Koine Greek phonology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Koine Greek is phonologically a transition period: at the start of the period, the language was generally virtually identical to Classical Ancient Greek, whereas in the end the language had phonologically a lot more in common with Modern Greek than Ancient Greek.

Contents

[edit] Overview

The most significant changes during the Koine Greek period concerned vowels: these were the loss of vowel length distinction, the substitution of the pitch accent system with a stress accent system, and the monophthongalization of diphthongs (except αυ and ευ). These changes seem widely attested from the 2nd Century BC in Egyptian Greek, and in the early 2nd Century AD in learned Attic inscriptions; it is therefore likely that they were already common in the 2nd Century BC and generalized no later than the 2nd Century AD.

Another change was the fricatization of the second element of diphthongs αυ and ευ. This change likely took place after the vocalic changes described above occurred. It is attested in Egyptian Greek starting from the 1st Century AD, and seems to have been generalized in the late Roman period.

Another series of changes was the fricatization of voiced plosives, which is widely attested in Egyptian Greek starting from the 1st Century AD, but may have been generalized at a later date, possibly in the late Roman or early Byzantine periods.

Yet another series of changes was the fricatization of aspirated voiceless plosives, which is attested in several locations from the 1st century AD, but seems to have been generalized at a later date, possibly in the late Roman or early Byzantine period.

A last change (possibly related to fricatization of aspirated plosives) is the loss of aspirate, which may have begun as soon as the late 1st century BC in Egyptian Greek, seems to have taken place no earlier than the 2nd Century AD in learned Attic inscription, and had most probably been generalized by the late Roman times.

[edit] Issues with reconstructions

The primary issue comes from the diversity of the Greek-speaking world: evidence suggests that phonological changes occurred at different times according to location and/or speaker background (with an opposition of learned speech vs. vulgar speech). As a matter of fact, it appears that many phonetic changes associated with the Koine period had already occurred in some varieties of Greek during the Classical period, but were not generalized before the Roman period: assuming that later pronunciations are directly derived from earlier ones (which is a matter of discussion), some of these changes would then have taken almost a millennium to generalize; and even if we assume otherwise, there seems to be in several cases hiatus of more than two centuries.

The opposition between learned language and vulgar language is visible in the corpus of Attic inscriptions. Some phonetic changes are attested in vulgar inscriptions since the end of the Classical period; still they are not generalized until the start of the 2nd Century AD in learned inscriptions. While some orthographic conservatism in learned inscriptions must be accounted for, contemporary transcriptions from Greek into Latin support the idea that this is not just orthographic conservatism, but that learned speakers of Greek retained a conservative phonological system into the Roman period.

Interpretation is more complex when different datations are found for similar phonetic changes in Egyptian papyri and learned Attic inscriptions. A first explanation would be dialectal differences (influence of foreign phonological systems through non-native speaker could be invoked as well); changes would then have happened in Egyptian Greek before they were generalized in Attic. A second explanation would be that learned Attic inscriptions reflect a more learned variety of Greek than Egyptian papyri; learned speech would then have resisted changes that had been generalized in vulgar speech. A last explanation would be that the orthography in learned Attic inscriptions was artificially conservative; changes would then have been generalized no later than they are attested in Egyptian papyri. All these explanation are plausible to some degree, but would lead to different datations for the generalization of the same changes.

The only way to date a phonological change in a given context is to find evidence specific to this context. However, while there is quite probably still much evidence to be exploited, it would be unfeasible to reconstruct every variant of Greek speech as evidence would be too scarce for such an undertaking.

To sum this up, due to the diversity of the Greek-speaking world, the current interpretation of known evidence does not preclude a measure of incertitude in datation of phonetic changes; indeed, the exact datation and the rapidity of the generalization of Koine Greek phonological changes are still matters of discussion among researchers. Orthographic variants in contemporary written sources is the most direct evidence, but it is not enough to date a change in every context. Testimony of grammarians and, to a lesser extent, transcriptions into foreign language are interesting because they can indicate which pronunciation was regarded as standard by learned locutors; however, it has been argued that transcriptions may in some cases be conventional rather than phonetic, and Greek grammarians appear to describe learned pronunciation while ignoring established vulgar pronunciation.

