No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 September 2009
The demands on a modern Latin course are formidable indeed: it must present all the requisite grammatical and syntactical material intelligibly and palatably to learners unfamiliar with the structure of even their native language, whet their appetite for the riches of Latin literature in the original, and allow them to graduate to it as quickly and painlessly as possible. University students, reared on nonlinguistic courses in ‘Classical Civilization’ (uel sim.), bulk large among today's consumers, and as one who has often in recent years had to teach them the Latin language, I wholeheartedly welcomed the appearance in 1986 of Reading Latin (hereafter RL), which expressly sets out to meet the aforementioned needs. Some brief reviews appeared shortly after its publication, but as the authors envisage the course ideally being spread over two academic years (Text p. v), now is perhaps the time for one who has so used it in a university department to appraise it again in the light of experience. Does it work? For some or for all? What are its strengths and weaknesses? How'could it be improved? In offering the following observations and suggestions, I am only too well aware of how easy it is to criticize such a project, and how hard to do better.
2. See e.g. Hill, D. E., G & R 34 (1987), 83–84Google Scholar.
3. See further Leumann, M. and Hofmann, J. B., Lateinische Grammatik: Laut- und Formenlehre (Munich, 1928), p. 278Google Scholar.
4. See Woodcock, E. C., A New Latin Syntax (London, 1959), pp. 85–86, 129–30Google Scholar.
5. See Kühner, R. and Stegmann, C., Ausführliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache 4, rev. by Thierfelder, A. (Hannover, 1962), Vol. II. (ii), pp. 213–4Google Scholar.
6. The meaning of the vocative, as well as its form, has been known to mystify, as witness Winston Churchill's description of his first encounter with the declension of mensa in My Early Life:
‘Mensa, o table, is the vocative case,’ [said the master’
‘But why o table?’ I persisted in genuine curiosity.
‘O table, – you would use that in addressing a table, in invoking a table.’ And then seeing that he was not carrying me with him, ‘You would use it in speaking to a table.’
‘But I never do,’ I blurted out in honest amazement.
‘If you are impertinent, you will be punished, and punished, let me tell you, very severely,’ was his conclusive rejoinder.
7. The discussion of Woodcock, (op. cit., pp. 157ff.Google Scholar) is in comparison a model of lucidity.
8. See further Woodcock, , op. cit., p. 121Google Scholar.
9. I am grateful to all my students, intra- and extra-mural, who have freely expressed their opinions and patiently answered my questions about RL.