Saturday, May 12, 2012

Even more thinking on the Ørbergian Greek reader

I haven't written much the past few days. Yet this morning I sat down with a guide to the grammar in LL, and I have been using that to create a parallel file for my Greek reader. This is better than straight translation, as it allows me to map out Latin constructions, and work out appropriate Greek parallels, and then work out how to introduce them.

The second stage of this process is to sit down with something boring like Mastronarde (his textbook did mange to come with us!), and map out where Greek significantly differs, and how to best insert this into the grammatical timeline.

Key points that come to my mind are:

1. Tenses: Having aorist/imperfect/perfect adds a layer of complication to the text that the Latin does not have. I think this will mean additional chapters in my text.
2. Mood: The addition of the optative also requires consideration. My plan is to introduce the optative firstly when I introduce sequence of moods; this is a natural correlation to sequence of tenses, and so it should be more readily grasped. Secondly, Ørberg does introduce coniunctivum optativum, and so I will do the same. Wish expression is not too difficult to work in.
3. Participles. Latin is quite restricted in its participial system, whereas Greek evidences a lot more forms and so a lot more variety. This may necessitate extra chapters as well.
4. Middle voice. Generally this would correspond to a Latin verb with reflexive force. I think my general plan will be to introduce the middle as and when verbs that have a middle sense require it. Again, possibly extra chapters.
5. Particles. Greek has so many of them. I'm not great at composing with them to begin with, but I think I will sit down with a discourse grammar and work out how to start sprinkling them through the text.

On another note, I've picked up and started reading again from Rouse's A Greek Boy at Home. I see Anne Mahoney has also revised Rouse's A First Greek Course. I would be interested in seeing more than the generous sample online. Anyway, the great problem with Rouse, in my opinion, is that he launches into fairly extreme grammar almost immediately. λεκτεον for instance! Not to mention rabid use of particles, unusual vocab with contextual help (naming trees and vegetables, for instance), and the dual of course. In one sense Rouse is fantastic, but I would not want to teach from it ab initio. Thus my labour continues.

No comments: