MATSEC IM Latin common mistakes
MATSEC IM Latin · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Translating the Latin verb as if its tense were decided by the English sentence alone, so that a historic present is rendered as past or a perfect is rendered as simple past regardless of context, without checking sequence of tenses in subordinate clauses.
Candidates learn principal parts and tense labels in isolation but are rarely drilled on how Latin tense encodes aspect and how sequence of tenses (primary vs historic) governs subjunctives in indirect statement, purpose, and result clauses; they default to the English narrative tense.
What to do instead
Before translating, scan every finite and subjunctive verb and mark its tense and mood in the margin; then apply the sequence rule explicitly: primary sequence (present, future, future perfect, perfect with 'have') takes present subjunctive, historic sequence (imperfect, perfect, pluperfect) takes imperfect or pluperfect. Practise with short passages where the same verb form appears in both sequences and justify each choice in writing.
Treating every noun ending in -a as first declension feminine and every -us as second declension masculine, then mis-parsing forms like 'agricolae' (genitive/dative singular or nominative plural), 'domus' (fourth declension with irregular forms), or 'manus' (fourth declension feminine).
Textbooks introduce declensions with model nouns and gender rules of thumb; candidates memorise the paradigm table but not the exceptions and homographs, and exam passages deliberately include high-frequency irregulars and fifth/fourth declension nouns.
What to do instead
Build a personal list of nouns whose gender or declension breaks the pattern (e.g. 'poeta', 'nauta', 'agricola' masculine first declension; 'domus', 'manus', 'cornu' fourth; 'dies', 'res' fifth) and test yourself by generating all cases in context. When parsing, always identify the case by its function in the sentence first, then confirm the ending fits.
Leaving subordinate clauses as loose paratactic English ('he said, he was coming') or misreading indirect statement because the accusative-and-infinitive construction is not recognised, especially when the subject accusative is a pronoun or the infinitive is passive.
English uses 'that' clauses and reported speech with tense shift; candidates translate word by word and do not flag the head verb (e.g. 'dicit', 'putabat', 'spero') that triggers the construction, so the accusative looks like a direct object and the infinitive looks like a main verb.
What to do instead
Annotate every passage: circle verbs of saying, thinking, knowing, perceiving; bracket the accusative-and-infinitive; write the literal 'X to be Y' first, then convert to idiomatic English with the correct tense shift. Drill with sentences where the same accusative could be object or subject of the infinitive and decide from the head verb.
Rendering cases by a fixed English preposition (genitive always 'of', ablative always 'by/with', dative always 'to/for') without checking whether the noun depends on a verb, adjective, or preposition, producing nonsense such as 'by the city' for an ablative of place where or 'of the war' for an ablative absolute.
Case endings are taught with a single English gloss, and candidates do not learn the inventory of uses (ablative absolute, ablative of means, manner, time, comparison; genitive of description, objective, partitive; dative of possession, agent, reference) or how to test them against the governing word.
What to do instead
For each noun, write the case, number, gender, and the governing word or construction, then name the use before translating. Memorise a checklist of ablative and genitive uses with a diagnostic question for each (e.g. ablative absolute requires a participle and a noun both in the ablative and no preposition). Apply the checklist to every ablative in a set passage.
Confusing the passive and active forms of the perfect system (e.g. 'amatus est' as 'he loved' rather than 'he was loved'; 'amavit' vs 'amatus est'), and confusing deponent verbs (e.g. 'loquitur', 'profectus est') with passives.
The perfect passive is a compound of participle plus 'esse', which looks like a present-tense verb to candidates; deponents look passive but are active in meaning, and the two confusions compound each other in exam sentences.
What to do instead
Make a table of the four principal parts for model verbs and mark which forms are active, passive, and deponent. Practise converting active sentences to passive and back across all tenses, and maintain a running list of common deponents (loquor, sequor, proficiscor, conor, vereor, patior) with their meanings. In translation, check whether the participle agrees with a subject and whether the verb can take an object.
Translating poetry as if it were prose: ignoring enjambment, hyperbaton, and the metre, so that adjectives are attached to the wrong noun (e.g. an adjective at the end of one line agreeing with a noun at the start of the next) and the word order is forced into English order without accounting for emphasis.
Candidates are trained on prose syntax and do not scan; Latin verse separates agreeing words deliberately and uses the line break for emphasis, and without scansion the caesura and clause boundaries are invisible.
What to do instead
Scan the passage first (identify the metre, mark feet and main caesura), then bracket each clause and draw lines connecting adjectives to their nouns and pronouns to their antecedents before translating. Read the Latin aloud in metre. Practise with short Virgil and Ovid excerpts where hyperbaton is extreme, and write a literal version followed by an idiomatic one.
Summarising a passage's plot without identifying the literary technique or authorial purpose the question asks about, and failing to quote or cite specific Latin words as evidence.
Candidates prepare set texts by reading translations and memorising events; they do not practise the analytical vocabulary (simile, apostrophe, allusion, irony, dramatic irony, ring composition, epithet) or the habit of anchoring claims in the text.
What to do instead
For each set text, build a grid of key passages with columns: Latin quotation, translation, technique, effect, and link to theme or genre. Practise writing short analytical paragraphs with the formula 'quote, identify, explain effect'. Learn a small set of technical terms and use them precisely rather than vaguely.
Writing the essay or commentary in vague generalities ('Virgil is a great poet who shows emotion') without a clear thesis, structure, or reference to the question's exact wording, and running out of time because the passage translation was done first and at excessive length.
Candidates underestimate the planning time needed and treat the commentary as a retelling; they also allocate time poorly between translation and essay sections, and lack practice in timed conditions.
What to do instead
Practise timed papers with a fixed allocation (e.g. translation, then 5 minutes planning, then essay). Underline the command words in the question and write a one-sentence thesis plus three topic sentences before starting. Use the PEEL structure (point, evidence, explanation, link) and keep a bank of flexible topic sentences for recurring themes (pietas, furor, fate, love, power).
Misreading the metre when scanning, placing the ictus on the wrong syllable and treating the final -m or a final vowel before a vowel as pronounced, ignoring elision and the rules for final -a, -e, -o, -um, -am.
Scansion is often taught late or skipped; candidates rely on stress-based English reading and do not apply elision or the quantity rules for vowels before two consonants or before a mute plus liquid.
What to do instead
Drill scansion systematically: mark all long vowels by nature and position, mark elisions first, then divide into feet from the end. Use a short checklist (final -m elides; final vowel elides before another vowel or h; -a in the ablative singular is long, in the nominative/accusative plural short). Scan ten lines daily and check against a commentary's scansion.
Answering background or context questions (historical, political, social, or literary-historical) with unsupported assertions or anachronisms, e.g. describing Roman 'democracy', equating the principate with a modern monarchy, or dating an author by guesswork.
Candidates revise set texts in isolation and do not build a chronological framework or a working knowledge of Roman institutions (consul, tribune, senate, equestrian order, patron-client relations) or of the Augustan settlement.
What to do instead
Maintain a one-page timeline of the relevant period with key events and authors, and a glossary of Roman political and social terms with precise definitions. For each set text, note its date, genre, patron, and political context, and practise linking a passage to that context with evidence rather than assertion.