AI baffles Latin teacher 👨‍💻 ChatGPT speaks Latin 

Sermō Gē Pē Tē bene Latīnam scit et ūsūrus est macrōnibus sī id rogās.

Lol

Or Old Norse. Or Ancient Greek. Or any other language besides English pretty much

@@dsracoon They even butcher simple archaic English. It's not that difficult to use "thou, thee & thine" correctly or the -th ending. Instead we see games like Tales of Symphonia use thou and thee interchangeably and -th for every person...

@@christopherhellmann7754 Shutiteth thine mouth

Rip

I think that would help. If you ask it to speak English of a certain timeline it is more than happy to, so it certainly at least has an awareness.

I've tried doing that with German. It sometimes still mixed up Old High German and Middle High German. Or I asked it to translate something into Middle High German and it would provide me with the Modern German translation.

FOUND YOU SOUL!! wassup dude!

I love this music, but thanks anyway for the comment

AI 🤖 would probably do the best if it learned a monogrammar language as a reference point, as it is modular and thus easy to apply systematically. The simplest possible language is a monogrammar ☝ language 📜. The grammar rule ➊ of a sentence existing is all the grammar needed. 😆 Directly translating a monogrammar ☝ language 📜 into the non-monogrammar ❌☝ languages 📜📜📜 humans 👥👥👥👥 have results in gibberish 😵‍💫. Thus, in order to translate a monogrammar ☝ language 📜, you need to know a monogrammar ☝ language 📜 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Anyway, the point is, it is useful for communicating across intelligence classes 👤🐕🌲👽🤖📜, as it is modular, and easy to start learning. It can also be used as a reference for understanding common human languages. 😆 It is also impossible to reach the conclusion of monogrammar ☝ incrementally for you 👈. Due to how your common language(s) 📜 fundamentally work ⚙. This makes pre-planning the only method to detect 📡 monogrammar ☝ for you 👈. 🪧🔗 www.youtube.com/@mahapushpacyavana2033/community 📹🎶 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-au5nOhalImc.html 📹🎶 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-nXOR4UQA8_k.html

For Italian is pretty good.

It's good for any language it can easily access a corpus for. So basically any modern, widely-used language.

Grātiās!

I asked it in Latin to write a simple computer program, it replied in Italian.

To be fair, Google Translate's Latin has improved lately. Still sucks, mind. But it's not as bad as it was when it got its reputation.

@@newq I mean, I can still write basic sentences in Swedish that it couldn't translate to English... Which I mean, is quite sad. I mean, they're so closely related and well known languages, for grammar, and vocabulary...

For me, the program answered in Modern Greek when I asked in Ancient Greek. How did you make it answer in ancient greek? Do you need the purchased version?

Can you still use it to have conversations in latin at least as a way to practice communicating in latin since i have noone to practice speaking with Is it reliable enough for that

Lol really? How silly

@@polyMATHY_Luke i just went back to my old chat to double check, and now macrons do show up, but they didn't display a few weeks ago. They must have changed ChatGPT since then. If you do another video on this you could ask it to write with macrons and see.

​@@will19125 This is interesting. Have you noticed any improvement in its Latin aside from the Macrons when asking for that? I imagine the model would try to pull more from the data it was fed that included macrons, which I assume would be better quality texts.

In my case, it did actually switch to writing Latin with macrons when requested, and it was correct!

@Rodd Broward It still seems to make errors for me, but it has improved over the past month or so that I have tried Latin with ChatGPT. The first time I tried, it was still making simple verb conjugation errors which don't seem to be nearly as common now.

Can you still use it to have conversations in latin at least as a way to practice communicating in latin since i have noone to practice speaking with Is it reliable enough for that

Dr. Bret Deveraux wrote an article titled "Collections: On ChatGPT" on his blog, in which he judges ChatGPT's historical knowledge and provides a link to ChatGPT-generated essay on Roman army. It's full of factual errors. His conclusion is that while ChatGPT is mostly capable of dealing with the external form of an essay, it's incapable of filling it with actual correct information. In other words, all form, no substance. So if you care about your eleventh century roleplay to be historically accurate, ChatGPT is not going to provide it.

​@@vytahperhaps it's accurate to the eleventh-century layman...

I’ve had a similar experience. I gave it the title of one of my old university assays on linguistics and asked it to write its own version. It seemed to understand the terms alright but didn’t produce many examples of their use. In my essay there are over 50 sample sentences. So I consider it was not capable of going very deeply into the subject.

it probably doesn't know to use only classical latin like most people prefer.

good tips!

