Short, Doable Latin

David Pellegrino, a retired, high school Latin teacher who lives in Upstate New York, occasionally shares on Facebook "short, doable Latin," which teachers can use with their students. Here is his post from Friday, February 24:

Cicero Basilo sal.

Tibi gratulor, mihi gaudeo; te amo, tua tueor; a te amari et, quid agas quidque agatur, certior fieri volo.

Cicero, Ad Familiares VI.15

I particularly like the passage's variety of pronouns, something students frequently need to review: tibi, mihi, te, and a te, not to mention the substantive use of the possessive adjective tua. Reading this letter also gives the opportunity to review the subjunctive use of the indirect question: quid agas quidque agatur set up by the Latin idiom certior fieri. There is a lot of Latin packed into this brief missive.

Here is my literal translation in the Latin word order:

"Cicero to Basilus greetings. To you I give thanks; for myself I rejoice; you I love, your things I watch over; by you to be loved and, what you are doing and what is being done, more certain to be made I want."

Now here is my polished translation:

"Greetings to Basilus from Cicero! Congratulations to you! I am so happy! I love you and am taking care of your personal affairs. I hope the feelings are mutual. Let me know how you're doing and what's going on."

Apparently this is the congratulatory message sent by Cicero to one Lucius Minucius Basilus, one of the conspirators who is taking refuge or has fled after the assassination of Julius Caesar. This context explains the expressions of congratulations, thanks, and affection for Basilus from Cicero, who was no fan of Caesar or his politics.

Translating Cicero in Word Order

I have encouraged my students this year to read and translate their Latin passages in the order in which they appear, left to right. We have endured the "Yoda-speak" and seem to be making progress. After we translate in the word order, we do, of course, go back and "English it up."

In his First Oration Against Catiline, Cicero writes in chapter 11:

Tune eum quem esse hostem comperisti, quem ducem belli futurum vides, quem expectari imperatorem in castris hostium sentis, auctorem sceleris, principem coniurationis, evocatorem servorum et civium perditorum, exire patiere, ut abs te non emissus ex urbe, sed immisus in urbem esse videatur?

When we approach this from the beginning and move from left to write, we end up saying, with appropriate inflection of our voice in English,

"Do you [something] him whom you have discovered to be an enemy, whom you[etc.], whom you [etc.], whom you know to be an author of crime, a chief of conspiracy, an inciter of slaves and of evil citizens, to leave you will allow..."

The advantages of this technique allows the student to know immediately that the speaker of the passage (in this case, the personified Republic) is asking a question of Cicero about Catiline (Tune eum). Then there are three full relative clauses and then three more relative clauses abbreviated by ellipsis, and then an infinitive and (finally!) the main verb. If a student were to hunt and peck through this sentence, she would be hopelessly lost. Indeed, after the first reading in Latin, the relative clauses would be easily identified and mentally bracketed, then leading to a easier discovery of exire patiere to complete the main sentence. The students do need, of course, a prompt that patiere is really a patieris. The student then passes to the rest of the sentence, a subordinate clause, happliy marked by the ut.

"Latin Word Order Doesn't Matter..."

I hear repeatedly from my students that they have been taught that Latin word order does not matter. I gasp and reply that Latin word order makes all the difference!

A little bit of background first -- I teach Latin II, III, IV, AP Latin Literature, and AP Latin: Vergil. Strange to say, I have not taught Latin I in well over a decade! I regularly get my students from four different Latin I teachers and then lead them upward as far as they are willing and able to go.

I have come to the conclusion that I will have to approach these teachers and address this issue as a fundamental understanding of the Latin language. Since I am not known particularly for my tact, I will have to proceed gently and bring up the subject at the appropriate time.

I tell my Latin II and III students (when we complete our Compositio Hodierna) that the Romans did not have punctuation, did not underline their words, did not have bold print or italics, but relied upon word order to show emphasis and contribute to the meaning.

An example readily made itself available today as we began our reading of Caesar's De Bello Gallico in Latin IV. After encouraging my advanced students to read and translate in Latin word order (left to right, NOT hunting for the subject and verb, as I am so accustomed to do), we came across in the very first paragraph,

Gallos ab Aquitanis Garumna flumen, a Belgis Matrona et Sequana dividit.

When a student asked, "Why did the sentence begin with an accusative?" and scratched his head, I, remembering the conversation I had had with Latin II just the class period before, seized the opportunity to discuss the meaning and importance of Latin word order. I told them that the most important positions in the Latin sentence was the first and last words and that everything in between simply filled in the meaning. So, in our sentence from Caesar, the emphasis was on "the Gauls" and what happened to them (dividit), not so much on the names of the actual rivers, although that information was still important.

I have frequently had this conversation with my AP students when we are analyzing poetry, but I have never really taught this to my lower level students for whom this information is just as important. Now if I can just tell the Latin I teachers who send me their students...