What are the benefits of learning Latin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dempsey1919
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Dempsey1919

Guest
I’ve been interested in learning latin for quite some time but I can’t help but wonder if it is pointless?

It’s a dead language. Nobody speaks it. All Church documents are already translated. What use is learning this language? I would only use it in a religious manner anyway.

What do you think?

I might learn Spanish instead. At least this would be useful because I could communicate with people. It may even improve my career prospects.

Latin or Spanish? I can’t decide.
 
Latin is the underlying language of a whole family of European languages today (e.g. French, Spanish, Italian). During the Renaissance in England, thousands of Latin based words were adopted into English. Latin was the language of scholars then in addition to being the language of HMC.
 
I think Latin’s quite useful. Translations can still be ambiguous, so Latin is always handy for getting to the root of things. Besides it can help with many more languages, something Spanish would not so readily do.
 
I think Latin’s quite useful. Translations can still be ambiguous, so Latin is always handy for getting to the root of things. Besides it can help with many more languages, something Spanish would not so readily do.
Click to expand...
Do you think a knowledge of latin would help me when learning other European languages, such as Spanish?

Also, I’ve never really understand why latin was part of the traditional curriculum of many schools? In the past, the intellectual classes of society were all well versed in latin. Why was it deemed deemed necessary? And more importantly, why did they stop teaching latin in modern schools?
 
Dempsey1919 said:
Do you think a knowledge of latin would help me when learning other European languages, such as Spanish?
Click to expand...
Yes, definitely. Indeed, you might find it useful to learn more than one Romance language.

I don’t know why they dropped it from curricula. Certainly, I rue not being taught Latin, and am making up for it!
 
Dempsey1919 said:
Do you think a knowledge of latin would help me when learning other European languages, such as Spanish?

Also, I’ve never really understand why latin was part of the traditional curriculum of many schools? In the past, the intellectual classes of society were all well versed in latin. Why was it deemed deemed necessary? And more importantly, why did they stop teaching latin in modern schools?
Click to expand...
The use of Latin allowed for an international scholarly culture. The modern university world is hampered by vernacular scholarship because one’s reading is typically confined to scholars in his own language group(s) and there is also a great reliance on others’ translations, whereas in the past a scholar from any part of Europe could study at any university and read the works of any scholar, because everyone was using the same language.

As for Latin’s current value for you, you mentioned that you’d “only” be using it religiously. But even if your parish was falling on its face and not using Latin in the liturgy, knowing the language would open up all sorts of primary sources that are theological gems and pillars of Latin Catholic spirituality. Not to mention that we belong to a church whose (almost) entire liturgical patrimony is in Latin, thus behooving one to understand the language that Holy Mother Church asks that one preserves when carrying out some of the most important actions one will ever do (like assisting at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, receiving the grace of the sacraments, joining in the public prayer of the Church through the Divine Office, etc.). Sounds useful to me!
 
For scholarly purposes, Latin would be interesting to fully learn.

For practical purposes, something like Spanish would be a much better choice.

I am not concerned with Latin. The only Latin I encounter is at Mass, and I have the Church to translate it for me.
 
Latin is not only the mother of the Romance languages. Latin and Greek, but Latin in particular, are also the mother languages of science. Medical and botanical terminology come from Latin. Many English terms, terms which do not necessarily exist in the other Romance language, were coined from Latin or Greek roots, a practice which continues to this day.

Furthermore, Latin is an intellectually rigorous language. Why? Because the words have endings which tell you their grammatical place in the sentence. I don’t want to go into the technical explanation, but you know from the ending which noun is the subject and which is the direct or indirect object (or is possessive, and so on), rather than from its position in the sentence.

In English, if you take the sentence, “Caesar defeated the Gauls” and reverse it to read “The Gauls defeated Caesar”, you will have changed the entire meaning of the sentence. This is not true in Latin. This allows the author to place the words in the sentence according to what is rhetorically or poetically advantageous. This makes it a very powerful language.

It is presumably for this reason that students who study Latin have a demonstrated advantage over other students, even other students who study Romance languages, in the language sections of tests such as the SAT. Even a rudimentary knowledge of Latin will typically render academic results.

Consider that Latin, like English, has many nuances to its words. Very often, there isn’t a direct translation to another language that carries the same collection of connotations as the original. When translating from Latin, there can also be a loss of rhetorical content because the choice of word order cannot be duplicated in the English translation. If you think you might ever use it to read Church texts in their original, learn Latin.

It does not sound as if you have a great desire to learn any particular language. By that, I mean that “communicate with people” won’t drive your progess like “be able to talk to my in-laws” would. If you had a compelling reason driving your desire to learn a modern language, I might give different advice.

As for career prospects, pardon me, but everybody and their dog takes Spanish and French. How many are conversant? Unless you would be neglecting a language you are hungry to learn in order to take it, take Latin. Latin will not hurt your resume for either college entry or career purposes. It is more likely to make you stand out.