[edit] Sample reconstructed phonological systems

[edit] Learned pronunciation, late 4th Century BC through early Roman period

Until the beginning of the Roman times, learned locutors probably retained a conservative pronunciation that preserved many traits of the Ancient Greek phonological system. In Attic learned inscriptions, this learned pronunciation may have been retained until the beginning of the 2nd Century AD, but appears to be in complete decadence by the mid 2nd Century AD.

The conservative pronunciation described here is mostly atticizing, with the exception of diphthongs /yi/, which had already been monophthongalized in Attic during the Classic period but appears to have been retained by at least some locutors in early Koine, and /oːu/, which did not exist in Attic but seems to have been retained by some locutors of early Koine.

[edit] Short vowels

Front Back
unrounded rounded rounded
Close /i/ ῐ /y/ ῠ  
Mid /e/ ε   /o/ ο
Open /a/ ᾰ

[edit] Long vowels

Front Back
unrounded rounded rounded
Close /iː/ ῑ, ει /yː/ ῡ /uː/ ου
Mid /eː/ η, ει   /oː/ ω
Open /a/ ᾱ

The ει pseudo-diphthong was confused with ι, except before vowel, where it was confused with η.

[edit] Diphthongs

Front offglide Back offglide
Short first element /ai/
αι		 /oi/
οι		 /yi/
υι		 /au/
αυ		 /eu/
ευ		  
(Long first element) (/aːi/)
(ᾳ)		 (/oːi/)
(ῳ)		   (/aːu/)
(ᾱυ)		 (/eːu/)
(ηυ)		 (/oːu/)
(ωυ)

Long first element diphthongs are written in parentheses because they were gradually monophthongalized starting from the classical period; early locutors of Koine probably retained some of these diphthongs, but by the 1st century BC the process of monophthongalization was over (see diachronic description below for more details).

[edit] Plosive consonants

Bilabial Dental Velar
voiceless /p/ π /t/ τ /k/ κ
voiced /b/ β /d/ δ /ɡ/ γ
aspirated voiceless /pʰ/ φ /tʰ/ θ /kʰ/ χ

Ancient grammarians and transcriptions suggest that voiced and aspirated plosive consonants were retained until the beginning of the Roman period.

[edit] Other consonants

Nasals /m/ μ /n/ ν
(/ŋ/) γ
Liquids /l/ λ /r(~r ̥ʰ?)/ ρ (ῥ)
Sibilant /s/ σ /z/ ζ, σ
Aspirate /h/ ῾

Some scholars regard [ŋ] as an allophone of [n], others as a separate phoneme, which is why it is put in parentheses.

What exact sound ῥ represented is a matter of discussion, but it should probably be regarded as an allophone of the /r/ notated by ρ.

ζ notates a [zz] geminate.

[edit] Accentuation

Learned speech retained the tonal accent system of Ancient Greek.

[edit] Boeotian, 4th Century BC

Although it belongs to the late classical period rather than the Koine Greek period, Boeotian phonology is shown here as it prefigures several traits of later Koine phonology.

By the 4th Century BC, Boeotian had monophthongalized most diphthongs, and featured a fricative γ.

Note that, in contrast with Ionic-Attic and Koine, υ had remained a back vowel in Boeotian.

No first-hand reference has been found on when Boeotian discarded vowel length distinction, but it seems it remained relevant at the time.

Starting from the end of the 4th Century, vulgar Attic seems to display similar values (except for υ which was a front vowel).

[edit] Short vowels
Front unrounded Back rounded
Close /i/ ῐ /u/ ῠ
Mid /e/ ε /o/ ο
Open /a/ ᾰ

[edit] Long vowels
Front Back
unrounded rounded rounded
Close /iː/ ῑ, ει /yː/(?) οι /uː/ ῡ, ου, υι
Close-Mid /eː/ η   /oː/ ω
Open-Mid /ɛː/ αι    
Open /a/ ᾱ

The /yː/ value for οι is attested later, in the 3rd Century BC. An intermediate value of /øː/ has been suggested by some.

[edit] Diphthongs

/au/(?)
αυ		 /eu/(?)
ευ

No reference has been found on the status of the αυ and ευ diphthongs in Boeotian.

