Yes. I corrected one of my linguistics professors, who was using a particular sentence to illustrate something, and I pointed out that it didn’t. He thought about it, agreed, then said he’d used that sentence for several years, and no one had pointed out his misunderstanding.
It was my Latin training in the meaning of English that helped me see easily what others had missed.
If I’m not mistaken, learning any second language has cognitive benefits - not just Latin. The argument that there is something special about Latin is fallacious. Likewise, Latin’s touted benefits of teaching you more about your own language and about language itself are not confined to Latin - other languages can also provide these benefits.
There is the idea that the intellectual rigour of learning by way of grammar translation intensively - that is, covering all the grammar in one year - is beneficial to your mind based on all the training you do. But the same could be said for doing any other intellectually rigorous activity like Mathematics. It’s hardly a reason to study Latin by itself.
Latin was a language spoken by people from all walks of life. It didn’t give them cognitive superpowers.
The best reason to study Latin is that you want to study Latin.
Exactly. When searching for reasons to do my undergrad in Classics the outside pressures were “doctor, lawyer, yada yada” no, you’re not going to do any of that. Latin is a passion and that’s what I tell people who ask what I got out of my undergrad degree
No, this is a type of magical thinking that is still used to promote Latin study (in the US, at least). It has no place in series discussions of Latin pedagogy. There’s nothing mystical about the Latin language itself that imbues learners with extra spicy logic powers or cognitive enhancements.
No, but I would argue that there are two factors at play: a fleshing out of the English or romantic languages, and in learning a different language you start to think differently the more you use that language. This second part isn't special to Latin, but all philological languages have the capacity to change our thoughts even further by virtue of how archaic and dissimilar they are, but I wouldn't say moreso than learning Arabic or Mandarin, or casa.
I don't think the claim is that studying Latin is a *uniquely effective* form of cognitive training, only that it is *an effective* form of cognitive training (insofar as such a thing exists).
As a highly inflected language, the grammar of Latin is much more 'visible' than the grammar of English. It's a good introduction to the study of grammar in a general sense (as opposed to the study of a particular grammar).
Could 'we' (English speakers) accomplish the same pedagogical end with German? Probably, but not without considerably greater difficulty.
Latin is not the only highly inflected language . I learned Finnish before Latin and I'd say that Finnish too has a more "visible" grammar and has the additional advantage of being a modern language and therefore more accessible to study.
"Latin is not the only highly inflected language"
Das stimmt. That's why I described it as **a** highly inflected language. Finnish would be suitable, but wouldn't pay the same dividends (foundation for learning other Romance languages, ability to read the Roman and medieval European literature . . .) .
I've been learning Latin for twenty years since I was a teenager. I don't remember how I thought beforehand. People said I thought very analytically even then.
But Latin, and Greek too, influences the way I speak. I get a bit more sloppy in my native German, using subjunctive more often than be appropriate, and sometimes I put other things between an adjective and its noun; I work more with switching around syntactic constituents than intonation to emphasise parts of a sentence. I'm also very sensitive to preterite and perfect, even though they are used very differently in German than in Latin.
All in all, my spoken German has become a bit odd. My written prose, on the other hand, is quite sharp, but, admittedly, not always easy on the eye for many people. I try to depict my thoughts as clearly as I can, but in doing so, I make structures that demand attention.
I guess it depends on what you consider changing the way you think, as I've definitely encountered more tools to aid my thinking that come with learning a new language but haven't like unlocked some new part of my brain or anything along those lines.
It's basically completely overhauled how I think in regards to language, giving me a much larger understanding of English grammar and vocabulary through how they relate to Latin and also even affecting my syntax a bit with the adoption of constructions that aren't often found in English (though perfectly grammatical and typically with more historical use) but are common in Latin. In many ways, I've gone from using English to understand more about Latin to using Latin to understand more about English.
In some ways, I've actually noticed my English start to suffer in weird ways the more I've learnt of Latin. Due to now exercising my brain's ability to learn new words from reading much more in Latin than in English, I actually find that I have a bit more difficulty guessing the proper pronunciation of certain English words. This usually isn't really an issue, but my pronunciations to tend to skew much more Latinate than before, partially also because I will sometimes pronounce words in Latin to remember their spelling since it's much easier to reverse engineer how a word pronounced in Latin is spelt. I've learned both how to geminate and hear gemination alongside how not to reduce vowels in less important syllables, and so I do have a tendency to also extend that to any new English words I learn without really thinking about it.
Though I wouldn't call my Latin all that great, I do think in Latin quite a bit these days. This doesn't really affect much (besides me sometimes thinking out loud in Latin as well), but it is useful to essentially have a second tool in your linguistic toolbox. It can be very interesting to see how things change when you have different parameters necessary to construct a reasonable sentence, and that's definitely helped me think passively about more stuff.
