skip to main |
skip to sidebar
From
The Imaginative Conservative:
Despite the myriad arguments for the
language, of which I have listed above only those which seem to me most
salient, there has never been a period in history less literate in Latin
than ours since the very dawn of the Roman Republic. Not a century ago,
anyone with an education could be counted on to have at least a
rudimentary understanding of the language, and a few to have even a
great command of it. You would be hard-pressed today to find anyone in
your social circle with a real proficiency in Latin. And, what is more,
very few students take up the language in the 21st century, though I
concede that the numbers are rising.
But even the 20th century could be said
to be marked by a widespread lapse in Latin literacy. Latin had long
enjoyed a status as the language of scholarship in Europe, and was
widely spoken, written, and read well into the 19th century. The rise of
vernacular usage during and following the renaissance did little to
weaken its position. Even being supplanted as the Lingua Franca was not enough to knock it from its pedestal. What, then, accounts for the decline in literacy within the last two centuries?
I would argue that Latin is the first
victim of modernism, its decline analogous to the worst fears
surrounding such educational reform as Common Core. The early modern
period saw a break in tradition; the pedagogy of antiquity, the Middle
Ages, and the Renaissance gave way to modern techniques and innovations,
and for the past two centuries we have let our students wallow in the
mire they created. (Read more.)
Share
No comments:
Post a Comment