/clg/ - Classical Languages General

[Anonymous No.19534926]

Saturnalia Edition

Previous thread: >>19446607

All dead languages with a literary tradition are welcome.

[Anonymous No.19534956]

>>19534904
>The spoken language has lost more inflection than the rest of the romance languages.
Really? I don't speak any French, but just looking at Wikipedia, tenses/moods seem to be as abundant as in Latin. Of course, nouns are not declined, but apart from Romanian, they also aren't in the other romance languages.

[Anonymous No.19534974]

Χαίρετε φίλοι, πειράσω τά γε παρ'ἐμοῦ ἐκεῖνον τὸν λίνον ζῶν σῴζειν

[Reposting this from prev threa(...) No.19535051]

> I have not been a philologist in vain—perhaps I am one yet: a teacher of slow reading. I even come to write slowly. At present it is not only my habit, but even my taste—a perverted taste, maybe—to write nothing but what will drive to despair every one who is “in a hurry.” For philology is that venerable art which exacts from its followers one thing above all—to step to one side, to leave themselves spare moments, to grow silent, to become slow—the leisurely art of the goldsmith applied to language: an art which must carry out slow, fine work, and attains nothing if not lento. For this very reason philology is now more desirable than ever before; for this very reason it is the highest attraction and incitement in an age of “work”: that is to say, of haste, of unseemly and immoderate hurry-skurry, which is intent upon “getting things done” at once, even every book, whether old or new. Philology itself, perhaps, will not “get things done” so hurriedly: it teaches how to read well: i.e. slowly, profoundly, attentively, prudently, with inner thoughts, with the mental doors ajar, with delicate fingers and eyes.
Is this true Latin bros? Has reading /lit/ in your native language improved thanks to your training in an ancient language?

[Anonymous No.19535206]

>>19534974
based. i would like to do this with latin in the future, depends if I get any of my friends fired up enough to start speaking the language.

[Anonymous No.19535269]

>>19534956
Old French used to have a morphological distinction between subjects and objects. Now the only distinction is made singular and plural nouns. As verb conjugations go, you are right. English seems baby tier in comparison.

[Anonymous No.19535299]

>>19535051
This is Nietzsche?

>Has reading /lit/ in your native language improved thanks to your training in an ancient language?

Latin has definitely helped my English. There have been a number of more obscure English words of Latinate origin that I used to forget the definitions of, but after studying Latin I now remember them. An example of this would be the English word "Inimical," which of course I now remember because "Inamicus," which is of course in- (not) amicus (friend)—or, on a larger scale, becoming familiar with the ab- ad- constructions in Latin also helps in English because so many words append those phrases to words.

[Anonymous No.19535300]

Does anyone have resources on Vandals, their language, history and all? Lexicity only has Gothic, was that more or less their language?
Also, quality thread.

[Anonymous No.19535311]

>>19535269
>Old French used to have a morphological distinction between subjects and objects.
That's interesting. Any recommendation for learning Old French? Will put it off until after I know Modern reasonably well, but still.

[Anonymous No.19535323]

>>19535300
Just go into a public restroom and read what's written on the wall in sharpie.

[Anonymous No.19535341]

>>19535300
> Lexicity only has Gothic, was that more or less their language?
That seems to be the case, for all we know. Unfortunately even for that there's no original literature to speak off.

[Anonymous No.19535343]

>>19535311
>https://lrc.la.utexas.edu/eieol/ofrol
I started with this and then moved onto books written in French like "l'Ancien français en 18 textes et 18 leçons". And yeah, you should be at least intermediate with modern French before tackling OF. I have 2 years of high school French and it has helped a lot with my acquisition, mostly in vocabulary. A bonus is that your knowledge of modern French will also improve.

[Anonymous No.19535353]

>>19535343
Thanks!

[Anonymous No.19535437]

>>19535323

[Anonymous No.19536226]

PVLSVS

[Anonymous No.19537009]

>>19535323
toppus cecus

[Anonymous No.19537119]

I am about to start an English degree, and I have the choice of supplementing it with either Greek or Latin. Which way should I go?

With Greek I could read Homer and the tragedians etc. etc.

With Latin: Ovid, Augustine, Aquinas etc. etc.

[Anonymous No.19537142]

>>19537119
latin, it's easier
if you are interested you will learn both no matter what we say

[Anonymous No.19537437]

>>19537119
>>19537142
I'd also say Latin, it's just more applicable, and you can always learn Greek after (as at is the traditional order that a lot of learning material expects).

[Anonymous No.19537668]

>>19535051
>it teaches how to read well: i.e. slowly, profoundly, attentively, prudently, with inner thoughts, with the mental doors ajar, with delicate fingers and eyes.
Thanks for sharing Anon.

[Anonymous No.19537714]

>>19527904
You jest, but there are some religions that actually believe that. In Hinduism for instance, they consider the precise pronunciation of the Vedas sacred.
>>19528088
Me, I'm studying Classical Chinese.
>>19534107
If it helps, Lexicity has a bunch of resources for it, as does Lexilogos.
>>19534537
I've heard of a 'direct method' type video course for Sanskrit, but apparently it relies to some extent on cognates that speakers of Indian languages or other languages that borrow heavily from Sanskrit will recognize. I think I've heard of another site that's based on comprehensible input but it's still in progress, called Amarahasa.

[Anonymous No.19537737]

>>19537009
Don't you know C before front vowels has always been an affricate? /s
(There do seem to be some people who actually refuse to believe Latin used to sound different, though.)

[Anonymous No.19537750]

ωδε γαρ εξερεω, το δε και τετελεσμενον εσται

[Anonymous No.19537801]

>>19534956
I meant that you still write distinct conjugations only because the way the language is spelled and written has not been updated since the spoken verbal form of the language has lost most of the inflection. So many conjugations sound the same even though they are still spelled the same because for whatever reason they don't want to update French spelling and remove the unused conjugations.

[Anonymous No.19537806]

>still spelled *differently*
typo

[Anonymous No.19537813]

>>19535300
Vandals spoke Vandalic not Gothic. Gothic was spoken by Goths.

We can study Gothic because we have a Bible translation written in it. We have little evidence of Vandalic, but we know they are both east Germanic languages. So they would be similar like Swedish is to Norweigan since those are both North Germanic languages. Not saying it would sound like Swedish, but I'm just comparing the relative closeness Vandal language would have to the language of the Goths.

[Anonymous No.19538288]

>>19535051

Is this why most people have such stupid takes about any philosopher, literary writer, or great poet they read? They never seem to comprehend anything but the superficial and it doesn't seem like they even remember things clearly. Is it just hastiness? This problem is common among academics and intelligent people too

[Anonymous No.19538305]

>>19538288

oh, one more thing. Readers often have a prior idea about the work they are reading which frames expectations. If you've ever had the experience of being the only one in a group who seemed to directly understand what they were reading

[Anonymous No.19538824]

>>19537750
Is this ancient or Koine?

[Anonymous No.19539256]

>>19534956
As abundant as in Latin?? Sure, you can get to the same meaning, but the majority of French's complex tenses are periphrastic, plus passives are an être+participle construction instead of an actual synthetic verb form. The simple past is practically only used in literature, the imperfect subjunctive is used even less, and the subjunctive is generally used much less than in Latin. There are only 6commonly-used synthetic (non-periphrastic) tense/mood/aspect combinations: the present indicative, the future indicative, the imperfect indicative, the conditional, the present subjunctive, and the imperative. There are 19 in Latin.

[Anonymous No.19539459]

I am looking for a book to learn Ionic Greek so I can read Herodotus in original

I have looked absolute everywhere: google, Yandex, duckduckgo, zlibrary and libgen. The only thing turning up are Homeric and Attic Greek, I even found a french book on Ancient Cypriot Greek.

Or will I be able to read Herodotus with Homeric Greek ?

[Anonymous No.19539486]

>>19539459
Greek dialects are not that different from one another, I think you could start learning the standard Attic Greek and then learn about what is different in other dialects.

[Anonymous No.19539713]

>>19539459
check out Geoffrey Steadman's website

[Anonymous No.19539817]

>>19537801
Ah, that's what you meant with spoken language. That's indeed a difference to the other romance languages I know.

>>19539256
My highly scientific approach was skimming the Wikipedia article, so I didn't differentiate between analytic and periphrastic tenses. Good to know that French would be easier in that regard.

[Anonymous No.19539825]

>>19539486
>I think you could start learning the standard Attic Greek
I already have some attic notions but I am taking a break from it because I want to read the Greeks in chronological order, something like Homer -> Hesiod -> Herodotus -> and so on

Right now I am using Pharr Clyde's Homeric Greek and it's pretty cool.

>>19539713
>check out Geoffrey Steadman's website
thanks, looks like what I am looking for and it's got PDF download

How come there is such a knowledge hole on the internet with this prestigious dialect I'll never know

[Anonymous No.19539845]

>>19538824
It's Homeric. Quote from the Iliad

[Anonymous No.19540625]

>>19539845
How does Homeric differ from Attic?

[Anonymous No.19540700]

>>19540625
Various little things. Homeric has multiple forms and spellings used interchangeably to fit the metre, and there's some different pronouns and no articles, and there's some particles/phrasings that aren't in Attic. Imo if you know Attic already, you can just study more or less what's in the wikipedia page or whatever material you find and you're good.

[Anonymous No.19540734]

>>19540700
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeric Greek forgot to link. There's a couple things it doesn't mention. If you just look at sample like say the first 200 verses of the Iliad, it contains what youre gonna have to know for the whole corpus. So no worries.

