Portal talk:Latin

Topic:Latin

Well, I hope I haven't created a bit of a mess. I had the School of Latin on my watchlist. When an IP made a change then removed the change, I decided to place the page under School:Language and Literature as part of its Foreign language learning departments. I've added the Latin stream to the See also list. Opinions, comments, criticisms, or suggestions are welcome! We can always change it back or to something else. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 00:35, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

New Latin Course

Well, well, well.

So having had a good browse through the department's course, I think that it feels really full on throwing heaps of grammar at once at a learner which is no way to learn a language, therefore I'd like to propose a more approachable system for instance on Latin: Subjects and Objects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whovian z (talk • contribs) 3 May 2018 (UTC)

@Whovian z: Improvements that are more approachable would be wonderful! My recommendation would be to take over Latin and remake it what you have in mind. Latin/Subjects and Objects isn't a good name for a page. First, the colon causes problems with Wikimedia software, because the colon indicates a namespace (such as Portal: or Portal talk:). Second, the name suggests it will be one of multiple pages on Latin, and should be Latin/Subjects and Objects, or perhaps Latin/Nouns. Linguistics isn't my field, so I would respect your wisdom there. But from a content organization and Wikimedia software standpoint, if this is Latin:, then it should be Latin/. Another option would be to create the content as Draft:Latin/... and build the resources that way. We can move it back to replace Latin once you have the existing content moved over and reorganized and/or replaced.

One other thought. If you're up to the challenge, there's no obvious advantage to having both Latin and Latin stream. This should all be just Latin. When I'm in doubt on what to name pages and subpages, I typically use Wikipedia as a guide. There are many more participants on Wikipedia, and they've usually already worked out what the commonly accepted wording is for a given subject. From that perspective, Wikipedia:Latin shows that the project should be named Latin, and subjects and objects would be Latin/Nouns. But again, approachability might favor Latin/Subjects and Objects. One other approach would be to name the page Latin/Nouns and then have a redirect from Latin/Subjects and Objects, or list the link on the page as Latin/Nouns - Subjects and Objects.

Most important is to be bold. If you have a vision, start working toward that vision, as you are already doing. We'll try to assist and organize within the wider Wikiversity scope and approach as you go. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:18, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Portals and Resources

I noticed that Latin is currently redirected to Portal:Latin. It's important to recognize that Latin is available in searches, but Portal:Latin is not. Portals are used to organize projects and contributors. Portals are more like a Wikipedia project. They are not meant for content. Redirecting might make sense temporarily, but ultimately the Latin page needs to stand by itself in supporting Latin content, with a See Also link to Portal:Latin. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 20:37, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

@Dave Braunschweig: Thanks for the support earlier, I fixed the page naming error as said. The redirection of the Latin page is only temporary whilst I attempt to sort the course out as the page Latin is just like the Wikipedia page in itself rather than a course introduction or anything like that but I'll keep in mind your advice as always and Be Bold. Thanks as ever. --Whovian z (discuss • contribs) 07:26, 9 May 2018 (UTC) AKA Zac C

Possible home for CarpeLanam's sentence-practice course

Hi there,

I have been discussing with CarpeLanam about the future of the course she posted on Duolingo's forums for Latin beginners:

https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/8053459/Latin-Lessons-Directory

It covers most of the basics at this point, and I believe she would like to extend it further.

I have been doing the course and have learnt a great deal from it. The power in it is with the hands-on sentence practice and vocabulary learning that is available through Memrise:

1. https://www.memrise.com/course/906792/carpelanams-duolingo-latin-sentences/
2. http://www.memrise.com/course/748509/latin-for-duolingo/

Of course, this content could also be migrated to open source tools like Anki that work in a similar way, if the content is openly licensed and contributed somewhere. I think she'd be interested in getting audio for the course done as well.

So, what I'd like to know is:

1. Is Wikiversity a good place for this course? I know you have other courses on the go, but I think this could be a good complement, and potentially some of the exercises could be linked to or drawn into other courses at a later date. However, it is informal, so you may think otherwise.
2. Would this course be welcome here, or would you prefer us to find a different place to put it, given that you are developing other materials?

If you are interested, or if you think this is a bad idea, then please let us know! JimKillock (discuss • contribs) 09:00, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

@JimKillock: Wikiversity is a good place for open content courses. It is more effective for straight content than it is for interaction. Interaction is possible, but not as easy by default. We may need to look at creative ways to get the interactive components, or look at extending the interface with some JavaScript options. It is possible to upload supporting audio and video as well.

Regarding existing Latin content, some people start working on it occasionally, but no one has maintained their efforts to a finished product. That content could be merged into whatever it is that you develop, or you could build on and replace what has already been created.

One caution for building here would be name recognition for the content creators. If you are looking to share free learning, this is the right place. If you are looking to build name recognition or seeking any type of personal financial gain for your efforts, another site would be best suited for that approach.

