Is learning a language just to read (a) certain text(s) worth the time and effort involved?

Is learning a language just to read (a) certain text(s) worth the time and effort involved?
For example, would learning German to read Nietzsche, Kant, etc. or Ancient Greek to read Plato be worth all of the extra sunken costs as opposed to reading English translations of their works?

It's almost certainly not worth the effort, but it's fun regardless.

If you have to ask then the answer is no. You'll end up studying for a bit before quitting so don't bother.

Well I already speak Spanish and can learn languages very easily, I'm just seriously interested in the opportunity cost or cost:benefit of learning a new language to read/understand a text better vs. just reading the stuff translated in English.

Passive language skills (reading and listening) are much more easily acquired than their active counterparts (writing and speaking) and of the two passive, reading is the easier.

If you aren't retarded then it isn't that hard to acquire a new language for reading knowledge. Grad students do it all the time within the span of a semester, and it gets easier the more languages you know.
Translations are literally for brainlets.

You sound like a retard.
How can anyone quantify the "cost-benefit" of learning a language? Either do it if you want to or don't, what the fuck are you even asking

In general its like a billion times easier to learn a language well enough to read it than it is to speak and listen in it.
I say this as someone who can fairly fluently read in French but still feel like a retard if I have to ask someone for directions.
In that way when it comes to time demanded to reward its actually more often worth learning a language to read it than it is to speak it.

Good for you but the answer is the same. If you have to ask then don't bother. Why would you want to learn a language if you don't already have a motivating purpose? What's going make you stick with it?

>Passive language skills (reading and listening) are much more easily acquired than their active counterparts (writing and speaking) and of the two passive, reading is the easier.

This isn't quite true. Listening is by far the hardest skill, like harder than the other three combined

>but the answer is the same. If you have to ask then don't bother.

This is the stupidest meaningless horseshit platitude I seen on here in a while. Think before you write dipshit

>Listening is by far the hardest skill

No it isn't. Speaking quite obviously is the hardest.

The point is that if you have to ask, it means you don't have a motivating purpose. This means you're likely just going to waste your time. Do you understand now?

I suppose it depends what you mean by difficulty.
The way I see it you can express pretty much anything propositionally with a very limited vocabulary. It might be slow and clumsy but it will get you from A to B.
Whereas with listening you can basically hear absolutely nothing until you reach a certain level. Its too vulnerable to total comprehensional collapse if you can't quickly decode and follow the grammar and vocabulary. You'll only pick up stray words and be lost.
Now I agree though when it comes to like total fluency it will be harder to get speaking to that peak but I didn't have that in mind

>it means you don't have a motivating purpose

Except he expressed very clearly he does. Problem is he has a fucking life and doesn't want to have to wait five years for a hobby to pay off

Ok so it might be harder to comprehend a university lecture than it is to ask for directions.
But that's because you are making an unequal comparison. The idea is that all other things being equal, like fluency level, speaking is harder than listening.

My reasoning for why listening is easier than speaking is self-evident - when you are the speaker you obviously have to supply all the proper grammar and vocabulary yourself. Meaning you need a higher mastery of those tools because you're the one utilizing them.
Whereas with listening you can get by with a lesser degree of mastery. For example while listening proper grammar will be supplied for you and you might often be able to guess the meaning of unknown words based on context.

I can understand very proper Hochdeutsch fairly well, but can rarely speak it. I can write and read it very well, though I am very rusty and will only become moreso.

Listening is not difficult unless an odd and unfamiliar word is key. Of course, I can't understand any other dialect terribly well, as shown by my trip to Germany. Like with Chinese but to a much lesser extent, at least there's a standardized script, and even with non-mutually comprehensible dialects outside of Germany (Bavarian German and Dutch), even then it can be read to some extent.

You're a weird dude. I don't know why your talking about having a life or waiting years. The OP clearly does not have a motivating purpose because he's he asking whether or not he should learn a language. If you have to ask that then you obviously don't have a purpose. He's even asking about the cost and benefit of learning an unidentified language. Think before you write.

What the hell are you on about. He says right there in the OP that he would like to be able to read someone like Nietzsche or Aristotle. That's his motivating purpose, the problem is he has other motivating purposes in life and is wondering how much sacrifice it would take to reach this one and how rewarding it can be.

If you plan to seriously study these authors (i.e academically), then it is required.

Let's be honest OP is a shitposting faggot who posted this on a whim while taking a break from fapping.
I can't believe you guys take this shit seriously and are debating his motivations like he's actually going to learn ancient greek or something. He won't even remember this thread 2 days from now. You both need to go back. Now.

I would like to speak Latin so I could read Virgil. That's not a motivating purpose, that's a dream. A motivating purpose is something that's going to keep me working hard so I can actually learn the language.

Why are you even replying to me?

Because you're full of shit drawing big black and white imperatives on what is clearly a nuanced issue. Why the fuck can reading Virgil alone not be enough to keep you or OP working hard? You're drawing lines that don't exist

Reading Hölderlin, Celan, and Rilke in their original language is a pleasure that I cannot describe.

Holy shit this thread is a disaster

Yeah okay dude. I'm drawing lines.

Go learn Latin faggot

Yes.

>of the two passive, reading is the easier
If you struggle with listening, your reading skills can't be at a high level though.

>In general its like a billion times easier to learn a language well enough to read it than it is to speak
Depends on the context where the language is learned. Many Africans are multilingual, and their strongest skill is speaking. They may even speak a language fluently (though not at a high level) without being able to read anything but the most simple newspaper article.

>fairly fluently read in French but still feel like a retard if I have to ask someone for directions
Asking for directions is a set situation. It can feel awkward for many even in their native language. Speaking skills are mechanical so you need a lot of practice and repetition to master the mechanics. It's less an intellectual activity than something comparable to physical training.