/clg/ - Classical Languages General

[Anonymous No.20548905]

Ēditiō nocturna
Prius fīlum: >>20542003

https://mega.nz/#F!9o4QEIIK!P3piz8Bfw-z7jgb7Q8NWDg

Remember, all claims about Latin the author can't back up in Latin are to be disregarded.
Mementōte, omnēs dē linguā Latīnā assertiōnēs quās auctor Latīnē corrōborāre nōn potest abiciendae sunt.

[Anonymous No.20548924]

>>20548905
Based and Leighton pilled

[Anonymous No.20548929]

>>20548905
I know your Latin is bad because I could read it and I only know basic Latin

Scio tuum blah blah

[Anonymous No.20548935]

What languages should one learn after latin and greek? I was thinking Persian or Hebrew

[Anonymous No.20548936]

>>20548929
Are bad and simple/easy to understand the same thing?

[Anonymous No.20548937]

>>20548935
But you haven't learned either yet.

[Anonymous No.20548943]

>>20548935
What about Classical Chinese?

[Anonymous No.20548944]

>>20548905
> nocturna
"Vestālis" substituendī oblītus sum.

Ignōsce mihi, dea.

[Anonymous No.20548945]

>>20548936
They're not the same thing, they're related things. If your Latin is good you naturally use more sophisticated constructs because you have the command of the language that allows you to exploit its subtleties and idiosyncrasies.

[Anonymous No.20548947]

>>20548945
Mightn't they also be intentionally writing in a way that's easy to understand? Not that it's needed since an English translation is right next to it.

[Anonymous No.20548959]

>>20548945
writing about simple matters in a complicated way makes you nothing more than a pseud who enjoys sniffing his own farts

[Anonymous No.20548969]

>>20548945
Why? He wants it to be read therefore he shouldn't use obscure grammar or vocabulary, that's the reason he put the translation alongside Latin as well, which is not even grammatically incorrect, so you're just sperging for the sake of sperging.

[Anonymous No.20548988]

>>20548944
>Ignōsce mihi, dea.
Iram dearum patiet

[Anonymous No.20548989]

>>20548937
I have a whole life to plan ahead though.

>>20548943
Sounds really appealing desu, i really want to read the Journey to the West in original, but I don't even know if it is considered "Classical" since it was published quite late.

[Anonymous No.20548990]

>>20548947
>>20548959
Cope. Your Latin is trash.

[Anonymous No.20549010]

>>20548989
Fuck off with your deluded fantasies, first learn a language dipshit

[Anonymous No.20549014]

>>20548989
Journey to the West is in somewhat literary Mandarin.

[Anonymous No.20549063]

>>20548990
> Your
Nec adhūc tē respondī, Anon... Sed cōnsentiō aliīs, ut etiam Cicerōnī (dē commentāriīs Caesaris):
> Valdē quidem, inquam, probandōs; nūdī enim sunt, rēctī et venustī, omnī ōrnātū ōrātiōnis tamquam veste dētracta.

[Anonymous No.20549093]

>>20549010
You must be 18 years old...

>>20549014
Is classical Chinese literature worth it to the level of greek literature?

[Anonymous No.20549102]

>>20549093
Absolutely. And there's tons of it, quite a lot untranslated, since it was the language of the educated in much of East Asia for centuries.

[Anonymous No.20549157]

>>20548905
> virgo.jpg
Haec labra, hnnng.

Num virginitas intacta quoque orem Vestalis pertinuit?

[Anonymous No.20549178]

>>20549102
>>20549093
>chinese literature is on the level of greek literature
One more retarded than the other

[Anonymous No.20549187]

>>20549178
Yes, it absolutely is, and it's pure eurocentric prejudice to say it isn't.

[Anonymous No.20549232]

>>20549178
>>20549187
The duality of retardation

[Anonymous No.20549266]

>>20549178
>>20549187
>>20549232
The thesis-antithesis-synthesis of retardation

[Anonymous No.20549290]

>>20548924
> The painting was rediscovered in a Battersea home in the early 1960s, boxed in over a chimney. Andrew Lloyd Webber saw it soon afterwards in a shop on the Kings Road, but his grandmother refused to lend him the £50 asking price, stating: "I will not have Victorian junk in my flat".
What the fuck, man.

[Anonymous No.20549316]

>>20549290
All these great artists like Leighton, Bouguereau, Tadema, Waterhouse, etc were practically discarded and forgotten after they died and remained forgotten for around 100 years.
Many of these artists works are missing today, some of them have hundreds of paintings missing.
It's likely that most of them are either still in some dusty attic somewhere rotting away, or have been destroyed by the bombings during WW2

[Anonymous No.20549328]

>>20549290
Wait till you hear about all the lost literary works throughout history
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_literary_work

[Anonymous No.20549365]

>>20549328
> mfc numquam Claudii librum De arte aleae legam

[Anonymous No.20549403]

>>20549328
having none of Aristotle's dialogues survive to our day fucks me up the most

[Anonymous No.20549415]

>>20549328
>>20549365
>>20549403
Who cares? Modern literature is better.

[Anonymous No.20549431]

>>20549316
Because they weren't actually great. People back then were well aware of it. Go to any good art school's oil painting department and you'll see students painting just as well as this.

[Anonymous No.20549485]

>>20549431
I do think that the britisth raphaelites were pretty good even for their time. There was a pretty drastic aesthetic shift after them that saw their views on art as unacceptable.

[Anonymous No.20549504]

>>20549266
Kek
Checked

[Anonymous No.20549544]

Did I get these questions right? First is Latin>English then vice versa

>Ilia omnium urbis viarum brevissima fuit. That was the shortest of all the ways to the city

>This is the easiest of all the ways through the territories of the Gauls. Hoc omnium viarum per finis gallorum facillima est.

[Anonymous No.20549571]

>>20549544
why "to the city"?
it's genitive, so 'of the city'
plus it should be illa, not ilia

haec omnium viarum per fines Gallorum facillima est

[Anonymous No.20549584]

>>20549544
>to the city
Shouldn't it be "of the city"?
>Hoc omnium viarum per finis gallorum facillima est.
I think it should be "haec omnium viarum per fines gallorum facillima est"

[Anonymous No.20549865]

>>20549571
>plus it should be illa, not ilia

OCR failure sorry , it was illa in the PDF.

>>20549584
Thanks, you guys are alright. The authors of this book are dead and the publisher is gone, is there a better way to find people to check my Latin exercises than asking /clg/?

>fines Gallorum

A lot of textbooks say fines/finis are both valid, how do you decide?

[Anonymous No.20549882]

>>20549544
>that was the city's shortest road
>>20549584
>I think it should be "haec omnium viarum per fines gallorum facillima est"
this

[Anonymous No.20549887]

>>20549865
-īs is indeed a common alternative plural nom/acc ending for certain third declension nouns/adjectives(e.g like urbs, civis, etc...), so you should beware of it in the literature
that being said -es is what is usually taught and if you are writing Latin yourself I think that's what people go for

[Anonymous No.20549892]

>>20549865
finīs can be the accusative plr. of finis, they're both fine. but it should have been haec not hoc

[Anonymous No.20549993]

>>20548905
What languages should one learn after latin and greek? I was thinking Persian or Hebrew

[Anonymous No.20550020]

>>20549993
do you speak german and french already?