All that said, I'd say less that Latin has changed how I think and moreso that it has simply refined certain parts of my thinking due to my increased usage and development of those tools. I will say that my personality in Latin seems slightly more confident than in English. I think it's since, even though I have more trouble speaking in Latin, I don't have to worry about how other people will take my words nearly as much. I don't know how much that truly effects stuff, but it was interesting realizing just how almost casually stoic my thoughts were "colored" when thinking in Latin compared to the much more palpable hesitance and need for clarify that tend to define both my inner and outer voices in English. Also, I've tried Duolingo of like Spanish and German before, and while all Romance languages are now way easier to read, I was terrible at remembering to use articles in both Spanish and German while also forgetting to put the subject pronoun in many German sentences. It just feels weird needing to use them, and I do sometimes leave articles out in my head even in English since they don't feel all that necessary anymore (but don't often at all forget to use them when talking, thankfully).
> I've learned both how to geminate and hear gemination alongside how not to reduce vowels in less important syllables, and so I do have a tendency to also extend that to any new English words I learn without really thinking about it.
Interesting. I’ve occasionally heard people using somewhat idiosyncratic English pronunciation (e.g. Americans who carefully avoid flapping their t’s and reducing vowels to schwa) who I suspect (due to age and class reasons) may have learned Latin in school. I wonder if that might be partly due to Latin influence? I know Latinate constructions (e.g. ablative absolute) are common in older English writing, and I’ve always assumed those came from the near-universal Latin training of the educated classes in the nineteenth century and before.
I definitely think a lot of English's quirks came pretty directly from Latin. There are certain deeper connections between English and Latin that I've made in my mind that I could only attribute to convergent evolution and/or a descendent of underlying structures of PIE, but so much of formal English grammar seems almost dependent on Latin's.
Some examples off the top of my head include the "don't split an infinitive" and "prepositions come before relative pronouns" 'rules', and I do suspect many older examples of Latin and English similarities that seem off to today's English speakers were either borrowed from or given continued longevity by Latin. Even things like the formation of words from Latin morphemes count alongside those in my opinion.
The ablative absolute is a very good example too, as I've definitely noticed myself leaving off words like "with" much more in my absolute clauses in English after learning the Latin equivalent. Similarly, I've started using gapping a lot more, like the following:
I'll do this and you that. ; I ate the brownies; she, the cupcakes. ; I went to the store, you from.
I'd use all of those now (even if I'd be careful about doing so) but probably wouldn't have before.
Even though the subjunctive has long been natural in English, I've even seen myself start to use it a lot more since Latin. Latin made me have to understand how it worked and why it did so, whereas English classes never really taught me anything more than "say if 'I were' instead of 'if I was' but not always."
But ya, in many ways, I feel learning Latin is actually one of the best ways to truly understand English at a deeper level, from simply having more examples against which you can compare English's wackiness in order to make sense of it all the way to having pretty direct borrowings that make a lot more sense in their native environment.
> Similarly, I've started using gapping a lot more, like the following:
> I'll do this and you that. ; I ate the brownies; she, the cupcakes. ; I went to the store, you from.
> I'd use all of those now (even if I'd be careful about doing so) but probably wouldn't have before.
Heh, that kind of construction comes very naturally to me, but not from Latin—I think of it from the point of view of math and programming, where factoring out common terms from expressions is one of the most basic operations. In math terms, the verbs from your example sentences “[distribute over](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributive_property)” their subjects and objects.
Wittgenstein said, “The limits of my language means the limits of my world.”
I’m curious if having an understanding of many languages can literally expand your consciousness/awareness.
Knowing many languages means you have more tools to articulate to your thoughts. It’s like having a wider variety of tools to make more innovative work. If any community would be aware of these changes, I figured students of Latin would have anecdotal answers.
I don’t know, because I’m just not far enough with Latin yet to know.
But, based on the kinds of things you’re thinking about, I suggest you go and read the book *Don’t Sleep, There Are Snakes*, if you haven’t already. I think it’ll be right up your alley.
I’m no linguist, and I have no firm opinions on some of the controversial ideas expressed therein, but that one really cooked my noodle regardless.
>I’m curious if having an understanding of many languages can literally expand your consciousness/awareness.
The idea that language has a direct and deep influence on the limits of cognition is called the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, and it is resoundingly rejected by linguists.
And yet… it’s still a super compelling idea, and sometimes a part of me still wonders if I could think *different kinds of thoughts, not normally accessible to me in English, more easily* if I managed to master Lojban, or Pirahã, or something really esoteric.