[Anonymous No.19541148]

>>19535299
>This is Nietzsche?
Yes, and thanks for your response fren
>>19537668
<3
>>19538288
You may be right. Like in law, it is not allowed to corrupt the jury's view on the defendant by presenting irrelevant information that would paint them in a bad light because it could affect the jury's decision on the case. In a similar way, people will have made their minds up on a certain philosopher's ideas without having read them or while reading them.
As for your second point
>the worst readers are those who behave like plundering troops; they take away a few things they can use, dirty and confound the remainder and revile the whole

[Anonymous No.19541558]

Why is the first word of יְדֵי דָּוִד pronounced y'dE in Sephardic pronunciation, but the first word of בֵּית דָּוִד bEIt instead of bEt?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niqqud doesn't mention any difference for when it occurs at the end of the word or something like that.

[Anonymous No.19541622]

>>19541558
> for when it occurs
With "it", I mean tsere followed by yod, in case that wasn't clear.

[Anonymous No.19541701]

>>19534926
sup, im fluent in sanskrit both classical and vedic. ask any questions on how to learn the language or about the language if interested

[Anonymous No.19541724]

>>19541701
You were also there in the last thread, right?

Since you know Vedic, have you ever tried reading Old Avestan texts? I heard it's easy, coming from Vedic Sanskrit, but I don't know whether that's true.

[Anonymous No.19541764]

>>19541724
yes, i was in the last thread. pretty sure im the only guy who knows sanskrit here.

> Since you know Vedic, have you ever tried reading Old Avestan texts? I heard it's easy, coming from Vedic Sanskrit, but I don't know whether that's true

i have, its like reading dutch as a native german speaker or vice versa. old persian of darius however would be far more understandable to 90% sanskrit speakers (who dont know the vocabulary of avesta/vedic very well).

old persian is contemporary to classical sanskrit so same stage of evolution. here's a small example of me translating old persian to sanskrit word for word.

Old Persian: baga vazraka auramazda, hya imam bumim ada, hya avam asmanam ada, hya martiyam ada, hya shiyatim ada martiyahya, hya darayavaum khshayathiyam akunaush

Classical Sanskrit: bhagah vajah asuramedhah, yat imam bhumim adat, yat amum ashmanam adat, yat martyam adat, yad anandam adat martyaya, yat dharavasum kshetaram akarot

English: A great god is Ahuramazda, who created this earth, who created yonder sky, who created man, who created happiness for man, who made Darius king

old persian-classical sanskrit is like spanish and italian more or less.

[Anonymous No.19541774]

>>19541764
btw i understood like 30-40% of this text on my first read of the behistun inscription with no knowledge of old persian. two or three re-reads made comprehensibility like 60%

[Anonymous No.19541808]

>>19541764
>>19541774
Cool. thanks. One day I'll get around to Sanskrit, I hope.

[Anonymous No.19543122]

>>19541558
>>19541622
Can anyone help me with my babby tier Hebrew question?

(Mainly wanted to post the language, in case someone Ctrl-Fs the thread.)

[Anonymous No.19544851]

I'm trying to learn english grammar really well. I know it doesn't sound related, but I have trouble identifying the grammar ideas when learning latin and think if I learned them in english I can learn the latin better.
Does anyone have some kind of english grammar book that goes over not just english grammar but also general ideas of grammar?
I went to public school if you're looking for an explanation about why I'm so ill educated.

[Anonymous No.19544872]

>>19544851
Look up English Grammar for Students of Latin on Amazon

[Anonymous No.19544998]

>>19544872
>on Amazon

[Anonymous No.19545512]

>>19544998
Look up everything on Amazon.
Never buy anything.

Simple as.

[Anonymous No.19545579]

>>19544851
> I have trouble identifying the grammar ideas when learning latin and think if I learned them in english I can learn the latin better.
I don't think that will help. The formal study of grammar (in the West) was created out of a need to study Latin and Greek, so grammatical terms are almost tailor-made for these languages, but have to go through all kinds of weird contortions to make sense for Germanic grammar, and especially for English.

[Anonymous No.19545664]

>>19541701
a. did u pronounce 'a' as schwa-like as some people mention and why or whynot?
aa. why did panini not care about the elision of 'h' to turn into 'kh' sound when it meets velar sound, and 'f' when it meets labial sound? why did these disappear in classical sanskrt?
i. why the hell did certain -m sound turns into -gum?
ii. do u pronounce 'jna' as two separate combined sounds or one?
u. do u find the declensions and conjugations of sanskrt harder than latin?

[Anonymous No.19545841]

>>19534926
Numquam Rōmae aetātis aureae inter frātrem animō iam relictō cubantem et amīcās paene nūdās meās laetāns bacchābor.

[Anonymous No.19545946]

>>19545841
Concedo, aut si tu verissime stoicus es ut demonstrat signum tuum , infortunium lamentare non oportet.
Ac amicas nudas non iam crures aperuerint nobis, frater, nam chadii non sumus (ego enim non sum, nam in siniensis imaginibus foro iam scribo, kekius. Male sentio, virum).
Valete

[Anonymous No.19546035]

>>19545946
> infortunium lamentare non oportet.
Rēctē dīcis, ob hōc "Necā mē tandem!" sententiam dēlēvī ante mittendum, ita observātiō sola manēbat.

Vērum in imāgine meā faciem vidētur cum hanc observātiōnem fēcī.

[Anonymous No.19546077]

>>19535051
Reading Latin and returning to Shakespeare is illuminating. More than just words it is the syntax that shines. I had known before that he was very Latinate in his construction (“And in our faults by lies we flattered be” for a great example) but to see this in every line now and every speech, it redounds! My thinking after reading or watching a play is in the mood of Shakespeare, and here the words are echoed. Then, I return to Ovid, and see that Shakespeare indeed had more Latin than Jonson joked him for. Read a late tragedy, or listen to it, and see how closely the verse sounds to Ovid. I am convinced that Shakespeare heard Ovid speak aloud.

[Anonymous No.19546228]

>>19546077
You're right, he does seem very into that weird Latin verse construction you find in Ovid and other texts in general. It kind of reminds me of German when it comes to the unnatural word order.
I had the same experience returning to the Lusiads. It's obviously an adaption of the Aeneid (mixed with the Odyssey with Vasco da Gama as Odysseus), but the references and structure are an exact match to Virgil, even down to the first line (The arms and the barons... I sing).

[Anonymous No.19546867]

anyone here learning aramaic?
if so, how/where did you start?

[Anonymous No.19546884]

>>19546867
Do you already know Hebrew? I think most material assumes familiarity with that.

[Anonymous No.19547345]

>>19541558
Replying to myself, I now think this is just an oddity in Aleph with Beth, who normally follows Sephardic pronunciation, but for this word uses Ashkenazi, for whatever reason.

[Anonymous No.19547445]

That's it, I'm fucking learning latin

[Anonymous No.19547536]

>>19541701

Are the hindoo religious texts really so profound? Are translations worthwhile?

[Anonymous No.19547945]

>>19545579
Yeah I mean I know the structure is different, but the meaning should generally be a same, right?
There are parts of speech and verbs and moods and such.

[Anonymous No.19548083]

The thread's still up. Nice.

[Anonymous No.19549011]

>>19547445
Fundatus

[Anonymous No.19549023]

>>19549011
No
>>19546035
Idiot

[Anonymous No.19549118]

>>19549011
Lol

[Anonymous No.19549128]

>>19549023
> Idiot
Quārē?

[Anonymous No.19549193]

>>19535051
>The abolition of Latin as the universal language of learned men, together with the rise of that provincialism which attaches to national literatures, has been a real misfortune for the cause of knowledge in Europe ... The neglect of them is rapidly gaining ground in France and Germany.
>If it should really come to this, then farewell, humanity! Farewell, noble taste and high thinking! The age of barbarism will return, in spite of railways, telegraphs and balloons.

>It follows from this that a man's thought varies according to the language in which he speaks. His ideas undergo a fresh modification, a different shading, as it were, in the study of every new language. Hence an acquaintance with many languages is not only of much indirect advantage, but it is also a direct means of mental culture, in that it corrects and matures ideas by giving prominence to their many-sided nature and their different varieties of meaning, as also that it increases dexterity of thought; for in the process of learning many languages, ideas become more and more independent of words. The ancient languages effect this to a greater degree than the modern, in virtue of the difference to which I have alluded.
>From what I have said, it is obvious that to imitate the style of the ancients in their own language, which is so very much superior to ours in point of grammatical perfection, is the best way of preparing for a skillful and finished expression of thought in the mother-tongue. Nay, if a man wants to be a great writer, he must not omit to do this; just as, in the case of sculpture or painting, the student must educate himself by copying the great masterpieces of the past, before proceeding to original work. It is only by learning to write Latin that a man comes to treat diction as an art.
>The result of such study is that a writer will pay keen attention to the meaning and value of words, their order and connection, their grammatical forms. He will learn how to weigh them with precision, and so become an expert in the use of that precious instrument which is meant not only to express valuable thought, but to preserve it as well.

>To be entirely ignorant of the Latin language is like being in a fine country on a misty day. The horizon is extremely limited. Nothing can be seen clearly except that which is quite close; a few steps beyond, everything is buried in obscurity. But the Latinist has a wide view, embracing modern times, the Middle Age and Antiquity; and his mental horizon is still further enlarged if he studies Greek or even Sanscrit.

[Anonymous No.19549267]

>>19549193
Schopenhauer?

