Ancient Greek phonology

The ancient Greek Phonology (Greek φωνολογία / προφορά της κλασικής Αρχαίας Ελληνικής γλώσσας, fonologia / proforá tis klassikís Archéas Ellinikís glóssas, ancient Greek φωνολογία τῆς ἀρχαίας Ἑλληνικῆς γλώττης ) is the study of phonology (or pronunciation ) of the ancient Greeks.

It should be observed, first, that the concept of ancient Greek as such is problematic since this is a considered both location- based and over time very heterogeneous form of language that existed in a number of different dialects and written texts from Homer to the present was and is. So it is clear that there is not " a Greek "; rather, there are a variety of ancient Greek dialects, different sounds and a different pronunciation of the Greek alphabet had in different places and at different times. The Attic dialect is commonly referred to as the Ancient Greek par excellence, which, however, carries the risk of succumbing to the erroneous assumption of a homogeneous Greek language that gave it at any time. Since the Attic is the most famous and best-researched ancient Greek dialect due to the many text documents of the Greek classics, this article is based primarily on the phonology of the Attic.

• 7.1 Arguments within the Greek 7.1.1 Initial sound-letter mapping
• 7.1.2 typo
• 7.1.3 onomatopoeia words
• 7.1.4 morphophonological aspects
• 7.1.5 Nonstandard spellings
• 7.1.6 Metric evidence

• 7.2.1 According to descriptions
• 7.2.2 Comparison of different dialects
• 7.2.3 loanwords
• 7.2.4 Comparison with older alphabets
• 7.2.5 Comparison with younger or derived alphabets
• 7.2.6 Comparison with the Modern Greek
• 7.2.7 Comparative Reconstruction of Proto - Indo-European

• 8.1 Renaissance
• 8.2 The 19th century
• 8.3 Recent Developments

Three different pronunciation models

There are three different ( post-classical ) systems by which ancient Greek texts were read or be:

• The system of Erasmus of Rotterdam, which is no longer used today in its original form.
• Today's school pronunciation of the ancient Greeks, that inspired by the Erasmian system and is subject to modifications by the phonological conditions of each country.
• The modern Greek pronunciation, which is only known in Greek-speaking countries.

None of these three pronunciation variants detected in the ancient Greek phonology actually as it ever was actually at a certain place in the Greek -speaking world or how they could also have been only plausible according to the state of science. Due to the great distance of time to Ancient Greece and the limitations of the resulting font evidence of the complete uncovering of the ancient Greek phonology is limited. It will never be possible with the present state to describe the authentic pronunciation of all Greek dialects at different times with one hundred percent certainty.

Vowels

In ancient Greek, a distinction was made between long and short vowels. As far as reconstructed, the Attic dialect, which is considered as a classic form of Greek, contained five short and seven long vowels. To reconstruct your exact pronunciation of a particular time is difficult, but the following scheme of W. Sidney Allen ( 1968) is generally accepted.

( For the meaning of " rounded " and " unrounded ", see the article " Rounding (phonetics ) .")

In the a-, i-and y- lutes the length was therefore not distinguished in the Scriptures, which were soon or length character introduced only in modern times and are and will be only sporadically and if, then only in the linguistic context, never in the classroom, related. In the e - and o- sounds ever a short and two long phonemes, which were also written differently. The short vowels were reproduced with Epsilon and Omicron, it is believed that they were rather half- closed ( [e ], [ o] ), but it is also quite possible that they had the half-open allophones [ ɛ ] and [ ɔ ]. In the long vowels was between the open sounds [ ɛ ː ] and [ ɔ ː ] (written with Eta and Omega ) and the closed sounds [e ː ] and [o ː ] distinguished. The sound [ ɛ ː ] could also have been expressed more openly under certain circumstances, for [ æ ː ]. The long half-closed vowels [e ː ] and [o ː ] had a complex history. In some cases, they have developed from the diphthongs [ ei] and [ou ], whereupon the spellings ει and point ου. However, they have arisen in other cases by a compensatory lengthening of the short sounds [e ] and [o ] to compensate for a failed consonant. For example, go λυθείς ( lytheis ) and λύουσι ( lyousi ) on λυθεντς * (* luthents ) and λυοντσι * (* luontsi ) back. In yet another case, [e ː ] has made ​​a syneresis of < εε > and [o ː ] from a from < εο >, < οε > or < οο > developed the unconnected shapes are preserved in other dialects. When the original diphthongs lost their diphthongal debate and, probably in pre-classical period, to [e ː ] and [o ː ] were presented the spellings < ει > and < ου > a fairly simple method of written reproduction represents, irrespective of their origin. Where the spellings ει and ου match with a former diphthong, they are called " true diphthongs ", in other cases "false diphthongs ".

