[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 2.52 MB, 2000x3008, 1331668098167.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2640030 No.2640030 [Reply] [Original]

How hard is it to learn to read Latin?

>> No.2640047

Not too hard. Certainly easier than Greek, at least. But it will still take a while to gain proficiency.

>> No.2640086

Obviously it takes due time to learn any language, tho I'd say Latin is easier than most. Its very rigid in its structure, so translations are normally very simple if you know what you're doing. Something like ancient Greek can be more flexible, Latin not so much, which is a plus if you're reading it. So yeah, its not too hard, just learn your declensions, specific constructions, verb endings, etc. by memory and you're all set. And as its a dead language there's only really so much to learn, so there isn't a huge amount.

>> No.2640117

As has been said, not too hard. Go to Wiktionary and look up the Latin conjugation for amo and the Italian/French/Spanish conjugation for any verb. Looks daunting, but the regularity is actually nice, if you commit to learning it.

To read like a Roman read it: only if you're a particularly talented and devoted classics scholar.

>> No.2640116

It also depends on where you're learning it from. I'd suggest using Cambridge. I've never used it myself, but I used Ecce Romani in middle school and had to essentially relearn everything when I got to the real stuff, like Cicero. The biggest thing is vocab. Okay, well, that's any language, but drill that vocab!

>> No.2640122

>>2640116
Why'd you have to relearn everything? I'm using Cambridge now and can vet for it being pretty good, though we're starting book 3 (of 4? not sure if there's more) and it still hasn't begun to cover the subjunctive or passive, really. Aside from the perfect passive participle.

>> No.2640152
File: 37 KB, 240x315, Chii.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2640152

It's pretty easy learning the vocabulary since most English words are based off of it.

But the grammar and whatnot is somewhat complicated, what with the ends of words changing based on where they are in a sentence (subject, indirect object, direct object, ect.).

>> No.2640156

>>2640152

>most English words are based off of it.

Except English is a Germanic language. Nice attempt to pass yourself off as intelligent though.

not really, it's obvious you've absolutely zero education

>> No.2640161

>>2640156
Look, the words are often similar enough to recognize. Is it necessary to be a dick? He was just trying to be helpful.

>> No.2640162

>>2640156
English is a Germanic language, yes, but the vocabulary is mostly Latin based you fucking pedant, because English is a clusterfuck of a language.

>> No.2640165

>>2640030

The real question is how hard is it to read Tao Lin.

>> No.2640167
File: 42 KB, 250x250, 250px-Origins_of_English_PieChart_2D.svg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2640167

>>2640156
>Except English is a Germanic language. Nice attempt to pass yourself off as intelligent though.

Not the same guy, but you just proved yourself to be worse.

Pic strongly related, and note that French is also derived from Latin.

>> No.2640169

>>2640156
Jesus, this is hilarious considering that several words in your post have a latin root, eg germanic, language, intelligent etc.

>> No.2640172

>>2640162

>the vocabulary is mostly Latin based

Except it clearly isn't, you fucking twat. The largest part of the language is Anglo-Saxon, mixed with Norman French and Scandinavian languages. There's latin vocabulary in there, but to say it mostly latin just makes you look even more stupid.

>> No.2640170
File: 293 KB, 1000x726, 1267757274766.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2640170

>>2640156
>not knowing that English vocabulary is Latin based

No, seriously, how did you not know that? Haven't you ever wondered why English and the Romantic languages have basically the same words?

Now apologize before you make yourself look like more of an ass.

>> No.2640177

wow, you dumbasses really can't into historical linguistics, huh?

English is a Germanic language, with some loan words from Latin and Greek and French. German also has loan words from Latin and Greek and French, but alas it is Germanic. Come back when you know anything about genetic characteristics

Sincerely, linguistics major

>> No.2640178

>>2640172
>Except it clearly isn't, you fucking twat.
>>2640167
Yessum Latin takes a hefty chunk out of that pie chart, doesn't it?

Now here's a tip for you: pedantry is bad. You don't make yourself look smarter by jumping at the opportunity to call others stupid, especially when you don't know what you're talking about.

>> No.2640180

>>2640167
The Latin element and quite a bit of the French is less significant in terms of occurrence than the bulk of the Germanic component, especially the root words. In any event, the other guy is basically correct. English is a Germanic language. It is distinctly Germanic. The deliberate infusion of Latin and Greek in the past few centuries by learned dudes who thought their language was drab as fuck can't undo that. To say "most English words are based off Latin," even if it's somehow technically correct as per that chart, is misleading.

>>2640152
Yes, it's an inflected language. They're pretty common. Less important than the inflection is the conjugation, where Latin has a whole lot of possible stems for verbs compared to modern Romance languages.

>> No.2640186

Mmmmm I clearly remember my Latin teacher going on about how more than half of all English words with more than three syllables have a Latin root or something.

Anyway, that would explain why English vocabulary has so much more in common with the Romantic vocabularies than that of other Germanic languages.

>> No.2640188
File: 140 KB, 620x620, 1332283017112.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2640188

>>2640177
You're a pretty shitty linguistics major then

>> No.2640198

>>2640188
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_languages

it's this fucking easy.

If you pay attention to syntax, and more everyday lexicon, English is obviously much more Germanic, and even much more French-derivative than Latin. Latin and Greek terms have a lot of technical applications, meaning they are more numerous numerically (ha) but not in terms of usage.

>> No.2640204

>>2640198
>and even much more French-derivative than Latin

Which is itself Latin based, so what's the difference?

The point is, a huge chunk of English words were originally Latin words.

>> No.2640213

>>2640198
No one ITT is denying that English is a germanic language.
The point of contention here was
>>2640156
>most English words are based off of it.

