Oldschool Latin

[Hunter]

Back in the 1990s, I started my son with a library copy of Latin Made Simple, and then saved up for Henle Latin. At the beginning I had to make up things for him, not being sure if I was doing it right, but it it got him ready to start Henle effortlessly, so...it worked I guess :-0 Most of the grammar he learned, he learned while he was learning Latin and Greek. It's all a bit foggy now years later.

 

I want to refresh my own Latin and would like to be prepared to teach Latin. So I'd like to work through a text I intend to teach from. I tend to lean towards Henle because I've used it, and we all know how nauseatingly attached I am to narrow curricula. :tongue_smilie: Henle is only 500 words and prepares for Caesar.

 

I remember there used to be a lot of talk about a good Latin teacher being able to mostly just teach from a grammar and not even needing a text.

 

I don't even know what I'm asking. I'm just opening up conversation to discuss oldschool latin instruction, what has changed, what is still available, what is better now, etc.

 

I no longer have either my copy of Trivium Pursuit or Climbing Parnassus, to refer to. I need to find my copy of LCC 1st edition buried on my harddrive somewhere.

[Hunter]

I think it was this article I was remembering, and Bennett's book.

[nansk]

Henle is only 500 words...

 

Really?!

[i.love.lucy]

Really?!

500 vocab words is probably what she means. Is that what you meant by "really"? I just started teaching with it and it's no slouch of a text, that's for sure. I really like it.

I adore this quote from the Preface to "The Roman Way", written by Edith Hamilton (who clearly owned a Well Trained Mind):

 

I have read Latin ever since my father, who knew nothing about softening the rigors of study, started me at the age of seven on "Six Weeks' Preparation for Caesar", I have read it, except during the brief intermission of college, for my own pleasure merely, exactly as I would read French or German. I open a volume of Cicero or Horace or Virgil, purely for the enjoyment of what they write, not in the slightest degree because they write in Latin.

 

Note that "Six Weeks' Preparation for Caesar", being seriously out of copyright, is freely downloadable from google books, just go to google.com/books and search for it. The Adler Latin text is another fascinating 19th century work. Although it was never popular in its day, it is also freely available on google books, and making a bit of a comeback now. Of course both of these presume a fair amount of English grammar.

 

There's a lot of questions on this forum (and in your linked article) about when to start teaching Latin. I think this question is worthless unto itself -- I hear of lots of Moms who start Latin in 3rd grade, but go too slowly to be much of any use -- commonly a year's worth of material will be the same as a week of high school Latin. Again and again I hear about kids who use some kind of easy intros to Latin from 3rd through 8th grade, but can't even test into a rigorous Latin II class when they are 9th graders.

 

So, I think the question should be not just when to start Latin, but how rigorously to teach it at what grade levels. And to do this, it is important to think about goals. The Vulgate is easier to read than Caesar, who is much easier to read than Ovid or Virgil. If you want to read the Vulgate in 10th grade, you'll need to work backward from there.

 

And, I don't quite understand your comment about vocabulary. Learning Latin vocab isn't particularly hard, as there are many cognates with English, and the total Latin vocabulary isn't terribly large, at least compared to ancient Greek and English. What even a rank beginner will need to memorize, however are the paradigms: this beginner will need to memorize something like 100 inflected noun endings, 700 verb endings and somewhere near 100 pronoun forms.

[i.love.lucy]

 

And, I don't quite understand your comment about vocabulary.

My comment? I didn't mean to imply that it's hard. So far I think it's about diligent memory work of the rules and paradigms. Not hard, but takes focused work. But I should bow out of this discussion because I am a new user to Henle and not well versed in learning or teaching it yet, so maybe I am not understanding your post.

[nansk]

500 vocab words is probably what she means. Is that what you meant by "really"? I just started teaching with it and it's no slouch of a text, that's for sure. I really like it.

 

Oh! I get it now. Thank you. :)

 

I do agree with about starting with a smaller vocab and focussing on the grammar first. A grammar (v/s reading) approach makes more sense to me.

[momma2three]

I adore this quote from the Preface to "The Roman Way", written by Edith Hamilton (who clearly owned a Well Trained Mind):

 

 

 

Note that "Six Weeks' Preparation for Caesar", being seriously out of copyright, is freely downloadable from google books, just go to google.com/books and search for it. The Adler Latin text is another fascinating 19th century work. Although it was never popular in its day, it is also freely available on google books, and making a bit of a comeback now. Of course both of these presume a fair amount of English grammar.

 

There's a lot of questions on this forum (and in your linked article) about when to start teaching Latin. I think this question is worthless unto itself -- I hear of lots of Moms who start Latin in 3rd grade, but go too slowly to be much of any use -- commonly a year's worth of material will be the same as a week of high school Latin. Again and again I hear about kids who use some kind of easy intros to Latin from 3rd through 8th grade, but can't even test into a rigorous Latin II class when they are 9th graders.

