Why American place names in the Latin course?
I don't know about anybody else, but I find the inclusion of American place names in the Latin course baffling and irritating. First- I'm interested in learning a classical language, I can't see the relevance of American place names in that context. Second, they are annoying to type. Novum Eboracum? Philadelphia?- just gratuitous. If you have to go down this path - what's wrong with Utah or Iowa? Otherwise - great fun. Paul
Thanks for that info I enjoyed it. And likewise Eboracum is the Roman name for York when they occupied Britain. Although they were repeated quite a bit - in fine Duo tradition - and likewise used creatively, I don’t remember any place names that wereentirely without some classical Roman connection.
So we should use Latin American place names next time. Gotcha. ;)
(I'm joking, btw. ;)
In all seriousness, you must remember that the course is in Beta, and the current tree is a bonsai. This means that the course is incomplete (I would be far more surprised if they didn't add other place names as well eventually). And seriously - if a dead language can be given words like autocinetum, saccharum, althaea, etc. and no one bats an eye, well, it can also gain new place names. And that means they can easily be used in a course teaching the language.
(Except for New York. Eboracum being the original Latin name for what is now York makes Novum Eboracum a pretty obvious name for New York. And for the record, both a Boston and a Philadelphia exist in the UK.)
Volgav vitsenanieff nivya kevach varatsach.
It's my comment marker, written in one of my conlangs, which means "Two rivers do not flow the same direction." Since Duolingo offers no option to search by username, and my Followed list is already super long, I need a way to find my comments using something the Duo search can search for. As you can imagine, conlangs work beautifully for such purposes. ;)
Thanks for asking!
Volgav vitsenanieff nivya kevach varatsach.
You mention the word relevance, which I agree it's something important. On Duolingo I think relevance should be seen in relation to usefulness. And that is something which is quite lacking, not only in the Latin but in other language courses also. As funny as it is to see a sentence talking about a drunk violent parrot for the 20th time, I for one would welcome more common conversational phrases, especially in the beginning lessons.
But if your main goal of learning Latin is to be able to read classics then I would highly recommend LLPSI which is actually built up in a way leading to exactly that. It's also one best (if not the best) language courses I've come across, for any language.
As a (Latin Rite) Catholic, I pray and sing in Latin regularly. To me it is a living language, so the names of modern cities are helpful.
Furthermore, I routinely handle church catalogues where the names of American cities are latinized. So it is profoundly helpful to see these cities used.
It also helps one understand the Latin in various college insignia, such as my alma mater in Vigornii, Massachusetts.
The name "Novum Eboracum" actually appears in the seal of New York City, so that's official. As for the modern use, Latin is still the official language of the Vatican, so while you'd mostly need it for old texts, there are also people who still use it to speak of and about the modern world.
They might as well add Latin mottos of states, cities, and institutions into the course.
The whole discussion here boils down to "Esse quam videri" (To be, rather than to seem, North Carolina's motto). So yes, it might be interesting to use some of them in the course, to have a good laugh about the discrepancy between having a motto and what is done with it, and also from a philosophical point of view.
Sic semper tyrannis! ;-)
I read that question in the sense of "why stop at American?". As a Canadian, I would not mind seeing Edmontonia or Marianopolis. I guessed at Edmontonia because it must be as good as Bostonia, but Marianopolis is the Latin for Montreal.
There are so many cities known to the Romans that still exist (Athens, Alexandria, London, etc.); why not use them instead of names like New York which not only is in the Americas (a place they did know of) but also is a city that didn't exist in ancient times. I think that it's fine to refer to modern cities, but there are many cities that would make good examples that are actually attested in ancient texts.
I am also highly frustrated by the focus on American places in the course, but apparently not for the same reasons as most people studying Latin. My concern is not that the Romans never knew that the Americas even existed; I simply do not find these names useful. I want to learn Latin as a living language, so I'd prefer to be able to say that I've lost all my pens before learning to recite the names of places that have no relevance to me. I would like to point out that this is not just because I am not American: I would be similarly annoyed by having to learn the Latin names of my own country's states and cities.
I think the course would be much more enjoyable if the places taught had greater global significance - for example, Jerusalem (sacred to Jews and Muslims), Sarajevo (where Princip pulled the trigger that began World War I), China (where so much of our stuff is made), and fictional places such as Mordor, Araluen, Narnia, and Kirrin Island - the beauty of fictional people and places is that they are cherished wherever the story is read, not just in the country of their origin.
bas sake buxbeze sabeDev
I can see people's point about teaching Latin that is modern and relevant as a "living language", but I also believe that languages encode many aspects of culture simply because people of a certain culture speak the language. So, the ways things are expressed and what is most often said should give us some 'feeling' of the Roman world. And I don't know, focusing too much on the modern world, we might miss out on getting to know part of the Roman world and lifestyle through the language. So, while I do think referring to modern things and places is necessary, I would also love to see some places, objects, people and concepts that were relevant to the Romans. It's not like they haven't done this, there were plenty of references to Rome, Greece and Sparta, but I do hope they keep a healthy balance of the two.
