This topic contains 20 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by Anonymous 3 years, 4 months ago.
July 27, 2017 at 6:05 am #2518
L. Livius mag. omnibus sociis sal.
One idea that did not survive the amendment process, but which seemed to have some traction nevertheless, was some form of credentialed recognition by the College of those whose ability with Latin has been sufficiently proven to be endorsed as teachers, translators, etc. I had originally dubbed such persons grammatici.
I think such a credential would be a useful tool for our College to identify those socii whom the public can confidently approach for a certain level of expertise with Latin. Here are my initial thoughts on establishing a consilium grammaticorum within the College:
- All socii who have been granted the qualification of grammaticus would collaborate as a body of peers: the consilium grammaticorum.
- To become a grammaticus, the following criteria would need to be met:
- The candidate must be a voting member of the College (i.e., Roman citizen optimo iure, and member of the College),
- The candidate must prove their expertise with Latin through the presentation of credentials (e.g., academic degree), or passing a test devised by the consilium. Either such application would be accompanied with a fee of Ӿ20 paid to the College.
- Upon meeting the above criteria, the socius would then be considered for appointment as a grammaticus by the magistri upon the recommendation of a majority of the consilium.
- The above-mentioned test would be reviewed and revised by the consilium annually.
- To maintain their status, the grammatici would pay an annual fee of Ӿ5 to the College.
- The magistri would maintain an official list of all grammatici, and remove anyone from it as necessary (especially upon the recommendation of a majority of the consilium).
These are just some initial ideas. Thoughts?
Valete.July 27, 2017 at 1:00 pm #10825
I agree with this fullyJuly 29, 2017 at 3:23 am #10865
L. Horatia Adamas L. Livio Senecæ omnibusque S.P.D.
I am in Lexington, Kentucky, for the annual meeting of the Academia Latinitati Fovendæ, a group which normally meets in Europe. Last evening we enjoyed an introductory dinner, with over 100 people of all ages and many nationalities chattering away in Latin of varying fluency. It was amazing to see and hear so many people speaking Latin!
Finally got some net access this afternoon, but don’t know if this will go through; I had to use webmail as other outgoing mail is not allowed.
I think a group of Grammatici might be a good idea, but charging a fee sounds much more like the loathsome behavior of the B-school than of academia. Academia spurns that sort of thing, although we all know that we have to have pecunia, and some entities demand something called ‘bit coin,’ which apparently is a virtual species thereof. However, I cannot possibly support having anyone pay a fee either for entry into such a group or to remain in it. As for checking competency, I think all of us know that there are at least three of us who are very good Latinists, and at least a couple of others who are learning and practicing Latin. I hardly think we need to prove that sort of thing. After all, classics majors of my generation and before were not proctored during examinations after freshman year unless non-majors were in the course, and in like manner, we old hands should not have to prove anything. Perhaps new members might have to do so, but a nice post in decent Latin, or several of them, should settle the matter. Possibly my first post to this list had unintended consequences for the conditrix…
Valete!July 29, 2017 at 3:30 pm #10868
L. Livius mag. Horatiae Adamanti mag. et omnibus sociis sal.
I’m glad to hear that the Academia’s convention is going well! Do us Quirites proud, dear colleague!
The initial members of the consilium would need to be appointed by the College (for lack of a consilium to make recommendations), after which they would collectively decide upon the future requirements for cooption. Horatia Adamas, I think your appointment would be inevitable, as your expertise is beyond question.
As for the fees, the motive for them is in no way mercenary, but simply a way to encourage the grammatici to remain invested in their role. The amounts I’ve proposed are actually insignificant (the annual fee amounts to $1.25 USD), but an important gesture of maintainance and investment in the consilium and collegium. All professional associations and fraternal organizations of which I know have some sort of dues for members, so I do not see this as terribly counter-cultural.
Vale et valete.July 29, 2017 at 9:52 pm #10875
I agree with Seneca. If this was a bigger amount Id also be against it, but it is so insignificant that its meaning can truly only be to gauge activity in a way that does not require a vote to remove someone from the Consilium. A mechanism can even be made to wave the payment requirment if the person is sick or something of the sort that impedes them.July 30, 2017 at 1:38 am #10877
There is no logic in charging a fee.
Someone is supposed to pay a fee in order to have to do additional work? In any normal society people get paid, when they do work, not the other way around. No matter how insignificant the amount may be, the denarii would move in the wrong direction.
One would need to be insane to apply for grammaticus.
Valete!July 30, 2017 at 2:31 am #10878
Anonymousquote Gaius Florius Lupus:
Only if no equal privilege accompanies the costJuly 30, 2017 at 11:12 am #10879
L. Livius mag. C. Florio sal.
You mistake the nature of the grammatici, C. Flori. It is not a chore to be named grammaticus, but (as C. Aurelianus has indicated) a privilege. It entitles one to a form of recognition of value to anyone seeking compensation as a Latinist within our Republic, viz., the stable, corporate testimony of their peers as to their expertise.
