ginlindzey | Entries tagged with progressions

October 2017

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30	31

Custom Text

A conversation came up on the Cambridge list regarding SALVIOI ROGANTI in Stage 40. Many had replied, and of course this is definitely the correct answer, but I felt there was more to add. So here it is:

***

>>Re line 5: "Salvio roganti" is a dative that goes with "suadebant": different people were recommending different things to Salvius [who was] asking what should be done.

Actually, there's a little something more here.

One of the things I tell my students to watch for is a dative case when in the midst of conversation. It develops over time in the text, beginning in Stage 11 when we start seeing the dative with respondit and dixit:

Marcus Quarto dixit "Afer candidatus optimus est."

"minime! Holconius candidatus optimus est," Quartus fratri respondit.

In Stage 23 we are met with this:

deinde Memor, qui iam tremebat sudabatque, alteri sacerdoti, "iubeo te," inquit, "omina inspicere."

The "inquit" is buried in the quote, which appears in the next paragraph in the text, so it appears that we have just a nominative and dative (Memor...alteri sacerdoti) without the "said" or "replied" or similar. It does show up, but at first it doesn't appear to be there. Admittedly alteri sacerdoti is difficult for students to pick up as dative without pausing to parse unless they are reading with expectation. The expectation is that we have a conversation going on, therefore someone will be speaking TO SOMEONE.

By Stage 32 (and probably sooner) we have datives being moved to the front of the sentence in a conversation. And in this case, we have a qui correlative in the dative:

"nemo nisi insanus laborat."
cui respondit Euphrosyne voce serena, "omnibus autem laborandum est."

And then again:

huic Baebii sententiae omnes plauserunt.

And applause is a type of reply. (And I like the genitive nicely nested inside the dative phrase.)

In Stage 39 we find one of the first (I think) datives with a participle:

Publio hoc narranti Domitianus manu significat ut desistat.

Dative up front again, in a conversation of sorts, and we get this wonderful snapshot of the action perfectly. Publius is still reciting his version of the Ovid they were studying and while he is doing this Domitian raises his hand and we end with an indirect command (without a "verb of the head" but certainly it's being communicated).

In fact, it is interesting as we move through the stages how CLC condenses and combines what we know. In the case above, present participles, datives in conversation, plus an indirect command. In Stage 40 it is condensed more:

Salvio roganti quid esset agendum, alii alia suadebant.

Dative in conversation (though we don't realize we have a conversation sort of thing going on until we get to suadebant, which of course, also takes a dative), present participle which is also a "verb of the head" governing an indirect question, and that indirect question also includes a passive periphrastic. So cool.

I know I have skipped a lot of examples that would show the progression and development in the way datives are used, but this gives you a small glimpse. These progressions are interesting to me to chase down, but a bit time consuming.

Don't forget once you are reading Vergil, you have plenty of examples of datives up front, sometimes with participles, and you have to keep in mind that there is a conversation of some sort going on:

talia iactanti stridens Aquilone procella / velum adversa ferit (1.102-103)

Anyway. There's more to Salvio roganti than just accidentally confusing students with something that appears to be an ablative absolute. It's not that at all. It's about datives, it's about conversations, it's about developing those reading expectations that are critical to moving forward in Latin. And it's up to us teachers to truly understand what our textbook is doing, to ask these questions, to look for and follow the progressions, and show them to our students so they will develop the skills necessary.

Tags:

I'm working on a paper I'm presenting at TFLA tomorrow. I foolishly volunteered but it will be a good thing. The fact is, I really like working on papers, pouring over a text to try to find things (or using search engines). This year I have my eye on phrasing that turns up in Caesar.

I've posted this progression before (2 years ago when I was working on a different version of this paper for CAMWS), but this now includes examples from Caesar and Vergil that correspond to the construction from CLC. What I was showing with this progression, as I call it, is the development of a simple phrase for "after he said these words" to the more complex structures such as ablative absolutes. See if you can follow: (we'll see how it copies and pastes in...)

Progression from simpler to more advanced grammar for the same or similar phrase.