[Anonymous No.20550034]

>>20550020
Well, I already know English so I assume I would be able to get German pretty quick, and studied Spanish, too, so I probably already know a good deal of the rest of romance languages (except Romanian).

[Anonymous No.20550047]

>>20550034
>I already know English so I assume I would be able to get German pretty quick
...

[Anonymous No.20550054]

>>20550034
Knowing English doesn't make learning German easy, it just help you find more cognate, thus faster vocab.

[Anonymous No.20550110]

>>20549993
How do you learn languages with dementia this bad?
>>20548935

[Anonymous No.20550134]

>>20549993
after I learn latin and greek I won't have any time to learn other languages because I'll be too busy spending the rest of my life reading the enormous book list of ancient classics

[Anonymous No.20550267]

Gabriella est in cubiculum dormit

[Anonymous No.20550275]

>>20550267
Is not "est" useless there?

[Anonymous No.20550281]

>>20550275
You're right, it's redundant. Ignore the weeb.

[Anonymous No.20550283]

>>20550275
No clue, I'm just copying the formatting from my textbook

[Anonymous No.20550319]

>>20550275
>>20550281
>>20550283
It's not just redundant, it's wrong, just like in English:
> Gabriel is in the room sleeps

[Anonymous No.20550323]

>>20550283
The difference is that you included another verb in your own sentence. What you wrote literally means "Gabriella is sleeps in bed," so there's a clash between 'est' and 'dormit'. 'Dormit' specifically means 'she sleeps', not 'sleeping'.

[Anonymous No.20550341]

>>20550047
Not him, but German doesn't sound that bad, big corpus, big language with many many many resources, i assume logical inflections, many opportunities to speak it with cognates looking plentiful and cases being not that many, compound words sound logical as well and in general it sounds easier much than greek, but maybe I'm completely wrong and it's the most difficult language in the world, who knows.

[Anonymous No.20550385]

>>20548905
>>20549157
>> virgo.jpg
> Haec labra, hnnng.

> פָּנַי אִם לֹא נַעֲרָה אֲשֶׁר לַהּ שְׂפָתַיִם כָּאֵלֶה

[Anonymous No.20550386]

>>20550267
in cubiculo dormit

no est and no accusative

[Anonymous No.20550404]

>>20550283
Problem is that dormit(he/she sleeps/is sleeping) is the third person present active indicative form of dormire(to sleep), so est(he/she is) is redundant there. Also, cubiculum is not in the ablative case, so your sentence has another grammatical error there. Compare how every noun after "in" is in the ablative case(horto from hortus, triclinio from triclinium, culina from culina[the ablative case has - above a] and via from via[the ablative case also has - above a since it has the same declension as culina]).

[Anonymous No.20550422]

>>20550267
>Gabriella is into the bedroom she sleeps
LSL

[Anonymous No.20550444]

>>20550404
Souka

[Anonymous No.20550453]

>>20550267
sounds like you need to join in on the llpsi read alongs

[Anonymous No.20550472]

Any old english chads here?

[Anonymous No.20550484]

>>20550267
Verpa in Gabriellae vagina

[Anonymous No.20550492]

>>20550453
holy fucking based

[Anonymous No.20550517]

>>20550404
Not him, but is the ablative used with all prepositions?

[Anonymous No.20550524]

>>20550517
Not him, but no. It's not even consistently used with "in":
> Gabriella in cubiculo dormit.
but
> Gabriella in cubiculum it.

[Anonymous No.20550535]

>>20550517
no
in this particular case
>in cubiculo
in the room
>in cubiculum
into the room
A small distinction but important.
Most prepositions take the ablative or accusative

[Anonymous No.20550551]

>>20550517
Nope, some take the accusative and some take both, but have different meaning (in + accusative means into/onto, for example).

[Anonymous No.20550671]

>>20550524
>>20550535
>>20550551
Grātiās vōbīs agō.

[Anonymous No.20550728]

This is what happens when you don't look at a grammar book and you try to "infer" noun endings. You said retarded shit like "est in cubiculum dormit". You really are learning the way a child learns - you are embarrassing yourself and taking twice as long to put a simple sentence together.

[Anonymous No.20550747]

>>20550728
it's really pathetic that you live for this shit

[Anonymous No.20550756]

>>20550747
Stop responding to him already.

Or at least do it in Latin so that he fucks off again.

[Anonymous No.20550793]

I found funny that we have both an inpoot troon and a grammar autist.
The two extremes of language learning and none of them know shit. Heh.

[Anonymous No.20550800]

>>20550728
jeez take a chill pill

[Anonymous No.20550819]

>>20550728
>you are embarrassing yourself
Wrong. He is studying, making mistakes and have people helping him understand his mistakes. Unlike your shitposting, at least that anon is studying and learning. Also, from the image he posted, the book he is reading is called Cambridge Latin Course which, funny enough, teaches Latin grammar. Thus, your point is so invalid you have no idea what you are talking about.

[Anonymous No.20550940]

>>20550385
> mfw.jpg
הַקַּרְנַיִם הָאֵלֶה הֲנְּג

[Anonymous No.20550988]

>>20550800
no

[Anonymous No.20551079]

Ubi de naturali philosophia libros invenire possum? Tantum Isacci Newtoni Principia Mathematica et unus alius quem non cognosco sunt in gutenberg.org.

[Anonymous No.20551119]

>>20551079
thelatinlibrary compilationem variam auctorum modernorum habet

[Anonymous No.20551178]

>>20551079
Postulatne gutenberg.org ut aliquis OCR agat? Magnopere laboriosum est, itaque archive.org fortasse forma imaginibus plures libros antiquos habet.

Vel editiones criticas quaere, nec vero gratuitae sunt.

[Anonymous No.20551207]

>>20550728
Your post is what happens when an insufferable faggot gets angry and posts on a galwegian salmon fishing forum

[Anonymous No.20551246]

>>20550728
this post is what happens when a mf get no pussy what so ever frfr

[Anonymous No.20551258]

>>20551246
Ebonics is not a classical language.

[Anonymous No.20551279]

>>20551178
> imaginibus
I should have used "imaginum" instead, I think.

[Anonymous No.20551328]

>>20551178
>>20551079
G**gle books quoque multas imagines librorum antiquorum habet.
Aut quaere in theca quae inveniatur in primo nuntio huius fili, in qua etiam editiones criticae insunt.

[Anonymous No.20551420]

How can I express passive action with deponent verbs (those that have active meanings) without writing out the agent? e.g. miror-admire, how do I say "he is admired"? cohortor-encourage, how do I say "I am encouraged"? utor-use, how can I say "you are being used"? Is it just simply impossible to do this in Latin?

[Anonymous No.20551454]

>>20551420
The only way I can think of is inverting the sentence, with "someone" as the subject in the first and the third, and with "something" in the second of your cases.

[Anonymous No.20551459]

>>20551420
convert to active sense with indefinite or express it equivalently/idiomatically
e.g magni habetur (ab/apud ...)
augeor animo
etc...