Which is absolutely correct. He did not say "syntax" or "grammar", he said "words".

>> No.2640214

>>2640204
a huge chunk, granted, which is going to do you jack shit in terms of syntax and much of everyday lexicon.

which also has jack shit over what is an accepted and obvious genetic classification within historical linguistics

which also has jack shit to do with OP's question, which will depend on his or her competency with other (romance in particular) languages, competency with learning languages in general, patience, etc., and a bit on the language's genetic classification and relation to English.

>> No.2640221

>>2640213
This. Fuck's sake.

>> No.2640222

>>2640213
alright, my bad. sorry I got my butt all frustrated. still OP should note that that has a rather minimal effect on the easiness of the language to learn

>> No.2640227

Why would you want to learn Latin?

>>2640116

Cambridge?

>> No.2640240
File: 104 KB, 1585x1527, ven.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2640240

>>2640227
Get out

>> No.2640247

>>2640222
You got all butt frustrated because you were so eager to prove how much you knew about linguistics. Now be careful not to act like a pedant again in the future.

>> No.2640249
File: 51 KB, 317x265, 1326751038793.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2640249

>>2640240

Not until you answer my Cambridge question.

>> No.2640256

Around 50 perc. of english words come from latin. You could find thousands of citations to support that number. On those 50p, 15 come directly from latin. Apply Cartesian doubt and search for proof instead of ad hominem bullshit.
Absolutely no method in your madness...

Signed: A french math major who seems to know more about the roots of english than an english/american (probably) dude majoring in linguistics.

>> No.2640259

>>2640249
Google "Cambridge" and "Latin.


It's a set of coursebooks.

>> No.2640270

Do you need coursebooks to learn? Couldn't you just learn the alphabet and then go into the works?

>> No.2640274

>>2640247
was a mere miscommunication - I thought some members of the thread were refuting certain obvious facts which is now evidently not true. didn't mean to come off as a pedant.

>> No.2640277

>>2640274
didn't bro

everyone was being a fag

>> No.2640284

>>2640169

Intelligence enters the English language from Old French (which, as a romance language, takes it from Latin). Get yourself an etymological dictionary, then GTFO.

>> No.2640287

>>2640284
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/intelligens#Latin

>> No.2640288

>>2640152

>>most English words are based off of it.

I think you mean based ON it.

You can't even use English you fucking pleb.

>> No.2640290

>>2640287

>intelligence (n.)
late 14c., "faculty of understanding," from O.Fr. intelligence (12c.),

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=intelligence

>> No.2640293

Allow me to try to be helpful: granted, I know no Latin, but I would imagine that mere numerical correlation of cognates would not necessarily make Latin easier to learn, for various reasons I mentioned - syntax, largely technical context, etc.

What other languages do you know, OP?

>> No.2640298

>>2640293
Just English. I've been reading Roman history and feel inspired.

>> No.2640308

>>2640298
then I imagine learning the syntax would be your biggest hurdle as it will be rather different from English's, but as mentioned you might find its rigidity to be an easing factor. I understand there's some seven cases for which there are all unique endings which as someone who only knows Germanic languages sounds terrifying but you might enjoy it.

>> No.2640313

>learning a dead language
enjoy being a pretentious faggot

>> No.2640333

>>2640313

>thinking this faggot will actually go through with this

ishiggitymotherfuckingdiggity.

This is /lit/ - nobody has the discipline or brains to teach themselves a language. OP will be back to fapping over japanese piss-porn within an hour.

>> No.2640342

>>2640333

Are you saying I can't learn a language?

>> No.2640374

>>2640333
Are you saying I can't learn a language?

>> No.2640386

>>2640374

Yes. Are you going to cry now?

>> No.2640400

Try learning Italian or Spanish.
Latin would be much easier to learn after that.

>> No.2640425

>>2640400
Romanian is more similar to Latin than Spanish.

>> No.2640453

>>2640425

Maybe, but you can only use it to speak to gyppoes.

>> No.2640887

>>2640386

I'm back, you're wrong I can learn a language, just give me a timeframe.

>> No.2640948
File: 310 KB, 798x598, uploadversion45.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2640948

I took lessons of it before. It's somewhat easy, but made harder by you having to think about how no one else speaks it and so not learning any new communication skills.

>> No.2640979
File: 73 KB, 500x649, 1331264580355.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2640979

omnes vos estis cinaedi. loquimini mecum Latine aut me iruma.

Why is no one in here speaking Latin

>> No.2640984

>>2640979

Why should I learn latin? No really.

>> No.2640998

>>2640984
1. It's fucking cool
2. It's poetry and prose inspired thousands of years of Western literature, so surely there is something truly significant in those texts.
3. It increases your English vernacular indirectly.
4. It's obscure to most people, so you'll sound smart and in some cases will get you bitches.
5. Catullus XVI. Go read it. It's the best thing written in Latin, and not for the reason you think.

>> No.2641001

>>2640998

Alright so give me an estimate or timeframe on how long Latin will take to learn, just need to know.

>> No.2641023

>>2641001
It takes 9 months of study to begin to read basic prose. 12 to start poetry. After 15 months you should be able to start on Caesar. After AT LEAST two years you can MAYBE start on Vergil's Aeneid, which is the pinnacle of Latin Literature. So, after 2 years you could be a master of the language. However, speaking it is considerably more difficult than reading or writing it, so keep that in mind.

>> No.2641027

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:Language_Learning_Difficulty_for_English_Speakers

>> No.2641044

>>2641023

Cool alright thanks dude.

>>2641027

Latin isn't on that, but thanks for the link.