crying about it either. Just gentle reminders.

We could include something diplomatic in the OP explaining the basic debate over Latin learning and recommending the usual 5 or 6 Latin textbooks representing both sides. A paragraph at most. Newbies could be referred to it if they really want guidance.

[Anonymous No.20015630]

If you want to keep learning/pedagogy discussion out, then post in Latin. Because you can, right?

[Anonymous No.20015923]

>>20005782
>Yes, but my point is that an intuitive understanding is more than enough.
Depends. If you want to learn a language to be able to understand and communicate it at a plebian level, INPOOT is the correct method. If you wish to read, write about, and write literature, Literature with a capital L not YA, you need explicit training in grammar. Case in point, the modern native English speaker would get filtered by Pater/Ruskin and still make grammatical mistakes because they INPOOTED English from other plebs, like their monolingual parents or cartoon shows.

> Do you really think Latin the average Latin speaker back in the day was even actively thinking about this stuff?
No. They also were neither reading nor writing it at a literary level. The level of ideas that they were CONSOOMING and OUTPOOTING was surface level, thereby erasing the need of having a high level command of their native language.

>All you need to know is how a tense is used in context. You don't need to be able to name it.
This is just lazyfuck cope. Read how the ancients did literary analysis. They autistically paid attention to how the grammar was being used to get the underlying messages buried here and there within literary works, e.g. Servius on the Aenied or Priscan on various authors. Ofc, having this skill is not necessary if you just want to read them passively.

[Anonymous No.20016009]

>>20015923
>and still make grammatical mistakes
That's not how it works. How native speakers speak the language (consistently and on self-reflection, obviously I'm not including typos and slips of the tongue) can't be wrong per se, just different from a formal written standard. No natural language is intrinsically correct or incorrect, just different.

[Anonymous No.20016047]

>>20016009
>all levels and varieties of English, from Kentucky Cleetus to inner city Shaquisha, are heckin cute and valid.
Thanks for the input, descriptivist burger.

[Anonymous No.20016082]

>>20016047
What's your objective criteria for determining which are better?

[Anonymous No.20016170]

>>20016082
Sounding like you were university educated in the early 20th ce because Allah knows that the standards have slipped and burger academics are coming up with ways to justify it.

[Anonymous No.20016178]

>>20016170
That's not an answer to my question.

[Anonymous No.20016193]

>>20016178
Yes it was. It was an implicit answer. Take more than 5 seconds to think and you'll figure it out.

[Anonymous No.20016229]

>>20015164
This

[Anonymous No.20016242]

I wanna learn classical tibetan so I can read Buddhist sutras and tantras, anyone got some reccs?

[Anonymous No.20016261]

>>20015630
Hoc mihi placet. Omnes in hoc filo latine (aut graece) loqui debent ne filum plenum stercoris sit.

Quid nunc legitis, /clg/?

[Anonymous No.20016323]

>>20016193
It's an example of what you consider better. That's not the same thing as the underlying rule generating your preferences.

[Anonymous No.20016328]

>>20016261
豈不可以漢文?

[Anonymous No.20016361]

>>20016328
>>20016328
Cur non? Estne lingua classica?

[Anonymous No.20016382]

>>20016361
雖然,而君曰「羅典文或希臘文」;aut有互斥之意否?

[Anonymous No.20016521]

>>20013801
>But LLPSI teaches grammar,
Please stop. It just gives names of things like "dativus". There is no English text to explain what Dative is, what a case is, what a declension is, or what inflection is - which is kind of fucking important.

[Anonymous No.20016524]

>>20014843
Old Saxon and Old English are not the same language.

[Anonymous No.20016525]

>>20016521
Meaning is not made of English. It is possible to explain things by other means than an explanation in English.

[Anonymous No.20016544]

>>20016521
What difference does it make whether they label it as dative or dativus? it's the same thing

[Anonymous No.20016598]

>>20016382
>aut有互斥之意否?