[Anonymous No.20552032]

Is Greek: An Intensive Course any good?
What I want is a book that teaches grammar and drills it in with copious amounts of text to read, I don't care if it's not selections from authentic text

[Anonymous No.20552070]

>>20550517
JUST INFER IT!!! JUST INFER IT!!! THAT'S HOW A BABY LEARNS!!! A BABY!!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.20552109]

>decide to read some real Latin
>check out Sallust
>de Coniuratione Catalinae
>60 chapters of seething Cataline derangement syndrome

I spent years teaching myself Latin so I could read ancient propaganda. I need to reevaluate my life choices.

[Anonymous No.20552138]

>>20552109
Do not assume that only good work survive all this time.

[Anonymous No.20552143]

>>20552109
>read ancient historical text about political and military affairs
>come across the writer's opinions on political figures from the era
How could that possibly be? Why are historians not just cold, unbiased, opinionless presenters of facts?

[Anonymous No.20552224]

>>20550054
It also helps with the grammar, though it won't help much with the cases and genders.

[Anonymous No.20552234]

>>20550422
What, as opposed to LFL? There haven't been any of those in centuries.

[Anonymous No.20552241]

>>20550472
Not learning Old English (though I might like to some day) but I posted this vocaroo in a previous thread.
https://voca.ro/1gznAci6WZql

[Anonymous No.20552242]

Someone learn Akkadian with me

[Anonymous No.20552246]

>>20549853
So what should you do if you want to talk about non-binary people in Latin?

[Anonymous No.20552287]

>>20552246
"Mental illness" would suffice anon.

[Anonymous No.20552291]

>>20552241
How big are your milk tanks, whore?

[Anonymous No.20552315]

>>20552242
I actually know a girl who's trying to teach herself fluent Akkadian to use in the modern day. Tell me your Discord and I'll forward it to her.
>>20552291
I already posted them this morning. Why are you guys so obsessed over seeing them?

[Anonymous No.20552330]

>>20552032
Yes! It's designed to get people reading as soon as possible with a trial by fire.

[Anonymous No.20552365]

>>20552330
Ah great, that's exactly what I want
Thanks

[Anonymous No.20552386]

>>20552365
If you need more text to read, the Reading Greek series may be nice to pair with it. You can find the older editions used on ebay for a decent price. They grammar and text are in separate volumes.

[Anonymous No.20552773]

>>20551119
>>20551178
>>20551328
Gratias vobis ago

[Anonymous No.20552806]

Starting a Greek study group, if you have any advice let me know
>>20552459

[Anonymous No.20552816]

>>20552806
link the text in OP, maybe to the folder in the Mega or some other download site

[Anonymous No.20552975]

>>20550404
Ablative doesn‘t always follow „in“. In this case it does because it answers to the question „Where“, but it can also be in accusative where it answers „where-to“.

Gabriella in cubiculo dormit, ergo in cubiculum venio.

[Anonymous No.20553039]

>>20552975
>Gabriella in cubiculo dormit, ergo in cubiculum venio.
Q-quid agere voles, Anone? Cur mansisti foras adhuc obdormiverat?

[Anonymous No.20553128]

>>20553039
Gabriella rapere volo, si scis quis significo.

[Anonymous No.20553244]

>>20553128
>si scis quis significo
Eh... non certus sum; potesne, quod significas, illustrare? *se togam tollens*

[Anonymous No.20553359]

Who is following the lipsi read along in here? Should we still keep doing a chapter a day? Do you feel like the difficulty has increased already enough to need to slow down?

[Anonymous No.20553388]

>>20553359
It's on every-other-day now I think

[Anonymous No.20553405]

>>20553388
Yes, it is. I was wondering if it would be better to still do a chapter a day like with the first ones.

[Anonymous No.20553521]

Does anyone know a good video/site where I can learn Ancient Greek pronunciation?

[Anonymous No.20553527]

>>20553521
PodiumArts I think it's called has some videos in good reconstructed Classical Attic, though I think it's also perfectly defensible to use modern Greek pronunciation or some sort of reconstructed Koine.

[Anonymous No.20553542]

>>20553527
Thank you!

[Anonymous No.20553618]

>>20553527
>or some sort of reconstructed Koine
you won't find any good recordings in koine so I'd stick with either PodiumArts or modern pronunciation.

[Anonymous No.20553624]

>>20553618
I've seen some things in Lucian pronunciation, which is a sort of reconstructed Koine.

[Anonymous No.20553661]

>>20553624
yes and all of them sound very unnatural and awkward. also it's anachronism makes it completely indefensible. you shouldn't adopt it just because theatre kids like Ranieri or Found in Antiquity shill it. keep in mind that none of these people have actaully displayed any fluency in ancient greek.

[Anonymous No.20553663]

>>20553661
Anachronism in what sense? The texts of interest cover such a wide period that any pronunciation will be anachronistic for some of them.

[Anonymous No.20553698]

>>20553663
It's anachronistic in the sense that no one has actaully used "the lucian prononciation" ever. it's not a reconstruction, it was invented by Ranieri so he could have yet another thing named after himself.

[Anonymous No.20553702]

>>20553698
Is it not based on a certain period of Koine, with certain things allowed to be adjusted in either direction?

[Anonymous No.20553734]

>>20553702
To my understanding the philosophy behind it is trying to bridge the gap between koine and modern greek. The "adjustments" seem pretty ineffectual because they decided to exclude reconstructed classical prononciation. In any case my bias against this prononciation method doesn't change the fact that there isn't any good content made using it.

[Anonymous No.20553735]

Ok, so i want to say "he seems suspicious" and i have been overthinking way too much, so I'm just going to put these constructions and i hope I get to know why they are wrong:

"Suspectus est"
"suspectō est
"suspectī est"
"suspectus ā nōbīs videtur"
"Suspectus videtur"

[Anonymous No.20553738]

>>20553735
Amogus

[Anonymous No.20553763]

>>20553735
suspiciosus
use a dictionary

[Anonymous No.20553814]

>>20553763
>Noooooo you aren't supposed to use a dictionary AAAAHHHHHH

[Anonymous No.20553817]

P.D. /qa/ vicit

[Anonymous No.20553823]

>>20553814
literally nobody thinks this

[Anonymous No.20553833]

>>20553823
People who think reading doesn't count when you need to use a dictionary do

[Anonymous No.20553852]

Here's a question; what do classicists actually DO? What are the main areas of modern classical inquiry? What do classics postgraduates at the world class universities actually research?

[Anonymous No.20553856]

>>20553852
They don't lol, there's no money in classics. It's all just a bunch of rich people living their hobby

[Anonymous No.20553860]

>>20553833
literally nobody thinks this

[Anonymous No.20553863]

>>20553852
Translating Homer into ebonics lol. That Odyssey translation greentext really isn't a joke.

[Anonymous No.20553867]

>>20553833
There's a difference between "reading doesn't count when you need to use a dictionary" and "reading while looking up every other word is very slow and painful and not the best use of your time."

[Anonymous No.20553869]

>>20553852
Mostly write babbling tripe about theories on classical works.
They used to have a strong interest in philology but that has gone by the wayside. Now it's about whoever can advance the most PC ideas by torturing the text as much as possible.

[Anonymous No.20553875]

>>20553852
Honestly I have no idea so I'm not going to guess

[Anonymous No.20553878]

>>20553852
Apologize white boy.

[Anonymous No.20553944]

>>20553823
>>20553860
I do.
I'm trans btw I don't know if that matters

[Anonymous No.20553962]

>>20553944
What kind?
MTF = cringe
FTM = based

[Anonymous No.20553969]

>>20553962
Why's that?

