I would like to second Karen Jolly's observation: a sound working
knowledge of Latin is absolutely ESSENTIAL for anyone who deals with the
European Middle Ages. This means the ability to _read_ (not just translate)
accurately and readily. Even when you use translations, as all of us do at
times for the sake of convenience, comfort, and speed, you must refer back
to the original for any terms or usages that are important for whatever
problem you are investigating and certainly you will need to read and
re-read and perhaps even translate independently any passage(s) critical to
your argument. Even the best translations are fallible. The translator may
not have approached the passage from the same perspective that makes it
important for your purposes and may thus have missed some essential nuances.
And even good translators can occasionally misunderstand what they are
translating. Take for example the English translation of Justinian's Digest
edited by Alan Watson. It's an outstanding piece of work and fortunately it
prints the Latin & Greek texts and notes in the Mommsen edition on facing
pages with the English version. It's something I use practically every day
and am exceedingly grateful to have. BUT I have run across at least a
half-dozen, and probably more, passages where the translators either didn't
get it right at all or else (more commonly) chose to print just one out of
several possible ways of rendering the text. The point is, of course, that
unless you're equipped to verify a translation and have sufficient Latin to
be able to see the various possible shades of meaning, you will be totally
at sea without chart, compass, sextant, or chronograph.
JAB
At 09:28 AM 6/22/96 -1000, [log in to unmask] wrote:
. . . . .
>[L]earning a
>language is more than decoding words and syntax, it is a way into medieval
>mentalities. Consequently, I think Latin is an essential skill in the field.
>No matter how good the translation, English cannot reproduce the structure or
>nuances of the original language.
. . . . .
> I cannot
>imagine pursuing a degree in medieval studies without some kind of competence
>in Latin, since its usage is ubiquitous in both the primary and secondary
>literature. Even if I am not a Latin "specialist," I ought to know enough to
>read the specialists and know what they are talking about. The same applies
>to paleography and other "scientific" subdisciplines within medieval
>studies--grad students need enough exposure to read intelligently, and need
>specialized training as it relates to their research. A working knowledge of
>Latin I would consider basic to any medieval research; this comes from someone
>who readily admits to struggling with Latin.
>
>Karen Jolly
>History
>University of Hawai'i at Manoa
>[log in to unmask]
>
James A. Brundage
History & Law
University of Kansas
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|