The sounds [y ] and [y ː ] ( like German ü) originally had the phonetic value of [ u] and [u ː ]. It is difficult to say with accuracy when occurred this sound shift. They also did not occur in all Greek dialects, but was taken over by the Koine as standard.

In the post-classical period Greek vowels went through numerous changes, which led gradually to the modern Greek system with only five vowel phonemes. During or shortly after the classical period shifted both [e ː ] and [o ː ] and became [i ː ] and [u ː ]. [e ː ] ( ει ) coincided with the original [i ː ], while [o ː ] took the place of the original one [ u ː ], which had previously moved to [y ː ] (see above). The fact that < υ > and < ου > were never confused, suggests that the shift of < υ > before of < ου > occurred or that the sound changes occurred in parallel. The unrounding of [y ] to [i ] occurred in Byzantine times. The distinction between long and short vowels was abandoned, so that at the end only the phonemes [ a], [ ɛ ], [i ], [ ɔ ] and [u ] were left.

Diphthongs

In ancient Greek there were many diphthongs. All were closing diphthongs, they ended up either [ i] or [ u], as in a halbvokalischen final sound. The first part of volume might be either long or short, what the table below (in the first row of a cell pronunciation in IPA is given, including its classical notation):

These diphthongs developed during and after the classic period (and its partial takeover in Koine ) different. Two of them, ει and ου, were early repectively ( see above). The remaining diphthongs, which had previously ended on Iota, were shortly afterwards to monophthongs. This happened early, during or shortly after the classical period. Here, those diphthongs altered to the effect with long initial sound (< ᾱι >, < ηι > and < ωι > ) that the i -sound silent and only the initial sound remained: < ᾱ >, < η >, < ω >. The Iota (later ) represented only by a mere iota sub - or adscriptum.

The short initial sound diphthongs (< αι >, < οι >, and < υι > ) changed, however, independently: [AI ] initially shifted to [ ɛ ː ] and fell the task of long and short vowels with ε [ ɛ ] together. The fact that the ETA is now very different, [i ], pronounced, suggesting that the displacement of [ ɛ ː ] to [i ː ] in front of said displacement of Alpha and the eventual collapse occurred of long and short vowels. < οι >, and < υι > shifted, however, both to [y ], and later, together with the simple < υ > to [ i].

The remaining backwards closing diphthongs ( αυ, ευ, ηυ ) changed to the effect that the final sound was consonant during the Hellenistic period, which directly to the modern Greek sounds [ av ], [ ev ] and [ iv ], but the right to voiceless consonants and word-finally to [af ], [ ef] or [ if] quasi- auslautverhärten led. ωυ was rare and did not appear in the classical Attic (but very comfortable in the Ionian ). Since it was also not accepted by the Koine due to its rarity, the digraph does not appear in today's Greek.

Consonants

In classical Attic there were many consonants, which later became completely different sounds, although their sheer number over time remained almost the same; for example, a whole series of plosives to fricatives, but the original plosives were only partially re from other sounds, so it is only slightly more consonants in Modern Greek, apart from allophones of the actual sounds.

Plosives

Several Modern Greek frikativisch pronounced sounds can be assumed with a probability bordering on certainty the fact that they were classical Attic plosive. The ancient grammarians, who tried first to classify the sounds, beginning with Aristotle, they were ἄφωνα ( Aphona ).

Later, both the mediae and the Aspiratae changed greatly: The mediae became voiced ( [v ], [ ð ] or [ ɣ ] ), the Aspiratae to voiceless ( [ f], [ θ ] or [ x] ) fricatives. It is believed that these changes during the late antiquity, was spoken mainly during Koine, and occurred with the displacement of [ ɡ ] in the third century after Christ began and ended with the Aspiratae. Therefore, it is written in ( old ) Greek transcriptions also up today, " ph" instead of " f".

In the case of the labials, the changes of the intermediate steps of the bilabial fricative [ β ] and [ ɸ ] must have occurred, as the modern phonetic values ​​are not bilabial, but labiodental.

Other consonants

In addition to the classical Ancient Greek plosives includes two nasals ( [m ] and [ n] ), two Liquide ( [l ] and [ r] ) and two fricatives ( [h ] and [ s] ), which are dealt with separately in individual sections. Ancient grammarians classified the nasals, liquids, and [s ] as ἡμίφωνα ( hemíphona ), so they probably thought that they could be expressed in contrast to the Aphona, in the debate without vowel pronunciation help ( for example, allows the to sound [ b] is only poorly articulate, he needed to understand still a vowel, for example, [be ː ] what the sound [ s ː ] does not need ).