[Anonymous No.20553974]

>>20553878
Ea translatio fortissime it
Odi feminas sic tantum ut irreale sit
Amorem ab kazahkstan

[Anonymous No.20553978]

>>20553969

[Anonymous No.20553980]

another dumpster fire of a thread

[Anonymous No.20553983]

>>20553852
Oh no no no no

[Anonymous No.20553985]

>>20553980
Yeah, the only keeping me here is the LLPSI guy

[Anonymous No.20553990]

>>20553878
Ea translatio fortissime it
Odi feminas tam multum ut irreale sit
Amorem ab kazahkstan

[Anonymous No.20553992]

>>20553978
But trans girls aren't just girly boys and trans guys aren't just tomboys.

[Anonymous No.20553994]

>>20553985
*Thing

[Anonymous No.20553998]

>>20553983
What is the problem with this? It's a valid question to ask. Every culture has its own ways of seeing these things.

[Anonymous No.20554004]

>>20553998
>Write that some weird eunuch priestess shit isn't a primordial incarnation of beautiful trans women
>Fail paper.

[Anonymous No.20554013]

>>20553852
None of these people who replied know anything about academia. All this crt stuff comes from anglo countries which should already discredit their academic work. I took some classical greek classes in uni and my professors were very proficient. Most of their work aside from teaching was editing textbooks and translating works. It all seemed very comfy to me and i wish i had their life.

[Anonymous No.20554015]

>>20554004
There were some authors at the time who used feminine pronouns/grammatical forms for them if I'm not mistaken.

[Anonymous No.20554024]

>>20553985
I used to post the translation exercises, one per thread, just so everyone could try something different out and see how they compare to others. Pretty much pointless now though because these threads are horrid.
Same pointless arguments over Wheelock and LLPSI
Same dumb shitflinging over how to learn instead of actually learning
Same dumb tranny making the thread about himself

[Anonymous No.20554029]

>>20554013
What country?

[Anonymous No.20554040]

>>20554029
Finland. There's still a lot to be translated from less mainstream ancient authors so you can get funding for those sorts of projects. I imagine the climate is different in Germany or France where most of everything is already translated. I mean, we still don't have anything from Proclus, Iamblichus or Plotinus aside from I.6 in Finnish.

[Anonymous No.20554041]

>>20554024
Hopefully he will kill himself soon. I hope the antillpsi schizo will follow it.
I used to do translating exercises if I saw them btw, thanks for porsting them back them.

[Anonymous No.20554044]

>>20554041
back then

[Anonymous No.20554047]

>>20554041
Might start again, just lost motivation at the state of this general. I foolishly thought a classical languages thread would be beyond shitposting and retardation but apparently not

[Anonymous No.20554059]

>>20554047
Lmfao faggot

[Anonymous No.20554115]

>>20554047
Appropriating classical culture is part of the war for cultural hegemony that has being fought in the West for decades. Indoctrinated faggots feel the necessity to shit up these threads for this reason.

[Anonymous No.20554161]

>>20554115
medicinae, sine mora

[Anonymous No.20554170]

>>20554161
Kill yourself faggot

[Anonymous No.20554188]

>>20552816
Thanks

[Anonymous No.20554194]

>>20554115
The psychological explanation is simple: in their head, classical culture is intrinsically related to fascist-like manifestations; "punch a nazi" they say, and since they're unable to do it irl, they find this kind of substitutions online.
I can grant you one thing: none of them is learning latin to read classical culture, which they despise.

[Anonymous No.20554198]

>>20554194
>classical culture
Classical literature I mean

[Anonymous No.20554218]

>>20554194
> classical culture is intrinsically related to fascist-like manifestations
The only place I've ever seen someone make that connection is here, usually by people who gush over both of it.

[Anonymous No.20554226]

>>20554218
I said "in their heads", I wasn't implying it's true.

[Anonymous No.20554238]

>>20554226
in whose heads?

[Anonymous No.20554265]

>>20554238
In yours, for example.

[Anonymous No.20554313]

Do the creators of critical editions follow some kind of style guide? How did we ever end up with the situation were they use V for consonantal U, but not J for consonantal I?

[Anonymous No.20554321]

>>20554313
use v if you want to be a tradcvck

[Anonymous No.20554329]

>>20554321
No, I prefer the separation between consonantal and vocalic letters. I just want to know why they're not applied consistently.

[Anonymous No.20554331]

How would you translate this sentence?

>Scipio ad Ticunum flumen vitam patris virtute servavit posteaque ad Cannas contra Hannibalem se fortem praebuit.

[Anonymous No.20554344]

>>20554331
Without looking at a translation:
> Scipio valiantly saved his father's life at the river Ticunum [or whatever its name] and afterwards presented himself strongly at Cannas against Hannibal.

[Anonymous No.20554347]

>>20554331
>Scipio ably saved the life of his father by the Ticinum river and following that showed his valour at Cannae against Hannibal.

[Anonymous No.20554424]

Calling back yesterday's post that incited so many replies, shouldn't it be grammatically correct to make use of the present participle "dormens" of the verb "dormo" to say "Gabriella in suo cubiculo dormens est" to translate "Gabriella is sleeping in her bedroom"?
>>20553852
Work at a private school as a history teacher if they're lucky, at a public school as a history and gym teacher if they're slightly unlucky, at Whatabuger if they're very unlucky, and at a scrapyard owned by a close relative if they've got no social skills whatsoever and live in a town where there's literally nothing else for them to do.
Alternatively, if they're a member of the {{{underrepresented minority groups}}} and can somehow curry their professors' favor, they might be able to secure an assistant professor position and eventually a professorship, so that they can apply deconstructionism and Foucaultian discourse analysis to reveal how classical authors reveal the unspoken world of subalternates with suppressed epistemes in the Mediterranean basin and beyond.
;^)

[Anonymous No.20554451]

>>20554424
First of all, it's "dormiens". That would be grammatically correct, but not very idiomatic. The English present progressive "is sleeping" is a unit, you can't just translate it word for word. Just say
> Gabriella in suo cubiculo dormit.

[Anonymous No.20554456]

>>20554424
grammatically correct and good Latin aren't the same thing, you wouldn't see such an use in place of dormit, "dormiens est" while a possible construction just sounds like barbarian grug Latin

[Anonymous No.20554867]

>>20553878
>find the beginning
lol

[Anonymous No.20554916]

>>20554313
I think it's more of an institutional thing, schools of thought on the matter. For example recent Oxfords use consonantal U while Teubner uses V.
Glancing through a few OCTs I own it seems that it is related to the editor, perhaps even of each volume. Some have U, some V and with just a quick look I think it isn't limited to a particular era or span of years.
There is no established formal style guide, just various options. Sometimes editors choose one or the other and justify it in terms of readability or authenticity or not at all.

[Anonymous No.20554917]

Iulia calidus esse putat atque vestem suam detrahit.

[Anonymous No.20554939]

>>20548905
>Remember, all claims about Latin the author can't back up in Latin are to be disregarded.
Fallacious and irrational thought process that only a conceited midwit would assert. You must have gotten BTFO'd badly in another thread.

