RSS Feed

Author Archives: Carla Hurt

When ‘comprehensible input’ is not enough

Posted on

I’ve been on Latin reddit discussions for years and one single educational theory comes up again and again as if it were the only way to learn a language: Krashen and his comprehensible input hypothesis.

Put simply, a learner should be introduced to the each feature of the language incrementally, by receiving input that contains their previous level of competence plus the next feature (i + 1).

This is extremely similar to Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development which can be summarised as “for optimal learning, give a student enough challenge but not too much”. And “if a challenge is too great, give them scaffolding (i.e. help) until they can do it with the scaffold, then gradually take the scaffold away.”

There is sound wisdom in advice as basic as “give them just enough challenge” – that it is what we aim to do in teaching every subject, not just languages.

The error comes in believing that if a student successfully translates a sentence which happens to contain the target grammar feature, they necessarily understood the target grammar feature.

I see this all the time when teaching the accusative case to a beginner level class of mixed ability.

A lot of textbooks, when introducing the accusative, just keep on piling on sentence after sentence in the format of Subject-Object-Verb (SOV):

puer puellam videt.

The boy sees the girl.

As teachers we try to verbally explain that the ending of “puella” changed here, and this is the accusative case and you should pay atttention to it. That’s all well and good, but the experiential learning is more powerful for the student, and it often overpowers the verbal, abstract, theoretical explanation. What the student learns experientially from seeing SOV sentence after SOV sentence is that “the first noun I see is the subject, the second noun I see is the object”. By contrast, a single-letter difference on the end of the second word seems of minor importance. “Oh, so the second word gets a spelling change. Cool. Well I already guessed it was the object – correctly! – without noticing the one letter difference. I don’t need that letter.” And the more SOV sentences they see, the more their reliance on assuming the SOV word order is reinforced.

Step back and think how little a change an -m is on the end of puellam. When you are reading, you don’t read every single letter in every word. You glance at each word and it triggers recognition. Ifm there’sm one differentm letter sometimesm you can still recognise what word it’s supposed to be, and ignore the extra letter, just like you ignored the extra -m’s in this sentence. Seeing puella and puellam as variant spellings of the same word does not seem like that big of a deal to a lot of beginner Latin students, if they even registered there was an -m at all.

So now, I’m going to use Lingua Latina Per Se Illustrata (LLPSI) as an example of how ‘comprehensible input’ can reinforce an unintended habit. I chose this because the Krashen crowd likes this book. However, it is far from the only textbook that does this. I could have chosen almost any.

Chapter 3 introduces the accusative case. Therefore, I tallied up the word order in all the 41 sentences containing an accusative case noun in Ch. 3 (but I excluded sentences near the end which contained the relative pronoun, which I would treat as a seperate and more difficult topic).

These are the stats: a student can correctly assume that the first noun is the subject in 36 out of the 41 sentences. That’s 88% for just assuming English-like word order.

In the remaining five sentences, a student can try translating the first noun in each phrase as the subject and not necessarily believe they made a mistake from the context. If the teacher does not immediately correct them, many students will work on the assumption that these answers could be correct:

Quīntus īrātus est et Mārcum pulsat.

*Quintus is angry and Marcus punches. (in the next sentence, Marcus indeed punches Quintus, and Julia then complains that Marcus punches Quintus.)

Iūlia plōrat et Aemiliam vocat: “Mamma!”

*Julia cries and Aemilia calls. “Mamma!” (It makes sense that the mum might call to her daughter to figure out why she’s crying. Then again, it would be odd for the next bit of speech to be Julia’s, but sometimes the word for “she says” is left out. And sometimes students just forget who is meant to be the mum or daughter.)

pater dormit neque tē audit

*Father is sleeping and you don’t hear [him]. (That’s why you didn’t know he was asleep, you just didn’t hear whether he was awake or asleep)

Iūlius Quīntum videt eumque interrogat

*Julius sees Quintus and he asks (the father really does do the asking in the next sentence.)

Mārcum verberat, quia puer improbus est.

*Marcus is hitting [people], because he is a rude boy. (Rude boys do beat up people.)

Students can use an incorrect method to translate sentences that happen to contain the accusative case, and apparently get it right almost all the time, reinforcing their erroneous assumptions. The input is comprehensible and it ‘contains’ that one extra grammar feature (i + 1), but it does so in such a way that it gives the same reward and reinforcement to ignoring the accusative case ending as it does to actually paying attention to the endings.

There are a variety of solutions to this particular problem – for example, a teacher can train students on three word sentences with totally random word order (SOV, OSV, SVO, OVS), showing that they must rely on word endings alone for meaning. I don’t prefer this approach personally, because it gives the impression that Latin word order is random, as if it were concocted to trip up students like a puzzle.

Another approach is to give a “fill in the blanks” exercise to students where they have to put the nominative and accusative endings on the Latin words to show they know they’re supposed to be there. Unless you’re training students to compose in Latin (in which case this is a good scaffolding step), I think from a reader’s perspective, this type of exercise just reinforces to students that they can still read and understand the meaning of the Latin, even with the endings removed, so endings are really unnecessary for comprehension. No wonder Latin lost its endings in the Romance languages, if you can read “Marc__ Iuli__ pulsat” and already guess what it’s supposed to say! Noun endings are clearly superfluous to getting the meaning.

