Este tópico está presentemente marcado como "adormecido"—a última mensagem tem mais de 90 dias. Pode acordar o tópico publicando uma resposta.
I'm interested in improving my Latin knowledge a little bit more. Also, I'm interested specifically in the Latin of the Classical period: Classical Latin. If you know any book, manual or document which can be of help in learning Latin, please, tell me!
Also, for the sake of pronunciation, if you know any software, program or web page which can accurately teach its pronunciation, it will be more than welcome!
Thank you very much brethren!
I'm quite tempted by the audiobook of Minimus: Starting Out in Latin; I have the books, which are charming!
vocative if given is given 2nd but several texts omit it on the grounds it's often the same as nominative
Wheeler uses a different order (N;G;D;Acc;Abl; voc) which involves mental gymnastics unless it's the only book you use. Is his order normal in USA?
And for Greek it is pretty much the same, just no ablative, obviously.
I believe you are correct, it is US usage; all my American Latin texts are arranged that way.
Down at the bottom of that page, Wikipedia says that Wheelock is particularly well-adapted for independent study.
Those Wikipedia pages do indeed credit Kennedy with the change in case order in English schools. The idea was not original to Kennedy, of course. His Preface credits Thomas Hewitt Key, Johan Nicolai Madvig, and Henry John Roby. That's the publication order (1845, 1849, 1862; Kennedy 1866) that their elementary grammars appeared in English, but Madvig's original German was 1843.
Madvig's Observations credit the order in Sanskrit and Rask's work on modern European languages.
In terms of what Kennedy replaced (Wikipedia being pretty vague and a little hyperbolic in its "medieval"), I believe that would be the Eton Grammar or the King Edward's adapted from it. The Eton Grammar was from the 1750s and itself adapted from William Lily's Grammar that had been authorized since Henry VIII (around 1540).
I was going to say that the order of cases in declensions is essentially arbitrary. However, it came to mind that there were grammars and accidences compiled in ancient times and that some compiled by Greek or Roman scholiasts have survived - although I think you would be hard pressed to find one in a modern edition. There certainly aren't any in the Loeb Classical Library. If anyone is familiar with the work of these ancient grammarians, perhaps they would care to comment what order of cases they use in their declensions? It may be that older texts like those of Kennedy and Rutherford and their sources followed the order of a particular scholiast.
As far as the NAGDA order, I was once told that it was because the nominative and accusative cases are the most common cases one encounters.
Perhaps I should share another surprise I had. While I was in Boston I idly perused in a bookstore Morwood's Oxford Grammar of Classical Greek and was surprised by the guidance it gave on how to pronounce classical Greek. I learned my Greek from a sizable team of classicists all of whom received their degrees in Classics from either Oxford or Cambridge universities. The pronunciation they taught me seemed to bear no relation to the guidance this book gave on how Greek was to be pronounced. I learned my Greek in the 1960s - has there been a radical upheaval in the world of classicists in the last half century that has revolutionized pronunciation of classical Greek?
But all told, I think our understanding of the ancient languages tends to grow over time. I have always been taught "classical" pronunciation of Latin, with hard C's, no J's, etc. But my uncle learned Latin in the 60s and he pronounces almost as if it were modern Italian. It could be a similar process at work in what you describe regarding Greek.
Though I have to say, I often wonder if we are a bit too canonical at times regarding classical Latin's pronunciation and its difference in sound from modern Romance languages. After all, Spanish, French, etc might all sound the way they do today for a reason :-)
It is possible that some of those things that did or didn't exist actually existed in forms that we don't usually talk about in English, and, librito, possibly in Spanish, like bilabial fricatives which can come across as rounded, so W, or labiodental, F or V. I took French in public schools. My friends who took Latin had V always as W, but did CI as ČI. That was late '50's to early '60's in the Northeastern United States.
The Wikipedia article on Sardinian ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sardinian_language ) confirms this.
Adira para publicar