If you think this is a good fit, let us know how we can help you get started. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 17:22, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Dave. The interactive components of CarpeLanam's course are supported elsewhere, currently on proprietary tools. We could make an effort to port these to open source tools. However, online language learning does ideally need exercises to complement the lesson content. Equally exercises are useless without background and explanation. It could be interesting to see how this works best; I can see some very helpful integration between the course content and Wiktionary as well.

Regarding name recognition, I understand what you are saying. That isn't the goal I am sure. There isn't a commercial goal. The goal I am certain is to give the course somewhere to develop freely. However it would make sense to give some recognition, not least for copyright and licence reasons, rather as other wholesale imports on Wikimedia products do (usually a statement of the source in the notes near the end, as well as the contribution notes made at submission). There is a little history as to where and how the course got developed which could be referenced in an introduction perhaps. (This is just a suggestion: and with the understanding that content develops, and authors and policies change over time, so guarantees over the shape of content can't be guaranteed.) Whether this all suits CarpeLanam is another question, I know she's keen to release the content, but she might want a bit more control than a conventional wiki approach affords. That can take a bit of getting used to. That all said, there's been only sporadic attempts to develop a Latin course, so I wouldn't expect a flood of edits and changes any time soon, if I am honest. JimKillock (discuss • contribs) 20:29, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

As a PS I thought I would just spell out that this course is already pretty comprehensive. Not every aspect of Latin si covered, but an awful lot of the basics:

JimKillock (discuss • contribs) 20:42, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

@Dave Braunschweig: Hi again, @CarpeLanam: has signed up with an account here, she seems enthusiastic to get going, which is great. The next step seems to be to find a good way to record that she's released the material under a cc-by-sa licence so we can move it across, without having to get her to do all the submissions herself. I've suggested she puts a note on the index page to the course, but perhaps it would also be helpful to record this somewhere here? JimKillock (discuss • contribs) 09:27, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

@JimKillock: The notice of release could be a footnote on the main page of the content or a comment that page's Discuss/Talk page. The advantage of using a footnote is that it appears in any printed versions.

Please put a little time into thinking about what title you want for this resource. When in doubt, we usually go by whatever Wikipedia calls it. In many other languages, it is "whatever language", such as French language, to differentiate it from French culture, French fries, etc. However, Latin is just Latin. I think the best approach would be to take over the Latin course and revise it with this new content.

One other thing to consider. Per Wikiversity:Naming conventions, we try to avoid naming things Lesson 1, Lesson 2, etc. It prevents the content from being searched for by title and limits reuse by others who might want a different sequence. Where possible, the titles should describe the content. Unfortunately, I'm not enough of an expert in Latin to provide any examples. But if you need suggestions, let me know and I'll try to do some homework.

Thanks for bringing this content and creator to Wikiversity! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:13, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

@Dave Braunschweig: and @CarpeLanam:, I have started porting the content across at Latin. It will take a bit of time. I am trying to remove the Duolingo references of course, but it does flatten the language a bit, so if you @CarpeLanam: want to leaven it a bit please feel free. I guess stylistically we should avoid using "I" on the pages. we will also need to add a cc-by-sa licence / attribution note directly on the page, but we can do that later. I will try to keep the navigation in place as well JimKillock (discuss • contribs) 18:54, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

I am still a complete beginner at Wiki formatting, so forgive me if I stumble. My course was never intended to be a conventional Latin course; I minimized the grammar-translation methodology, and emphasized the model sentences in a way that was similar to Duolingo at the time (spring of 2015). I don't actually know the term for this method, maybe progressive? or gamified? In an interactive app, you can't go on to the next level without completing the first. My course heavily emphasizes sentences used as examples, which I observed from my own experience help me to internalize grammar more quickly; but I added just enough grammar explanations to satisfy myself and anyone who prefers a more traditional approach. I haven't looked enough at Wikiversity, but the traditional teacher in me would not like to see my experimental course take the place of a more traditional course if you have that already available. I am very grateful for the new home for my course, however, and will begin editing it for a more formal tone when I am more confident of my formatting abilities. Thank you! CarpeLanam (discuss • contribs) 20:31, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi @CarpeLanam:, the old course are at Portal:Latin currently - there are two or three lessons in each of two courses. Basically: not much. Somebody could one day write a more traditional course, but it isn't here currently. As an aside, MediaWiki is good at tables! JimKillock (discuss • contribs) 20:49, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

@JimKillock and CarpeLanam: It's not necessary that it be a "formal" course. It can be whatever you think is appropriate for the audience you want to reach. Formal may be better for college, but in 15 years, no one teaching college-level Latin has wanted to come here and create a resource. If your audience is DuoLingo-like, informal is probably a better approach. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 20:54, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! @CarpeLanam: I would strongly suggest keeping the informal tone. It is very refreshing, especially for a Latin course. It will help learners along, and keep them reading. JimKillock (discuss • contribs) 21:11, 20 March 2019 (UTC)