Where Are Your Keys' Universal Speed Curriculum

[Jonathan Robie]

More of a question of style:

Is it more natural to talk about ὁ λίθος or λίθος if it is the only one on the table? Does that change if there are both λίθος μικρός and λίθος μέγας on the table?

I think both are good style, they just mean different things - "this is a rock" versus "this is the rock". But including the article gives students a lot more practice on a very important aspect of the language. One of the goals of this exercise is to get experience on all the bits of the noun phrase working together.

So I always include the article for pedagogical reasons.

[Jonathan Robie]

I thought a lot about the question of 'this' versus 'that'. Eventually I settled on using οὗτος for the basic questions. You would use either in English, "What's this? What's that?"

At some point you'd want to introduce the distinction between οὗτος and ἐκεῖνος. At that point, I'd use a set-up to create proximal and distal objects. Very easy. That's one thing I like about WAYK - want to teach a chunk of language? Figure out a way to arrange objects to create minimal contrast and make the distinction obvious, then use real language to talk about it.

Since I'm also using John as a text, I really want to distinguish the two. So I just translated the English to 'this' for the first exercises. Distinguishing 'this' from 'that' is important very early in John.

[Jonathan Robie]

Here is a go at Part 2; though I'm pretty unsure on the accenting on ἔστιν and how it changes in this script.

I'm doing this off the top of my head, someone (maybe me later) should take a look at the thread on the syntax of questions. Some of what I say may be wrong, others will correct it if it is.

Evan: That is a stone.
οὗτός ἐστιν λίθος

I would normally have used "That is the stone" and ὁ λίθος, but the article gets a good workout below, and you nicely illustrate how the article is used here and below, so this is good too.

Justin: Is that your stone?
οὗτος ὁ λίθος ἐστιν σού;

I suspect it would be more natural to say:

οὗτος ὁ λίθος σού ἐστιν; (or οὗτος ἐστιν ὁ λίθος σού;)

If you are asking whether it is his stone, as opposed to his cup, then οὗτος ὁ λίθος ἐστιν σού; is natural (but perhaps better with unemphatic σου), but if you are asking whose stone it is, then I prefer οὗτος ὁ λίθος σού ἐστιν; I suspect οὗτος ἐστιν ὁ λίθος σου; works equally well for either question, and it is more similar to the form I used in Part 1. But I am appealing to my own intuition here, not anything like a systematic investigation of usage.

Evan: Yes that is my stone.
ναί, οὗτος ὁ λίθος ἐστίν μου.

I prefer ναί, οὗτος ὁ λίθος μου ἐστίν.

Justin: What is that (pointing to his cup)?
τί ἐστιν τοῦτο;
Evan: That is a cup.
τοῦτ᾿ ἐστιν ποτήριον.
Justin: Is that your cup?
τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον ἐστιν σού;

As above, I prefer τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον σού ἐστιν;

Evan: No that is not my cup, that is your cup.
οὐχί, τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον οὐκ ἔστιν μου. τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον ἐστίν σου.

Here you really do want the emphatic possessive forms, and probably a different word order. I prefer not to use οὐχί for simple no, it is emphatic and used only 54 times, οὐ is used 1606 times. So I would prefer:

οὐ, τοῦτο οὐκ ἔστιν τὸ ποτήριον μού. τοῦτο ἐστίν τὸ ποτήριον σού.

Justin: So that is my cup, is that my stone?
ὀρθός, τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον ἐστίν μου. οὗτος ὁ λίθος ἐστιν μού;
Evan: No that is not your stone, that is my stone.
οὐχί, οὗτος ὁ λίθος οὐκ ἐστίν σού. οὗτος ὁ λίθος ἐστίν μου.
Justin: Oh yea, that is your stone, and that is my cup.
οὗτος ὁ λίθος ἐστίν σου, καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον ἐστίν μου.
Evan: Yes that is your cup, and that is my stone.
ναί, τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον ἐστίν σου, καὶ οὗτος ὁ λίθος ἐστίν μου.

I prefer:

Justin: So that is my cup, is that my stone?
ὀρθός, τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον μου ἐστίν. οὗτος ὁ λίθος μου ἐστιν; (emphasizing cup versus stone)
Evan: No that is not your stone, that is my stone.
οὐ, οὐκ ἐστίν οὗτος ὁ λίθος σού. οὗτος ἐστίν ὁ λίθος μού. (emphasizing whose it is)
Justin: Oh yea, that is your stone, and that is my cup.
ναί, οὗτος ὁ λίθος σού ἐστίν, καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον μού ἐστίν.
Evan: Yes that is your cup, and that is my stone.
ναί, τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον σού ἐστίν, καὶ οὗτος ὁ λίθος μού ἐστίν.

