Latin Extension 2018 HSC exam pack

Prescribed text

Students should:

• provide translations of prescribed texts that are coherent and fluent, and not awkwardly literal
• check their translations to ensure that no words or phrases have been accidentally omitted
• address all elements of a commentary question in a logical and cohesive manner, focusing only on relevant information
• support their explanation or analysis with relevant and valid examples, explaining the link between the examples given and the aspect being analysed
• use ellipsis when quoting more than a few words from an extract, for example, diem… appareret in order to avoid copying long sections of text
• demonstrate in English their understanding of how the Latin is relevant to their argument, and not leave sections of quoted Latin text to speak for itself.

Question 2

In better responses, students were able to:

• explain the comparison between outward form and character succinctly: questions worth two marks do not need a lengthy and overly detailed explanation (Q2 a ii)
• identify a number of rhetorical techniques and motifs which make the introduction to the speech effective: for example, the confidence of the speaker, the motifs of unity and freedom as rallying points (Q2 b)
• deal effectively with the desperation of both Romans and Gauls, although most of the extract focused on the Romans (Q2 c).

Areas for students to improve include:

• demonstrating knowledge of technical terms: there was some confusion between hortatio and laudatio (Q2 b)
• explaining the use or effect of a particular technique or stylistic device: it is not sufficient to state that a device is effective (Q2 b, c)
• differentiating between stylistic or rhetorical techniques which contribute significantly to an effect, as opposed to others which are not as noteworthy: for example, writing at length about alliteration (Q2 c).

Question 3

In better responses, students were able to:

• identify a number of Camillus’ qualities as shown in different contexts: as a military leader in battle, as a leader conscious of his duty to the gods, as a leader in peace time
• recognise that Tacitus deals with both Agricola’s personal qualities and his military achievements, and that there is a degree of understatement in his presentation
• situate Agricola in his own political and historical context: his achievement was possibly all the more impressive because he lived during difficult times.

Areas for students to improve include:

• adhering to the requirements of the question: some students were distracted by a comparison between the two authors and tried to find non-existent points of similarity
• not focusing on inconsequential grammatical features when analysing the text
• avoiding long and largely irrelevant introductions which do not add value to the response
• avoiding broad, generalised comments not related to the extracts: for example, on the author’s style or historical background
• avoiding reference to secondary sources.

Non-prescribed text

In better responses, students were able to:

• recognise the contrast domi/foris and translate accordingly (Q4 a)
• convey appropriately the force of Quin igitur (Q4 a)
• recognise the extract from Sallust as a hortatio, similar to the speeches in Livy and Tacitus (Q4 c)
• identify in the Sallust extract a number of rhetorical techniques also present in other works of Roman historiography (Q4 c)
• identify in the Sallust extract motifs also present in other works of Roman historiography, such as the insatiable greed of the wealthy Romans (Q4 c)
• recognise the tmesis of prius…quam and translate accordingly (Q5 a).

Areas for students to improve include:

• demonstrating effective dictionary skills: differentiating between words which look similar (Q4 a)
• examining carefully the form of Latin words: reliqui is an adjective, not the present passive infinitive of relinquere, nor its perfect indicative.