Latin.

[Gaius Octavius]

Although this belongs in 'Lingua Latina', I am posting this here for good reason.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/03/opinion/...amp;ref=opinion

 

Note the author's use of punctuation, and grammar. Implications are to be drawn from what the author writes.

 

And, yes, the previous two sentences are meant to be cryptic and sarcastic.

Edited December 3, 2007 by Gaius Octavius

[Guest Iulis Mascellus]

I can't agree more with the article...I myself took the National Latin Exam in 2005, but my high school in desperately lacking in my favorite language. I myself want to teach classical Roman history when I retire from whatever language-related career I pursue in my younger adulthood to come. Man I hope more people start speaking Latin...

[Melvadius]

Although this belongs in 'Lingua Latina', I am posting this here for good reason.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/03/opinion/...amp;ref=opinion

 

Note the author's use of punctuation, and grammar. Implications are to be drawn from what the author writes.

 

And, yes, the previous two sentences are meant to be cryptic and sarcastic.

 

 

Personally I was wondering if the autor meant us to draw any particular conclusion from the major collapse in American Latin scholarship after GWB took it. Much as I may like to subscribe to this viewpoint, I have to be honest and say I don't think it can. Even if he is right I would hope that the same parallel could not be drawn with a similar collapse in Britain.

 

Having had much of my early tuition in the period, including a small amount of Latin, I think that the general collapse had more to do with the view, in Britain at least by the mid to late 60's, that there would be no need to learn grammatical structures as it was no longer relevant to modern living.

 

Mind you, seeing some of what passes for 'English' amongst popular author's and journalists maybe they were right?