Vere, non scio. Nolui sic dicere. Quicquid linguam antiquam includere volui.

[Anonymous No.20016604]

>>20016598
Latine scribis siniceque intelligis! Non male!

[Anonymous No.20016632]

>>20015537
>. Little to no discussion of authors or works, of alternative readings, of textual criticism, of grammar, of syntax.
people are going to talk about what they want to talk about
the threads are pretty much dead whenever there's no discussion about latin methods, it's not like those discussions are drowning out discussions about texts and authors because there ain't none in the first place

[Anonymous No.20016650]

>>20016544
There isn't a difference in whether the term is in English or not. The difference is that you end up having to look elsewhere to figure out what the fuck a dative is because there is no explanation in English.

[Anonymous No.20016663]

>>20015036
But can you translate it into any language and retain all of its meaning?
No, you fucking can't. Some languages inherently translate better into others. Don't reply to posts if basic reading comprehension is beyond you. Dumb fuck.

[Anonymous No.20016695]

>>20016663
Angloids will never (never ever) understand that nuances and connotations are not universal.
You can tell them that a word has 6 different meanings in Latin and while one is an appropriate translation here some of the others will be at the back of the mind of any native speaker and can't be expressed by that word in English and they will nod.
You'll give them an example and say that iuvencus, the young bull also means young man in Latin and when the author speaks of old bulls being used to teach it how to plow a field a Roman man will inevitably think of veteran soldiers teaching a young recruit sue6to the terminology used and they will agree and say what a nice little detail that is.
And then they'll look at somebody being called a little Greek, translate it as such without any annotation and then not just don't realize what the author meant with that insult but also don't get how their reader wouldn't get it.
They lack understanding of how other languages differ from theirs on a fundamental level, doesn't matter if they have an IQ of 140, they're still brainlets when it comes to understanding and applying languages other than their own.
God's curse for being jewish golems I assume.

[Anonymous No.20016766]

>>20016650
but you can literally see what it does right there

[Anonymous No.20016776]

The furry Latin poster needs to come back. I want to know what happens between the wolf and the country widow.

[Anonymous No.20016870]

>>20016766
Have you ever looked at a language textbook? I swear you guys have never learned a language before.

[Anonymous No.20016888]

>>20016870
>Have you ever looked at a language textbook?
yes, which is why i know they're unnecessary
>I swear you guys have never learned a language before.
i'm a yuropoor who's become fluent in english and japanese by just reading and watching shit i'm interested in

[Anonymous No.20016903]

>>20016888
You simply don't get it anon, Latin and Ancient Greek are holy, classical languages. The only way to learn them is via autistic memorization of declensions and cases. At least that's what my textbook told me.

[Anonymous No.20016921]

>>20016903
>getting this butthurt
>>20016888
>being this retarded
There are shows to watch in Latin, but you won't need able to read classical texts by binging them.

[Anonymous No.20016931]

>>20016921
>but you won't need able to read classical texts by binging them.
why not?

[Anonymous No.20016953]

>>20016888
Recommend some Latin movies, TV series, or imageboards.

[Anonymous No.20016954]

>>20016931
You think you'll be able to read Goethe by binge watching easy German on YouTube?

[Anonymous No.20016962]

>>20016954
no, but by binging german texts that are slowly increasing in difficulty
strawman harder

[Anonymous No.20016969]

>>20016962
Ah yes. That's the exact method universities are getting students to do literary analysis on Goethe and Novalis within two years.

[Anonymous No.20016972]

>>20016969
most students are unable to even order a currywurst after two years of college classes in german so i'm not sure what your point is

[Anonymous No.20016975]

>>20016969
Yeah bro. I went from Clifford the Big Red Dog to Harry Potter to Twilight and ended up reading Mill on the Floss with 95% comprehension.

[Anonymous No.20016977]

>>20016969
>literary analysis on Goethe and Novalis within two years.
I laughed.

