EPILOGUE

The terms ‘root’, ‘stem’, ‘prefix’ and ‘suffix’ have occurred regularly in the preceding pages. ‘Root’ refers to the simplest, usually the dictionary, form of the word: so scrib- is the root of the verb scribo, ‘I write’. But the verb has another ‘stem’, script- (used for different tenses and voices: so – scribo, ‘I write’; scriptum est, ‘it was written’). We get words from both of these, e.g ‘scribe’, ‘scripture’.

These words are formed by the addition of prefixes attached to the front and/or suffixes to the end. Our ‘scribe’ derives from Latin scrib-a with the -a replaced by -e; ‘scripture’ from Latin script- + the suffix -ura, and again the -a replaced by -e. Our ‘prescribe’ derives from praescribo: note the pr(a)efix prae-.

Pedants moan endlessly about the ‘corruption’ of words formed from different languages – for instance, ‘television’ derives from Greek têle (τηλε, ‘far off ’) + Latin stem vis, ‘seen’. Let them. Unless a word is taken directly from Latin without change, such as ‘momentum’ or ‘consensus’, it will inevitably use anglicized or at least non-Latin endings, such as the -e at the end of ‘scribe’ and ‘scripture’. Technically, therefore, ‘agendums’ would break no ‘rules’ of English word-formation. It has simply become convention that we use the Latin plural agenda.

Romans regularly added - io to the alternative stem to make a noun, e.g. scriptio, ‘the act of of writing’. One very fruitful source of English is to add an -n to that, making -ion. So the script- stem yields de- /pre- /in- /re- /trans-scription; compare duco (duct-), ‘I lead’ + the prefixes de- /in- /re- /pro-duct with the suffix -ion.

But English also makes use of the root. Take port-o, ‘I carry’ and add the prefixes im- (= in-) /ex- /re- /trans- /de-. You can then add other English suffixes, such as ‘-er’ or ‘-ing’, to give ‘reporter’, ‘reporting’ and so on. Or you can add Latin suffixes such as -abilis, English ‘-able’, meaning ‘X can be done’ – ‘reportable’, ‘transportable’.

It would be possible to expand this list of prefixes and suffixes very considerably. But this explains why Latin roots and stems bulk so large in English (mostly via Norman French) and why those who learn Latin (and Greek, which works in just the same way) always talk about how ‘useful’ it has been. It is easy to see why: since Latin helps to explain words and their formation, it makes people understand more and so feel confident about their use of English as well as easing their learning of the Latin-based romance languages.

The structure of the Latin language also opens eyes to the way language actually works (see here). The result is that reading Latin or Greek is an invaluable training in linguistic awareness. You must understand the function of every word, and how Latin marks it, in order to translate it into English.

Result: you will be able to say precisely what the function of the word ‘of ’ is in the following utterances: ‘a cup of tea’, ‘the pen of my aunt’, ‘he died of boredom’, ‘piece of cake’ (and a few more could be listed). You may say, ‘So what? I understand the English.’ Of course you do. But that was not the isssue. To understand function gives a deeper grasp of, sensitivity to and awareness of language. Take the phrase ‘the love of God’. That has two quite different meanings. Doesn’t it?

Try it again with ‘to’. What is the function of ‘to’ in the following utterances? ‘To me, that makes no sense’, ‘I like to run’, ‘I’m off to Wales’, ‘To cross the line, use the footbridge’, ‘Donate to Classics for All’. All this is clearly of great importance if you want to learn a foreign language, which may work in a quite different way from English, but whether children as young as six should be put through it for its own sake is quite another matter.

Obviously, you do not need to learn Latin or Greek to understand precisely how language works. But if you do learn them, you will not only be able to read the magnificent literature composed in two of the West’s most influential languages; you will also better understand your own language (its vocabulary and structure) as well as other languages, and you will be a far better communicator because of it.

This is no idle boast. A nationwide YouGov survey conducted in 2011 showed that classics provided lifetime skills, benefits and pleasure, not to mention employability, even to those who have studied them to no further than age sixteen. This is not an invention: it is what respondents themselves said – and they, after all, should know. It is striking how many people who never studied Latin will confidently say how useless it is.

The full survey report (the second of three surveys) can be found at http://classicsforall.org.uk/book-reviews/perceived-value-classics. What is most striking of all is that, among those who studied Latin to age sixteen and did not study anything classical again, while just over 20 per cent found the exercise a waste of time, nearly 80 per cent rated their study to have been anything from beneficial to very beneficial. The reasons centred almost wholly on the sense that their understanding of English and their ability to use it clearly, accurately and persuasively had been considerably enhanced. Again it must be stressed that there are many ways to skin a cat. Winston Churchill, for example, a supreme master of the English language, would have been one of the 20 per cent. But not all of us are Churchills.

The plain fact is that Latin and Greek, through their unparalleled literatures, have spoken to generations of people down the millennia. That is why they have survived. The languages cross all barriers, enriching our own language and at the heart of many others (French, Italian, Spanish, modern Greek). In them, for the first time in the West, we hear the voices of epic and lyric poetry, history and philosophy, biography, tragedy, comedy and satire. On the walls of Pompeii, on scraps of papyrus, on grave monuments, from northern Britain to Egypt, the voice of each of us speaks out, with our loves and fears, jealousies and worries, hopes and failures, enmities, pleasures and jokes.

These are highly inventive and imaginative cultures: atomic theory, democracy, republicanism, aqueducts, history, concrete, geometry, logic, tragedy, the foundations of many legal systems, biology, rhetoric, rational medicine, our alphabet and the arch, with a range of other major architectural forms – all were either invented or radically developed on their watch.

Greeks and Romans were the first people in the West to discuss, intensively and at length, a range of concerns that we still grapple with: life, death, gods, sex, love, family, children, education, the natural world, our origins, history, money, health, property, respect, status, friendship, empire, power, politics, crime, justice, war. In the process they raise questions of slavery, heroism, citizenship, sexism, human rights, responsibility and blame, the just war, the uses of power, xenophobia, punishment theory, the good life, racism, inclusive (not exclusive) deities. Further, as people who were not Christianized, they provide a fascinating alternative mirror in which to look at ourselves and reflect on our world, its values and concerns. If their literature is ‘dead’, then so are Shakespeare and Mozart. Some achievements are immortal.

And the spin-offs! Latin and Greek demand especially close and accurate attention to linguistic detail; teach close linguistic reasoning (though they are no more ‘logical’ than any other language); provide, at a very basic level, a solid foundation for understanding how languages work; and make a superb introduction to English’s Graeco-Roman linguistic vocabulary (often thought of as ‘difficult’).

For those of us with some knowledge of the ancient world, it is incomprehensible how 75 per cent of our school pupils can be kept from anything other than brief, casual contact with such riches. How fortunate for those that go to schools where something classical is taught in depth! If that is ‘elitist’, we want all our pupils to have a taste of it.