Rationes alterius filiae heri non fuerunt eaedem. Secundas litteras discipulae heri videbas et de verbis tum cogitabas. (L 10.1)įilium nautae Romani in agris videmus. Neuter scriptor de remedio ullo istius morbi dicebat. Quid de me et exitio patriae meae cogitat? (L 4.4)Īgricola uxorque in terra sub caelo pulchro saepe cenabant. Mitte, O me frater, ullam cupiditatem pecuniae et studium voluptatis. O puella, patriam tuam serva, amabo te! (L 2.4)Īmicus meus de philosophia semper cogitat.
#PECUNIA EST VIRTUS LATIN FULL#
The sentences are either dreadfully trite and full of stodgy and laughable pieces of philosophical advice or they are just drivel, collections of words whose sole purpose is to test the students’ recollection of the various elements of grammar and vocabulary without making any effort to engage the imagination or interest. This is almost entirely vitiated by the atrocious sentences that have been composed for the students to translate. There is no question that the grammar is organized and laid out very well in Wheelock. This is something like admiring the colour of the deck chairs on the Titanic. The reviewers claim “for the most part, these changes (to Practice and Review) are welcome” and to illustrate the point they applaud the addition of ‘saepe’ to ‘Apollo me servat’ (SA 1.11). The most glaring weakness of Wheelock is ignored and the focus, instead, is upon minutiae. What is most unfortunate is the lack of reaction to the sentences offered for translation in the PR, SA and L. Adding “lower leg” to the definition only confuses the issue and provides an unnecessary choice for the student. The example of pes, pedis being glossed as “lower leg, foot” would seem rather to be an example of a bad change.
The expansion and refinement of the definitions are not to be entirely praised. The Practice and Review in Chapter 7 has two instances of a missing macron (‘de’ in #1 and ‘temporum’ in #8). The typos have not all been found and corrected.
On the other hand, the following observations are less than accurate. Also, the paradigms are sometimes awkwardly divided by page breaks and the stubborn insistence on distinguishing between ‘shall’ and ‘will’ is quite unnecessary. The English-Latin vocabulary should be expanded to the level that all English words are included. To be sure, the reviewers make some very good comments which I am happy to acknowledge. A specific sentence will be identified by the category under which it falls, the chapter number and the sentence number (e.g., SA 4.3 the third sentence in the Sententiae Antiquae from chapter 4). 1 For convenience the following abbreviations will be used throughout: PR = Practice and Review, SA = Sententiae Antiquae, L = Lectiones (from the Workbook). I was sufficiently disappointed with the efforts of Smith and Trzaskoma that I felt some comments were necessary.
and have used the fifth and sixth editions as an instructor. I was introduced to the third edition of Wheelock in 1983 in the first year of my B.A. I awaited with some anticipation the review of Wheelock’s Latin, 6th edition which recently appeared in the BMCR due to my long association with this particular teaching tool.
0 kommentar(er)