While the terminology of Aphona and hemíphona more than referred to the letters on the phonemes, the letters Psi were ( Ψ, ψ ), Xi ( Ξ ξ, ) and Zeta ( Ζ, ζ ) for each consonant combinations and were as διπλά Dipla ( " double letter" ) designated so they were each coupled Hemíphona, probably because it contained all [s] as an element. The pronunciation of zeta is not entirely clear. For the formation of metrics, it was treated as a double consonant, ie, it formed long syllables (see below), but it is unclear whether it [ dz ], or perhaps stood for [ zd ] or at different times for each one of the two; the only certainty is that it was taken as [ dze ː ta ] at the Roman takeover into Latin ( cf. Italian z as [ dz ] and [ ts ] ). Were the other two were Dipla probably pronounced in the classical Attic [ p ʰ s] and [k ʰ s], which, for example, it sees them as if they did not exist in the Attic as a single letter, as < φσ >, or < χσ > posted, the aspiration of the first loud, however, was irrelevant to phonological classification.

Nasal

In ancient Greek there were two nasals: bilabial nasal the [m ], written as My ( Μ, μ ), and the alveolar nasal [n ], written as Ny ( Ν ν ).

Depending on the phonetic environment was the phoneme / s / realized while talking to four different types:

• Before the labials [b ], [ p] and [p ʰ ] it changes its phonetic value to [m ] and is written with μ. Thus, for example ἐν (s) before βαίνω ( Baino ) to ἐμβαίνω ( embaíno, " I walk in, I walk " ), before πάθεια ( pátheia ) to ἐμπάθεια ( empátheia ) and before φαίνω ( Phaino ) to ἐμφαίνω ( emphaínō ). This will also happen if a [s ], as follows, in the form of a Psi in ἔμψυχος ( émpsychos ).
• Before nasal [m ] it is assimilated and geminiert and they are together pronounced as extended bilabial nasal [m ː ] and written as μμ, for example ἐν μένω → ἐμμένω
• Before the velars [ ɡ ], [ k] and [k ʰ ], the phoneme / s / as [ ŋ ] was pronounced and written with gamma. For example: ἐγγύς, ἐγκαλέω, ἐγχέω ( Engys, eŋkaléō, eŋchéō ). The same happens when following the sound [ s] in the form of Xi, as in συγξηραίνω ( syŋxeraínō ), but this occurs less often. The spelling γγ so do not stand for the gemination and therefore will not [ ɡ ː ] pronounced.
• In all other cases, the phoneme / s / as [n ] is pronounced, which is also the default.

Where possible, the phoneme / n / is a Geminationen without being assimilated, such as in the word ἐννέα ( Ennea ), pronounced [ e ː s ˦ a ˧ ]. Artificial gemination to metric purposes can be found in some cases, for example in the form ἔννεπε ( Ennepe ), pronounced [ e ː n ˦ epe ].

Cash

In ancient Greek there were two Cash [l ] and [ r], with the Lambda ( Λ, λ ), and Rho ( Ρ, ρ ) have been written.

If a [n ] before [ l], a gemination takes place and the combination is [l ː ] pronounced as in συλλαμβάνω ( syllambáno ), the συνλαμβάνω * (* sunlambáno ) is based.

The Rho probably stood for a rolled alveolar volume, [r ], as in Italian or Greek, and in today's Germans ( regionally ), tend not to like English or French. Beginning of a word is ρ partially with alcohol asper written ( ῥ ), likely to represent a voiceless or aspirated allophone [r ], probably [r ] or [r ʰ ], whence probably also the traditional transcription " rh " stirred. The same spelling is sometimes used when a gemination of [r ], as in " συρρέω " ( syrréo ), which therefore also partly συῤῥέω ( syrrhéo ) is written, occurs what the transcription to " rrh " moves. This example also shows that [ n] is one of the following assimilation [r], which leads to gemination.

Fricatives

Before the mediae and aspiratae to fricatives were the Greek probably had only two fricatives: the sibilant [s ], with the Sigma ( Σ, σ, ς ) was written and [h ]. The former was probably the voiced allophone [z ] before other voiced consonants, but this was not observed in spelling, but there is no evidence.

The sound [ h] was only in word-initial. In the Attic dialect it was originally written with Heta. Shortly before or during the classical period, he fell silent in the Ionian and Aiolischen, but in Attic he stayed longer. In the Ionian Eta was then used as a vowel letter. As was the Ionian alphabet then adopted by the other regions ( as 403 BC in Athens), had [h ] but continues to play. In some inscriptions instead it was written with the left half of the ( H) eta, see picture. Later grammarians, during the Hellenistic Koine, changed the icon to Spiritus asper (Greek δασεῖα ( daseîa ) ), which she no longer than individual letters, but as a diacritical mark, which is about a initial vowel letters, had been missing. Accordingly, they created another diacritical mark called Spiritus lenis (Greek ψιλή ( Psile ) ), which should make it clear that the word does not begin with [h ]. In general, the characters were introduced only in the Byzantine period.