[edit] Plosive and former plosive consonants

Bilabial Dental Velar
voiceless /p/ π /t/ τ /k/ κ
voiced /b/(?) β /d/(?) δ /ɣ/ γ
aspirated voiceless /pʰ/(?) φ /tʰ/(?) θ /kʰ/(?) χ

Fricative values for β, δ, φ, θ and χ are not unlikely, but are not attested in Boeotian at this time. (A fricative value for θ is attested in Laconian in the late 5th century.)

[edit] Other consonants

Nasals /m/ μ /n/ ν
(/ŋ/) γ
Liquids /l/ λ /r(~r ̥ʰ?)/ ρ (ῥ)
Sibilant /s/ σ /z/ ζ, σ
Aspirate(?) /h/(?) ῾

No reference has been found on the status of the aspirate in Boeotian at this period.

[edit] Accentuation

The tonal accent system of Ancient Greek probably remained relevant.

[edit] Egyptian Greek, early 1st Century BC

From the 2nd Century BC, Egyptian Greek had monophthongalized diphthongs and lost vowel length distinction.

[edit] Vowels

Front Back
unrounded rounded rounded
Close /i/ ι, ει /y/ υ, οι, υι /u/ ου
Close-Mid /e/ η    
Mid     /o/ ο, ω
Open-Mid /ɛ/ ε, αι    
Open /a/ α

[edit] Diphthongs

/aw/(?)
αυ		 /ew/(?)
ευ

The transition of αυ and ευ from [au], [eu] to [av], [ev] was likely already in progress. A probable intermediate stage is therefore presented here.

[edit] Plosive consonants

Bilabial Dental Velar
voiceless /p/ π /t/ τ /k/ κ
voiced /b/ β /d/ δ /ɡ/ γ
aspirated voiceless /pʰ/ φ /tʰ/ θ /kʰ/ χ

There is little evidence of fricative pronunciation of β and γ in Egyptian Greek before the 1st Century AD. Fricative pronunciation for aspirates may have been generalized even later in Egyptian Greek.

[edit] Other consonants

Nasals /m/ μ /n/ ν
/ŋ/ γ
Liquids /l/ λ /r(~r ̥ʰ?)/ ρ (ῥ)
Sibilant /s/ σ /z/ ζ, σ
(Aspirate) (/h/) ῾

The aspirate may have already been in the process of disappearing in Egyptian Greek, which is why it is put in parentheses.

[edit] Accentuation

The accent had changed to a stress accent.

[edit] 4th Century AD

By the 4th Century AD, the loss of vowel length distinction and aspiration was most probably generalized. Η was often confused with ι (hence pronounced /i/?), but still occasionally with ε (pronounced /e/?) (as it still is today in Eastern (i.e. Pontic and Cappadocian) Greek dialects). Fricative values for former voiced and aspirate plosive consonants were probably already common; however, some dialects and/or learned speech may have retained voiced and aspirate plosive consonants until the end of the 1st Millennium.

[edit] Vowels

Front Back
unrounded rounded rounded
Close /i/ ι, ει, η /y/ υ, οι, υι /u/ ου
Mid /e/ ε, αι, some η (dialectal?)   /o/ ο, ω
Open /a/ α

The confusion between /y/ and /i/ had begun as early as the 2nd Century AD in Egyptian Greek, but it was most probably not generalized yet.

[edit] Plosive and former plosive consonants

Bilabial Dental Velar
voiceless /p/ π /t/ τ /k/ κ
voiced /β/ β /ð/ δ /ɣ/ γ
formerly aspirated voiceless /f/ φ /θ/ θ /x/ χ

[edit] Other consonants

Nasals /m/ μ /n/ ν
/ŋ/ γ
Liquids /l/ λ /r/ ρ
Sibilant /s/ σ /z/ ζ, σ

[edit] Accentuation

The stress accent system was probably generalized.

[edit] Diachronic phonetic description

[edit] Loss of vowel quantity distinction

The ancient distinction between long and short vowels was lost, so that all vowels became isochronic.

