|
 |
Does Latin make you clever? | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages |  | |
| krog Diglot Senior Member Austria Joined 5838 days ago 146 posts - 152 votes  Speaks: English*, German Studies: French, Latin | Message 1 of 42 15 February 2009 at 4:35am | IP Logged | ||
|
An interesting radio programme from Südwestrundfunk, 'SWR2 Aula: Latein macht klug', to be found here, by this man Ralph Schumacher, tackles various 'learning ideas', including whether learning Latin brings a transferable cognitive benefit, a question which is handled by Elsbeth Stern and Ludwig Haag. They conducted various studies into Latin which are discussed between 2.00 and 4.25 of the programme.
A rough transcription: The effect of Latin learning has been investigated by researcher into learning, Elsbeth Stern, and former Latin teacher and current professor of pedagogy Ludwig Haas in several different studies. In a longitudinal study, 3 groups of students (of comparable intelligence) were tested in regard to the development of logical capabilities. The students who had either 2 or 4 years of Latin were not found to be superior in logical reasoning than the students who did not have Latin instruction. So: Latin does not improve logical reasoning capabilities. Another idea that is often put forward on the part of Latin, is that learning Latin makes it particularly easy to learn other Romance languages. Behind this concept is the idea that Latin is the 'mother-tongue of Europe' and that using this example of the 'basic language' is the best way to see how other Romance languages function. Stern and Haas have shown that in this case too, the supposed efficacity of Latin can't be confirmed by real-life testing. Further studies with pupils show, that knowledge of Latin is not superior to knowledge of another Romance language, when it comes to learning a given Romance language. Latinists were no more successful at learning Spanish than French speakers. Therefore: knowledge of Latin is not superior to knowledge of French when studying Spanish. On the contrary, the Latinists made more mistakes in Spanish grammar, erroneously applying Latin grammar rules. However, they were endowed with a better perception of individual words - they could find mistakes in German sentences better than those with knowledge of French. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| William Camden Hexaglot Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 6061 days ago 1936 posts - 2333 votes Speaks: English*, German, Spanish, Russian, Turkish, French | Message 2 of 42 15 February 2009 at 5:03am | IP Logged | ||
|
It might make people think you are clever, which is not the same thing. It is a good "Pretentious? Moi?" sort of language. I agree that it does not help with Romance languages any more than English does - they are all rather different from it, and have essentially lost key grammatical features of Latin. Latin may help in getting people accustomed to inflected languages. Edited by William Camden on 15 February 2009 at 5:03am 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| diabolo menthe Diglot Groupie United Kingdom Joined 5762 days ago 68 posts - 70 votes Speaks: English*, French Studies: Italian, Swedish, Japanese | Message 3 of 42 15 February 2009 at 5:52am | IP Logged | ||
|
I think this misconception of it making you more intelligent also stems from the fact that nowadays it is only really
taught in grammar schools/public schools (private schools in America). Why would a knowledge of Latin above any other language make a person more intelligent? I find that concept so bizarre. What differentiates Latin from Chinese, or even Latin from mathematics? I would say being naturally gifted for Latin, just like having a natural ability in science, would be a better indication of intelligence (if we're thinking intelligence is an ability to learn and apply concepts quickly and easily). 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Tyr Senior Member Sweden Joined 5571 days ago 316 posts - 384 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Swedish | Message 4 of 42 15 February 2009 at 7:29am | IP Logged | ||
|
There is a difference. With latin you can drop bits of it into English and you give the impression of intelligance.Latin being the historic language of learning and a huge influence on English and everything.
Chinese meanwhile is alien and nothing to do with English. I'd agree with William. Except with the addition that other people think you're more clever too. But you're not. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| diabolo menthe Diglot Groupie United Kingdom Joined 5762 days ago 68 posts - 70 votes Speaks: English*, French Studies: Italian, Swedish, Japanese | Message 5 of 42 15 February 2009 at 7:37am | IP Logged | ||
|
I don't think I expressed myself clearly, sorry. What I meant is, essentially, what is the difference between learning
the two? They are both languages that can be learned, so why is there a perception that knowing one over another makes one more intelligent? I'm just adding to the argument that it is ridiculous to think of it in that way, that learning one language over another makes you more intelligent. It is possible that you could have an easier time learning one over the other, but that stems from being able to draw on pre-existing knowledge, not a more advanced ability to learn. And I still don't think I've expressed myself clearly, but that will remain to be seen. Edited by diabolo menthe on 15 February 2009 at 7:38am 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Chung Diglot Senior Member Joined 6945 days ago 4228 posts - 8259 votes 20 sounds Speaks: English*, French Studies: Polish, Slovak, Uzbek, Turkish, Korean, Finnish | Message 6 of 42 15 February 2009 at 10:13am | IP Logged | ||
|
The perception is still entrenched in the minds of those who are educated with Eurocentric views (exceptions can be found, namely on this forum). I agree with William's view that knowing some Latin gives the veneer of sophistication (which is subjective and dependent on the environment) but that ties into the association of Latin with European antiquity and a supposed cultural superiority of those times over modern times. On a related point, it'd be foolish to think that those who don't know Latin, or languages that do not import characteristics or words from Latin are somehow inferior to those that do.
1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Raincrowlee Tetraglot Senior Member United States Joined 6491 days ago 621 posts - 808 votes Speaks: English*, Mandarin, Korean, French Studies: Indonesian, Japanese | Message 7 of 42 15 February 2009 at 10:42am | IP Logged | ||
I disagree with this. Both would give people the impression that you're intelligent, because they're both prestige languages. Latin gets its prestige from being a historical language of learning, while Chinese gets its from being a difficult exotic language. The listeners would have a slightly better chance of understanding Latin dropped in conversation, but other than that, you're just trying to act posh. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Tyr Senior Member Sweden Joined 5571 days ago 316 posts - 384 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Swedish | Message 8 of 42 15 February 2009 at 1:43pm | IP Logged | ||
|
It depends what circles you're in.
Traditional intelligista would place the latin as being better. To normal people though if you say you know Chinese thats more impressive seeming. Latin...its just more than a language. Knowing it is somewhat tied in with all sciences and law and all sorts of stuff. Chinese just has kung fu movies (to the popular perception). And yes. It is just trying to act posh. Its 'educated' in a horrible, pretentious way. Edited by Tyr on 15 February 2009 at 1:44pm 1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
