Latin Journals

[Aurifex]

It is my general experience that language scholars know a great deal more about how to translate from a "dead" language than into one.

I'm not sure I follow your reasoning here, but the knowledge required to translate into the dead language is there in every line of the "authentic" texts; the task is to absorb this knowledge as comprehensively as possible and apply it in your own composition. You'll more readily acquire an appreciation of vocabulary, grammar, syntax and style if you have to generate Latin yourself rather than only analyse it in an authentic text.

 

[cogitans]

I'm not sure I follow your reasoning here

Well, here's a fun experiment which relates to ancient languages. Have some Hebrew professors translate a tricky verse from the Old Testament, not from Hebrew into English but the other way around. Sit back and enjoy the very different (and not very authentic) results. True, we're talking about a different language in this case, but I'm not immediately certain why the results of a similar experiment would not be much the same.

Still, if you feel it helps you, knock yourself out. It does nothing for me whatsoever.

 

[PacificVictory]

Well, the same could be said of any two languages, living or dead... especially with complex sentences such as some bible verses. Even if we were both native bilingual Hebrew and English speakers, your translation would often be different from mine.

 

[cogitans]

Well, the same could be said of any two languages, living or dead... especially with complex sentences such as some bible verses. Even if we were both native bilingual Hebrew and English speakers, your translation would often be different from mine.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. No one is a native speaker of Biblical Hebrew, indeed much of the language isn't really properly understood. But maybe Latin is different, and scholars consistently produce authentic material, without huge variations, when translating from English into Latin?

 

[Aurifex]

Well, here's a fun experiment which relates to ancient languages. Have some Hebrew professors translate a tricky verse from the Old Testament, not from Hebrew into English but the other way around. Sit back and enjoy the very different (and not very authentic) results. True, we're talking about a different language in this case, but I'm not immediately certain why the results of a similar experiment would not be much the same.

There's a slight contradiction going on here. If you are able to tell that the Hebrew composed by the Hebrew professors is "not very authentic", then it presupposes that the person judging it to be not very authentic knows what would constitute authentic Hebrew and could produce it if required.

 

[PacificVictory]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. No one is a native speaker of Biblical Hebrew, indeed much of the language isn't really properly understood. But maybe Latin is different, and scholars consistently produce authentic material, without huge variations, when translating from English into Latin?

No my point was that the language doesn't matter... if we were both native speakers of English and Chinese the results would be the same. My translations would vary from your translations in wording and sentence structure etc. Same with Latin or Greek or French or any language. But that doesn't mean that your translation is more or less authentic than mine.
Does that make sense to you?

 

[cogitans]

There's a slight contradiction going on here. If the Hebrew composed by the Hebrew professors is "not very authentic", then it presupposes that the person judging it to be not very authentic knows what would constitute authentic Hebrew and could produce it if required.

One only needs to look up the relevant verse in the original text to find the real deal. But there might be problems with grammatical forms and such which you will have in one language, and not the other. So I'm not claiming an exact parallel between Latin and Hebrew.

No my point was that the language doesn't matter... if we were both native speakers of English and Chinese the results would be the same. My translations would vary from your translations in wording and sentence structure etc. Same with Latin or Greek or French or any language. But that doesn't mean that your translation is more or less authentic than mine.
Does that make sense to you?

But the claim isn't that there can't be any variation at all. And now you're comparing two modern, living languages, which is not analogous to my proposed experiment at all.

 

[PacificVictory]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. No one is a native speaker of Biblical Hebrew, indeed much of the language isn't really properly understood. But maybe Latin is different, and scholars consistently produce authentic material, without huge variations, when translating from English into Latin?

To make my point more concisely... Someone with a solid understanding of Latin is able to translate concepts from English into correct, idiomatic Latin that very well may have been used by ancient Romans even if the phrase isn't attested to in any available surviving text.

How well an individual can do this is of course dependent on how much skill and experience they have as a Latinist.

 

[cogitans]

To make my point more concisely... Someone with a solid understanding of Latin is able to translate concepts from English into correct, idiomatic Latin that very well may have been used by ancient Romans even if the phrase isn't attested to in any available surviving text.

How well an individual can do this is of course dependent on how much skill and experience they have as a Latinist.

That's a pretty good and clear statement.

In order to create a parallel to my experiment, though, you would need a surviving text for comparison. And I can't help but think that even the most experienced Latinist would have fewer problems doing it the other way around. Technically being able to do such a thing doesn't really mean it's a worthwhile exercise, either.

Anyway, when it comes to studying languages, I doubt that there is any one approach which is correct for everyone.

 

[Gaia]

I keep a journal, which is mostly in English. Recently, however I have tried to write in it in Latin, occasionally. I don't know enough Latin to write very much, though, or sometimes even to make my point.

I have a friend who emails me in various languages using Google Translate. She then puts her original (English) words in the email. I respond in Latin. I first write the reply in Latin, then I write out a translation. I find this far easier than writing in English first, because this way I can use slightly different Latin words than what I would have originally intended, and I can still make my point without having to run to a dictionary/grammar book for every other word. Still, I sometimes have to resort to English. Heu.

Please, do not warn me of the evils of Google Translate. I have seen some of its English into Latin translations and spent considerable amounts of me ripping them apart, word by word... Even in languages I know none of, I can often tell that a translation from English is incorrect, because some words not translated. I know that they are not always cognates because of different alphabets...

I am trying to say that I would write far more in Latin if I did not have to constantly resort to circumlocution. But trying to write anything in Latin still helps my Latin, and when it improves enough, I am sure I will write far more in the language of the Romans!

 

[interRetiarius]

Does anyone keep one?

I've been keeping journals in English all my life, and in Spanish for the last 5 years and I eventually want to reach a level of Latin fluency where I can keep them in Latin as well.

Has anyone done this? If not, what kind of Latin writing have you done, if any?​

Do you know Ephemeris (http://ephemeris.alcuinus.net/) ? I think that it is a good starting point.