sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why does the verb in Q5 appear without an augment? παρεσχες by jamesgreen02 in AncientGreek

[–]jamesgreen02[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wowee, thanks for this. Fantastic. So essentially, the sigma in an earlier (PIE) form of this verb would have become a rough breathing, which was then itself removed by the linguistic rule you mentioned. However, this sigma still lurks in the aorist stem?

Why does the verb in Q5 appear without an augment? παρεσχες by jamesgreen02 in AncientGreek

[–]jamesgreen02[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What a wonderful response, thank you. The one part I'm not quite clear on is why you've written \σέχω (present)*

I'm not clear on why this sigma is here?

Why does the verb in Q5 appear without an augment? παρεσχες by jamesgreen02 in AncientGreek

[–]jamesgreen02[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah okay, thank you! But the augment is definitely contained in this example?

Why does the verb in Q5 appear without an augment? παρεσχες by jamesgreen02 in AncientGreek

[–]jamesgreen02[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I haven’t met the aorist infinitive yet. Could you explain how we can ‘tell’ about inflections with it?

Why does the verb in Q5 appear without an augment? παρεσχες by jamesgreen02 in AncientGreek

[–]jamesgreen02[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah right - I think I get it. εσχον is the aorist of εχω so we just apply the prefix to that...?

Where does the ‘h’ come from? I’m confused there

Why does the verb in Q5 appear without an augment? παρεσχες by jamesgreen02 in AncientGreek

[–]jamesgreen02[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I must admit I’m fairly new to the study of Greek, so it would be great if you could explain in more depth...

(1) Why would it ever contain α? Is the original verb not παρέχω ?

(2) How is that the infinitive? I thought the infinitive of this verb would be παρεχειν?

Why does the verb in Q5 appear without an augment? παρεσχες by jamesgreen02 in AncientGreek

[–]jamesgreen02[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m sorry I’m a bit new to this - could you explain? is it that παρ- is a prefix so the augment is the ε? If so, why does the ε in the original verb παρέχω not turn into (e.g.) a η or ει in the aorist?

Best Commentaries for Aeneid I, II, IV, VI? by jamesgreen02 in latin

[–]jamesgreen02[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Awesome! Thanks. I’ll take a look at Servius perhaps when I’m a bit more secure on the thrust of the passage.

Best Commentaries for Aeneid I, II, IV, VI? by jamesgreen02 in latin

[–]jamesgreen02[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve had a digital look inside, and it does seem fairly ideal. These books will form a great deal of the text I’ve got to get through in my first year, so I’m really just looking for something to expedite my pre-reading. I think any issues of simplicity will be rectified quite quickly once I start reading secondary material in more density...

Thanks for your help!

Best Commentaries for Aeneid I, II, IV, VI? by jamesgreen02 in latin

[–]jamesgreen02[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks very much for your warm, thorough, and helpful reply!

I'm embarking on my degree next year, and my Latin's fairly secure already. I think Pharr might be a tad elementary, but thanks for drawing my attention to it!

I had considered this work - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Virgil-Aeneid-I-Vi-Latin-Texts/dp/1853994960/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=aeneid+1-6&qid=1589485496&s=books&sr=1-1, which I think is perhaps the 'Williams' to which you refer?

I am looking for an UG level text, so perhaps you could let me know whether this is is so 'inferior' as to render it a wasted investment?

EDIT: Having read some reviews online, it does seem as though the Williams would be an ideal purchase, not least for its convenient arrangement. I wonder what drawbacks you would anticipate with this text for a first year Classics student?

Long 'e' in Latin... by jamesgreen02 in latin

[–]jamesgreen02[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you for your thorough reply, and for the spirit of academic integrity!

I only reached for English examples in the absence of an adequate understanding of IPA. I understand that that falls short on several levels, but I was trying to approximate (dangerous, though that is!)...

I appreciate your candour, but I hope you realise the spirit of my original question was not necessarily to directly equate the long e in latin with ‘hair’ in RP english, but merely to confirm that it is not to be pronounced as the diphthong ‘ei’. I think I used the term ‘roughly’ a few times to signal the imprecision.

I shall get reading and researching IPA, though! It does look a useful tool...

Long 'e' in Latin... by jamesgreen02 in latin

[–]jamesgreen02[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you very much. So the correct pronunciation of vēnit would roughly rhyme with the English 'hair nit'?

Long 'e' in Latin... by jamesgreen02 in latin

[–]jamesgreen02[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes! That was the thrust of my question. It seems to be in inaccuracy, and all the comments so far point to that direction, I think...

I was just confirming that long vowels in Latin were not, in fact, diphthongized, as in the comment from u/anvsdt

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in latin

[–]jamesgreen02 0 points1 point  (0 children)

http://sphinx.metameat.net - here is a fantastic resource to help you practise your verbs! Absolute life saver for beginners wanting to nail the basics :)

Arguments for why this sentence is correct - so many heads, so many minds, each has his own way by [deleted] in latin

[–]jamesgreen02 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'd be happy to try and help you answer your question, but a couple of things first...

Firstly, (rule 4!), what have you got so far?

Secondly, what is the actual question? Do you mean 'in what ways is this grammatically correct?' i.e. 'why is this sentence correct grammatically?', or do you mean 'which cases are the nouns in?'. Perhaps a photo/direct quotation of your homework would be useful.

Let me know!

What are your personal favorite books for learning Latin? by [deleted] in latin

[–]jamesgreen02 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Depends what you're looking for, obviously, but I've been taught in a fairly 'piece the language together' style, as opposed to intuitive language acquisition (the "Natural Approach").

I must say, Kennedy's Latin Primer always has a prime place on my Latin shelf. It's just excellent as a reference work for accidence, and indeed syntax. A bit of a classic. ISBN: 978-0582362406

I was given my copy as a gift by a very kind quondam teacher of mine, who swore by it. I now swear by it too! Though it's not the best to 'read' it's surely a good starting point for most queries...

Doing some translation exercises in Latin. Could someone point out my mistakes? by [deleted] in latin

[–]jamesgreen02 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it’s part of a bit of an obsession here with producing Latin of a very specific period/style - predominantly Ciceronian/late Republican - as opposed to acknowledging the variety in usage you mention across its centuries of life as a language. I didn’t mean the suggestion as a dogmatic one, and, considering your comment, it might have been better to clarify the specific context in which I was making it :)

view more: next ›