[Anonymous No.19549270]

>>19549267

[Anonymous No.19549316]

>>19549193
>The abolition of Latin as the universal language of learned men, together with the rise of that provincialism which attaches to national literatures, has been a real misfortune for the cause of knowledge in Europe
Of course, it was also a barrier to education, such that the percentage of people who are educated is much higher. In fact, I suspect that the total number of well-educated people in one European country today exceeds the total in all Europe back in the middle ages or Renaissance, between population growth and the spread of education.
>It follows from this that a man's thought varies according to the language in which he speaks.
Actual linguistic scientists say that there's some evidence for weaker forms of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis but not much more.
>so very much superior to ours in point of grammatical perfection
This is pure pseudoscience. It is to linguistics what the idea of an 'ultimate life form' or 'evolutionary levels' is to biology.

[Anonymous No.19549473]

τί ποιεῖ ὁ κύων;

[Anonymous No.19549530]

>>19549316
>This is pure pseudoscience. It is to linguistics what the idea of an 'ultimate life form' or 'evolutionary levels' is to biology.
Why do you say this, do you not yield that Latin possesses a concise elegance which is due, in large part, to its grammatical syntax, that is lacking in many modern languages, which have been since simplified as to lose their inflection?

>Actual linguistic scientists say that there's some evidence for weaker forms of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis but not much more.
Speaking of pseudoscience. But beyond any issues with psychology and the social sciences producing anything empirically conclusive, as far as I could gather, as ever when someone says "members of X field say this", even within the field there is far from a definitive conclusion on the matter of how much or how little language and those different modes of expression impact the speaker's cognition and ideas

[Anonymous No.19550047]

>>19549530
Not really. Many modern Indo-European languages are less inflected because PIE was extremely inflected and there was 'nowhere to go but down' in morphological complexity, but lots of modern languages are very morphologically complex, and morphological complexity isn't the only type of complexity.

[Anonymous No.19550081]

>>19549193
>There is no better recreation for the mind than the study of the ancient classics. Take any one of them into your hand, be it only for half an hour, and you will feel yourself refreshed, relieved, purified, ennobled, strengthened; just as if you had quenched your thirst at some pure spring. Is this the effect of the old language and its perfect expression, or is it the greatness of the minds whose works remain unharmed and unweakened by the lapse of a thousand years? Perhaps both together. But this I know. If the threatened calamity should ever come, and the ancient languages cease to be taught, a new literature shall arise, of such barbarous, shallow and worthless stuff as never was seen before.
Bros... is there any hope?

[Anonymous No.19550153]

>>19550047
Do you speak/read Latin yourself may I ask?

[Anonymous No.19551014]

>>19550047
>PIE was extremely inflected and there was 'nowhere to go but down'

evidence in itself that PIE was gifted to mankind by benevolent aliens, and we have slowly degraded their superior gift with our primitive minds.

[Anonymous No.19551044]

>I walk, we walk
>You walk, you walk
>He walks, they walk

>I will walk, we will walk
>you will walk, you will walk
>He will walk, they will walk

>I walked, we walked
>You walked, you walked
>He walked, they walked

Lmao

[Anonymous No.19551945]

βαδίζω, βαδίζομεν
βαδίζεις, βαδίζετε
βαδίζει, βαδίζουσιν

βαδιῶ, βαδιοῦμεν
βαδιεῖς, βαδιεῖτε
βαδιεῖ, βαδιοῦσιν

ἐβάδιζον, ἐβαδίζομεν
ἐβάδιζες, ἐβαδίζετε
ἐβάδιζε, ἐβάδιζον

[Anonymous No.19552191]

>>19549316
>it was also a barrier to education
On the contrary it was a common bridge across the plethora of languages of post-Roman Europe which facilitated education, saving the learner from presumably having to learn Dutch, French, German, English etc. just to get access to the contemporary works of his field.

[Anonymous No.19552323]

>>19551945
*bruteforcing vocab several hours a day*

[Anonymous No.19552551]

Language cycle circle

agglutinative > fusional > isolating
And of course it goes circular so
fusional > isolating > aggluntinative
isolating > agglutinative >fusional

[Anonymous No.19552913]

There's something extremely pleasing about Old English that I can't put into words

[Anonymous No.19553031]

>>19552913
it's like German but beautiful

[Anonymous No.19553041]

>>19553031
Spot on

[Anonymous No.19553104]

>>19551945
You WILL write out all the verb forms and like it

[Anonymous No.19553167]

>>19549270
>>19549193
>>19549267
Which book?

[Anonymous No.19553299]

>>19553167
The Art of Literature and chapter On the Study of Latin https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Literature/On_the_Study_of_Latin

[Anonymous No.19553380]

That feelerino when too dumb to learn a language you won’t be having conversations in and thus have to research the best translation of Homer, Ovid, etc like a cuck instead of having it straight from the tap

[Anonymous No.19553442]

>>19553380
it's easier though...reading can be as slow as you want

[Anonymous No.19553909]

I'm bored of banging my head against Caesar all day every day. What is a short, interesting, but relatively beginner friendly Latin piece to try reading as I take a break fro de Bello Gallico?

[Anonymous No.19553910]

Fæder ure þu þe eart on heofonum, si þin nama gehalgod. To becume þin rice, gewurþe ðin willa, on eorðan swa swa on heofonum. Urne gedæghwamlican hlaf syle us todæg, and forgyf us ure gyltas, swa swa we forgyfað urum gyltendum. And ne gelæd þu us on costnunge, ac alys us of yfele. Soþlice.

[Anonymous No.19554008]

>>19534926
I'm so so glad I started to learn Latin bros... There are so many benefits to learning this beautiful language. I can say with confidence that it is one of the best decisions I have ever made in my life.
>>19553380
Anon, I failed English in high school. The other day I realised I was thinking in Latin. Its possible. There is an abundance of resources out there to help you learn it.

[Anonymous No.19554046]

>>19553909
Cattus Petasatus

[Anonymous No.19554272]

>>19553909
Eutropius

[Anonymous No.19554289]

>>19549530
No, there's pretty strong agreement among linguists about that. They differ between exactly how strong but all but a very small fringe say it's not a very strong effect.
>>19550153
Learning it, not great at it yet.
>>19551014
Kek. (There are plenty of modern languages that are at least as morphologically complex, though.)
>>19552191
I suppose that works as a definition of 'educated' if you're willing to say that no monolingual can be considered educated by definition.

[Anonymous No.19555757]

I'm going to write erotica in Latin so I can increase my range of sexual vocabulary and fucking verbs. I think I'll get some inspiration from the Pompeian graffiti database the Krauts made. I remember reading one about moist vaginas. I hope I find it again.

[Anonymous No.19555764]

>>19555757
I think there's some Renaissance-era erotica in Latin, I forget what it's called though.

[Anonymous No.19555768]

3 months of writing out Latin paradigms for an hour and a day and still no end in sight.

I cannot wait for Greek...

[Anonymous No.19555781]

>>19555768
Why not learn it some more sensible way?

[Anonymous No.19555802]

>>19555781
In what other way will I know the future perfect passive? In all seriousness, though, Dowling instilled a true fear in me. I don't want to read Latin like a crossword puzzle.

[Anonymous No.19555807]

>>19555802
Comprehensible input.

[Anonymous No.19555834]

>>19555764
:( got any wikisource links or poets?

[Anonymous No.19555845]

>>19555807
That works, but only for closely related European languages like French or Spanish, I can confirm. But for inflected languages, like Latin and German, I honestly don't see how it would work without at least memorizing inflectional morphology.

[Anonymous No.19555859]

>>19555845
Why wouldn't it work? Have you even tried LLPSI? After all, kids acquire those languages by osmosis just fine. There's nothing magical about noun cases.
>>19555834
Like I said, I forget what it's called.

[Anonymous No.19555880]

>>19555834
>>19555859
Was it the Historia de duobus amantibus from Pope Pius II?
>Have you even tried LLPSI?
I have it sitting on my bookshelf right now. The plan is to go through it once I finish writing out the paradigms.
>After all, kids acquire those languages by osmosis just fine. There's nothing magical about noun cases.
They're just too subtle and it can certainly be sped up by memorizing. And for an ancient language there's nowhere near enough input to memorize all the noun and verb endings.

[Anonymous No.19555884]

>>19555880
>The plan is to go through it once I finish writing out the paradigms.
It teaches you the paradigms, though.
>And for an ancient language there's nowhere near enough input to memorize all the noun and verb endings.
Maybe if you insist on only classical-period Latin, which is a tiny fraction of all the Latin ever written.

[Anonymous No.19555903]

>>19555884
>It teaches you the paradigms, though.
But I've heard horror stories of people who've gone through Lingua Latina and can't distinguish between the nominative and the accusative.
>Maybe if you insist on only classical-period Latin, which is a tiny fraction of all the Latin ever written.
Written for those who already know Latin though :/

[Anonymous No.19555942]

>>19555903
>But I've heard horror stories of people who've gone through Lingua Latina and can't distinguish between the nominative and the accusative.
Sounds like they have a few extra chromosomes.

[Anonymous No.19556004]

>>19555903
>But I've heard horror stories of people who've gone through Lingua Latina and can't distinguish between the nominative and the accusative.
Complete idiots, maybe. If you have the remotest notion of what nominative and accusative are, that definitely won't happen to you.
>Written for those who already know Latin though :/
Yes, but once you've gone through all of LLPSI you're likely to be at a level where you can read at least some of the easier texts.

[Anonymous No.19556251]

>>19541724
Hey Sanskrit anon. Thanks for pointing out Amarahasa as a Sanskrit learning tool.

I'm an Amerimut raised to read/write Mandarin, and tired of my burnt out dopamine receptors in this capitalist global reality and trying to learn about Buddhist dharma to direct my meditation integration and not end up with atheistic madness/egomania.

