"I study Latin literature."
Translation:Ego litteris Latinis studeo.
I'm using a couple of sets of Latin workbooks/grammars in addition to the Latin here. Because it's a beta version--and because they seem to want to teach classical Latin simply by immersion--I find the other works very helpful as supplements.
And, of course, there is Rae herself, who somehow answers the trickiest questions. :heart:
As far as I can tell, yes, but I'm hardly an authority on the subject.
Duolingo really isn't rigorous enough to make me sure about much. Nothing against the course contributors; I know that it is a LOT of work to put a module together. It hasn't been out for long and I assume the tree will grow over time, but right now the Esperanto module is more comprehensive than the Latin. I recently finished the Latin module (my first completion!) and I can see that at the moment it's just a very casual, very basic introduction to Latin. There are a lot of noun cases it barely scratches the surface on, and we've only seen the tip of the verb iceberg. I get my best information from the actual Latin instructors who comment in these fora and work from that. I know there are some good YouTube channels, but I can only get so much from mini-lectures (no matter how well they explain a point) without a way to practice it. My husband used to have an old Latin textbook somewhere, but we're not sure if it's misplaced or long-ago sold to a second-hand book shop because we needed the money.
Thank you, Rae, that's what I figured.
I bought a bunch of different Latin texts, all available for Kindle at Amazon. The most comprehensive seems to be Wheeler's, which looks like a full year's college course. It's expensive in hardback or paperback, but under $20 on Kindle.
But after watching a YouTube video on immersive learning (a video I found thanks to some link you posted in one of these discussions, so thank you), I decided to try Familia Romana. Even the copyright page is in Latin! No English whatsoever.
I just finished Chapter 5 and so far I am really enjoying it. (The text doesn't skirt declensions, for example, it just finds ways to describe them with diagrams, pictures and Latin.) I find myself reading the chapter literature in Latin without translating it into English in my head.
Of course, the readings are elementary level and remind me of the books I read about Alice, Jerry and Jip in first grade. But even so I find it more pleasurable to read about Iulius and Aeminia and their tres liberi than banging my head against something trying to memorize declension endings.
BTW, Rae, here's something that wonders me. How did the Romans get by with the prepositions ab and ad having opposite meanings? It seems to me there must have been ample misunderstandings, given how close the sound of b and d were and are!
Or perhaps this is just proof of how much language we understand from context.
For how they got ab and ad, we would need to see the language that Latin evolved from, but we don't know that much about Latino-Faliscan or Italic, and the re-construction of Proto-Indo-European is merely our best guess based on available data and techniques.
But that issue is not unique to Latin. How often do you have to ask someone "Did you say fifty or fifteen?" "Did you say you can or you can't?"
Absolutely. No one knows better than I, since I am and have always been a "fast talker" and apt to confuse listeners.
Sometimes even slowing down doesn't help. The other day I was telling someone how pleased I was to hear the word "quotidian" and finally know exactly what it meant and where it came from. "Quotidie, Latin for 'daily'", I said. I had to repeat "daily" four times and very slowly, because without any context, the listener just couldn't make sense of the sounds. (I was talking to my doctor, so not an uneducated listener.) LOL
I needed to read this thread because I was not getting any sense whatsoever why 'litteris Latinis' was used in one sentence, 'litteras Latinas' in another, and even 'linguae Latinae' in another. I still do not understand why the direct object forms are not always used, but at least I know that the problem is not my memory. I cannot find a good explanation of the dative case: the explanations are all soup.
Sure, in the singular. We need the plural.