dead language redux
jsqu...@gmail.com
currently being acted out in the US Senate,
I grew tired of endlessly hearing
"health reform must be passed"
ever more stridently shrieked by that loathsome
Sen. Reid. He puts me to mind of Cato with his
"Carthago delenda est"
(, and, tangentially, having another go at sorting out
"gerund vs gerundive".)
Apparently, I am not the only one who hears
this Roman senator still shouting :
http://jetownsend.wordpress.com/2009/06/07/carthago-delenda-est/
So, what is my point?
It is this:
Is Latin dead?
Even if we don't use it at the check out
counter, does it not still give some spine
to western culture?
Ed Cryer
<jsqu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:59e02731-7bb2-44be...@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
Ancient Rome. It was their language. The Renaissance gave ancient
culture a rebirth. The great historical examples of Rome; what made it
great, what destroyed it; what constitution was the best; etc.
And the founding fathers of the USA were great admirers of the Republic.
Classical studies were the studies of what many regarded as the world's
greatest age. In fact Edward Gibbon in his Decline & Fall just asked
simply "Is there anyone who would deny that the greatest age of humanity
was the age of the Antonines?"
Latin lived on as the international language of learning; as the
language of the Catholic Church's liturgy; and as the language used by
Rome's great literary giants.
Your question, to me, raises the parallel question of the extent that
the three above items are still alive. Because it was those that kept it
in use.
Ed