 

So, I think the question should be not just when to start Latin, but how rigorously to teach it at what grade levels. And to do this, it is important to think about goals. The Vulgate is easier to read than Caesar, who is much easier to read than Ovid or Virgil. If you want to read the Vulgate in 10th grade, you'll need to work backward from there.

 

 

That's an interesting point.

 

Do you have any recommendations for a course of study that would start in 1st or 2nd grade, and achieve enough fluency to test into an advanced Latin class by 9th grade?

[Hunter]

Thanks so much for the tip about the 6 weeks book. Here is the link, if anyone is looking for it.

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=BtgMAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

I know it's easier for some, but Latin is hard work for me and it's hard work for my students. 500 vocabulary words and preparing for 1 book is enough for me and mine. Seriously. :willy_nilly: There are so many subjects to cover. I need to set just a few small goals, and hit them bullseye, before making new ones.

 

From what I've heard--and I'm no expert--some 1st year grammars include 2000-3000 vocabulary words as well as all the grammar. Henle has considerably fewer and is both loved and hated because of that.

 

IF we actually get all 500 words and all the grammar completed and read Caesar, then we can study more vocabulary and more books. I'd rather switch over to Greek at that point though, I think. I had Machen 1st edition out last night. Again another controversial book for it's small vocabulary :lol: I started a thread with free links if anyone is interested in the most commonly used Greek book used back in the day. Part of the reason it was used so often though was merely price and availability. It was dirt cheap for awhile. Hey Andrew 3 and 4, then Machen 1st edition have always been my favorite.

[Hunter]

There is no key to the 6 weeks book, right?

[Halcyon]

That's an interesting point.

 

Do you have any recommendations for a course of study that would start in 1st or 2nd grade, and achieve enough fluency to test into an advanced Latin class by 9th grade?

 

I cannot say where my children will place in 9th grade, as we are not there yet. However, older will complete Henle 1 by end of sixth grade at the latest (we are shooting for mid 6th) and then begin either Henle 2 or Wheelocks. I fully expect him to be prepared for advanced latin by 9th.

 

Younger began latin in K with GSWL. He will finish Lively Latin at the end of 2nd grade (this year). I am not sure what i will use next. Henle is wonderful, but older did not begin henle until 4th, so I Am not sure a 3rd grader would be up to it, but he always surprises me. We might choose First Form. He is an accelerated child, however, as is his older brother.

[momma2three]

Thanks, I don't mean to sound like crazy Tiger Mom, but I do like the idea of starting Latin on the young end, and ideally I'd like something that my two oldest can do together. I think I'm going to start Song School Latin next year (1st grade for my DD, and kindergarten age DS can just pick up whatever he picks up), because it looks like a really cute program.

There is no key to the 6 weeks book, right?

 

I don't think there is one.

[Critterfixer]

I don't know if you are still looking for Latin, but I am studying Latin for Beginners by Benjamin Leonard d'Ooge that I found on Google Books. At the time I didn't want to purchase Henle for myself (and now that I've seen it I'm really glad I didn't!). I picked it because both the student text and the teacher text were online, and the teacher text, rather than just being a question/answer key actually went through the teaching process for each lesson and noted places where extra care in teaching was needed.

Not bad for free.

 

Thanks, I don't mean to sound like crazy Tiger Mom, but I do like the idea of starting Latin on the young end, and ideally I'd like something that my two oldest can do together. I think I'm going to start Song School Latin next year (1st grade for my DD, and kindergarten age DS can just pick up whatever he picks up), because it looks like a really cute program.

 

I don't think it sounds like Tiger Mom at all. The more I see of Latin, the more convinced I am that vocabulary work in the early years is very important. It's far more fun to learn the difficult grammar if you already have a large store of words to begin with. Ah, for the days when I could memorize as easily as breathing! My third grade boys are going to have it so much better. They get to start when they are young, while I get to muddle and slog through trying to memorize vocabulary AND get the grammar at the same time.

[Hunter]

I don't know if you are still looking for Latin, but I am studying Latin for Beginners by Benjamin Leonard d'Ooge that I found on Google Books. At the time I didn't want to purchase Henle for myself (and now that I've seen it I'm really glad I didn't!). I picked it because both the student text and the teacher text were online, and the teacher text, rather than just being a question/answer key actually went through the teaching process for each lesson and noted places where extra care in teaching was needed.

Not bad for free.

 

 

 

Thanks so much! I didn't know there was an original answer key! Wow! I skimmed it quickly. It looks like it uses a 600 word vocabulary, with the Caesar words in bold type.

[momma2three]

I don't think it sounds like Tiger Mom at all. The more I see of Latin, the more convinced I am that vocabulary work in the early years is very important. It's far more fun to learn the difficult grammar if you already have a large store of words to begin with. Ah, for the days when I could memorize as easily as breathing! My third grade boys are going to have it so much better. They get to start when they are young, while I get to muddle and slog through trying to memorize vocabulary AND get the grammar at the same time.

 

That makes a lot of sense, thanks. I see that you're using Prima Latina and Latin Christiana? And you're happy with them? I'd prefer something secular, but my priority is that the program is interesting for the student, relatively simple for me (I know no Latin), and provides a really solid foundation that can be built on when they're older.

[MeaganS]

Thanks so much! I didn't know there was an original answer key! Wow! I skimmed it quickly. It looks like it uses a 600 word vocabulary, with the Caesar words in bold type.

 

I've tried to use Latin for Beginners but I gave up. I didn't know there was a Teacher's text available. Do you have a link?

 

ETA: Nm, I found it. Here it is.

ETA again: Wow, this is great! I might have to whip out my copy again!

ETA yet again: Has anyone looked through his Latin composition for secondary schools. It looks like there are a few. At least one based on Caesar and one on Cicero? Do they look good? I don't know enough to say if they are or aren't. Here's book one (based on Caesar) and book 2 (based on Cicero)

Edited September 4, 2012 by MeaganS

[Hunter]

I've tried to use Latin for Beginners but I gave up. I didn't know there was a Teacher's text available. Do you have a link?

 

ETA: Nm, I found it. Here it is.

ETA again: Wow, this is great! I might have to whip out my copy again!

 

There are no translations, though????

[MeaganS]

There are no translations, though????

 

No, there aren't. One has been compiled by students and is available online. I compiled a list of resources for it on a blog post a year or so ago. Here's a link to my post. There is actually quite a bit around.

 

I'm finding the direction to be helpful in the Teacher's Manual, though. I think I was trying to go through it too fast before.

[Amy Jo]

You might check out Linney's Latin Class - it uses The First Year of Latin by Gunnison and Harley (1902 edition) -- which is freely available. It looks like he's just finished an answer key for the book. (He wrote GSWL, but you don't need to have used GSWL first.)

[Haiku]

Do you have any recommendations for a course of study that would start in 1st or 2nd grade, and achieve enough fluency to test into an advanced Latin class by 9th grade?

 

Take this with a grain of salt, because I held off on Latin instruction until my dd was (is) in 5th grade because I wanted her to be reading fluently, writing and spelling well, and well-immersed in English grammar.

 

Imo, nothing you do in 1st or 2nd grade is going to have any effect on where you are in 9th grade.

 

Think of it this way: we usually start kids in arithmetic around age 5 or 6 in the hopes that by the time they reach 12-14 we can start them in algebra. If we didn't start kids with arithmetic until they were 8 or 9, does that mean they wouldn't be ready for algebra until 15-7? No, of course not. An 8 or 9 year old will likely learn in a far shorter amount of time what the 5 or 6 year old learned.

 

I think it's the same with Latin. We could slog away with vocabulary and simple grammar when they are very young, but we're not going to get that far until they mature enough to be able to understand the abstract grammar. My 10 year old is doing very well in both Spanish and Latin. My 9 year old has stalled in Spanish; he can't grasp the idea that "My sister" takes the form of the verb that goes along with "she" on the verb chart. His understanding of grammar is not at all sophisticated; developmentally, he's just not there yet. He doesn't really think abstractly. Pounding Latin vocab into him wouldn't make much difference for him in the long run; if he ever studies Latin, it will be when he's mature enough to grasp the meat of it, not just the fringe stuff.

 

I started Latin in with dd5th not so much because I think she needs the head start for later advanced Latin study but because I knew she would enjoy the intellectual challenge and the roots/derivatives. I think she could have started in 7th grade and still be where I want her to be in 9th grade.

 

Tara

[Sahamamama]

Take this with a grain of salt, because I held off on Latin instruction until my dd was (is) in 5th grade because I wanted her to be reading fluently, writing and spelling well, and well-immersed in English grammar.

 

Imo, nothing you do in 1st or 2nd grade is going to have any effect on where you are in 9th grade.

 

Tara

 

That is a possibility, and one I thought about before starting Latin with my 2nd grader this year. She enjoys Prima Latina quite a bit, but I admit, it's mainly vocabulary at this point. Still, I do think it's the right move for this child, because she seems to enjoy seeing "connections" all over the place now. She's also more on the level of at least a 3rd grader with language skills, so we're going with that.

 

Reasons for Latin

 

Latin Is the Next Step After Phonics

 

Hunter, have you considered the First Form series (First Form, Second Form, Third Form, Fourth Form)? I'm working my way through that, and am finally starting to understand verbs. :001_huh:

[Hunter]

Hunter, have you considered the First Form series (First Form, Second Form, Third Form, Fourth Form)? I'm working my way through that, and am finally starting to understand verbs. :001_huh:

 

Last time I looked at the first form series it only had 2 levels, and I wasn't interested in an incomplete series. I worry a bit about the authors' expertise level, and since I had Henle, I thought, "What do I need First Form for?" I spend a lot of time LOOKING at MP materials and have bought a few over the decades, but I seldom stick with them. I can't put my finger on it, but...something always feels wannabee or intolerant about them, or...I don't know :-0 I get...annoyed :-0

 

Meagan, Thank you!!!! I downloaded the key and the 99 cent audios. I'm going to try it out, and see if I can keep up, and like it. I pulled out my Machen Greek and was thinking about starting that, but I'm really in the mood for Latin and to buy myself a new copy of Loeb Caesar, in all it's cute chunky redness. There are some really good vintage and modern Caesar supports materials. Caesar is like a giant unit study.