But we're missing a section ... what about ἡ ἐπιστολή?

[Ben Clark]

Here is an update to my original layout. Since I am trying to set up a script for only one teacher, this is an attempt to work on the mine/yours part.

Techniques are indicated in all caps

A cup, a letter, and a rock are laid out on the table in a circle.
TECHNIQUE
COPYCAT
THREE TIMES

COPYCAT
τί ἐστιν τοῦτο; [What is this?]
τοῦτ᾿ ἔστιν τὸ ποτήριον. [This is the cup.]
τί ἐστιν τοῦτο; [What is this?]
αὔτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐπιστολή. [This is the letter.]
τί ἐστιν τοῦτο; [What is this?]
οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ λίθος. [This is the rock.]

CRAIGSLIST Make Me Say Yes: ναί, καλῶς, ἀληθός
COPYCAT
τοῦτ᾿ ἔστιν τὸ ποτήριον; ναί, τοῦτ᾿ ἔστιν τὸ ποτήριον. [Is this the cup? Yes, this is the cup.]
αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐπιστολή; ναί, αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐπιστολή. [Is this the letter? Yes, this is the letter.]
οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ λίθος; ναί, οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ λίθος. [Is this the rock? Yes, this is the rock.]

CRAIGSLIST Make Me Say No: οὐχί, οὐ, μή, κακός
COPYCAT
οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ λίθος; οὐχί, οὗτός οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ λίθος. τοῦτ᾿ ἔστιν τὸ ποτήριον. [Is this the rock? No, this is not the rock. This is the cup.]
τοῦτ᾿ ἔστιν τὸ ποτήριον; οὐχί, τοῦτο οὐκ ἔστιν τὸ ποτήριον. αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐπιστολή. [Is this the cup? No, this is not the cup. This is the letter.]
αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐπιστολή; οὐχί, αὕτη οὐκ ἔστιν ἡ ἐπιστολή. Οὖτός ἐστιν ὁ λίθος. [Is this the letter? No, this is not the letter. This is the rock.]

SET UP Remove the rock and cup and make sure each player has a letter.
CRAIGSLIST Whose (Poke/Slap): ἐγώ μοῦ, σύ σοῦ
COPYCAT
αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐπιστολή μου; ναί, αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐπιστολή μου. [Is this my letter? Yes, this is my letter]
αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐπιστολή σου; οὐχί, αὕτη οὐκ ἔστιν ἡ ἐπιστολή σου. αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐπιστολή μου. [Is this your letter? No this is not your letter. This is my letter.]

SET UP Clear letters; put cup, letter, and rock back on table in a circle.
COPYCAT / CAT'S OUT OF THE BAG
COPYCAT
Indicating my cup:
τοῦτ᾿ ἔστιν τὸ ποτήριον σου; [Is this your cup?]
CAT'S OUT OF THE BAG (Others ask me: is this your cup?)
ναί, τοῦτ᾿ ἔστιν τὸ ποτήριον μου. [Yes, this is my cup.]
THREE TIMES

Indicating other person's letter:
αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐπιστολή σου; [Is this your letter?]
Letter owner should answer:
ναί, αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐπιστολή μου. [Yes, this is my letter.]
Note: if student doesn't know how to answer, go back to setup with everyone having a letter, then come back to this question.

[Jonathan Robie]

Nice work! I think you made me say ναί, καλῶς, ἀληθός!

[Paul-Nitz]

SET UP Remove the rock and cup and make sure each player has a letter.
CRAIGSLIST Whose (Poke/Slap): ἐγώ μοῦ, σύ σοῦ
COPYCAT
αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐπιστολή μου;

First, for those who might be less familiar with Where Are Your Keys (WAYK), know that Ben is using some terms of the game here: COPYCAT, CAT OUT OF BAG, MAKE ME SAY, etc.

Secondly, Ben, when you get into possessives, why not start using τίνος?

Thirdly, After you try this out, I'd like to specifically know how it went with introducing the three genders right from the start.

As I wrote in a previous post, I've always started with like nouns: κόκκος, λίθος, κάλαμος. I'm not sure if that's better or not. Then there is the related question of whether to start with only 1st and 2nd declension or to throw in 3rd. The question words are 3rd (τίς, τίνος, τιίνι...), so I guess I do throw those in at the beginning.

[Ben Clark]

Thanks for your comments, Paul.

First, for those who might be less familiar with Where Are Your Keys (WAYK), know that Ben is using some terms of the game here: COPYCAT, CAT OUT OF BAG, MAKE ME SAY, etc.

