Latina CI - Latin 101

gangleri2001

gangleri2001

Garbage day!!!
Joined
Sep 30, 2007
Messages
4,010
Location
Caldes de Montbui, Großkatalonien
THE RULES

This is a thread for people who want to practice Latin here in OT (because it has become some sort of our internet home or any other reason). However, every post has to follow the following rules:

  1. The general rules of OT and CFC, of course.
  2. Every single post must be bilingual (Latin and English). In order to make it look a Latin-only thread (so people who is learning Latin don't cheat and read the English version first) is strongly recommended to put the English verison in spoiler tags.
  3. In order to avoid posts full of corrections of previous posts (which make, in fact, this thread unreadable) , put please the corrections in spoiler tags too.

AVETE!

Beneueniti ad filum Latina CI - Latin 101 ubi linguam romanorum exercitabimus. Quoniam non habeamus natiuos, peritis necesse est nobis. Nosco MagisterCultuum unum peritum esse. Sed si alios peritos cognoscitis, petite illos num hic scribere optent. Linguam latinam classicam scribam, quia neque serioram neque medieualam latinam non comprobo quoniam putem ea uera latina non esse. Si serioram uel medieualam latinam scribere optatis, habebitis nullum impedimentum.

Post scriptum: Si errores in mea scripta uidetis, corrigite haec.

Spoiler :
HI!

Welcome to the thread Latina CI - Latin 101 where we will practice the language of the romans. Since we don't have natives, we will need experts. I know that MagisterCultuum is an expert. But if you know other experts, ask them if they wish to write here. I will write in classic Latin because I don't recognize neither the late nor the medieval Latin for I think that they're not real Latin. If you want to write late or medieval Latin, you'll have no impediment.

PS: I you see mistakes in my writings, correct them.


LATIN COURSE
PRONUNCIATION GUIDE
LECTIO PRIMA - FIRST LESSON
LECTIO SECVNDA - SECOND LESSON
 
gangleri2001 said:
AVETE!

Beneueniti ad filum Latina CI - Latin 101 ubi nos linguam romanorum exercitabimus. Quoniam non habemus natiuos, nos peritos indigebimus. Ego scio qui MagisterCultuum unus peritus est. Sed si uos alios peritos cognoscitis, petite illos si illi hic scribere optant. Ego linguam latinam classicam scribam, namque ego neque serioram neque medieualam latinam non comprobo quoniam puto quod uera latina non sunt. Si uos serioram uel medieualam latinam scribere optatis, habebitis nullum impedimentum.

Post scriptum: Si errores in mea scripta uidetis, corrigite haec.

Spoiler :
HI!

Welcome to the thread Latina CI - Latin 101 where we will practice the language of the romans. Since we don't have natives, we will need experts. I know that MagisterCultuum is an expert. But if you know other experts, ask them if they wish to write here. I will write in classic Latin because I don't recognize neither the late nor the medieval Latin for I think that they're not real Latin. If you want to write late or medieval Latin, you'll have no impediment.

PS: I you see mistakes in my writings, correct them.
Click to expand...

Did you write this with errors on purpose, just to attract traffic? :)
 
Nanocyborgasm said:
Did you write this with errors on purpose, just to attract traffic? :)
Click to expand...

No, it's just that I've the problem of interference with modern Latin languages. People should realize that native speakers of Romance languages like me need a different approach than the rest. You know what I mean? Most methods out there make us memorize vocabulary that we already know and don't deal with the (huge) problem that we have which is what to do with the inevitable interference of our native tongue.

But anyway, it would be a nice gesture from your part if you corrected my previous message.

CELTICEMPIRE said:
Amo Latinum.
Click to expand...

Latinam. Languages are feminine.
 
gangleri2001 said:
FALSUS!

De bello Gallico dicit:



:p

Spoiler :
WRONG!

The De bello Gallico says:



:p
Click to expand...

Vincis :hatsoff:

XV anni post legavi fuerunt

Spoiler :
You win!
15 years since I read [Caesar]...