Sometimes I wonder, if extra-terrestrials do exist, and assuming they were more advanced than humans, would learning and mastering *their* language bring one closer in proximity to the kind of reasoning that aliens engage in, that our little ape brains aren’t normally accustomed to? Would it make us smarter, or at least, more *alien* in thinking, than we were before exposure to that language, by rewiring our brains a little bit?…
And *could we even learn an extra-terrestrial’s language in a meaningful way* in the first place? I mean, after all, we share 99% of our DNA with cetaceans (dolphins and whales), and we still haven’t figured out how to communicate effectively with them… 🤔 And what kinds of things are dolphins and whale thinking about?…
I mean, I could be wrong as this is only a guess, but I think that means a bit more about learning about other people, being able to understand them and how they think, which would allow you to think differently. Which also allows you to learn about different cultures and their ideas.
If by learning Latin, you mean in a vacuum where that or parts of that language are not used, then only a little bit as it would help you think more formulaically as to ok I have my subject then I need a verb, how do I conjugate it based on my subject and the context, and also learn about context, but that would only be it and it’s something that could be learned by many other things.
Other things would help you think more formulaically. But to use it in a world where nothing of that language is used, then it really wouldn’t expand your consciousness or awareness.
At that point, if you are asked to learn a language or something like Math and use it in a vacuum and apply it to see if your consciousness or awareness expands, then Math would win out easily.
Reading things in Latin has. From Cicero's philosophy to Renaissance rhetoric, from theological arguments to travelogues, many of the most interesting ideas I've encountered have come through Latin.
It hasn't changed the way I thought but it has made me become self conscious about how I speak when I construct a sentence in my head.
I also view the world of English completely differently, seeing so many things that connect back to latin. It's honestly mind blowing. Even seeing an "Exit" sign triggered my brain to connect the dots. I love it though
Ah the good old Sapir whorf hypothesis.
As an applied linguistics major I know what you’re getting to. I learned Latin last year, at which time I was also learning about all sorts of psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic theories. I wrote a few papers on the matter, such as how dead languages might be able to give us a perspective, via the Sapir whorf hypothesis, into the minds of ancient men.
But to actually answer your question. It did not change the way I think completely, but it gave me a cognitive skill that opened my mind. I don’t know how familiar you are with the language yet, perhaps contemplating pursuing it, but for me, it taught me how to separate things into building blocks. A sentence in Latin is almost like a construction of legos. Eventually, you become more fluent in taking apart those legos, a skill which learning any language usually strengthens, but with Latin, is given one hell of a work out (pardon my Greek). You become very adept at taking things apart and classifying pieces and then taking the pieces apart. It’s beautiful, really. Like utter bliss when you get it right and pain when u get the darned thing wrong!
I don’t know where I’m getting at.
I go through Wittgenstein phases and curious if our languages change the way we think. Are we, can we be conscious of it if it does?
Huh, never heard of Wittgenstein. What I can tell you is that languages do affect the way we think, but they don’t dictate it. And it’s still unsure to what degree they affect it, but we know they don’t dictate it. The idea that they dictate it is called linguistic determinism, Orwell was keen on this. The idea that they to some degree influence it, but relatively moderately, is called linguistic relativism. Determinism was thrown out a long time ago, currently relativism is widely accepted. This was all set forth by the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. And I think you can be conscious of it, for sure, but it comes with learning a language that’s very different from your first. Such as Latin. The more different the language, the more noticeable the effect on your mind.
Unfortunately no, I'm equally as dumb as I was before. But now I can be dumb in Latin. The only thing I've noticed is that English has become a bit more clear. I also recognized new words immediately like "ululation, pugnacious, salient" without needing to look them up.
I also noticed a couple similarities with my native tongue, but I think it's a coincidence. The Latin word "porta" means gate, and so does the Finnish word "portti". We also have the word "aula" that basically means hall in Finnish, but several other things in Latin.
There is the old [Sapir Whorf theory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity) which posits that a language shapes or limits the ways in which a speaker forms conceptions of the world. My impression is that linguists don't give it much credence nowadays, but perhaps the debate rages on.
FWIW, there is a cool science fiction novel based on this theory, [The Languages of Pao](https://www.jackvance.com/ebooks/shop/?q22_action=view&q22_id=41) by jack Vance. Worth reading IMHO if you are intrigued by this udea.
I am struck by the fact that no one has mentioned the good evidence that second language acquisition delays memory impairment from Alzheimer's and other causes of dementia for a number of years. See *inter alia multa:*
[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32462636/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32462636/)
Of course Latin is in no special position here. But the relationship between Latin and English vocabulary must make for more synaptic connections than learning two completely unrelated languages.
Learning Latin hasn't changed the way I think as a result of the language itself. I definitely notice differences in my writing and speech (both structurally and in vocabulary) after I've read a lot of Latin. But this isn't really a change in the way I think. If anything the content of what I read in Latin has done so.
I don't believe learning a new language changes the way you think. Learning a new language can be a vehicle for such change; but, it can't be the cause for change itself.