Memor, postquam haec verba dīxit, statim obdormīvit. (“Lūcius Marcius Memor” Unit 3 8)
Latrō, haec verba locūtus, exiit (“Vilbia” Unit 3 20).
Vilbia, simulatque haec audīvit, īrāta fontī appropinquat (“amor omnia vincit: scaena tertia” Unit 3 37).
haec verba locūtus, rēgī poculum obtulit (“in thermīs II” Unit 3 48).
senex, haec locūtus, lentē per iānuam exit (“Britannnia Perdomita” Unit 3 54).
cum Dumnorix haec dīxisset, Quīntus rem sēcum anxius cōgitābat (“Quīntus cōnsilium capit” Unit 3 68).
Belimicus, cum haec audīvisset, gladium dēstrictum ad iugulum servī tenuit (“Salvius cōnsilium cognōscit” Unit 3 72).
sollicitus erat quod in epistulā, quam ad Agricolam mīserat, multa falsa scrīpserat (“in prīncipiīs” Unit 3 107).
deinde renovāvit ea quae in epistulā scrīpserat (“in prīncipiīs” Unit 3 107).
- his rebus adducti et auctoritate Orgetorigis permoti constituerunt ea quae ad proficiscendum pertinerent comparare, iumentorum et carrorum quam maximum numerum coemere, sementes quam maximas facere, ut in itinere copia frumenti suppeteret, cum proximis civitatibus pacem et amicitiam confirmare. (DBG 1.3.1)
haec cum audīvisset, Agricola respondit, “sī tālia fēcit, eī moriendum est” (“tribūnus” Unit 3 111).
- haec cum dixisset, procedit extra munitiones quaque pars hostium confertissima est visa irrumpit. (DBG 5.44.4)
haec ubi dīxit Agricola, Salvius respondit īrātus, “quam caecus es! quam longē errās!” (“contentiō” Unit 3 112).
- haec ubi dicta, cavum conversa cuspide montem / impulit in latus; ac venti velut agmine facto, / qua data porta, ruunt et terras turbine perflant. (Aeneid I.81-83)
- haec ubi dicta dedit, lacrimantem et multa volentem / dicere deseruit, tenuisque recessit in auras. (Aeneid II.790-791)

quod cum audīvisset, Salvius, “ego” inquit, “nōn Cogidubnus, aureōs tibi dedī (“cēna Salviī” Unit 3 150).
- quod cum animadvertisset Caesar, scaphas longarum navium, item speculatoria navigia militibus compleri iussit, et quos laborantes conspexerat, his subsidia submittebat. (DBG 4.26.4)
Belimicus hīs verbīs perturbātus, “nimium bibistī, mī amīce,” inquit (“Belimicus rēx” Unit 3 152).
- illi repentina re perturbati, etsi ab hoste ea dicebantur, tamen non neglegenda existimabant maximeque hac re permovebantur, quod civitatem ignobilem atque humilem Eburonum sua sponte populo Romano bellum facere ausam vix erat credendum. (DBG 5.28.2)
quae cum audīvisset, Haterius adeō gaudēbat ut dē tignō paene dēcideret (“polyspaston” Unit 3 198).
- quae cum adpropinquarent Britanniae et ex castris viderentur, tanta tempestas subito coorta est ut nulla earum cursum tenere posset, sed aliae eodem unde erant profectae referrentur, aliae ad inferiorem partem insulae, quae est propius solis occasum, magno suo cum periculo deicerentur;… (DBG 4.28.2)
hīs verbīs audītīs, praecō, quī Eryllum haudquāquam amābat, magnā vōce, “Eryllus!” inquit (“salūtātiō II” Unit 3 220).
- hīs dictīs impēnsō animum flammāvit amōre / spemque dedit dubiae mentī solvitque pudōrem (Aeneid IV.54-55).
- His animum arrecti dictis et fortis Achates / et pater Aeneas iamdudum erumpere nubem / ardebant. (Aeneid I.579-581)
- quam simul ac tālī persēnsit peste tenērī / cāra Iovis coniūnx nec fāmam obstāre furōrī / tālibus adgreditur Venerem Sāturnia dictīs: (Aeneid IV.90-93).
tum Messālīnus, simulatque haec Epaphrodītī verba audīvit, occāsiōne ūsus, “satis cōnstat,” inquit, “nūllōs hostēs ferōciōrēs Germānīs esse, nūllum ducem Domitiānō Augustō esse meliōrem (“cōnsilium Domitiānī II” Unit 4 57).
quibus verbīs sollemnibus dictīs, Pōlla postēs iānuae oleō unguit fascinātiōnis āvertendae causā (“cōnfarreātiō III” Unit 4 71).
quibus audītīs, Salvius spērāre coepit sē ē manibus accūsātōrum ēlāpsūrum esse (“cognitiō” Unit 4 105).
- quibus auditis liberaliter pollicitus hortatusque, ut in ea sententia permanerent, eos domum remittit et cum iis una Commium, quem ipse Atrebatibus superatis regem ibi constituerat, cuius et virtutem et consilium probabat, et quem sibi fidelem esse arbitrabatur, cuiusque auctoritas in his regionibus magni habebatur, mittit. (DBG 4.20.6)