[Anonymous No.20016982]

>>20016969
Universities aren't exactly known for the effectiveness of their language programs.

[Anonymous No.20016990]

>>20016972
>>20016977
>>20016982
The average university student goes to a GenEd requirement language class and use iMessage on their laptops during lectures while using Google translate for homework. Method must be bad.

[Anonymous No.20016994]

>>20016990
Where are these people who are analysing Goethe after two years then?

[Anonymous No.20017007]

>>20016994
The industrious few who are actually motivated to do the work, capable of grasping abstract concepts and memorize the rules/vocab. As for the majority who need to spend more time in the kiddy pool to reach a mediocre level is fine as well. Just know your place.

[Anonymous No.20017009]

>>20017007
Glad you agree, they don't exist. I accept your concession.

[Anonymous No.20017010]

>>20016903
>autistic memorization of declensions and cases.
All i fucking said was that it didn't explain how the case system works, it just tells you it's dative or genitive etc without saying what the fuck genitive or dative even means. That doesn't mean I think memorizing without lots of input is a good idea to learn a language you fucking retard.

You chimps think you have only 2 options: Mass input with zero English ever for any reason at all no matter what - or memorizing grammar, translating in your head, and never reading ever.

I want no part in your fucking moronic binary system. I was criticizing LLPSI, a book THAT I USE, because I don't worship Orberg or think that it's some kind of magic bullet. I use it with a grammar. That's what people say about the book that you guys don't fucking understand. People are NOT saying not to use the book, they are saying it's not a one and done resource and most language textbooks incorporate reading & grammar. LLPSI does not do the grammar justice by itself. Get over it you fucking cultist.

[Anonymous No.20017012]

>>20017010
>fuck fucking fuck fucking fuck fuck
that was a tough read

[Anonymous No.20017015]

>>20017012
Amazing refutation. I am defeated. You deconstructed every single one of my points masterfully. I will hide my face in shame now.

[Anonymous No.20017021]

>>20017009
Hope you enjoy your time in the kiddy pool. Let me know how much you revel within the arduous syntax of Statius after reading Winnie the Pooh translations for ten years.

[Anonymous No.20017022]

If you have to take 45 minutes to read a single page of some difficult latin or greek author, you shouldn't go around telling people you can read it in that language, your grasp of the language is too weak.

Once you can read it with the same ease as your native language (or alteast 80%), then you can say you can read it

[Anonymous No.20017024]

>>20016953
There are none. but somehow you are supposed to learn Latin using even less English than if you wanted to learn Russian, German, or French. Because that's totally normal for studying a dead language with minimal (mediocre) audio resources available.

[Anonymous No.20017026]

>>20017021
>after reading Winnie the Pooh translations for ten years.
crazy how you haven't made a single argument that wasn't a strawman this is your brain on declensions

[Anonymous No.20017030]

>>20017026
Try and learn Russian without learning your declensions and then come back here with this cocky dipshit attitude.

[Anonymous No.20017034]

>>20017026
Are you really that lazy/dumb? You are incapable of memorizing 25 noun endings? Most of which are duplicates? I feel bad for you LLPSIets

[Anonymous No.20017038]

>>20017034
It's this new Zoomer culture of "hacks" as shortcuts to doing any hard work. Anything that challenges your mind or stumps you is "wrong" or "bad". Everything must be microwaved, otherwise the impatient kids bail out.

[Anonymous No.20017046]

>>20017038
Recte dicis, amice. Hi stulti linguam latinam numquam cognoscent.

[Anonymous No.20017074]

Ask me about Old Norse.

[Anonymous No.20017079]

>>20017074
What resources did you use?

How much is there to read?

Do you have any interest in learning Gothic or Old English too?

[Anonymous No.20017098]

>>20017079
For dictionaries I use Cleasby-Vígfusson's, Old Norse Prose and Wiktionary. I also use skaldic.org and heimskringla.no. Together they have almost all texts.