From the 2nd century BC, spelling errors in non-literary Egyptian papyri suggest stress accent and loss of vowel length distinction, but it may be a peculiarity of Egyptian speech.[1] The widespread confusion between ο and ω in Attic inscriptions starting in the 2nd century AD may be caused by a loss of vowel length distinction, but might be caused by a mere loss of vowel quality distinction, too.[2]

However, for phonological reasons, this transition is likely to be linked to the transition to stress accent and therefore to have been generalized by the 3rd century AD.[3]

[edit] Transition to stress accent

The means of accenting words changed from pitch to stress, meaning that the accented syllable is not pronounced in a musical tone but louder and/or stronger.

From the 2nd century BC, spelling errors in non-literary Egyptian papyri suggest stress accent and loss of vowel length distinction, but as already noted above it may be a peculiarity of Egyptian speech. More evidence of stress accent appears in poetry starting from the late 2nd century AD – early 3rd century AD.[4]

[edit] Diphthongs

[edit] Pseudo-diphthongs

Before consonant, diphthong ει had started to become monophthongal in Attic as early as the 6th century BC, and pronounced like ε̄, probably as [eː]. From the late 4th century BC in Attic, pseudo-diphthong ει (now notating both etymological ει and etymological ε̄) came to be pronounced like ῑ, probably as [iː] (with the quality that the digraph still has in modern Greek).[5]

Before vowel, diphthong ει did not follow the same evolution as pre-consonantic ει.[6] One theory to explain this difference is that pre-vocalic ει may have kept a diphthongal value [ej] until the 4th century BC, the [j] being progressively perceived as a glide from [e] to the next vowel.[7] From the late 4th century BC, pre-vocalic diphthong ει came to be confused with η, which implies that, unlike before consonant, it conserved a value of [eː], with probably a loss of openness distinction with η;[8] for later evolution, refer to η below.

Starting from the 6th century in Attic, diphthong ου had been monophthongalized and confused with ο̄. While its initial value had probably been [oː], it must have evolved to [uː] quite early (possibly in the 6th century BC, and at any rate before 350 BC); this later value was preserved through modern times, as far as vowel quality is concerned.[9]

[edit] Short-first-element ι diphthongs

Diphthong αι was probably monophthongalized at first as [ɛː]. This value is attested in Boeotian in the early 4th century BC with the Boeotian spelling of η for αι.[10] Confusion of αι with ε suggests that this transition had taken place by the mid 2nd Century BCE in Egyptian Greek.[11] Still, diphthong αι must have kept a diphthongal value at least in learned language until Roman times, as it is transcribed as æ in Latin, and Latin æ is transcribed as αι, too.[12] Further confusion between αι and ε is found in Palestine in the early 2nd Century,[13] and the confusion between αι and ε starting from c. 125 AD in Attic suggests that the monophthongalization took place in the early 2nd century AD in learned Attic.[14] Allen thinks the transition to [e] (i.e. loss of openness distinction with ε) to have taken place later; while Allen is not very explicit on this point, this theory seems based on the observation that while both η and αι are confused with ε, αι is not confused with η.[15] However, not all scholars seem to agree.[16] No reference on this point of debate has been found.

Diphthong οι was monophtongalized as [yː] or [y] (depending on when the loss of vowel length distinction took place).[17] This is attested in Boeotian in the early as the 3rd century BC with a spelling of υ for οι, but this was probably a dialectal trait.[18] Still, diphthong οι must have kept a diphthongal value at least in learned language until Roman times, as it is transcribed as œ in Latin. Further evidence of monophthongalization is found from the early 1st Century BC in Egyptian Greek, as well as in the early 2nd Century AD in Palestine.[19] Monophthongalization in learned language seems attested by a υ spelling for οι found in a text dated from early 2nd century AD and another from c. 240 AD.[20] (Look up note on evolution of υ for subsequent evolution.)

Koine Greek initially seems to feature diphthong υι, which had been progressively monophthongalized to [yː] (written υ for ῡ) in Attic from the 6th century BC to the 4th century BC but retained in other Greek dialects.[21] It was later monophtongalized as [yː] or [y] (depending on when the loss of vowel length distinction took place). The author of these lines has not found any reference on when this change took place, but this transition may be phonologically linked to, and at any rate is quite unlikely to have taken place after, the similar transition of οι to [yː]/[y]. (Look up note on evolution of υ for subsequent evolution.)