Yes, sorry about that. There is a large list of techniques on the WAYK website (https://whereareyourkeys.org/technique-glossary/) but the main ones that I am planning to use are:
TECHNIQUE: describe the process of playing the game with signed techniques
THREE TIMES: each new piece will be repeated 3 times
COPYCAT: sign this to indicate that everyone mimics the speaker in motion and in speaking
CRAIGSLIST: a group of related words given in a series, with associated signs for each
SETUP: pausing the game to change the scenario (objects on the table, people's positions, etc.)
CAT'S OUT OF THE BAG: a play off of copycat in which a scenario is being set up that the listeners don't yet know how to participate in; so their portion is demonstrated and then they are requested to use it (like prompting listeners to ask a question of the speaker so the speaker can demonstrate the answer). If there is more than one speaker participating then this technique would be unnecessary.
MAKE ME SAY: ask a question that restates a known fact so that the question can be answered (in a full sentence)

Secondly, Ben, when you get into possessives, why not start using τίνος?

Thanks for the suggestion. This is the portion that I am working on next; I will post what I've got as it comes together in a semi-coherent set of exchanges. Right now I am trying out some ideas on τίς and τίνος.

Thirdly, After you try this out, I'd like to specifically know how it went with introducing the three genders right from the start.

As I wrote in a previous post, I've always started with like nouns: κόκκος, λίθος, κάλαμος. I'm not sure if that's better or not. Then there is the related question of whether to start with only 1st and 2nd declension or to throw in 3rd. The question words are 3rd (τίς, τίνος, τιίνι...), so I guess I do throw those in at the beginning.

My goal in these games is to get some exposure to the text in 1st John. I've got a list of 12 'target' passages from 1st John and these are directing me on the phrases that I want to use as the steps for each of the 12 class times. I don't have an overarching grammar sequence because I am not familiar enough with the grammar of the language to be able to plan that way. I have kind of made a pass (though not complete) through 'Learn New Testament Greek' by Dobson but that is about my only exposure to the grammar.

[Jonathan Robie]

Yes, sorry about that. There is a large list of techniques on the WAYK website (https://whereareyourkeys.org/technique-glossary/) but the main ones that I am planning to use are:
TECHNIQUE: describe the process of playing the game with signed techniques
THREE TIMES: each new piece will be repeated 3 times
COPYCAT: sign this to indicate that everyone mimics the speaker in motion and in speaking
CRAIGSLIST: a group of related words given in a series, with associated signs for each
SETUP: pausing the game to change the scenario (objects on the table, people's positions, etc.)
CAT'S OUT OF THE BAG: a play off of copycat in which a scenario is being set up that the listeners don't yet know how to participate in; so their portion is demonstrated and then they are requested to use it (like prompting listeners to ask a question of the speaker so the speaker can demonstrate the answer). If there is more than one speaker participating then this technique would be unnecessary.
MAKE ME SAY: ask a question that restates a known fact so that the question can be answered (in a full sentence)

I'm curious about the sign language. When I play it out in my mind, it feels like sign language introduces yet another language, making things more complicated. I've avoided that part if the technique. Currently, I just describe what I want them to do in English. It would be better to do that in Greek eventually, but ... one bite at a time.

Some of this may involve a former life in deaf education and audiology, sign language is a real language for me, and one I am rusty in. What experiences have y'all had using sign language with WAYK?

[Paul-Nitz]

Sign language, custom created gestures, and imprompt gestures are hugely helpful in getting meaning into your head without resort to a second language. That said, I think it should be used when helpful and sparingly. A WAYK guru watched some of my lessons and approved of my sparing use of sign language. For example, I do not try to sign "is" in the sentence τουτ εστιν λίθος. I use natural and impromptu signs for things like "give" and "want." I stop using sign language when we get over the initial stages.

Think of it as extreme gesturing to get your point across, or like a form of motherese helping language at early stages.

"Signing" the cases has been especially useful in my experience. I ought to update this video because I've refined things a bit, but it will give you an idea of signing cases. Each teacher probably needs to make up his own gestures anyway.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7S8kb8meYw

[Seumas Macdonald]

Personally, I do use sign when working on the fundamentals and find it very helpful. I find it functions effectively as a second non-verbal "layer" over the exchange that really allows students to connect the language with the concrete things going on. I don't sign everything (definitely not "to be"!), but I do sign the main words/phrases as we go. This makes things like TQ: Make me Say, and TQ: Pull me through it, work very well as you can sign to a student who will both sign and produce the language.

I think one might have some problems if you knew a sign language "properly", but I don't have that issue. Also, there's no particular need to use "authorised" signs (ASL or other), except it helps to have some compatibility with other WAYK users.

The Latinists came up with a some good signs for case-usage, which I wouldn't use when speaking normally, but I would use if I was drawing attention to cases. Look it up on youtube perhaps.

Lastly, I don't think they are long-term necessary - especially as people gain some more fundamental fluency and move to talking about more abstractions.