[Anonymous No.20554943]

>>20554424
You are applying English grammatical rules to Latin. dormit is 'sleeps' and 'is sleeping'

[Anonymous No.20555011]

>>20554917
te amo

[Anonymous No.20555075]

>>20554917
Iulia, desine! Hic locus plenus paidophilorum est!

[Anonymous No.20555092]

>>20554939
Ecce alius niger qui Latinum nescit

[Anonymous No.20555107]

>>20554939
Bateus biggus faggotus

[Anonymous No.20555119]

>>20555075
Noli timere
Nam Iulia trecenti annos habet

[Anonymous No.20555133]

>>20555119
Putasne adhuc virgo esse?

[Anonymous No.20555160]

>>20554939
> Vah, vah! Latine nescio, ergo meae sententiae de hac lingua ab omnibus neglegantur.
> Sed Anglice OP maledicens certe filum persuadebo, ut id iniuria sit.

[Anonymous No.20555174]

>>20555133
Immo virgo non esse scio

[Anonymous No.20555187]

>>20555133
>>20555174
I think you two need to use accusative plus infinitive in both of these cases, not just infinitive:
> Putasne adhuc virginem esse?
> Immo virginem non esse scio

[Anonymous No.20555193]

>>20555187
Gratias

[Anonymous No.20555222]

>>20550267
If you were trying to say "Gabriella is in the bedroom sleeping", you would use a gerundive.

[Anonymous No.20555251]

>>20554917
>Iulia calidus esse putat
is this valid?

[Anonymous No.20555259]

>>20555251
For the impersonal "It's hot", it should be "calidum", not "calidus".

[Anonymous No.20555261]

>>20553244
Uterque homosexuales sunt. Ispum occide.

[Anonymous No.20555265]

>>20555251
No, it should be accusative

[Anonymous No.20555272]

>>20555259
>>20555265
I see, thank you.

[Anonymous No.20555280]

>>20555261
"Uterque" takes the singular in Latin.
The "Ipsum" without "te" sounds weird to me, don't if it's incorrect.

[Anonymous No.20555286]

>ianua
>ianitor
>janitor
damn bros...

[Anonymous No.20555289]

>>20555265
I think he's trying to say "It's hot", not "She's hot".

The latter is an English idiom and couldn't be used in Latin in this way, but also the sentence wouldn't make much sense:
> She thinks she's hot,
Either she is or she isn't, there's not reason to talk about what she thinks to be the case.

[Anonymous No.20555303]

Meus mentula maior quam rōmānus imperium lol xDD

[Anonymous No.20555311]

>>20553983
>when is a man not a man
>when is x not equal to x

[Anonymous No.20555313]

>>20555280
I declined wrong. It should have been utrique, it think.

[Anonymous No.20555323]

>>20555303
> Mea mentula maior quam imperium Romanum
ftfy

[Anonymous No.20555342]

>>20555289
It doesn't matter, it needs to be accusative. Nominatives refer to the subject
>calidus esse putat
>She, being hot, thinks is
This makes no sense.
>calidum esse putat
>she thinks it is hot
>calidum se esse putat
>she thinks she is hot
Those are the options.
Regardless I doubt there is a single instance of calidus being used this way in the ancient corpus. It is typically adjectival and not related to a human subject. See pic related for an example from Lucretius.

[Anonymous No.20555352]

>>20555323
That's the thing, if i remember correctly quam can only be used to compare two things in the same case, so Romanus has to be in the nominative to be compared with mentula

[Anonymous No.20555396]

>>20555342
> It doesn't matter, it needs to be accusative.
Alright, I agree, it was just a bit confusing, because his adjective was not only the wrong case, but also the wrong gender.

> I doubt there is a single instance of calidus being used this way in the ancient corpus
With "this way" you mean like in "She's hot" (i.e., the counterpart of freezing)? Yes, that's an English idiom.
Or does "this way" also extend to "It's hot"? Because that one is fine in Latin, I'd say.

[Anonymous No.20555410]

>>20555352
Romanus is an adjective, it follows the gender and case of imperium, neuter and nominative, that's why it's Romanum in the sentence.

[Anonymous No.20555429]

>>20555313
Nah, "uterque" is fine. Don't think of it like the English "both", but like "either":
> Either of them is a homosexual.

[Anonymous No.20555453]

>>20555396
I think it is fine too but I doubt there is a single instance of it in the corpus. Maybe "it's hot" just isn't something Romans would say, instead they would refer to the temperature. I am specifically referring to the construction 'calidus sum (esse)' as I can find no mentions of it in the OLD or Lewis and Short. Perhaps it was in use and indeed seems proper but there are no instances of it that I am aware of.

[Anonymous No.20555480]

>>20555410
Gratias tibi ago.

[Anonymous No.20555506]

>>20555453
Huh, you're right. According to OLD, "caleō" (1b, passive, impersonal) was used to describe the weather.

So classical style would call for something like
> Iulia caleri putat

[Anonymous No.20555546]

Velleius Paterculus is fun

>Una neque multorum annorum spatio divisa aetas per divini spiritus viros, Aeschylum Sophoclen Euripiden, inlustravit tragoediam; una priscam illam et veterem sub Cratino Aristophaneque et Eupolide comoediam; ac novam comicam68 Menander aequalesque eius aetatis magis quam operis Philemo ac Diphilus et invenere intra paucissimos annos neque imitandam reliquere. Philosophorum quoque ingenia Socratico ore defluentia omnium, quos paulo ante enumeravimus, quanto post Platonis Aristotelisque mortem floruere spatio? Quid ante Isocratem, quid post eius auditores eorumque discipulos clarum in oratoribus fuit? Adeo quidem artatum angustiis temporum, ut nemo memoria dignus alter ab altero videri nequiverint.

>Potentiae Romanorum prior Scipio viam aperuerat, luxuriae posterior aperuit: quippe remoto Carthaginis metu sublataque imperii aemula non gradu, sed praecipiti cursu a virtute descitum, ad vitia transcursum; vetus disciplina deserta, nova inducta; in somnum a vigiliis, ab armis ad voluptates, a negotiis in otium conversa civitas. Tum Scipio Nasica in Capitolio porticus, tum, quas praediximus, Metellus, tum in circo Cn. Octavius multo amoenissimam moliti sunt, publicamque magnificentiam secuta privata luxuria est.

[Anonymous No.20555566]

>>20555546
I can't read that anon. Perhaps you could link Google translate with it?

[Anonymous No.20555600]

>>20555566
no, you now have a goal for the day/week

[Anonymous No.20555601]

>>20548905
How long would it take to learn Ancient Greek so I can read their philosophy? I read the guide in the link but was wondering about the time it would take.

[Anonymous No.20555628]

>>20555601
6 months

[Anonymous No.20555644]

>>20555601
By read do you mean be able to read any word/sentence you want while reading a parallel English/Greek edition, or do you mean sit down with an unannotated pure Greek text and translate it from scratch into English?

