h1

The Best Greek and Latin Grammars (are in German)

October 7, 2010

Natürlich.

Previous posts have covered the best and/or commonly used Greek and Latin grammars available in English. In both languages, the standard grammars are in German, however, so serious researchers will want to consult the following.

Latin:

Lateinische Grammatik (Main Library 3rd floor PA25 .H24 Ser. 2, Sect. 2, v. 1, etc.) by Leumann, Hofmann, and Szantyr, is described by Jenkins (no. 536) as “the best available comprehensive latin grammar.”  Kühner-Stegmann (see below) is a better descriptive grammar, but this work surpasses it in all other areas.

Ausführliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache, vol. 2, also known as ‘Kühner-Stegmann,’ is described by Jenkins (no. 534) as “the best descriptive latin grammar available.”   Jenkins also includes information about the index, separately published (Index Locorum zu Kühner-Stegmann “Satzlehre,” Jenkins no. 535).  At UGA we only seem to have the 1912 edition, although Jenkins implies the text has been revised further since then.  Our copy is located at the Repository (off campus storage); we do not appear to own the Index Locorum.

Greek:

Ausführliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache (Main Library 3rd Floor PA255 .K95a 1898; also available online through Perseus) falls into two parts: volume 1, ‘Kühner-Blass,’ which covers phonology and morphology and which Jenkins (no. 532) describes as “still useful [but] somewhat dated” (he prefers Schwyzer, see below); and volume 2, ‘Kühner-Gerth,’ which covers syntax, and is described by Jenkins as “sound and detailed.” We had a chase after the Kühner-Blass volumes last year and discovered them missing, so we are in the process of acquiring new copies. There is an Index Locorum zu Kühner-Gerth (Main Library 3rd Floor PA254 .K72 C3; discussed by Jenkins as no. 533).

Schwyzer’s Griechische Grammatik: Auf der Grundlage von Karl Brugmanns Griechischer Grammatik (Main Library 3rd Floor PA25 .H24 Ser. 2, Sect. 1, v. 1, etc.) is in four volumes: the first is preferable to Kühner-Blass for morphology and phonology, and the second is described as “offer[ing] extensive illustrative examples from greek literature” but sometimes inferior to Kühner-Gerth for descriptive grammar. The final two volumes contain indexes.

Advertisements

2 comments

  1. I’m not sure on exactly what Leumann-Hofmann-Szantyr’s is better than Kühner-Stegmann’s but I may be too newbie on Latin to tell it. So far Kühner-Stegmann’s looks more organized, with better samples from Latin texts and it’s way more complete (regarding topics I’m particularly after). I needed to check on pronouns and while Leumann-Hofmann-Szantyr’s only had 17 bland pages on it I could count over 50 in Kühner-Stegmann’s, and those pages were more useful indeed. I’d really like to see and put to use the better parts of Leumann-Hofmann-Szantyr’s but right now I can’t see them 😦



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: