Thread 24607199

Veteris Italicae editio

>τὸ πρότερον νῆμα·
>>24570219

>Μέγα τὸ Ἑλληνιστί/Ῥωμαϊστί·
https://mega dot nz/folder/FHdXFZ4A#mWgaKv4SeG-2Rx7iMZ6EKw

>Mέγα τὸ ANE·
https://mega dot nz/folder/YfsmFRxA#pz58Q6aTDkwn9Ot6G68NRg

>Work in progress FAQ
https://rentry dot co/n8nrko

All Classical languages are welcome.

visne linguam latinam exercere aliis cum cultoribus linguae? ecce tibi https://porticuspublica.org

>>24606619
>perhaps. his point was learning vocabulary out of context is an inefficient use of time
He has a point. Past the most common 2-3k words you’re better off reading with a dictionary for vocabulary and only employing flash cards for particularly difficult words. Anything worth reading you’re going to be re-reading dozens of times, during which you’ll be “tested” on recall Iike you would be if you were using anki. Anki wouldn’t hurt but the time it takes to make a card for every single word and test daily just isn’t worth it compared to reading.

hellenic niggas be like are you talking about plural plural or dual plural because we are that autistic

best use of flashcards I got was indeed basically as support for the textbook I'm following, once you start reading it would be overdoing it; it's also why I don't usually like generic decks, it should tightly follow what you are doing

>>24606125
He has a video of himself discussing literature in Arabic on his channel. He can speak a handful of languages with high proficiency (as per himself) and as for the rest, he has reading knowledge. I really don't know why some people love to seethe at him so much and claim he has zero ability; it must be ressentiment from people who have tried and failed to learn a language. I see no other reason.

>>24607884
how come the more ancient languages are more autistically stuctured? it's strange the more primitive people had more complex grammar

>>24608563
This isn't true across the board. Classical Chinese, for example, is arguably simpler than modern.

>>24607466
>>24608227
>/clg/ - youtuber friend simulator general

Just started learning Latin with Lingua Latina per se Illustrata Familia Romana. Is this video worth listening to for pronunciation? I'm annoyed by how he talks.

https://youtu.be/YtPd2ALW5b4

>>24608603
Hi (or "salve" if you will)! If you don't the one you posted, I can offer a few alternative suggestions. This channel has videos in the ecclesiastical/Italian pronunciation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpUxN01Ew_4&list=PLeAdgLsSLlqoJ8Ji6zvfrwCSQgKSGSOOP

Orberg recorded most, but not all of the chapters. Luke Ranieri, whom you might know better as Scorpio Martianus, recorded the full book, but they got taken down off of YouTube. If you'd like to try either of those options and have a hard time tracking down the recordings, just ask back in the thread. Someone can lend you a helping hand. We're all devotees of Orberg and his work. We're glad anytime to see fresh blood in our circle.

>>24608597
I find this post and others of its kind offensive, as Alexander Arguelles serves as something of a surrogate father figure in my language-learning endeavors. In fact, I often fall asleep to this video of him reading Harrius Potter. I close my eyes, and imagine him close by, as if he were reading solely to me at my bedside.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfTwvbrNvYA

>>24608647
for me, it's my Italian wife Satura Lanx
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTLg80cPvNI

Ge'ez
Sabaic

>>24608642
The response I was hoping for was feedback on that guy's pronunciation because to me it sounds stupid even though I don’t know how Latin is supposed to sound.
>ImpeEeEerium
Like it's a diphthong
Swallows "in".
Changes pace/rhythm from one sentence to the next for no apparent reason.
Etc.
Whether his pronunciation is correct or not is what I want to know.

Also he's dumb.
>you would not always have a 'clean' pronunciation (which is why it is harder to understand a native speaker, when (s)he speaks in normal speed in her/his mother tongue), and that is something I was imitating.
There are no native speakers of Latin.

>>24608642
>We're all devotees of Orberg and his work. We're glad anytime to see fresh blood in our circle.
Is this bait?

>>24608659
>Satura Lanx

I’ve wondered this for a while but I don’t post much: is her name supposed to be a pun? As in satire dish, but also dish dish?

why did like every other ANE language have some kind of ergativity? was it just an areal feature?

What are we reading, Norsechads?

>>24609594
I'm reading the Prose Edda, still on Gylfaginning
What about you?

>>24609603
I only started a couple of weeks ago, so I'm still doing grammar stuff

I am starting Latin again after becoming Catholic
>>24608563
lack of vocab and non-abstraction allowed for high utility for highly specific grammar constructs

>>24608563
There is an effect wherein languages tend to become more analytic over time. Expressions simplify, more complex grammar is circumvented. You see especially with highly agglutinative languages like Finnish.

Is it just me, or is the text on the left in two different font sizes? In, est, et, sunt look ever so slightly smaller than Roma, Italia, Europa.

>>24608563
>more ancient languages are more autistically stuctured
Not a general rule. You're thinking of the classical languages, Latin and Greek. They're called classical because they're more complex and refined. Those people were not more primitive. Their language didn't just develop "organically", it was engineered by the greatest thinkers in the history of mankind, Aristotle etc.

>>24609706
>picrel

I'm guessing this means when you have "in" before "Italia" the second "a" is long and when there is no "in" the second "a" is short? Does the emphasis shift too? Kind of weird you're just supposed to "get" what that note means with no explanation.

Reminder: if it’s aggressively retarded it’s probably bait.

>>24609739
yeah that's why I prefer using LLPSI with other sources, even though it's supposed to be self-contained.
it's the ablative case for nouns, which is sort of adverbial/used with prepositions like in

>>24606902
Interesting, thanks for answering.

>>24608806
You haven't said what you're looking for in a pronunciation. For all we know, you want to use the ecclesiastical pronunciation, which has a different standard of correctness than a "reconstructed"/"restored"/"classical" pronunciation. If you are interested in learning with a reconstructed pronunciation, the fact that there are no native speakers of Latin is not an insignificant point. There is no one alive that you can listen to uncritically as a model of how Romans actually spoke, and most of the proficient speakers of Latin are not even trying autistically to adhere to every possible facet. There is a low bar for what is considered a "passable" pronunciation. This is just something you have to accept when learning a dead language.

That said, there are two fundamental aspects of pronunciation I would consider. First is the stress accent. It doesn't seem that your video is carefully observing the rules of accent. He says Grae-CI-a instead of GRAE-ci-a. I skipped ahead to a random spot and heard as-PI-cit instead of AS-pi-cit. Maybe I just coincidentally stumbled on the only two errors in the whole video, but they could be a sign that he's not reliably modeling the rules of stress accent. Learn the (very simple) rules of stress accent and pay close attentionto this when you read.

The second aspect is vowel length. This is not essential for an ecclesiastical accent, but if you're aware of its existence and are interested in classical literature, I see no reason not to internalize it from the beginning. It doesn't seem that your video is carefully observing this either. For example, in "Italia" it's not clear that the middle "a" is short in comparison with the long "a" in the middle of "Hispania." Pay attention to the macrons when you read the text and consider them part of the spelling of the words. Outside of beginner student texts, Latin is not usually printed with macrons, so learn as much as you can from the macrons while they're there.

If you're interested in reconstructed pronunciation, I doubt there are better recordings of Familia Romana than Luke Ranieri's. But you oughtto do your own research and take responsibility for pronunciation into your own hands.

>>24609706
It looks the same to me.

>>24609739
You're not supposed to overthink it. When used as a simple subject, it's just "Italia." When it follows "in," it's "in Italiā." If you want more explanations, get the Neumann "Companion." But even in that book, it seems that a further explanation of "prepositions with the ablative" is delayed until chapter 5. The point I think chapter 1 is most concerned with is showing that Latin nouns change their endings depending on the usage, and that there can be a real difference in meaning between a long and a short vowel besides one being right and one being wrong.

If by "emphasis" you mean stress, the stress does not change. The stress placement is dependent on the length of the penult, not the final syllable. You're going to have to learn the basic rules of pronunciation from an external source.

>>24609823
>with other sources
such as?

>>24610091
Not him
Any textbook with explicit grammar instruction, take your pick.

>>24610091
Wheelock's Latin

>>24610091
so far I've jumped between these
>Wheelock's Latin
>Routledge's Intensive Basic Latin (might prefer this to Wheelock's but not sure yet)
>Cambridge's A Student's Latin Grammar (for reference)
>"latintutorial" youtube channel

>>24610098
>>24610100
>>24610106
seethe incoming any moment now for daring to suggest FR is not perfect in and of itself

>>24610106
another more recommended reference grammar I looked at was Oxford's A Latin Grammar but it didn't replace consonant u's with v's and threw me off, so I stuck with the Cambridge one

>>24610110
As a finn, the LLPSI is incredibly intuitive, because the grammatical cases often have an exact correspondence with my native tongue. It's very nice. Most sentences translate exactly.

>>24609721
>They're called classical because
Because it's the name of the historical period. It doesn't mean "classy" retard.

>>24610110
it is great and probably the best if you only choose 1 book, I just get impatient and want to understand all the cases and such first

>As a finn
I'll never understand why non-countries feel the need to announce themselves. That place has 2/3rds the population of my flyover state and 2/3rds its GDP but I don't tout the glory of

>>24610123
Point was to state that people of certain native languages will find the LLPSI much more grammatically complete than others.

>>24610123
Nta but I think finnougric languages in themselves seem quite interesting linguistically. One of the few ones still holding on to their vowel lengths. I can imagine that hungarians have no trouble at all with greek or latin vowel quality not to mention some shit like 18 cases and free word order. We anglos can only seethe

>>24610119
Nope. Just as classical music is called so because it's more complex, refined and has been of greater cultural value and importance than other music, classical languages are called so because they are more complex, refined and have been of greater cultural value and importance than other languages. Sanskrit is a classical language.

