Sir, Mr Richards’s request for Latinists to bring to bear their “vaunted clarity” in making a cogent argument for the teaching of Latin in schools (letter, July 4) will not be satisfied, I fear, by my recent piece in the school magazine which attempted to do just that.

To argue, as I did, that learning Latin is, inter alia, about the pursuit of learning for its own sake, an ideal which has lost ground in our utilitarian age, and that one might study Latin for the love of it, is not exactly “vaunted clarity”. Closer to your correspondent’s demand might be arguments based on the great literature, civilisation and culture which a knowledge of Latin makes available to an individual.

However, for me and for my students, there is no escaping the fact that being unshackled from the criterion of usefulness demanded of much of today’s curriculum adds spice to the study of Latin. Here is an opportunity to engage one’s intellect and express one’s passion for something without having to worry about one’s future career and salary which, ironically, as all reports indicate, are very well secured by qualifications in Latin.

To speak of the “love of learning” does not fall short of the mark, though it might lack the appeal to cogency.

STEPHEN DALZELL
Peterborough

Sir, Classical Latin is a “dead” language, therefore its grammar and syntax are more defined than those of modern languages which are constantly developing. The requirement to conform to a strict set of rules is an ideal discipline for computer programmers.

To understand Latin literature one needs the imagination to put oneself into the shoes of a Roman of the first century BC. This ability to empathise with a different “mindset” is precisely what is needed by the analyst struggling to get to grips with a business system.

The speeches of Cicero exemplify many of the techniques that will be used by the salesman. And no one who has studied Latin will offer his customers “a profeshernal service”.

Finally, the myths and legends of the Ancient Romans permeate European literature. How, if he has not read Virgil, will the systems manager comprehend the threat posed by a Trojan horse? All the above applies in spades to Greek.

TIM GOLDINGHAM
Maidenhead, Berks

Sir, To learn a living language one needs to speak with a correct accent and to understand a stream of speech at conversation speed; with Latin one has texts one can take at any speed. Ancient prose writers also employed a smaller vocabulary than modern ones. With only about 2,000 words and occasional recourse to a dictionary one can read Cicero’s speeches or Caesar’s De Bello Gallico. I do not think you can do that with a modern continental newspaper.

I do not know what is expected of GCSE students but in the old days of O Level all that was required was translation of a page or two of straightforward prose, translation of 20 lines of Virgil extracted from a passage of 300 lines which had been specified a year in advance and translation into Latin of a dozen or so sentences designed to bring out aspects of Latin grammar and idiom.

So what are these subjects which are easier than Latin?

PHILIP ROE
St Albans

Sir, Mr Richards requires clarity on Latin’s value. It trains the brain. Clear enough?

S. R. H JAMES
Latin magister, London SW1

Explore Letters

• Feedback