I wanted to say "15 years have passed since I studied", but I have no resources here but google, and I don't like to rely on that. Besides, I didn't trust their translation. It returned "Ut XV annos studuerim"

Isn't studuerim a future passive? Also, I opted for the nominative plural 'anni' since I wasn't confident of which dative or ablative I should have used. It's been, as I was trying to say, 15 years :lol:

I'll try harder next time. I promise.
 
Is there actually a point in being able to do [native language] -> Latin? Seems like a pointless thing to me. I sure never learnt it that way.

And writing u instead of v is quite confusing.
 
You'd think that if anything you'd write V instead of U. :)
 
Yeah, exactly, although I personally have no problem with the modern covention to use u for vowel-v and v for consonant-v.
 
Leoreth said:
Is there actually a point in being able to do [native language] -> Latin? Seems like a pointless thing to me. I sure never learnt it that way.

And writing u instead of v is quite confusing.
Click to expand...

V/U non me perturbat. Quisquam.

Spoiler :

V/U doesn't bother me. Whichever.

I think that practicing composition trains the brain to work with the language in a different way than pure translation. I don't think it's a waste of time, unless, of course, you'd rather be translating :lol:

Also, my Latin improved more in 6 weeks of teaching 5 different classes than it did my whole final year in college. Perhaps that says more about my commitment as a student versus teacher ;)
 
Also, my Latin improved more in 6 weeks of teaching 5 different classes than it did my whole final year in college. Perhaps that says more about my commitment as a student versus teacher
Click to expand...

Quando magistri sumus nostros discipulos ducere debemus, quocirca nos studiosi et diligentes quoque sumus.

Spoiler :
When we're teachers we have to guide our students, that's why we are studious and diligent too.


peter grimes said:
Vincis :hatsoff:
Click to expand...

victorestego.png


Spoiler :
a-winner-is-me-girls-tee_design.png


JEELEN said:
Certus.

Credo quia absurdum.
Click to expand...

Quare credis absurditas est?

Spoiler :
Why do you think it's an absurdity?
 
gangleri2001 said:
No, it's just that I've the problem of interference with modern Latin languages. People should realize that native speakers of Romance languages like me need a different approach than the rest. You know what I mean? Most methods out there make us memorize vocabulary that we already know and don't deal with the (huge) problem that we have which is what to do with the inevitable interference of our native tongue.
Click to expand...

I cannot believe that entirely because you make a lot of errors that cannot be excused by confusion with modern Romance languages. For one thing, you insist on using the subject pronoun in all instances. It's not necessary except for emphasis, and by repeating it so often, it cheapens emphatic use. That, I believe, is still a feature of modern Romance languages, like Spanish and Italian. You don't have to say "ego dico", but just "dico". You also seem averse to the subjunctive, which also still exists in modern languages.


But anyway, it would be a nice gesture from your part if you corrected my previous message.
Click to expand...

Beneveniti ad filum Latina CI - Latin 101 ubi linguam romanorum exercitabimus. Quoniam non habeamus nativos, peritis necesse est nobis. Nosco Magistrum Cultuum unum peritum esse. Sed si alios peritos cognoscitis, petite illos num hic scribere optent. Linguam latinam classicam scribam, quia necque serioram necque medieualam latinam non comprobo quoniam putem ea vera latina non esse. Si serioram uel medieualam latinam scribere optatis, habebitis nullum impedimentum.

Post scriptum: Si errores in mea scripta uidetis, corrigite haec.

Some of the above is just my own word usage (quoniam can just as easily be cum, for example). I've converted the relevant clauses into accusative-infinitive clauses. I've removed the subject pronoun in all cases, just because it is only used for emphasis, which has no words in English. So if you meant emphasis, there's no way for me to know. I've replaced appropriate subjunctives as needed. Also, the way to say "it is necessary" or "there is a need" is "...necesse est..." combined with the dative of the agent and the ablative of the needful item, or an infinitive if it is an action.
 
