I too hope this endures. Learning Latin, or any other language, is a good thing.
But there some questionable statements in the article.
First, Latin is definitely a dead language by the standard definition. Learning a language as a reading language in school does not bring it back to life. No one is adding vocabulary or slang. The grammar doesn’t evolve. No new original works of literature are being created in it. Etc.
“It’s the language of scholars and educated people,” said Jason Griffiths, headmaster of Brooklyn Latin. “It’s the language of people who are successful. I think it’s a draw, and that’s certainly what we sell.”
It may be the reason parents enroll their children in Brooklyn Latin, but Latin is not the language of scholars, educated people, and successful people. It once was, but no longer. There are good reasons to learn Latin, but this isn’t one of them. Medievalists like myself need to read Latin to do our work, but we don’t speak or write in it. There are no academic conferences where papers are presented in Latin. You don’t hear Latin conversations in the halls of the Centre for Medieval Studies here in Toronto. (Although there are some wicked games of Latin Scrabble.)
Max Gordon, another sophomore, said that he had learned more about grammar in Latin class than in English class. And he occasionally debates the finer points of grammar with his mother, Kit Fitzgerald, a video artist who studied Latin, while washing dishes after dinner.
“In some ways, it’s really frustrating,” he said. “I’ll hear someone say something that isn’t grammatically correct and I’ll cringe.”
It is true that learning another language will teach you about English grammar. I learned most of my grammar in German class. But someone needs to instruct this kid that you can’t take Latin grammar and apply it to English.
“It’s different,” she said. “Everyone says ‘I take Spanish’ or ‘I take Italian,’ but it’s cool to say ‘I take Latin.’ ”
That’s good to hear.