/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21466436]

So we all can finally agree that OrbergChads were right all along, right?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR-3VcTdXf0

[Anonymous No.21466543]

I am on Chapter 12 and just finished the Exercitia Latina lessons on it, but LLPSI is—for myself—by itself not sufficient. I need the companion book, but besides that I enjoy it.

[Anonymous No.21466687]

[Anonymous No.21466692]

[Anonymous No.21466697]

[Anonymous No.21466892]

>>21466436
None of this is particularly surprising if one has even a passing familiarity with Krashen's work.

[Anonymous No.21466908]

None of this even fucking matters. My intensive intro Latin class was 6 weeks and it could have been 4 or even 3. After that we didn't need the textbook. Fucking typical of this diluted degenerated dead age that people erect entire cultures around arguing about how to turn the doorknob on the front door but never actually enter the building.

[Anonymous No.21467013]

>>21466908
>t. have been learning latin for 6 weeks

[Anonymous No.21467034]

>>21466908
She can actually speak Latin whereas you can't.

[Anonymous No.21467052]

>>21467013
That class was 10 years ago

>>21467034
Case in point, enjoy another year of youtube videos and forum discussions about shit that should be irrelevant after the first semester

[Anonymous No.21467076]

>>21467052
I'm actually reading these books, whilst you are artistically spazzing out about people discussing books on a literature forum. Seethe and cope.

[Anonymous No.21467082]

>>21467076
>artistically
One month from now if you aren't done with the textbook or if you are still talking about textbooks, hang yourself because you're a failure.

[Anonymous No.21467092]

> >>21457320
> >>21457857
> >>21458245
> Embarrassing. lol.
Ørbergchads...we won. Hurtfags are in absolute shambles.

[Anonymous No.21467097]

>>21467092
Discupuli Orberganensi can't stop winning

[Anonymous No.21467109]

>>21467097
Wouldn't that be Orberganenses? "Discupli Orberganensi" would be "students to the Orbergian".

[Anonymous No.21467110]

>>21467052
>That class was 10 years ago
>still can't read

[Anonymous No.21467120]

>>21467082
Sure thing, bud. As long as you stop weirdly projecting onto people who are actually interested in learning something and discussing pedagogy and autodidactic methods.

[Anonymous No.21467121]

>>21467109
that's the amazing power of LISPI, it allows you to intuitively "feel" the declinations and then get them always wrong. WOW SUCH A POWERFUL METHOD

[Anonymous No.21467126]

>>21467121
I learned mainly from LLPSI too (what I do know, which admittedly is rusty at this point.)

[Anonymous No.21467135]

>>21467120
See you in a month, forever beginner.

[Anonymous No.21467136]

>>21467120
>Sure thing, bud. As long as you stop weirdly projecting onto people who are actually interested in learning something and discussing pedagogy and autodidactic methods.

[Anonymous No.21467148]

SAY IT IN LATIN OR SHUT UP IT'S OBVIOUS NONE OF YOU KNOWS SHIT ABOUT LATIN YOU FUCKING CRETINS

[Anonymous No.21467152]

>>21467126
He's retarded. He thinks a grammatical error by one person invalidates the usefulness of a book that has taught thousands. Not to mention, the fact that most people read LLPSI together with a book on grammar. Absolute retard.

[Anonymous No.21467159]

>>21467152
>He's retarded. He thinks a grammatical error by one person invalidates the usefulness of a book that has taught thousands. Not to mention, the fact that most people read LLPSI together with a book on grammar. Absolute retard.

[Anonymous No.21467165]

>>21467159
Mocking people doesn't make you right. All you're doing is make yourself look like an idiot.

[Anonymous No.21467169]

>>21467152
>This poster has earned the Gold Star: Over 5000 posts defending a method for learning a language he doesn't know!

[Anonymous No.21467174]

>>21467165
>discussing about effective methods to learn latin
>writes 1 (one) phrase, not even a sentence, in Latin
>it's wrong
It automatically invalidates anything you say after that

[Anonymous No.21467183]

>>21467174
I'm not the person who made that mistake, I'm the person who corrected him. And I do speak multiple languages even if Latin isn't one of them so I do know something about how to learn a language in general.