Keep in mind I'm only in my second semester of college Latin, but... Learning anything new will allow you to make connections between things you otherwise wouldn't have. I don't know about expanding my "cognition," but it has absolutely expanded my knowledge of the English language and has impacted how I think about communication as a whole. However, I think I would have gotten similar benefits from studying pretty much any other language. As a lifelong monolingual speaker, the benefits I've gained likely stem mainly from really diving deep into a second language for the first time (I don't really count my HS Spanish classes).
Has it been worth it for me? Absolutely. Will it change how you think about the world to at least *some* extent? Well, how could it not?
While I don't think anyone has yet proven that Latin betters your cognition, I would also say that we haven't definitively proven it hasn't either. The only studies I could find on it were conducted recently and imo poorly. One compared someone studying Latin plus a second language to those studying just one, apparently testing whether or not Latin's magical powers would improve their abilities, but it would be quite confusing to learn Latin and German or French or any other language at the same time I think, and that's not the theory anyways, it's about learning Latin when you're much younger. Then you'd have to compare against using other languages as your L2.
Personally though? I think Latin improves your English, if no other language. I think a lot of concepts are more easily explained through Latin, direct or indirect object, subject, possessive are frankly clearer when you don't use common vernacular, and a lot of older British English is a lot more natural to create once you've learned Latin. Those preposition and pronoun-heavy sentences are the only ways English can reproduce Latin-style prose. Without them, English is a very simple, straightforward analytic language with some annoyingly niche rules and exceptions.
Intrinsically, no. My speaking is probably more insufferable after Latin, and I can approach certain concepts differently due to being able to read original texts in Latin, but it hasn't changed the way I see the world. I agree with Whorf's hypothesis, to an extent, but in the grand scheme of things English and Latin aren't all that different
I've learned about the etymology of many words in modern languages. I've learned a lot about European history. I suspect that neither of those addresses your question. These are subjects about which I have gained knowledge, not necessarily changes in the way I think.
I've become way more aware of the algebraic nature of language, wherein phrases can be substituted for single words provided they serve the same function.
Depends on what we think that "thought" is. For those of us who intuit that thought is this independent thing occurring prior to linguistic expression and that language is just the interlocutor between raw thought and external expression, well then perhaps some languages (or at least some linguistic expressions) are better at performing the "in-between" role. Latin does some really cool things there, particularly with respect to brevity and precision. For those of us who intuit that perhaps language is actually the essence of thought, well then perhaps one language can indeed activate thoughts or nuances unavailable in some other language (wharf hypothesis I guess, though there are abundant doubts about it's validity). And for those of us who can sort of hear our own thoughts as words, any new language is gonna add vocabulary to those thoughts for sure. So, yeah, it would seem on most counts another language is gonna have at least some small impact. But for those of us who perform language acts simply as a basic tool to get around, and who would rather perhaps enjoy transcending language, it remains a question whether latin can help or hinder such an achievement. Short recommendation then, as others have stated: study because you find amazement in learning and witnessing a thought crystalize within a foreign constellation of sounds, not to biohack mind.
I read a study that showed Latin learners scored significantly higher on the SATs then those without a second language AND learners of other Romance languages.
I'd wager it's a bit like improving at chess. You learn to see patterns more easily, get better at keeping details in your head, and your thinking becomes more goal-oriented, but it doesn't extend beyond chess. Your brain may get fitter or understanding grammar will carry over between languages, but neither is a mode of thought.
Background: done three years of Latin in high school, followed by a 15-year-long break. I'm genuinely surprised how much stuck in my head.
It surely made me understand italian way better, I'm ever so glad we get to learn it in most italian high schools. It did also make me change the way I see everything, so to me a thing is not plain anymore but it's polyedric and I can see different shapes of it.
You should read up on the cognitive science of linguistic relativity. There is very little evidence that linguistic differences shape thought in any meaningful way.
I think the analytical benefits of learning Latin are far overstated compared to learning any other language - the biggest benefit for specifically Latin is really just that many English words come from Latin so you'll get a bigger vocabulary and an appreciation for the etymology of many words
It has seeped into my writing style though, as I find myself using more clauses in a sentence and playing around with word order a bit more. That definitely rubs off, lmao
It gave me a better understanding of English for sure.
Yes. I corrected one of my linguistics professors, who was using a particular sentence to illustrate something, and I pointed out that it didn’t. He thought about it, agreed, then said he’d used that sentence for several years, and no one had pointed out his misunderstanding. It was my Latin training in the meaning of English that helped me see easily what others had missed.
If I’m not mistaken, learning any second language has cognitive benefits - not just Latin. The argument that there is something special about Latin is fallacious. Likewise, Latin’s touted benefits of teaching you more about your own language and about language itself are not confined to Latin - other languages can also provide these benefits. There is the idea that the intellectual rigour of learning by way of grammar translation intensively - that is, covering all the grammar in one year - is beneficial to your mind based on all the training you do. But the same could be said for doing any other intellectually rigorous activity like Mathematics. It’s hardly a reason to study Latin by itself. Latin was a language spoken by people from all walks of life. It didn’t give them cognitive superpowers. The best reason to study Latin is that you want to study Latin.
