rw R IC HA R D C LA Y A N D SO N S , Lm r

LO N D O N A x n B UN G A Y THE

PRO N U N C IA TIO N O F GREEK .

THE e G re e k ris of the nation from its long bondage, and its

v i l rapid progress in general de elopment , in pol tica importance , o t in c mmerce and in education during the last fif y years,

reveal s an inherent tenacity and vigour of life whi ch has scarcely

a ever been witnessed in any other people . The r pid means of communication has also brought Greece withi n easy access

E r l of Western u ope, and the once distant country is readi y

i v s r v sited by numerous tra ellers , either for mere plea u e , or to study the relics whi ch still attest the former supremacy

in and a i of Greece art rch tecture . This new intercourse with a nation whose literature has had so much influence on the

ans ci ori o world at large, and is the f g of so much of its

ll al v m has a inte ectu de elop ent , led m ny scholars , especially in

H ll s Germany and o and , to recon ider the question of the proper

a of a a a as pronunci tion the l ngu ge , and to study the langu ge

r f at present spoken and w itten in Greece itsel . The scholars of England can hardly be said to have fairly turned their

U v a attention to this subject . ntil ery l tely modern Greece,

l a an d a its angu ge literature, found but little f vour in the

a a an d v r nks of our schol rs, e en to the present day there

.

exists a remarkable ignorance among us of the progress,

A 2 4 PRO NU NC IA TIO N G REEK THE OF . im provement and multiplicity of the works which are constantly

r t he in issuing f om press Greece .

There is in Englan d a general indifference to any modern

i ll an Greek l terary production , or more genera y complete ignor ce — of the existing literature the prevailing idea be ing that

a f ag r modern Greek is very dif erent langu e f om ancient Greek , and that the present language is so debas ed that the an cient

iz The can hardly be recogn ed in it . general use of the ex ” pression modern Greek has led to a deepening of this

v who v opinion, and ery few of those ha e spent the best years of their lives in the study of Greek at the public schools and universities have any idea of the language now spo ken in the land where the great wr iters of Greek antiquity wr ote their immort al productions ; and they woul d be surprised if they were told that the lexicon of Liddell and Scott which they h v a e so often used is the best for the language now spoken ,

v some idioms and pro incialisms excepted . But who can tell how many idi oms and provincialisms of the best times of A ttic

are n literature not contai ed in any lexicon , and perhaps are only to be found in the traditional deposits of the nation and ex pressed by the people now as they were thousands o f years ago

P an l rofessor Blackie , who is exception to the genera rule in

t Helios az this country , wri es in the (the mag ine of the Hellenic Society in A msterdam) I am constantly meeting with inte lli gent persons who labour under the impression that the language

and n P S . C of lato hrysostom is a dead la guage , as much as Latin

I n w and and Hebrew . an age when Greek ne spapers Greek

v e are h books on a great ariety of subj cts publis ed every day, t he e xistence of such a notion among intellige nt persons is a

’ sad Sign of that ‘ insular ignorance with which Professor Seeley reproached the inhabitants of this tight little island ; T HE PRONU NC IA TION GREEK 5 OF .

and it is a notion pardonable enough in the general public , as professional scholars unfortunately have done not a little to t gi ve currency to so gross a misconcep ion . For professors and schoolmasters, and teachers of the classical languages generally, partly from their habit of devolving their living function as

of i teachers language on dead books, and partly from the r barbarous habit of m urdering the classical tongue by Latin accentuation and E n lish vocaliz ation g , have taken up a position that, so far as they and their disciples are concerned , makes the living language of Greece practically dead ; and so complete is w this deadness, that hen our young Greeklings, after it may be

’ ten years study of Greek in Eton or Oxford , make a tour to l a a the and where the l ngu ge is spoken , they find that scarce a

- H u sentence in their well crammed ellenism is nderstood , and h forthwit , instead of blaming themselves and their teachers for M their barbarous treatment of the language of the uses, they ” s denounce the spoken language as barbarous . This represent i the prevail ng opinion among us, which we trust will soon be one of the past . The term modern should no more be used

r - as an adjective before G eek to represent the Greek of to day, than before English or French to distinguish those languages from what they were in the fifteenth or sixteenth century . German of the present day differs more from the language of