>>24610098
>>24610100
This could be dangerous advice. It would be better to devote oneself to consistently working at and finishing one course, rather than try tackling two and getting demotivated or quitting. Some learners also have more limited time than others, and don't really have time to fully split between two different textbooks and do a good job at both.

See >>24610106

If you're doing Familia Romana, stick to Familia Romana. You're not going to get to the end of Familia Romana and lack an understanding of prepositional phrases or why there's a long a at the end of "in Italiā."

>>24610119
Please see >>24609818 and in the future do your part by not replying

>>24610128
>My superior Finnis has rewarded me with a complete understanding of Latin you petty rubes - Anon from fuckhole

>>24610140
You were supposed to post the etymology to prove me wrong you fuckwit. I'm so tired of this shit general.

>>24610148
Wheelock + Orberg is how I started and I see nothing wrong is recommending it to others.

>>24610157
You were the one to disagree with my proposition, so that was your job.

>>24610234
Is it difficult for you people to type Ørberg?

nonne amici esse possumus?

>>24610140
>because it's more complex
Honestly makes it worse more often than not.
Harmony > Melody

>>24610258
Inimici tantum

>>24610246
Yes, actually.

So how much more do you enjoy the classics in their original language than an English translation?

>>24610424
reading a translation compared to the original is like listening to a foreigner with a thick ass accent

>>24610258
num bona anones fide respondere credis?

>>24610397
Alright. My keyboard has it. Anyway, this being a classical languages thread I think we ought to know about some good way to type special characters. I don't know any. I just started learning Latin, I need to know how to type macron, and I plan to start learning Greek soon and then I need the whole Greek alphabet.

Α α, Β β, Γ γ, Δ δ, Ε ε, Ζ ζ, Η η, Θ θ, Ι ι, Κ κ, Λ λ, Μ μ, Ν ν, Ξ ξ, Ο ο, Π π, Ρ ρ, Σ σ ς, Τ τ, Υ υ, Φ φ, Χ χ, Ψ ψ, Ω ω

>>24610424
Reading Aeneid in English is like looking at grayscale printout of a scanned photo of a chinese copy of the Mona Lisa

>>24610234
If it worked for you, that's fine. I just said it was potentially "dangerous" advice. He already said he had a problem flitting from one thing to the next.

>>24610540
If you use Mac, you can just hold down vowel keys to get alternative options with various accents. This works for all vowels except y, but you can substitute ŷ instead of ȳ (or copy and paste one where needed, like I did here). This is also not a very fast input method, but it's an easy method if you only type macrons occasionally. For faster input, you can enable the Maori keyboard, and just type alt+<vowel> to type the macronized version. However, the Maori keyboard also lacks ȳ and you lose the ability to easily type ŷ.


Mac OS has a "Greek - Polytonic" keyboard. You have certain keys to type pitch accent marks or breathing marks, and then type the vowel. For example, with the Greek keyboard enabled, typing '+;+a (apostrophe/single-quote key, then semicolon key, then "a" key) produces ἄ. It works well, but I don't think it supports macrons. To get around that, I created a sheet of macronized characters (in combination with the various pitch accent and breathing marks) that I can copy and paste from if I need to write macrons. That's my experience on Mac, but it probably works similarly on Windows or Linux.

>>24610540
on Windows this program is pretty good
https://github.com/samhocevar/wincompose
you just type Right Alt + - + e to type ē etc.
Right Alt + * + a to type α
but I found some of the defaults were repeated and conflicted, and had to edit the config to override these
><Multi_key> <-> <a> : "ā"
><Multi_key> <-> <o> : "ō"

>>24609690
Awesome
I know it's long but I recommend you try reading Egils saga for your first text
http://www.vsnrweb-publications.org.uk/Egla/Egils_saga.pdf

>>24610813
This is invaluable, thank you anon

>>24610424
prose carries the least satisfaction, albeit it can still be fun, especially prose that still hinges upon the languages like comedy and jokes/expressions that get lost in translation, but the more poetic it is, the more it's enjoyable in the original

>>24610148
You could just as easily say only using one book is potentially dangerous as it could be too ambiguous or not fitting with learner sensibilities leading to frustration
Stop putting textbooks on a pedestal

LLPSI is really good and there is no reason to not read it. Just use some other grammar textbook (like Wheelock) to solidify grammar and learn about some of exceptions that can be missed with the natural method. You need both intuitive language skills and solid grammar. Anyone who says something in contraty is a retard.

>>24612133
>spelling mistakes
anon... nothing you said matters you ESL piece of shit

>look up Greek edition of a text
>400 something dollars
guess I am now a scribe

>>24611484
You could just as easily say anything at all if you don't care about what's true or reasonable. Maybe Wheelock's isn't enough, and he needs also to work through Moreland & Fleischer simultaneously to fill up what is lacking in Wheelock's. And why stop at three textbooks when ten could be even better? This is not a serious line of argument.

Does the posted in this post sound like someone who's problem is not having enough resources or someone who lacks discipline and regimen?
>>24610106
They are flitting from one thing to the next without making any progress, and now they're in chapter 1 of Familia Romana doubting what they should do because they're not sure if they understand why there's an "ā" in "in Italiā."

Such a person should pick one textbook, and develop a regular habit of working and progressing through that one textbook before they start adding on auxiliary resources or activities. This advice applies to most people. People have jobs, spouses, children, other hobbies that don't allow them to devote unlimited time and energy to learning a language. If someone has a half hour or an hour per day that they can reliably devote to studying Latin, and they want to split their time between two different textbooks, they are necessarily going to do a worse job and make slower progress in both textbooks than they would in a single textbook, and it's not guaranteed that the retarded progress in both adds up to more focused progress in one. I hate to be this poster, but did you work through LLPSI and Wheelock's at the same time, and under what circumstances did you do so?

Finally your "danger" is not a real problem. The poster here didn't seem to be aware of the Neumann "Companion" or "Latine Disco." Maybe it would be more sensible to try using one of these student's manuals with LLPSI before jumping to the conclusion that he cannotadequately understand the grammar taught in LLPSI without simultaneously studying and working through the lessons from Wheelock's. Besides the student's manuals, the student could also try consulting an actual Latin grammar (https://dcc.dickinson.edu/grammar/latin/alphabet), asking in an online forum or chatroom, and these days, you probably could even "ask ChatGPT," as they say, for quite a lot.

Watch this 5-year-old reading Capitulum 1 of Familia Romana at her Latin immersion school. You're not stupider than a five-year-old, are you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qm5vLsdwjVM

>>24613065
does she understand the grammar though

>>24613057
personally I started with Wheelock's, got annoyed because I was asked to memorize the 3rd and 4th principal parts without knowing what they are, and also wanted to know how to do past and future tenses right away. so I watched some latintutorial videos and looked through the reference grammar to get an overview of everything. now I'm just reading LLPSI. I agree you have to stay disciplined and not jump around too much, though I am still interested in looking at the exercises in those textbooks later

>>24613106
Wheelock's is shit for anything except a beginner's grammar reference. Latin -> English translation exercises in particular are an insidious time sink that ossifies poor reading habits.

>>24613192
nta but I really think it depends how the exercises are done.
Most people seem to mindlessly translate the Latin into English, not even trying to pronounce it. Anyone that studies a language in such a way has only themselves to blame when they cannot understand anything.

>>24610751
>>24610771
I have a chromebook. None of your suggestions seem to work. The google chrome extension "special characters" might work but you have to log in with google to use it so I couldn't be bothered. I think what I'll use from now on is unicode characters.

on chromebook:

>find the unicode symbol for a character here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unicode_characters#Latin_Extended-A
>click any text field where you are going to type
>press ctrl+shift+u
>the symbol ̱u̱ appears
>type the unicode symbol
>press enter

For Greek I'll change the system keyboard to Greek and possibly enable on-screen keyboard. For macron I might use unicode 0304 with the method above for combining macron, type a letter you want a macron on, then follow the steps above and the macron appears on that letter.

>>24605985
>*至, 到 is not classical.
Do you mean to say that the word 到 didn't exist at all in CC? Because ctext returns 782 paragraphs containing it in pre-Qin and Han.
>I would use 乃 instead of 而
Ooh you're right, that does sound better.
>也 feels incorrect here, it's making a statement, can't really be used as a condition or reason clause
I'm fairly certain I've seen it used that way? Like 夫子至於是邦也必聞其政.
>几乎 as "almost" is not classical
Again, I'm finding what looks like several examples on ctext.
>I'd use 焉 instead of 之有 but both seem ok
I just know that 何X之有 is like, a known expression.

>>24606580
Ooh, this is really good, and I'm surprised how well I'm doing on it for having never explicitly studied pitch accent. I know Ma or Ma exists for Mandarin tones, but do you know of anything like this for Cantonese? Or any other tricky phonemic contrasts really.

>>24608563
Proto-Indo-European was about as festooned with grammatical bells and whistles as a language could be, so its descendants had nowhere to go but down in that regard. There are modern languages that are at least that autistically complex, though, like Navajo or Tsez.
>it's strange the more primitive people had more complex grammar
You are sort of onto something here- part of it is that when a language is learned en masse as a second language that tends to simplify it, whereas languages spoken only by a small insular community tend to become and remain fairly complex. The Romance languages are essentially Latin as spoken by a bunch of LSLs who had trouble with the cases.

>>24613510
Maybe you don't really know what you're looking for. For Latin macrons, it sounds like you can just enable the Maori keyboard.

https://support.google.com/chromebook/answer/1059492?hl=en
https://support.google.com/chromebook/thread/183528408/how-do-you-type-macrons-maori-on-chromebook-keyboard?hl=en
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/maori-language-week/96716977/its-mori-language-week--heres-how-to-install-macrons-so-you-can-get-involved

Try this for polytonic Greek.

https://ryanfb.xyz/etc/2019/02/19/typing_ancient_greek_on_chromeos.html
https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/alternative-greek-keyboar/nbclmofnhpkggnndkdeleaefmbkibmjg?hl=en

That seems to imply even without the extension that you should have a built-in monotonic Greek option.