It looks like that just came out

​@@polyMATHY_Luke ah, it didn't occur to me you probably made the video earlier lol

I think AI 🤖 would probably do the best if it learned a monogrammar language as a reference point, as it is modular and thus easy to apply systematically. The simplest possible language is a monogrammar ☝ language 📜. The grammar rule ➊ of a sentence existing is all the grammar needed. 😆 Directly translating a monogrammar ☝ language 📜 into the non-monogrammar ❌☝ languages 📜📜📜 humans 👥👥👥👥 have results in gibberish 😵‍💫. Thus, in order to translate a monogrammar ☝ language 📜, you need to know a monogrammar ☝ language 📜 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Anyway, the point is, it is useful for communicating across intelligence classes 👤🐕🌲👽🤖📜, as it is modular, and easy to start learning. It can also be used as a reference for understanding common human languages. 😆 It is also impossible to reach the conclusion of monogrammar ☝ incrementally for you 👈. Due to how your common language(s) 📜 fundamentally work ⚙. This makes pre-planning the only method to detect 📡 monogrammar ☝ for you 👈. 🪧🔗 www.youtube.com/@mahapushpacyavana2033/community 📹🎶 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-au5nOhalImc.html 📹🎶 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-nXOR4UQA8_k.html

That's probably because the macrons are going to play hell with the tokenisation before the text even reaches the machine learning.

I think the danger (of learning from bad Latin) outweighs the benefit. There’s plenty of carefully-written material available for beginners to read.

Noted

Is éard atá i gceist leis ná go bhfuil go leor taithí aige ar an mBéarla agus déanann sé iarracht a bheith ag tógáil ar an taithí sin chun cumarsáid a dhéanamh i dteangacha eile nach bhfuil taithí aige orthu. Mar sin dá laghad a thaithí ar an teanga is amhlaidh is mó a mbeidh rian an Bhéarla le feiceáil air. Is í sin an tuiscint atá agamsa ar an scéal ar aon nós.

That would be even worse.

​@@polyMATHY_Luke I was hoping that someone ask about program to see the answer) I was quite certain that "programma" is not, of course, a valid latin word, but still can be used, dictionaries mark it with *, meaning it's a neologism, or like "we're not sure about this". Maybe you could suggest some source to rely on for modern latin? What i could find is: -Wikipedia says it's "programma computatrāle", obviously that's a bad idea to take wikipedia without re-checking. -Latinitium (apparently, it's in lack of modern words whatsoever) and neolatinlexicon have no records for program or software. -Other dictionaries say it's "programma -atis f", some "Levine "Latin Dictionary" calls it "praecepta ratiōcinātōris", that's all i could find. So if i'm let's say a software engineer, than how could i express who i am and what i do?) Or actually if i am to describe what's ChatGPT. I would like to emphasize, that i'm asking about the source of knowledge, not like "Luke, tell me please how to translate this word" stuff, i think the lack of a well-known reliable source of modern words is a big obstacle for people who want to learn latin, cause, for example, you possess the knowledge, but it's hard for other people to obtain it. And if with program we should periphrase, then how to do it properly, like we know that "claviatūra" is not ok, but will "malleōlum series" be, based on what criteria? If the romans had neither computers nor programs then why "computātōrium" is valid, but "programma" is not, can "tēlephōnum portābile" be "sophophōnum" and can it have "applicātiōnēs" installed?) Sorry i'm just bringing up my thoughs, meaning that it's confusing, maybe from my own view only, i'm certainly not requiring any answer here, just highlighting the problem, maybe you see it in that area too.

Absolutely, I made video about it ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-XZT423ff9NU.html

Makes sense.

God is real

Haha could be. In any case, I think it’s ability to teach Latin is pretty limited, since it doesn’t produce good Latin yet.

@@polyMATHY_Luke Which model did you use? The new one that came out, GPT-4, is supposed to be much more capable than previous models.

It's only available to ChatGPT Plus subscribers though. You'd have to pay 20 bucks.

Did you try to get ChatGPT to make English synthetic again? That would be the pinnacle of computation, I believe.

Heh I just recorded the video the day before v4 debuted.

The problem is that New Latin and Modern Latin are all fundamentally Classical Latin, so something like “persona” doesn’t fly. It’s essentially just badly programmed; it needs better sources to draw from.

@@polyMATHY_Luke I agree :) It does learn by itself though, so hopefully with more input and more sources it will become better with time.

@@polyMATHY_Luke In dictionaries, indeed, the meaning of the word "persona" as "person" is mentioned as if in passing, mostly at the end and with a note that this meaning is rare and characteristic of post-Augustan Latin. However, words in real use do not function as they do in dictionaries - festooned with labels with many possible meanings. In fact, almost every time - except when ambiguity is intended - a word has one specific meaning derived from the context. I have juxtaposed all 21 occurrences of the word "persona" in Book II of Cicero's "De Oratore" - it is certainly THE Latin language ;) - with their equivalents in J.S. Watson's 1860 translation. And guess what, it is translated only once as "mask", once - also in connection with theater - as "personated part". In ten (!) cases, Watson found no better translation than "person", and in some remaining cases words and expressions like "character", "head", "parties to the suit" (reorum personis) could be replaced by "person" without causing confusion. Why dictionaries are reluctant to recognize the fact, that the word "persona" in its "modern" sense is not infrequent at all in the Classical context? I think this is somewhat due to the fact that in Western languages the etymology of "person" has been completely obliterated, and therefore their users are inclined to see a contradiction in the use of the Latin word "persona" both in the concrete and more abstract sense. However, if we look at other languages, we can see that such "coexistence of meanings" is perfectly natural. In Russian, for instance, the word for "person" (an individual, a legal entity, or a grammatical category) is "лицо" - exactly the same word, which also means "face" or " the outward (front) side" of something, e.g. cloth. Maybe AI is not so ignorant, employing the word "persona" as Cicero sometimes did?