And from these I have other directions to research--uses of id quod in CLC, certain types of participles (like I worked on for my paper this summer). If only I had time to do such things.

Current Mood: creative

Tags:

I posted the following on the CLC list earlier. I was hoping it would encourage more similarly "meaty" or useful posts, but really there's only been a flutter of "how I get my students to remember the participles." Is it me, or didn't the original poster want true HELP with using CLC Unit 3? I hear this problem all the time. The stories are longer, the students get frustrated, the teachers don't have ideas about how to truly teach the bigger concepts. That is, for many teachers there's just the endings/morphology and then the sentence, with the idea that if you memorize everything you can "decode" everything. But that's not enough. You have to help build structure. And here, in my reply, I'm talking about how to really internalize whole participial phrases, or so I think.

Is it just me?

Anyway, here was the initial post and my reply:

> This is my third year teaching, all three with the CLC. I love Cambridge,
> but I hope to learn strategies to become a more effective teacher
> (particularly with respect to the Unit III "green" book). I also hope to
> contribute to discussions from time to time, especially as I gain more
> experience.

I confess that the more I teach from CLC, the more I appreciate the artistry of Unit 3/the Green book. I like how it introduces participles; I like the progressions in development of clauses and phrases that are equivalent to "after he said/heard this" from postquam through many variations until you get to ablative absolutes. Part of me wants to write at length about all that I find neat in this book, but perhaps it would be better if you ask something specific--some particular aspect that your students don't get.

For instance, I demand that they be able to tell identify and of course accurately translate a present active, perfect active, and perfect passive participle. For present participles, I will often write preseNT [sic] to remind them to look for NT or NS. For perfect ACtive [sic] I tell them to look for ACcusative [sic] objects (and will only include on tests/quizzes perfect active participles that have accusative objects, and explain that of course they do not always have to have one, but when one is there you know for sure without looking the word up in the dictionary that it is a perfect active participle). For perfect passive participles, we say that they are "passing by" to remember that it has a/ab ablative of agents or ablative of means.

Also, for warm-ups, I will have them metaphrase whole participial phrases to get them used to them coming as a chunk or unit, and will often require the whole phrase to be translated on a vocabulary quiz (my quizzes are in context). To metaphrase, we use the placeholding sentence, "Someone verbed something (to someone)."

So, for instance, I might have the following:

1. Memor, togam praetextam gerens,
2. rex, e balneo egressus,
3. libertum frustra resistentem
4. templum, a fabris Romanis aedificatum, (*2 ways)

So the above would be:

1. Memor, wearing a toga praetexta, verbed something. (That is, the whole phrase is the subject.)
2. The king, having left from the bath, verbed something. (Once again, the whole phrase is the subject.)
3. Someone verbed the freedman resisting in vain. (The whole phrase is the direct object.)
4. a) The temple, built by Roman craftsmen, verbed something. (If the neuter is acting as the subject....)
b) Someone verbed the temple, built by Roman craftsmen. (If the neuter is acting as the object.)

As for the "progressions," you might want to see something I wrote for CAMWS a couple of years ago, a portion of which I posted here: http://ginlindzey.livejournal.com/2010/04/01/

Tags:

I recently gave a paper at CAMWS (Classical Association for the Middle West and South). There was a portion in it which I called progressions--how a textbook gets students to the point of being able to read Latin that is more like what they will encounter with a real author. I wanted to put that section here in case others (what few who may read this slow moving blog) may want to comment. Maybe they've observed similar things in the textbook they use.