>>24609721
>Their language didn't just develop "organically", it was engineered by the greatest thinkers in the history of mankind, Aristotle etc.
No, Latin and Ancient Greek are not conlangs.

>>24612138
I only see one, "contraty", and that looks more like a fat-finger error than one produced by not knowing how the word is supposed to be spelled.

Don't know if it will be useful for anyone but I use a custom keyboard layout for the Latin alphabet that has all the diacritics and unusual letters I could want, covering the classical and modern European languages and Indic romanization. It's a normal US keyboard layout until you hold down the right alt, then the white keys produce the indicated character and the grey keys apply the diacritic to the next character you type. If there's no precomposed character in unicode then you can type a character then the diacritic key then space to get the unicode combining character applied to it.
File opens in Microsoft Keyboard Layout Creator, you use that to create an installer. You can also customize it yourself in that tool.

https://files.catbox.moe/myd1dw.klc

>>24613987
They literally invented grammar as we know it, plus logic and rhetoric. And then shaped the language in accordance with their wisdom. Classical languages aren't people's languages, they're the languages of the intelligentsia. You're thinking of vulgar Latin and Greek.

>>24614297
>They literally invented grammar as we know it
They invented the terms in which to describe grammar, people were already speaking with various tenses and cases and such before that. If Latin and Ancient Greek were conlangs, we couldn't reconstruct PIE.

>>24614323
It's a combination of on the one hand preexisting language, and on the other hand geniuses like Cicero and Virgil in Latin, and Homer and Plato in Greek, contributing to the languages' literary and philosophical richness, while also impacting their structure and vocabulary.

>>24614337
What aspects of those languages in particular do you think are invented and why?

>>24614430
Where do you think language comes from? Adam and Eve, an entire dictionary just popped into their heads. The greatest thinkers in the history of the world lived in Ancient Greece. The richest languages in existence are Latin and Greek. But hey why didn't they just take some fisherman's language and use that?

>>24614450
You can express any thought in any language. Ask any actual linguist.

>>24614462
the midwittery behind this post is outstanding

>>24614470
You do not know better than an entire field of specialists because it "seems obvious" or is "just common sense".

>>24614462
I don't entirely disagree, but would argue that the quality of a thought is strongly and uniquely determined by the language by being wrapped in the context of culture and linguistic connotation. Is it, in the first place, even possible to have certain thoughts without a language? The problem there is what your definition is for two statements in different languages to correspond to the "same thought."

>>24614485
But that's a matter of culture- not the structure of the language itself.

>>24614462
Some languages are considerably more conducive to logic than others. You don't want a lot of syntactic ambiguity in intellectual discourse, it makes argumentation cumbersome and difficult to understand. Is it a coincidence that the European classical languages are the most conducive to logic while also growing out of the cultures that gave birth to greatest thinkers in the history of mankind, the fathers of grammar, logic and rhetoric, the cultures that invented and produced most of the material of value in grammar, logic and rhetoric? When they studied the Trivium it was Latin and Greek they studied, ever since that time, even to this day.

>>24614498
>Some languages are considerably more conducive to logic than others.
Citation very much needed.
>You don't want a lot of syntactic ambiguity in intellectual discourse, it makes argumentation cumbersome and difficult to understand.
If the default way of expressing something in a language is ambiguous that doesn't mean they can't clarify/disambiguate, they always can.
>Is it a coincidence that the European classical languages are the most conducive to logic
Again, citation very much needed.

>>24614507
You have never studied logic.

>>24614515
I have (two semesters of it), and more relevantly I have a degree in linguistics. Some languages being inherently more conducive to logical thinking than others is a truly extraordinary claim, and as such requires extraordinary evidence.

>>24614524
>truly extraordinary claim
It's not, and you're lying.

>>24614489
What, then, does it mean that "every thought" can be expressed in "every language," if the culture and language one grows up in at least partly determines those thoughts? Wouldn't that mean there could be two culture-language pairs in which there exist mutually incompatible thoughts?

Alright, I bow out from ignorance, though I still don't see what guarantees that every language is complex enough to communicate "everything," for ex. trivial conlangs or something that hasn't gone past "danger, hungry, food, water, sex," unless you mean "everything in that person's framework, excluding all other thoughts that they could/would not have."

>>24614531
Again, you do not know better than an entire field of specialists just because it "seems obvious" or "just common sense". Do you have any evidence for the claim that some human languages are inherently more conductive to logical thinking than others?

>>24614536
>What, then, does it mean that "every thought" can be expressed in "every language," if the culture and language one grows up in at least partly determines those thoughts?
You can still explain the meaning of something said in another language, even if it might take more words.
>for ex. trivial conlangs or something that hasn't gone past "danger, hungry, food, water, sex,"
I thought it was a given that when we were talking about "languages" we meant actually-existing human languages. Most conlangs are not languages, they are (incomplete) plans for a language, though a few (e.g. Esperanto) have become the language of an actual speech community.

>>24614546
Okay, fine, anything in use. Doesn't that make the statement even less fundamental? Now the explanation of a very sophisticated idea requires that the language be from a country whose people have sufficiently developed, unless you'd say "people from this undiscovered island do not speak a language" when they communicate verbally. We no longer have a fundamental linguistic theorem, but something totally empirical.

I'm sure you have an explanation, that with a participant of that language who's perfectly sensible and logical could understand, using the scant vocabulary and grammar of that undiscovered language, any idea. Fine, but it does seem a little suspect. I'm only arguing out of curiosity.

>>24614236
Thanks, Brendan

>>24614540
An entire field of specialists have said that no language is more conducive to logic than any other? Post source.

You have just as little to back up your claims as I have backing up mine.

I'm not interested in discussing with a liar and someone who clearly knows nothing.

Anyway I talked a little about logic in different languages here:

https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/512229253/#512247582

https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/512229253/#512248480

When I have read arguments between people, and myself been engaged in arguments with people, and just read books, I have often seen ambiguity is hindering the flow, often as in what I talked about in those links where it's unclear what a word or phrase is referring to, as in another word or phrase in the same sentence or a previous sentence. And when you have to constantly spell things out, rather than just two-three letters at the end of a word making it clear what you're referring to, that makes it cumbersome and leads to misunderstandings, people talking past each other etc. And even if you can sometimes say the same thing in two different languages but one says it way more succinctly and elegantly, then those two arguments or discourses are not equal, if it can be said in a more elegant, succinct way that's easier to read, easier to understand and requires less work parsing the text then that is the definition of one language being more conducive to logic.

>>24614540
Appreciate that you have actual credentials, but fyi you're replying to the resident troll

>>24614546
>even if it might take more words.
If it takes more words then that language is less conducive to logic.

>>24614577
>Now the explanation of a very sophisticated idea requires that the language be from a country whose people have sufficiently developed, unless you'd say "people from this undiscovered island do not speak a language" when they communicate verbally.
You can still explain it, though you might have to give more background explanation.

>>24614619
Linguist my ass. This is the actual troll right here.

>>24614599
Who are you? I have barely made any posts at all in this general. I'm certainly not "resident". Either you are mistaking me for someone else, or you're a troll yourself in which case you can fuck off.

>>24614630
What, do you want I should post a picture of my diploma? I'm not going to dox myself.

>Latin has no U in its alphabet, only V
>there are both letters in the text
>even in the same word

>>24614762
Originally there was just one letter V, which was used as either a vowel or a consonant. It was V in majuscules, but u in minuscules. Then, people started writing it as Uu when it's a vowel and Vv when it's a consonant. (Some texts from around the Renaissance use both forms but purely based on position rather than sound.)

>>24614692
I'm not surprised if you have a degree in linguistics. Most university graduates know nothing about logic.

>>24614768
I took two semesters of logic.

>>24614767
From what I've heard they didn't even have lower case letters, so that's another thing, why they have that in my text.

>>24613954
No, sorry. I just saw it mentioned in the Japanese learning community. (No, I'm not learning Japanese. Don't get the wrong idea.) If you do find one for Cantonese, post it here. I'd be interested to try it.

>>24614770
Doesn't matter, if you think one language with more syntactic ambiguity and one language with less syntactic ambiguity are equally conducive to logic then you don't actually know any logic at all.

>>24614767
>Then,
Why the fuck would you put a comma after "then"? Facepalm.

>>24614775
Because they make reading easier and adding them doesn't lose any information?

>>24614784
Do languages actually differ markedly in their degree of syntactic ambiguity, in practice? They all have to stand up to the needs of real-world communication. When a language loses one bit of grammar, it usually innovates some other way to express the same meaning, like how the Romance languages started using more prepositions to make up for the loss of cases.
>>24614794
Because I'd pause after it if I were speaking to you verbally?

>>24614795
You just said in the other post:
>It was V in majuscules, but u in minuscules.
Make up your mind. In fact you said it was just V, then you said it was V for upper case and u for lower case. You can't make a coherent post. I'm out.

>>24614799
>Because I'd pause after it if I were speaking to you verbally?
you sound illiterate

>>24614804
My point is, originally there was just one letter, V, then V and U were variant shapes of one letter, then people started using the V variant when it represented a consonant and the U variant when it represented a vowel.
>>24614815
I'll admit my comma use is mostly vibes-based.

>>24614799
Again, if you have to use more words to say the same thing, more words to have the same level of ambiguity, then it's less conducive to logic.

>>24614831
First of all, some of these senses would sound different read aloud, so they're only ambiguous in writing (though some would sound the same). And you have still given no evidence whatsoever for your claim.