The letter digamma ( Ϝ, ϝ ) was sound [ w] used in some dialects for the syllable. This sound was silent in Attic and Ionic (see German wine, att. Οῖνος, originally ϝ οῖνος, Latin vinum ) before the classical period, and was only used as a numeral for 6, where he was later replaced by the stigma. The [w ] of the other Greek dialects and foreign languages ​​was usually written with < β >, and later with < ου >.

Double consonants

Gemination existed in ancient Greek, pronounced double consonants have been lengthened, as well as to metrical purposes, in modern Cypriot dialect. Double consonants do not appear in word-initial and end. φ, θ and χ are not doubled in spelling, as a substitute, the letter combinations πφ, τθ and used κχ, compare also the double -Rho - rule above.

A double sigma of the most ancient dialects (and in Koine ) - σσ - appeared in the Athenian general than double Tau ( ττ ). Some scientists have hypothesized that this is an affricate ( [ tʃ ] or [ ts ] ) is, but there is no direct evidence.

Syllables

In ancient Greek, the distinction between long and short syllables is very important because it was the basic element of classical versification. A long syllable is a syllable that contains either a long vowel or a diphthong, or ends in a consonant. If a consonant between two syllables is within a word, he is usually the second, which is in front of it shortly (assuming their vowel is short). If two or more consonants, a double consonant ( ζ, ξ or ψ ) or supporting an elongated ( geminierter ) consonant between two syllables appear within a word, is one of the first to the front of it and lengthens it. Certain combinations of consonants, voiced plosives or nasals plus Liquide (eg τρ or κν ), are exceptions because under certain circumstances, both consonants are part of the second syllable - a phenomenon that is known as " correptio attica ". Ancient grammarians referred to a long syllable with a short vowel as " θέσει μακρά " ( " thesei Makra " ) - long after the Convention, which was later collected via recognized as " positione longa " into Latin. A langvokalische syllable was described as " φύσει μακρά " ( " physei Makra " ) - "long by nature " - " natura longa " - referred to.

Accent

In ancient Greek, a syllable of a word usually had an accent; However, there were a few small exceptions. This accent was in ancient Greek - unlike in Modern Greek - realized primarily as a so-called pitch accent (pitch accent). The stressed syllable was uttered in a higher pitch and, as a secondary attribute, with higher volume. According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, the interval was about one fifth. In the standardized polytonic orthography, which was developed in the Hellenistic period, however, generally only in the Byzantine period prevailed, as the tonal accent was already given way to a dynamic, acute (Greek ὀξεῖα oxeia ) is a simple accented syllable was used display. In long vowels and diphthongs, the emphasis was on each half (or Mora ) fall of the syllable. Fell the accent on the first Mora, the syllable had only a high and then a normal tone. This was highlighted in spelling by the circumflex (Greek περισπωμένη perispōménē ). Thus, for example, [ ɛ ː ˥ ˧ ], ie the decrease of a particularly high note on normal pitch with a long [ ɛ ], reproduced with < ῆ >, [ ɛ ː ˧ ˥ ], so the same vowel with an increase of normal pitch on a particularly high note, with < ή >. The same applies to [e ː ˥ ˧ ] = εῖ and [e ː ˧ ˥ ] = εί, [y ː ˥ ˧ ] = ῦ etc. This also explains why the short vowels Epsilon and Omicron never appear with circumflex.

For the distribution of accents, the following rules were used:

• Basically, he was able to fall on the last three syllables of a word;
• Should (eg by Kasusänderung and a long ending of the word) the last syllable of a word, in which the acute lay on the antepenultimate syllable containing a long vowel or a diphthong, he shifted to the second to last (eg Nom: ὁ ἄνθρωπος ho anthropos "man " Gen. tou τοῦ ἀνθρώπου anthrópou "of the people ");
• Is a word with acute on the last syllable not in front of a punctuation mark ( period, colon, comma, semicolon ), so acute is the Gravis ( βαρεῖα bareîa ). It may be that this should display a Tonsenkung; but for lack of evidence.

• He can (see above) are available only on long vowels or diphthongs;
• He can stand only on the last syllable - or on the penultimate, but only if the last contains a short vowel;
• Should be the last syllable of a word where the caret would be on the penultimate syllable, get a long vowel or a diphthong, it becomes the acute (eg Nom: ὁ Δαρεῖος ho Darius gene. tou τοῦ Δαρείου Dareíou, proper name Darius ); Gravis rule for the acute applies as usual.

