so called "Old Literature"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

I would think that I think of Latin as most non-native speakers of Latin would have. Native speakers sometimes have different ideas about a language.Unless you have some idea of what language is, then it , Latin, is just another language. I suppose that my greater knowledge of science would make me different from someone who lived in Rome under the kings, but they were humans, and I am a human, so we have a lot in common.

---

What did make you to start writing in Latin? I had a similar idea with old-polish but I have never managed to do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hannah_arendt

How often do you come back to reading old literature? Do you have your favourite works? Do you think that contemporary reader can reach a full understanding of the main ideas?

---

Only just recently joined this most interesting of sites and what a fabulous and intriguing question to ask.

Just as an immediate gut reaction, I think so but I don't have the time and place of their then and now, yet feel the really great works deal with the themes and ideas and moral concerns common to us all. I need to think about it more.

I'll come back to you on this, if you don't mind, and I notice you've recently widened it to include languages. Greatly interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hannah_arendt

What did make you to start writing in Latin? I had a similar idea with old-polish but I have never managed to do it.

---

I, personally, do not use Latin except in small quantities. It is a perfectly good language, except that it is a bit out of date. Moderns languages are more streamlined with fewer verb forms and few, if any, noun forms. And the vocabulary is not as large as is necessary. English is much easier, and it has a huge vocabulary. But Latin is useful in ENglish; how else can one determin what the correct plural of "virus" is? The best plural is "viruses".

Modern languages are streamlined in a different way to old ones, which we find more normal. The idea (in my opinion) of old languages was that you could say a word which would include everything: the function in the sentence (case), number, gender, passive/active, aspect (past, present or future), where/when/etc. (with integrated prepositions), etc. Humans are lazy and have now got different words for everything. Mainly Germanic languages have this tendency. Romance languages such as French still have their different verb endings to determine aspect, while they do use auxiliary verbs to express certain of these aspects. The Russians still have two different verbs for active and passive.

All languages have their own merits of course, that's why poetry is so difficult to translate (it's either shape or contents, only very very rarely both), but you could probably express much much more in three Latin words than in three German ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

I, personally, do not use Latin except in small quantities. It is a perfectly good language, except that it is a bit out of date. Moderns languages are more streamlined with fewer verb forms and few, if any, noun forms. And the vocabulary is not as large as is necessary. English is much easier, and it has a huge vocabulary. But Latin is useful in ENglish; how else can one determin what the correct plural of "virus" is? The best plural is "viruses".

---

I`ve learnt Latin at university for about 3 years. Then, when I was writing my M.A, I started to learn Greek but up to now I can read only. Maybe one day I`ll come back to it.
In comparison to Polish, English seems to be easier. However english vocabulary is much larger. According to Humboldt fo example, Polish doesn`t have future tenses (because of morphological point of view).

Latin gave many possibilities but seems to be too difficult to learn for many people. We all want to do everything quickle and without effort.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kiki1982

Modern languages are streamlined in a different way to old ones, which we find more normal. The idea (in my opinion) of old languages was that you could say a word which would include everything: the function in the sentence (case), number, gender, passive/active, aspect (past, present or future), where/when/etc. (with integrated prepositions), etc. Humans are lazy and have now got different words for everything. Mainly Germanic languages have this tendency. Romance languages such as French still have their different verb endings to determine aspect, while they do use auxiliary verbs to express certain of these aspects. The Russians still have two different verbs for active and passive.

All languages have their own merits of course, that's why poetry is so difficult to translate (it's either shape or contents, only very very rarely both), but you could probably express much much more in three Latin words than in three German ones.

---

Many contemporary language still have: aspect, cases etc. For example German has 4 cases and gives many possibilities of creating new words. In Polish, there is aspect whereas in English we use just the adequate tense.

Old languages (I don`t like the word 'dead') gave more opportunities to express yourself very briefly. Almost everything we have now, we have inherited. There is no doubt that our culture is creating new things all the time but we couldn`t do without Plato or Aristotle. Sometimes it seems to me that we are becoming more and more superficial and lazy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hannah_arendt

I`ve learnt Latin at university for about 3 years. Then, when I was writing my M.A, I started to learn Greek but up to now I can read only. Maybe one day I`ll come back to it.
In comparison to Polish, English seems to be easier. However english vocabulary is much larger. According to Humboldt fo example, Polish doesn`t have future tenses (because of morphological point of view).

Latin gave many possibilities but seems to be too difficult to learn for many people. We all want to do everything quickle and without effort.