Is Pali worth learning, or is Sanskrit good enough to learn ancient text/suttas in their original context/poetry?

[Anonymous No.19556254]

>>19541764
I meant to quote this post. Oops

[Anonymous No.19556822]

>>19555757
There's The Latin Sexual Vocabulary by Adams, if you're serious.

[Anonymous No.19556877]

>>19553909
Nepos de viris illustribus.

[Anonymous No.19557120]

>>19555802
You can understand Latin texts without a totally fluent knowledge of a paradigms, and copying out paradigms doesn't necessarily translate into being able to fluently recorgnize and understand them in an actual text. Even if you don't recognize a future perfect verb in context, if you recognize it's third person plural (e.g.) and get the intended meaning from context, uncertainty about the tense doesn't prevent you from understanding the meaning.

>>19555859
>Have you even tried LLPSI? After all, kids acquire those languages by osmosis just fine.

That's the inspiration behind LLPSI, but it's not really how it works (learning by immersion). Besides making the student read a larger amount of Latin than many typical courses (which is good), the distinguishing principle is that the student learns things primarily by inferring them from a natural context (not the same thing as osmosis), which gives a reference anchor for those things (like "that's like the word they used when Diodorus was scolding Marcus at school").

>>19555903
>But I've heard horror stories of people who've gone through Lingua Latina and can't distinguish between the nominative and the accusative.

That's negligence on the student's part. Grammatical paradigms and explanations are written out explicitly at the ens of each chapter. There is a supplement, Latine Disco, that explains the major points of each chapter in English. There is a "College Companion" that offers even longer English explanations for a true Wheelock experience. The last chapter of Familia Romama is literally just excerpts from a grammar textbook.

[Anonymous No.19557149]

>>19553909
Look for Nutting's "First Latin Reader." It is intended to be used prior to Caesar, and it has syntax and vocabulary derived from Caesar. Hopefully reading it will help make Caesar easier. The first chapters are about American history, then chapters about Caesar, and they are short.

[Anonymous No.19557236]

>>19557120
>>But I've heard horror stories of people who've gone through Lingua Latina and can't distinguish between the nominative and the accusative.
>That's negligence on the student's part. Grammatical paradigms and explanations are written out explicitly at the ens of each chapter.
There are also exercises which are supposed to act as a check for whether you understood everything in the preceding chapter. If someone fails the nominative/accusative exercise in chapter 3 and decides to press on regardless, then he can't be helped.

[Anonymous No.19557379]

Latin > Greek
This is objective fact

[Anonymous No.19557409]

>>19557379
> Hell yes, I want to read about the glory of Rome!
> National epic expects the reader to have read Homer
> Decide to go for Ovid instead
> Popularizations of Greek myths
> Maybe theater then?
> Remakes of the Greek tragedies
> Cope by trying to read the Roman philosopher emperor
> Greekd again!

[Anonymous No.19557424]

>>19557409
>implying I'm reading classics
>implying I'm not a Medievalist
>implying I'm not reading law
>implying I'm not reading letters
ngmi

[Anonymous No.19557771]

>>19557409
> Hell yes, I want to read about the glory of Rome!
Read Titus-Livius Ab urbe condita

[Anonymous No.19557920]

I often see introductory classical language courses with 10 or less students on my university's course calendar. They either have to be the comfiest yet still intensive courses on offer, or that has to be the worst instructor you could ever have in a language course. It honestly makes me hesitant to sign up.

[Anonymous No.19557964]

>>19557920
>They either have to be the comfiest yet still intensive courses on offer...
This was exactly the experience with my Greek course with usually only 6-4 students showing up. The reason for such low numbers is that (aside from being a pretty niche subject with little to no use in the job market) Greek has a reputation of being super difficult which discourages a number of people. Out of those who decide to sign up around 50-75% drop out fairly quickly after realising that those pseud-points don't come for free.

[Anonymous No.19558393]

>>19554289
>No, there's pretty strong agreement among linguists about that. They differ between exactly how strong but all but a very small fringe say it's not a very strong effect.
So how does that refute Schopenhauer saying
"It follows from this that a man's thought varies according to the language in which he speaks", when he says is that such a thing has an effect and not that it's 'very strong' (which would put him in disagreement with your so-called linguistic scientists)

[Anonymous No.19558474]

>>19555768
If you read Latin texts you will learn them organically, don't sit and write them out all day like some soulless Anglo insect, go and read through one of Cicero's writings, that will give you far better practice than writing out the same future perfect endings x100 for different verb stems (and it might actually lead you to being able to read those Latin texts rather than Anglo intellectual masturbation with verb tables)

[Anonymous No.19558485]

>>19558474
>soulless Anglo insect
Yes. Only English people ever taught by rote.

[Anonymous No.19558493]

Can someone explain what the word “Esse” and “Ēsse” mean and how it is used in Latin? None of the online dictionaries or my reference book explain it very well. “Ēsse” means “they eat,” right? But “Esse” means the same thing as est/sunt?

[Anonymous No.19558499]

>>19555768
You're meant to speak not write
And you're meant to write sentences as well

[Anonymous No.19558508]

>>19558474
>>19558499
may not be everyone's cup of tea but it works

[Anonymous No.19558530]

>>19558493
they are infinitives
Ēsse = to eat
esse = to be
edere is the alternative infinitive of the former

[Anonymous No.19558555]

>>19558530
Interesting
D > S has also happened in many Gaelic words

[Anonymous No.19558595]

>>19557120
>Even if you don't recognize a future perfect verb in context, if you recognize it's third person plural (e.g.) and get the intended meaning from context, uncertainty about the tense doesn't prevent you from understanding the meaning.
I would say not only that but if you can get it from context what tense it must be, that's more powerful learning than just reading it in isolation.
>the distinguishing principle is that the student learns things primarily by inferring them from a natural context (not the same thing as osmosis)
You're right, I was just being a little imprecise with my terminology.

[Anonymous No.19558602]

>>19558485
Such individuals are the main proponents of the practice in recent times and are responsible for much of the English-speaking world adopting this approach, although I'm fully aware that this insipid custom of teaching the language is derived from the Germans more than anyone else

[Anonymous No.19558610]

>>19557409
It's hardly news that the Romans were a bunch of Hellenaboos.

[Anonymous No.19558619]

>>19558602
>is derived from the Germans
No
Its been done for thousands of years

[Anonymous No.19558627]

>>19558393
My point is that linguists are in agreement that it's a minor effect at most. There might be some thoughts you're a bit more likely to think in a given language, but there's no thoughts you can't think in a given language.

[Anonymous No.19558638]

>>19558508
For a certain value of "works", I suppose.

[Anonymous No.19558651]

>>19558530
Thanks.

[Anonymous No.19558660]

>>19558619
Roman grammatici taught formal registers of Latin language through reading Latin poets and Latin writings (often Cicero), their approach was not that of the dry, clinical Anglo-Germanic tradition

[Anonymous No.19558686]

>>19558660
Not much evidence for how they taught people it
>clinical Anglo-Germanic tradition
It isn't. It's been done since at least medieval times across all of Europe.
I don't know why you keep saying this.

[Anonymous No.19558687]

>>19558660
To be fair, that was to teach native speakers of (the plain/spoken register of) the same language, though I don't think it ultimately detracts from your point.

[Anonymous No.19558863]

>>19554272
Exactly what I was looking for. I was able to get through Book I just with a dictionary. Short enough to be approachable.

[Anonymous No.19558885]

>>19558686
>https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/learning-latin-and-greek-from-antiquity-to-the-present/teaching-latin-to-greek-speakers-in-antiquity/E66450FF4D2CB9F84DB0CD1FD0217545 in the pic related
Also, do you have any examples for the Medieval claim, as far as I seem to recall old English Latin teachers used to use Latin texts and examples with English translations on the other side

Also, I keep saying this because of things such as:
>Philology had always been important to the upkeep of Latin, preserving it from the natural process of change that all languages undergo, but when it became scientific, it began to be able not only to preserve the language, but to unlock its deepest secrets. Classical studies in the 19th century were marked by furious philological work; dictionaries were refined to the excellent quality we find them today, our understanding of grammar brought to a surgical edge, the great works of Latin literature were translated, and many obscure and corrupt works were finally understood and purified.

>The combination of minimized use and ivory-tower philology led to a shift in paradigm at the elementary stage of Latin learning. Students began to be prepared and trained not to understand, read, speak, and write Latin per se, but to analyze it grammatically and produce translations. This was meant to prepare them for the realities of academia, and, at the time, did not have far-reaching consequences. There was still enough usage of Latin to insure that they learned all they once learned, in addition to the new science of linguistics.

>At the end of the 19th century, however, classical philology came to a standstill. Having done nearly everything that could be done, solved nearly every problem that could be solved, scholars moved on to other projects. But Latin education did not. It retained, and does to this day, the grammar and translation model that was meant to prepare linguists, not Latinists. Latin literacy declined sharply as a result, teachers having in the first place stopped teaching Latin in favor of grammar and translation, and students furthermore no longer having the opportunity to acquire that most envious skill in their later learning. After a generation or two, even the teachers began to be illiterate, having never been taught to read, but only to analyze grammar and produce translations at a snail’s pace. This is where we are today.