>>24614821
>I'll admit my comma use is mostly vibes-based.
And yet you're a linguist. This is what universities today teach you. I'm glad to be anti-schooling and an autodidact.

>>24614836
You didn't read the links I posted, and you don't know any logic, so this discussion is futile.

>>24614840
Being a linguist is not about being a grammar nazi, it's about the scientific study of human language as a phenomenon.
>>24614849
Surely if you understand the matter you can explain it concisely as possible rather than making me read through all your reams of prior rambling?

>>24614852
The stuff you've posted since I posted those links is more text than what's in those links. Utter troll. I'm done with you.

>>24613937
到 for arrive (as it can also mean 颠倒) is ambiguous in CC while 至 is not

the examples in ctext of 几乎 are mostly 庶几乎 which is just 庶几+exclamative particle, and 庶几 has almost the same meaning as 若 如 倘 etc

>>24615516
I would have thought it's understood that I as a present-day writer am probably not engaging in 假借.

>>24607199 (OP)
I've been reading "A Greek Boy at Home". In chapter 3b it says:

>ουτως και τα ορνιθια τικτει ωα.

Shouldn't the verb be in plural, as in "τικτουσιν"?

>>24615821
get used to it because this is a peculiarity of Greek, neuter plural things have the verb in third person singular, they are treated like one thing
πάντα ῥεῖ

>>24615830
this also happens in Hittite. Neuter subjects also have to take a special suffix when the verb is transitive.

Thoughts on google translate's Latin pronunciation?

https://voca.ro/18EUnglR6b2H

I notice the pronunciation of "Graecia" is different from here:

https://files.catbox.moe/zj3yws.mp4

Kek charlatans be like
>i have two semesters of ___ from cumsock university!
>but im a linguist sir I swear
then get mogged by unemployed autodidacts on an anime forum

>>24616178
AI sloppa
Can /clg/ get any lower?

>>24616178
it's just an Italian pronouncing Latin, so basically the ecclesiastical pronunciation with 0 care for vowel length

>>24616178
The sounds in that clip are quite reasonably for ecclesiastical pronunciation. The main problem is a total disregard of quantity. I also suspect that a bigger sample would reveal more errors in stress accent and sounds.

Why in the bloody benchod is Pali published in the latin alphabet nowadays? What were they thinking

>>24616530
What else should it be published in?

>>24615935
I did vaguely recall something about PIE even, about the animate vs inanimate thing, inanimate collective => perceived as one thing, something like that

>>24616530
I was going to make a shitpost about how arguments against writing Sanskrit in Latin characters also apply to Devanagari, but it appears that Pali doesn't even have an anachronistic standard writing system in the same position as Devanagari is to Sanskrit. the Sri Lankans use Sinhala script, the Burmese use Burmese scripts, the Thai use Tthai script, etc etc. What an odd situation.

new challenge

Easy
Bring me the shield.
Are you ready to go?
Few among them could match his speed.

Medium
Although surrounded by the enemy and outnumbered, they slaughtered their way out of peril.
If you had listened and not acted rashly, we might have caught the deer.
Praise the gods! For without them the city wouldn't stand a chance!

Hard
"Would you", he began to argue, "insist as strongly as you do upon this point, were you not under the mind-altering influence of that wild herb?"
To whomever might read this letter without explicit permission, beware, more than the gods are watching.

>>24618296
ῥᾳδία
τὴν ἀσπίδα μοι πάρεχε
ἆρ' ἐτοῖμος εἶ πορεύεσθαι;
ὀλίγοι αὐτῶν ταχύτητί οἱ ἦσαν ἀντίπαλοι

μέσα
τῶν πολεμίων αὐτοὺς κεκυκλωκότων πλειόνων ὄντων τὸν κίνδυνον ἔφυγον ὅσους σφιν ἠναντιούντο κατασφάζοντες
εἰ ἔπιθες καὶ οὐκ ἀφρόνως σε παρέσχες, ἐμάρψαμέν κέ πῃ τὴν ἔλαφον
τιμάσθων οἱ θεοί, μὴ γὰρ παρόντων ἡ πόλις μινυνθαδία τοι εἴη κε

χαλεπά
«ἆρα τῆσδε τῆς γνώμης» ἀνερόμενος ἦρξεν «οὕτω σφόδρ' ἔχοι' ἄν μὴ θελγόμενος ὑπ' ἐκείνου τοῦ φρενομαίνοντος βοτανικοῦ φαρμάκου;»
εὐλαβείσθω ὁ τήνδ' ἐπιστολὴν μέλλων ἀναγιγνώσκειν ἐξουσίαν μὴ ἔχων, πρὸς γὰρ θεοῖς ἄλλοι πέλονται φυλάττοντες

>>24616239
Since when does autodidact = unemployed?

>>24618730
He's right and you know it.

>>24618730
Any serious autodidact is either unemployed, wealthy, or retired.

>>24618734
Who is right about what?

>>24618745
Bullshit. Anybody teaching themselves anything as opposed to attending school for it is an autodidact in that subject.

>>24618805
Oof, sounds like you're unemployed. Yikes, TGIF tomorrow amirite?

>>24618825
Nope, I'm not unemployed. I work full time and study various subjects in my free time.

>>24618730
I definitely achieved higher highs in Latin as an unemployed 25 year-old NEET than I am now studying Greek while working full-time.

Lingua Latina per se illustrata

01 https://files.catbox.moe/zj3yws.mp4
02 https://files.catbox.moe/3t7sc3.mp4
03 https://files.catbox.moe/1cjlwe.mp4
04 https://files.catbox.moe/5ljwg8.mp4
05 https://files.catbox.moe/etzxkw.mp4
06 https://files.catbox.moe/0kh9gs.mp4
07 https://files.catbox.moe/1hntqg.mp4
08 https://files.catbox.moe/559z4u.mp4
09 https://files.catbox.moe/heuw4i.mp4
10 https://files.catbox.moe/n9gpgw.mp4
11 https://files.catbox.moe/zvf2dc.mp4
12 https://files.catbox.moe/a0art4.mp4
13 https://files.catbox.moe/n580tf.mp4
14 https://files.catbox.moe/h2eikt.mp4
15 https://files.catbox.moe/rqbjv6.mp4
16 https://files.catbox.moe/wi5xus.mp4
17 https://files.catbox.moe/ht9noe.mp4
18 https://files.catbox.moe/9ospv5.mp4
19 https://files.catbox.moe/9o2h9f.mp4
20 https://files.catbox.moe/r1bafj.mp4
21 https://files.catbox.moe/x6y9sd.mp4
22 https://files.catbox.moe/65vrqi.mp4
23 https://files.catbox.moe/2tybr2.mp4
24 https://files.catbox.moe/5nlup0.mp4
25 https://files.catbox.moe/kwehqn.mp4
26 https://files.catbox.moe/7rim8t.mp4
27 https://files.catbox.moe/464bxv.mp4
28 https://files.catbox.moe/f2k98o.mp4
29 https://files.catbox.moe/kfoafs.mp4
30 https://files.catbox.moe/xmf1qc.mp4
31 https://files.catbox.moe/2svzr7.mp4

https://archive.org/details/familia-romana-and-colloquia-personarum-audio-files

https://archive.org/details/lingua-latina-per-se-illustrata_202506

https://archive.org/details/familia-romana

>>24618874
Wtf you don't consume slop after work until you pass out?

>>24618933
Impressive. Very nice.

>>24608642
>Luke Ranieri, whom you might know better as Scorpio Martianus, recorded the full book, but they got taken down off of YouTube
>>24618933
and the full playlist with both books: >>>/t/1344565

>>24616239
The trouble with playing chess with a pigeon...

>>24616259
>>24616482
I thought Ecclesiastical pronunciation didn't normally have any regard for vowel pronunciation, except for E becoming /e/ or /ɛ/ depending on historical length, and similarly with O becoming /o/ or /ɔ/?

>>24615935
So like a kind of ergativity or split-ergativity?

>>24619514
I mean for vowel length, d'oh.

Can someone help me find transcipted texts of the first Encyclopédie?
>>24610235
trvnuke

>>24619496
What do I do with the last link?

Does it have the same content as this?

https://libgen.li/ads.php?md5=4c6993b1ce064526838fc9fcfc3e8f7a

Notice the mp4s I posted are missing the last four chapters, the guy who posted the links to me didn't seem to have them but the thread was deleted before I could ask. For just audio this link has all chapters except two.

https://archive.org/details/familia-romana-and-colloquia-personarum-audio-files

>>24619518
yeah, pretty much.

>>24619514
I'm not sure. If you use slightly different sounds for long e or long o, I don't think anyone would object. I know at least one "ecclesiastical" Latin textbook (maybe Collins) prescribes different sounds in terms of quality for short and long vowels, but pronunciation guides (which are practical guides, not precise, academic descriptions, and are also often written primarily with singing in mind) typically prescribe that each vowel letter has a single sound. "Ecclesiastical pronunciation" could mean different things. In my perspective as an American, "ecclesiastical pronunciation" is an artificial system to pronounce Latin in the context of, say, the church's liturgy. There's room for some diversity of practices, while still falling under the umbrella of correctness or good-enoughness. The norm is the modern Italian (particularly Roman/Vatican) pronunciation of Latin to some extent, but the way Italians actually pronounce Latin has it's own quirks and foreigners are not expected to imitate all it's features, such as the insertion of unwritten vowels in between words all over the place ("et-uh ne nos inducas in tentationem").

For vowel length, my perspective is learning it can only help, not hurt. Even if you don't end up employing it in your own pronunciation, the better your knowledge of it, the easier time you will have if you have any interest in quantitative verse. It also helps reinforce correct stress accent, which is absolutely necessary for a "correct" ecclesiastical pronunciation. I also think it can be employed in an unobtrusive way, so that listeners unaware of quantity wouldn't notice what's going on anyway.