---

I agree that Latin has lots of possibilities, but there are different forms for too many different things, while in English the same auxiliary word or ending would fit most places. I suspect that in ancient times few people even knew that some of the forms existed in the same way that some people now just speak in the present tense indicative.

One of the most convenient things about English is the ease with which one can add words. I have seen estimates that there are more than 650,000 words in English, but that number is debatable, and it is almost impossible to determine how many words there are in any language.

When it comes to Polish, many people uses cases with mistakes. It is more and more often now. English is easier. You can hear/ read it almost everywhere. I would say that it is a Latin of our times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hannah_arendt

When it comes to Polish, many people uses cases with mistakes. It is more and more often now. English is easier. You can hear/ read it almost everywhere. I would say that it is a Latin of our times.

---

And like Latin in Ancient times most people who use it do not know it well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

And like Latin in Ancient times most people who use it do not know it weell.

---

There is in Poland a year of the Polish with events promoting polish language. However, if people doesn`t read it won`t change anything in my opinion. The language is becoming more and more simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

And like Latin in Ancient times most people who use it do not know it weell.

---

Since it takes a lot of effort to master a foreign language, it's unavoidable that people make mistakes. And many language learners either honestly believe that learning all the rules of grammar is beyond their grasp or think that it's too much of a hassle, hence it's sufficient for them if their command of a language is enough to communicate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aylinn

Since it takes a lot of effort to master a foreign language, it's unavoidable that people make mistakes. And many language learners either honestly believe that learning all the rules of grammar is beyond their grasp or think that it's too much of a hassle, hence it's sufficient for them if their command of a language is enough to communicate.

---

Making mistakes in the case of non-natives is something natural. I have been learning English since I was a child and I am not satisfied with my level. I am conscious that I make mistakes and probably I won`t ever speak as a native. However, recently I have noticed that many people next to me, native-Poles, commits terrible, I would say "stupid" mistakes speaking Polish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aylinn

Since it takes a lot of effort to master a foreign language, it's unavoidable that people make mistakes. And many language learners either honestly believe that learning all the rules of grammar is beyond their grasp or think that it's too much of a hassle, hence it's sufficient for them if their command of a language is enough to communicate.

---

It takes a lot of effort to master a language, even if it is your first language. There are many native speakers of English who seem to think that learning all of the rules is beyond the. Or maybe they are not aware of all of the rules, and I don't mean nit-picking things like comma placement, but major matters like the subjunctive voice and all of the varieties of the past tense. I have even known people who only used the present tense, regardless of when something happened.

I have also known non-native speakers who try to apply rules from another language into English. There is another board that I frequent where one poster, who translates materials into his native language from English, tries to get pointers on what soemthing would actually mean or how it should be said in English.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hannah_arendt

There is in Poland a year of the Polish with events promoting polish language. However, if people doesn`t read it won`t change anything in my opinion. The language is becoming more and more simple.

---

On the other hand, in the distant past most people didn't use their language to communicate anything except for simple matters, because that was all they did. And there were philosophers, mathematician, shamans, etc. who used the full breadth of the language for communicating complicated ideas. We shouldn't expect the majority of people to use language that they don't need, because they never even try to communicate complicated ideas. Even now, if you communicate with people who have complicated thoughts you will hear complex language structures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

It takes a lot of effort to master a language, even if it is your first language. There are many native speakers of English who seem to think that learning all of the rules is beyond the. Or maybe they are not aware of all of the rules, and I don't mean nit-picking things like comma placement, but major matters like the subjunctive voice and all of the varieties of the past tense. I have even known people who only used the present tense, regardless of when something happened.

I have also known non-native speakers who try to apply rules from another language into English. There is another board that I frequent where one poster, who translates materials into his native language from English, tries to get pointers on what soemthing would actually mean or how it should be said in English.

---

It`s very difficult to start thinking in different language without making cliches. When we translate a text, despite grammar and vocabulary, we should pay attention to cultural things too. Polish grammar, despite complicated cases, different endings for each person in tenses, is not so complicated. We have only 2 past tenses ("Past simple", "Past continous"). Earlier we had "Past Perfect" too but it dissapeared at the end of XIX century. However, I like use it sometimes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

On the other hand, in the distant past most people didn't us their language to communicate anything except for simple matters, because that was all they did. And there were philosophers, mathematician, shamans, etc. who used the full breadth of the language for communicating complicated ideas. We shouldn't expect the majority of people to use language that they don't need, because they never even try to communicate complicated ideas. Even now, if you communicate with people who have complicated thoughts you will hear complex language structures.