>As I said, Latin was among the first victims of modernity. It is the model for disastrous educational reform, whereby students do not learn their subject better, but actually cease to learn it at all. What is worse, the reform was so long ago, and so slow to show its effects, that hardly anyone alive today even notices. I have met many a student or teacher of a classical school that continues to teach Latin by the modern method, thinking it traditional.
From https://theimaginativeconservative.org/2021/01/learning-latin-medieval-way-michael-champagne.html if curious

[Anonymous No.19558905]

>>19558686
>>19558885
Missed out the most important part
>Much of this work was done by German scholars, such that, even today, anyone who wants to seriously contribute to classical studies will be lost without a sound knowledge of German as well as Latin.

[Anonymous No.19558955]

>>19558687
I would think the same but I read this https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17597536.2019.1641936 which seems to suggest that even by later years the approach of grammatici (or Servius anyway) maybe was the same, even with students of "differing linguistic backgrounds"

[Anonymous No.19558974]

>>19558687
Yeah I would think the same and it's what the pic related >>19558885 kind of says, but I read this https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17597536.2019.1641936 which seems to suggest that even by later years the approach of grammatici (or Servius anyway) maybe was the same, even with students of "differing linguistic backgrounds"

[Anonymous No.19558977]

>>19555757
is this the databse?
http://ancientgraffiti.org/Graffiti/

[Anonymous No.19559025]

>'Nam Sibyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse oculis meis vidi in ampulla pendere, et cum illi pueri dicerent: Σιβυλλα τι θελεις; respondebat illa: αποθανειν θελω'.
--T.S. Eliot, 'The Waste Land'.

Don't speak Latin or Greek but always thought this was a pretty one. Loved 'The Satyricon' (in translation). God bless you, based philologists.

[Anonymous No.19559029]

What materials did people use in the past for studying ancient/classical languages?

[Anonymous No.19559086]

>>19559029
There's a bit of an autism discussion ongoing in this thread about it, I myself would say Latin students would read/work through rhetoric and poetry (with perhaps corresponding translations given beneath in Medieval times) which probably taught them both grammar and style in an organic fashion, certainly not the modern 'tradition' that has been imported from 19th century German philology

[Anonymous No.19559092]

>>19559029
Whatever was the mosr popular grammar in it at the time

[Anonymous No.19559117]

>>19559086
>with perhaps corresponding translations given beneath in Medieval times
No

[Anonymous No.19559229]

>>19559029
Classical Chinese, at least, was taught mainly inductively; the student would read over the texts with a teacher who would explain them, and they would memorize them.

[Anonymous No.19559293]

>>19559229
i think that only works because the language is really just built off of phrases and not inflections so that part is an easier way to teach

[Anonymous No.19559399]

>>19559293
I don't think there's anything special about declensions, natural languages are natural languages.

[Anonymous No.19559575]

>>19559117
Wrong. It was certainly the preferred Humanist/Renaissance approach and what was the custom from the 1500s onward:
>William Horman (c. 1440 – April 1535) was a headmaster at Eton and Winchester College in the early Tudor period of English history.[1] He is best known for his Latin grammar textbook the Vulgaria, which created controversy at the time due to its unconventional approach in first giving examples of translations of English writings on different topics, and later discussing the rules of grammar.[2] He asserted, probably following Quintilian, that grammar cannot be perfect without music.

>The Vulgaria is the more important of William Horman's surviving works, a Latin textbook based on humanist principles published in 1519.[14] The book was dedicated to William Atwater, Bishop of Lincoln.[18] The preface of the book included verses by William Lilye and by Robert Aldrich, the master at Eton from 1515 to 1521.[19] The name Vulgaria is used in the Latin sense of "common things", in this case "everyday sayings". The book is a collection of English sentences followed by their Latin translations, covering subjects related to school, manners, upbringing, religion, natural history and many other subjects. The textbook is not radically different from previous Latin grammars, differing mainly in its arrangement by subject rather than by grammatical structure.[15] In this, it followed the principles laid out by Erasmus.[19]

>The "new" grammar as exemplified by Horman's Vulgaria, arranged according to directives laid down by Erasmus, was less colloquial than the "old" grammar exemplified by Whittington's Vulgaria.[14][15] Whittington's Vulgaria was in fact to be the last such textbook ever published.[15]

>Indeed, Whittington's old, traditionalist, approach was eventually to lose the war, when in the late 1520s Cardinal Wolsey was to proclaim that Leonard Cox's revision of Lilly's grammar was to be the single grammar used in all schools across the country.

[Anonymous No.19559678]

>>19559117
Teaching by example translations was the Humanist/Renaissance custom from the 1500s onward, I don't know for certain if it was ever done for Latin to English, but it was certainly done in the form of English to Latin examples
>William Horman (c. 1440 – April 1535) was a headmaster at Eton and Winchester College in the early Tudor period of English history.[1] He is best known for his Latin grammar textbook the Vulgaria, which created controversy at the time due to its unconventional approach in first giving examples of translations of English writings on different topics, and later discussing the rules of grammar.[2] He asserted, probably following Quintilian, that grammar cannot be perfect without music.

>The Vulgaria is the more important of William Horman's surviving works, a Latin textbook based on humanist principles published in 1519.[14] The book was dedicated to William Atwater, Bishop of Lincoln.[18] The preface of the book included verses by William Lilye and by Robert Aldrich, the master at Eton from 1515 to 1521.[19] The name Vulgaria is used in the Latin sense of "common things", in this case "everyday sayings". The book is a collection of English sentences followed by their Latin translations, covering subjects related to school, manners, upbringing, religion, natural history and many other subjects. The textbook is not radically different from previous Latin grammars, differing mainly in its arrangement by subject rather than by grammatical structure.[15] In this, it followed the principles laid out by Erasmus.[19]

>The "new" grammar as exemplified by Horman's Vulgaria, arranged according to directives laid down by Erasmus, was less colloquial than the "old" grammar exemplified by Whittington's Vulgaria.[14][15] Whittington's Vulgaria was in fact to be the last such textbook ever published.[15]

>Indeed, Whittington's old, traditionalist, approach was eventually to lose the war, when in the late 1520s Cardinal Wolsey was to proclaim that Leonard Cox's revision of Lilly's grammar was to be the single grammar used in all schools across the country.

>In some ways Horman was more traditional than Whittington, since he rejected the common vocabulary of Medieval Latin and idealised the "pure" Ciceronian form of Latin while Whittington was more pragmatic in his views
A more grammar-based rote style seemed to be the custom for a strange period between antiquity and early pre-renaissance Europe, then the custom shifted to the perhaps more traditional study of authors such as Cicero, Terence and Virgil which was a similar approach used by grammatici in antiquity

[Anonymous No.19560304]

>cum processisset armatus, corvus ei supra dextrum bracchium sedit. Mox commissa adversum Gallum pugna idem corvus alis et unguibus Galli oculos verberavit, ne rectum posset aspicere. Ita a tribuno Valerio interfectus. Corvus non solum victoriam ei, sed etiam nomen dedit. Nam postea idem Corvinus est dictus.

Roman history is fucking metal.

[Anonymous No.19560306]

>>19556822
gratias
>>19558977
>Hic inscriptiones Latinas, a Romanis in moenia urbium Romanarum scriptum, legere potes. Vocabula iocosa atque quaerenda: "futuere" (fuck), "pedicare" (sodomize), "cacare" (the verb "to shit"), "irrumare" (facefuck), "culus" (asshole), "cornutus" (cuck), "merda" (the noun "shit"),
"nates" (ass cheeks), "pathicus" (power-bottom), "cinaedus" (catamite).

>search here: http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/epi.php?s_sprache=en

It's this one. You can search for certain words and any graffiti that contains them will pop up. Some anon a while back made a thread on this. Was a fun one

[Anonymous No.19560327]

>>19560306
>searched for "mentula"
>get "me mentula linge"
>translate it
>lick my cock
kek based Roman shitposters

[Anonymous No.19560341]

>>19559678
Okay but can you please show examples that army Wikipedia quoting people that are quoting people?
Show me a mediaeval or ancient book that claims to teach a language which uses this method as the way.

[Anonymous No.19560350]

>>19560306
>cacare
It's strange how all indo-european languages have preserved this word in a near original form.

[Anonymous No.19560366]

>>19535343
I'm not the anon you've been speaking to, but you (and others here) might find this interesting. In early October I got to look over a handwritten document composed in Middle(?) French from 1580. I can't read it, but I found it very interesting!

[Anonymous No.19560545]

>>19560366
Its a contract for something but i think that's obvious

[Anonymous No.19560585]

>>19534926
Does anyone think Aramaic is classical?

[Anonymous No.19560605]

>>19560545
Yes, I figure it's most likely regarding land holdings or sale, but I don't know for sure

[Anonymous No.19560925]

>>19560585
To me it is. Not that I speak any.

[Anonymous No.19560963]

>>19557409
Simple as

[Anonymous No.19561711]

>>19560585
Definitely

[Anonymous No.19563254]

bump

[Anonymous No.19564198]

>>19560366
Where is this from?

[Anonymous No.19564252]

>>19564198
Dumbarton

[Anonymous No.19564368]

Greekbros, I just ordered a copy of Alexandros. I've been struggling through a grammar-translation book, and it's been getting increasingly frustrating without giving me the sense that I'm learning anything. Hopefully i've picked up enough that this reader won't be completely undecipherable. Am I gonna make it, or did I choose the dumbest, hardest way to do this?

Pic not related.