[Hunter]

You might check out Linney's Latin Class - it uses The First Year of Latin by Gunnison and Harley (1902 edition) -- which is freely available. It looks like he's just finished an answer key for the book. (He wrote GSWL, but you don't need to have used GSWL first.)

 

The Linney key is only half finished? I've seen so many curricula abandoned over the decades. I don't like to start half finished things. I did look at it, but passed for NOW.

[momma2three]

Tara, that's interesting. I've been reading a bit about delayed math recently, and I have to say that I'm not totally convinced. So long as everything's done in a gentle, developmentally appropriate way, obviously, I think it's better to get them used to the basic language earlier rather than later.

 

Maybe a good comparison would be swimming? I think that kids aren't going to be able to have the large motor control and patience to perfect their strokes until they're a certain age. But I think that getting them used to the water, the pool rules, the basic methods of instruction, the games little kids learn at swim lessons, and so on will provide a foundation that will make "real" swimming easier when they are actually ready to learn.

 

I think that's why I like the Song School Latin for the first year or two. It seems really gentle and fun, and the idea is that they'll memorize some vocabulary. They may not have any context for that vocabulary, but then hopefully when they're a bit older and understanding the complicated grammar is more developmentally appropriate, it won't be a shock as if they've never been in the pool before.

 

Really, though, I just clicked on this thread from the New Threads list, and I thought that comment about certain Latin curricula which suck up many years without producing anything worth the time invested caught my eye. That would bother me, to say the least. So it's not so much that I'm worried about which curriculum I use to start, but I was thinking about further down the path.

[Hunter]

Last time I looked at the first form series it only had 2 levels, and I wasn't interested in an incomplete series. I worry a bit about the authors' expertise level, and since I had Henle, I thought, "What do I need First Form for?" I spend a lot of time LOOKING at MP materials and have bought a few over the decades, but I seldom stick with them. I can't put my finger on it, but...something always feels wannabee or intolerant about them, or...I don't know :-0 I get...annoyed :-0

 

I don't like how this sounds. Here on the East coast we have a little problem. We are intolerant of the intolerant :tongue_smilie: It's similar to the Amish who are proud of their humbleness :001_huh:

 

I can be a typical East coast snot, when it comes to certain curricula. In the middle of a HORRIBLE education, I had a REAL Latin teacher who dumbed down and slowed down out instruction, but taught us REAL Latin. And she gave me a base to begin my self instruction on.

 

For Greek I had to start my instruction from scratch and had to use some resources that others snub, to get STARTED. It's better to pick up back habits and do it "wrong" and even be subjected to intolerance and just about anything if it gets you STARTED. When it comes to Greek, my response is that "You have to know an awful lot about Greek to have bad habits!" Go bad Greek habits! :D

 

I can afford to be a bit of a Latin snob and a cheapskate when picking Latin curricula. I don't want to discourage anyone from using MP Latin, if it's working for THEM. Seriously, use what you are making progress with, and collect bad habits as souvenirs. :lol: And spend what you HAVE to. Just PERSONALLY I'm not using the MP products right now.

[Critterfixer]

I see that you're using Prima Latina and Latin Christiana? And you're happy with them? I'd prefer something secular, but my priority is that the program is interesting for the student, relatively simple for me (I know no Latin), and provides a really solid foundation that can be built on when they're older.

The boys seem to like it. We've only been at it for three weeks, so I don't feel we've been through enough of the program to comment on whether or not I'm happy with it. But then I don't mind the non-secular aspect of it, and the heavy memory work. Both boys love any opportunity to trot out their memory skills, and if they can scandalize the grandparents with a Latin prayer then the day is complete.:D

 

I really prefer the D'Ooge text for myself, though. I took one look at Henle this past week and decided I didn't want to feel that old so quickly. (I felt I needed a magnifying glass to read it, and when I complained I was told to go get bifocals. Not yet, thanks. I'll stick with D'Ooge for myself and save the bifocals for later.)

 

No offense to anyone who wears bifocals. Likely I need them, and it's a conceit on my part.

Edited September 4, 2012 by Critterfixer

Take this with a grain of salt, because I held off on Latin instruction until my dd was (is) in 5th grade because I wanted her to be reading fluently, writing and spelling well, and well-immersed in English grammar.

 

Imo, nothing you do in 1st or 2nd grade is going to have any effect on where you are in 9th grade.

 

Tara

 

I totally agree with the above, and it seems to play out in practice, when talking with others who have started Latin very early. What I think _is_ important in the early years is to learn a modern language, or at least the pronunciation of one. I think a window to immersively learning a modern foreign language closes by about 5th grade. So, we're listening to a lot of Spanish during these years, and waiting until the middle school years for Latin.

[MeaganS]

As far as early instruction goes, I will be heavily influenced in my approach by this awesome thread about teaching Latin to younger children without a curriculum.

[Amy Jo]

The Linney key is only half finished? I've seen so many curricula abandoned over the decades. I don't like to start half finished things. I did look at it, but passed for NOW.

 

He says he's just rough-drafted the whole answer key - but the lectures for the whole book are not complete. Sorry I can't be more helpful - computer issues galore tonight. :glare:

[Medieval Mom]

For Greek I had to start my instruction from scratch and had to use some resources that others snub, to get STARTED. It's better to pick up back habits and do it "wrong" and even be subjected to intolerance and just about anything if it gets you STARTED. When it comes to Greek, my response is that "You have to know an awful lot about Greek to have bad habits!" Go bad Greek habits! :D

 

I can afford to be a bit of a Latin snob and a cheapskate when picking Latin curricula. I don't want to discourage anyone from using MP Latin, if it's working for THEM. Seriously, use what you are making progress with, and collect bad habits as souvenirs. :lol: And spend what you HAVE to. Just PERSONALLY I'm not using the MP products right now.

 

:D

 

As you know from other threads, I've come to the end of my rope with MP FFL. I do know enough Latin (from college) to recognize the errors. (Yesterday, in Lesson 7, they have children memorizing the four prin. parts of do, dare... as "do, dare, dedi, datus" which ought to be "do, dare, dedi, datum". Now, if I hadn't had "do, dare, dedi, datum" memorized already, I would not have caught the error. Luckily, my Cassell's Latin dictionary on the shelf confirmed what I knew to be the true 4 prin. parts of "dare". )

 

I just don't encounter those types of errors in older books. In my frugal mind, if I'm going to spend big $$ for a new, modern, flashy program, it better have VERY FEW ERRORS. If not, why not go with an older text, or as in the awesome thread referenced above, no "program" at all?

 

(I guess I'm a snob about this. For this reason, I never buy the coffee-table-book-like knitting books that come out. They have beautiful, glossy pictures but no genius behind the construction. Far worse, they are rife with errors. I don't have patience for that, even though I'm an experienced knitter enough to recognize the errors at once. I'd rather design my own pattern, or use older books written by knitting masters who were more concerned about content and method than a flashy layout.)

 

So, I think I'll be spending the next few days wading through my old school Latin books for what I'd look for in a knitting book: a book written by a master who cared more about content, method, and results than about a flashy (or even easy) layout.

 

In the meantime, ds would probably be quite happy sitting down to read a bit of Latin. I've collected new and old readers that he'll contented read for an hour or so. He's tired of just translating one word sentences from FFL. ;)

Edited September 5, 2012 by Medieval Mom

[Hunter]

He says he's just rough-drafted the whole answer key - but the lectures for the whole book are not complete. Sorry I can't be more helpful - computer issues galore tonight. :glare:

 

Oh? I'll go look again. I missed that. Thanks!

[Hunter]

:D

 

As you know from other threads, I've come to the end of my rope with MP FFL. ..."do, dare, dedi, datus" which ought to be "do, dare, dedi, datum".

 

I just don't encounter those types of errors in older books. In my frugal mind, if I'm going to spend big $$ for a new, modern, flashy program, it better have VERY FEW ERRORS. If not, why not go with an older text, or as in the awesome thread referenced above, no "program" at all?

 

I haven't been keeping up with the Latin threads lately, so had no idea of your struggles with FFL. I'll have to go search some of them out :-)

 

Latin and Greek can be great for OCD when it's correct, but when there are mistakes it's just :scared:. I need books written by people with OCD, when possible.

[Hunter]

He says he's just rough-drafted the whole answer key - but the lectures for the whole book are not complete. Sorry I can't be more helpful - computer issues galore tonight. :glare:

 

I only see through lesson 48. :confused1:

[Medieval Mom]

I haven't been keeping up with the Latin threads lately, so had no idea of your struggles with FFL. I'll have to go search some of them out :-)

 

Latin and Greek can be great for OCD when it's correct, but when there are mistakes it's just :scared:. I need books written by people with OCD, when possible.

 

Oh, good. I was afraid that I'd rather overdone the point. :tongue_smilie:

 

I'd definitely like a Latin book written by people with OCD. :D

[Jayne J]

:D

 

As you know from other threads, I've come to the end of my rope with MP FFL. I do know enough Latin (from college) to recognize the errors. (Yesterday, in Lesson 7, they have children memorizing the four prin. parts of do, dare... as "do, dare, dedi, datus" which ought to be "do, dare, dedi, datum". Now, if I hadn't had "do, dare, dedi, datum" memorized already, I would not have caught the error. Luckily, my Cassell's Latin dictionary on the shelf confirmed what I knew to be the true 4 prin. parts of "dare". )

 

 

This mistake bothered me enough to write to MP and ask. I don't have any Latin but what I am learning with my ds, so I can't tell if there are errors in any book we choose. I picked MP because it seemed solid, but teachable for me. The reply I received was:

 

 

Different dictionaries and Latin programs have different conventions for writing the fourth principal part with an -um or an -us. Neither one is wrong. I would go with the Latin program you are using, in this case FFL. It will keep things simpler when memorizing vocabulary from that program.