---

The problem here is that sometimes you can`t communicate with such people. I hope that cases won`t dissapear. We don`t have established word order so it would be difficult to understand each other.

It is natural that we describe things we know. That is why Robert Howard did a great thing describing barbarians in very simple language. Nowadays writers very often forgot about adjusting the language, a kind of decorum. I don`t know whether it happens in English but in Polish does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hannah_arendt

Many contemporary language still have: aspect, cases etc. For example German has 4 cases and gives many possibilities of creating new words. In Polish, there is aspect whereas in English we use just the adequate tense.

Old languages (I don`t like the word 'dead') gave more opportunities to express yourself very briefly. Almost everything we have now, we have inherited. There is no doubt that our culture is creating new things all the time but we couldn`t do without Plato or Aristotle. Sometimes it seems to me that we are becoming more and more superficial and lazy.

---

Of course we still have those things like aspect etc., but as you also say, we can't express them briefly anymore. In English, you need three words to express 'I have done', in Russian you need one and in Latin too (I don't know about Polish, maybe a little more than Russian).

You are right that for Slaves it would become a problem to communicate without cases. Apart from the odd preposition; what's the difference in meaning only between 'a sem c nim' or 'a sem s on'? Granted, it sounds weird, but in terms of meaning, you'd probably understand. If on the other hand, you were to leave out a dative case in a long long sentence, the direct and indirect objects could get swapped around in hte mind of your listener. Chaos abound! ;)

German on the other hand has fixed word order. It's daughter language Dutch has got no cases anymore and we manage fine. The only real remnant of the old case system is our personal pronouns which are structured in two tiers like in English (although some linguists insist on a separate form for the third person plural dative, but that's nonsense). Germans could manage perfectly well without cases, I think and it's going that way. In spoken language, they don't use the genitive case anymore, but use 'von + dat.' instead.

But, may I ask, what do Poles do if they have to express a past perfective idea?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hannah_arendt

The problem here is that sometimes you can`t communicate with such people. I hope that cases won`t dissapear. We don`t have established word order so it would be difficult to understand each other.

---

Cases are not necessary, if there are prepositions that make it clear what function a noun has. English only has cases for pronouns, and the lack does not create any problem.

Quote:

---

It is natural that we describe things we know. That is why Robert Howard did a great thing describing barbarians in very simple language. Nowadays writers very often forgot about adjusting the language, a kind of decorum. I don`t know whether it happens in English but in Polish does.

---

I also find that many writers do not make their language fit the situation. Lovecraft was better than Howard at that, and Hemingway did that quite well in his dialogue. I find that a skilled writer can tell more about a character through dialogue than any other way. The vocabulary, pacing, sentence length, and sentence structures are important in showing how someone thinks. (see: Styles and Structures by Charles Kay Smith)

Quote:

---

But, may I ask, what do Poles do if they have to express a past perfective idea?

---

There is no equivalent of Past Perfect in modern Polish. There was once, but it's obsolete now, so in order to express that something occurred before another action in the past you need to use conjunctions such as before. In other words, time clauses are used in such situations.

If you simply want to say that an action is completed, you add a prefix, e.g: "Robiłam" - I was doing. "Zrobiłam" - I have done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kiki1982

Of course we still have those things like aspect etc., but as you also say, we can't express them briefly anymore. In English, you need three words to express 'I have done', in Russian you need one and in Latin too (I don't know about Polish, maybe a little more than Russian).

You are right that for Slaves it would become a problem to communicate without cases. Apart from the odd preposition; what's the difference in meaning only between 'a sem c nim' or 'a sem s on'? Granted, it sounds weird, but in terms of meaning, you'd probably understand. If on the other hand, you were to leave out a dative case in a long long sentence, the direct and indirect objects could get swapped around in hte mind of your listener. Chaos abound! ;)

German on the other hand has fixed word order. It's daughter language Dutch has got no cases anymore and we manage fine. The only real remnant of the old case system is our personal pronouns which are structured in two tiers like in English (although some linguists insist on a separate form for the third person plural dative, but that's nonsense). Germans could manage perfectly well without cases, I think and it's going that way. In spoken language, they don't use the genitive case anymore, but use 'von + dat.' instead.

But, may I ask, what do Poles do if they have to express a past perfective idea?

---

In German, cases has always been a problem for me. Now it`s over but it is very difficult. The same occurs with adjectives. At the very beginning it seemed to me complicated.