There is a lot to read. Not nearly as much as medieval Latin or other comparable language, but there are many long sagas and poems.

I am very interested in Old English, mainly to be able to read the poetry like Beowulf unassisted. I have looked into Gothic for linguistic reasons and am aware of the basics, but there is just so little to read in it.

[Anonymous No.20017107]

>>20017098
What's your opinion on the Gothic revival movement online?

[Anonymous No.20017135]

>>20017107
On the one hand I think it's always good when a large group of people takes an interest in subjects like this, and if they want to study and learn Gothic then that's great. But on the other hand, I think the way they handle it--making up words that never existed for modern concepts like transsexuality--and the people involved--I know many well--are distasteful and blasphemous. It is like they are more interested in the raw language itself than writing anything of value in it. They could translate beautiful Germanic poetry into Gothic and create a new heathen literature, but instead they poorly translate texts like the UDHR, Harry Potter and god knows what else.

You asked for my opinion.

[Anonymous No.20017147]

>>20017135
>I think the way they handle it--making up words that never existed for modern concepts like transsexuality--and the people involved--I know many well--are distasteful and blasphemous
I don't have a problem with neoligsms. If you want a language to have continued use, then you have to do so. I think a violation would be getting rid of "problematic" words or changing already existing rules or phrases. I guess what I'm saying is if they are only adding and not taking away, then I don't see how it's harmful.

[Anonymous No.20017188]

>>20017074
I've heard that Icelandic has been very conservative by retaining a good amount of its ancestor's (old Norse) grammar and vocab. Is this true? If so, would you recommend learning Icelandic first or just dive deep into old Norse?

[Anonymous No.20017202]

>>20017135
>they are more interested in the raw language itself than writing anything of value in it
Latin suffers from this same issue.

[Anonymous No.20017239]

>>20016931
Conversational sentences and constructed sentences, particularly in a language like Latin with an author like Cicero, differ widely.
A tv show won't teach you to recognize grammatical connections between 2 words 2 lines apart. Have you ever read Kant? Same thing.

[Anonymous No.20017243]

OP thought banning textbook discussions was the solution to shitflinging when the real solution was to ban ALL discussions of Latin.

[Anonymous No.20017250]

>>20017239
Not sure why you're so focused on the tv show thing that post was talking about binging classical texts, not tv shows in Latin

[Anonymous No.20017253]

>>20017098
>very interested in Old English
I "learned" old English for 2 semesters.
Quotation marks because I could read it better in the first session than anybody else in the class could after 2 semesters simply because I know German.
Old English is literally just old German with some funky vocab. If you spend a couple if days going over the grammar, know German and have the fitting vocabulary nearby it's ridiculously easy.

[Anonymous No.20017262]

>>20017250
You won't magically see the connections there either just by reading it.
It takes analysis to understand Latin literature. Eventually you can read more fluently but that's because the analysis and awareness of grammar become second nature to you, not because you magically don't need it anymore.

[Anonymous No.20017320]

>>20017262
>You won't magically see the connections there either just by reading it.
no but you will get an idea of the meaning by looking up words in a dictionary and checking translations and the more you do this the less you'll need to look stuff up as you'll gain an intuitive understanding of cases, declensions, etc. without ever analyzing them or worrying about what they are called
>It takes analysis to understand Latin literature.
i cannot express how inane this statement is, you'd be laughed at for saying this about any modern language but for some reason latin is just so fundamentally different that you can only understand it through a microscope. truly nuts.

[Anonymous No.20017337]

>>20017320
you don’t speak latin

[Anonymous No.20017338]

>>20017188
The similarity is exaggerated. Morphologically, the similarity is the greatest. There are minor differences (ON first singular past indicative -a vs Ice -i, merging with the third singular form), but overall it is very similar.

