Knowing an ancient Language a bad thing for a possible recruit?
 

For your GLO would a possible recruit knowing Ancient Greek, Latin or Biblical Hebrew make them *less* likely to be selected for recruitment in your organization?

(presume you have two possible recruits and the other knows Modern Danish)

I have trouble imagining education in any particular subject being seen as a bad thing. My kids are studying Latin in school, and I can see how it makes them better students in both the humanities and science. I would also be enthusiastic because the potential member obviously took his or her studies outside of the box.

Obviously every organisation looks for different things in potential members, but as someone who is fluent in two modern languages and two dead languages, both take an incredible amount of work! I tend to value dead languages ever so slightly more, as there are so few people for you to actually speak with, whereas you can find tutorials and materials and conversational partners for modern languages fairly easily. However, in this day and age, any language is an asset! I am very impressed with your recruits :)

I’m kind of curious about the reason for this question. Are you thinking a GLO would not want a member who studies Ancient Greek because that person might nitpick the group’s name/meaning? Are they afraid that someone would discover that the Greek letters don’t actually stand for the words that their organization has held most sacred for all these years? Or that the secret motto was incorrectly translated by the founders one hundred years ago, and nobody ever noticed it before?

“My brothers, it turns out our fraternal duty is not to Live With Strong Convictions, it is actually to Rule With Violent Tendencies.”

Not quite (though I can't top "Rule with Violent Tendencies" (and that would make a great name for a rock band)) more that the fratenrity/sorority would be concerned that pledge having that knowledge might disrupt in some way the order of learning things for pledges/new members. If, for example, a fraternity's officers are referred to be greek letters and in week one, the pledge goes "huh, put together, they spell out the greek word for oversee". which is either explained much latter in the program *or* in the brotherhood/sisterhood ceremony.

I'm thinking less an incorrect translation and more something more subtle. For example, if a fraternity or sorority were to have Love as one of the cardinal principles, using Eros or Storge would be very different than using Agape. All would be translations of Love, but very different connotations. Note, this would be much less likely for groups formed in the 19th century when a decent number of students actually took classical greek than ones formed post WWII.

As a former Ancient and Medieval History/Classics major, I can say that none of my sorority sisters would have thought twice about my knowledge, because they didn't know enough about that knowledge to know it might be interesting/dangerous. For example, by knowing the background of someone who may have been influential on our founders, and knowing what this person probably knew, I figured out where something in our ritual came from prior to initiation. When I explained my reasoning to my sisters, the blank stares were epic, even though it turns out I was correct.

So I would say, No. So few people know dead languages these days, most mottos are very poorly translated, and many glos --because of truncated pledge periods (yes PLEDGE) -- have members who barely know enough to carry out the ritual, much less appreciate its nuance and history. Sad but true. Listening to a chapter I advised struggling to learn something ritualistically important prior to an official visit was a sad wake up call into the many weaknesses of the modern "New Member" period.

Only if they insist on carrying on in Ancient Greek during a rush party

I don't see why this would be a problem. I can't ever imagine at Central Oklahoma we'd have to choose between a recruit who should definitely be a Letters major and a recruit who is fluent in modern Danish.

I misunderstood your reasoning, but I still don't think knowing Greek/Latin/Hebrew would pose an issue! If someone somehow gleamed the meaning of something early, it's not the end of the world. Also, many orgs were formed at a time when students *would* be practiced in these languages, so I suppose that they didn't have problem with it.

This is literally the only scenario that I can think of that would be a deterrent from getting a bid for a person that knows an ancient language. As long as you're somewhat socially adept, you'll probably get a bid somewhere.

What a strange question to be asking.