Latin literature thread? I'm also learning the language

If you don't know about principal parts, you need to do some serious remedial reading on Latin grammar. Start with Wikipedia and go from there.

>>9239511
Is it "I", "to __", "I have___" and a past participle?

is that the general order?

>>9239503

>deicio
present active 1st person singular indicative
>deicere
present active infinitive
>dejeci
1st person singular perfect indicative active
>dejectus
perfect passive participle

>>9239537

In other words:

deicio - "I throw, cast down"

deicere - "to throw, cast down"

deieci - "I threw, cast down" (and finished doing so)

deiectus - "thrown down"

>>9239556

Yes but Latin has a more robust tense system than English so at some point it will be better to take the training wheels off and stop trying to convert everything to English forms.

>>9239556

>deieci - "I threw, cast down"

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think the better translation for this one would be "I have thrown"

>>9239586

If you're from England, maybe. In American English, the 'perfect' is best translated by the simple past tense. American English doesn't really use "have [simple past]" productively anymore.

(I am American)

>>9239614

I don't really know what it means to use a tense "productively" but Americans use the perfect tense all the time.

>>9239618

I mean that the tense is not used that way. Americans never say "I have gone", only "I went", no matter the context.

I'm just saying that my translation is how an American would translate it, because American English does not really allow for forms like "he has eaten" in normal conversation. You just say "he ate". Further differentiation of precisely what occurred and when is done with adverbs and so on.

>>9239627
>I mean that the tense is not used that way. Americans never say "I have gone", only "I went", no matter the context.

This just isn't true. I'll grant that Americans don't say "I have gone" but they certainly say "I've gone."

>American English does not really allow for forms like "he has eaten" in normal conversation

Where are you getting this from?
"He's eaten"
Hear it all the time.

>>9239637

At least in my experience, those can only be paired with "already" as in "I've already eaten". And, more importantly, it is far more common to hear "I already ate" or "I ate". It is true that the forms you've cited are not totally absent from American English, but they are increasingly less common or require, as I said originally, an adverb that subtly changes the meaning such that simple "I ate" is a better idiomatic A.E. translation.

This is a silly argument, since we're really talking about Latin here anyway, but there is statistical research out there to support what I'm saying.

>>9239703

The point you're trying to make is not only factually incorrect but it's also turbotism.

>>9239714

Please read this: http://www.onestopenglish.com/grammar/grammar-reference/american-english-vs-british-english/differences-in-american-and-british-english-grammar-article/152820.article

What I'm saying is actaully factually correct.

>>9239729

>in AE the perfect can only be used with adverbs

There is NOTHING about this that is correct.

>I can't find my keys. Did you see them anywhere? (AmE)
>I can't find my keys. Have you seen them anywhere? (BrE)

Absolutely absurd.
This is the kind of shit that gives grammar a bad name.

is there any book on English Grammar I could read and know everything about grammar? I don't have a problem reading long textbooks if that is the answer

>>9239754

>book on English Grammar

just don't unless you want to get memed by some lisping publish-or-perish hack

>>9239762
then how do I become a legitimate grammar nazi?

>>9239800

By speaking a language that has legitimate grammar

>>9239820
i'm in latin 101 right now, I'm just getting raped with vocab lists. Best Latin grammar book?

>>9239833

Here's several, take your pick.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B9QDHej9UGAdMTF6RjhZWkxvQTQ

Personally I like "Latin - An Intensive Course" the best. It deals you straight and cuts out all the bullshit.

>>9239855
thanks, friend

>>9239503
I recommend Familia Romana and, after getting a considerable vocabulary and grammar, I recommend reading scientific or philosophical books (like the ones by Seneca, the Scholastics, Bacon, Descartes, Spinoza, Newton etc.) as they have a more direct and concise style.

>>9239833
I like wheelocks latin, but I prefer the way British textbooks layout noun declentions.

British:
Nom
Voc
Acc
Gen
Dat
Abl

American:
Nom
Gen
Dat
Acc
Abl
Voc