Michael

Memoria Press

 

Do you know enough Latin to confirm or deny this? I have found various sources online that use the -um, and others that use -us, but I am too much a novice to understand why.

Do you know enough Latin to confirm or deny this? I have found various sources online that use the -um, and others that use -us, but I am too much a novice to understand why.

 

It isn't a mistake. There is no consensus on what the fourth principal part of Latin verbs should be. The -um form is the -m (or I) supine, which is a very rarely used verbal. The -us form is the perfect passive participle, which is much more commonly used. These two forms are syntactically very close -- you can always form one from the other just by swapping the m for the s. That means, for the purpose the principle parts are needed for, they are functionally identical. Some dictionaries list the 4th part as the participle, because you'll use it a lot more than the supine. The problem with this is that not all verbs have passive forms -- e.g. some are intransitive, and those don't have passive participles. Some dictionaries which use the participial form then switch to the future active participle for the 4th part of intransitive verbs.

[Hunter]

Oh, good. I was afraid that I'd rather overdone the point. :tongue_smilie:

 

I'd definitely like a Latin book written by people with OCD. :D

 

It really is okay not to trust a certain author. Sometimes we can feel an author's worldview and personality, and just NOT click with it. It's okay to trust your gut. Trusting my gut has led me wrong a few times, but the VAST majority of times it has led me correctly. Times I didn't trust myself got me in far more trouble than trusting myself.

 

It's funny because I love Machen 1st edition [Greek]. I've heard there are mistakes, but I'm not sure whether there are or not, and keep using it anyway. I'm told Koine is "bad habits". I keep learning it anyway. I trust the author to get ME where I need to go.

 

MP I just don't have trust in. It doesn't mean they aren't worthy of trust. It just means I PERSONALLY don't click with them enough to trust them to lead ME where I need to go.

 

I'll bet others feel about MP, like I do about Machen and THEY should use it! MP feels all wrong and scary to me though. And then there is the price tag. I'll pay big bucks when I trust, but not when I don't.

 

Those of us with OCD know our own kind when we meet them in a book :lol:

 

It isn't a mistake. There is no consensus on what the fourth principal part of Latin verbs should be. The -um form is the -m (or I) supine, which is a very rarely used verbal. The -us form is the perfect passive participle, which is much more commonly used. These two forms are syntactically very close -- you can always form one from the other just by swapping the m for the s. That means, for the purpose the principle parts are needed for, they are functionally identical. Some dictionaries list the 4th part as the participle, because you'll use it a lot more than the supine. The problem with this is that not all verbs have passive forms -- e.g. some are intransitive, and those don't have passive participles. Some dictionaries which use the participial form then switch to the future active participle for the 4th part of intransitive verbs.

 

Thanks SO much for explaining this!!! I almost understand it :lol:

Edited September 5, 2012 by Hunter

[Jayne J]

:iagree:

 

Thanks! Now I'll go scratch my head for a bit...

[justamouse]

Hunter, you are forever lighting a fire under my posterior. :grouphug:

 

I have Minimus. I have MP. I have Henle. (what, what?) :D

 

I'll have to blow the dust off Henle.

[Medieval Mom]

It isn't a mistake. There is no consensus on what the fourth principal part of Latin verbs should be. The -um form is the -m (or I) supine, which is a very rarely used verbal. The -us form is the perfect passive participle, which is much more commonly used. These two forms are syntactically very close -- you can always form one from the other just by swapping the m for the s. That means, for the purpose the principle parts are needed for, they are functionally identical. Some dictionaries list the 4th part as the participle, because you'll use it a lot more than the supine. The problem with this is that not all verbs have passive forms -- e.g. some are intransitive, and those don't have passive participles. Some dictionaries which use the participial form then switch to the future active participle for the 4th part of intransitive verbs.

 

Oh sheesh! I had forgotten all about this, if, indeed, I ever knew it. :blush:

 

Thanks for the clarification. :)

[Hunter]

I'm adoring the D'ooge audio, but Henle is SO much easier to start with. I really like that these 2 books overlap in limited vocabulary geared towards Caesar. I'm glad I don't need to immediately purchase and wait for shipping for Henle, to get an immediate Caesar prep fix. And I'm learning a lot of English pronunciation as well as Latin. :lol:

 

If I stick with the D'oogle, I'll repurchase Henle AGAIN :lol: I've owned MANY copies over the years. I always end out back with Henle and Machen.

 

I would have been in heaven with the free vintage Latin Without Tears, when I was teaching my little guy with homemade sentences from the library copy of Latin Made Simple. Boy, do I wish I could mail myself that book, back in time.