The diphthongs αι and οι, if they are at the end of a word and are part of inflectional ending, usually as short vowels treated (eg οἱ ἄνθρωποι hoi anthropoi ). Compound words are partially stressed how their components: ( eg οὔτε oute, ὥσπερ Hosper )

In reconstructing arguments and evidence used

The above information is based on a large amount of documents, what linguists and philologists in the 19th and 20th centuries, continually discussed. The following are some of the arguments are specified, as were described in this argument, along with a brief overview of the sources.

Arguments within the Greek

Initial sound-letter mapping

If a language takes a alphabet font, must have a certain simple degree of correspondence between the graphemes (letters) and the phonemes of the acquiring language be given, which does not necessarily mean an exact " one-to -one correspondence ". This always leads to the same spelling errors so long as the discussion is the same. If a sound shift occurs through successive generations, the spelling changes either so that this shift in sound is obvious, it remains conservative, so that penetrates a traditional spelling. In the first case, what can be quite dub as " spelling reform ", the time of the introduction of the reform also point to the timing of the sound shift. In the second case, when passing through a historical spelling, are writing mistakes that inexperienced writers, on the key elements that allow linguists, sound shifts and reconstruct their time and thus the development of the debate on the time.

Typing error

If it is found that most writers often confuse two letters, it can be concluded that the two sounds have collapsed. This happened often, for example, < ι > and < ει >, shortly thereafter < υ > and with < οι >, with < ο > and < ω > and < ε > and < αι > and still later with < η > and < ι > and < ει > that had already collapsed.

If you find out that writers often omit a letter where he would be needed in the standard orthography, or that they wrongly use one where it does not belong (see hypercorrection ), one can conclude that the sound that this letter represented, has been lost in the debate. This happened quite early with the "Spiritus asper " ( [h ] ) word-initially in most forms of Greek. Another example is the occasional omission of the iota subscript in long diphthongs ( see above).

Typos are an important source of evidence, but appear limited. They prove only that the phonetic development occurred in the language of the document, but not that they prevailed in common valid. Ancient Greek was not a homogenous or static language, but divided into many regional and social variations. Many of the linguistic features that are characteristic for the late and today's Greek, probably originated as early as the sociolects the classical Attic, but the old dialects seem to have been preserved for centuries.

Onomatopoeia words

Greek literature sometimes contains depictions of animal screaming in Greek letters (see onomatopoeia ). The most commonly cited example is the " Schafblöken " < βῆ, βῆ >, which is seen as evidence that the beta Voiced bilabial plosive as and that the Eta were pronounced as a long half-open unrounded front vowel. Onomatopoeia verbs such as " μυκάομαι " ( " mykáomai " ) ( cf. Latin. " Mugire ") for the cow mooing, " βρυχάομαι " ( " brycháomai " ) ( cf. Latin. " Rugire ") for the roar of a lion or " κόκκυξ " ( " kókkyx " ) (. cf. Latin " cuculus " ) for the name of the cuckoo suggest that the archaic pronunciation of the long Ypsilon [u: ] was before they [ y: ] was.

Morphophonological aspects

In some developments within subject words lute regular changes such as As or dissimilation, which are sometimes taken into consideration when writing. This can be used to reconstruct the " original " sounds.

• < π ​​>, < τ > and < κ > are regularly reported as < φ >, < θ > and < χ > is written at the end of a word when the following word has a "Spiritus asper " to the first letter. This also applies to compounds. Examples: " ἐφ ' ἁλός " instead of " ἐπὶ ἁλός " or " καθ ' ἡμᾶς " instead of " κατὰ ἡμᾶς ".
• The Attic dialect is characterized by Synäresen: Two vowels without intervening consonant pull together and become a syllable; for example, appeared in the other dialects, although not regularly connected < εα > on, is in Attic but to < η >, which considered that the Eta rather [ ɛ ː ], which is situated between [e ] and [ a], because when [i ], as in modern Greek, pronounced. Accordingly, the Ionian unrelated sounds ( [ ο.ο ] [ ee ] ) < ου > are < εε >, < οο > in Attic also connected < ει >, or written, giving a pronunciation [e ː ], or [ ο ː ] of them ( at least in Attic ) suggests, in contrast to [i ] and [ u], for which they were later.

Non-standard spellings

Morphophonological changes such as those described above are often treated differently in non-standard spellings. This sometimes leads to questions about the representativeness of the literary dialect and allows reconstructions that would not be possible if only one version stands in the literary texts of the standard language. For example defines the non-standard correction of a Kappa to a gamma at the end of a word when the following word with a voiced consonant begins, or Kappas to a Chi end of the word before commencing with alcohol asper words suggest that this Kappa [ ɡ ] or [k ʰ ] was assimilated.

Metric evidence

The Metra, which have been used in classical Greek poetry, based on the principle of long and short syllables, and can sometimes be used as evidence for the vowel length, if this is not already clear from the spelling. From the fourth century after Christ poetry was written so that overemphasis based Metra were used, which suggests that no more distinction was made between long and short vowels, and that the Polytonische accent was replaced by a pure stress accent.

Evidence outside the Greek

According to descriptions

Some ancient grammarians tried to write systematic descriptions of the sounds of the language. For other authors, you can find occasional comments about the "correct" pronunciation of individual sounds. Both types of evidence are often difficult to interpret, since the phonetic terminology that time was often vague and it is often not clear in what relation the forms described to those who were actually spoken by the broader layers of the population, are.

Important ancient authors are:

• Dionysius Thrax
• Dionysius of Halicarnassus
• Aelius Herodianus

Comparison between different dialects

Sometimes the comparison of the standard Attic with written forms of the other Greek dialects or the humorous transmission of the can " alien" dialectal pronunciation (eg Spartan Doric into Attic plays ) provide evidence of the phonetic value of certain spellings.

Towards the end of the fifth century BC Athenian authors sometimes transcribed the Spartan θ with σ: " ναὶ τὼ σιώ ( Att θεώ ) παρσένε, ὀρσά ( ὀρθή ) ἀγασώς ( ἀγαθούς ) " by Aristophanes ( " Lysistrata " ) and can also be found " σύματος " ( " θύματος " ) in Thucydides ( the latter case was found in descriptions of Dorian from the fourth century BC ). One can conclude that the < θ > of the Spartan Doric already (at least before vowels ) was a fricative and that the Athenians authors this since the Attic retained the plosive longer parodied.

Loanwords

The Greek spelling foreign words in other languages ​​and another language speaking loanwords in Greek can be an important clue to the debate. But the evidence is often difficult to interpret or undeveloped. One must note that the sounds of loanwords are often not adopted identical language to the other. Where the target language lacks a phoneme that corresponds exactly to one of the source language, this is usually replaced by a similar sounding phoneme of the target language.

Latin has taken over due to the close proximity of numerous Roman Greek culture Greek words. It is therefore of great importance for the reconstruction of the ancient Greek phonology. First, Greek loanwords, particularly technical terms and proper names containing the letters Φ, transcribed with " p" or " ph", bringing the writer, albeit incomplete, sought, a sound to write the Latin did not contain. Later, in the first centuries after Christ, diving for the first time overrides with "f" in such loanwords on, indicating that the Phi had already become a fricative. Thus, in the second century " P (h ) ilippus " is replaced by " Filippus ". Around the same time a start was made to use the "f" as a substitute for the theta, for lack of a better choice, from which one can infer that the sound was the Greek Theta also become a fricative.

In order to represent certain other Greek words, the Romans added the letter " y" and " z" to the Latin alphabet which will, they took directly from the Greek. This is important because it shows that the Romans had no characters for the sounds of the letters Υ and Ζ in Greek, which means that in this case no can be used According to the Latin for to reconstruct the Greek lute.

Comparison with older alphabets

The Greek alphabet evolved from the older Phoenician alphabet. One may assume that the Greeks tried to use every Phoenician letters for those Greek sound that was most similar to the Phoenician. However, this interpretation is similar to the loanwords, not sure.

Compared with younger or derived alphabets

The Greek alphabet is the basis of other alphabets, the Etruscan and later the Armenian, Gothic and Cyrillic alphabet. Similar arguments as in the Phoenician- Greek case can be derived in these cases.

For example, the Cyrillic letter We ( " В ") stands for the sound [ v ], which confirms that the beta in the ninth century was already pronounced by Christ as a fricative, while the new letter Be ( " Б ") for the sound [ b] was invented. In contrast, the Gothic, the letter, which was derived from the beta for [b ], so the beta was in the fourth century after Christ, nor a plosive.

Comparison with the modern Greek

In the case of any reconstruction of ancient Greek must be taken into consideration, such as the lute developed for modern Greek way later, and how these changes occurred. It is generally accepted by linguists that the differences between the reconstructed ancient Greek and modern Greek are relatively unproblematic, since the relevant changes ( conversion of plosives to fricatives, shifts of vowels [i ], loss of the initial sound [h ], changes in vowel length and stress systems, etc.) are regularly observed in many languages ​​and are relatively easy to explain.

Comparative Reconstruction of Proto - Indo-European

Systematic correspondences between the sounds of Greek and those of other Indo-European languages ​​are linguists as strong evidence for the reconstruction, because such correspondences are seen as strong evidence that these sounds have to go back to a common proto-language of the sound.

History of the reconstruction of the ancient pronunciation

Renaissance

By the fifteenth century ( during the time of the Byzantine Greek Empire ) Greek texts were pronounced the same as contemporary Greek when it was read aloud. From about 1486 condemned several scholars (particularly Antonio de Nebrija, Jerome and Aldus Manutius Aleandro ) this debate as incompatible with the descriptions that were handed down from ancient grammarians, and proposed an alternative pronunciation before.