If the former, a couple months of reasonably hard work, if the latter, 10 years

[Anonymous No.20555683]

In uno lugare manchego, pro cujus nómine non volo calentare cascos, vivebat facit paucum tempus, quidam fidalgus de his qui habent lanzam in astillerum, adargam antiquam, rocinum flacum et perrum galgum, qui currebat sicut ánima quae llevatur a diábolo. Manducatoria sua consistebat in unam ollam cum pizca más ex vaca quam ex carnero, et in unum ágilis-mógilis qui llamabatur salpiconem, qui erat cena ordinaria, exceptis diebus de viernes quae cambiabatur in lentéjibus et diebus dominguis in quibus talis homo chupabatur unum palominum. In isto consumebat tertiam partem suae haciendae, et restum consumebatur in trajis decorosis sicut sayus velarte, calzae de velludo, pantufli et alia vestimenta que non veniut ad cassum.
Ignatium Calvum, Historia domini Quijoti Manchegui, I, cap. I.

[Anonymous No.20555695]

>>20555644
I should elaborate on this post more since I was trying to be encouraging but it ended up sounding discouraging. My point is that sight reading raw Greek is a good endgame goal like being able to pick up Goethe in German and just read him. But if you set your sights on reading Goethe with a bit of help in combination with hard work, you could be doing it within a few months. Somewhere in between is probably the most relaxed and normal way to read Goethe for a German learner. So my point is, you could be reading and slowly translating your favorite philosophy within just a few months (which is motivating, to me anyway), and within a year or two of that sort of practice you will feel at home enough in it.

But you'll always have dictionaries and grammars to the side. Past the initial hump of learning the basics, it's all a matter of HOW MUCH you consult the dictionary/grammar. So instead of looking at this as "I can't REALLY read Greek until several years in," look at it as "I'm doing the same as a Greek grad student, just slower, within my first year!" I had to translate Plato in my 101 class as an exercise. I sucked at it (multiple overlapping indirect speech clauses with interruptions and reversals = bad idea for a first time exercise) but it was still Plato.

I only really felt like I was learning and enjoying Greek when I started reading Aristotle 90% in English, 10% looking at the Greek and puzzling over it. Then after a while it was 80/20, 70/30.. It never reached 0/100 (unless I have to) but that's okay.

[Anonymous No.20555704]

>>20555644
My goal is to understand the texts in their original language because I don't trust the translations and understand that things look different in their original language and in philosophy that's the whole purpose of it.

[Anonymous No.20555766]

>>20555695
Based effortposter

>>20555704
You can still make use of parallel translations, just as a hint to make sense of the original text.

[Anonymous No.20555771]

Dude I use a dictionary reading in my first language how are you supposed to read a classical language without using one

[Anonymous No.20555790]

>>20548935
English

[Anonymous No.20555799]

>>20555790
English is a dead and ugly language. Broken ESL English is the future.

[Anonymous No.20555837]

Quamquam hoc filum malum est, lingua latina """ (how the hell do i say "is being spoken", loquor is a deponent so i can't use the passive, what construction can I use?)

[Anonymous No.20555840]

>>20555695
Thanks, I will keep that in mind.

[Anonymous No.20555856]

>>20555799
t. can't read english literature

[Anonymous No.20555865]

>>20555506
>Iulia caleri putat
calere, no?

[Anonymous No.20555869]

>>20548905
every time I scroll past this FUCKING IMAGE I think it's a meme image of a yawning cat and I CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE!

[Anonymous No.20555899]

>>20555837
adhibetur

[Anonymous No.20555904]

>>20555865
No, it needs to be passive for the impersonal sense, according the OLD entry.
> quasi, quom caleretur, cocleae in occulto laterent

[Anonymous No.20555967]

>>20555899
Interesting, so i basically have to use a synonym, i thought something could be done with the participle

[Anonymous No.20555996]

>>20555967
you shouldn't try to be too literal
the idea itself of a "language" "being spoken" i.e using a passive form of the verb 'to speak' doesn't necessarily translate well in an ancient language like Latin, which is also why you typically express the language spoken adverbially e.g latine/graece/theodisce/anglice/etc... loquor and not as an object of the verb 'to speak'

[Anonymous No.20556030]

>>20555996
Not him, but expressing the language adverbially doesn't help here, because you'd still want to use the passive impersonal.

[Anonymous No.20556066]

>>20556030
my point is that the verb "loquor" doesn't admit a language as a direct object in the way we use it in modern western languages like english, thus the passive form doesn't work either
e.g "quidam latinam loquitur" is nonsense, and so it would be the passive form

[Anonymous No.20556069]

Man, do I hate deponent verbs. I'm glad the Romance languages got rid of them, it's one of the few things in Latin that's just pure, unadulterated bullshit.

[Anonymous No.20556075]

>Sciendum est autem quod hoc totum quod est civilis multitudo vel domestica familia habet solam ordinis unitatem, secundum quam non est aliquid simpliciter unum; et ideo pars huius totius potest habere operationem quae non est operatio totius, sicut miles in exercitu habet operationem quae non est totius exercitus
i know it's not hard but it feels good to be able to read this

[Anonymous No.20556079]

>>20555799
Broken English is the lingua franca of stem scholars.

[Anonymous No.20556097]

>>20556066
I understood, but my point is that even using the adverbial form "Latine" doesn't help.

Suppose "loqui" weren't a deponent verb, then you could write "Latine loquitur" for "Latin is being spoken". But it's deponent, which is the core problem of the original question.

[Anonymous No.20556127]

Anybody got a program that can parse words in a paragraph and give their possible case, number, gender, meaning etc? It would be great if it came with some grammar construction analysis as well, but that almost definitely doesn't exist. I just want to make it easier figuring out the meaning and word endings.

How do you guys do it? It's so slow and tiring to have to parse new words by going through the dictionary and figuring out the declensions/conjugations.

[Anonymous No.20556132]

>>20556097
well the problem is at the root, which is trying to mechanically translate from english an usage of the verb "to speak" that just isn't contemplated in Latin
maybe for our purposes a verb like "garrio" could be used passively, but we'd still express he language adverbially
essentially, in Latin you never "speak" a language itself, you employ or use a language -->to speak

[Anonymous No.20556133]

>>20556127
for latin i mean

[Anonymous No.20556136]

>>20556127
>It's so slow and tiring to have to parse new words by going through the dictionary and figuring out the declensions/conjugations.
>How do you guys do it?
I don't.

[Anonymous No.20556142]

>>20556136
What? Are you so good you can just feel it out? I was doing that for a long time but now I'm trying to work through the Illiad and even the first paragraph has been rough for me.

[Anonymous No.20556143]

>>20556127
throw them into the perseus word study tool
https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?la=la&l=esse

[Anonymous No.20556152]

>>20556127
With conjugations I use the dowling method, but i honestly don't see the point of using it with nouns, you're still going to have to look up a dictionary because the author decided to use the ablative of farts and not the ablative of pee so you have to figure it out, or that inflection is used for multiple cases and so on.

[Anonymous No.20556155]

>>20556143
I'm already using Perseus. Is there anything more advanced? Something that can take sentences and explain even some idioms like amabo te.?

[Anonymous No.20556156]

>amabo te
acquired this from llpsi

[Anonymous No.20556167]

>>20556152
Yeah but figuring out how the different cases fit is fun. It's just figuring out the endings and having to type the word in a dictionary thats a chore.

>>20556156
lol same. LLPSI is actually fun its crazy. I wish it figured out how to teach actual grammar rules/morphology this way. Still have to grind the grammar.

[Anonymous No.20556173]

>>20556155
there's an emacs script that, for the word under the cursor, shows grammatical information like the perseus tool does. beats having to copy each word into a search field, at least.

