"

I don't think the problem is with including Latin as an example, but rather that after 'veni, vidi, vici' it gives a ""literal"" translation as 'came, saw, conquered' and then an ""idiomatic"" translation that reads 'I came, etc.' The problem is that 'came, saw, conquered' would not be considered a ""literal"" translation by any Latin scholar or teacher. I am a Latin teacher and I would expect the pronoun expressed in an English rendering since it's clearly expressed in the Latin. The ""literal"" translation implies that Latin doesn't mark person and number on verbs, which is of course false. Now that I look at the other examples it looks like this problem pervades the article. Someone is trying to ""recreate"" the effect of such languages (I call them pro-drop) in English. The problem is that you can't create the effect in English, which is one of the points of the article, i.e. English is not a null-subject language! 'came, saw, conquered' does not create the effect that a Latin speaker would feel upon hearing 'veni, vidi, vici', in fact 'I came, I saw, I conquered' is as close as one can get to create the effect of this phrase in English."