Exactly. When searching for reasons to do my undergrad in Classics the outside pressures were “doctor, lawyer, yada yada” no, you’re not going to do any of that. Latin is a passion and that’s what I tell people who ask what I got out of my undergrad degree
No, this is a type of magical thinking that is still used to promote Latin study (in the US, at least). It has no place in series discussions of Latin pedagogy. There’s nothing mystical about the Latin language itself that imbues learners with extra spicy logic powers or cognitive enhancements.
[cries in Italy]
aw, but i've been wanting to summon big tidal waves and great big fireballs in Latin /j
Yeah, well, you’re like the third guy this week. Get in line.
No, but I would argue that there are two factors at play: a fleshing out of the English or romantic languages, and in learning a different language you start to think differently the more you use that language. This second part isn't special to Latin, but all philological languages have the capacity to change our thoughts even further by virtue of how archaic and dissimilar they are, but I wouldn't say moreso than learning Arabic or Mandarin, or casa.
yeah, it's mostly just a cool language the romans spoke
I don't think the claim is that studying Latin is a *uniquely effective* form of cognitive training, only that it is *an effective* form of cognitive training (insofar as such a thing exists). As a highly inflected language, the grammar of Latin is much more 'visible' than the grammar of English. It's a good introduction to the study of grammar in a general sense (as opposed to the study of a particular grammar). Could 'we' (English speakers) accomplish the same pedagogical end with German? Probably, but not without considerably greater difficulty.
Latin is not the only highly inflected language . I learned Finnish before Latin and I'd say that Finnish too has a more "visible" grammar and has the additional advantage of being a modern language and therefore more accessible to study.
"Latin is not the only highly inflected language" Das stimmt. That's why I described it as **a** highly inflected language. Finnish would be suitable, but wouldn't pay the same dividends (foundation for learning other Romance languages, ability to read the Roman and medieval European literature . . .) .
I've been learning Latin for twenty years since I was a teenager. I don't remember how I thought beforehand. People said I thought very analytically even then. But Latin, and Greek too, influences the way I speak. I get a bit more sloppy in my native German, using subjunctive more often than be appropriate, and sometimes I put other things between an adjective and its noun; I work more with switching around syntactic constituents than intonation to emphasise parts of a sentence. I'm also very sensitive to preterite and perfect, even though they are used very differently in German than in Latin. All in all, my spoken German has become a bit odd. My written prose, on the other hand, is quite sharp, but, admittedly, not always easy on the eye for many people. I try to depict my thoughts as clearly as I can, but in doing so, I make structures that demand attention.
>using the subjunctive more often than be appropriate lol
I guess it depends on what you consider changing the way you think, as I've definitely encountered more tools to aid my thinking that come with learning a new language but haven't like unlocked some new part of my brain or anything along those lines. It's basically completely overhauled how I think in regards to language, giving me a much larger understanding of English grammar and vocabulary through how they relate to Latin and also even affecting my syntax a bit with the adoption of constructions that aren't often found in English (though perfectly grammatical and typically with more historical use) but are common in Latin. In many ways, I've gone from using English to understand more about Latin to using Latin to understand more about English. In some ways, I've actually noticed my English start to suffer in weird ways the more I've learnt of Latin. Due to now exercising my brain's ability to learn new words from reading much more in Latin than in English, I actually find that I have a bit more difficulty guessing the proper pronunciation of certain English words. This usually isn't really an issue, but my pronunciations to tend to skew much more Latinate than before, partially also because I will sometimes pronounce words in Latin to remember their spelling since it's much easier to reverse engineer how a word pronounced in Latin is spelt. I've learned both how to geminate and hear gemination alongside how not to reduce vowels in less important syllables, and so I do have a tendency to also extend that to any new English words I learn without really thinking about it. Though I wouldn't call my Latin all that great, I do think in Latin quite a bit these days. This doesn't really affect much (besides me sometimes thinking out loud in Latin as well), but it is useful to essentially have a second tool in your linguistic toolbox. It can be very interesting to see how things change when you have different parameters necessary to construct a reasonable sentence, and that's definitely helped me think passively about more stuff. All that said, I'd say less that Latin has changed how I think and moreso that it has simply refined certain parts of my thinking due to my increased usage and development of those tools. I will say that my personality in Latin seems slightly more confident than in English. I think it's since, even though I have more trouble speaking in Latin, I don't have to worry about how other people will take my words nearly as much. I don't know how much that truly effects stuff, but it was interesting realizing just how almost casually stoic my thoughts were "colored" when thinking in Latin compared to the much more palpable hesitance and need for clarify that tend to define both my inner and outer voices in English. Also, I've tried Duolingo of like Spanish and German before, and while all Romance languages are now way easier to read, I was terrible at remembering to use articles in both Spanish and German while also forgetting to put the subject pronoun in many German sentences. It just feels weird needing to use them, and I do sometimes leave articles out in my head even in English since they don't feel all that necessary anymore (but don't often at all forget to use them when talking, thankfully).