Johannes Reuchlin, the leading scholar of Greek in the West in 1500, had taken the doctrines of the Greek Byzantine scholar from the emigration and continued to use the modern pronunciation. But Erasmus of Rotterdam (* 1466 or 1469, † 1556 ) wondered if the ancient Greek pronunciation might have been different. In 1528, he wrote " De recta Latini Graecique sermonis pronuntiatione dialogus " ( " conversation about the correct pronunciation of Latin and Greek ," included in the links ), a philosophical treatise in the form of a philosophical dialogue in which it a new way, the ancient Greek and speak Latin, developed. However, it is said that Erasmus had continued so to use the traditional system for teaching. The two models were quickly known by the name of its first proponents as " Reuchlinisches " and " Erasmisches ", or, according to the characteristic vowel pronunciations, as " itazistisches " (or " iotazistisches ") or " etazistisches " system.

Erasmus ' reconstruction was based on a wide plethora of arguments derived from the philological knowledge that were available at that time. Mainly he fought for a more regular correspondence between letters and sounds and assumed that different letters for different sounds must have stood and same letters for the same sounds. This brought him to the fact that, for example, the different letters, all [i ] are pronounced in itazistischen system, various phonetic values ​​must have had, and that ει, αι, οι, ευ, αυ and ου all diphthongs with shutting final position have been need to be. He also insisted that the ancient grammarians were taken into account, for example, if they prescribed that long and short vowels are, or that the acute and circumflex accent had clear characteristics in terms of pitch contour different. He also drew a number of comparisons with the same significant words in Greek, Latin and other European languages. Some of his arguments are, in retrospect, wrong, as it naturally lacked the knowledge that arose only by later linguistic research. Consequently, he could not distinguish between Latin and Greek word relationships that emerged through loan words (eg " Φοῖβος " and " Phoebus " ), and such a distinction, which sprang from a common Indo-European root (eg " φῶρ " and " furus " ) and he was also a victim of so-called " false friends " due to only random similarities sacrifice (eg Greek " θύειν " - French " door " to kill ). In other areas, his arguments are quite the same as those that use modern linguists, for example, when he argues on the basis of inter- dialectal correspondences within the Greek that the Eta, a rather more open e - sound, closer to [ a] must have been.

Erasmus took great pains to assign the individual phonemes in his reconstructed system plausible phonetic values ​​. This was no easy task as it was lacking in the contemporary theories of grammar to a rich and precise terminology to express such phonetic values ​​. To work around this problem, he used his existing knowledge of the phonetic repertoire of modern languages ​​, for example, he compared his reconstructed η with a Scottish "a" [ æ ], be reconstructed ου with a Dutch " ou " [ oʊ ] and its reconstructed οι with a French "oi " [ oɪ ] (after the then debate).

Erasmus attested that the Greek consonant letters < β >, < γ > and < δ >, the voiced stops [ b], [ g], and [ d] were, while the consonant letters < φ >, < θ > and < χ > the fricatives [ f], [ θ ] or [ x] as in modern Greek are (where he led, however, that this f -sound must have distinguished from the Latin, perhaps he meant that it was [ φ ] been ).

The inclusion of Erasmus ' ideas by his contemporaries was different. The most prominent of the scholars who spoke out against it, was Philipp Melanchthon, a pupil of Reuchlin. Debates within the humanist circles lasted until the seventeenth century, so the situation remained undecided for centuries, until it was decided in favor of the Erasmian model.

The 19th century

A renewed interest in the topic of the reconstructed pronunciation came on in the 19th century. On the one hand was the new science of historical linguistics, which was based on the method of comparative reconstruction, lively interest in the Greek. They quickly realized that, contrary to any doubt, the Greek along with many other languages ​​belonged to the Indo-European proto-language. This had major implications for the reconstruction of the phonological system. At the same time, the ongoing work brought in philology and archeology an ever increasing amount of non- literary and non-classical Greek writings, such as inscriptions and later papyri to light that deviated from the standard language. These findings contributed significant steps to expand the knowledge on the development of language. Secondly, the academic life in Greece lived again after 1830 a Greek state had again seen the light of the world, and the Greek scholars accepted initially reluctant to the seemingly strange idea that Greek was so different, as they knew it, pronounced.