[Anonymous No.21467186]

>>21467152
>book that has taught thousands.
Citation needed. Book one has 1400 reviews om Amazon, mostly from people who haven't even finished it and book two barely has 100 reviews. The amount of people who rave about the book within the first 10 chapters and then later get filtered is probably creating an illusion that the book is more popular and successful than it actually seems to be in reality.

I don't really see an increase in people who are fluent since the book has become popular. I see an increase in online arguments about fluency and about the book. The discord server has like thousands upon thousands of members and maybe 10 people chat in the Latin channel. 5 are actually competent. And all of those 5, all are multilingual Euros who studied using another brook for several years prior to Orberg and have attended multiple in-person speaking events in Italy.

[Anonymous No.21467191]

>>21467183
>Latin isn't one of them
funny how it is always like this

[Anonymous No.21467196]

>>21467191
Why does it matter? Latin is a natural human language, the scientific facts about the human brain and language acquisition apply the same to it.

[Anonymous No.21467199]

>>21467186
let me guess, you're those 5 people

[Anonymous No.21467209]

>>21467196
cus u are a fucking nigger, thats why

[Anonymous No.21467211]

>>21467196
too bad there's no latin natives alive to chat with
it's obvious you've never attempted to learn a classical language

[Anonymous No.21467213]

>>21466436
>>21467097
why are they bald lmao

[Anonymous No.21467215]

>>21467199
>let me guess, you're those 5 people
No, I'm one of the honest people at doesn't lie about only using one book to magically become fluent. I'm not fluent and I've used probably 3 other books alongside Orberg like Moreland, Wheelock, & Sidwell/Jones. Familia Romana is ok as a reader, but without a teacher it's really not a good single source for an English speaker with no language experience. This is only a controversial statement if you are a part of a pedagogical religious movement.

Also he Discord server is a tranny echochamber which I was on for maybe a week. The Latin is not good and that's a poor excuse for "practice. You should read if you want to practice input and keep a journal if you want to practice output.

[Anonymous No.21467217]

>>21467196
No it isn't, classical Latin is a literary language and almost every text written in Latin is self-consciously stylized and syntactically far more complex than living language. You should get as much input as possible, once you know the grammar. Any method that says you "assimilate grammar naturally" is retarded.

[Anonymous No.21467218]

>>21467211
>too bad there's no latin natives alive to chat with
The youtuber in the OP can actually speak it fluently.

[Anonymous No.21467222]

>>21467218
you're retarded

[Anonymous No.21467270]

>>21467211
I have, I can read Classical Chinese decently (of course, it depends on the period, style, subject matter, etc, as 'Classical Chinese' is a broad umbrella.)

[Anonymous No.21467274]

>>21467217
The texts we have are stylized (most of them) but the language itself is a natural human language in terms of its actual linguistic properties (vocabulary, grammar, phonology etc).

[Anonymous No.21467289]

>>21467222
> Can't disprove my statement.
I accept your concession.

[Anonymous No.21467506]

>>21467218
good luck learning a language with maybe a couple hundreds hours —luckily— of decent audio content, all of which is extremely simple and made by non native speakers, specially when the only reason to learn that language is to read literally texts
>>21467274
have you even tried to learn Latin by this method? please try it and you will realize immediately why it is materially and practically (even if not theoretically) impossible
how comes it is always the less experienced people the ones who seem to hold the strongest (and most retarded) opinions?

[Anonymous No.21467512]

>>21467289
he seems kind of right, though

[Anonymous No.21467636]

>>21467506
>good luck learning a language with maybe a couple hundreds hours —luckily— of decent audio content, all of which is extremely simple and made by non native speakers, specially when the only reason to learn that language is to read literally texts
The problem with this argument is that they will inevitably move the goal posts as more and more dogshit content is produced for YouTube. They are already talking about how "we need more input". By agreeing with them and saying there isn't enough, you aren't really addressing the actual issues with their method and it implies if only there was more that this method would work.

