Is this the end of Latin in state schools?

[Edmontine]

Depressing news:

The Guardian

a) This was what is known as an argument reductio ad absurdum: I was advancing a ridiculous premise only in order to show you that if I said the same thing about art and architecture as you do about Latin, then you would be able to see how faulty your argument is.

b) You could benefit from a study of the Classical models of argument and rhetoric: that would allow you to understand parody, satire, and irony (all terms deriving from Classical Greek or Latin or both). Some familiarity with the Latin satirists might have clued you in to the ironic tone of my post.

c) What art and design is to your career, Latin is to mine. It’s also a key to the richness of our cultural heritage. Why shouldn’t state schools teach it? If every Year 7 is painting a portrait in cheap watercolours so that a very very few of them can go on to study architecture years later, why is Latin any different?

(NB: my DP is an architect 😆)

Gosh, no, I’m not ‘delighted’ at all, that’s quite the projection. I’m realistic about some of the recently announced private school closures being less to do with the imposition of VAT and more to do with those schools being in a financial hole for a number of years. I’m also cynical about parents in Facebook groups using media articles to claim that moving their child from a private school to an oversubscribed outstanding state school has ruined the child’s chance of going to vet school.

State school children can study a number of academic subjects. I can think of O level subjects that I took which are often not available at GCSE level now that are just as valid as Latin.

Ego valde sciebam quid ageres.

To be fair, Chat GPT can actually quickly translate anything into Latin, to be proficient in Art / design takes years of learning and a lot of the time you either have it or you don’t

The amount of Latin required by a lot of industries these days, for example Doctors/ Lawyers can be quickly translated in a google / chat GPT search and is really non essential for either of those industry’s ( and a lot of others) in this day and age.

Proficiency in art and design is essential from anything from architecture to fashion design ( and many many more industries) Pursuing a degree in either field without a strong foundation in these skills would likely prove to be a completely unproductive endeavour.

So please don’t compare the usefulness of one to the other

In essence, I believe the reason this topic has riled you so much seems to stem from the fact that you’ve devoted years of your time and education to mastering Latin, only to discover that many people don’t hold it in high regard and consider it quite unnecessary for children to study it at 2nd level

You haven’t actually read my posts at all, have you? And you certainly didn’t understand the point. I didn’t master any Latin because I went to a comp. And my choices later in life of what I could do in my discipline were affected by it. I don’t think traditional academic subjects should be withheld from state school pupils, or that being able to know about a significant part of our history, languages and culture should be the preserve of only a few.

You’ve missed the argument entirely if you think academic subjects should be entirely about usefulness. Most of them aren’t, at school level. But you need a broad academic education with lots of exposure to interesting subjects that aren’t just for use or money or future jobs.

And chat GPT does not translate things accurately. It probably does as good a job at translation as a builder does using CAD. Perhaps we should get rid of architects altogether? Many contractors can design and put up standard building designs with no input from an architect. Any building that requires any kind of architectural vision is a waste of money, when we could just get a structural engineer to check over a few bog standard contractor-led design and builds and that would be much cheaper and more useful to society all round.

What art and design is to your career, Latin is to mine.

Do you or did you not study Latin, if you did not study it then please don’t come out with statements like that because I did study Art and design so it’s not quite the same thing.

If you did study it then my point about why I think you have become so riled up still stands, and no I did not read all your posts, why on earth would I, there are so many

Also it’s very evident from your comments that your understanding of Architecture and the industry is extremely limited. As a result, I won’t be engaging in a detailed discussion on this platform with you as it would be completely pointless and also going off topic, but you seem intent on referring back to a subject which you know very little about

I'm sad that some people still think Latin is pointless. I did GCSE Latin decades ago and it was the most useful GCSE I had in opening doors for me, yes it was seen as elitest but I went to a state school and due to other factors that could have held me back, Latin helped to overcome that. I also struggled with grammar at school, it gave me an insight into why I should try to use grammar properly. I found it useful in science subjects I studied after school and it gave me a love of history too. I still use it now 30 odd years on.

Shame it is being ditched in state schools.

To be fair, Chat GPT can actually quickly translate anything into Latin, to be proficient in Art / design takes years of learning and a lot of the time you either have it or you don’t

You are either being deliberately provocative or you know nothing about learning a language.

It's the logic side of learning Latin that makes it useful. Not needing to speak the language makes it more accessible to children who have confidence issues with speech. It is very rules based, structured and a good introduction to "messier" languages later...

Was way more useful that Russian GCSE. Although reading the Cyrillic alphabet has its uses.

Latin can either be a very logic based subject for a science focussed student, potentially broadening their outlook, or it helps with logic/structure for a student who believes they can't do "logic" because it's "dressed as" a language rather than a science - but still develops the skills. As a "dead" language the rules are still much more evident than German or Russian and very much more so than French.

English is a very illogical language linguistically because it is such a melting pot ..

Absolutely. It’s fantastic training for a brain.

(And an absolute joy to teach as the pupil watches the language structure unfold. Introducing a young relative to Latin was some of the must fun I’ve ever had. And yes, they were very willing!)

It is depressing to see so many with such a utilitarian view of education and a wish to see a direct correlation between a subject and a future career. Latin is great fun - not for everyone, granted, but for a lot of us. It sharpens logical thinking and an eye for detail - introduces pupils to a different world view, which is expressed in the language and it is embedded in our culture. That should be enough for it to be welcomed as part of the curriculum. [And no, Chat GPT cannot achieve the above - that's just crass.]

When I went to secondary school in the 70s, those schools that taught Latin to O level also did the same for Ancient Greek. Is this still taught in schools?