[edit] Short-first-element υ diphthongs

Diphthongs αυ and ευ lost their ancient value of [au] and [eu] and acquired a fricative pronunciation of [aβ] and [eβ] or [av] and [ev].[22] Confusion of αυ and ευ with αβ and εβ is found as early as the beginning of the 1st Century AD in Egyptian papyri, which attests a fricative pronunciation.[23] Yet, this fricative pronunciation was likely not generalized at once; for instance, Jewish catacombs inscriptions still show a diphthongal value in the 2nd–3rd century AD.[24] Confusion of αυ and ευ with αβ and εβ becomes increasingly common in late Roman and early Byzantine times, which suggests that it had been generalized by this time.[25]

[edit] Long-first-element ι diphthongs

Diphthong ῃ[26] had started to become monophtongal in Attic at least as early as the 4th century BC as it was often written ει and probably pronounced [eː]. In Koine Greek, most ῃ were therefore subjected to the same evolution as other classical [eː] and came to be pronounced [iː]. However, in some inflexional endings (mostly 1st declension dative singular and subjunctive 3S), the evolution was partially reverted from c. 200 BC, probably by analogy of forms of other cases/persons, to η and was probably pronounced [eː] at first (look up note on evolution of η for subsequent evolution).[27]

Other long-first-element ι diphthongs (ᾳ and ῳ[28] became monophtongal by the 2nd century BC, as they were written α and ω;[29] the former was probably pronounced [aː], while the later may have been pronounced [ɔː] at first if openness distinction had not been lost yet, and was eventually pronounced [oː] at any rate (look up discussion of single vowels ο and ω below for details).

[edit] Long-first-element υ diphthongs

When augmented from ευ in verbs, diphthong ηυ had been altered to ευ from the 4th century BC.[30]

Other long-first-element υ diphthongs (ᾱυ, ηυ and ωυ) had become monophtongal from the 1st century BC, as they were written as α, η and ω;[31] the first was probably pronounced [aː], while the two later may have been pronounced [ɛː] and [ɔː] at first if openness distinction had not been lost yet ([eː] and [oː] otherwise), and were eventually pronounced [iː] and [oː] at any rate (look up discussions of single vowels ο and ω and single vowel η below for details).

[edit] Single vowel quality

Apart from η, simple vowels have better preserved their ancient pronunciation than diphthongs.

As noted above, at the start of the Koine Greek period, pseudo-diphthong ει before consonant had a value of [iː], whereas pseudo-diphthong ου had a value of [υː]; these vowel qualities have remained unchanged through Modern Greek. Diphthong ει before vowel had been generally monophtongalized to a value of [eː] and confused with η, thus sharing later developments of η.

The quality of vowels α, ε̆ and ι have remained unchanged through Modern Greek, as [a], [e] and [i].

Vowels ο and ω started to be regularly confused in Attic inscriptions starting in the 2nd century AD, which may indicate that the quality distinction was lost around this time. However, this may as well indicate the loss of length distinction, with an earlier or simultaneous loss of quality distinction. Indeed, the fact that some less systematic confusion is found in Attic inscriptions from the 4th century BC may alternatively point to a loss of openness distinction in the 4th century BC, and the systematization of the confusion in the 2nd century AD would then have been caused by the loss of length distinction.[32]

The quality distinction between η and ε may have been lost in Attic in the late 4th century AD, when pre-consonantic pseudo-diphthong ει started to be confused with ι and pre-vocalic diphthong ει with η.[33] C. 150 AD, Attic inscriptions started confusing η and ι, indicating the appearance of a [iː] or [i] (depending on when the loss of vowel length distinction took place) pronunciation that is still in usage in standard Modern Greek; however, it seems that some locutors retained the [eː]/[e] pronunciation for some time, as Attic inscriptions continued to in parallel confuse η and ε, and transcriptions into Gothic and, to some extent, old Armenian transcribe η as e.[34]

Koine Greek adopted for vowel υ the pronunciation [y] of Ionic-Attic. Confusion of υ with ι appears in Egyptian papyri from the 2nd century AD, suggesting a pronunciation of [i], but this is probably a regional trait.[35] Transcriptions into Gothic and, to some extent, Armenian suggest that υ still retained a [y] pronunciation, and the transition to [i] in mainstream Greek is thought to have taken place at the end of the 1st millennium.[36]