[Anonymous No.20556189]

>>20556173
darn could you link me? that's a big upgrade

[Anonymous No.20556203]

>>20556189
https://github.com/sinic/grammaticus
not on melpa, for whatever reason.

[Anonymous No.20556249]

>>20556075
Reading your first real Latin sentence from beginning to end effortlessly is an incredible feeling

[Anonymous No.20556271]

>>20556203
thanks a lot. lol learning how to use emacs again is a trip

[Anonymous No.20556357]

>>20556075
>>20556249
I struggled with this a lot :( I'm on my second year of latin and I still didn't catch that sciendum was a gerundive. Why is it Predicative rather than Attributive here? Do you just have to guess by context? I really hope there's a point where I just know and don't have to puzzle this out.

[Anonymous No.20556528]

>>20550385
>> פָּנַי אִם לֹא נַעֲרָה אֲשֶׁר לַהּ שְׂפָתַיִם כָּאֵלֶה
Should it be אֲשֶׁר יֵשׁ לַהּ? Or is it alright to drop the יֵשׁ, like I did?

[Anonymous No.20556973]

N

[Anonymous No.20557001]

I

[Anonymous No.20557022]

no chud

[Anonymous No.20557069]

>>20557022
Nigger

[Anonymous No.20557077]

>>20557069
CHUD STOP THAT

[Anonymous No.20557078]

>>20557069
unwoke

[Anonymous No.20557522]

>>20557069

[Anonymous No.20557652]

I'm buying the Cassell's latin dictionary but I'm wondering if you think buying used dictionary is ok? It says good condition but idk if the spines of these are usually fucked up.
Also getting Familia Romana.
I don't think I'm going to to the Dowling method but I'll try to memorise and write out the paradigms as I encounter them in Familia Romana

[Anonymous No.20557698]

>>20557652
Btw would Cassell's be ok if I eventually want to read stuff like the vulgate, augustine and boethius? Or do I need another dictionary?

[Anonymous No.20557892]

>>20557698
It will only have Classical words. It's the best dictionary. You way later on want to get an Ecclesicasical dictionary.

[Anonymous No.20557909]

>>20557652
>buying used
absolutely. check to see what it's like beforehand, usually sellers are straight forward about defects. You can always fix books with ph-neutral glue as well, simple and cheap. My first Cassell's was 60 years old when I got it
>>20557698
Probably for the Vulgate. It will cover 95%+ of Augustine and Boethius but not all and I know that from experience. At a certain point with Late/Medieval Latin the amount of new words makes it useful to consult other dictionaries as well.
Below is from a post I made a few threads back about dictionaries in general. Souter's will be fine for your purposes.
>Souter's A Glossary of Later Latin to 600 A.D.
Covers from 200-600. Good for ecclesiastical words not found in classical dictionaries
>Niermeyer - Mediae Latinitatis Lexicon Minus
Covers 500-1150. Focus is on juridicial and institutional vocab, less so philosophy, science, literary terms.
>Latham - Revised Medieval Latin Word List from British and Irish Sources
Covers early Medieval up to the sixteenth century. Only words from British and Irish manuscripts yet is quite useful for texts from anywhere. Good source for medieval Latin peculiarities.

[Anonymous No.20557945]

>>20557909
What do you think about the old oxford dictionary?
I can get it for $100 and it seems to have a lot of medieval words? It's a bit expensive for a hardback edition though
>>20557892
Cool, thank you
I'll probably just stick with classical works for now

[Anonymous No.20557987]

>>20557945
The Oxford Latin Dictionary? It is the best available, bar none. $100 is a steal, I was excited to find one for $200 and it got bought by someone else almost instantly.
make sure it is the OLD and not the Oxford Desk Dictionary or one of their other ones. See pic related. The ones in the middle are junk. The leftmost is the newer 2-volume edition, the rightmost is the older 1 volume edition. I prefer 1 volume. 2 volume has smaller, less clear print and is more of a bear to use in general.
There are caveats. It is huge - you will not be carrying it with you. It can be intimidating for beginners.
If you are just starting out I would recommend Cassell's. Cheap, portable, reliable, thorough. OLD is better once you are reading authentic texts. It is a tome you keep at home and refer to for deep, analytical detail.
That said $100 is a bargain, I would buy that instantly if I knew about it.

[Anonymous No.20557996]

>>20557987
No I mean the older one sorry
Lewis and Short
Yeah I wish it was the Oxford Latin Dictionary, I'd definitely buy that

[Anonymous No.20558017]

>>20557996
>Lewis and Short
This is good too, it is in the trinity of Latin-English dictionaries (OLD, Cassell's L&S). Some of the definitions are a bit outdated and there are some issues with vowel length but overall it is a great resource.
$100 seems steep though. I wouldn't pay that. I see them used for around $60-80 in various states of wear. You can get a paperback reprint for $40.
If I were you I would stick to Cassell's for now. Keep an eye out for a bargain on L&S. $100 would only be worth it if it is a hardback in mint condition and even then think twice.
There is also a free L&S app on the Google Play store. Formatting is clunky but it works for being on the go.

[Anonymous No.20558039]

>>20558017
It was a 1958 edition hardback, doesn't seem to be in the best condition however
For Australia it's probably the best you can get though, people are selling them for $500 used here lol
I'll just stick with cassell's for now

[Anonymous No.20558050]

>>20558039
It will serve you well. Cassell's got me through my bachelors in Classics. There were a handful of times I had to look something up in OLD. Mega has it if you get stumped.

[Anonymous No.20558054]

>>20558050
The one I'm buying is the Twenty-seventh Edition published in 1955
Could there be any potential issues?
I mean I can't imagine they'd update it much

[Anonymous No.20558080]

>>20558054
No, you'll be fine. My first one was from the 40's, got it mid-2000's, still have it now.

[Anonymous No.20558402]

>hodie dies lectionis coniunctae est
AGAAAAAAAAMUUUUSSSSSSS

[Anonymous No.20558509]

LLPSI Read Along Chapter 10

In which Quintus shall never walk again

[Anonymous No.20558514]

>>20558509
This chapter introduces a few things, the main things being some more third noun declension forms, and the infinitive.

The infinitive is similar to the English infinitive
"to err"
"to cry"
"to walk"
"to sing is a good thing"

[Anonymous No.20558525]

>>20558514
There are however a few areas that caused me confusion on first read so I will point them out incase they too cause you confusion.

note the difference between volo and volo
one goes to volat, volant, volare, and it means "fly"
whereas the other goes to vult, volunt, and it means "desire"

Petaso is a hat, the drawing is quite vague on this I think

Note the esse is a different esse than the one we know for "roma in italia est". But I think both show up in the text and you should know one of them is referring to edo

Nidus is the nest, not the trunk of the tree, I thought this image was unclear

and don't mix up audio and audeo, one is refering to hearing and the other refers to daring

[Anonymous No.20558543]

>>20558525
Then there are two more grammatical things introduced in the text

One of these is the "necesse est + dat" form which unless I'm mistaken means
"neccese est - homini"
"is necessary - to humans"
dative being used to indicate "to"
Please correct me if I'm wrong on that

The other one, which was actually brought up in the last chapter but is used much more in this one is the "in + accusative". Wherein "in" doesn't indicate that someone is simply in something (wherein the ablative would be used) but instead is refering to movement.
"In arbore" - in the tree
"in arborem ascendit" - entering and ascending the tree
Do correct me if I'm wrong on that too, these concepts are new to me as me. I'm learning along with you

[Anonymous No.20558547]

>>20558543

[Anonymous No.20558700]

>>20558509
>>20558514
>>20558525
>>20558543
>>20558547
Chaddest chad ITT

[Anonymous No.20558932]

>>20548943
What about it?

