MATSEC AM Latin common mistakes
MATSEC AM Latin · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Translating the ablative absolute as if it were a finite clause joined by 'and', e.g. rendering 'his rebus cognitis' as 'these things were known and...' rather than 'when these things had been learned'.
Candidates learn the construction as a vocabulary label ('ablative absolute') but never practise converting it into an English subordinate clause, so at speed they fall back on the word order of the Latin and produce two co-ordinate statements.
What to do instead
Drill a fixed conversion routine: identify the participle, decide its time relationship to the main verb, then render with 'when/since/although/after' plus a subject. Build a personal list of ten ablative absolutes from past practice passages and rewrite each in three different English clause types.
Leaving subordinate clauses in Latin word order in the English version, so that 'quod Caesar venerat' becomes 'because Caesar had come' placed before the main clause even when English requires it after, or leaving the verb at the end of a 'that' clause.
Under time pressure candidates translate word by word left to right and never re-read the English sentence as English; they check meaning against the Latin rather than checking whether the output is a grammatical English sentence.
What to do instead
After drafting, cover the Latin and read only the English aloud. If any sentence sounds unnatural, restructure it. Practise by translating a short passage then rewriting the English twice more for fluency while keeping the sense identical.
Confusing the case functions of the same form, e.g. reading a dative of agent with a gerundive as a plain dative, or taking an ablative of means as an ablative of agent, producing translations such as 'the city was to be captured by the soldiers' plan' instead of 'the plan had to be captured by the soldiers'.
Case endings are recognised, but the candidate does not test which of several possible functions makes sense with the particular verb and context; the first function memorised wins.
What to do instead
For every ambiguous noun, write the two or three possible functions in the margin and eliminate them using the verb's semantics and the surrounding sentence. Keep a one-page reference of gerundive constructions (dative of agent, ad + gerund, genitive of purpose) and test yourself on minimal pairs.
Skipping or guessing at unknown vocabulary instead of using context, etymology, or English derivatives, resulting in a translation that is fluent but wrong at the key word on which the comprehension questions depend.
Candidates treat the passage as a test of the vocabulary list they happen to know; when a word is unknown they insert a plausible filler and move on, then answer comprehension questions from the invented meaning.
What to do instead
Adopt a three-step strategy for unknown words: check for a compound of a known root, check English derivatives, then infer from the sentence's logic and note the guess with a mark. Build a running list of the 300 most frequent prose words and revise it weekly.
Answering comprehension questions from general knowledge of the historical figure or myth rather than from the Latin actually printed, e.g. stating that Caesar invaded Britain because 'he wanted conquest' when the passage gives a different stated motive.
Background knowledge is easier to recall than parsing, and candidates who have studied the set author's period unconsciously substitute it for reading the text; this is especially common when the passage is a familiar episode.
What to do instead
For every comprehension answer, underline the Latin word or phrase that justifies it before writing. If no phrase can be underlined, the answer is unsupported and must be revised. Practise on passages whose outcome you think you already know.
Producing a literal rendering of a set poetic text that ignores figurative language, so that a metaphor or transferred epithet is translated flatly and the comment or literary question is answered with plot summary rather than analysis of the effect.
Candidates revise the set text by reading translations and memorising content, so they can describe what happens but cannot identify the stylistic device or explain why the poet chose that word order or image.
What to do instead
Annotate the set text line by line for devices (metaphor, apostrophe, hyperbaton, alliteration, simile) and for the effect each creates. Practise writing two-sentence comments of the form 'device + literal meaning + effect on the reader', using the Latin words quoted.
Quoting little or no Latin in answers to literary questions, or quoting from memory with wrong inflection or word order, so that the point cannot be verified and marks for reference to the text are lost.
Candidates believe paraphrase is sufficient and are anxious about misquoting; they therefore avoid quotation altogether rather than learning a small number of short, exact phrases.
What to do instead
Learn eight to twelve short quotations per set book, each no more than four words, with exact endings, and attach each to a specific interpretive point. In practice answers, always follow a quotation with a translation and then the comment it supports.
Treating the set prose author's rhetorical structure as mere content, so that a question about how an argument is organised is answered by summarising the argument rather than by naming the arrangement (exordium, narratio, argumentatio, peroratio) and the devices used at each stage.
Candidates prepare the set prose by learning what the author says and the historical circumstances, not by analysing how the speech or narrative is constructed; rhetorical terminology is often learned as a list of labels without application.
What to do instead
Make a structural outline of each set prose text with section numbers and the function of each section, then add the two or three marked devices in each. Answer past questions on structure by writing the outline first and only then drafting prose.
Writing literary answers that narrate the plot or paraphrase the passage for most of the response, with evaluation confined to a final sentence such as 'this makes it vivid', so that the answer never addresses the question's analytical demand.
Plot summary is safe and easy to produce under exam pressure, and candidates have not practised the difference between describing what a text says and arguing about how and why it says it.
What to do instead
Before writing, underline the question's key analytical verb (compare, explain the effect, how far) and plan three points, each pairing a quotation with an effect and a judgement. Ban yourself from any sentence that only reports events; every paragraph must contain an evaluative claim.
Mistranslating a set verse passage in the examination when asked to translate lines studied in class, because the text was learned from an English translation and the Latin was never parsed closely enough to survive exam pressure.
Set texts are frequently revised passively, by rereading a translation alongside the Latin, which creates a false sense of familiarity; the candidate recognises the passage but cannot construe unusual word order or poetic forms such as syncopated perfects and Greek accusatives.
What to do instead
Revise the set text by translating it cold from a clean copy, then checking against a commentary; mark every line where you stumbled and retranslate those lines a week later. Keep a list of poetic forms and constructions peculiar to the set author and test yourself on them.