4 ms·

I believe the other popular suggestion is Ørberg's Lingua Latīna: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_%C3%98rberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_%C3%98rbe

I believe the other popular suggestion is Ørberg's Lingua Latīna: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_%C3%98rberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_%C3%98rberg

jthnews 6y ago
Yes, several other commenters have made that suggestion, and I agree it is a good one. This tool is aimed at those interested in a public domain text, or people who using other tools who are looking for additional practice in the form of interactive exercises with explanations.
billfruit 6y ago
I thought the common suggestion for a modern Latin textbook is Wheelock. https://www.amazon.com/Wheelocks-Latin-7th/dp/0061997226# https://www.amazon.com/Wheelocks-Latin-7th/dp/0061997226#
- HuShifang 6y ago
  From my own casual investigations, Wheelock is considered a perfectly good textbook (particularly for people with lots of experience learning languages, e.g. grad students in the humanities), but also a bit "traditional," focusing more on learning grammatical rules and less on developing an intuition for the language. Lingua Latina Per Se Illustrata is at the other, "immersion"-oriented end of the spectrum.
  - voldacar 6y ago
    My latin teacher used both wheelock and lingua latina. They complement each other really well.
- throw0101a 6y ago
  It is common, but that does not mean it's good, especially with all the research that's been done in learning over the past few decades. As someone remarked, Wheelock: > It teaches about Latin, teaching you the Latin language is not the goal of this book […] * https://old.reddit.com/r/latin/comments/8rp222/ https://old.reddit.com/r/latin/comments/8rp222/ Wheelock can be used as a technical reference if you want to know the exact structure. But it's like trying to read the C++ ISO spec if you want to program. The consensus seems to be either Ørberg and/or Cambridge if you want dead-tree materials.
  - andi999 6y ago
    Why call it dead tree which sounds negative and not carbon sink instead...
SilasX 6y ago
Yes! Orberg's is neat in that it's all in Latin, and you just infer what everything means from the pictures as you read. I got referred to it from this earlier HN thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14448974 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14448974
cambalache 6y ago
For me it is the best book for language learning I have ever seen, irrespective of the target language.

I believe the other popular suggestion is Ørberg's Lingua Latīna: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_%C3%98rberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_%C3%98rberg

jthnews 6y ago

Yes, several other commenters have made that suggestion, and I agree it is a good one. This tool is aimed at those interested in a public domain text, or people who using other tools who are looking for additional practice in the form of interactive exercises with explanations.

billfruit 6y ago

I thought the common suggestion for a modern Latin textbook is Wheelock. https://www.amazon.com/Wheelocks-Latin-7th/dp/0061997226# https://www.amazon.com/Wheelocks-Latin-7th/dp/0061997226#

HuShifang 6y ago
From my own casual investigations, Wheelock is considered a perfectly good textbook (particularly for people with lots of experience learning languages, e.g. grad students in the humanities), but also a bit "traditional," focusing more on learning grammatical rules and less on developing an intuition for the language. Lingua Latina Per Se Illustrata is at the other, "immersion"-oriented end of the spectrum.
- voldacar 6y ago
  My latin teacher used both wheelock and lingua latina. They complement each other really well.
throw0101a 6y ago
It is common, but that does not mean it's good, especially with all the research that's been done in learning over the past few decades. As someone remarked, Wheelock: > It teaches about Latin, teaching you the Latin language is not the goal of this book […] * https://old.reddit.com/r/latin/comments/8rp222/ https://old.reddit.com/r/latin/comments/8rp222/ Wheelock can be used as a technical reference if you want to know the exact structure. But it's like trying to read the C++ ISO spec if you want to program. The consensus seems to be either Ørberg and/or Cambridge if you want dead-tree materials.
- andi999 6y ago
  Why call it dead tree which sounds negative and not carbon sink instead...

SilasX 6y ago

Yes! Orberg's is neat in that it's all in Latin, and you just infer what everything means from the pictures as you read. I got referred to it from this earlier HN thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14448974 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14448974

cambalache 6y ago

For me it is the best book for language learning I have ever seen, irrespective of the target language.