# Latin by the Dowling Method



## SemperEruditio (Jun 2, 2009)

Is this worth the effort? It sounds like it might be but.... Anyone use this or heard about it?
Latin by the Dowling Method


> Latin by the Dowling Method
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## CharlieJ (Jun 2, 2009)

It sounds like marketing hype. Although, he's right that a good amount of paradigm memorization is necessary for any language. I like Latin for Americans, which is a very nice inductive textbook series that focuses heavily on learning by reading and incremental steps. They have Latin for Americans, Lingua Latina, Wheelock, and the Cambridge Latin Course at BJU. I've looked through them all and like Latin for Americans the best. Of course, my opinion is only that of a student evaluating for ease of use.


----------



## SemperEruditio (Jun 2, 2009)

There's nothing to buy. The method is what is posted. Essentially you:

_"(1) learn a few simple concepts necessary for understanding Latin grammar -- what the "case" of a noun is, for instance -- then 

(2) sit down and systematically learn the main categories of Latin grammar by "brute memorization," and 

(3) begin reading a direct-method Latin reader entitled Lingua Latina, doing all the end-of-chapter exercises and making sure you understand every word of every sentence."_


----------



## CredoFidoSpero (Jun 3, 2009)

Sounds like you have to at least buy Lingua Latina .

I don't think this would be a bad way to go, although, it seems to me that _any _method will work if you study 30 minutes every day and use any 'dead time' for memorizing forms, as he suggests.

This seems to be in between 'Rosetta Stone' type learning and traditional, grammar-intensive learning. But I think determining what's best is somewhat dependent on the individual's learning style. Me, I want a lot of grammar up front. I get frustrated with even modern language courses that focus mainly on idiom and conversation. I _want_ to know the grammar. I learn languages faster and remember things better if I know the structures and rules behind it all. But, again, that may be just what's best for me.


----------



## CharlieJ (Jun 3, 2009)

I'm not sold on the method. I think it runs quite counter to modern language acquisition theory. BJU (which has an excellent ancient language department) employs a heavily deductive methodology like the one described. The result is that about 50% of Greek 101 students drop the class or fail. 

On the other hand, I learned Hebrew through an inductive method (Yale curriculum - Hoffer, Kittle). In an inductive system reading takes precedence over memorization so that you learn by doing and remember better. Grammatical concepts are introduced through examples and exercises so that you literally build your knowledge of the system step by step. Inductive learning is also more fun - I went through about 5 lessons per day when I taught myself Hebrew.

Either way, you're going to have to learn the paradigms. But brute memorization is a highly inefficient method. It takes longer and doesn't transfer as well into reading ability. Inductive methodology is based on the way people actually learn their native languages. You spoke English (or whatever your first language is) reasonably fluently before you ever took "English" courses, but they helped clean up and polish your language skills. In the same way, second language learners should familiarize themselves with the language through actual use, THEN learn every single paradigm and exception. Some people like to know everything up front (like Ashley expressed, and I'm with her), but that's not the best way to learn.

See if your local library (or university library) has Latin for Americans.


----------