That’s my two cents.
 
EasterJoy said:
In English, if you take the sentence, “Caesar defeated the Gauls” and reverse it to read “The Gauls defeated Caesar”, you will have changed the entire meaning of the sentence. This is not true in Latin. This allows the author to place the words in the sentence according to what is rhetorically or poetically advantageous. This makes it a very powerful language.
Click to expand...
This begs again, a question that I have asked and yet to have answered.

I keep reading here that “Latin doesn’t translate well”. So, if that is the case, what good are the missals that we are constantly exhorted to use here on this forum? If it can be translated well enough for use in a missal in the pews, why is translation to the Sacrementary “flawed”?

Why use a language that can’t be translated properly? Doesn’t that relegate those of us in the pews to robots reciting and listening to words that we really don’t understand because they cant’ be “properly translated?”
 
Dempsey1919 said:
Do you think a knowledge of latin would help me when learning other European languages, such as Spanish?

Also, I’ve never really understand why latin was part of the traditional curriculum of many schools? In the past, the intellectual classes of society were all well versed in latin. Why was it deemed deemed necessary? And more importantly, why did they stop teaching latin in modern schools?
Click to expand...
Latin absolutely will help you with other European languages. Because so many European languages stem from Latin, knowledge of Latin will give you a key to vocabulary in multiple languages. (Incidentally, Latin is at the root of 50-60% of English words; I can only imagine the percentage for Romance languages is much higher.)

Your second question is more interesting.

In the US, anyway, Latin was taught because it gave the student access to important works of literature (the Aeneid, Cicero, Caesar, the Latin Vulgate) and thus could give the student an “inside perspective” on the ancient world (which was long - and rightly, I think- considered a source of wisdom.)

Also, Latin grammar reinforces and clarifies the study of English grammar. In addition, the memorization and pattern identification involved in learning is really good for mental discipline; it helps the student learn how to study. This mental discipline combined with the grammar, spelling and vocabulary knowledge Latin provides makes Latin just fantastically good for most students.

Latin was dropped from US schools initially because various educational theories that didn’t value it were on the rise. I suspect that behind those theories lurked views such as memorization is useless, traditional studies are irrelevant, (education should be “current”) and students ought not to be encouraged to do hard things.
 
ethelzguy said:
I keep reading here that “Latin doesn’t translate well”. So, if that is the case, what good are the missals that we are constantly exhorted to use here on this forum? If it can be translated well enough for use in a missal in the pews, why is translation to the Sacrementary “flawed”?
Click to expand...
I don’t think “Latin doesn’t translate well” is a true statement.

No language “translates well;” that is, translations of metaphors, idioms, and poetry (all of which prayers tend to utilize) are always going to be a little lacking. This is because it’s very difficult (if not impossible) to recreate the context, connotations and associations of words belonging to one language in another. And, of course, this is one of the reasons people choose to learn foreign languages.

On the other hand, that doesn’t mean translation is a doomed endeavor and all translations are just bad. It means that in some cases, the translator has to have some skill, and must know his own language and the other language extremely well in order to get as close as possible to the meaning of the text he’s translating. (I guess translation could be thought of as linguistic calculus.)

The current English translation of the Mass is flawed (I can’t speak for the rest of the Sacramentary) not because the translators somehow failed to capture idioms etc. in the Latin prayers, but because it seems they just didn’t try and resorted to leaving out or mangling anything problematic.

(N.B. I’m not in favor of the very “literal” (i.e. translate everything with cognates) translations one often find in Pre-Vatican II missals, either. )
 
Dempsey1919 said:
I’ve been interested in learning latin for quite some time but I can’t help but wonder if it is pointless?

It’s a dead language. Nobody speaks it. All Church documents are already translated. What use is learning this language? I would only use it in a religious manner anyway.

What do you think?

I might learn Spanish instead. At least this would be useful because I could communicate with people. It may even improve my career prospects.
Click to expand...
I’m not only not Catholic, I’m not even Christian but I had several years of Latin at school and it certainly gives one an insight into other languages - just as a knowledge of ‘Old English’ or, even, German gives one an insight into English as we know it today. Not only that, of course, it’s interesting in and of itself.

On the other hand, you could learn Latin as it is spoken by its modern speakers - by the Spanish and Italians in other words.
Latin or Spanish? I can’t decide.
Click to expand...
Italian. 🙂
 
What are the benefits of learning Latin? Easy. If you learn Latin, you won’t embarrass Obama when you visit Latin America. 😃
 
While Spanish is more practical for daily use, Latin is indeed a very useful language to learn. I say this having taken four years of Latin in high school, and very glad that I did.

For one, it’s not a dead language. There are Latin words and phrases everywhere! Exempli gratia: et alius, id est, ante meridem, anno Dominis, circa, ibide, inter alia, nota bene, per annum, versus, et cetera.

