The Classics Society Mk II

I see, that makes sense. Well, I am quite a Latinist, and I work with the OLD a lot, but the only Latin-English dictionary I have is that pocket gem thingy which is obviously ridiculous. I love working with a decent dictionary. For reading, you don't have to understand every work (as you wouldn't when you read French, or when I read English), but for translating and writing commentaries, I always have to go to the Library which is annoying. We can't borrow any dictionaries, they're reference only, and the OLD is not online.

It's about 180 pounds when I buy it through Amazon Germany, and since I was offered part bursaries for both summer schools I'm going to in the summer, I think I may spend this sum on my education, and just keep using the whimsical fury I call my bike for a wee bit longer.

Sappho happy est de hac conclusione

You most certainly do. Well I suppose it depends on what you want to get out of the texts, if you want to just read them as you would French or German literature, sure I guess. I don't personally agree with this approach and I think its not an even slightly valid one to antiquity but ok.

For anyone working from a contextual perspective this is not a permitted approach, you need to understand not only every word but also why that word/construction hence the huge amount of secondary lit on register, semantics etc.

I don't think its a necessity until you get to more advanced work, but if you want it and are willing to save for it why not? You in particular really love your Latin anyway and I suspect you'd get more out of it than your average student anyway. Something like this is an investment for years. If I could get a cheap copy of the Lfge I'd jump on it.

That's basically what I meant. I was saying there are certain texts I can 'understand' without understanding the full meaning of every word, however to appreciate them in more detail, and in particular to translate them into decent English, I like to make use of an appropriate dictionary (among other things, of course).

I ADORE my Latin. And I've worked with the thing a lot, and will in the future. 180 pounds for 3 remaining undergrad years alone is 30 pounds for a semester. I pay more for printing and copying. With that in mind, it doesn't sound like that much of a luxury any more tbh.

There are people who spend more than that on getting hammered throughout term, the O Unio. costs around that actually.

Out of curiosity what do you use as a workaday dictionary? I'm just curious since you're studying in English but the average quality of German Latin dictionaries is better.

Skipped an entire day of research in order to read about the evolution and reception of the tradition, particularly on the continent.

On one hand its been a series of very distasteful essays (the subject matter, not the authors!) but on another really interesting, especially considering how the nature of my research topics (cultural context) is so focused that its easy to miss out some of this stuff. I.e you're trained to dismiss bad scholarship but never really question WHY people are going down such paths in the first place.

Fascinating.

Because it's fun and because you think you're really sophistiated while you write omething overly bad? I'm talking from experience

Just realised that the post isn't completely clear and on line. Let's simply put it like this. I was saying that a lot of what may seem like "bad reasoning" or even blatantly incorrect and moronic lines of reasoning employed by academics are not arrived at due to faulty logic, but in the absence of logic motivated by misplaced "nationalistic" reasoning.

Ha, not necessarily. I do kind of think this is an important topic, its certainly a debate that has been playing out in the Classics for a while and can actually be seen here at Oxford, for example: How do we approach them?

There is an increasingly large divide between hardlined philology, anthropology etc (the only real approach) and reception (a load of ****). The latter approach really is symptomatic of a lot of bad stuff in the discipline. Largely the assumption that "we're all Greeks".

This last line is essentially what the stuff I've been reading has been getting at, the use (abuse) of Classical antiquity by academics and nation states. Essentially a lot of the ****ty arguments arise from the idea that they were just like us/we're their heirs/can interpret on our own terms etc.

Look at Frankel's much celebrated commentary on the Agamemnon. Its absolute ****. Maybe a worthy approach to a Victorian novel, but not to Aiskhylos. Likewise fully 60% of the stuff one finds nowadays.

I really think for the discipline to have any integrity whatsoever and to stop being seen as a playground for rich white public schoolboys a lot of things need to change. As things stand I think I'm very much with the "Classics is useless and needs to die" crowd simply because its not doing its job and, quite frankly, most of this stuff could happily be taught in English Literature.

For every philologist we have 60 idiots on about Vampires and another 200 about the "Western tradition" or some such nonsense. I used to think the much touted criticism of Roman History funny (i.e most scholars are essentially biased because being Oxbridge types they erroneously subconsciously equate themselves with the Senatorial classes) but these past few years its just worried me.

Aaaaaah, just booked train tickets to London to go to the British Museum for the first time. I'm so lame, but Rosetta Stone etc =]

Ooooh, a blog, sounds fun! But also complex.

The BM is like...well if I was a Catholic it would be my Vatican, a Muslim: my Mecca. Well not quite, I probably love the Nat Arch Athens better...but still.

It is phenomenal. If you're going for the Greek stuff I STRONGLY recommend you also see as much as you can of the Assyrian etc stuff too to get context. Then go onto the Romans/Etruscans. Its...omg so awesome.

Particular goodies involve: scary Mesopotamian demons carved into walls full of writing. Rosetta Stone (duh!?), Hellenistic suit of armour. That's boring? THIS IS ONE IS A CROCODILE. Alexander as Mithras killing a bull.

And many more. =D

Well Sappho I look forward, as ever, to hearing your opinion. And anyone else for that matter.

A question. I'm thinking of starting a blog. Which in itself is ungainly and pretentious, but wait! Its largely meant to be a repository of resources and mini tutorials (largely philology) for students, looking for a provider which makes it private without a password or a direct link at first if I can anyway. It needs a name, I have a few but would welcome suggestions. You have three months to supply me with one. Winner gets a moderate sized Latin panegyric with late (3rd cent. +) phonological features just for that added air of authenticity. Or a picture of my cat, whatever.

Cool, that sounds interesting. I was just reading through Sihler's comparative grammar yesterday, it's been a while since I've done anything seriously classical tbh.

I don't understand what you mean by wanting a provider that makes it private without a password or direct link though -- how would anyone access it? Or do you just want it private at first so you can work on putting magnificent things up there without anyone being able to see your tinkering, and then you can grandly unveil when it's fully tinkered with?

By the way, on the topic of your discussion/rant earlier, what (if anything) do you think about Black Athena? It seems to be quite unpopular within classical circles, yet, from what I know of it (and of course I've not read all three volumes in entirety), it doesn't seem to be arguing much more than you were in your post. Lots of the criticism seems to be based around the idea that Bernal's use of evidence is a bit shaky, but I can't really comment on that.

Aaaaaah, just booked train tickets to London to go to the British Museum for the first time. I'm so lame, but Rosetta Stone etc =]

Ooooh, a blog, sounds fun! But also complex.

The BM is like...well if I was a Catholic it would be my Vatican, a Muslim: my Mecca. Well not quite, I probably love the Nat Arch Athens better...but still.

It is phenomenal. If you're going for the Greek stuff I STRONGLY recommend you also see as much as you can of the Assyrian etc stuff too to get context. Then go onto the Romans/Etruscans. Its...omg so awesome.

Particular goodies involve: scary Mesopotamian demons carved into walls full of writing. Rosetta Stone (duh!?), Hellenistic suit of armour. That's boring? THIS IS ONE IS A CROCODILE. Alexander as Mithras killing a bull.

And many more. =D

Someone else who gets excited about the Rosetta Stone, I saw on a Classics trip to British Museum in College.

I also found an Aztec mask which was the spitting image of George W. Bush. I hope it's still there, it made me giggle.