In Polish, we just use Past Tense. We don`t pay much attention which activity happened earlier. We use the word such as at the beginning, earlier, after etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

Cases are not necessary, if there are prepositions that make it clear what function a noun has. English only has cases for pronouns, and the lack does not create any problem.



I also find that many writers do not make their language fit the situation. Lovecraft was better than Howard at that, and Hemingway did that quite well in his dialogue. I find that a skilled writer can tell more about a character through dialogue than any other way. The vocabulary, pacing, sentence length, and sentence structures are important in showing how someone thinks. (see: Styles and Structures by Charles Kay Smith)

---

It is very difficult to write a good dialogue. I`ve had a problem with it. Thanks for the title:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aylinn

There is no equivalent of Past Perfect in modern Polish. There was once, but it's obsolete now, so in order to express that something occurred before another action in the past you need to use conjunctions such as before. In other words, time clauses are used in such situations.

If you simply want to say that an action is completed, you add a prefix, e.g: "Robiłam" - I was doing. "Zrobiłam" - I have done.

---

Do you speak Polish? I am asking of sheer curiosity:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hannah_arendt

It is very difficult to write a good dialogue. I`ve had a problem with it. Thanks for the title:)

---

You are more than welcome. It is a good and useful book.

Quote:

---

Do you speak Polish? I am asking of sheer curiosity:)

---

I am Polish. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aylinn

I am Polish. :)

---

Miło mi:) Może przypadkiem też polonistką?

Nie, skończyłam filologię angielską. :)

Ja można powiedzieć, że jedno i drugie. Skończyłam polonistykę i jestem na drugim roku anglistyki:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

Cases are not necessary, if there are prepositions that make it clear what function a noun has. English only has cases for pronouns, and the lack does not create any problem.

---

You are right, on a general level, there is no need for cases, but wen you start looking at languages with and without, it seems rather to be the case that those which have them are allow themselves more freedom in word order. Those that don't must put the words always in the right order. Although I don't think that applies to Asian languages.

English has many many prepositions. 'To' is not the same as 'in' and 'onto' is not the same as 'on', or 'of' as 'from'. Latin for example had in + Acc. and in + Dat. German still has it (and has many others, dubbed Wechselprapositionen because they alternate cases between the Acc. and Dative depending on whether it's a direction or place). The Slavic languages have v which can mean 'in' or 'to'. 'In' is a simple case. If you say 'Ich sitze ins Kino', that's wrong, but the fact that you are sitting will denote that you really wanted to say 'Ich sitze im Kino'. But there must be situations where it's not so clear.
In Dutch we have no cases. But, we are tied to word order. I cannot at a whim change my direct and indirect objects around, because it would cause confusion or sound strange. Similarly in English, we cannot use a thing that is supposed to be a dative. 'I gave it the man' used to be right at some point (the man being dative). Now we have to say 'I gave it to the man'. In French too (also no cases) there is a mandatory order if you have a sentence where I and DO have been substituted by personal pronouns. Otherwise the IO is marked by à.

German seems to be an exception to this, in that it has strict word order, but still has cases. They are not necessary in spoken laguage, although you are grateful that there is something like cases when you are reading something which is quite long. Otherwise it would be hard to work out who is doing what at times.

The Slavic languages on the other hand have many more possibilities to throw the word order around, depending on what is the most important. English does the expressing in another way, of course.

Both systems have their charms. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aylinn

There is no equivalent of Past Perfect in modern Polish. There was once, but it's obsolete now, so in order to express that something occurred before another action in the past you need to use conjunctions such as before. In other words, time clauses are used in such situations.

If you simply want to say that an action is completed, you add a prefix, e.g: "Robiłam" - I was doing. "Zrobiłam" - I have done.

---

Shame. Seems unwieldy at times, although maybe the fact that it has become obsolete meant it wasn't used in the first place.
It's a peculiar thing, those perfective infinitives, but you get used to it. You start to miss them in other languages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hannah_arendt

In German, cases has always been a problem for me. Now it`s over but it is very difficult. The same occurs with adjectives. At the very beginning it seemed to me complicated.

---

Since I live in Germany, I'm permanently subjected to them, so m knowledge is getting quicker. The problem is getting them out properly when talking. I'm ver good at writing, but talking is bad. Although everyone says we speak such good German (maybe compared to other people, but still). Cases and grmmar are my baby. I love that! :blush:

If you know grammar and vocabulary writting isn`t so complicated but I cannot start thinking in German:) However it is very logical, almost ideal language for philosophy for example.

We have gone to linguistic matters, so I have one question connected with stresses in English. I have been thinking whether you consider this element as important?