Secondly, it’ll expand your vocabulary. Maybe you didn’t know what celerity meant… but having learnt the word “celeritas”, meaning swift, you’ll be able to use the root word to find the definition. This is of great help particularly if you read a lot, or if you deal frequently with medical documents. There are myriad medical terms (from body parts to ailments to cures) that are either in Latin or are derived from Latin; knowing Latin will make it that much easier to understand what your doctor is saying.

Third, if you’re at all interested in biology, Latin is a lifesaver. All of the species have common names and official Latin names, the latter of which are used around the world and often describe the species in some fashion. If you know a spot of Latin, it’s much easier to remember a species’ name, and even if you’ve never seen it before, maybe guess a bit about what it is or what it looks like. Latin can help you tell the difference between an Odocoelus virginianus, a Quercus rubrum, and a Salvelinus fontinalis.

Fourth, it’s a beautiful language. Sure you can read the translations, but as the saying goes, there’s something lost in translation. I think prayers are that much more beautiful when read in the original Latin, and to go to a Latin Mass (there are still some acceptable ones offered from time to time, IIRC) and understand the words is astoundingly beautiful. You can understand the words to the ancient Gregorian chants, too, and follow along a little more closely with the Ave Maria. And even outside the Church, Latin is beautiful; if you get really proficient, you can read the Carmina Burana or the Illiad in the original Latin; I’ve done that, and it’s great!
 
When it came time to make the same decision – Latin or Spanish – one of my girls decided on Latin, “because with Latin no one can tell me I can’t speak it like a native” 😃

That, of course, was before she discovered there were indeed differences between Church Latin and Public Latin! She ended up with four years of Latin in high school, and two years in college.
 
ethelzguy said:
I keep reading here that “Latin doesn’t translate well”.
Click to expand...
Where, in particular? I don’t think there’s a problem translating Latin. It takes more work to translate it well than to translate it loosely, of course, but that goes without saying for any language.
ethelzguy said:
So, if that is the case, what good are the missals that we are constantly exhorted to use here on this forum?
Click to expand...
I have no problem with, for example, my mother’s 1961 daily missal which she gave me. It translates the prayers of the Mass quite well, and rather literally.
ethelzguy said:
If it can be translated well enough for use in a missal in the pews, why is translation to the Sacrementary “flawed”?
Click to expand...
Because the current English translation is poor by the standards for translation, not because Latin is hard to translate. It fails to capture the rich language of the Latin, it fails to convey the precise theological concepts, and it often misses out entirely on the important structure of the prayers themselves. Instead of praying (on-the-fly example) “Almighty God, who delivered Israel through the Red Sea, grant in this time of distress for your holy people to pass safely through every obstacle, that we may rest safely in Your sovereign power”, the current translation would render it as “Almighty God, you brought Israel through the Red Sea. Help us to trust in you to get us through our difficult times.” Not only is the language pedestrian and the imagery neutered, but the very structure of the prayer (address, attribute, petition, reason) is changed. This is how someone else explained it to the translators:
The Structure of the Collects: Relative clauses often disappear in the proposed text (especially the initial Deus, qui…, so important in the Latin Collects), so that a single oration is divided into two or more sentences. This loss is detrimental not only to the unity of the structure, but to the manner of conveying the proper sense of the posture before God of the Christian people, or of the individual Christian. The relative clause acknowledges God’s greatness, while the independent clause strongly conveys the impression that one is explaining something about God to God. Yet it is precisely the acknowledgement of the mirabilia Dei that lies at the heart of all Judaeo-Christian euchology. The quality of supplication is also adversely affected so that many of the texts now appear to say to God rather abruptly: “You did a; now do b.” The manner in which language expresses relationship to God cannot be regarded merely as a matter of style.
 
I really don’t care which language you choose…but I warn you…“mercy beaucoup” just won’t cut it anymore!! LOL!
 
Thank you very much for your replies. They were all great!

Based on your responses, I have decided to learn latin. It would be excellent to be able to read Papal documents in their original language. Not to mention being able to read the Vulgate. Plus it will open up an entire world of great scholastic works which haven’t been translated into english.

I was also shocked to see that all of the Harry Potter books have been translated into latin. Not that I like Harry Potter, but it goes to show that the language certainly isn’t as dead as some people think.

As many of you said, learning latin will improve all of my lingual skills; learning Spanish will be far easier after I’ve learned Latin.

I’ve ordered these two books:

Primer of Eccleasiastical Latin by John F. Collins and An Answer Key to Primer of Eccleasiastical Latin.
 
Such thinking that Latin was useless led me and my school pal at the tender age of 12 to drop Latin from our studies after only one year of it, That is a decision I have since regretted,and I wish my parents had intervened , but they didn’t.

My reasons are that when I read books such as Elements of Christian Philosophy by Etienne Gilson,today, I find Latin would be very helpful, so would more than a basic understanding of Aristotle. The Summas of St. Thomas Aquinas are very well explained, but still difficult to understand.
But, I cannot go back in time, and I have Wheeler’s book on Latin to refer to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top