- Luther than the Greek of to day from that of classic times . N 0 romance language approaches so near Latin as the Greek of - P ff c to day to that of lato . The di erent Latin dialects , whi h are

a in so now classed as langu ges in Europe , have deviated many particulars from the parent tongue that the Latin scholar has to make a separate study to acquire any one of them . The Greek

f w the scholar has not this di ficulty, if he ishes to read writings of modern Greeks . He will find when he begins to study the 6 T HE PRONU NC IA TI O N OF GREE K .

modern literature such a surprising resemblance as to excite his

m a ha t he astonishment , and to refute the ideas he y ve had as to

language being so utterly changed as to be unintelligible to the

s . O cla sical scholar n the contrary , he will make the agreeable

disco very that at first sight he can understand as easily as

a o f t he classic l Greek most well written books , and with a few weeks ’ study he will be able to read the newspapers and

T he a as v periodicals . popular l nguage , in e ery country , will ff o er more variety of dialectic form , and not be so readily

a a a cquired by the cl ssical student, but is most interesting

i r diffi ph lological study . The pronunciation is the p incipal

hi s al culty which the Western scholar finds on arriv in Greece, and it is this which stands as a wall of separation between the

and scholars of the West and those of Greece , which hangs the

d a a shroud of eath around the ancient cl ssic tongue , and br nds the A ttic wit of the present day as barbaric to those who have

e contented themselves with pronouncing Gr ek , a foreign tongue ,

wn in the same manner as their o language . This curious question of how a language should be pronounced

is k a language which living , which has always been spo en and

has had a continuous literature even in times when the national

e is life seem d almost extinct, the one we propose to examine briefly in the following page

There can be no doubt but that in a language so widely spoken as the Greek was about the time of the Christian era

there must have existed many dialectic forms and varieties

t of pronunciation . It is not long since persons from the differen

counties of England could be readily recogni z ed by their pro

nunciat io n ; some counties had more marked differences of d a a a i lect th n others , and still retain, especi lly among the lower

l s m anv a c asse , of these peculiarities of pronunci tion , and also T HE P RON UNCI ATION OF G REEK .

many words and expressions peculiar to their own counties ; t he a a same m ay be said of most European countries . The st nd rd of a language in form and pronunciation must b e sought for

among t he e ducated and those residin g in or near the centres

l v h a a a of intel ectual de elopment, w ich in most c ses is the c pit l

w c m a ir a a to n of the ountry . We y fa ly ssume that fter the

and z fall of Greece proper, the rise of the By antine power ,

C a wt t and and onst ntinople i h its statesmen, ora ors writers,

A a a m l h lex ndria with its gr m arians and schools of phi osop y , would be centres of learning in whi ch the Greek language was

r spoken and written with compa ative purity . The writings of t he A lexandrian grammarians attest their anxiety for the pre servation of the purity of their language and the correctness a of its pronunciation . We c nnot suppose that Chrysostom

would have gained the epithet by which he is no w known had

he not had a pure pronunciation and a flowing delivery . t The language continued to be spoken, s udied , and written

with care in Constantinople until the fall of the Byz antine

r empire and the captu e of the city by the Turks .

A fter the capture of C onstantinople many learned Greeks left the city and migrated into western Europe and gave an i A mpulse to the then awakening spirit for letters . mong these

m a z a men y be noted the famous Theodorus Ga , who composed

t he t he a grammar for use of those who were studying Greek , t hi N firs two parts of w ch were translated by Erasmus . o one at

that time thought that t he writings of the an cients should be read with any other pronunciation than that which these men

wa brought with them . Greek s then pronounced with its own

v a W living pronunciation and learned as a li ing langu ge . herever these refugees from C onstantinople taught their language they taught their own pronunciation and their pupils taught it to HE PRONU N C I A TI ON G REEK 8 T OF .

a v . others , and so they read and spoke the l nguage as a li ing one

It seems to be a pctitio pr incipii to say that this traditional

pronunciation of these men was a wrong one , and yet this is the

argument or statement of the bppone nt s of the present pro — nunciat io n the followers of thé Erasmian system .