[Anonymous No.19564699]

declensions comparison
i think i did the greek wrong by putting toin and that but it shouldnt make much a difference
also for plural gen. in q-celtic it may also be viroi and plural acc. as virons

[Anonymous No.19564755]

>>19564699
well you either put all the definite articles or not, generally the first option is what happens with greek

[Anonymous No.19565153]

>>19545664
> a. did u pronounce 'a' as schwa-like as some people mention and why or whynot?

yes, its pronounced as a schwa only. like the first a in away. that's just what the pronounciation is. sometimes its pronounced as /ɐ/ (IPA)

> why did panini not care about the elision of 'h' to turn into 'kh' sound when it meets velar sound, and 'f' when it meets labial sound? why did these disappear in classical sanskrt?

he did, it's called the jihvamulya and is dealt with in the sutra कुप्वोः ≍क≍पौ च 8.3.37 of the asthadhyayi.

> i. why the hell did certain -m sound turns into -gum?

they're homorganic nasals which assimilate to the next consonant. the "gum" is probably just the velar nasal + g sounding like "gum" to you

> ii. do u pronounce 'jna' as two separate combined sounds or one?

one sound, here's how it's pronounced: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2hReqbgsL0&ab_channel=TheSanskritChannel

> do u find the declensions and conjugations of sanskrt harder than latin?

yes, its much harder. i find latin to be very easy.

[Anonymous No.19565240]

>>19564198
I don't know, to be honest. I'm frequently at a historic house for a once-prominent family in western new york, and the current head of the estate showed me the letter as the oldest written document in his possession that I believe is connected to his family. I can't really say more for fear of giving away too many details, but as far as I know it isn't scanned or anywhere online

[Anonymous No.19566136]

βoύμπ

[Anonymous No.19566194]

anyone know of any websites or books that go into historical semantics of languages like Latin or ancient Greek? what I mean by historical semantics is the piecing-together of what words meant and how we know what they meant - to the extent we do. I assume that a good deal of it is reading translations from other languages that we currently understand, comparing the spelling and assumed pronunciation to related languages, etc., but I wanted to read something in-depth on the subject. I would accepted general websites and books on the subject too, not just ones relating to ancient Greek and Latin specifically (though I would prefer those).

[Anonymous No.19566798]

οὐ γει εἰμί

[Anonymous No.19566942]

>>19566194
yeah there are
this one is alright
Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the other Italic languages
here is an example from it
just get a pdf

[Anonymous No.19567067]

>>19566942
just downloaded it, looks interesting. any other reccs on the subject? if not, no worries; I appreciate the recc.

[Anonymous No.19567895]

>>19564368
If you're asking about grammar translation, I'd say it's the dumbest, hardest way, yeah. I'd even go so far as to say it's actively harmful- it creates the mental habit of treating the language as something to decipher into your mother tongue rather than something to actually understand as a language.

[Anonymous No.19567908]

>>19566136
Shouldn't that be something like βάμπ? There's no reason to go by non-English letter values when transliterating an English word.

[Anonymous No.19568198]

>>19560304
Qua confecta pugna, omnes plauserunt.

[Anonymous No.19568724]

>>19567908
True, my bad.

[Anonymous No.19569025]

>>19565153
bene amici gratias

[Anonymous No.19569377]

>>19567895
Hahahaha

[Anonymous No.19569543]

>>19537119
Greek because its more based imo

[Anonymous No.19569562]

>>19537714
>>19528088
>>19534537
I learned with Goldman's Devavanipravesika. That was in a class and its still pretty brutal, but as far as an introduction goes you can (with a teacher) start reading epics immediately after completing it. I think its preferred by many teachers because it employs a mixture of traditional methods and western grammar-translation.

[Anonymous No.19569569]

>grammar-translation
By fucking jove you're all lunatics

[Anonymous No.19569580]

>>19556251
Not Sanskrit anon but another Sanskrit anon but don't trust me I'm only in intermediate:
Pali and Sanskrit have different texts associated with them so it depends on what you want to study, but learning Sanskrit will give you a wider range imo but if you're like hyperfocused on the Pali cannon then it might not be useful. In any case they're almost the same, and learning one will certainly help you learn the other.

[Anonymous No.19569592]

>>19558885
>bunch of germans get a hold of ancient indian grammar
>"what if we used this for Latin/Greek"?
essentially

[Anonymous No.19569604]

>>19569592
Yeah
No one taught by rote until the Germans read Hindu scriptures in the 1800s

[Anonymous No.19569608]

/lit/ I have a problem
>dicking around in college, studying /lit/ not quite sure what to do with myself
>sign up for Sanskrit because it looks cool
>get super into it
>also other classical language being offered
>ancient near-eastern languages, some fairly obscure, more recently deciphered ones too
>5 language classes next semester
>FIVE LANGUAGE CLASSES
why. why did I do this. I tell myself its so I can have access to more diverse source texts but I know its for its own sake, because i think its cool...because...there must be something wrong with me...

[Anonymous No.19569619]

>>19569608
>cool...because...there must be something wrong with me...
Yeah learning Sanskrit lmfao

[Anonymous No.19569626]

>>19569619
shutup nerd do u know how much yoga mom pussy i get? none.

[Anonymous No.19569628]

>>19569626
In the end tamil boys get the women

[Anonymous No.19569763]

>>19569608
What are the other languages?

You can always become this thread's resident Elamite expert, or whatever.

[Anonymous No.19570018]

>>19569608
For the love of Zeus master one language before jumping into the next.

[Anonymous No.19570049]

>>19569580
Thanks anon, I grew up christian, around wealthy jews and hate the hypocrisy of Abrahamic followers. Even Muslims I met in college who were chill at first, but realize they were just doing it for aesthetics and drink/drug/whore and are disrespectful like the rest of us.

Did some psychedelics after the military and suddenly have an interest in eastern religions, I guess Sanskrit would be good if I want to also study the Bhagavad Gita and Veda as well?

Been trying to read 道德經 in Mandarin but it's kind of hard because it's not exactly the same as colloquial Chinese.

Been listening to the Majjhima nikaya on YouTube in English and doing breathwork meditation, and trying to become a more stoic person.

t. Uncle Sam's Misguided Child who emancipated self and trying to self actualize

[Anonymous No.19570100]

>>19553909
Apuleius, the Cupid and Psyche section

[Anonymous No.19570802]

how do you learn classical (if that's the right term) chinese

[Anonymous No.19570915]

what are some must read top 3 classics?

[Anonymous No.19571072]

>>19570100
First time I've heard that being feasible for beginners.

[Anonymous No.19571146]

>>19570802
Theres a difference between classical and literary but i dont care
Get A New Practical Primer of Literary Chinese by Rouzer
Its the best

[Anonymous No.19571162]

>>19570915
Fingal
Temora
Cathlodin

[Anonymous No.19572399]

>>19570018
I'm pretty good w/ Sanskrit but I'm not going to spend 4 more years "mastering" it before learning any other language.

[Anonymous No.19572409]

>>19569763
I do wanna learn Elamite but its not on the menu at my school.

[Anonymous No.19572415]

i failed my latin exam bros. i just walked out mid exam without even handing anything in.

[Anonymous No.19572427]

>>19570049
Yes, I'm reading the BG now. Definitely, if you want to study any sort of Hindu theology/philosophy, you're going to need Sanskrit.

And good luck on your journey anon. It's a hard road and few make it; even for the wisest among us.

[Anonymous No.19572498]

>>>/int/156539341
Language learning from int does not seem to give a shit about latin.
Rate my attempts please

[Anonymous No.19572851]

>>19570049
>Been trying to read 道德經 in Mandarin but it's kind of hard because it's not exactly the same as colloquial Chinese.
If you're reading it in Mandarin, that's a translation. The original is in Classical Chinese.

[Anonymous No.19572854]

>>19570802
https://old.reddit.com/r/classicalchinese/wiki/index

[Anonymous No.19572965]

>>19572498
>lumina lux peto (?)
lumen/luminar ut accendas, peto
>Interrete est fenestram in defferentas mundas
interrete est fenestra ad alios mundos
>amicus stultus meus iacebat lac in peristroma
amicus meus stultus forte deiecit lac super stragulum
>per scholam multas sonticas artes discebam
mmh, internship is a hard-ish one, but "tirocinium" should fit even in modern terms
multas graves artes didici

[Anonymous No.19572966]

>>19541701
Where to start as an absolute beginner?

[Anonymous No.19573013]

>>19572965
Habeo gratiam tuam

[Anonymous No.19573021]

>>19534926
test

[Anonymous No.19573037]

>>19534956
Spanish has best preserved the Latin verbal conjugation system

[Anonymous No.19573123]

What does /clg/ consider classical language?
>Latin, Greek, Sanskrit
>Persian/Avestan
>Old Norse
>Hebrew, Arabic, Aramaic, Syriac, Ugaritic
>Egyptian, Babylonian, Akkadian, Sumerian, Elamite
>Tibetan, Chinese
I can't think of any that aren't too recently attested/have a large literary tradition.

[Anonymous No.19573761]

>>19573123
What about Old French?

[Anonymous No.19574330]

>>19573761
too contemporary. Also I might want to add some old Dravidian language to the list as well.

[Anonymous No.19574385]

for those who havent listened to how Old/Archaic Chinese go listen on youtube now. it sounds extremely different and dare i say, strange and uncanny. if u do not like the sound of normal modern chinese, give this one a chance

also, nobody mentioned based TOCHARIAN and HITTITE yet in these threads

[Anonymous No.19575135]

>>19573123
>>19573761
I put
> All dead languages with a literary tradition are welcome.
in OP, so I consider all of these on topic here (even though the literary tradition part is iffy for something like Elamite, but it's not like we're getting drowned in discussions about it).

One could insist on only calling languages of western antiquity classical, but that's a bit of a meaningless distinction, and excludes languages that literally have "Classical" in their name.