I asked it in another somewhat obscure language (more spoken than latin, but only because it's still a living language, but a language less people know of than latin) and I asked it how to do heroin but it thought I was asking it how to be a heroine. I rephrased my question to be more simply how do I do drugs and it gave me a very strange mostly nonsensical answer because it clearly did not quite understand me, but it did try to talk about how drugs were bad. Then I asked it how to overdose and it thought I was asking about over-eating food. lol. So I cut to the chase and just asked it how to make a bomb and it definitely has trouble figuring out to flag your question in languages it's not used to. It did tell me that it's against the law, at least.

@@felicityc Lol. Honestly, I can't wait for an advanced alternative to Chat GPT. One that isn't so heavily censored by """Open""" AI. I get it from a corpo's view but honestly, it sucks that the people farthest ahead of the curve are like this.

Here is an example of the kind of chat I can have with GPT-4 in particular, as a learner of Latin. I might or might not be getting the best answer, but it seems to follow and the interaction has been enormously useful to me. GPT-3.5, well not so much. Here is a snippet of a recent chat: User Even in Latin, though, the process is, I think, limited because of the derivational morphology. Consider, we can imagine: The man painted the house; the house was painted; the neighbors liked it => the neighbors liked the painted house but now imagine that we want to de-emphasize the neighbors as the particular ones who liked the house, and wrap that up into a recursive adjective that means was-liked-having-been-painted. Because maybe the mayor's office is enumerating such things. Contrived, but maybe you see the point. In English, we are out of generative capacity in the participles, and I suspect in Latin too, and so we implement that at the level of phrasal syntax. Unless Latin can do that too. ChatGPT You bring up an interesting point. Indeed, the generative capacity for creating recursive adjectives using participles is limited in both English and Latin. While Latin has a more flexible and nuanced system of participles than English, it is not without its constraints. In the case you mentioned, it would be challenging to create a single recursive adjective in either language that means "was-liked-having-been-painted." Instead, we would need to resort to phrasal syntax to express this idea in both English and Latin. In English, we might say something like: "The house, having been painted, was liked." In Latin, we could express a similar idea using an ablative absolute construction: "Domus picta, placuit." Literally translated, this means "With the house having been painted, it pleased." The phrase "domus picta" (the house having been painted) is an example of an ablative absolute, a construction in Latin that expresses a circumstance or condition in which the main action of the sentence occurs. The verb "placuit" (it pleased) is in the indicative mood, signifying that the house was liked. While Latin's system of participles and its ability to create complex adjectives is more extensive than English's, it still has its limitations. In cases like this, both languages must rely on phrasal syntax to convey the desired meaning. User Ah, that is sweet.

Does this transfer to multiple sessions and users?

@@polyMATHY_Luke Not possible currently. Its "context window" (few thousand words, but increasing) may be augmented behind the scenes by summarization techniques, but it cannot learn in any meaningful sense of the word.

Lol I was super tired when I recorded this, hence the slurring of speech and involuntary lenition of postalveolar affricates haha

@@polyMATHY_Luke I'm not convinced - this must have been AI generated! 😳

I recorded this a few days ago, so I guess it was the previous iteration

Loved the video! @@polyMATHY_Luke GPT4 is quite a lot better & is definitely something I would suggest trying with again at some point in the future. Also, there are a lot of ways to give it better prompts which will result in higher quality results. Additionally, the longer the chats get, the lower the quality of the response (the entire conversation is resubmitted for each new reply, there are costs in reading and producing the data so the longer the conversation has gone one, the less capable the model becomes in many ways). Instead of just starting the conversation with a prompt in latin like you did, you may actually get better results by saying something like: We are going to talk in classical latin [or even provide a particular style/author] and I want you emphasize accuracy and good style. Starting a new thread with the system for each task (rewrite the prompt for translation, rewrite the prompt for generating poetry in meter, rewrite the prompt to have it translate a phrase and then explain its justification for translation, etc.) would likely yield much better results.

If you want to laugh ask it for the lyrics of a song, most of the time it gets the first few lines right and then descends into madness

* in its contents * in its mind * Its info * trying its best (sigh)

@@DieFlabbergast Oh yes, I'm aware of that grammatical rule but for whatever reason it is (it's) still one that trips me up from time to time. There was a time my blunder was the standard spelling however funnily enough; you can find my "it's" in Blackstone, Austen, and the Constitution as a matter of fact. Maybe if enough people continue to misspell it we will return to that earlier, more intuitive spelling?

​@@sirknight4981It may be intuitive but it won't return because it's needed as a distinguishing mark. It's its function ;)

Amazing! If I forget to make a video about this feel free to remind me

Quite so

_arguably_

Thanks, Nathan! Do let me know (by Patreon message, preferably) what thinks to ask it in the future videos on ScorpioMartianus

It can compose poetry too if you ask it! Btw if you think its latin is bad, wait till you try it with Greek.

If only