2 A D a was It was not till 1 5 8 . . th t the learned world surprised by the theory of another pronunciation for Greek than the

v l D E generally recei ed and traditiona one , when esiderius rasmus of Rotterdam made known his discovery in a treatise entitled

“ a i r ci u rm ni ro nunciatio ne dialo s D e recta l tin g ae q e se o s p gu . The dialogue is supposed to take place between a clever Bear a and a learned Lion . It is more a witty th n a serious pro E a duction , and which of these two r smus intended it to be is

d as k now ifficult to sert . The clever Bear underta es to prove to

the Lion that the pronunciation in use among the Greeks of

n do their own la guage is quite wrong , and that they not know a how to pronounce it , that the right pronunci tion of ancient Greek had been lost in the course of time and the various

n transitions through which the ation had passed , and therefore a it was necess ry to reconstruct the pronunciation by giving , to

the vowels and consonants the sounds which b e suppose d they

had and had originally , suggested that the ancient Greeks similar sounds to those in the D utch language with a slight

and G a admixture of French erm n sounds .

That Erasmus himself ever adopted the pronunciation re com

in a mended the f mous dialogue seems to be very improbable .

He appears to have used the traditional pronunciation himself,

and v a to ha e t ught it to his students . and he begged his Greek

ri Lascaris f end to find him a Greek as teacher, that the children

“ C on duce ndus ali uis might learn to pronounce properly . q

nat io ne a alio uin e ruditus nat ivum Gr ecus , licet q parum , propter H G REEK 9 T E PRONUNCIATION OF .

i illum at rium sonum ut e a d scantur. ac p , castigat gr eca sonari “ A nd in another letter to Lascaris he says : Meum consilium

ut adscisce re t ur a e rm anam semper fuit, Gr ecus natus unde g ” r ni ronuntiatio ne m g aeci se rm o s p imbibant autores .

u It seems almost incredible that, after s ch strongly expressed opinions in favour of the living pronunciation of Greek , Erasmus should have suddenl y abandoned it for one totally different and a purely artificial, which in a jocul r moment he had propounded a — in his f mous dialogue . If he did for this point is somewhat — uncertain he does not appear to have had an immediate wide

in hi s so - spread influence even own country . In fact, the called

n Erasmia pronunciation seems to be a posthumous child , born f some fi ty years after the death of its reputed father . The gram matical bibliography of the latter half of the sixteenth century shows this clearly, since grammars continued to be published in which the traditional pronunciation was adopted ; w a and these books ere used in the schools of Belgium, Holl nd , and Germany. We may mention among those who continued to use the

G olius 1 5 2 traditional pronunciation Theophilus , who in 7 published his instructions in the Greek language, for the use S of the Gymnasium of trasburg . In the same year (1 572) there issued from the press of

C P An r L exicon Gree cum et institutiones hristopher lantin, twe p , a lin uw Grazece 1 530 N C le nardus i hi g . In icolas publ shed s

I nstitutiones in lin uam Gree cam va g at Lou in .

A f r 1 576 A terwa ds he published , in , at ntwerp , from the press

P A bsolutissim ce i nstitutioncs in lin uam Graecam of lantin , his g . I a n none of these is there any mention of new pronunciation ,

r a but the ules given are according to the tradition l one .

Cle nardus 1 62 5 l This grammar of was in use until , a so in the 10 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

a - schools of Holl nd , as we learn from the time table of the

t he a 1 625 v C H a schools for ye r , appro ed by the ouncil of oll nd

D ie b us a M J v e t a a Lun e , artis, o is Veneris hor IV . Rudiment e

a G rmca C LE N A R D I ne m e doctri na de litteri s grammatic recensita p , acce ntum de clinatio nib us co m aratio nib u notis atque p s.

l 1 626 w v In the fol owing year ( ) ho e er, we find that the Erasmian pronunciation was introduced into the schools of H l a o land by Ger rd Voss , and his book ordered to be used in

: ‘ a V ii Jo . o ss ae e cae the schools Ger rdi lingu rudimenta , quibus decreto o rdinum Hollandiae in usum scho larum ” P ro vinciaa ejusdem .