[Jayne J]

So, for those of you using vintage resources, especially readers or immersion style resources, can you tell me how you use them? Do you do vocab before reading a story? Do you just muddle through each sentence with a dictionary? I really want to add an immersion angle to our studies, but being just a lesson ahead of ds, I can't explain words we haven't learned together, and certainly can't help with the more complex issues of declensions or conjugations/tenses beyond the present system, the first two conjugations, and the first two declensions. I am attempting to study ahead, but I am not far enough ahead yet. I've loaded and looked at Cornelia, and another primer, and the first sentences had me guessing. So what would a day in your Latin class be like?

Edited September 5, 2012 by urpedonmommy

[Hunter]

When I use immersion, I use it WAY behind the drill and kill. I only use it as review. I don't TEACH with immersion.

[Medieval Mom]

I'm adoring the D'ooge audio, but Henle is SO much easier to start with. I really like that these 2 books overlap in limited vocabulary geared towards Caesar. I'm glad I don't need to immediately purchase and wait for shipping for Henle, to get an immediate Caesar prep fix. And I'm learning a lot of English pronunciation as well as Latin. :lol:

 

If I stick with the D'oogle, I'll repurchase Henle AGAIN :lol: I've owned MANY copies over the years. I always end out back with Henle and Machen.

 

I would have been in heaven with the free vintage Latin Without Tears, when I was teaching my little guy with homemade sentences from the library copy of Latin Made Simple. Boy, do I wish I could mail myself that book, back in time.

 

Oh no! Remember this thread, Hunter? :willy_nilly:

 

I've been (re)considering my original plan of Latin Without Tears all day long. Maybe I should just give it a shot. After all, it's only 4th grade, right? I can always choose something else next year. Latin Without Tears seems to be the perfect extension for our Latin study after GSWL.

 

Sigh.

[Hunter]

Oh no! Remember this thread, Hunter? :willy_nilly:

 

I've been (re)considering my original plan of Latin Without Tears all day long. Maybe I should just give it a shot. After all, it's only 4th grade, right? I can always choose something else next year. Latin Without Tears seems to be the perfect extension for our Latin study after GSWL.

 

Sigh.

 

Well...I've noticed we are both attracted to some similar curricula lately. LWT looks a bit like How to Tutor. How are you doing with the 2 letter spelling words with your little guy? I forget the name of that vintage speller you linked me to, that was like HTT. Are you looking to do something similar with Latin, because that teaching style works for you?

 

No matter what curricula you use, what are your goals? Are you looking at a narrow or wide vocabulary? With my little guy I wanted a large vocabulary for 1st declension ONLY, so he could PLAY with it. Draw pictures. Write little stories. That was his 4th grade year. I still remember his wolf and ghost story hanging on the fridge :crying: I wouldn't do that differently. 1st declension and present tense were enough. I wanted him to understand how inflection worked.

 

I think I would have stopped using LWT in 5th grade and started serious Caesar prep. By 2nd declension I would have wanted to severely narrow the vocab and start tackling the declensions and conjugations, NOW that he understood how inflection worked and had fallen in love with the language. We started Henle in the 2nd half of 5th grade, when I was able to afford it. I remember I had it mailed to my neighbor's house so my husband wouldn't get mad at me. I had to listen to a sermon from her first on submission :tongue_smilie:, but she let me do it.

 

Sometimes I have hopped curricula, but the student was studying the same exact thing, just with a different book, or only "I" was seeing a different book. Some of these Latin curricula are covering the same topics, but are just written in a different style, or even just formatted differently. That isn't the same as switching from Weaver to My Father's World to Abeka to CLE.

 

If you have a set of goals to cover this year, and switch ten times from one free book to another, it won't matter, as long as you cover the topics you planned to.

[Medieval Mom]

Well...I've noticed we are both attracted to some similar curricula lately. LWT looks a bit like How to Tutor. How are you doing with the 2 letter spelling words with your little guy? I forget the name of that vintage speller you linked me to, that was like HTT. Are you looking to do something similar with Latin, because that teaching style works for you?

 

No matter what curricula you use, what are your goals? Are you looking at a narrow or wide vocabulary? With my little guy I wanted a large vocabulary for 1st declension ONLY, so he could PLAY with it. Draw pictures. Write little stories. That was his 4th grade year. I still remember his wolf and ghost story hanging on the fridge :crying: I wouldn't do that differently. 1st declension and present tense were enough. I wanted him to understand how inflection worked.

 

I think I would have stopped using LWT in 5th grade and started serious Caesar prep. By 2nd declension I would have wanted to severely narrow the vocab and start tackling the declensions and conjugations, NOW that he understood how inflection worked and had fallen in love with the language. We started Henle in the 2nd half of 5th grade, when I was able to afford it. I remember I had it mailed to my neighbor's house so my husband wouldn't get mad at me. I had to listen to a sermon from her first on submission :tongue_smilie:, but she let me do it.

 

Sometimes I have hopped curricula, but the student was studying the same exact thing, just with a different book, or only "I" was seeing a different book. Some of these Latin curricula are covering the same topics, but are just written in a different style, or even just formatted differently. That isn't the same as switching from Weaver to My Father's World to Abeka to CLE.