The only way to learn a literally language is to get blow the fuck out by reading real texts and yet continuing to come back and reread them until you can understand each author's stylistic tendencies and lexical preferences. Since the grammar is the only thing that is shared by all of them, it is the framework and should be learned first.

[Anonymous No.21467664]

Is it possible to actually learn latin or is it like a snipe hunt meme thingie?

[Anonymous No.21467685]

>>21467664
yes, just use science backed method based on comprehensive input and don't listen to pretentious retards who enjoy spending their time autistically memorizing declension tables and ablative rules

[Anonymous No.21467703]

>>21467685
>science backed method
A 10 minute Stephen Krashen VHS clip on YouTube is not a citation.

[Anonymous No.21467755]

>>21467506
I had gotten decently far with Familia Romana but then I got busy with other things and fell off it. I was progressing pretty well though.

[Anonymous No.21467760]

>>21467703
No, but there are studies on the subject. I can give some actual citations if you like.

[Anonymous No.21467768]

>>21467760
>I can give some actual citations if you like.
Sure.

[Anonymous No.21467808]

>>21467755
>decently far
>with Familia Romana
LOL
it's a starting book, it can't take you any far, after finishing it you will have just scratched the surface of the language (I read it two times btw)

[Anonymous No.21467835]

>>21467636
enjoy wasting your time flipping through the pages of your textbooks and dictionaries

[Anonymous No.21467895]

>>21467768
Here you go:
https://books.google.com/books?id=HrhkAwAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&dq=Approaches%20and%20Methods%20in%20Language%20Teaching&hl=es&pg=PA6#v=onepage&q&f=false
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWOjBulEyrs
https://magisterp.com/2018/07/02/studies-showing-the-ineffectiveness-grammar-instruction/
https://books.google.com/books?id=_udVA--sg4kC&lpg=PA251&dq=grammar-translation%20latin&pg=PA250#v=onepage&q&f=false
https://doi.org/10.1017/S2058631020000513

[Anonymous No.21467930]

>>21467895
go ahead and try it by yourself, retard
oh, right, you are too busy to learn latin (but not enough to teach others how to do it)

[Anonymous No.21467935]

>>21467930
What I have or have not done myself does not change the scientific facts about language acquisition. You asked to see citations and now you're moving the goalposts.

[Anonymous No.21467948]

>>21467935
please, stop embarrassing yourself. Just try to apply those methods to Latin and you'll see why everyone is laughing at you.

[Anonymous No.21467967]

>>21467948
What makes Latin different from every other natural human language?

[Anonymous No.21467972]

>>21467935
I'm trans btw I don't know if that matters

[Anonymous No.21467979]

>>21467972
This person is not me.

[Anonymous No.21467989]

>>21467935
>You asked to see citations and now you're moving the goalposts.
I'm the original guy who asked for the citations, not the other 2. Thank you. I'll read these later.

[Anonymous No.21467994]

>>21467967
the fact that it's dead? that I can't watch the news or my chinese cartoons in latin in order to impooooting? that Harrius Potter is utter shit? that there may be just a few hundreds of actually proficient speakers/writers and they're still LSL? that most texts that have survived are literally works and therefore not easy to read?

[Anonymous No.21467998]

>>21467994
Hey, most of my current Classical Chinese is primarily from reading and more reading, not grammatical analysis and deciphering. Give me something in Classical Chinese to translate if you don't believe me.

[Anonymous No.21468036]

>>21467998
I don't know if you realized it but, conversely to latin, chinese have practically no morphology.
fucking lmao, just try to learn latin and you'll see by yourself. this time try to at least finish familia romana kek

[Anonymous No.21468045]

>>21468036
Why is that relevant? Both are dead languages. (But if you want me to show I know Latin morphology I'll decline any noun you like.)

[Anonymous No.21468058]

>>21468045
I guess it isn't really relevant since you'll never be able to read past the first 10 chapters of FM. But that's ok if you're happy with it.

[Anonymous No.21468074]

>>21468058
You are continually moving the goalposts. First it was because Latin is a dead language, now it's because Latin is an inflected dead language.