[Anonymous No.20559037]

LLPSI pars una tandem finivi.
Num quid ago? Istne Roma Aeterna tam difficilis quam putant?
Bene intellego latine, sed prave scribo. Merdapostare non tam facile est quam putabam.

[Anonymous No.20559119]

>>20558509
Pronunciation practice
https://voca.ro/1ibRaDjjIkZV

[Anonymous No.20559154]

>>20559037
Gratulatio! Num Fabulas Syrae iam legisti? Paulo difficilior sunt quam Familia Romana.
Etiam Ritchie's Fabulas Faciles legere potes, quae multa nova vocabula continent. Plerique alii "reader" vero faciliores sunt quam FR.
Aut progredere ad Orberg editiones Caesaris vel Sermones Romanos.

> Bene intellego latine, sed prave scribo. Merdapostare non tam facile est quam putabam.
Ne timueris, melius Latine scis quam nonaginta per centum fili.

>>20559119
Accentum Hispanum auditur, sed nihil mali.

[Anonymous No.20559194]

>>20559154
> Accentum Hispanum
Or rather Accentus Hispanus, even though the Romans probably didn't use the word in that sense.

[Anonymous No.20559252]

>>20559194
I've read "loquela" used in that sense, but it was in the Nova Vulgata, end of gospel of Mark or Matthew I believe to remember, when Peter is accused to be a follower of Jesus.

[Anonymous No.20559257]

>>20556069
Isn't 'be born' a deponent verb in English, since 'bear' in the sense of 'give birth to' is mostly archaic now?

[Anonymous No.20559263]

>>20556167
Isn't that the whole point of introducing forms gradually as you go, testing them at the end of chapters, etc?

[Anonymous No.20559332]

>>20559154
Gratias tibi, fratre! Oblivisci Fabulas Syrae, eas legebo eodem tempore quam R. Eterna, fortasse.

>>20559119
Tamen accentum hispanicum audio, sed me placet. Est accentum magis "purus" atque similis quam classicum, ut legi aliquo (si tales res dicuntur possunt).

[Anonymous No.20559338]

You guys were right, Latin is very easy at the start then ramps up. How'd I do this time?

>A better plan was shown to the senate/ Consilium melius senatui demonstratur.
>The largest towns sent a hundred hostages to Caesar/ Oppida maxima centum obsidatus Caeseri miserunt.
>The Gauls had more horsemen than the Romans/ Galli pluribus equitibus habuerunt quam Romani

>Italiae pars inferior propter multas Graecorum urbes Magna Graecia appellabatur ; superior pars Italiae, quod ibi Galli incolebant, Gallia Cisalplna vel Gallia Citerior appellabatur/ The lower regions of Italy were called Greater Greece on account of the many Greek cities. Upper regions of Italy were called Cisalpine Gaul or nearer Gaul because Gauls lived there.

[Anonymous No.20559339]

>>20559252
Interesting. But I think it just means speech, so it's ambiguous. In the Bible, they presumably meant Aramaic with different accents, but loquela Hispania could be understood as Spanish.

[Anonymous No.20559363]

>>20559338
>demonstratum est
>centum obsides
>Galli plus haberunt equitum quam Romani

[Anonymous No.20559369]

>>20559338
> Oppida maxima centum obsidatus Caeseri miserunt.
obsides
> Galli pluribus equitibus habuerunt quam Romani
plures equites, because habere takes the accusative

[Anonymous No.20559375]

>>20559339
Yes, probably. I also feel like "loquela" has a very broad meaning, and do not indicate specifically what we mean by accent.

[Anonymous No.20559381]

>>20559119
Two things:

The macrons: ā, ē, ī, ō, ū signify that you have to pronounce the vowels for twice as long as you would normally do, like "caama" instead of "cama", "paloo" instead of "palo" and so on, but don't say the vowel twice, just elongate it like when the doctor asks you to say aaa, but you stop when twice the length is pronounced, something similar occurs with double consonants, like in Italian: https://youtu.be/9W_UY7amJLk

The second, the Romans didn't pronounce the final "m" of a word like us, the final "m" gets nasalized like in portuguese, so "sum" would be pronounced like "s̠ʊ̃", the bald man did a good video on the topic: https://youtu.be/UFgYUMaOjm

There are two other things you don't get wrong but i would like to point out, the "h" between words can be safely elided like you did since the Romans didn't consider h to be a consonant, but if the sentence begins with an "h" you have to say it, like the English "h", hello, hi, hope, etc,. Second thing, the s, your s is the same one the Romans used, the retracted one, so if someone else is reading this the s he's using is the one you should use.

[Anonymous No.20559501]

>>20559381
thanks fren

[Anonymous No.20559671]

>>20559257
I guess the difference is that "to be born" is simply the passive of a verb whose active fell out of use, but without change in meaning. So either the active meaning is so weird that it's never needed, or there are synonyms for the active meaning that supplanted the original ("give birth", "deliver", in this case).

The problem with deponent verbs in Latin is that they are just randomly used for actions that you might very well want to invert: "loquor" was already mentioned, "sequor" is another one. That's annoying not only to the writer, but also to the reader. He needs to know whether "sequor" is deponent, otherwise he has no idea who follows whom.

[Anonymous No.20559734]

>>20559369
>>20559363
Thanks guys, how long did it take you to get to reading classical texts?

[Anonymous No.20559759]

>>20559671
>randomly
There is nothing random about it. Read into the history of Latin

[Anonymous No.20559780]

>>20548935
Hebrew, Syriac, Gothic

[Anonymous No.20559781]

>>20559759
You know what I meant: there's no way to predict whether a verb is deponent, it's just down to the word's etymology, which is often lost to time.

[Anonymous No.20559790]

>>20559780
> Hebrew
Do you know the answer, by chance? >>20556528

> Gothic
But why?
Other than for fun, which is always a valid reason. Or if you're a linguist, I guess.

[Anonymous No.20559968]

>>20558547

[Anonymous No.20559991]

>>20559734
I think approximately a couple of years after I started I had finished reading Caesar. I took my time though and I think I was already reading some Nepos and Lhomond

[Anonymous No.20560002]

>>20559991
But... Caesar is a classical text. One of the easiest, but still.

[Anonymous No.20560007]

>>20558509
>>20558514
>>20558525
>>20558543
>>20558547
Thank you bruddah

[Anonymous No.20560039]

>>20559671
The deponent is the same, though, it's from etymologically middle verbs from before the middle voice fell out of use in Latin. (Or possibly from passives too, as in nascor.)

[Anonymous No.20560048]

Novum fīlum:
>>20560046
>>20560046
>>20560046
>>20560046
>>20560046

[Anonymous No.20561648]

The classical languages threads might be the only good threads on /lit/ these days.

[Anonymous No.20561679]

>>20561648
these threads suck