I think it would have been more appropriate to speak of towns that existed while Latin was fluently spoken, such as Alexandria in Egypt, or Lugdunum (Lyon, in France). And I don't even speak of Italian towns.
But I remember that this course was made by volunteers. So, my com is just a suggestion, not a complain.
Ancient Rome no longer exists. Nor do Romans. Nor does Latin as the Romans spoke it. This course is, at best, an approximation of a language that only the Catholic church tries to keep alive. It's fun to study and informative, but to pretend that there's anything authentic or contextual is ridiculous. So many place names around the world have been informed by Latin. Embrace them.
I'll concede the point that there is little point being precious about the language, however, my personal preference, when I play make-believe, is to enter as "authentically" as I can into the world I'm imagining, Ancient Rome in this case. That's enough reason, as far as I'm concerned to leave contemporary terms and concepts out of a Latin course. I'm not asking anyone to jump on board with that, its just my preference.
Now, while I see your point as far as allowing that many people "embrace" whatever is thrown at them, I can't see any justification for having to suffer the annoyance of having to type long American place names rather than something more easily manageable. It's needless.
You assume other place name are more manageable. Why? More so than Boston? Eboracum was a Latin place name. Yep. That's easy. Londinium, Venta Belgarum. Ratae Corieltauvorum - All classical Latin Names for Places in Britain. The others are just as friendly if not more so. Yes. They would be much easier. Why don't you make a list of all these easy wonderful classical Latin place names and send them to the people who creating this course, just to give them a little education?
There certainly are a lot of sentences relating to America and Americans, for a course on a language whose speakers were entirely unaware of the existence of the Americas.
And while [Novum] Eboracum and Philadelphia and reasonable enough as Eboracum and Philadelphia were place names used in Classical Latin, very very many sentences (including mentioning those, e.g. "Philadelphia is an American city", etc) refer specifically to America and Americans by name (including "so-and-so is American", etc); far more than refer to Europe and Europeans, which is odd since from the perspective of a speaker of Classical Latin, Europe was literally their known world, with honourable mentions to the nearer parts of Asia and Africa.
If the course is going to make so many references to Americans, it might as well refer to Klingons with equal validity. America was just as well-known to them as Qo'noS, after all!
May I ask what other sentences were relating to America? I have done the Latin lessons to golden owl (min level 1 on all lessons) and I didn't notice any except the two city names already mentioned.
If there are more sentences relating to America than to Europe then I agree it's very unbalanced.
I don't remember many of the exact sentences now, but they were very plentiful in some early skills, within the first five or so. Perhaps you tested out some of the early skills?
There were certainly a lot of references to America and Americans, and very few to people and places that would be relevant in the context of Classical Latin.
There are quite a few mentions of NY, Philadelphia and Boston in some lessons, as well as a number of sentences about cities and states in America.
While I have no problem with the modern approach, I do agree that typing "novi eboraci" and "philadelphiae" for the thirtieth time is getting a bit tedious. But I'm sure we'll be getting plenty of other places in the future :)
Eboracum and Philadelphia were names of towns that existed in Roman times and were mentioned in classical texts, and that's not to mention medieval and more recent texts--even Bostonia is probably to be found in Latin from a couple of centuries back, and here's a very nice reference to Philadelphia in modern Latin, and another, with the added bonus of reading "nummus," another word taught in the course :) The American city names work perfectly well as Latin words, a few first declension, one second. If brevity is your goal, be glad you were spared Pennsylvania, where Duolingo is located!
The course was developed in the U.S., and those words are as fine to practice with as any others, especially as they give practice in referring to town names, which are a bit difficult in Latin. Although, I'll grant you that it's be nice to see some mention of Iowa.
Within the past year I saw someone's college degree (in law, perhaps) that was written entirely in Latin. Because the college was located in New York City, the diploma referred to the city as Novum Eboracum. So there is a modern American application for learning the Latin names of US cities. (I myself live in a town called New Iberia, but for a time in the 1800s it was known as "Nova Iberia" -- "Iberia" already being Latin (i.e., for the name of the European peninsula where Spain and Portugal are now located) and "Nova" being the feminine form of the Latin for "New".)
I agree with paul55776
Furthermore, I do not know of any modern language that changes the names of big-cities-that-are-not-ancient. "Nova York" in Spanish of Italian? "Nieuw York" in Dutch? Not really... Londra/Londres/Londen, Parigi/París/Parijs - yes.
And no, Paris in the state of Texas, is not Parigi in Italian; Brooklyn is not translated to Breukelen in Dutch (although its original name was Breukelen); and Los Angeles is not referred to as "The Angels" in English newspapers.
Also, all the courses here discourage students to translate Juan, Jean, Jan, Johann, Giò to John. So why force people to translate a name of a city. The existence of York in Roman times has nothing to do with it.
It's OK to teach Novum Eboracum as a fun fact, as long as the modern version, New York is considered to be THE translation in the exercises.
PS To end on a lighter note: Discussions like these would be a lot more interesting if we had the vocabulary to have them in Latin, with the occasional use of (classical) Greek to show off, like the Romans did. χαίρετε!