Dunsscot,
A knowledge of Latin or any foreign language is only evidence of a particular kind of intelligence. But Howard Gardner and Robert J. Sternberg show that there are many different types of intelligence.
I disagree that a knowledge of Latin or any foreign language is evidence of a particular kind of intelligence. It is more likely evidence of schooling or exposure to other languages and cultures. In Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, Howard Gardner focuses on poetry and literature in his chapter on linguistic intelligence; foreign languages are given only a mention in passing.
In my reading of his work, Howard Gardner's main point is that reason, intelligence, logic and knowledge are not synonymous. Neither is academic success the only criterion to measure intelligence.
I am not familiar with Robert J. Sternberg, so I looked him up on the net. I found this especially interesting:
He points out, as does Dr. Gardner, that traditional educational systems value "componential" intelligence most highly, and that tests are designed largely to assess this type of intelligence--composed primarily of linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities. Two other kinds of intelligence, "contextual" (the source of creative insight) and "experiential" (the "street smarts" of intelligence) are of enormous value to society, yet not reinforced nor given much opportunity to develop in many traditional classrooms. Dr. Sternberg's wit and playful sense of humor keep his audiences laughing as he presents powerful information and practical suggestions for educating students more broadly for a world in great need of creative thinkers and those who enjoy completing tasks to the best of their ability.
I have enjoyed reading Howard Gardner's books, and given the reference to Sternberg's wit and playful sense of humor, I think I will enjoy his work, too. Thank you for mentioning him.
I am only asking this question for fun. Are you having fun yet? :-)
I have mixed feelings. The part of me that is playful and competitive and curious would like to give the right answer to your question.
Another part of me does not want to play your game because based on what I've seen of your writing elsewhere on this board, I don't quite believe your question is just for fun. If I give what you consider a wrong answer, I wonder if you will gloat over me as you have over AlanF because you know Latin and he does not? I suspect your intent. Wouldn't it be easier if we just compare S.A.T. and I.Q. scores and get it over with?
I've looked through the Handbook of Rhetorical Devices, and I'll give your question one last go. Even though summa cum laude and magna cum laude are adverbial phrases, perhaps you consider them an example of hyperbaton?
When . . . writing . . . all the natural instincts are at work the way some people play a musical instrument without a lesson and, others, even as children, understand an engine.LILLIAN HELLMAN, An Unfinished Woman, as quoted in Frames of Mind
Ginny