Lexically and phonologically Icelandic has the most innovation, and there are many words in it that in terms of pronunciation and meaning barely resemble their predecessors at all. I would go so far as to say that phonologically Icelandic is at further from its 1200s form than modern Swedish is from its. Modern Icelanders can not read Old Norse poetry without long explanations of grammatical peculiarities and words that no longer exist.

This is to a large degree masked by the spelling, which is very close to normalized Old Norse (actually Old Icelandic) for three reasons. First, standardized Old Norse as we know it is 1200s West Norwegian-Icelandic. It is not the predecessor of eastern Norwegian dialects, nor of any Swedish and Danish dialects. Second, its standardized spelling is often retconned to be even closer to modern Icelandic, and third, Icelandic spelling has itself been changed to be closer to Old Icelandic:

Take the first singular dative personal pronoun "me". In Old Norse (Norwegian-Icelandic) it was mér, and this is also its spelling in modern Icelandic. However, Icelandic had an early change where long é has become jé [jɛː], and so it is pronounced mjér. Until the 1800s this used to be the spelling, but it was then "corrected" back to mér, without any change in pronunciation. Once you start looking into Icelandic words you find this everywhere.

[Anonymous No.20017341]

>>20017337
oh yeah!? watch this then!

ROMA
IN
ITALIA
EST

[Anonymous No.20017350]

>>20017253
Yes, Old English prose is easy to read. I am certain that you could not understand Beowulf in the first session.

[Anonymous No.20017366]

>>20017320
>no but you will get an idea of the meaning by looking up words in a dictionary and checking translations and the more you do this the less you'll need to look stuff up as you'll gain an intuitive understanding of cases, declensions, etc. without ever analyzing them or worrying about what they are called
Nope.
>Latin is fundamentally different
Yes. Languages always tended to simplify in history, Latin is 2000 years behind there. You could do what you say with medieval, aka not real, Latin, since that was basically modeled after languages at the time and simplified more and more to be internationally understandable (not consciously but it still happened).
Classical Latin is a different beast.

[Anonymous No.20017373]

>>20017350
The only thing posting any difficulty in Beowulf were the word pairings but once you're in the correct mindset that's no issue. Whale-way sounds weird, but once you understand that a sea voyage is meant and start thinking along those lines that's not difficult either. At that point it's just a matter of knowing it looking up vocab for weird words.

[Anonymous No.20017379]

>>20017341
Not the guy you replied to but all of your posts are wishful thinking.
You want it to be true but have no experience or knowledge to back it up so you vainly try to ridicule your betters without realizing that those who have the experience you yearn for know how ridiculous you sound
>Latin is just like modern Spanish you guiiiiseee!!!!
Insanity.

[Anonymous No.20017409]

>>20017338
Thanks anon. Very informative post. I appreciate the time you took to write this.

[Anonymous No.20017410]

>>20017320
>you'll gain an intuitive understanding of cases, declensions, etc. without ever analyzing them or worrying about what they are called
When is this meme going to die? You've never learned a language in your life. Monoglot American teenagers who watch too much YouTube need to stop misleading people with this crap.

[Anonymous No.20017413]

>>20017410
>Monoglot American teenagers who watch too much YouTube need to stop misleading people with this crap.
Those are exactly the people who believe this isn't possible. Meanwhile all Europeans who dicked around enough on the internet have acquired English.

[Anonymous No.20017427]

>>20017413
english is one of the easiest languages in the world and is taught everywhere from the 2nd grade

[Anonymous No.20017432]

>>20017413
You are not living in St. Petersburg for 6 months to learn Russian. People are sitting in their bedrooms alone maybe an hour a day after work/school with minimal resources available and almost no beginner level input. Learning Latin is fucking hard and it's not like modern language learning where you can walk to your local Mexican grocery store and practice your Spanish, or change the language of your phone to French for immersion, or watch anime without the subtitles to learn Japanese. Comprehensible input works, Latin does not have enough.