This is a common, and ancient practice with nearly every organized profession. Lawyers must be admitted to the bar of their jurisdiction and maintain their status with the local bar association (through conduct, and dues). Engineers, accountants, physicians, etc., etc., all operate similarly.
Being a grammaticus isn’t a job, it’s being certified for a job by one’s peers.
Vale.July 30, 2017 at 6:35 pm #10883
How exactly does this recognition benefit the title holder?
One would get nothing in return. On the other hand the magistri would be encouraged to accept as many grammatici as possible regardless of their actual skills, because every grammaticus means more money for the Collegium.
Let us take this example: There is currently a compensation of Ӿ 50 paid by the Republic for translating the Declaration. So the Collegium has its grammatici translate the Declaration, pockets Ӿ50 and additionally charges Ӿ5 from each grammaticus for the questionable honor to do this work.
But a citizen could just as well translate the Declaration himself, take the money and save the fees of the Collegium.
Livi Seneca, you just came up with a great idea of a business model. I will setup a company and instead of paying salaries the employees pay me for the honor. It does not even matter, if it is much, I just need lots of employees. I do not need to produce anything, since the employees already generate my profit.
Currently I have a job opening. Would you mind to apply? I only charge Ӿ20 for the application.
This is really the best idea since the invention of sliced bread.
Back to our Collegium, it would be far more reasonable that the grammatici receive money for their work. If the Collegium translates the Declaration into Latin in a common effort, it would be fair, if the money paid by the treasury goes into the pocket of the Collegium and it pays the salary of the grammatici from that money. So everybody would get a fair share.
You cannot compare it to a professional association, because the members there receive a benefit. Sometimes it is a pension, sometimes a health insurance, a liability insurance, legal protection etc. Our Collegium would give nothing of that in return. The honor of being a grammaticus is useless in comparison. And it is not reflected anywhere apart from the moment when one has to pay the fee.
Do you think Horatia needs the permission of the Collegium, for people asking her on advice about a grammatical question? Would her expertise be less valuable, because she did not pay the annual fee for a grammatica? She is an expert due to her knowledge and skills, not due to any title.
I support Horatia Adamas in this topic. Let us keep money out of it! There is no need for paying fees or salaries. What we do for the Collegium, we do voluntarily.
The original idea was to have these grades (grammaticus, discipulus etc.), so that they would give people an idea, which role this Collegium member plays. Is he here to learn something? Is he here to help others? You want to turn it into a business model. And it would not even work as such.
If we charge fees for grammatici, we will not find any member for this council, except Seneca himself perhaps who would join just to prove his point.
Valete!July 31, 2017 at 2:38 am #10889
L. Horatia Adamas L. Livio Senecae omnibusque S.P.D.
Still in Lexington…the first day of lectures was held in a building with terrible acoustics; thought I was going deaf, but then I heard that others could not hear the speakers, either. Maybe that’s why they spontaneously broke into song, singing "Gaudeamus, igitur" quite forcefully…not that all of us there are juvenes; there are several silver-haired participants as well as several juvenes and everything in between. Some also have installed their toddlers in the lecture hall, and tried to pacify them with electronic stuff no kid that age should ever see. Every now and again, however, howls break forth…
Today the young gentleman who has taken over the late David Morgan’s efforts at compiling a dictionary of modern Latin was among the speakers, and there were several other interesting ones–more audible in a different building. We shall finish late tomorrow night. Then comes the fun of packing the car and driving for 12 hours at over 80 mph to keep from being run over. Ugh! Hope I survive…
As for the fees, once again, please, let’s keep money out of this.
Valete! We have to be up early, so I must hit the sack!July 31, 2017 at 4:12 pm #10892
L. Livius mag. Horatiae Adamanti mag., C. Florio, et aliis sociis sal.
As with any system, there is potential for abuse, but the situation you envision, C. Flori, is quite improbable. The magistri cannot boundlessly profit from appointing grammatici: first, any candidates would need to satisfy the requirements of the consilium itself; second, any such candidates would have to be invested enough in the mission of the College to agree to the appointment and pay their dues; and lastly, any dues would go to the treasury of the College, not the magistri, and would require the College to vote on the disbursement of those funds. On the other hand, for those interested in the state of the College’s coffers, you are correct on one thing: it would incentivize the recruitment of new Latinists, instead of the passive growth upon which we currently rely.
The example you provide is an excellent example of the economic value of peer recognition. Any citizen could submit a translation on their own merits, but how would the customer judge its merits? Maybe the text they’ve received is worthless, or maybe it rivals Cicero: the customer likely hasn’t the means of knowing. Given the choice of a translator credentialed by his peers, or a freelance translator who is not, the customer is likely to favour the former with a commission. The credentialed translator receives his commission, and once per year pays his dues to the College for the buyer confidence it supplies to him. Our freelance translator has saved his pocket change, but never receives work.quote C. Florius Lupus:
I can see that, once again, the push for professionalism is not a popular one here, and I will not insist upon it unilaterally. Impugning my motives, however, C. Flori, is unnecessary, and unjustified, I think. Have I really ever given you reason to believe I am so intransigent as to be unwilling or incapable of discussion or compromise?