In this b o ok Voss explains the pronunciation accordi ng to

so - E and l a in the called rasmian , warns the pupi s gainst that

a a a a use , th t is the tr dition l one , and th t they must not pronounce the vowels and diphthongs as they have been

t he accustomed to , or according to general practice . But this system of Voss does not appear to have been

l r s introduced into the schoo s of Belgium , until late at lea t , for there and in many schools of Germany the old pronunciation continued to be used and was taught in the grammar of Jacob

G re t se r U v In oldst adt—R udim enta , professor at the ni ersity of g

’ lingu cc gr ce ca ca:p rim e libr o i nsiitutionum Jacobi Gretseri .

o dii w rk Le . J O u e 1 3 6 . . . 7

Thus we learn that for many years after Erasmus the old

was a a a pronunciation t ught in Belgium , Holl nd , and Germ ny , and a o th t the new pronunciation , introduced by Voss int his

a z H gramm r , was not authori ed to be used in olland until

a a E a . ninety years fter the de th of rasmus , its reputed origin tor

a w v The influence of the Er smian theory ho e er, from the

wa i c t he and nt of proper teachers , . . Greeks for pronunciation , t he a a v w d comp r ti e neglect into hich the stu y of Greek fell , l l THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK . gradually caused the traditional pronunciation to disappear

the ff E from the schools ; and , in di erent countries of urope ,

Greek was pronounced according to the respective sounds of

a a in w was the l ngu ge of the country hich it taught, so that no Greek student of one country understood the Gre ek student

an of another, and a Greek could not understand y one of them .

n da This confusio exists unto the present y, but will, we hope , by degrees disappear as scholars begin to understand more

fully the present state of the Greek language and its literature , a a which is increasing d ily in quantity and qu lity . S ince the end of the sixteenth century until lately, the question of the pronunciation of Greek has remained in

v l e has abeyance . In England ery ittl interest been felt with

respect to it , and therefore we shall be obliged to refer more P especially to Continental writers . rofessor Blackie has for a some years been the champion of the tr ditional pronunciation , A but he has found little response in these islands . . R .

R an ab é t he an g , veter scholar of Greece , published his

a D ie A uss racli e ales Griecli iscli en 1 861 p mphlet, p in , and a 1 888 second edition in . Dr . Engel , of Berlin, published an

1 88 D ie A uss racli e des Gri cli isch 7 e en . interesting volume in , p

These are the principal defendants of the traditional pronun

iati n A c o . There has just appeared at thens a work by Th .

D e m e t rak o oulos p , which we have not yet seen, but which c —” appears from a review in the E ar la to treat this question t very exhaus ively . I 1 869 1 870 P K n and rofessor Blass, of iel , came forward a t as defendant of the Er smian views , and las year a third

a e a n and enl rg d edition of his work appe red . This, comi g

at a time W hen the question of Greek pronunciation is beginning

n has s P to be reco sidered , attracted ome attention . rofessor 1 2 T NC T G HE PRONU IA ION OF REEK .

Z acher also published a pamphlet last year in support of

’ a v P Bl the s me iews . rofessor ass s book is perhaps the most important defence of the Erasmian theory that has appeared i l since the Sixteenth century . He exam nes careful y all the vowel sounds and diphthongs , and with great critical acumen

supports his views from various authors and inscriptions, still for the most part he seems to fail to prove that the

a a Greeks ever pronounced according to the Er smi n system . When the Erasmians change in the pronunciation nearly

has v a all that been recei ed as tr ditional , they must not only endeavour to prove in detail those things which have not been disputed by those who favour the traditional pronuncia tion , and questions which were admitted before the time

E so - of rasmus , but they must prove that the bold called restorations which they introduce , did really exist in the

A s v ancient pronunciation . yet, however, they ha e not succeeded in proving this in any of their writings that have da appeared from the time of Erasmus to the present y . They cannot Show conclusively that the traditional pronuncia

o wn tion is wrong and their theory right, and that for

is the simple reason that the former the true one , handed down from generation to generation and supported by the