[edit] Loss of aspirate

The aspirate breathing (aspiration), which was already lost in the Ionic idioms of Asia Minor and the Aeolic of Lesbos,[37] later stopped being pronounced in Koine Greek. Spelling errors in Egyptian papyri suggest that this loss was already under way in Egyptian Greek in the late 1st Century BC.[38] Transcriptions into foreign languages and consonant changes before aspirate testify that this transition must not have been generalized before the 2nd century AD, but transcriptions into Gothic show that it was at least well under way in the 4th century AD.[39]

[edit] Consonants

Among consonants, only β, γ, φ, θ, and ζ are certain to have changed from Classical Greek. Consonants δ (and, with lesser probability, χ) are likely to have changed, too, but there is no clear evidence of this in the Koine Greek period.

Consonant ζ, which had probably a value of [zd] in Classical Attic[40] (though some scholars have argued in favor of a value of [dz], and the value probably varied according to dialects – see Zeta (letter) for further discussion), acquired the sound [z] that it still has in Modern Greek, seemingly with a geminate pronunciation [zz] at least between vowels. Attic inscriptions suggest that this pronunciation was already common by the end of the 4th century BC.[41]

Digraph -σσ- is much more frequent than Attic -ττ- in Koine Greek.[42]

Consonants φ, θ, which were initially pronounced as aspirates [pʰ] and [tʰ], developed into fricatives [f][43] and [θ]. On the other hand, there is no specific evidence of the transition of consonant χ from aspirate [kʰ] to fricative [x]/[ç] in the Koine Greek period. There is evidence for fricative θ in Laconian in the 5th century BC,[44] but this is unlikely to have influenced Koine Greek which is largely based on Ionic-Attic. The first clear evidence for fricative φ and θ in Koine Greek dates from the 1st century AD in Pompeian inscriptions.[45] Yet, evidence suggest an aspirate pronunciation for θ in Palestine in the early 2nd Century,[46] and Jewish catacomb inscriptions of the 2nd–3rd century AD suggest a pronunciation of [f] for φ, [tʰ] for θ and [kʰ] for χ, which would testify that the transition of θ to affricate was not yet general at this time, and suggests that the transition of φ to affricate may have happened before the transition of θ and χ.[47] Armenian transcriptions transcribe χ as [kʰ] until the 10th century AD, so it seems that χ was pronounced as aspirate by at least some locutors until then.[48]

It is not known with accuracy when consonants β, γ and δ, which were originally pronounced as [b], [g], [d], acquired the value of [v],[49] [ɣ] and [ð] that they have in Modern Greek.[50] Though some evidence of fricative γ after a front vowel go as far back as the 4th century BC, it does not seem to have been a standard pronunciation.[51] Ancient grammarians describe the plosive nature of these letters, β is transcribed as b, not v, in Latin, and Cicero still seems to identify β with Latin b.[52] Evidence from non-literary papyri suggests a fricative pronunciation in some contexts (mostly intervocalic) from about the 1st century AD; however, this pronunciation was not necessarily generalized yet.[53] Increasingly common confusion of αυ and ευ with αβ and εβ in late Roman and early Byzantine times suggests that the fricative pronunciation of β was common if not general by this time.[54] Yet, it is not before the 10th century AD that transcriptions of β as fricative v or γ as voiced velar l are found in Armenian, which suggests that the transition was not general before the end of the 1st millennium; however, previous transcriptions may have been learned transcriptions.[55]