Vale et valete.July 31, 2017 at 8:41 pm #10893
I also believe you were unnecessarily aggressive, Lupe. Seneca has always proven to be miled mannered and a gentleman. No need to take off the gloves like that… We’re all civilized people here.
If the others don’t want it, I will not be one to go against them. I have no right in this after all, I am just a fan of latin with no ability to ever compare to the likes of you three, Horatia in particular. But I would like to note that I did not find Seneca’s proposal absurd and do believe it could have been worked into the system in a perfectly agreeable manner. But, alas, the decision is up to you.August 1, 2017 at 12:27 am #10894
Sorry, Seneca, if I sounded aggressive. I would like to apologize in this case.
I never argue against a person, only against a proposal. I know that you are somebody who is good in getting things done very efficiently, a character trait that I highly appreciate. But this is why I had to oppose it so vehemently. Without drawing attention to the problem, it would probably have passed without anybody thinking the consequences through.
Paying a fee is not a credential. The recognition as grammaticus requires to show some certifications. This is what counts. And it does not go away, when somebody forgets to pay the annual fee. I would prefer your or Horatia’s expertise over anyone’s else who simply paid the fee to be called "grammaticus". So the title would not be worth much.
We would first need the Republic to enact a lex that bans anybody to translate a text into Latin without being a recognized grammaticus in order for this system to work.
Vale!August 1, 2017 at 2:46 am #10896
L. Livius mag. C. Florio sal.
The apology is appreciated, C. Flori. Tone is so very difficult to discern accurately in online media, and I thank you for being one of the few faithful socii dedicated to participating in our Collegium.
A state monopoly on Latin translation work would certainly be advantageous for this and many other potential initiatives of the College. Perhaps lobbying for such is a better initial project for us to pursue?
Vale.August 1, 2017 at 6:05 am #10897
If, as appears to be the case, all are in agreement that the risk for abuse is sufficiently low, is there any harm done by the proposed fee, aside from the potential to be a deterrent to people signing up? If there is not, is there any reason that it couldn’t be enacted as proposed, and, if it doesn’t work as intended, the fee removed? It seems like a system that could still work if the fee were removed. As someone who is new here and struggles with Latin, I for one might find myself appreciating RR-credentialed Latinists, whether or not they’d paid for those credentials.
ValeteAugust 1, 2017 at 9:10 am #10898
I would argue there is another harm done. The grammatici would not be rewarded for their work, but punished. So let us do it the other way around first. Let us pay the grammatici a salary first, see if it works and then change it if necessary.August 1, 2017 at 2:26 pm #10902
Anonymousquote Gaius Florius Lupus:
I think this is a great compromise. They would be paid a commission anyway (it is not like they’d just pay a yearly fee and not have any in on the commission). But if everyone feels rather tense about it, we could do it like so:
I) We institute the Grammatici at first with no fee.
II) We lobby the RR to make it so all latin translated works requested by the RR as a government should be made exclusively by the Grammatici, which adds them much importance.
III) The commission of said work is divided among the grammatici in full.
IV) After this year and the next are passed, we see how much Denarii that has lent the Grammatici and rationally debate if the fee is worth it (given the privilage to get a monopoly on the work provided by the government).
What say you? Make this with the condition that it be revisited for debate in 2019.August 1, 2017 at 11:28 pm #10913
This would be an option.
Apart from that I am wondering what the Collegium actually needs money for? Even in the future I cannot think about anything that the fees would be collected for.
….. maybe an annual Saturnalia party or something….August 2, 2017 at 12:14 am #10917
L. Livius mag. C. Flori, C. Aureliano, et aliis sociis sal.
Collegium funds could be used for any number of projects:
- Commissioning translations or written works (grammars, dictionaries, books, articles, etc.),
- Funding scholarships for students,
- Funding research grants,
- Creating and maintaining a website and other online resources,
- Collegium merchandise,
- Hosting colloquia or conventions,
- Supporting other Latin organizations,
- etc., etc., etc. …
It is possible to establish the consilium without any dues, but in my experience it is infinitely more difficult to institute a fee after having done something for free, than vice versa. I am inclined to focus our efforts on collaborating with the Senate on monopoly legislation.
Valete.August 3, 2017 at 3:28 pm #10959
I can not see the immediate necessity for funding any projects and the collection of money for the Collegium.
Therefore I propose the following amendment to our bylaws without reference to any money:quote :August 4, 2017 at 2:56 pm #10979
This does not necessarily require an amendament to the bylaws. It could be estabished as a resolution under article XIII of the bylaws. Not all of the business of the collegium has to be bylaw amendments. Once it has been in operation we can then decide if an amend the bylaws is necessary.
We may also deliberate on the operation of the collegium; edicta magistraria, leges collegiariae, consilia collegiaria.
P. Sextius Laevus
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.