World Language Selection? French or Latin?
Topic: China writing and language
June 24, 2019 / By Darrell Question:
I need to choose a courses for next year. I'm starting highschool and to get an advanced diploma i need to take two years of world language but i dont know which one. French or Latin?
Whats the difference between the two?
Which one if harder?
Please help I can't make up my mind
Best Answers: World Language Selection? French or Latin?
Baal-Zebub | 9 days ago
Are those the only choices?
French is a dying language, and Latin is dead.
How about Spanish, Chinese, Russian, Japanese. These are all rising languages and all have business uses in todays growing world economy.
But if you insist:
French: Very nasaly language, hard to speak for an english person. Cannot be read phonetically. Sounds cool.
Latin: The basis for a lot of modern languages such as spanish, french, portugese, italian. But make no mistake learning it will give you no better aptitude for the modern languagese since they have changed so much. It's fairly consitent, onces you get the conjugations down, all that's left is aquisition of vocab.
Chinese: difficult to learn, very tonal (bases in vowels and ptiches), uses countles symbols. Has a high usage rate and is very useful since china is one of the biggest economies in the world.
Spanish: Extremly common language to learn, fairly easy. Very useful in american business.
Japanese: Easy to pronounce/ learn to write. Difficult to master all the different dialects and formal/casual/base/polite language forms.
Russian, hard to learn. Difficult culturaly to use.
👍 206 | 👎 9
Did you like the answer? World Language Selection? French or Latin?
Share with your friends
We found more questions related to the topic: China writing and language
Originally Answered: A question for those of you who are familiar with the French language
Today my mother took my little sister to the dentist. When they went in, the dentist [a woman] asked them: To what do I owe the pleasure of this visit? (literally, what favorable wind blows you here?)
As you can see, amener has a number of different meanings in French, including take, bring, and accompany. In this case it is a sailing metaphor.
You might want to explore WordReference.com. It explains many idioms in comparable phrases.
I like French better, but it depends. Both are a new language for you to learn, so both can be hard depending on how well you learn new languages. French is a romance language which is deprived from Latin, so there are some similarities. Latin is a dead language, so you wouldn't have to speak it. Latin helps if you want to go into the medical, scientific, or linguistic fields during and after college. I prefer and recommend French though. But, you should really decide on which you like better instead of taking somebody else's word for it, because after all you will be the one to learn it, not them
👍 80 | 👎 1
Latin is an awesome language but you wouldn't have much use of knowing it unless you want to stun your friends so I would suggest French it is easier hope this helped:)
👍 72 | 👎 -7
DO NOT NOT NOT TAKE LATIN.
sorry thats my opinion. haha, but i will tell you a little about the language just so you can make your own decision:)
*well there is a lot of memorization. like all the verbs have four "principal parts" and you will most likely have to remember all of the parts of every word that have like nothing to do with each other.
*you need to really know english grammar very well as in direct/indirect objects, predicate nom./adj, and all of that to even think about translating a basic sentence.
*it is just confusing, because in a sentence all the words are like scrambled up so you need to know the declension charts very well
*verb conjugations are insanely confusing. you need to like tell the difference between 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd(io), and 4th conjugation verbs in like present, past, future, perfect for all of them
and i am in 9th grade and thats what we are doing
i hope that helps:D
👍 64 | 👎 -15
Originally Answered: US Army selection vs British Army selection?
As the others have pointed out a lot of it has to do with size
If tomorrow the UK was forced to triple or quadruple the size of her forces...you would see minimum standards drop to rock bottom and training cut to a bare minimum
Look at WW2 for example...many of those men would never even make it through the door of today's military without being disqualified
As far as us weeding people out...only about 2-3 out of 10 kids in the US even meet the bare minimum requirements to get into the US military. When I was a Recruiter I had to weed through 30 kids to get one enlistment on average.
Compound that with the fact that we have more people get out of the US military, that have to get replaced every year, than you have in your entire armed forces.
If we were as selective as the UK we would never meet the demand for personnel.
Even after you weed out unqualified people..you still have way more people wanting in than you have spots for. So you can afford to pick the "best qualified" rather than simply the "qualified".
I wish we had that problem.
Another interesting difference...is the size of your reserve force. The Army Reserve/Territorial Army only has 36,000 people. Which is only 30% of your total force.
By comparison the US Army Reserve and Army National Guard, combined, has 559,000 people..a full 50% of the total force. And they receive the exact same initial entry training as the regulars (which takes up training space/time/resources)...which I don't believe is the case with the TA in the UK where the Common Military Syllabus (Recruit) is trained on the weekends.
Good question though. Wish there were more like this.