The work of comparative linguists led to a picture of ancient Greek, Erasmus ' model initially more or less confirmed, albeit with some changes. It soon became clear that, for example, the pattern of long and short vowels, which was observed in Greek, in other languages ​​like opposites contained that even in modern Greek successors possessed (see ablaut ); that the Greek < υ > earlier [ u] must have been, because in all other Indo-European languages ​​according to [ u] is (see gr " μῦς ", Latin for " MUS "); that in many cases < η > before [a: ] was ( cf. gr " μήτηρ " Latin " mater "); that the Greek < ου > sometimes stood in words for a gelängtes < ο > and therefore partially for: should be ( the same applies mutatis mutandis to < ε > and the long [e: ], < ει > ) [o ], and so further. Regarding the consonants, the original Plosivität both aspirates < φ >, < θ > and < χ > ( [P ʰ ], [ t ʰ ] and [ K ʰ ] ), and the mediae < β >, < δ > and < γ > ( [b ], [ d ] and [ g] ), found about one in turn found out that they direct further developments of similar sounds in the original Indo-European ( reconstructed * [b ʰ ], * [d ʰ ] and * [g ʰ ] and * [b ] * [ d] * and [g ] ) were. It was recognized also that the alcohol asper beginning of a word was usually a remnant of a * [s ] ( cf. gr " ἑπτά " and Latin " septem " ), which was believed that he had been weakened his pronunciation to [h ]. Furthermore, we worked on the reconstruction of the linguistic background of meter in classical Greek, especially in Homer, which threw an important light on the phonological syllable structure and accent. Also described and explained scholar regularities of development of consonants and vowels in processes such as assimilation or reduplication.

Although comparative scientists could certainly prove in this way that a certain level, according to the Erasmian model, in essence, had been subject to a certain time, and that some changes later, during the development of the modern Greek were made, could the comparative method little about say when this happened. Erasmus had been especially eager to find a pronunciation model that matched as close as possible to the written letters, and now it was natural to assume that this reconstructed sound inventory was at the time when the Greek was written form. For a time, it was assumed that this was the one debate that had existed throughout the classical period. Still, it was very possible that the pronunciation of the living language had started quite early during antiquity to transform itself from the reconstructed system to modern Greek.

Under these circumstances, the information from the new, non-standard inscriptions were especially important. Critics of the Erasmian system stayed in particular the systematic patterns of spelling mistakes. These errors showed that writers had problems with various words the correct spellings distinguish, for example, < ι >, < η >, and < ει >. This proved that these vowels had begun already in the language of that time, coincide. Scholars in Greece stressed quickly these findings force to overcome the Erasmian system generally, while some Western European scholars rather tended to downplay them and either as isolated exceptions or as influences of non- Attic, non-standard dialects dismiss. However, it seems to be so wanted that some scholars, motivated by the ideological tendency to view the post- classical, particularly the Byzantine and modern Greek as a vulgar form of the language, preserves the ancient Greek in a "pure" form of knowledge. The resulting from this debate was expressed for example in the works of AN Jannaris (1897 ) and T. Papadimitrakopoulos (1889 ) on the contra - Erasmian and F. Blass (1870 ) on the per - Erasmian page.

It took until the 20th century to the work of Georgios N. Chatzidakis who recognized the results of comparative linguistics, was accepted by Greek scholars commonly. The international consensus, which was reached in the early and middle 20th century, as evidenced by the work of Sturtevant (1940 ) and Allen ( 1968).

Recent Developments

Since the 1970s and 1980s, some scholars attempt a systematic re-evaluation of the evidence on the basis of inscriptions and papyri ( Teodorsson 1974, 1977, 1978; Gignac 1976; Threatte 1980 Summary of Horrocks 1999). Many of the relevant phonological changes can according to your results are well dated, sometimes even to the classical period, and the period of Koine can be set with many sound changes with respect. Many of the changes in the vocalism are now dated to the period between the fifth and the first century BC, while it is assumed that the consonants were completed by the fourth century after Christ. Nevertheless, there is still a considerable debate on accurate data, and it is still not clear to what degree have and for how long different types debate within the Greek-speaking Community exists side by side. The consensus view today is that a phonological system that is about the reconstructed Erasmus corresponds, has probably been considered during the period of the classical Athenian literature, biblical or other post- classical Koine Greek but was already pronounced in a way that modern Greek the already comparable in important respects.

Recently, however, there was also an attempt at a complete rejection of the Erasmian reconstruction by the theologians and philologists C. Caragounis (1995 and 2004). Due to the inscriptions dated Caragounis all relevant vowel changes during or even before the classical period. He also advocated an early conversion of the aspirates and mediae to fricatives and generally doubted the importance of vowel lengths and the differences between the accents in spoken language. These views are currently within this scientific field isolated.

Christos Karvounis comes in his investigation to the remarkable result that most of the phonological characteristics of the modern Greek existed in ancient times or in the making were - though not yet at the same time in one place. You have probably assume that the phonological diversity was much greater already in classical times and numerous sounds much earlier tended in the direction of today's modern Greek pronunciation, than previously suspected of research.