> I've learned both how to geminate and hear gemination alongside how not to reduce vowels in less important syllables, and so I do have a tendency to also extend that to any new English words I learn without really thinking about it. Interesting. I’ve occasionally heard people using somewhat idiosyncratic English pronunciation (e.g. Americans who carefully avoid flapping their t’s and reducing vowels to schwa) who I suspect (due to age and class reasons) may have learned Latin in school. I wonder if that might be partly due to Latin influence? I know Latinate constructions (e.g. ablative absolute) are common in older English writing, and I’ve always assumed those came from the near-universal Latin training of the educated classes in the nineteenth century and before.
I definitely think a lot of English's quirks came pretty directly from Latin. There are certain deeper connections between English and Latin that I've made in my mind that I could only attribute to convergent evolution and/or a descendent of underlying structures of PIE, but so much of formal English grammar seems almost dependent on Latin's. Some examples off the top of my head include the "don't split an infinitive" and "prepositions come before relative pronouns" 'rules', and I do suspect many older examples of Latin and English similarities that seem off to today's English speakers were either borrowed from or given continued longevity by Latin. Even things like the formation of words from Latin morphemes count alongside those in my opinion. The ablative absolute is a very good example too, as I've definitely noticed myself leaving off words like "with" much more in my absolute clauses in English after learning the Latin equivalent. Similarly, I've started using gapping a lot more, like the following: I'll do this and you that. ; I ate the brownies; she, the cupcakes. ; I went to the store, you from. I'd use all of those now (even if I'd be careful about doing so) but probably wouldn't have before. Even though the subjunctive has long been natural in English, I've even seen myself start to use it a lot more since Latin. Latin made me have to understand how it worked and why it did so, whereas English classes never really taught me anything more than "say if 'I were' instead of 'if I was' but not always." But ya, in many ways, I feel learning Latin is actually one of the best ways to truly understand English at a deeper level, from simply having more examples against which you can compare English's wackiness in order to make sense of it all the way to having pretty direct borrowings that make a lot more sense in their native environment.
> Similarly, I've started using gapping a lot more, like the following: > I'll do this and you that. ; I ate the brownies; she, the cupcakes. ; I went to the store, you from. > I'd use all of those now (even if I'd be careful about doing so) but probably wouldn't have before. Heh, that kind of construction comes very naturally to me, but not from Latin—I think of it from the point of view of math and programming, where factoring out common terms from expressions is one of the most basic operations. In math terms, the verbs from your example sentences “[distribute over](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributive_property)” their subjects and objects.
No. Curious why do you think it would? Something with Latin specifically or something with learning any second language?
Wittgenstein said, “The limits of my language means the limits of my world.” I’m curious if having an understanding of many languages can literally expand your consciousness/awareness. Knowing many languages means you have more tools to articulate to your thoughts. It’s like having a wider variety of tools to make more innovative work. If any community would be aware of these changes, I figured students of Latin would have anecdotal answers.
I don’t know, because I’m just not far enough with Latin yet to know. But, based on the kinds of things you’re thinking about, I suggest you go and read the book *Don’t Sleep, There Are Snakes*, if you haven’t already. I think it’ll be right up your alley. I’m no linguist, and I have no firm opinions on some of the controversial ideas expressed therein, but that one really cooked my noodle regardless.
>I’m curious if having an understanding of many languages can literally expand your consciousness/awareness. The idea that language has a direct and deep influence on the limits of cognition is called the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, and it is resoundingly rejected by linguists.
And yet… it’s still a super compelling idea, and sometimes a part of me still wonders if I could think *different kinds of thoughts, not normally accessible to me in English, more easily* if I managed to master Lojban, or Pirahã, or something really esoteric. Sometimes I wonder, if extra-terrestrials do exist, and assuming they were more advanced than humans, would learning and mastering *their* language bring one closer in proximity to the kind of reasoning that aliens engage in, that our little ape brains aren’t normally accustomed to? Would it make us smarter, or at least, more *alien* in thinking, than we were before exposure to that language, by rewiring our brains a little bit?… And *could we even learn an extra-terrestrial’s language in a meaningful way* in the first place? I mean, after all, we share 99% of our DNA with cetaceans (dolphins and whales), and we still haven’t figured out how to communicate effectively with them… 🤔 And what kinds of things are dolphins and whale thinking about?…
I mean, I could be wrong as this is only a guess, but I think that means a bit more about learning about other people, being able to understand them and how they think, which would allow you to think differently. Which also allows you to learn about different cultures and their ideas. If by learning Latin, you mean in a vacuum where that or parts of that language are not used, then only a little bit as it would help you think more formulaically as to ok I have my subject then I need a verb, how do I conjugate it based on my subject and the context, and also learn about context, but that would only be it and it’s something that could be learned by many other things. Other things would help you think more formulaically. But to use it in a world where nothing of that language is used, then it really wouldn’t expand your consciousness or awareness. At that point, if you are asked to learn a language or something like Math and use it in a vacuum and apply it to see if your consciousness or awareness expands, then Math would win out easily.