[Anonymous No.21468089]

>>21468074
Hey I'm not a part of this argument, but as a previous poster noted, it's kind of cringe to being giving advice on how to learn a language that you don't even know. Also to be reviewing a book that you haven't even finished. I'm not interested in ad hominems or anything like that, I just do think this is a valid point that you haven't really addressed. It actually damages your case because it makes it seem like the only proponents of this position are the ones who never progress past the beginner stage as multiple people in the thread have accused you of. You are actively hurting your position by prematurely making absolutist statements about how languages are learned when you haven't learned this one and may not understand the different challenges it may pose. Sorry this thread has gotten so toxic, good luck on your studies!

[Anonymous No.21468095]

>>21468074
Make a thread when you'll be able to finish (the first book of the series) llpsi. Maybe my grandchild will be still alive to congratulate you.

[Anonymous No.21468103]

>>21468089
I know another dead language.

[Anonymous No.21468104]

>>21468089
It doesn't matter, he has linked some articles, he's obviously an expert in -learning- latin.

[Anonymous No.21468111]

>>21468104
It doesn't matter how much of an expert I personally am or am not, the validity of a citation does not depend on who is giving it but on the credibility of the source cited.

[Anonymous No.21468198]

>>21468111
>but on the credibility of the source cited
which is zero kek

[Anonymous No.21468204]

>>21468198
I have cited a great number of academic sources.

[Anonymous No.21468242]

>>21468204
all bullshit, you're the living proof that they don't work

[Anonymous No.21468259]

>>21468242
One negative example is not a disproof. There are many reasons why someone might fail other than the resources being flawed, such as not being able to be bothered with any method.

[Anonymous No.21468269]

>>21468259
>one disproof
>zero proofs

[Anonymous No.21468275]

>>21468269
I've given proofs and you've ignored them.

[Anonymous No.21468280]

>>21468275
those articles aren't scientific at all, it's like reading a schizophrenic's manifesto
>criticizes made up imaginary approach
>states that the opposite is true
>offers no proof, zero successful cases following the proposed approach

[Anonymous No.21468306]

>>21468280
A book by two PhDs in the relevant field and published by Cambridge University Press isn't a credible source? A great big compilation and analsysis of EMPIRICAL STUDIES isn't a credible source? (I refer to the third link)

[Anonymous No.21468351]

>>21468306
yes, they're not real scientist they're (((humanists))), they basically publish bullshit for the sake of it
have you even read what you linked?

[Anonymous No.21468356]

>>21468351
Do you have any actual criticisms of the methodology or are you just going to dismiss it out of hand by accusing it being part of some Jewish conspiracy? (How exactly does people using effective methods to learn languages benefit this Jewish conspiracy anyway?)

[Anonymous No.21468362]

>>21468356
I already did
>>21468356
>>criticizes made up imaginary approach
>>states that the opposite is true
>>offers no proof, zero successful cases following the proposed approach
plus
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_march_through_the_institutions

[Anonymous No.21468381]

>>21468362
How does that have anything to do with the third link? It cites a bunch of empirical tests.

[Anonymous No.21468397]

>>21468381
because the "grammar-translation teaching methodology" only exists in their heads and nobody has ever used it (more specifically, in the heads of gullible people like you, they know they made it up in order to justify their departments)

[Anonymous No.21468401]

>>21468351
>>21468362
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.21468407]

>>21468397
What the fuck is something like Wheelock's then? What the fuck is the method that the people who say Latin is "like a crossword puzzle" are using?

[Anonymous No.21468421]

>>21468401
It's literally written on jewpedia, are you implying than jews would write something false? That's antisemitic, goy
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/aug/18/wikipedia-editing-zionist-groups

[Anonymous No.21468420]

>>21468407
>What the fuck is something like Wheelock's then?
It's called a primer.

[Anonymous No.21468428]

>>21468407
a proper latin instruction

[Anonymous No.21468443]

>>21468421
Again, fuck off to your containment board.
>>21468428
We have been over this before in previous threads. Its author literally has said that it's designed to teach the skill of transverbalizing Latin to English, not of reading Latin.