[Anonymous No.19575178]

I just finished chapter 4 of Lingua Latina
Marcus did nothing wrong

[Anonymous No.19575508]

>>19575178
PVER IMPROBVS EST

[Anonymous No.19575712]

>>19574385
this is classical languages not dead languages

[Anonymous No.19575734]

Is classical Chinese harder than modern Chinese?

[Anonymous No.19575735]

>>19575178
>I just finished chapter 4 of Lingua Latina

lmfao

[Anonymous No.19575819]

>>19575508
Marcus improbus est, etiam Medus.

[Anonymous No.19576304]

I'm having a lot of trouble with the poetry chapter in LLPSI (CAP. XXXIV). Any advice?

[Anonymous No.19576335]

>>19576304
Have you been using any of the accompanying pamphlets? There's Latine Disco, which explains extra points about each chapter for people who are studying by themselves, and there's Latine Doceo, which is the instructor's manual for Familia Romana.

[Anonymous No.19576338]

>>19576304
If you are having trouble with the last chapter, then I would say you have done well enough. Did you read Fabulae Syrae, Colloquia, or Latinae?

[Anonymous No.19576340]

>>19576304
what part are you having problems with, exactly? are you talking about the meter, the omitted words/grammar, something else?

[Anonymous No.19576345]

>>19575819
Medus simp est. Nonaginta sestertii!?! Nunc saccus Medi vacuus est.

[Anonymous No.19576394]

>>19575734
No. Bone script actually looks like the fucking object and they still use it to teach kids how to remember modern ideograms.

[Anonymous No.19576406]

>>19576345
Medus amicam habeo, itaque pecunia est necesse.

[Anonymous No.19576454]

>>19576335
>Have you been using any of the accompanying pamphlets?
Nope, didn't even know there were any.
>There's Latine Disco, which explains extra points about each chapter for people who are studying by themselves, and there's Latine Doceo, which is the instructor's manual for Familia Romana.
Cheers, I'll check libgen for them.
>If you are having trouble with the last chapter, then I would say you have done well enough. Did you read Fabulae Syrae, Colloquia, or Latinae?
Finished Colloquia, half way through Latinae (going slowly because it's repetitive and boring to me) and started Fabulae Syrae (little bit more difficult than Fabulae Faciles but still not a big problem) last week along with Fabulae Faciles (no problem with these stories. In fact, they're a bit too easy but mythology is interesting to me so I'm going to finish the whole book).
>>19576340
>what part are you having problems with, exactly?
I feel like I can't understand the poetry like I can the prose. I had to look up translations of Catullus after reading the chapter to see if I was getting the proper meaning and I got maybe 30-40% of Catullus 3 (the death of Lesbia's sparrow).
>are you talking about the meter, the omitted words/grammar, something else?
Pretty much everything you listed.

[Anonymous No.19576464]

>>19576406
Habeo is 1st person. Ego Habeo. I have.
Habet is 3rd person. Medus habet. He has.

[Anonymous No.19576467]

>>19576464
Yeah, I caught that after writing it. Thank you though.

[Anonymous No.19576479]

>>19576454
Read the Vulgate. Just bombard your brain with Latin. There's no shortage of content and if you can read the last chapter of LLPSI or Fabulae Faciles, you should be fine.

[Anonymous No.19576568]

>>19576406
Hahahae, Medus amicae eae pecunia domini ei anulum illlum emens stultus est.

[Anonymous No.19576689]

>>19576568
Medus est futuere-puer.

[Anonymous No.19576702]

>>19576345
Illā parte legendō Iūlius mihi maximē stulte esse vidēbātur. Cūr eī necesse est nummōs (nōn semel, sed bis!) numerāre ad intellegendum sē X an C nummōs habēre? Quīn hoc plānus est?!

[Anonymous No.19577184]

>>19576479
Alright, will do. Thank you, anon. Do you think I'd be able to read Descartes' Meditations or Spinoza's Ethics in Latin yet?

[Anonymous No.19577986]

>>19574385
The reconstructed pronunciation isn't necessarily meant to be taken literally as phonetic values to my understanding, it's more like a schematic model of the underlying system that produces the modern lects. It probably has some resemblance to what they actually spoke but it might not be that close.

[Anonymous No.19577994]

>>19575734
Not inherently, they're both natural human languages. But Classical Chinese can be tricky both because there's less opportunity to practice speaking and hearing it in the modern day, and because authors often leaned heavily on allusions to express ideas.
>>19576394
Almost nobody learning Classical Chinese learns oracle bone script, though, they learn it in modern character forms. (And the oracle bone inscriptions are preclassical anyway.)

[Anonymous No.19578722]

What are Indian classical languages like? I heard there are six.

[Anonymous No.19578748]

>>19576454
>I feel like I can't understand the poetry like I can the prose. I had to look up translations of Catullus after reading the chapter to see if I was getting the proper meaning and I got maybe 30-40% of Catullus 3 (the death of Lesbia's sparrow).
how much Latin poetry have you read? and what aspects of the format do you think are giving you problems? what parts of Catullus 3 did you understand and which did you not? can you normally find the subject(s)? what about the object(s)? can you see what's in the ablative case and what agrees?

if you're still new to Latin poetry, naturally it's going to be somewhat difficult and strange compared to standard, formal prose. if you keep at it though, you will see that there are trends within the broken-down grammar found in Latin poetry, and that the notable poets (Catullus, Horace, Ovid, Virgil, etc.) have their own peculiarities. Like another anon said, reading a lot more will help you. I mean this in an encouraging way, but Catullus is often considered one of the easier Roman poets. So, you could benefit from trying to go through his other poems and looking up breakdowns on YouTube of Latin teachers explaning the structure (or lack thereof) of the given poems. you could also benefit by getting a Latin reader. I used "A Longman Latin Reader: Catullus and Horace" in my 4th semester Latin course, and it helps you a lot with idioms and other particular aspects to the poems.

[Anonymous No.19578761]

>>19576479
I've been going through bits of the Vulgate since I finished LLPSI. It's pretty easy reading compared to the classical authors I've looked at. There's a lot of repetition and the grammar seems simpler.

[Anonymous No.19578784]

>>19578722
Depends on what you mean by 'classical' but Sanskrit is probably the most important one and the most influential outside of India.

[Anonymous No.19578820]

>>19578761
I've only read stuff here and there of the vulgate, but I can confirm it's pretty simple grammar overall. some of the ways of speaking are interesting. I was actually reading Genesis 4 yesterday, and I read "Factum est autem post mutlos dies ut offeret Cain de fructibus terrae munera Domino" (lit. And it happened after many days such that Cain offered gifts from the fruts of the earth to the Lord." idk why but I love reading shit like that, especially when you can understand it without having to look words up.

[Anonymous No.19578853]

>>19578761
I've only read stuff here and there of the vulgate, but from what I've read it is definitely simpler than, say, Cicero or Caesar. just yesterday I was reading genesis 4 and it said "Factum est autem post multos dies ut offerret Cain de fructibus terrae munera Domino." (lit. And it happened after many days that Cain offered from the fruits of the earth gifts to the Lord.) I love the writing in it, especially when I can understand it without having to look words up. there are a fair bit of loan words that make you scratch your head though.

[Anonymous No.19578857]

Where do you guys get your Vulgates?

[Anonymous No.19578894]

>>19578857
you can actually buy physical copies. I bought one a year or so ago, but I sometimes just read it on a website. the latin library has it up: http://thelatinlibrary.com/bible.html
for whatever reason the link in the 'Christian Latin' section doesn't have the right url, but if you just look up "thelatinlibrary bible" you should be able to find it whenever you want to read it (assuming you want to read it online)

[Anonymous No.19578902]

>>19578894
to clarify, I got my physical copy from Amazon (editio quinta)

[Anonymous No.19579230]

>>19578853
Yeah, Cicero and Caesar, I often end up staring at a sentence, and even after looking up all the words, I can't make heads or tails of the meaning. But reading the Vulgate makes me feel almost fluent.

>>19578857
I just read it online.

>>19578748
I also found that poetry chapter of LLPSI challenging. The whole idea of Latin poetry is just incomprehensible to me right now.

[Anonymous No.19579841]

Can someone please explain what the fuck is an aorist is and how it's different from the perfect?

[Anonymous No.19580413]

>>19578857
Bible.com you can put it side by side with the Douay-Rheims English translation. It's better for cross reference than the KJV because it's modeled after the Latin and it matches up better.

[Anonymous No.19580462]

>>19579841
θνησκω = I am in the process of dying
εθνησκον = I was/used to be in the process of dying
εθανον = I died (the moment of death)
τεθνηκα = I am dead (resultative)

[Anonymous No.19580748]

What are the differences in Classical and Medieval Latin? I know there are differences, especially with the consistency of writing but are there any other ones?

[Anonymous No.19580821]

>>19578857
The Vatican has its Nova Vulgata available online. I heard it's a bit closer to classical Latin than the others, for better or worse.

[Anonymous No.19580832]

>>19580748
I've heard good things about Reading Medieval Latin by Sidwell.

[Anonymous No.19580939]

>>19580748
Just for the language itself
The largest is that people would write latin influenced by their own language so it would sometimes have idiom from their own language in it
The second biggest ia the modern pronounciation.
So nation was commonly put nacion and other similar softenings

[Anonymous No.19581717]

>>19580748
Some of the way they use grammar is simplified in Medieval Latin. Also the vocab may be diferent. For example they would use more vulgar Latin vocab like Caballus instead of Equus for horse. Or Homo instead of Vir for man. The subject matter also leans heavily in the religious corner.