My favoured approach to teaching students to really heed the accusative case is to give them many examples of a sentence type I call “SOV-OV” and work on them in an environment that gives instant feedback:

The word order of the first part is Subject-Object-Verb (SOV), while the second part is Object-Verb (OV) with an implied subject carried over from the start of the sentence.

In this sentence, the format of the question shows that the answer must either be “and the daughter greets” or “and greets the daughter”.

The words have to be carefully chosen. The subject and object must be people (who, unlike inanimate objects, are capable of both acting and receiving action), and the verb must make sense as an action either person could do to the other. The student makes a choice not based on what they could assume from context, but only on the grammatical information in the word they are focusing on, and instantly, the computer tells them if their choice was correct.

Also, the word order in this sentence is something they are likely to encounter in real stories, as the implied subject is carried over without it needing to be restated. This is more natural than getting sentences in totally jumbled word orders, or having to insert an unknown “he/she” at the start of a sentence without a stated subject.

Just so that students don’t learn “the word in this position must be an object”, I sprinkle its opposite version amongst the example questions too. This is the SOV-SV sentence that would accompany the above example:

The instant feedback is key, or else students will believe they were right when they were actually wrong. I’ve been making these as online exercises via the platform Education Perfect, so that as soon as students select their answer, they are given instant feedback (and an explanation for why they were wrong, if they were wrong). You could also convert these into multiple choice questions on a free platform like Quizlet. If I have to teach in a tech-free classroom (a rarity in this pandemic now), I give students an answer key to their practice sentences and instruct them to correct their sentences as soon as they finish each question.

Habits (like assuming the first noun is a subject) are not broken by verbally explaining this to young students and hoping they do it on their own when they are caught up in the flow of reading. Students learn more powerfully by “doing”, and a poorly designed experience can teach them things we don’t intend. When designing comprehensible input for a target grammar feature, the reading activity has to reward only the right reasoning, or it will unintentionally reinforce a lazy and erroneous assumption.

Getting better at teaching scansion

Posted on

scansion4

Previously, I had taught the scansion of dactylic hexameter by giving a lecture of the whole system then getting students to have a crack at it with a copy of Latin text – and with no macrons printed either.

(I quickly learned not to use the opening of Aeneid 1 as the starter material, because line 2 is so aberrant – you could go hundreds of lines without seeing an –ia ending turn into a –ja like that! It’s awful! If I do use the opening of the Aeneid for learning scansion, I tell students to skip line 2, and all the while it stares at us awkwardly on the board.)

Now I’ve just introduced scansion with my year 11s, who are translating a section of Ovid’s Metamorphoses, and I’ve worked out a way to make the first introduction to scansion less of a lecture, and more of an intuitive workshop.

icarusanddaedalus_painting

Icarus and Daedalus – our set passage from Ovid, and perhaps a metaphor for how students feel when they first see hexameter scansion. [source]

My goal in this session is not to give students a step-by-step formula for answering exam questions – not yet. My goal is to bring them to understand scansion from first principles.

Continue reading →

‘Palatina Medea’ or ‘Medea Palatina’? A preference for adjective-noun word order in Latin

Posted on

We’ve been told that adjectives in Latin ‘tend to’ or ‘prefer to’ follow the nouns they describe.

But on the contrary, the statistical evidence shows that Caesar and Cicero actually preferred putting adjectives before nouns.

We didn’t learn that ‘noun then adjective’ rule from reading unadapted Latin. We didn’t discover it from real usage. We learned it from our textbooks and from word of mouth. ‘They’ said that it was true and ‘they’ must right!

So when Cicero dramatically calls Clodia a ‘Medea of the Palatine’, we think he should naturally put his adjective after the noun, but he doesn’t:

507px-George_Romney_-_Lady_Hamilton_as_Medea

George Romney’s painting of ‘Lady Hamilton as Medea’. Source: [link]

Sic enim, iudices, reperietis … hanc Palatinam Medeam migrationemque hanc adulescenti causam sive malorum omnium sive potius sermonum fuisse.

For indeed, judges, you will find out… that this Palatine Medea and this migration of hers [to Caelius’s neighbourhood] has been the cause of either all the ills or, rather, all the rumours for the young man. 

However, examples like this don’t change our minds about adjective-noun order. Since they told us that adjectives ‘usually follow’ the noun, that must mean that Cicero was violating the ‘natural word order’ for dramatic effect.

It doesn’t matter how many anecdotal counter-examples we read when actually encountering the Latin; ‘this was the rule’ when we learned Latin, therefore whatever we see later confirms it. Whenever an author puts a noun first, it’s because of the rule; and whenever an author puts an adjective first, it’s because he does it for effect; ‘the exception proves the rule’ (!!).

So let’s get into the actual statistics.