Nanocyborgasm said:
I cannot believe that entirely because you make a lot of errors that cannot be excused by confusion with modern Romance languages. For one thing, you insist on using the subject pronoun in all instances. It's not necessary except for emphasis, and by repeating it so often, it cheapens emphatic use. That, I believe, is still a feature of modern Romance languages, like Spanish and Italian.
Click to expand...

In modern Romance languages the pronoun is no longer used for emphasis only. In fact, many sentences sound strange without the pronoun.

You also seem averse to the subjunctive, which also still exists in modern languages.
Click to expand...

I haven't used a subjuntive because I wouldn't have said any subjuntive in Catalan or Spanish. I guess that the usage of subjuntive has evolved a lot, which means that I'll have to study it :p

Beneveniti ad filum Latina CI - Latin 101 ubi linguam romanorum exercitabimus. Quoniam non habeamus nativos, peritis necesse est nobis. Nosco Magistrum Cultuum unum peritum esse. Sed si alios peritos cognoscitis, petite illos num hic scribere optent. Linguam latinam classicam scribam, quia necque serioram necque medieualam latinam non comprobo quoniam putem ea vera latina non esse. Si serioram uel medieualam latinam scribere optatis, habebitis nullum impedimentum.

Post scriptum: Si errores in mea scripta uidetis, corrigite haec.

Some of the above is just my own word usage (quoniam can just as easily be cum, for example). I've converted the relevant clauses into accusative-infinitive clauses. I've removed the subject pronoun in all cases, just because it is only used for emphasis, which has no words in English. So if you meant emphasis, there's no way for me to know. I've replaced appropriate subjunctives as needed. Also, the way to say "it is necessary" or "there is a need" is "...necesse est..." combined with the dative of the agent and the ablative of the needful item, or an infinitive if it is an action.
Click to expand...

Thanks!
 
gangleri2001 said:
Quare credis absurditas est?

Spoiler :
Why do you think it's an absurdity?
Click to expand...

Ego non. Sed Tertullianus dixit:

credibile est, quia ineptum est

Spoiler :
Not I. But Tertullianus said:

It´s credible, because it´s nonsense.

 Credo quia absurdum is, of course, a misquote.6 Tertullian's words are credibile est, quia ineptum est (De carne Christi 5.4). The difference between the imputed and actual words is striking and important. James Moffatt in a sadly neglected article of a half-century ago discovered the clue to the interpretation of the words in observing that here Tertullian "follows in the footsteps of that cool philosopher Aristotle."7 In Rhetoric 2.23.22 Aristotle shows that an argument |[P.418] from probability can be drawn from the sheer improbability of a story: some stories are so improbable that it is reasonable to believe them. On this view, the words presuppose a tidy correlation between faith and reason, and a consideration of Tertullian's aims in the treatise in which they are found supports this interpretation.

http://www.tertullian.org/articles/sider_credo.htm
 
gangleri2001 said:
In modern Romance languages the pronoun is no longer used for emphasis only. In fact, many sentences sound strange without the pronoun.
Click to expand...

Isn't that mainly the case for youngsters' speech, or am I mistaken? Take for instance the issue with the loísmo in Spanish. Not too long ago it used to be considered a mistake, but nowadays even politicians are guilty of it. Deterioration of language: it's everywhere. In French also they disregard the subjunctive and start too many sentences with 'moi, je...'. I prefer sounding in a fashion these anti-intellectuals refer to as 'pompous'.
 
What? I'm referring to the personal pronoun, whose usage has changed a lot in the las 1500 years. And what you're talking about it has nothing to do with youngsters speech, just bad grammar.
 
gangleri2001 said:
What? I'm referring to the personal pronoun, whose usage has changed a lot in the las 1500 years. And what you're talking about it has nothing to do with youngsters speech, just bad grammar.
Click to expand...

I was referring to everything. Responding to the use of personal pronouns, but talking about bad grammar in general. It's true, native speakers often butcher their own language.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom