Customer Reviews

Oxford Latin Course, Part I

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I can understand why most professors who teach latin in a formal school setting find this course (Three books and a reader, ISBN #s 0195212037, 0195212053,019521207x,0195212096, there are teacher's books available with all four) inadequate. This course is for students looking for a text that presents latin in a progressive and understandable format, which focuses on immersion in reading latin rather than consumption of immense volumes of grammatical information. The grammar is introduced slowly as it is needed (The grammar excercises in the second half of the book need to be done concurrantly with the chapter). The editors obviously are attempting to make learning latin easier by building vocabulary functionally and simply. This is essential for anyone that doesn't have the time to spend memorizing endless charts, or who struggles to understand grammar when it is abstracted from practical use in reading the language. It is much more useful to gain a working knowledge of vocabulary and grammar and then to memorize all the principle parts, conjugations, declensions, etc. I recommend using the oxford course first then moving to wheelock's for mastery of latin grammar.

In the end, this course is excellent for students because it is presented in a way that allows for a simple, progressive, and functional introduction to Latin. They lack answers ( though I haven't seen the teacher's text) but taking the time to check your work using the vocabulary lists and glossary is good review. The comics are terribly drawn and somewhat annoying, but are trivial. If the editors forgot some principles, any student that will miss them will study more advanced courses anyway. These books are the answer for anyone like me who found it impossible to learn the language from endless and voluminous sections on grammar, and I was one of the top students in my college course (I didn't have the time to take anything beyond the introduction and have had to teach my self since).

I worked my way through parts I and II of this Oxford Latin before stumbling upon Henle's latin course. I did honestly enjoy the Oxford course, but it's certainly no way to really acquire lingua latinae-- at least not in any great depth. The Oxford course also focuses strictly on classical latin, without any reference to ecclesiastical latin-- a major, major drawback, IMO.I wasted over $40 on parts I and II of this Oxford course, good money for mere superficial pamphlets! If your goal is to really learn latin, go with the four volume Henle course (each volume is around 400 pages!-- 300% more pages and 30% cheaper than Oxford! ). There is also an additional _Latin Grammar_ volume that is to be used in conjunction with the four volumes. Henle is a Jesuit philosopher and latinist, and his presentation is solid. And unlike the Oxford course, you will learn both classical and ecclesiastical-- the latter being VERY important in academic research/scholarship.

I have now completed the three books of this course over three semesters at the university level. First of all, there are several things the books do well. As long as students practice translating all the text in a given chapter, and work through the exercises, they should have a solid grasp of Latin vocabulary. The passages are fairly interesting; they are a combination of fiction and biography of the great poet Q. Horatius Flaccus. There is also a good deal of historical and cultural material introduced with each chapter. Students will get a basic understanding of what life in Roman times was like and what the main historical events were in the first century B.C.

The main problem I have with these books is that they attempt to "hide" grammar from the student. Grammar introduced in the chapter is put in a separate section in the back of the book, which is very inconvenient. Grammatical explanations tend to be very short; someone trying to learn Latin from these books alone would have a good deal of trouble, particularly when things get a little more complicated (e.g. with the subjunctive mood).

I may be a bit old-fashioned when it comes to learning languages. I think this course has more than a little bit of the whole language philosophy to it. Students are encouraged to learn by reading, and, unless the instructer is careful, "minor" errors in translation can easily occur, especially in passages where the student is encouraged to read for comprehension, not to produce a literal translation.

Having gone through courses in Greek using a more traditional grammar-oriented approach, I have to say I prefer the latter. Although it is more challenging for the student at first, I believe they will get a deeper understanding in the long run. As an added benefit, people who carefully study the grammar of a foreign language often find that their understanding of their native tongue improves. This is certainly the case with Latin.

If you are in a Latin course where this text is used, don't despair, especially if you have a good teacher. This series is perfectly serviceable. For teachers trying to decide which text to use, however, I would recommend a more grammar-oriented textbook like Wheelock or Moreland and Fleischer.

I would have to agree that reviews written by students and autodidacts are pretty much, sorry, useless. Having taught Latin from 6 different textbooks, I would say the Oxford Series has a major problem. It doesn't have nearly enough practice material. Either the student can learn Indirect Statement from 10 sample sentences, or the teacher would have to spend time writing 50 for them. Well, I like its stories and arrangement, but all their merits are fully nullified by the mere fact that complementary materials virtually do not exist. The same editors did a fantastic job in its Greek counterpart -- Athenaze, which employs the same friendly narrative/reading immersion method, but comes with abundant exercises and a workbook. It puzzles me why the same editors decided to sell Latin short.

The Oxford Series also makes a sorry attempt at 'balancing' the traditional (grammar) approach and the new (living language) approach; the result is it fails miserably at both. If you prefer the traditional, use Jenney. If you prefer the extreme of the new, use Cambridge. If you prefer one that does the best job at both, I personally recommend Ecce Romani. It uses the same friendly narrative/reading immersion method, but comes with clear explanation of grammar, abundant practice material, student activity book and a teacher's test book.

Somebody was wondering who drew all the terrible pictures: the editor's wife, who obviously has no talent, did. I'd chalk that one up to one of Oxford's good points, though. Your students will love making fun of the cactus-shaped and -sized fingers.

Having read some very critical reviews of this series, I wanted to say I have found it engaging and pretty well done. For my students, perhaps an overwhelming reason to choose it was the price, which compares very favorably with the $60 to $80 many conventional Latin texts cost.

I agree with some critics it would be better if there were more supplementary materials and, for many teachers who were educated more traditionally, not introducing all the principal parts of verbs at once is an adjustment. However, I do feel there are many things to commend this series, including the heavy emphasis on reading for comprehension instead of just rote learning. It certainly introduces a lot of vocabulary in a short time and gives a context for it.

All in all, my home school students have done well with this text.

I have this book, and it helped me realize that I enjoy Latin. However, the grammar is not explained very well, and I find that I cannot learn a new chapter without guidance from a teacher. Since I live in an area without many Latin teachers, I had difficulty utilizing this book with independent study. However, with a teacher to explain the grammar, this book would be all right. Another problem is that the cartoons at the beginning of each chapter are poorly drawn. Even though this might seem trivial to some, it really does bother me. Personally, I would look for a better text, but this one is OK if you have a teacher.

As a high school student in a Latin course using this text, I can say that it is of excellent quality. It starts out simply, with the very basics, then gradually moves into the more complex areas of the language. The book provides plenty of passages to apply the knowledge gained in each chapter, which are a great help in mastering the material. A possible drawback for some may lie in the fact that the concepts of tense and voice are not touched upon until well into the second volume.

At first I thought this book was for children with only like 100pages thin. Couldn;t believe this was a college textbook for a quarter. (UCD is in quarter system.) But this childish looking book can be challenging if you don;t keep up the pace.

Anyway, about this book... This book separates the reading passages from grammar sections that can be found at the back of the book. Stories are interesting and it does give you rich vocabularies in each chapter. The grammar sections are clear and are easy to understand.

What is bad about this book? I agree with previous reviewers that the cartoon that (probably author's wife or sister or someone) drew pictures horribly. Couldn't tell which was a girl or guy and also the expressions of people in the cartoons were very weird or may not go along with the context.

Another problem of this book is that the latin vocabulary in the index does not have all the words from each chapter. So you might want to buy Latin dictionary for some words.

And finally, I wished that odd answers were found at the back but there aren't any. So this means that you will have hard time to self-study. You need a professor for this book to correct your homework and give you some feedback.

These are only minor issues that makes the book not perfect.
Other than that, I think this book okay overall. Book teaches you less boring way, I think, because my Latin professor told us in class that they learned pretty boring and hard traditional way that she did not like Latin at first. That probably implies the reason why almost everyone hated Latin a few decades ago.

So if you got a prof, everything should be fine. My last advice: Just don't procrastinate memorizing vocabs Latin, or you will find yourself pretty miserable in class.
My actual rating for this book: 4.3~4.5

This is one of the best courses for the self-taught Latin learner that I have ever found. Easy to follow, it uses the "learn by doing" method of reading and learning from context, rather than bogging the reader down in intimidating Latin grammar. Grammar is introduced based on readings, and is broken up into short lessons so that it isn't too much to absorb at once. Plus, there's a real sense of accomplishment from reading Roman myths and about the wanderings of Aeneas in Latin! I recommend this course!

This review is actually for all three volumes as a complete system. I'm writing it because I don't see any reviews from teachers - they all seem to be from students or self-learners (bless their hearts). To be fair, I haven't actually used this series in class yet, but am about to because it is what the school has been using and I thought I would give it a try. I just spent the afternoon looking through it and I am a little worried (and embarrassed, having studied at Oxford). The other user complaints about the presentation (Grammar at the back, etc.) and artwork seem to me to pale in comparison to the fact that many non-trivial aspects of Latin grammar seem to be entirely missing (a couple, in fact, are actually incorrect). Also, since the perfect system for verbs (active and passive) aren't introduced until very late, students seem to learn many verbs beforehand, and then never learn the third and fourth principal parts. (Where is fero's "latus" given, for example? Have I missed it?) Some examples of grammar not included (based on a quick comparison with Moreland and Fleischer) seem to be:

Causal and concessive uses of participles
Substantive use of adjectives
Relative clauses of characteristic
Subjunctive subordinate clauses in indirect discourse
Negative clauses of fearing with "ut"
Use of the passive periphrastic as a future passive participle
The Supine (although it's promised for Vol. III in Vol. II)
Many uses of various cases: dative of the possesor(!); double dative; ablative of agent (!); ablative of cause; genitive of description; genitive of characteristic; partitive genitive; objective and subjective genitives (the authors appear to have a dislike of the genitive); Greek accusative; adverbial accusative
The plural forms of "vis"
Clauses of proviso
Clauses of doubting
Historical infinitive

Anyway, that's my first impression, for what it's worth.