>>24620062
I'm just going off what Wikipedia's article on regional Latin pronunciation says.

>>24619976
>What do I do with the last link?
Paste it into a torrent client >>>/t/1360641
>Does it have the same content as this?
No, it's the deleted Ranieri playlist including not only FAMILIA ROMANA but also COLLOQUIA PERSONARUM, parts of FABULAE SYRAE and ROME AETERNA, and several videos appearing to be entirely his own content which he felt helped supplement the series. The files are listed in the image attached to this post.
>the thread was deleted before I could ask
I was also in that thread, which is basically how I ended up searching /t/ for the rest of the videos and then searching /lit/ for a Latin thread in which to share what I'd found. I was glad to see your post here.

>>24620065
I assume you mean the table here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_phonology_and_orthography#Ecclesiastical_pronunciation

You're right about what the table says (I don't see if it cited a source), but consider the Liber Usualis cited below. It says "each vowel has one sound." However, it is a guide primarily to singing, not speaking, and it's mostly concerned with warning Americans not to inadvertently use English vowel sounds or diphthongize vowels.
http://www.musicasacra.com/pdf/liberusualis.pdf

what's a good site I can use to check pronunciation on Latin words

I am in intermediate Latin hell

>>24620957
on Forvo you can find samples by users pronouncing various words, albeit the quality varies, but at least you get some references

>>24620979
hang tight, your metal's being tested

>>24621041
IT'S METTLE YOU FUCK!!!!!!!!!!!

>>24621054
doesn't align with my metaphor

>>24621054
No, it's "metallum".

>>24621078
What exactly is the metaphor?

>>24621582
Anon struggling with Latin is using a metal implement to chisel and hack at hard, dense material.

>>24620979
re-read often!

quick, give me every source you have written in Classical Nahuatl

>>24618296
Mihi affer scutum.
Esne ire paratus?
Eorum pauci adaequare eum poterant cursu.

Cum ab hostibus circumvenirentur atque numero superarentur, trucidando viam e periculo fecerunt.
Si auscultasses nec temere egisses, cervum cepissemus.
Dis gratia sit! Quippe quibus absentibus urbs non superesset!

"Num tanta contentione," disputare coepit, "de hac re contenderes, nisi mente istius herbae turbatus ferae esses?"
Quicumque has litteras iniussu legeris, cave; plus quam di te spectat.

>>24622495
I picked up a primer of classical Nahuatl in a library once and the introduction began by scolding the reader not to import an Indo-European mindset onto Nahuatl. Put it back on the shelf. It's probably correct that Nahuatl grammar is different on a fundamental level but if you're the kind of person who is interested in learning classical Nahuatl you don't need to be talked down to about that.

>>24622751
>scolding the reader not to import an Indo-European mindset onto Nahuatl
This is good advice. Would you complain about a Japanese textbook telling you Japanese isn't English?

>>24620102
Actually, I was going off the "Italian" column in the table in this article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_regional_pronunciation

>>24621008
Is there any distinction by different pronunciations? Like indicating whether a recording is using classical pronunciation or ecclesiastical pronunciation or whatever. That said:
>>24620957
What do you mean, check pronunciation? Latin spelling is phonetic, provided you have macrons. (Well, I guess there's a little bit of fuckery with the sonus medius? But I'm not sure if anyone fully understands what's going on there.)

>>24622751
There are lots of people who are interested in this or that language for cultural or historical reasons but know fuck all about linguistics.

Is this Koiné Greek? What Greek is this?

>>24623380
Same question but Old Testament.

>>24623380
>>24623386
essentially yes, "Koine" broadly refers to the basic widespread Attic-derived form of Greek used in the eastern provinces and then in Rome, but of course being a centuries long period with multiple different peoples and regions using it, it's not so much a fixed standard, some learned writers might essentially write a form of Greek that is highly Atticizing and you could hardly tell it was written after the Greek classical period, others who only knew Greek as second language and weren't particularly educated a more elementary form, maybe with certain ways of expressing things that would sound off to an Attic speaker

holy crap you can play Ocarina of Time in Latin
https://www.romhacking.net/translations/7152/

At my new job I basically sit around for 8 hours a day doing nothing, waiting for customers and my boss is chill with me reading or doing whatever. Latin mastery here I come.

>>24623668
>t. has never read any koine beyond the gospels

>>24623668
Koine is like standard American English
Modern Greek is ebonics. I mean they literally use ειναι for εστι just like blacks say “he be”

Is classical Tamil literature good?

>>24623720
We haven't reach Modern Greek levels YET with English

>Quot servi sunt in familia? In familia sunt centum servi.
Wtf? No distinction between "a" and "the"...

>>24624539
There are no articles in Latin

>>24624544
And Latin is supposed to be a rich language.

>>24624544
Anyway I didn't mean articles per se but rather definiteness. In Swedish definiteness is expressed not with words like "a" and "the" but with endings.

>>24624547
NTA but here you don't need it. there might be some pronoun in the first question, huic I think. The answer to that would then do without.

>>24624596
Aramaic has an emphatic state for definiteness which is just the -a suffix.

>>24624539
>>24624547
Ngmi

Are the other LLPSI books besides the main one and Roma Aeterna worth it?

>>24624596
Context suffices. Latin can be vague but I've never been put off by the lack of such markers.

>>24622656
>nisi mente istius herbae turbatus ferae esses?
Just realised I had a brain fart here yesterday (was doing the challenge at the ER because I was bored)

*nisi mente ista fera turbatus herba esses?

>>24624702
the colloquia personarum is good practice as you work through LLPSI and fleshes out the lore of the characters

>>24624752
>Context suffices
That's exactly what you don't say about a rich language.

>>24624772
I listened to the first two chapters and it lowered my opinion of the series as a whole, sadly. The second chapter is pretty dumb.

>>24624776
Name a single language where you can perfectly understand everything without any context

>>24624801
Just looked up audio and it looks like the Ranieri version got taken down but the Via Latina version’s still up
Ecclesiasticalchads just canNOT stop winning

>>24624801
What’s wrong with it? Seems fine to me

>>24624838
https://archive.org/details/familia-romana-and-colloquia-personarum-audio-files

>>24624844
Delia says to Libanus it's not his family, but Cornelius' family. I don't think you would call a group of people which includes 20 or 100 slaves a family in today's meaning of the word, but let's say they did back then, still there is no explanation of who is right, Delia or Libanus, it's just left hanging.

Furthermore Delia says to Libanus it's not his family, but then when Libanus asks her how many slaves are in her family she doesn't say that it's not her family, but instead replies with the number of slaves. This is less of a negative than the first point though, because people say stupid things, the first point is the book itself being stupid, this second point is just Delia being stupid.

Also I think it should be made clear which conversations go with which chapters in the main book because the conversations don't teach you any words, unlike the main book, they presuppose that you already know the words. In the second conversation "neque" is used, but you were not taught this in the first two chapters of the main book, it appears first in chapter 3.

Cathay>>>>Serica>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Sinica

>>24624838
People who dislike EcclesiCHAD pronunciation ooze reddit

The only two reasons I hear in 99% of cases are some vague hatred of Christianity in general or Catholicism in particular (Reddit). Or some hatred of Italians (safe edgy and therefore Reddit).

>>24622809
The important thing about Latin pronunciation is to not be too perfectionist, because no matter how close your pronunciation gets to the standard you are using, someone will call it shit.

>>24619514
Yes, EcclesiGODs are supposed to use vowel length. However, since 99% of EP usage is singing by people with minimal Latin ability, it unfortunately tends to be disregarded by many speakers. The attitude towards pronunciation though is just generally more lax than among RP users. But yes, EP is actually a different thing than just “read latin as if it were Italian.” It’s the traditional Italian pronunciation *of Latin*. Italian is an interesting case too because Italian actually also has its own vowel length rules, they just don’t line up with the Latin ones.

TL;DR Ecclesiastical pronunciation has vowel length.

>>24624776
What do you even mean by 'rich language'?

>>24625293
Complex and refined, that's what "classical" in "classical language" is supposed to mean, just as in "classical music". Just as Robert Schumann's music is more complex and refined than Scott Joplin's music, Latin is supposed to be more complex and refined than English.

>>24625362
Refinement is subjective. What do you know about the complexity of Latin? You posted two sentences from LLPSI and arbitrarily decided that Latin isn't complex because it lacks markers for definiteness. Come back when you've had to deal with excessive hyperbaton and Latin's morphological ambiguity.

any tips on memorizing latin vocab? is there an anki deck on ankiweb that's good?

>>24625413
>Refinement is subjective.
No it's not, Mozart is objectively more refined than Red Hot Chili Peppers.

>Latin's morphological ambiguity
Ambiguity is the opposite of what you have in a sophisticated language.

https://i.4cdn.org/lit/1754440426200438.png

https://i.4cdn.org/lit/1754446932486585.jpg

>>24625444
No one is defending the idea that Latin is 'sophisticated', that is your pet peeve as a retarded layman with something equally idiotic to prove.

>>24625427
mnemonics seems interesting

>>24625475
No, classical in classical language, classical music and classical literature means it's of higher cultural value.

>>24623443
It’s from this.

>>24623668
There's nothing you could criticize about AAE that an Old English speaker couldn't criticize about Modern English. Hƿy spricst þu sƿa geƿæmmodlice?
>>24623720
"He be" doesn't just mean "he is", though, it specifically indicates a habitual action or state of affairs. It's originally from Hiberno-English, which in turn probably got it from Gaelic.

>>24623682
Yeah, and it's not the first, though I wonder if all of them are good.

>>24624827
Ithkuil, probably?