I don't think they should scrap it but I don’t think it means the end of Latin because it's relatively new and there were (a few) state schools already offering Latin before this funding existed and they're likely to continue to do so.
I do think it's a shame though. It's not a huge saving for government. I used to be skeptical about the value of Latin but I know several kids who did it (state school) and loved it and have pursued it at university. Talking to them has really opened my eyes to what an interesting subject it is and what a great foundation it is for learning other languages.

Fewer schools teach Ancient Greek but some do. Our local comprehensive does.

When I was at school in the 1970s Latin was already dying out in state schools. I think it was almost universally taught in grammar schools and most independent schools up until the 1960s and many of those would have offered Greek as well. Once the 11+ started to be phased out and the direct grant scheme was abolished, many of the former grammar and direct grant schools were either closed or became comprehensives, often by merging with a local secondary modern school. Some of the comps offered Latin as an optional subject, a few offered Greek as well, most offered neither. When I started my Classics degree, almost all the students in my year had been at independent schools. (A good few were funded by the taxpayer, as I was, through the direct grant scheme.) Most of us had both Latin and Greek A levels. Some were starting Greek from scratch or had just about reached O level standard alongside Latin A level. Two of those got Firsts in Classics, which meant they had to reach full Finals standard in both languages. They were very, very bright. They did both have very good Latin, though, and that was crucial.

I'm quite interested in the comments about Latin. All I remember was amo amas amat etc. and translating sentences about oxes and going go the market. Maybe I didn't realise what it was teaching me!

As someone who spend over a decade as a designer in the fashion industry and now spends at least 50% of my time doing graphic design, I can definitely say that you can go to Art College and work as a designer WITHOUT doing it at school.

I did an Art Foundation before my first degree as I thought it would be handy for archaeological illustration. Put my own portfolio together in my spare time and was given an unconditional offer.

I then went to Art College in my 20's and did a design degree. Won several major competitions and awards in my final year and a full time job offer after graduation.

So, nope, art at school is definitely not essential for a career.

It gives me pleasure to be able to decode the inscriptions on Roman altars and statues and sometimes even understand the jokes. I like that I can read at least some of personal copy of Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematicaz with its title page telling me that it was printed by Samuel Pepys as President of the Royal Society.

Unlike English Literature, which I was withdrawn from after failing my mock exam, Latin made sense. I was annoyed that timetabling constraints didn't allow me take Latin beyond year nine. I mention Lit because the quoted PP said "Come to think of it, the most absolutely useless school subject is one nearly all student take - English Language, which bears no relationship at all to any university language course and has no real value compared to English literature."

I disagree. English Language meant that I left school knowing how to punctuate properly and spell. Lit, I just cannot do that kind of reading and writing. I can program in four languages and write technical documentation all day, but I don't understand the story books nor even the exam questions with Lit. I can't even write a job application letter without AI assistance. I'm just not any kind of creative writer.

This is a very old debate, apparently. Here is a Protestant pastor describing 'the kingdom of Kerry where rich and poor are ...classical scholars ' in 1837.

He sees an old herdsman standing on a hillock -
' I beckoned him to come down and asked him some question about the romantic spot on which he stood. He did not understand one word I said but addressed me very fluently in Latin ....and we parted as wise as we met'
Later the same day he encountered a ' hedge school' master teaching Latin to some boys and this time has a chat in English.
' Now , notwithstanding all this I am still of the opinion that this kind of learning is not only useless , but injurious for the lower classes. .....Such knowledge creates pride ; a certain degree of it makes a man think he is born to be a learned man , and that the handles of the plough or the business of the counter would disgrace him ; but either of these is safe for him who attends them , while the former is uncertain and deceitful.'
The old class envy cuts both ways it would appear. Can't have Jack being as good as his master.
Bit off topic but - would Duolingo Latin be any use? It's not like a native speaker will laugh at your pronunciation.

I had no idea there was a Doulingo Latin!

Just had a very brief look. It seems quite fun so might be an un-intimidating introduction. But how soon do you get to a stage where you need rigorous explanation - and does Duolingo provide that? (Not in my memory of revising my long forgotten German.)

There’s no harm in it, I guess.

I don't think that Duolingo is good at systematic grammar learning, so it's ok but not as good as the old Cambridge Latin Course with Caecilius etc and a teacher explaining the grammar

I'm told (by a friend who is both a Duolingo nut and a Latin nut) that Duolingo Latin is terrible.

Great quote @Abhannmor . Where is it from?

It's from the Appendix to a book of poetry by Eoghan Rua O Súilleabhán : Na Aislingi .

Published by Aubane Historical Society 2002. Might be hard to track down but you never know. It originally appeared in a tract called ' Hints Addressed to the Smallholders and Peasantry of Ireland ' 1837 by Martin Doyle , pen name of the above mentioned rector.

When I did Latin GCSE at a grammar school in the 80s, it was known as the easiest A available. It probably still is.

Yes, it was useful as mental "puzzle" training, and introduction to grammar/tenses etc for other languages. But learning other and more (living) languages earlier is also useful for this, and it's not only "utilitarian" to think that would be a better use of resources.

"The thing about Latin is that because it’s a language, obviously you can’t just get to A-level standard quickly later on - you need to build on it from its foundations, whereas people learn accounting or similar from scratch at a later age."

But you can, of course, learn it from scratch at a later age. You can do Classics at Cambridge, which I assume is high standard, with no previous Latin or Greek. Arguably, that would be a better time to learn it should you wish, when you can go into depth, rather than spending five years doing it at school so you can memorise two pages of The Aeneid.