***
Another feature of the Cambridge Latin Course that I’ve come to admire over the last several years is how they build up from simple to more complex phrasing. For instance, let us consider the phrase “after he said (or heard) these words.” One of the earliest phrasings for this occurs in Stage 21 of Unit 2: postquam haec verba dīxit. Simple enough. But if we follow how this phrase and similar are used subsequently, we see the following progression:

1. Memor, postquam haec verba dīxit, statim obdormīvit. (“Lūcius Marcius Memor” Unit 3 8)

2. Latrō, haec verba locūtus, exiit (“Vilbia” Unit 3 20).

3. Vilbia, simulatque haec audīvit, īrāta fontī appropinquat (“amor omnia vincit: scaena tertia” Unit 3 37).

4. haec verba locūtus, rēgī poculum obtulit (“in thermīs II” Unit 3 48).

5. senex, haec locūtus, lentē per iānuam exit (“Britannnia Perdomita” Unit 3 54).

6. cum Dumnorix haec dīxisset, Quīntus rem sēcum anxius cōgitābat (“Quīntus cōnsilium capit” Unit 3 68).

7. Belimicus, cum haec audīvisset, gladium dēstrictum ad iugulum servī tenuit (“Salvius cōnsilium cognōscit” Unit 3 72).

8. sollicitus erat quod in epistulā, quam ad Agricolam mīserat, multa falsa scrīpserat (“in prīncipiīs” Unit 3 107).

9. deinde renovāvit ea quae in epistulā scrīpserat (“in prīncipiīs” Unit 3 107).

10. haec cum audīvisset, Agricola respondit, “sī tālia fēcit, eī moriendum est” (“tribūnus” Unit 3 111).

11. haec ubi dīxit Agricola, Salvius respondit īrātus, “quam caecus es! quam longē errās!” (“contentiō” Unit 3 112).

12. quod cum audīvisset, Salvius, “ego” inquit, “nōn Cogidubnus, aureōs tibi dedī (“cēna Salviī” Unit 3 150).

13. Belimicus hīs verbīs perturbātus, “nimium bibistī, mī amīce,” inquit (“Belimicus rēx” Unit 3 152).

14. quae cum audīvisset, Haterius adeō gaudēbat ut dē tignō paene dēcideret (“polyspaston” Unit 3 198).

15. hīs verbīs audītīs, praecō, quī Eryllum haudquāquam amābat, magnā vōce, “Eryllus!” inquit (“salūtātiō II” Unit 3 220).

16. tum Messālīnus, simulatque haec Epaphrodītī verba audīvit, occāsiōne ūsus, “satis cōnstat,” inquit, “nūllōs hostēs ferōciōrēs Germānīs esse, nūllum ducem Domitiānō Augustō esse meliōrem (“cōnsilium Domitiānī II” Unit 4 57).

17. quibus verbīs sollemnibus dictīs, Pōlla postēs iānuae oleō unguit fascinātiōnis āvertendae causā (“cōnfarreātiō III” Unit 4 71).

18. quibus audītīs, Salvius spērāre coepit sē ē manibus accūsātōrum ēlāpsūrum esse (“cognitiō” Unit 4 105).

19. hīs dictīs impēnsō animum flammāvit amōre / spemque dedit dubiae mentī solvitque pudōrem (The Aeneid IV.54-55).

20. quam simul ac tālī persēnsit peste tenērī / cāra Iovis coniūnx nec fāmam obstāre furōrī / tālibus adgreditur Venerem Sāturnia dictīs: (IV.90-93).

The transition from a simple postquam clause through various subjunctive clauses to ablative absolutes (and those using a qui-transitional, no less) was gradual but meaningful, supporting a pattern already in place and thus developing into an expectation within the student’s mind. Repetition with slight variations reinforces both structure and meaning so that by the time you get to Vergil (or other authors), such phrases are second nature.
This is one of many progressions from simple to more complex grammar that the Cambridge Latin Course does well. I offer up, to those interested, tracing the type and phrasing of participles, quī transitionals, the use of ille, the position of genitives, and the use of versus and conversus. If conscientious teachers recognize and support through exercises or discussions these progressions, their students will become efficient readers of Latin.
***
Comments??

Current Mood: contemplative
Current Music: Robert Palmer: Multiply

Tags:

Syndicate

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Style Credit

Style: Elegant Notebook for Gold Leaf by rosecarmine
Resources: Yusuke Kamiyamane and Atle Mo