Writers demand return of Latin to curriculum?

[EmilyKent]

Monday, Jun 14 2010
Writers demand return of Latin to curriculum to end Labour's 'discrimination' of classics
By Laura Clark
Last updated at 2:03 AM on 14th June 2010

The sound of 'amo, amas, amat' being chanted by children learning Latin has long since faded from most of our classrooms. But not, perhaps, for much longer.

A group of writers and broadcasters including Ian Hislop and Sir Tom Stoppard is calling for the return of Latin to the curriculum.

They are urging ministers to end Labour's 'discrimination' against the language of the Romans and give it the same status as French, German and Spanish.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1286312/Writers-demand-return-Latin-curriculum-end-Labours-discrimination-classics.html#ixzz0qmrYEQMB


Quisque comoedum est!



Edit: I was so startled I forgot the link!

[non sociopath skin]

1. The usual "Public School Culture Rules, Akay Yah" suspects.

And an excuse for the Wail to print daft, anachronistic Latin phrases.

What about the "discrimination" against Mandarin, Japanese, Hindi, Arabic, Swahili - to name but a few? At least living people (lots of 'em) speak them.

Elitist hogwash.

The Skin

[EmilyKent]

2. I'd say just plain absurd.

I can't believe that anyone would seriously propose this. Mandarin or Hindi would certainly be much more useful.

[miscsoc]

24. We had Latin at my comprehensive school.

It was a pretty average school in social makeup, it was an old one though and had traditions about these things. I didn't take it, I took classics though. I can't read a word, but from what I've read the structure of Latin lends itself to the development of logic, language skills - not sure about this "treat it like a modern language" stuff, since it obviously isn't - but I don't object to having it in schools at all or really see how it's elitist.

[enlightenment]

3. I had to beg to have the Latin and Ancient Greek I took in

college accepted for my language requirement (and still had to take French and Spanish in grad school). My son's high school offered Latin - he took four years worth. The kids' LOVED it; it was the most popular language class offered.

I don't think it's elitist; since I didn't have a language requirement when I was a kid (the oh-so liberal 60s/70s) and only learned Japanese because we lived there, I was at a disadvantage coming back to college as a mature (very) student. The foundation of Latin helped me immensely when it came to understanding French and Spanish. My son agrees and is thankful that he has it as a base for learning the modern Romance languages.

(The Greek was for fun - I wanted to read the raunchy poetry in the original)

[EmilyKent]

4. If one is concentrating specifically on Romance languages,

for whatever reason, then Latin is a tremendous help. But for most students, who only wish to pick up a useful and not necessarily connected language, there are other far better choices.

[enlightenment]

5. I don't disagree - I do disagree with the assessment that

Latin is a dead or useless language, because it certainly is not (even outside of studying the Romance languages).

That's a kind of thinking that goes back to the modern belief that education is only good if it will help someone 'get ahead'. Yes, in the modern world Chinese or Hindi is probably more 'useful' and there's nothing wrong with learning them (I wish I could but new languages are painfully difficult for me these days). It's not the choice of the language to learn, it's the REASON why people choose them that I find alarming.

I'm a college instructor and sometimes despair at the number of students who reject any knowledge that they don't feel will provide them an immediate benefit; learning for the sake of learning is dying a slow death and making us all worse off for it loss.

[EmilyKent]

6. I would have said that

learning Mandarin or any other language is simply more practical than learning Latin because you are far more likely to meet Chinese rather than Latin speaking people.

Learning something solely for the purpose of learning is what people do anyway. Many people have an interest that is of no benefit whatever to them, they simply like it.

[enlightenment]

9. I think you might be surprised at the number of students I have

who preface any conversation on learning with 'what good will this do me?' I would love to believe that learning for the sake of learning is what people do anyway - but I'm afraid those people are in a growing minority these days.

[EmilyKent]

10. I think students have always questioned it.

And if a teacher can't come up with a good answer, it shouldn't be taught. In fact, a teacher should explain to students at the beginning of every year why they need to learn a subject. Otherwise it just seems like punishment for no reason.