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ Allen, Vox Graeca, page 94, note 9.
  2. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 94.
  3. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 94.
  4. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 130.
  5. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 69–72. Diphthong 'ει' had already merged with ι in the 5th century BC in regions such as Argos or in the 4th c. BC in Corinth (e.g. ΛΕΓΙΣ) (Reference missing). It was also the case in Boeotia in the early 4th century BC (Allen, op. cit., page 74).
  6. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 72–73.
  7. ^ This perceived glide would explain why, in the 5th and 4th centuries BC in Attic, though there was no pre-vocalic ε̄ that ει may have been confused with, ει was often written as ε; indeed, while the confusion seems to have ceased after the 4th century BC, several etymological pre-vocalic ει remain in altered ε̆ form in Koine Greek. Such a perceived glide may actually be even older, since in Homeric verses etymological pre-vocalic ει is often written either as a short ε or a long ει. Allen, op. cit., page 83–84.
  8. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 72–73.
  9. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 75–78.
  10. ^ This spelling (e.g. πης, χηρε, μεμφομη (Reference missing)) indicates that the transition of αι to [ɛː] had taken place in Boeotian but not in Attic in the early 4th century BC (Allen, op. cit., page 74).
  11. ^ Randall Buth, Ἡ Κοινὴ Προφορά, page 3.
  12. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 79.
  13. ^ Buth, op. cit., page 3.
  14. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 79.
  15. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 79. The transition would then have taken place after the transition of η to [iː]/[i] was over in mainstream Greek, that is to say no earlier than the late Roman period or early Byzantine period.
  16. ^ Buth, op. cit., page 3.
  17. ^ with possible intermediate states [øj] and [øː]
  18. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 81.
  19. ^ Buth, op. cit., page 3.
  20. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 81.
  21. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 81, note 54.
  22. ^ Comparable to the modern pronunciation of [av] and [ev] (partially assimilated to [af], [ef] before voiceless consonants θ, κ, ξ, π, ς, τ, φ, χ, and ψ, this assimilation being undated).
  23. ^ Buth, op. cit., page 4, note 8, citing Francis Thomas Gignac, A Grammar of the Greek Papyri of the Roman and Byzantine Periods. Volume One: Phonology. Milan 1976, pages 68, note 1, and page 70.
  24. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 80, note 47.
  25. ^ Buth, op. cit., page 4, note 8, citing Geoffrey Horrocks, Greek, A History of the Language and its Speakers., page 111.
  26. ^ note that the subscript ι notation is medieval, the ι is adscript in ancient texts where it appears
  27. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 85–86.
  28. ^ once again, the subscript notation is medieval
  29. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 86. However, when augmented from οι in verbs, diphthong ῳ had been altered to οι instead (Allen, op. cit., page 87, note 70).
  30. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 87, note 70.
  31. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 87.
  32. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 94.
  33. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 73. This evolution had probably happened by the early 4th century AD in Boeotian but definitively not in Attic, as shown by e.g. Boeotian πατειρ vs Attic πατήρ (Allen, op. cit., page 74).
  34. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 74–75.
  35. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 68.
  36. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 68. Allen, op. cit., page 68, note 14.
  37. ^ Reference missing.
  38. ^ Randall Buth, op. cit., page 5–6, citing Gignac, op. cit., page 137–138.
  39. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 53.
  40. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 56; Allen, op. cit., page 58, note 115.
  41. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 58.
  42. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 13–14.
  43. ^ An intermediate stage of [ɸ] has been proposed by some, but there is no specific evidence to support this (Allen, op. cit., page 25).
  44. ^ e.g. Aristophanes Εἰρήνη, l. 214, σιώ for θεώ. Allen, op. cit., page 26.
  45. ^ Particularly meaningful is lasfe found for λάσθη. Allen, op. cit., page 23.
  46. ^ Randall Buth, op. cit., page 4
  47. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 24.
  48. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 25.
  49. ^ An intermediate stage of [β] has been proposed by some. (Reference missing)
  50. ^ except when preceded by a nasal consonant (μ, ν); in that case, they retain their ancient sounds (e.g. γαμβρός – [ɣambρ'os], άνδρας – ['andras], άγγελος – ['aŋgelos])
  51. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 31–32.
  52. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 31.
  53. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 32, note 46.
  54. ^ Randall Buth, op. cit., page 4, note 8, citing Horrocks, op. cit., page 111.
  55. ^ Allen, op. cit., page 32, note 45.

[edit] See also

[edit] Bibliography

  • W. Sidney Allen (1987): Vox Graeca: the pronunciation of Classical Greek, Cambridge: University Press, (3rd edition, ISBN 0-521-33555-8)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../k/o/i/Koine_Greek_phonology_070f.html"
In other languages