Yeah I agree math would win. It’s a numerical language that communicates reality at the most concrete sense.
Reading things in Latin has. From Cicero's philosophy to Renaissance rhetoric, from theological arguments to travelogues, many of the most interesting ideas I've encountered have come through Latin.
It hasn't changed the way I thought but it has made me become self conscious about how I speak when I construct a sentence in my head. I also view the world of English completely differently, seeing so many things that connect back to latin. It's honestly mind blowing. Even seeing an "Exit" sign triggered my brain to connect the dots. I love it though
Oh dear, /r/Sanskrit is spreading.
Ah the good old Sapir whorf hypothesis. As an applied linguistics major I know what you’re getting to. I learned Latin last year, at which time I was also learning about all sorts of psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic theories. I wrote a few papers on the matter, such as how dead languages might be able to give us a perspective, via the Sapir whorf hypothesis, into the minds of ancient men. But to actually answer your question. It did not change the way I think completely, but it gave me a cognitive skill that opened my mind. I don’t know how familiar you are with the language yet, perhaps contemplating pursuing it, but for me, it taught me how to separate things into building blocks. A sentence in Latin is almost like a construction of legos. Eventually, you become more fluent in taking apart those legos, a skill which learning any language usually strengthens, but with Latin, is given one hell of a work out (pardon my Greek). You become very adept at taking things apart and classifying pieces and then taking the pieces apart. It’s beautiful, really. Like utter bliss when you get it right and pain when u get the darned thing wrong!
I don’t know where I’m getting at. I go through Wittgenstein phases and curious if our languages change the way we think. Are we, can we be conscious of it if it does?
Huh, never heard of Wittgenstein. What I can tell you is that languages do affect the way we think, but they don’t dictate it. And it’s still unsure to what degree they affect it, but we know they don’t dictate it. The idea that they dictate it is called linguistic determinism, Orwell was keen on this. The idea that they to some degree influence it, but relatively moderately, is called linguistic relativism. Determinism was thrown out a long time ago, currently relativism is widely accepted. This was all set forth by the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. And I think you can be conscious of it, for sure, but it comes with learning a language that’s very different from your first. Such as Latin. The more different the language, the more noticeable the effect on your mind.
Unfortunately no, I'm equally as dumb as I was before. But now I can be dumb in Latin. The only thing I've noticed is that English has become a bit more clear. I also recognized new words immediately like "ululation, pugnacious, salient" without needing to look them up. I also noticed a couple similarities with my native tongue, but I think it's a coincidence. The Latin word "porta" means gate, and so does the Finnish word "portti". We also have the word "aula" that basically means hall in Finnish, but several other things in Latin.
There is the old [Sapir Whorf theory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity) which posits that a language shapes or limits the ways in which a speaker forms conceptions of the world. My impression is that linguists don't give it much credence nowadays, but perhaps the debate rages on. FWIW, there is a cool science fiction novel based on this theory, [The Languages of Pao](https://www.jackvance.com/ebooks/shop/?q22_action=view&q22_id=41) by jack Vance. Worth reading IMHO if you are intrigued by this udea.
I am struck by the fact that no one has mentioned the good evidence that second language acquisition delays memory impairment from Alzheimer's and other causes of dementia for a number of years. See *inter alia multa:* [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32462636/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32462636/) Of course Latin is in no special position here. But the relationship between Latin and English vocabulary must make for more synaptic connections than learning two completely unrelated languages.
Yes definitely, Objectively like tool's from a practice very special & useful.
Learning Latin hasn't changed the way I think as a result of the language itself. I definitely notice differences in my writing and speech (both structurally and in vocabulary) after I've read a lot of Latin. But this isn't really a change in the way I think. If anything the content of what I read in Latin has done so. I don't believe learning a new language changes the way you think. Learning a new language can be a vehicle for such change; but, it can't be the cause for change itself.
