logoalt Hacker News

cwnythtoday at 3:35 AM5 repliesview on HN

As a former Latin instructor with literally decades of experience, I strongly recommend not relying solely on Ørberg. The outcomes of those who refused to supplement it with a proper grammar and dictionary were far, far behind those who used Wheelock alone.

It's very popular online, but it's methodologically bunk.


Replies

golem14today at 6:09 AM

As a former pupil that took 7+years of Latin, I think the probability of actually reading latin texts fluently today would have been orders of magnitude higher had instruction been coupled with Ørberg. I still want to be able to read hobbitus ille, but no thanks to my Latin classes (and I think I had decent teachers).

show 1 reply
efskaptoday at 4:18 AM

Thanks for the perspective! I guess it depends on the outcomes in question

If they're measured by traditional academic metrics (parsing, recalling declension tables, translating into English), then Wheelock's grammar-first approach really does optimize for that. On the other hand Ørberg optimizes more for reading fluency and intuitive comprehension, which is harder to measure on a standard Latin exam.

show 4 replies
wy1981today at 12:23 PM

As an aside, do you still teach Latin? If not, any online recommendations for Latin tutors? Thanks in advance.

show 1 reply
lo_zamoyskitoday at 12:04 PM

In which case, I’ll drop the books of the late Reginald Foster who taught at the Gregorian University, Teresianum and Urbanianum and worked in the Latin Letters section of the Vatican’s Secretariat of State: Ossa Latinitatis Sola, Ossium Carnes Multae, and Os Praesens Reginaldi Docentis.

Pay08today at 4:25 AM

I've only been on the student side of this (with Hebrew), but that has been my experience as well. These sorts of books can work, but it needs extraordinarily good teachers to do so.