 

If you have a set of goals to cover this year, and switch ten times from one free book to another, it won't matter, as long as you cover the topics you planned to.

 

 

Yep. I thought about it today and decided that that's the direction we want to go in -- exactly-- for 4th and 5th. I want vocabulary-building in 4th (because he's INTERESTED; he's been reading Usborne beginner books in Latin and such just for the fun vocab. on his own time). (He's got enough Latin grammar down with GSWL to make fun sentences.) Then I want to hit Caesar prep. in 5th (mostly likely with Henle, which just arrived).

 

So, you hit the nail on the head. Wide vocab./narrow grammar in 4th followed by narrow vocab./serious grammar in 5th.

 

****

 

That vintage speller I linked you to was The North American Spelling Book. Let's see if I can find it. Oh, here.

So far, ds has fairly well grasped the two letter combos. of consonant-long vowel. He's having great fun pointing out words like be, so, we, he, etc. in our picture books. :) He's also picked up various and sundry words I've never taught, but that's a different story. ;)

 

Yes, direct, thorough, books of excellent content with little to no scripting work best for me. (McGuffey's, old spellers, old grammars, old arithmetic, old ... anything.) About as scripted as I can handle is R&S English and Arithmetic. :D

[crazyforlatin]

Oh no! Remember this thread, Hunter? :willy_nilly:

 

I've been (re)considering my original plan of Latin Without Tears all day long. Maybe I should just give it a shot. After all, it's only 4th grade, right? I can always choose something else next year. Latin Without Tears seems to be the perfect extension for our Latin study after GSWL.

 

Sigh.

 

I remember that thread. :D

 

What I like about LWT is the huge font. It actually works well after GSWL and even along Henle.

 

I'm an avid Henle fan. Every once in awhile I look at other modern Latin curricula, but an old-fashioned Latin textbook is what works best for us. I looked through Gunnison recently (really looked through as opposed to a cursory glance last year), and even though the organization is not the way I like to teach Latin, but it's still a great Latin book. So I'll incorporate some of it in our studies.

 

I did splurge on LNM though, without the answer key. It's a mix between Henle and a Latin reader.

[Hunter]

Yep. I thought about it today and decided that that's the direction we want to go in -- exactly-- for 4th and 5th. I want vocabulary-building in 4th (because he's INTERESTED; he's been reading Usborne beginner books in Latin and such just for the fun vocab. on his own time). (He's got enough Latin grammar down with GSWL to make fun sentences.) Then I want to hit Caesar prep. in 5th (mostly likely with Henle, which just arrived).

 

So, you hit the nail on the head. Wide vocab./narrow grammar in 4th followed by narrow vocab./serious grammar in 5th.

 

****

 

That vintage speller I linked you to was The North American Spelling Book. Let's see if I can find it. Oh, here.

So far, ds has fairly well grasped the two letter combos. of consonant-long vowel. He's having great fun pointing out words like be, so, we, he, etc. in our picture books. :) He's also picked up various and sundry words I've never taught, but that's a different story. ;)

 

Yes, direct, thorough, books of excellent content with little to no scripting work best for me. (McGuffey's, old spellers, old grammars, old arithmetic, old ... anything.) About as scripted as I can handle is R&S English and Arithmetic. :D

 

Oh good you already have Henle, so I don't need to worry about enabling you :-) I think YOU won't find Henle QUITE oldschool and OCD enough. :lol: It's just a tad adapted to the mid century. It's not quite as rigidly formatted and sparse at the turn of the century texts. You might find it too wordy. I'm getting to the point now, of wanting to copy and then annote some texts, to get them just like I want to present them to students.

 

But Henle is so much easier to start than D'Oogle, if someone hasn't already done some Latin. And as I said, I think they will be very easy to combine.

 

It's too funny that you also have been doing the "Wide vocab./narrow grammar in 4th followed by narrow vocab./serious grammar in 5th." :lol: Can you imagine someone writing a text doing that? It would be the world's least bought book, I think. But...it worked for US and I can't imagine doing it any other way.

[Hunter]

I remember that thread. :D

 

What I like about LWT is the huge font. It actually works well after GSWL and even along Henle.

 

I'm an avid Henle fan. Every once in awhile I look at other modern Latin curricula, but an old-fashioned Latin textbook is what works best for us. I looked through Gunnison recently (really looked through as opposed to a cursory glance last year), and even though the organization is not the way I like to teach Latin, but it's still a great Latin book. So I'll incorporate some of it in our studies.

 

I did splurge on LNM though, without the answer key. It's a mix between Henle and a Latin reader.

 

LNM? I'm getting lost in all the intitials.

 

I like old cheap copies of Ecce Romani for silent READING practice. Someone just shoot me if I ever had to TEACH from it though. I like to collect cheap used student texts, the more the better, for READING. I'm not too picky. No one tries to teach English with one book. I don't try and teach a foreign language with just one book. I like ONE solid GRAMMAR text for the spine, just like I like one solid math text for my spine, but supplementing is good, when it doesn't distract from the spine text.