>>24625098
What about disliking ecclesiastical pronunciation because it doesn't observe vowel length, which is key to poetic meter?
>>24625123
>Yes, EcclesiGODs are supposed to use vowel length.
I've literally never seen a guide or description of it that says that, can you show me one?
>Italian actually also has its own vowel length rules
Pretty sure vowel length is not phonemic in Italian. Or at least that's what every source I checked says.

>>24625362
There is no objective grounds on which to call one natural language better or more refined than another. (If there are, I'd like to hear what they are, and what makes them objective.)

>>24614540
dude there's Pirahã

>>24608739
interesting

>>24625655
Most of our information about it is from one guy.

>>24625649
I guess we can just stop calling classical music classical music and treat it as equal to boogie-woogie from now on.

>>24625676
>(If there are, I'd like to hear what they are, and what makes them objective.)

>>24625685
I don't know what they are, but whoever decided to call Latin and Greek classical languages, classical music classical music and classical literature classical literature thought they are of greater value than other languages, music and literature, because that's the meaning of the terms.

>>24625646
Idk dude my teachers in catholic school taught with vowel length, I read/speak with vowel length. AFAIK it’s totally usable but just not required and often ignored. Idk what to tell you. When I do poetic memorization I memorize it all in meter for example.

>>24625695
Or they thought Latin and Greek were more valuable because they were the languages of great civilizations.

>>24625646
>>Italian actually also has its own vowel length rules
>Pretty sure vowel length is not phonemic in Italian. Or at least that's what every source I checked says.

So, besides how smarmy this is, I didn’t say Italian has phonemic vowel length, I said it has vowel length. Maybe the linguistics is beyond me but AFAIK it has vowel length, just not phonemic vowel length. But I don’t know Italian. You’re probably correct.

I’m fine being wrong but the absurd level of preening faggotry radiating from your post reeks of the physics-envy present among a lot of the humanities in general. I’m a stupid idiot who went into a different field for my doctorate and I only use my Latin with silly dumb Christians so what do I know.

>>24624702
Do you mean just the readers, or are you also asking about books, like the student's guide or answer key? Among the readers, there's only a few that the course recommends to go with Familia Romana. The rest are recommended for after completing Familia Romana, or even partway into Roma Aeterna.

Colloquia Personarum is worth doing. My favorite colloquia are the ones at the end about the doctorand school teacher. There is also another reader that you can use from the earliest chapters called Fabellae Latinae. If you find it too much of a slog and don't think you really need the extra practice, you could skip that one.

Fabulae Syrae is intended to be read starting with chapter 26 of Familia Romana. I personally found the subject matter tedious in most of the stories, but it is still good reading practice and you might learn something about mythology from this book. Epitome Historiae Sacrae is recommended for after completing Familia Romana, but you can probably read it around the same time as Fabulae Syrae. It will be more or less easy depending on your prior knowledge of the biblical stories it's based on.

After those readers, the others you can either take them or leave them. If you're interested in the authors, they are fine (macronized) student editions of the texts, but the Orberg method breaks down when the marginalia have to explain unadapted texts written by other authors and not Orberg's own didactical lessons. This objection applies also to Roma Aeterna (and for the same reason, to EHS and maybe Fabulae Syrae, but to a lesser extent because they're easier). If you want to read some of the Aeneid, the Orberg edition could be a fine choice, but you could also consider Pharr's or some other student edition. Sermones Romani is the most unique, being a collection of excerpts from different works you might not have otherwise considered looking at.

>>24624801
If it's too juvenile for you, maybe you should quit LLPSI and just take up the Sauveur method for learning ancient languages...

>>24625707
Sorry if it came off like that, didn't mean it that way. It can be hard to judge how you'll come off without the benefit of tone of voice and body language.

>>24625715
In the over a decade that I’ve browsed this site this might be the first time anyone has ever actually said sorry. Thank you. Reconstructedsisters went up a notch in my book today.

>>24624919
That sounds like complex literature... She is nitpicking over the meaning of "mea," saying that Libanus does is not the master of the family. This echoes what Delia says in Colloquium 3, quibbling about Syra referring to Julia as "puella mea." It's part of her character. I don't think it's as confusing as you're making it out to be, and the text is implying that Delia's objection was not entirely reasonable. All that said, I do think there is one point where CP has a major contradiction with the narrative of Familia Romana.

I'm pretty sure each colloquium goes with the chapter of the same number. Is it really any harder to discern the meaning of "neque" from the context than it was to discern "quoque" in Chapter 1 of Familia Romana? Is it the end of the world if you walk away from Colloquium 2 not being entirely sure if you understand the precise meaning of the word?

>>24625720
Oh, I don't particularly dislike traditional pronunciations personally, I just gave that as a reason why someone might. (I study Classical Chinese, and pronounce it in either Mandarin or Japanese, so I'm used to not being able to directly hear poetic meter anyway.)

>>24625646
Collins' "A Primer of Ecclesiastical Latin" teaches a difference between long and short vowels in both quality and quantity.

>Note that short e, i, o, and u differ from their long forms in quality of sound as well as in quantity.
https://archive.ccwatershed.org/media/pdfs/12/07/05/17-58-25_0.pdf

This is a little sloppy because I don't think he meant to deliberately exclude a (or y).

This Catholic priest (Litterae Christianae) seems to advocate for observing quantity in a comment to this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJHAuqAqGRo&list=PLeGlZeM688lmy2U_7JjZgTbGMxjLMmVti

A viewer commented:
>Salve, pater! Dicitur mihi vocem Latinam tantum usurpari oportere secundum usum sacerdotum Romae, ita ut nec vocales longae adhibeantur nec geminationes, ut in ‘ecce’. Nescio utrum vera sint omnia quae dixerim, sed praeferendumne est hoc modo precari, id est cum geminationibus et vocalibus longis (quod velim)?

To which, the priest responded:
>Salve et tu! Quamquam Pius X suasit ut pronuntiatus Romanus qui dicitur adhiberetur, nulla tamen est lex sive regula qua tenemur. Syllabarum autem numerus servari potest etiam in pronuntiatu Romano et qui hoc negant omnino ignorant preces liturgicas numerosas esse.

My current mindset now that even if we want to use an "ecclesiastical" pronunciation, we should study the language primarily with a restored pronunciation in mind, and then adapt it to fit into the mold of ecclesiastical pronunciation (by adding chuhs and vuhs and so forth).

>>24625708
>If it's too juvenile for you, maybe you should quit LLPSI and just take up the Sauveur method for learning ancient languages...
I'll look into it. Any book you recommend?

>>24625754
That was kind of a joke. I posted about Sauveur not too long ago. He was a figure in the "natural method" movement, and his proposed method for teaching beginner Latin was to have students memorize thirty chapters of De Bello Gallico over a span of two months.

If you're curious about his teaching philosophy, he explains it here.
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Introduction_to_the_Teaching_of_Ancient/9OVOAQAAMAAJ

And this is the textbook he produced.
https://archive.org/details/talkswithcaesard00newy/page/n7/mode/2up

I really recommend you try sticking with LLPSI, and unless you just really dislike it or isn't working for you for whatever reason, commit to finishing Familia Romana. If you work through a chapter of a week, it will take about 2/3 of a year to finish it. You have the whole rest of your life to do what you want after that.

However, even though "Talks with Caesar" was intended for classroom use with a teacher, if it's of interest, it still might be approachable for a beginner given how the text is broken up. Note also that Sauveur strongly recommends the Epitome Historiae Sacrae.

>>24625768
Here's an idea: what if you memorized a bunch of text but made it easier by learning songs? Like, I still know all the words to American Pie, whereas I'd struggle to memorize a spoken speech of the same length.

>>24625768
I know you were memeing but when you first posted about that I memorized 5 chapters from DBG book one for fun and the result was curious. For about a week I dreamt in semi-comprehensible pseudo-Latin, and by day my inner monologue was trying to describe things in English with Latin word order and broken ablative absolutes. Sauveur might have been onto something.

So this is a 絶句 I wrote on a recent camping trip- specific geographical references redacted from title.
某城跨會營某村望池
營地斜陽暖
我旗映彩雲
逍遥同志語
亂世絶新聞
(Cell signal was limited at the campground, see.)

>>24625836
What is your method for memorizing non-poetic text at length?

>>24625777
>>24625768
Mass memorization of metered poetry was literally how the old British public school tradition taught classical greek and latin. Even pretty average students seem to have been classical machines by today’s standards.

I think Psalms aren’t a bad way to memorize either. The psalm that starts with “in exitu israel de aegypto” basically teaches you all the body parts and associated actions for example.

>>24625937
Not just metered poetry, but specifically set to a melody is what I was suggesting. (Hell, you can perfectly well set prose to a melody, that's essentially what cantillation is.) There seems to be something about melody that helps greatly with remembering words.

>>24625949
Then Psalms to gregorian tones is what you’re looking for. Or just scripture recitation in general. My only issue is most recordings are choirs so the words aren’t very intelligible, so you really need to hum till you get the melody and then sit down with a Vulgate Bible and sing to yourself.

>>24625920
NTA but: One good way I know is to read it over a few times, then copy out the first letter of each word (maintaining the formatting and punctuation as much as possible), try to read off from that a few times, then try to recite the whole thing from memory.

>>24625920
Haphazard. I opened a Perseus window at a width so that each line had 7-8 words and memorized one line at a time, then after each new line rewrote the entire chapter by memory to test myself. Then recited it all to myself at night in bed before I slept. I’m sure there’s a better way to do it.

Should i take the sanskritpill?

>>24627745
Do it and report back.
Recently someone claimed it's not that hard, but I suspect he lied.

I got wheelocks latin from a used bookstore, does anyone have some kind of study plan or something for this book. Do I need anything else?

>>24626506
https://www.linebyline.app/ does something similar. It removes letters gradually each time you recall a line correctly.