Continue reading →

Speed-running putting on a toga

Posted on

What can you do stuck at home inside? See how fast you can get yourself dressed for the Senate of course.

I started this challenge when someone said, “You need slaves or helpers to get yourself dressed in a toga – it’s so long and difficult to drape.” I understand that in practice, a wealthy senator probably did get a slave to help him dress; but I wanted to point out that it isn’t that hard to put it on quickly by yourself, and you aren’t required to be helped.

I think it is a matter of familiarity. We don’t wear togas much these days, and so we don’t have the years of practice that would make it come as second nature. But we succeed today in say, tying ties, tying shoelaces, slipping into tight dresses, and all other awkward clothes-wearing feats – as long as we do it often enough.

More videos to come in this series – I’ll post my personal best run soon!

Tabula: a strategic 2-player Roman board and dice game

Picture yourself planning for a Year 8 class in the final period of the day. It’s the second last week of term and everyone has finished their exams and have mentally started their holidays already. The class includes several (loud, influential) students who are not continuing Latin next year. They’ve probably been watching videos all day and I don’t want to contribute more to that. What do you do with them?

35efffc8260c89c01aaacc4121ad70e9

Pieces from the Gloucester Tabula board. Source: [Link]

How about play a strategic ancient Roman board and dice game?

Tabula was enjoyed for hundreds of years during the Roman period. It similar to Backgammon and relatively easy to explain.

For your convenience I have found here a version of Tabula which is playable, fun, and well explained. I’ve also made a printable board for it.

Continue reading →

The accent of words ending in -que

TL;DR: Latin words ending in -que should be accented on the syllable before -que only if that syllable is (or has become) heavy; otherwise, the word should retain its original accent. If this sounds new to you, that’s probably because you’ve been following Allen & Greenough and other nineteenth century scholarship.

SPQR Roman inscription augustus imperator

The rules of accent in Classical Latin are usually very simple. Almost all words follow the formula of the ‘Penultimate Law’, which states that the accent in multiple syllable words falls on the second-last (the penultimate) syllable if this is of heavy quantity, and otherwise on the third-last (the antepenultimate).[1]

But the enclitic –que (and the other enclitics, –ve, –ne, –ce) complicates these rules.

Continue reading →

Latin tutoring: Practice literary and context questions for Aeneid VI

The golden bough, ticket to the underworld in Aeneid VI. I painted this in my Year 12 - check it out at my deviantArt gallery

The golden bough, ticket to the underworld in Aeneid VI.
I painted this in my Year 12 – check it out at my deviantArt gallery

I’ve been captivated once again by the wonderful style and substance of Vergil’s Aeneid.

But this year I’ve been particularly nerding out because my three Year 12 Latin tutoring students are all studying book VI, the journey to the Underworld, which was the book I studied when I was in Year 12.

Continue reading →

Twelve tenses: When English outdoes Ancient Greek in precision

Posted on

I have sometimes heard people say, “Ancient Greek is the most precise language in the world.” This usually comes from people who have not studied Greek for themselves and haven’t really seen its quirks first-hand.

DSC00951_2

I don’t know how best to respond. True, there are distinctions which Greek makes that English doesn’t make, but in turn there are distinctions English makes which Greek doesn’t make. (For example, “I said” and “they said” would both be expressed εἶπον [eipon] in Ancient Greek, since the first person singular and third person plural look identical in certain tenses.) As long as the idea of overall precision is left undefined, it’s not really possible to measure whether or to what extent one language is “more precise” than another.

Continue reading →

A Latin counting song and thoughts on Primary Latin

Posted on

I’m sorry that I missed an update in April, but there has been at least one reason for that. I’ve been involved in a pilot program to introduce Latin to a public primary school, and so far it has been a blast.

Here’s a song I sung to the children yesterday on my guitar.

First we learned the numbers one to ten, and then played a game. I say “unus”, and someone else says “duo” and so on in the sequence, but if two people say the next number at the same time, we have to start again at “unus”. It was fun and a good way to get them to participate in saying the numbers aloud.

Continue reading →

Latin and Greek for your pets

Posted on

Your dog can learn Latin and Ancient Greek! And everyone in the family can pick up a bit of Latin or Ancient Greek along with you and your four-legged pal.

The internet may be chocked full of cat and dog videos, but did you know there aren’t any videos of dogs responding to (grammatically correct) Latin or Ancient Greek commands? You, sir or madam, can fix that. Teach your pet Latin or Ancient Greek and film the results – I want to see your adorable furry companions nailing the ancient languages like a boss.

To get you started on teaching your animals the languages of Plato and Cicero, I’ve put together a list of suggested commands – imperatives that you can teach your dog (or cat, or rat, or any animal that can be trained to respond to verbal commands). I’ve also made a couple videos of me saying these commands in Latin and Ancient Greek, using Classical reconstructed pronunciation for both languages. Sadly, I don’t have a pet myself, but I do have Rufus here.

For the forms of the imperative, suggested commands, and some extra words that I couldn’t illustrate with my puppet dog Rufus (he can’t roll over… it really tangles him), check out the words below.

Continue reading →