I don't know how much Latin Wittgenstein knew, how long he studied it, how he was taught. For what it's worth >one could not think a sentence with the remarkable >word order of German or Latin just as it stands must be a fairly common reaction; certainly that's how I felt when I was taught it first. I say 'first' not only because my first teacher wasn't much good, but also because English speakers tend to be pushed into putting the verb at the end in Latin, to instill in them the most common classical Latin prose style. (I didn't react in the same way to German, probably because I'd already studied Latin for a few years.) >"Latin has a very flexible word order" word order is not though unimportant, words can't -- pace wikipedia -- be drawn from a lucky dip. Declension's important, but word order is too, (Probably -- again -- English speakers have to be told about declension and its importance, and perhaps, after the very early stages (of being pushed to put the verb at the end), are encouraged to think it, not word order, important, Judy Evans, Cardiff ----- Original Message ----- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 3:32 AM Subject: [lit-ideas] Wittgenstein's "Lateinisch" (or Lack of It) J. Evans said she would see if she could find a good tricky example of Latin oratio obliqua. When it comes to Wittgenstein, I am reminded of Shakespeare who (alas, as Borges loved to say he too) had "little Latin and less Greek". Recall that Wittgenstein describes the 'order' of words in Latin as 'remarkable', 'queer', and 'peculiar'. The literal truth is that the order of words in Latin is pretty flexible, as every public-school boy knows. There must be more to it than that. The concern for Wittgenstein was 'order', or as I prefer, "^" (as in the 'sequence' sign favoured by Grice). Wittgenstein mentions two words ("Stellung" and "Ordnung"). Anscombe ingores "Stellung" and translates both as "order". "Es liegt hier ein Fall vor, ähnlich dem, wenn jemand sich vorstellt, man könne einen Satz mit der merkwürdigen WORTSTELLUNG der deutschen oder lateinischen Sprache nicht einfach denken, wie er dasteht. Man müsse ihn zuerst denken, und dann bringt man die Wörter in jene seltsame ORDNUNG. (Ein französischer Politiker schrieb einmal, es sei eine Eigentümlichkeit der französischen Sprache, daß in ihr die Worte in der ORDNUNG stehen, in welcher man sie denkt.)" ("Someone imagines that one could NOT think "a sentence"with THE *REMARKABLE* _WORD ORDER_ of German or Latin just as it stands" "Rather, one first has to think it, and then one arranges the words in that *QUEER* _order_" "(A French politician once wrote that it was a peculiarity of the French language that in it words occur *in the [peculiar] *order** in which one thinks them.)" Linguists apparently like to talk of word-order and McCreery is right on (the) spot when he mentions Japanese for "The cat chased the cheese-eating rat". Here below some online references on 'word order', then (or sequential surface structure, as I prefer). For FIXED word order in Latin, the reference is: Jong, Jan R. de 1989. The Position of the Latin Subject. Subordination and Other Topics in Latin: Proceedings of the Third Colloquium on Latin Linguistics, Bologna, 1-5 April 1985. Ed. Gualtiero Calboli. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 521-540. (citation record) Apparently the idea is that Latin has not a 'fixed' order -- allowed by the case system. However, there may be a fixed order in the subject in subordinated clauses. Latin has a very flexible word order, as this document below shows, so I don't see what Wittgenstein is complaining about -- Or is he 'quoting' someone who _might_ have complained? Surely not them [sic] 'public school boys' around him. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_grammar#Word_order "Latin allows for a very flexible word order because of its inflectional syntax. Ordinary prose tended to follow the pattern of Subject, Indirect Object, Direct Object, Adverbial Words or Phrases, Verb. Any extra, though subordinate verbs, are placed before the main verb, for example infinitives. Adjectives and participles usually directly followed nouns, unless they were adjectives of beauty, size, quantity, goodness, or truth, in which case they preceded the noun being modified. Relative clauses were commonly placed after the antecedent which the relative pronoun describes. While these patterns for word order were the most frequent in Classical Latin prose, they are frequently varied; and it is important to recall that there is virtually no evidence surviving that suggests the word order of colloquial Latin. In poetry, however, word order was often changed for the sake of the meter, for which vowel quantity (short vowels vs. long vowels and diphthongs) and consonant clusters, not rhyme and word stress, governed the patterns. It is, however, important to bear in mind that poets in the Roman world wrote primarily for the ear, not for the eye; many premiered their work in recitation for an audience. Hence variations in word order served a rhetorical, as well as a metrical purpose; they certainly did not prevent understanding. In Virgil's Eclogues, for example, he writes, Omnia vincit amor, et nos cedamus amori!: Love conquers all, let us yield to love!. The words omnia (all), amor (love) and amori (to love) are thrown into relief by their unusual position in their respective phrases. The meter here is dactylic hexameter, in which Virgil composed The Aeneid, Rome's national epic.The ending of the common Roman name Marcus is different in each of the following examples due to its grammatical usage in that sentence. The ordering in the following sentences would be perfectly correct in Latin and no doubt understood with clarity, despite the fact that in English they're awkward at best and senseless at worst: Marcus ferit Corneliam: Marcus hits Cornelia. (Subject-Verb-Object) Marcus Corneliam ferit: Marcus Cornelia hits. (Subject-Object-Verb) Cornelia dedit Marco donum: Cornelia has given Marcus a gift. (Subject, Verb, Indirect Object, Direct Object) Cornelia Marco donum dedit: Cornelia Marcus a gift has given. (Subject, Indirect Object, Direct Object, Verb) The problem I have with the examples above is that as every public school boy knows, in "Cornelia Marco donum dedit" _nobody_ in her clear mind would translate "Marco" as "Marcus": "to Marcus" comes immediately to mind. Old English did have cases like that -- so the thing should still resonate in English speakers (as in 'whose horses are being trained?', where 'whose' is a notable genitive). I haven't been able to check all the links below to different aspects of word order in Latin (and German). http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/wordord/keyword/index.html#word_order OV [Latin] SOV [Latin] SVO [and marked OV sequence] [German] SXV [Latin] verb [in clause-final position] [German] verb [in clause-final position] [Latin] verb [in clause-final position] [subordinate clause] [German] verb [in clause-final position] [subordinate clause] [Latin] verb [in clause-initial position] [Latin] verb [in medial position] [Latin] VO [Latin] word order [free] [Latin] word order [infinitive + auxiliary] [Latin] word order [infinitive + habere] [Latin] word order [subordinate clause] [Latin] word order [unmarked] [Latin] word order variation [German] word order variation [main vs. subordinate clause] [Latin] word order [verb-final] [German] OV to VO [Latin] postposition [change to preposition] [Latin] verb [in medial position] [emergence of] [Latin] verb [in medial position] [emergence of] [Latin] [explanation of] verb [in medial position] [spread of] [Latin] word order change [and case loss] [Latin] Cheers, JL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.