>>24614767
>Originally there was just one letter V, which was used as either a vowel or a consonant.
There was never a consonant. It was always essentially the same thing, but gradually a glide contrasting with a pure vowel, [w~u]. The consonant, /v/, showed up far later, in the middle ages.

>>24608739
cozy

>>24628104
I downloaded it maybe months ago. Planned to start reading it but never got into it. Then I found Ørberg's Lingua Latina per se Illustrata: Familia Romana and found it much easier to get into, so I'm studying that now. But I plan to try different materials. I was just now checking out Cambridge Latin Course and Oxford Latin Course and those seem to have a lot of pictures which is good I guess. Report back what you think of Wheelock's when you've read a little. Maybe compare it to Lingua Latina per se Illustrata if you want.

>>24618933

https://archive.org/details/familia-romana

It teaches you Latin using only Latin.

>>24628250
I was under the impression that the W sound was already fading or had largely faded by the last decades of golden age Latin.

I was surprised to see that some sentences have no capital first letter in Cambridge Latin Course and Oxford Latin Course. Why?

>>24628384
They're only capitalizing proper nouns. The most likely reason is they don't want you to mistake a common noun at the beginning of a sentence for a proper noun. ("Who is this character named Coquus?")

>>24628384
There isn't really any rule for capitalization in Latin. Sometimes it's the beginning of every sentence, or sometimes just the beginning of every paragraph, or sometimes only proper nouns. Depends on the publisher and the book

>>24628439
Clear capitalization rules are only fairly recent anyways. Even as late as the 18th century you see weird things (like the US Constitution)

It is funny that after years this general never really grew out of discussing LLPSI.

>>24629079
No, because I started posting here days ago. I made a thread about studying Latin on /pol/ where I linked LLPSI and some posters went here. What makes you think it's the same posters year after year?

>>24628604
Oxford Latin Course and Cambridge Latin Course were first published in 1988 and 1977 respectively.

>>24629206
Never claimed that. It's obvious this general has a steady influx of newfags.

>>24627755
What are the best resources for it?

>>24629297
You implied it by saying "grew out of". You should be happy that people want to learn Latin.

>>24629222
And as Latin is much older, there is no real convention (for modern languages each authority does their own thing). Even where conventions existed in the middle ages, it often varies today (i/j or u/v being distinguished). The only fairly universal convention I'm aware of which didn't exist classically is the existence of spaces between words, which I think most people are happy with.

>>24607199 (OP)
Once, someone recommended learning Sanskrit because it supposedly changes your thought structure. Has anyone here tried it? How did it go?

>>24629561
Was “someone” a tiktok short by BharatiNationalist832?

>>24629553
Your posts are incoherent. The 18th century is after the end of the middle ages. Anyway I'll just skip Oxford and Cambridge since they're the only ones I've seen with this retardation.

>>24629571
Indians are too busy trying to leave their country to study Sanskrit. Anyone singing the praises of Sanskrit is always a white man from the west.

>>24613976
>The Romance languages are essentially Latin as spoken by a bunch of LSLs who had trouble with the cases.
You are a retarded barbarian who knows nothing about Latin and its history.
>>24609693
>I am starting Latin again after becoming Catholic
You will never be Catholic, you will never be Latin, you will always be an insincere protestant LARPer dwelling in sheol unable to reach salvation.

>>24628384
It is to avoid confusing a proper noun with a common noun. The rule in text editing is not to use capital letters at the beginning of sentences, whether in Greek or in Latin. This is the rule for texts in the Loeb collection, the Teubner editions, and the Oxford Classical Texts.

>>24630359
NTA, but this is the first time in months I learned anything from this general. Thanks

>>24629625
Are you capable of reading? I think it's pretty clear that the medieval convention to which I was referring was i/j or u/v being distinguished. Capitalization is an even more recent convention (though one could argue that it's fairly old if you count initials).

>>24630534
You need to work on composition, but you're in the right place for that.

>>24609693
Great way to engage with the tradition. Best of wishes. Old church documents and creeds are a great way to get reading early, and modern documents are great too. Besides all the catholic authors from the early church till now.

The Gesta Francorum was what inspired me to start learning to read Latin on my own in the first place.

>>24610540
For linux the greek polytonic uses semicolon and single quote for acute and grave. Same keys with shift for breathings. And finally the bracket keys of circumflex and iota subscript. To combine them, just type them in series.

>>24628104
Just go through it chapter by chapter. Do all the exercises, get an answer key online
>>24628316
Maybe well intentioned but this comes off like a shill post

>>24630359
>This is the rule for texts in the Loeb collection, the Teubner editions, and the Oxford Classical Texts.
This is not true, most prose Latin Loebs and OCTs use regular capitalization. Seems to depend on the editor. I just checked about a dozen and 8 or 9 had Capitalization.
>>24630409
You learned wrong so the streak still stands.
I will post photos for evidence if anyone wants to challenge this

this is cute
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PJTZiERaZE

>>24631206
I tested two dozen volumes from my library and only an older edition of Apuleius procured by Hanson did capitalize. Granted it's not an absolute rule, but it's definitely the convention in classics. I checked Virgil, Apuleius, Lucretius, Valerius Flaccus, Petrionius, Tibullus, Catullus, Ennius and Livy and only got Apuleius with capitals. No capitals found in my OCT volumes and for the Teubner, the only exception I found is Endt's adnotationes super Lucanum which has been published like a century ago. Please post the list of titles with their authors, I'm interested.

>>24628152
Ayy, that's what I use too!

>>24628250
/w/ is a semivowel, so phonetically a vowel but functions in syllables as a consonant.

>>24629976
Yes, Sanskrit and Lithuanian are both conservative Indo-European languages.

>>24630142
Obviously what I said is a bit of an oversimplification-for-laymen, but how is the essential thrust of it wrong?

>>24631506
Because not sating everything in a semantically and technically precise fashion makes autistic pseuds with an ego spazz out.

>>24631466
>>24631466
I specified prose Latin. 3 examples in pic.
Capitalization: Livy, Quintilian, Isidorus, Caesar, Gellius, several works of Cicero (2 books of rhetoric, 6 of orations, de re publica)
Noncapitalization: Nepos, 4 works of Tacitus
Greek practically never with some peculiar irregular capitals here and there (Dokei in Nichomachean Ethics, probably a misprint)
All poetic works I have seen are uncapitalized.
Loeb Boethius and Rhetorica ad Herennium capitalized.
In total of Latin prose OCT volumes I have 21 with regular capitals, 5 without. It seems to be up to the editor.

>>24631604
My mistake, I was not aware that it was such a widespread practice in prose. I am more of a Hellenist than a Latinist, I probably projected. Thanks for the correction. For the record, my Yardley translation of Livy does not capitalize. I sent a query to Harvard to confirm it's a matter of editorial choice.

How far is Dante's Italian from Latin? Will it be easier to learn after?

>>24631637
About as far as modern Italian is, if only because standard modern Italian is heavily based on Dante's dialect.

>>24630359
>Works of science and mathematics, such as Euclid's Elements, are generally not represented.
I doubt THE CLASSICS are anything for me then. The whole reason I started studying Latin and plan to study Greek is that I want to acquire a CLASSICAL EDUCATION, which consists of the trivium and the quadrivium: grammar (Latin and Greek), logic, rhetoric, arithmetic, geometry, music and astronomy. I've been researching and studying the trivium for quite some time but I only recently began studying Latin. Still not totally sure what the difference is between these two, kind of thought they were the same I guess:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_education

Anyone study Ancient Egyptian? I'm assuming there isn't much lit but is it worth it for the history?

Anyone done the Latin course at the Open University in the UK? Worth it?
https://www.open.ac.uk/courses/modules/a276/

>>24608739
Awesome. I knew that

>>24631506
To start with, it is historically incorrect. The modern day Latin speakers descend from native Latin speakers. The people in Dacia, Hispania, and Gallia didn't magically switch to Latin, Roman soldiers and merchants and jurists from Italia moved there. Even if they intermarried, the children would be raised speaking Latin anyway. You can find Italian genetic signals in those areas too. The belief today is that the spread of Latin came from the middle class, not the peasantry.
>inb4 they picked up words from the local languages
Obviously. That changes nothing. If French was Latin spoken by LSL Gauls and Catalan by LSL Tartesians, those languages would be way more different than they are today instead of similar, Sprachbund nonwithstanding.

The reconstructed "proto-Romance" has shared similarities with Old Latin that are not present in Classical Latin, therefore there are ways in which the Romance languages are older than Classical Latin — though obvious in most ways they are not, they are newer and innovative.
I will not go in detail on what features those are and why they matter, no pearls to swine, no Latinity to barbarians.
>>24631558
Clanker.

>>24631866
To be more correct, the modern Latin languages — children of Cicero, first philellene, Caesar, conqueror of the Gauls, Marcus Aurelius, vanquisher of barbarians — are not "Latin as spoken by a bunch of LSLs who had trouble with the cases", no, as Eric Auerbach is often featured in introductions to a certain epic:
>Al contrario, la storia e la vita spirituale del primo Medioevo sembrano confermare l'influenza spesso diffusa, ma infine vittoriosa, di antiche idee e istituzioni, le loro spesso sciocchezze, ma quindi profondamente storiche e organiche. Più ci rendiamo conto che la storia delle lingue romaniche è la vera storia del latino, che il latino classico è una costruzione artificiale e che la sua imitazione è una compagnia estetica e storica, poiché vediamo chiaramente l'arte medievale come continuazione, rielaborazione e trasformazione della tradizione antica e mediterranea, maggiore è la tendenza in tutti i campi di Medie-Ristine per interpretare. Fenomeni come segni di una tradizione antica, a volte debole, a volte sfigurata, ma dopo tutto dominante, cioè una specie di anzianità volgare, se il termine è accettabile.

