|
 |
Latin & Greek | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages |  | |
| lola Groupie Joined 7157 days ago 63 posts - 65 votes  | Message 9 of 17 26 June 2005 at 4:04pm | IP Logged | ||
|
I've ordered Peter Jones' book on Latin from Amazon and intend to go through it just for fun, and then do the same with his Greek book.
If I feel like going for more, I might go with the Textkit books, just because they are there, unless I can recover my old text book from high school. More likely, I will just try to read some parallel texts. My reasons for not attempting something more in depth: - I can only commit to short term goals (a light book and minimal memorising), especially when I want to learn to speak other languages and have terrible memory. - My intention is to go through a mental exercise as well as a cultural trip to my roots, not to become proficient. - If you don't use a language, you may lose most of what you have learned. I'm working on the premise that I will not be using much Latin or Greek, so want to invest the minimum amount of time to experience a little bit of the language, and maybe understand my own better. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Qbe Tetraglot Senior Member United States joewright.org/var Joined 7140 days ago 289 posts - 335 votes Speaks: English*, Latin, Ancient Greek, Biblical Hebrew Studies: Japanese, German, Mandarin, Aramaic | Message 10 of 17 26 June 2005 at 7:29pm | IP Logged | ||
|
I think that Peter Jones' book will suit your purposes. The only regret I had about the Latin book was that it did not give you a lot of material from the ancient authors themselves. I appreciated that about Wheelock's book: it gave some early reward and motivation to be reading the ancients early on. Still, if you finish Jones' books and want more, you know where to go.
1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Austin Newbie United States Joined 7090 days ago 18 posts - 18 votes Speaks: English* | Message 11 of 17 05 July 2005 at 5:39pm | IP Logged | ||
|
How long would it take to learn to read Latin for someone who already speaks a Romance language?
1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| jradetzky Triglot Senior Member United Kingdom geocities.com/jradet Joined 7212 days ago 521 posts - 485 votes 1 sounds Speaks: Spanish*, EnglishC2, GermanB1 | Message 12 of 17 05 July 2005 at 5:45pm | IP Logged | ||
|
I've studied Pimsleur Greek and fell in love with the sound of the language. How different is Modern Greek from Ancient Greek? Is it like Old vs Modern English or is the gap even broader?
1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Languagelover Heptaglot Senior Member Switzerland Joined 7381 days ago 41 posts - 50 votes Speaks: French*, EnglishC2, German, Italian, Spanish, Latin, Ancient Greek Studies: Mandarin | Message 13 of 17 15 July 2005 at 4:34am | IP Logged | ||
I really depends on what you want to read. The Latin translation of the Gospels is probalby the easiest historical text (I mean by that, "not done espacially for Latin students"), it should be accessible in one year of good learning. Than, depending on the author, it is getting more and more complex. Ceasar and some parts of Ovide or Virgile are easy (good for 2nd year). Ciceron, Seneque, Tite-Live or Horace are quite a challenge, but really worth it. If you want to test the limit of your brain capabilities, you can try Tacite. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Austin Newbie United States Joined 7090 days ago 18 posts - 18 votes Speaks: English* | Message 14 of 17 17 July 2005 at 1:15am | IP Logged | ||
|
It takes an entire year? I could probably learn French in that time.
I guess I'll save Latin for later then. How did you learn Latin? 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| ProfArguelles Moderator United States foreignlanguageexper Joined 7261 days ago 609 posts - 2102 votes | Message 15 of 17 22 July 2005 at 1:18am | IP Logged | ||
|
Jradetzky, the diachronic study of Greek is particularly fascinating because it has changed LESS over time than any other language for which we have attested records. Homer is closer to contemporary Greek than Chaucer is to contemporary English, and yet the time scale is 2800 years in the first case and only 650 in the second. That said, you will, of course, still find many living Greeks who will tell you that they cannot understand the bible as the priests read it in church. Still, while Beowulf is utterly unintelligible to native English speakers who haven't studied Old English, I think that anyone who can read Modern Greek can at least get the gist of Plato.
It appears that the pronunciation has changed far more than either the grammar or the lexicon. Greek used to be a tonal language (hence the variety of accents that were still written until very recently). This naturally gives rise to various heated arguments about how it was and "should" be pronounced. Assimil recently came out with an Ancient Greek course. I got the book not long ago and it is excellent, but I didn't even bother ordering the recorded material because the reviews said it was preposterous. I personally pronounce Ancient Greek just like Modern Greek, and I think I have a fair amount of company in this. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| administrator Hexaglot Forum Admin Switzerland FXcuisine.com Joined 7381 days ago 3094 posts - 2987 votes 12 sounds Speaks: French*, EnglishC2, German, Italian, Spanish, Russian Personal Language Map | Message 16 of 17 22 July 2005 at 2:21am | IP Logged | ||
|
A greek explained me that Greece did not have any Renaissance thanks to the Turkish domination between the 15th and 19th century. He said that arts stopped developping almost entireley in Greece during that long time. Would that be one reason why Greek was so well 'preserved'?
1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