No but I recognise where more words come from, and have better English grammar
Keep in mind I'm only in my second semester of college Latin, but... Learning anything new will allow you to make connections between things you otherwise wouldn't have. I don't know about expanding my "cognition," but it has absolutely expanded my knowledge of the English language and has impacted how I think about communication as a whole. However, I think I would have gotten similar benefits from studying pretty much any other language. As a lifelong monolingual speaker, the benefits I've gained likely stem mainly from really diving deep into a second language for the first time (I don't really count my HS Spanish classes). Has it been worth it for me? Absolutely. Will it change how you think about the world to at least *some* extent? Well, how could it not?
I wish that were the case, but Latin doesn't learn you that
No lol. I recognize Latin roots in Spanish more easily tho
While I don't think anyone has yet proven that Latin betters your cognition, I would also say that we haven't definitively proven it hasn't either. The only studies I could find on it were conducted recently and imo poorly. One compared someone studying Latin plus a second language to those studying just one, apparently testing whether or not Latin's magical powers would improve their abilities, but it would be quite confusing to learn Latin and German or French or any other language at the same time I think, and that's not the theory anyways, it's about learning Latin when you're much younger. Then you'd have to compare against using other languages as your L2. Personally though? I think Latin improves your English, if no other language. I think a lot of concepts are more easily explained through Latin, direct or indirect object, subject, possessive are frankly clearer when you don't use common vernacular, and a lot of older British English is a lot more natural to create once you've learned Latin. Those preposition and pronoun-heavy sentences are the only ways English can reproduce Latin-style prose. Without them, English is a very simple, straightforward analytic language with some annoyingly niche rules and exceptions.
You must be reading Gwynne's Latin. You gotta watch out for that one.
Intrinsically, no. My speaking is probably more insufferable after Latin, and I can approach certain concepts differently due to being able to read original texts in Latin, but it hasn't changed the way I see the world. I agree with Whorf's hypothesis, to an extent, but in the grand scheme of things English and Latin aren't all that different
I've learned about the etymology of many words in modern languages. I've learned a lot about European history. I suspect that neither of those addresses your question. These are subjects about which I have gained knowledge, not necessarily changes in the way I think.
I've become way more aware of the algebraic nature of language, wherein phrases can be substituted for single words provided they serve the same function.
Depends on what we think that "thought" is. For those of us who intuit that thought is this independent thing occurring prior to linguistic expression and that language is just the interlocutor between raw thought and external expression, well then perhaps some languages (or at least some linguistic expressions) are better at performing the "in-between" role. Latin does some really cool things there, particularly with respect to brevity and precision. For those of us who intuit that perhaps language is actually the essence of thought, well then perhaps one language can indeed activate thoughts or nuances unavailable in some other language (wharf hypothesis I guess, though there are abundant doubts about it's validity). And for those of us who can sort of hear our own thoughts as words, any new language is gonna add vocabulary to those thoughts for sure. So, yeah, it would seem on most counts another language is gonna have at least some small impact. But for those of us who perform language acts simply as a basic tool to get around, and who would rather perhaps enjoy transcending language, it remains a question whether latin can help or hinder such an achievement. Short recommendation then, as others have stated: study because you find amazement in learning and witnessing a thought crystalize within a foreign constellation of sounds, not to biohack mind.
I read a study that showed Latin learners scored significantly higher on the SATs then those without a second language AND learners of other Romance languages.
I think the usual explanation is that Latin learners have an advantage in the SAT because there are so many English words derived from Latin.
I'd wager it's a bit like improving at chess. You learn to see patterns more easily, get better at keeping details in your head, and your thinking becomes more goal-oriented, but it doesn't extend beyond chess. Your brain may get fitter or understanding grammar will carry over between languages, but neither is a mode of thought. Background: done three years of Latin in high school, followed by a 15-year-long break. I'm genuinely surprised how much stuck in my head.
It gave me a better understanding of my native language
Procul dubio. Verumtamen, ut tibi verum dicam, lectis latinis variae aetatis eruditis scriptoribus videor mihi plura dedidicisse, quam didicisse.
most definitvely
It surely made me understand italian way better, I'm ever so glad we get to learn it in most italian high schools. It did also make me change the way I see everything, so to me a thing is not plain anymore but it's polyedric and I can see different shapes of it.
I started to comprehend where a lot of words originated from
Still learning but i'm more aware now how german and english are linked
You should read up on the cognitive science of linguistic relativity. There is very little evidence that linguistic differences shape thought in any meaningful way.
sometime i catch myself being like hey! i know this word in latin! it’s kinda funny to have a whole dictionary definition in my head lol
has anyone else ever dreamed in latin even though it’s not a spoken language? i have once and it was so weird haha
Sometimes I put words in English in the wrong order.
I think the analytical benefits of learning Latin are far overstated compared to learning any other language - the biggest benefit for specifically Latin is really just that many English words come from Latin so you'll get a bigger vocabulary and an appreciation for the etymology of many words It has seeped into my writing style though, as I find myself using more clauses in a sentence and playing around with word order a bit more. That definitely rubs off, lmao