I don't think you're missing out on that much but it's not uninteresting either.Funnily enough, I think safe for a few excerpts, I've never actually read any Caesar.
I don't think you're missing out on that much but it's not uninteresting either.Funnily enough, I think safe for a few excerpts, I've never actually read any Caesar.
Barring a few excerpts in my correspondence course and some that were posted on the forum, I came to Caesar rather late. I read De Bello Gallico and De Bello Civili only a few months ago. I just didn't feel particularly attracted to it.Funnily enough, I think safe for a few excerpts, I've never actually read any Caesar.
What's controversial about them is mostly, I think, the method in which they were meant to be used. LLPSI was written with the intent that students would simply start reading it and acquire the vocab and grammar in an "immersive" sort of way, without much (if any) laying-out of grammatical rules. While some people think that's a great idea, others, including me, think that that method must be inefficient, as things would seem to go faster when students are given the basic rules from the get go, rather than left to figure them out by themselves. The latter is possible, of course, but it seems to me that it takes much more time.May I ask why these books are controversial?
Reading what I have of Caesar, I find it interesting mostly as a historical reference, especially on ancient customs and the Druids.Barring a few excerpts in my correspondence course and some that were posted on the forum, I came to Caesar rather late. I read De Bello Gallico and De Bello Civili only a few months ago. I just didn't feel particularly attracted to it.
Those bits are indeed interesting.Reading what I have of Caesar, I find it interesting mostly as a historical reference, especially on ancient customs and the Druids.
others, including me, think that that method must be inefficient, as things would seem to go faster when students are given the basic rules from the get go, rather than left to figure them out by themselves.
Natural Method, they seem to call it. My dad started me on similar books when I was 9 (look where that got me). I had a pretty much convoluted concept of declensions and conjugations and the rest.Now, many people actually use LLPSI in addition to more structured study of the grammar. In that case, I think it's fine. The author's Latin is very good (unlike that of some other textbook authors).
Why?This is funny somehow
Why?
Really? Sigh.However, in modern didactics / language teaching, one of the gravest sins you can commit is to give people some grammatical rule and tell them to just ******* learn it.
Really? Sigh.
That's about as old school as it can get Sorry, I'm not trying to make fun of you, I think the very same wayImmersion does help tremendously*, but I think most people need both (at least to learn as efficiently as possible). Immersion probably works best, in most cases, after you've aquired some basics.
Now, it's always possible that some people are wired differently.
I have been an informal (not licensed) language teacher and tutor for four years. I didn't go through any theory or pedagogy to teach. Just solid application.That's about as old school as it can get Sorry, I'm not trying to make fun of you, I think the very same way
It's true that there's not a single teaching or learning method that suits everyone ... It just makes me wonder how no one ever notices that even the most super modern teaching strategies essentially yield no other results than those numb, barbarian methods of a dark and forgotten past.