[Anonymous No.21468451]

>>21468443
how do they do that without reading? do they feel or smell the letters instead of seeing them? amazing, I should have used Wheelock too

[Anonymous No.21468456]

>>21468451
You are deliberately misunderstanding what I'm saying and you know it. There is a difference between reading Latin and understanding it, and deciphering it into English and then understanding that.

[Anonymous No.21468529]

>>21468456
it must be a metaphysical difference then because from a practical point of view those just seem to be the same thing

[Anonymous No.21468537]

>>21468443
>Its author literally has said that it's designed to teach the skill of transverbalizing Latin to English
This is a recycled fake quote. I can't literally search this verbatim and find multiple people on Reddit and Discord repeating this nonsense. You don't even own the book. You people bend over backwards to justify not owning a book that you don't want to read. Just don't read it if you don't want to. Nobody cares.

[Anonymous No.21468541]

>>21468537
can*

[Anonymous No.21468576]

>>21468537
>transverbalizing as opposed to reading
is that idea even something falsifiable? It sounds like pseudo-scientific bullshit, since the only thing that could be actually measured is reading speed

[Anonymous No.21468600]

>>21468576
It's a made up quote so there is nothing to investigate or test.

[Anonymous No.21468804]

friendly reminder that
>knowing about latin ≠ knowing latin
>translating ≠ reading
>memorizing tables ≠ learning
you can cope all you want

[Anonymous No.21468822]

aequust vobis pol latine haec enarrare argumenta ne scurrae ipsi videamini quum sicut maenades verborum copias profertis sui expertes

[Anonymous No.21468849]

>>21468804
friendly reminder that repeating quotes verbatim from the sidebar wiki of a subreddit is not knowledge.

[Anonymous No.21468881]

>>21468822
>aequust
>quum
>no punctuation
>OMG I'M SO PRISCUS!!!

[Anonymous No.21468886]

>>21468849
>repeat true proposition
>magically it becomes false
friendly remainder that being a contrarian is not a personality

[Anonymous No.21468904]

>>21468886
>being a contrarian is not a personality
Have an original opinion otherwise no one will ever take you seriously reddit fag. You spend more time shitting up these threads than actually studying.

[Anonymous No.21468921]

@21468881 ebullit ira mirum in modum, ne unum quidem verbum adhuc tenet aut quit latine proferre

[Anonymous No.21468924]

>>21468904
>noooo you have to have an original opinion about everything otherwise no one in my hecking incel forum is going to take you seriously!!!!

[Anonymous No.21468937]

>>21468921
ebulli at non per ira sed risus causa!

[Anonymous No.21468943]

>per ira

[Anonymous No.21468951]

>>21468924
>incel forum
Keep showing off your impressive collection of wojack images and Reddit quotes kid. You're really giving em hell. This time I think you really got him.

[Anonymous No.21468962]

>>21468951
>>incel forum
>Keep showing off your impressive collection of wojack images and Reddit quotes kid. You're really giving em hell. This time I think you really got him.

[Anonymous No.21468983]

>>21468943
>ahahahahha he forgot an m

[Anonymous No.21468991]

>>ahahahahha he forgot an m

[Anonymous No.21468996]

>>21468804
>>21468886
>>21468924
>>21468962
>Hasn't finished a book
>Has a rave review that you should really hear
>Hasn't read another book
>Has a criticism that you should really hear
>Isn't studying Latin
>Talks about best way to learn Latin
>Can't speak Latin
>Lectures about how to get fluent in Latin
>Can't read Latin
>Lectures about what to read in Latin
>Never learned a modern language
>Insists learning Latin is basically the same thing
>Never argued without just quoting someone else
>Insists independent thinking isn't nearly as cool
>Reposts defunct cherry picked studies from transexual Discord server
>Calls it data
>Ventures outside of Orberg echochamber into the real world
>Gets blown the fuck out by at least 3 or 4 anons
>Posts cringey wojacks like a soiboi once he starts losing the argument
All instead of just studying the language that he loves in peace and quiet like a person who isn't autistic and 3 weeks away from suicide.