It is English, in fact, that is a melting pot of Celts, Dutchies, and Nords struggling to keep a coherent language and then throwing all grammar up to the airs in 1066 when they are forced to speak French for 300 years.

>Latin as spoken by a bunch of LSLs who had trouble with the cases
A reminder that one of the main branches of modern Latin, chiefly comprised of Romanian, has cases. Latin languages have kept complete gender and conjugation systems. Three features of Indo-European grammar. English has kept none of them. What does that tell us, besides that English is functionally, even if not historically, a creole?

>>24631866
>The modern day Latin speakers descend from native Latin speakers.
Can't be exclusively so, since there's some diversity of genetic ancestry among Romance speakers.
>The people in Dacia, Hispania, and Gallia didn't magically switch to Latin, Roman soldiers and merchants and jurists from Italia moved there.
I mean yeah, native Latin speakers were involved too. But Romance extends over a wide enough area, and displaced enough other languages, that its spread had to involve some non-native acquisition.
>>24631871
>It is English, in fact, that is a melting pot of Celts, Dutchies, and Nords struggling to keep a coherent language and then throwing all grammar up to the airs in 1066 when they are forced to speak French for 300 years.
The simplification of English grammar had, to my understanding, a lot more to do with the Norsemen than the Normans, simply because the former were a lot more numerous- the latter mostly left words, not grammar.
>>24631880
Yes, Romanian has cases- fewer than Latin. The others have none at all. Being less simplified than English doesn't mean they haven't simplified Latin grammar.

>>24631891
>Can't be exclusively so, since there's some diversity of genetic ancestry among Romance speakers.
You realise this has already been addressed in
>Even if they intermarried, the children would be raised speaking Latin anyway.
?
They were not "LSL" at any significant level. Again, for the second time, if they were, we would expect the languages to be way more divergent than they actually are, Sprachbund nonwithstanding.
>that its spread had to involve some non-native acquisition.
Are you purposefully ignoring these points already being addressed in the very post you are replying to?
>Romanian has cases- fewer than Latin
>they haven't simplified Latin grammar
Again, read the very end of the post you are replying to. It is bizarre, everything you have said has been specifically addressed in the post, you just conveniently missed to quote them as if they don't exist lol

>a lot more to do with the Norsemen than the Normans
It hadn't. English stayed mostly the same through the Norse invasions, though that was a benefit of the two languages being similar and not that Norse language didn't penetrate deeply into Anglo-Saxon.
It was after 1066, after the French invasion (none of that Norman cope) that a simultaneous loss of case, conjugation, and gender happened.

>That term harks back to the time when the language was regarded as being the regional dialect of the Norman invaders who came across the Channel with William the Conqueror. Yet there are good grounds for holding that the generic term ‘Anglo-French’, or ‘The French of England’, perhaps better reflects the reality of the situation. Those alternative terms take into account the heterogeneous composition of William’s army, which included many men from different regions of France, and the fact that over the following three centuries the language must have been used in Britain by all manner of people from dissimilar ethnic backgrounds, whose linguistic competence, to judge by the writings which have survived, ranged from a native mastery of French down to an mere elementary acquaintance.
anglo-norman . net/anglo-french/

And before I have to deal with more nonsense.
1
>>24631891
>Can't be exclusively so, since there's some diversity of genetic ancestry among Romance speakers.
is addressed by
>>24631866
>Even if they intermarried, the children would be raised speaking Latin anyway.

2
>>24631891
>But Romance extends over a wide enough area, and displaced enough other languages, that its spread had to involve some non-native acquisition.
addressed by also
>>24631866
>the children would be raised speaking Latin anyway
and
>>24631866
>>inb4 they picked up words from the local languages
>Obviously. That changes nothing. If French was Latin spoken by LSL Gauls and Catalan by LSL Tartesians, those languages would be way more different than they are today instead of similar, Sprachbund nonwithstanding.

3
>>24631891
>Yes, Romanian has cases- fewer than Latin. The others have none at all. Being less simplified than English doesn't mean they haven't simplified Latin grammar.
addressed by
>>24631866
>The reconstructed "proto-Romance" has shared similarities with Old Latin that are not present in Classical Latin, therefore there are ways in which the Romance languages are older than Classical Latin — though obvious[ly] in most ways they are not, they are newer and innovative.

Only on /lit/, the supposed beacon of intelligence, do I have to spoonfeed this bad. This doesn't happen even on /fit/ or /v/.

>>24631637
Easier it will be but you won't understand Italian just because you learned Latin.

>>24631659
I'm not sure why you mention me, but the education you refer to is medieval in origin, developing from the ninth century onwards. In Greece and Rome, education varied according to place and period, but centred chiefly on rhetoric, much needed for public speaking, and included a limited exposure to music here and there. Grammar formed part of that curriculum with the goal to acquire orator skills. I am not convinced that such a system has much relevance today. The trivium and quadrivium were designed above all to prepare clerics for theological study, I think you probably have more of a ‘renaissance’ type of education in mind.

>>24631900
>They were not "LSL" at any significant level.
Well, obviously the second generation would have grown up speaking it as a first language- but the local parent's non-native Latin would have been a significant part of the input they got. Not enough to turn it into a whole different language, but it couldn't help being a factor. Or why do you think the Romance languages lose so much of Latin's morphology?
>English stayed mostly the same through the Norse invasions
Surely at least some of that is down to the written tradition being conservative and not keeping up with the developments in speech, then being interrupted by the Norman invasion?

>>24628250
>>24628250
>but gradually a glide contrasting with a pure vowel, [w~u]
It was always a consonant since the historical period, retarded barbarian. Besides, /w/ itself is a consonant, though a horrible sound typical of disgusting guttural barbarian tongues, alien to Latin. Learn basic phonology before spewing nonsense about a race that wanted to genocide yours, blonde chimp.
>The consonant, /v/, showed up far later, in the middle ages.
Retard. Patently false.

>>24614762
Because we (and the 'we' here excludes barbarians with no ancient history) don't write with classical fonts anymore. V is used where it is pronounced with a v, u is used where it is pronounced as u and its allophones.

>>24631938
>but the local parent's non-native Latin would have been a significant part of the input they got
Unsubstantiated hypothetical statement which is in fact contradicted by the philological (linguistic isn't a real word) evidence and historical facts, as already pointed out in the original post.
>>24631938
>Or why do you think the Romance languages lose so much of Latin's morphology?
They didn't any more than Latin "lost" much of Proto-Indo-European morphology. Do you know who actually LOST the entirety of its morphology? English, in less than 500 years.
>>24631938
>Surely at least some of that is down to the written tradition being conservative and not keeping up with the developments in speech
Not the case in English. But it is very funny you make up this justification for English, a European mutt, but don't even think about it in the context of Latin.

Anyway, barbarians must be exterminated, their stain on this world has gone too far.

Do you ever read a post and just know it comes from Latin America?

>>24631986
kek I was thinking the same

>>24631969
On what basis do you assert this?

>>24631980
>Unsubstantiated hypothetical statement
What other possible way can there be for Romance speakers to be descended in significant part from non-Latin speakers? Unless you think every single instance was a child being taken from its non-Latin-speaking parents at birth to be raised by a Latin-speaking couple away from anyone who wasn't a native Latin speaker.
>They didn't any more than Latin "lost" much of Proto-Indo-European morphology.
Except for the cases (except for Romanian, which only lost most of them), and the entire neuter gender, and the synthetic passive, and the synthetic future and conditional (reformulated out of forms of habere). And more than that in the case of French.
>Do you know who actually LOST the entirety of its morphology? English, in less than 500 years.
More than most of the Romance languages did, yes. All of it, no. If English would done lose all morphology of it, then us would talk like this.

Why do latinx larp like they have some super deep connection to Rome that angloid hylics don’t

>>24632352
>>24632352

>>24631917
>I'm not sure why you mention me
I quoted you because you mentioned "the Loeb collection, the Teubner editions, and the Oxford Classical Texts", which was good that you brought up, I had heard about the Loeb collection before but had forgotten about it. My quote was from what I read when I was reading the wikipedia articles about those three collections, specifically the Oxford Classical Texts, but it might be that none of them contains all 13 books of Euclid's Elements. As for classical education you know nothing about it, so don't speak about it. Someone recommended me Gwynne's Latin. I had a look at it and was not impressed, but anyway in it I read a little about "classicists" and that's what I was attempting to discuss, and that's what I am going to research going forward. What are "the classics"? Why aren't texts like Euclid's Elements included? I seem to come across many contradictions but that's how it is in general when trying to acquire actually valuable information, it's all been distorted and hollowed out to where it's hollower than a Swiss cheese and it's a great challenge to connect the dots.

>>24632544
The “Classical education” you’re referring to was invented in the 1960s by zionists and christschizos

>>24607199 (OP)
>mega
Can you faggots just put it in a torrent. Why the fuck are you using this shit xd.

>>24631866
>The modern day Latin speakers descend from native Latin speakers. The people in Dacia, Hispania, and Gallia didn't magically switch to Latin, Roman soldiers and merchants and jurists from Italia moved there. Even if they intermarried

Ah, yes, they must not have intermarried to any significant degree and all RomanX sisters are descended 100% from ancient Rome with no outside mixing, which is why every modern RomanX country has a nearly identical genetic profile. Romanians and French speakers are in no way divergent from each other.


>If French was Latin spoken by LSL Gauls and Catalan by LSL Tartesians, those languages would be way more different than they are today instead of similar, Sprachbund nonwithstanding.

This is proven wrong by how similar Spanish is across Latin America and Spain. Certain areas like in Bolivia are like 90% native. Based on your proposition, the Latin American dialects should be more divergent from each other and from Spanish than Spanish is from Romanian.