I always found algebra to be a punishment. I had no idea it could be so useful. Perhaps if I had known at the time?

People pursue their own interests, or hobbies if you will. They learn no end of things that aren't the slightest use to them in everyday life.

[enlightenment]

11. Interesting perspective.

I hated algebra . . .

[EmilyKent]

12. And did it 'improve your character'

to be forced to learn something you hated, and something you haven't had the slightest use for since? ;)

[enlightenment]

15. Probably - if only for making me understand that

I am capable of doing something even if I find it boring, tedious, and - yes - useless. Character building generally comes from adversity, doesn't it? At least that's what my granny used to say . . . :evilgrin:

[EmilyKent]

16. No, character is what you are

when nobody's looking. :D

[enlightenment]

18. Ah - that sounds like her (granny's) morals/scruples

opinion. I rather like it.

She always said she had no morals, but plenty of scruples. I asked her (I was about 7 or 8, I think) what the difference was between them.
She said that morals are what other people tell you you should have; scruples are what you tell yourself you should have.

For her, that certainly amounted to 'character when nobody was looking' !

[EmilyKent]

19. Words to live by!

I like your granny.

[enlightenment]

20. She was a pretty extraordinary woman -

she took no prisoners and made no enemies in a long and eventful life. She's been gone almost 30 years, but she's still the voice in my head. I consider myself very lucky!

[EmilyKent]

21. The best remembrance she could have.

Yes, you were very lucky!

[enlightenment]

22. Thanks. And you know what?

She hated her Latin classes (born in 1899, of course her school taught it) - my mother loved hers; granny could never comprehend why. I suspect she would have much preferred learning Chinese or Hindi !

;)

[EmilyKent]

23. LOL well there you go!

It's always wise to listen to your granny! :D

[non sociopath skin]

7. I would have thought that there were only three reasons for learning a language

a) Because you want to be able to people who speak it.
b) Because you wish to study the language, history or another aspect of the relevant culture.
c) Because you decide on a whim that you'd like to learn it.

As you say, learning a language is challenging and I think there has to be a damn good reason for teaching it to someone who doesn't particularly want to learn it.

I did Latin at school in the 60s for four years and somehow managed to scrape a GCE pass. I hated it, every minute of it - though I loved my French, German and Russian classes. And having obtained a degree in English and taught English in school for nearly thirty years, I found my Latin to be of little or no benefit.

It's a specialist subject. Let's leave it that way.

The Skin

[enlightenment]

8. I teach history and find it beneficial - different strokes, I guess.

I suspect your school system has larger problems right now than whether or not Latin should be reintroduced to the curriculum - I know the US school system certainly does!

[LeftishBrit]

13. 'What I did 50 years ago is good enough for the youth of today!'

I have nothing against those who want to learn Latin doing so (I did myself in the days of the dinosaurs, and neither minded it, nor found it of much later use!) But there are just so many hours in the day, and so many important things for kids to learn, and Latin does not seem to me to be a priority for most people. With all the threatened education cuts, there are a lot of things that should come ahead of Latin in the queue for educational support.

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. It is impossible to give Latin "the same status as French, German and Spanish"

because it is not spoken by anyone now. The nearest you get to that is some church music - and my Latin teacher and my music teacher disagreed on pronunciation anyway.

It's a far more restricted subject than any significant living language - as well as the lack of anything oral, it also has a very limited literature, thanks to the lack of printing presses for most of its existence.

I know that some say it 'trains the brain' to analyse and contruct logically, but learning a computer language would do that more directly, and be more practical. The reciting of conjugations, declensions and principal parts is also a pretty discredited form of teaching, though one which they still hadn't got rid of in the lates 70s and early 80s for Latin when I learnt it. And while it may support learning a Romance language, you'd do better devoting more time to those languages.

It is a specialist subject, suitable for those studying ancient history, archaeology etc.

[EmilyKent]

17. Education has exploded in recent years,

and there are so many new subjects to teach I can't imagine why anyone would go back to old outdated ones.