[Anonymous No.21469002]

>>21468996
>Never learned a modern language
I think you're mixing personas but the fact you didn't realize I'm an ESL is truly a compliment, thanks.

[Anonymous No.21469013]

>>21469002
>Third worlder learns English by watching Twitch streamers play Minecraft
>Has some groundbreaking insight on how to learn a 2,000 year old literary language in order to read philosophical texts.
Nah I'm good.

[Anonymous No.21469028]

>>21469013
As I said, you're confusing people.

[Anonymous No.21469047]

>>21469013
>Third worlder learns English
that should be considered an achievement actually

[Anonymous No.21469181]

>>21467148
neca te niger

[Anonymous No.21469217]

>>21467148
mirum quod istuc filum ob argumenta sese praebuit ad linguam latinam exercendam ut inter alia quoque quisque quum autumat de methodis discendi suamet facundia usus vim iniceret aut huic aut illic discendi methodo

[Anonymous No.21469333]

>>21467506
>>21467636
>>21467994
>literally
I think you mean "literary", retard.

[Anonymous No.21469364]

>>21468529
> Pretends like there is no difference between reading a language and deciphering a language and then reading the English.
> Complains that there are no native Latin first language speakers

[Anonymous No.21469397]

>>21469371
lol retard

[Anonymous No.21469403]

>>21469217
hey it's the prisCOOM guy

[Anonymous No.21469409]

>>21469364
there isn't

[Anonymous No.21469412]

>>21469013
> You don't speak any other language than English
> Actually, English is my second language
> Hahah, you're just a third-worlder ESL (didn't notice it before he mentioned it)
Lol. Anything to get the one up, huh? you really showed him by moving the goal post for the umpteenth time!

[Anonymous No.21469423]

>>21469412
the third worlder thing actually hurt

[Anonymous No.21469428]

>>21467092
Lmao. The average Ørberg enjoyer versus the average Ørberg denier.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tom5f1_j6VA

[Anonymous No.21469441]

>>21469403
attat eccum illic "per sua" scurrulus

[Anonymous No.21469454]

>>21469441
>scurrulus
is this correct? shouldn't it be scurrula? just asking

[Anonymous No.21469610]

>>21469454
yup, my bad, you're right

[Anonymous No.21469789]

>>21469412
>didn't notice it before he mentioned it
Nobody is interested is analyzing your posts for ESL mistakes. For the life of me I'll never understand why every gook who can learn a grammatically bankrupt language like English thinks that he's a fucking linguist who's somehow qualified to lecture you about how to read Homer or Cicero. Y
>moving the goalpost
You moved the goalpost when you tried to flex that you learned a language with no noun declensions, no passive verbs, no subjunctive, and no verb conjugations by watching youtube and looking at memes.

Zhang, you aren't anymore qualified to advise anyone on learning Latin as an ESL than you would've been as a native English speaker. In bith instances, you have never learned a dead inflected language. And you have certainly never finsihed the textbooks that you are reviewing.

[Anonymous No.21469812]

>>21466436
None of this is particularly surprising if one has even a passing familiarity with Krashen's work.

[Anonymous No.21469948]

>>21469812
>Krashen
He completely changed how I started to approach language learning. This lecture is so good.
>https://youtu.be/NiTsduRreug

[Anonymous No.21469983]

>>21466687
>Stasia femina polulares est
>>21466692
>Chadamum videtis
>Sacculos magnos ea delectat!
>>21466697
>ampitheatrum
>Visne hic gladius
>Stasias gladium Bradmum inspectat
>Stasias respondet
>Stasia cum Chadamus abeunt

[Anonymous No.21470009]

>>21466687
>Stasia femina populares est
>>21466692
>Chadamum videtis
>Sacculos magnos ea delectat!
>>21466697
>ampitheatrum
>Visne hic gladius
>Stasias gladium Bradamum inspectat
>Stasias respondet
>Stasia cum Chadamus abeunt