>Meanwhile all Europeans who dicked around enough on the internet have acquired English.
English has retard grammar like Mandarin because it's been learned as a second language by so many people that it has simplified. Also if you think you are getting "English on the internet" levels of input in Latin from reading 35 chapters of a textbook, you need help.

[Anonymous No.20017438]

>>20017432
>Also if you think you are getting "English on the internet" levels of input in Latin from reading 35 chapters of a textbook, you need help.
Oh yes, I forgot about how tiny the Latin corpus is. Truly a shame that all that survived are 35 chapters of a textbook. I guess it truly is impossible to learn via input.

[Anonymous No.20017439]

>>20017413
>Meanwhile all Europeans who dicked around enough on the internet have acquired English.
Interacting 24/7 with native English speakers, watching English news, reading English memes, listening to English music, watching English sports, listening to English podcasts, watching English movies, jerking off to porn with people who speak English.

>But muh "ROMA IN ITALIA EST"!

[Anonymous No.20017440]

>>20017438
Hey waterhead, do you know what "beginner level input" is?

[Anonymous No.20017448]

>>20017438
Tell me how many people learned English from reading James Joyce

[Anonymous No.20017541]

Stop. Fucking. Replying. To. Trolls.

[Anonymous No.20017560]

>>20017541
Not everyone with a stupid opinion is a troll. Some of these ideas sound like trolling because they are so ass backwards, but unfortunately they are becoming mainstream. Not engaging with them is not the solution.

[Anonymous No.20017638]

Fortasse pro /clg/, novum filum faciendum sit nomine /latine/, in quo latine loquamur omnibus de rebus (aut praecipue de linguis antiquis). Hoc modo, ut iam aliquid hīc dixit, filum sine stercore habebimus.

[Anonymous No.20017642]

>>20017638
*ut iam aliquis
hercle

[Anonymous No.20017665]

[Anonymous No.20017707]

>>20017665
/clg/ in shambles.

[Anonymous No.20017729]

>>20017665
delete this

[Anonymous No.20017751]

>>20017665
source?

[Anonymous No.20017801]

>>20017751
Heinrich Schliemann

[Anonymous No.20017813]

>>20017801
>A former teacher and Athenian friend, Theokletos Vimpos, the Archbishop of Mantineia and Kynouria, helped Schliemann find someone "enthusiastic about Homer and about a rebirth of my beloved Greece...with a Greek name and a soul impassioned for learning." The archbishop suggested a young schoolgirl, Sophia Engastromenos, daughter of his cousin. They were married by the archbishop on 23 September 1869. They later had two children, Andromache and Agamemnon Schliemann.
lmfao an actual greek-weeb

[Anonymous No.20017866]

>>20017813
Classics people tend to be like that. My professor named all his children after Greek heroes.

[Anonymous No.20018030]

>>20017665
Ranieri bros we can't stop winning

[Anonymous No.20018052]

>>20018030
Great to see that even the world famous Heinrich Schliemann had adopted The Ranieri Method

[Anonymous No.20018221]

>>20017665
>>20017707
>>20017729
Protip: His Greek sucked.

[Anonymous No.20018227]

>>20018221
How do you know?

[Anonymous No.20018234]

>>20017665
This was all fine until
>"whenever a man finds errors in my greek, I can immediately prove I am right by merely reciting passages from the classics"
This is a really dishonest way of approaching critique. Just because a classic author wrote something, doesn't make it automatically grammatically correct. Furthermore it's a complete appeal to authority. He should learn to defend his shoddy greek on the basis of grammar and aesthetics and nothing more

[Anonymous No.20018891]

>>20017665
I believe you're thinking of this http://www.oldenglishaerobics.net/

[Anonymous No.20019000]

Novumne?

[Anonymous No.20019044]

>>20018891
You replied to the wrong guy, but that's it! Thanks. Did you use it. Do you have any tips or thoughts on learning Old English

[Anonymous No.20019047]

>>20019046

[Anonymous No.20019072]

>>20018052
Just wait until an LLPSI nut blows up the Colosseum.