Lastly you have to remember that medieval writers are not writing in their native language. So you have to imagine reading Spanish be someone written in Spain vs Spanish written by someone in Germany a thousand years after Spain doesn't exist anymore.

[Anonymous No.19582092]

Fluent Latin bros, how long id it take you to get proficient in reading the language? I have been studying it for two years now and thought I was starting to become one of the big boys after reading the Gesta Francorum and other earlier texts with ease, but now I have started reading De Bello Gallico and it's like pulling teeth.

[Anonymous No.19582143]

>>19582092
>how long id it take you to get proficient in reading the language?
The basic idea in medieval and more modern times is you should take two years to become completely fluent in Latin.

[Anonymous No.19582194]

any experiences with this book? how does it compare to Athenaze?

[Anonymous No.19582214]

>>19582092
read as much as you can. even if you're having trouble, just keep reading and re-reading. one day, you'll realize that everything just clicks.

[Anonymous No.19582249]

>>19569604
Stop being such a disingenuous faggot, it's already been demonstrated to you that it's the forensic manner of studying it today, which focuses almost-exclusively on grammatical principle rather than in-practice experiencing texts at length, is what is being spoken about, not the idea of rote learning as a whole

[Anonymous No.19582349]

>>19578722
Sanskrit, Tamil, Kannada, Telugu, Malayalam

[Anonymous No.19582362]

>>19573123
Sanskrit, Latin, Greek, Chinese

/thread

[Anonymous No.19582405]

>>19582249
>which focuses almost-exclusively on grammatical principle
No modern teacher does this.

[Anonymous No.19582422]

>>19582362
And Hebrew
And Tamil

[Anonymous No.19582437]

I'm reading Florus' Epitome of Roman History. It's a good rundown of Roman history from a strictly military standpoint.

[Anonymous No.19582568]

>>19582405
Yes they do, and any limited exposure to the language (beyond example sentences) is kept to selected chunks of text to dissect and translate over a long period of time (probably 1 hour per 15 lines roughly) in a forensic manner to further this aim, when you compare this to any other language it's embarrassing, there are people who have been studying the language in such a way for 8+ years and won't be able to read Cicero if you put it before them

[Anonymous No.19582712]

>>19582437
Neat. This will make a good comparison after I finish Eutropius' epitome.

[Anonymous No.19582794]

>>19582568
>Yes they do
No they don't.
>people who have been studying the language in such a way for 8+ years
Except all the people that did from the sumerians to 12 year olds in the early 1900s

[Anonymous No.19583600]

Is Koine easier than classical Greek?

[Anonymous No.19583685]

>>19582405
>>19582794
can't say most do this, but definitely some. my college professor for first semester Latin was very heavy, only going over a handful of sentences a week; mainly our class time was for teaching and practicing grammar. we went through about 20 chapters of wheelock, which has relatively little input as it is, but we didn't even look at all of it for each chapter. and there were multiple teachers teaching the same course with the same curriculum, so at least a few teachers were teaching in that manner. here's the kicker: my college is known (in part) for it's classics department. granted, as I progressed through the Latin courses we did less and less grammar study, but we really only *mainly* looked at larger texts and parts of text in my 4th year poetry course.

[Anonymous No.19583700]

None of you guys would make it into a classics program at a state school, you guys are all retarded autodidacts who will fail at your ability to learn a new language and will amount to nothing

[Anonymous No.19583707]

>>19582405
>>19582794
can't say most do this, but definitely some. my college professor for first semester Latin was very grammar-heavy, only going over a handful of sentences a week; mainly our class time was for teaching and practicing grammar (declensions, conjugations, ablative case uses, etc.) we went through about 20 chapters of wheelock, which has relatively little input as it is, but we didn't even look at all of it for each chapter. and there were multiple teachers teaching the same course with the same curriculum, so at least a few teachers that semester alone were teaching in that manner. here's the kicker: my college is known (in part) for it's classics department. granted, as I progressed through the Latin courses we did less and less grammar study, but we really only *mainly* looked at larger texts and parts of texts in my fourth year poetry course.

[Anonymous No.19583715]

>>19582362
What about Classical Arabic?

[Anonymous No.19583726]

>>19583600
A bit yeah, it doesn't use all the conjugated forms and relies more on prepositions rather than cases.

[Anonymous No.19583729]

>>19583707
>fourth year
fourth semester*
>it's classics department
its*

[Anonymous No.19583761]

>>19583726
Is the style of most Koine works simpler?

[Anonymous No.19583771]

>>19583761
Well, I think a lot of works in the Koine period weren't really in proper Koine, they were in an archaicizing/Atticizing variety, but as far as I know most works that were in Koine proper were simpler because they were aimed at a more popular audience, because someone with high literary pretensions wouldn't write in vernacular Koine. As in take the Gospels- they had no high literary pretensions, they just wanted to spread the word.

[Anonymous No.19583783]

>>19583600
Calling it classical Greek is a bit confusing, since Koine already shows up in the Hellenic period.

[Anonymous No.19583844]

Does anyone here know how to read IPA without having to consult any guides? Is there anything besides dictionaries that use IPA?

[Anonymous No.19583870]

>>19583844
Oh, sure, linguistics use IPA for a lot of things. It's basically the only way to clearly represent pronunciation in text. Try ipachart.com (I think that's the URL) to learn it.

[Anonymous No.19583880]

>>19583870
Thank you. I'll check out the link soon and hope it helps, but I am asking more about books that are written in IPA. I'm aware there are people who don't learn the signs for Akkadian but get to read it based on transliteration. I'm wondering if there are any works represented entirely in IPA.

[Anonymous No.19583891]

>>19583880
Printing whole texts in IPA is pretty rare, though I've heard of it.

[Anonymous No.19583899]

>>19583891
Awesome. I'm going to have to find them. I just made scans of a Chinese Manichaean book written in Syriac. It was printed in Aramaic square script in 1933 in Germany. There was a very brief period where Syriac texts were represented in square script, but that ended for obvious reasons.

[Anonymous No.19583906]

>>19583891
ðæt saʊndz laJk ə fʌkiŋ tʃɔɹ

[Anonymous No.19583908]

Anyone else having a comfy afternoon studying Latin?

[Anonymous No.19583915]

>>19557424
You do realize the Byzantines were a thing and they wrote in Greek, right?

[Anonymous No.19583922]

>>19583908
going through Epitome Historiae Sacrae atm. not a Christian, but it's pretty interesting & enjoyable to read

[Anonymous No.19583923]

>>19583899
Well, I know there's a site with a bunch of translations of Alice in Wonderland for sale and one of them is the original English in IPA.
>>19583906
To produce or to write?

[Anonymous No.19584028]

>>19583923
to write, assuming you had to do it manually. I'm sure you could automate it though: write a program that looks at a file word by word, looks at the ipa notation of it in some other file, and puts the ipa version on a new file. don't know if such a program exists, but you could make one

[Anonymous No.19584486]

omnes: quomodo vos habetis?

[Anonymous No.19584520]

>>19583923
*to produce or to read
d'oh
>>19584028
Yeah, I think that's how they did the Alice one, with some post-editing. Of course, if you compose directly in IPA it wouldn't be an issue.

[Anonymous No.19584530]

>>19535051
>Is this true Latin bros? Has reading /lit/ in your native language improved thanks to your training in an ancient language?
The way dead languages are taught makes you better at thinking about languages in general. It's the greatest benefit of learning a language that isn't actively spoken.

[Anonymous No.19584554]

>>19584530
Depends on the dead language and on how it's taught, no? I don't think there's just one way they're taught.

[Anonymous No.19585426]

>>19579841
Generally translated as a past tense but it isn't necessarily always the case according to some academic publications.

[Anonymous No.19585506]

>>19585426
yeah, an aorist imperative for example cannot be in past tense.

[Anonymous No.19585875]

>>19582092
I wouldn't have thought the Gesta Francorum would be easier the Caesar.

[Anonymous No.19585944]

>>19560585
No, I study classics and biblical studies. Neither Hebrew, nor Aramaic, nor Syriac, nor Ge'ez, nor Armenian, etc. etc. are classical. Latin and Greek are classic. Everything else is everything else. Even so, Aramaic has been my favorite language so far.

[Anonymous No.19586080]

>>19583700
I am an undergrad at a state school with a respected Classics program. It is a Big Ten school no less, so I'm not talking about Idaho, or Alaska, or something. I am finishing second semester Latin with a 99.5%. I am also taking Greek (not as good) and have studied Hebrew and Aramaic. All of these languages were learned at this state school. Over the past two months, I have talked to two graduate program directors about grad school. Both of them are very interested in me attending. I know I'm not the only one here who can cut it.

[Anonymous No.19586279]

>>19585944
hebrew is a classical language

[Anonymous No.19586295]

If people here would use just a tenth of the time spent arguing about whether a given language is classical for learning the language instead...

[Anonymous No.19586302]

>>19586295
It's not hard
A classical language is a language that is no longer spoken but still used for written, poetical or religious purposes.

[Anonymous No.19586695]

>>19583700
Stop projecting, loser.

[Anonymous No.19586734]

>>19586302
>a language that is no longer spoken
???
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMfnw6oBq9w

[Anonymous No.19586758]

>>19578857
I have a douay-rheims/latin new testament from amazon. I think TAN books has the full vulgate but its pretty expensive.

[Anonymous No.19587009]

Can I make a new thread yet or do you guys usually wait until page 10

[Anonymous No.19587046]

>>19587009
You can already create a new one.

Man, this thread has grown faster than expected and missed Saturnalia by a day.

[Anonymous No.19587060]

new: >>19587057
new: >>19587057
new: >>19587057