Greek grammarians , the immediate descendants of the ancient

and Greeks , thus resting on an historical basis , whilst the most important arguments of the Erasmians are generally

based on mere conjectures, and not on clear and indisputable

av - proofs . They h e only invented a barbarous sounding pro nunciatio n which no such refined and aesthetic nation as the Greek could ever have used . T hat the present pronunciation among the Greeks is in every respect the same as it was in the days of Pericles 1 3 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

the Reuchlinians do not presume to assert, but they admit h i t at possibly the long and short vowels were d stinguished ,

t h 7 v i o r f and that e sounds of 7, , and the d phthong di fered i i . n in some degree from that of They are, however, of opi on that the present pronunciation is identical with that in use

i ni C hi i stian P u a at the beg n ng of the era, and that of l t rch and the Evangelists . In the case of all languages the living traditional pronuncia

is tion accepted as the one to be adopted , and this is what

a t we ask for the Greek langu ge, which more than any o her European language has retained a pronunciation that can h be traced back at least about two t ousand years . The proofs

in ns of this are to be found inscriptions, and in tra criptions

i a and a i in from Greek nto L tin , L tin nto Greek , and the

r remarks of the g ammarians ; these last, however, must be used with caution .

The chi ef controversy between t he Erasmians and R e uch linians turns on the pronunciation of the diphthongs, except o v and , and a few of the vowels consonants . The maj ority of the vowels and consonants are pronounced in the same

n a a e i 0 cu ma ner by both p rties , , , , , (the latter pronounced as o o in r x 7x v 5 7 «» boot) ; y, , , u, , E, p,9 , , 90 l are generally admi tted to have retained their ancient sounds in the modern

is w Greek pronunciation , the same admitted ith respect to

" 8 9 or a vi E a , , , nd by all r smians who have studied the question

ll is scientifica y. The diversity of opinion chiefly confined

’ - 7 v a) at 6L o r av e u vi fl ' to the letters 7, , , , , , , B, é and fl . In consequence of the different pronunciation of the letter

7 It acist s Etacist s 7 the parties were named and . The former

was v ni a term gi en to the Reuchli ns who pronounce the 77 as the Greek iota or the English e in be ; the latter to the 1 4 T HE PR O N U N C IA T l O N O F GREEK .

E a who 7 e h r smians , pronounce the 7 as y in t ey, or as the

T he 7 w v G erman e . sound of 7 ho e er does not indicate the

e ff R i w chi f di erence , as most euchlin ans are illing to concede that in the classical period there m ay have been a slight

7 distinction between the sound of L and 7. The real crux is

wh af the the pronunciation of the diphthongs , ich fects sound

1 of the language much more than that of the single lette r 7.

The German pronunciation of Greek is t he only one which

we al resembles the Erasmian , and therefore shall refer princip ly

win to this in the follo g pages . The English pronunciation is d a mitted not to be the correct one by all scholars, and has no claim to be called Erasmian .

The following arr angement of the letters will show clearly w the divergencies of the t o systems .

‘’ T he a e i x 7x u v o 77 7 ( ) xr letters , , , , , , , , g , , , p, , j , x, i, and the

o u . diphthong , are pronounced alike by both parties The other letters as follows

HL N A N SM I A N E UC I I . E R A . R w B G e rm an and English b win e ig u in e ve r.

2 man and n ish G e m an o r n lish b e fore 6 v 7 G e r E gl g r j E g g , ; b e fore othe r vo we ls a so und b e

w e nd h— rm an n a t e n g a Ge g i t g .

n i h th in he n 8 G e rm an o r E nglish (I E gl s t .

3 z ra g Ge rm an 2 in z e it E nglish in e b .

= E n lish a in da Ge rman i o r n lish e in b e . 17 Ge rm an c g y y , E g

h in hin. 6 G e rm an o r E nglish t E ngli sh t t a Ge rm an soft 3 if initial ; if 3 m dial o r final hard 3 ha d 8 b e fo re 8 soft . e , r 6, y , , p , b G rm an ii or re nch u G e rm an 5 o r n l ish e in e . v e , F , E g

l as o in ho e b ut ve r lit le d iffe e nce a, ong 5 p , y t r 0 b etwe e n it and . G e rman ai in kaise r English

irf n in y i in t o r G e rm an c E ngl ish g da .

5 s c in he a t he sam e a:ai G e r man E ngli h . F 1 5 THE PRONUNCIATION O GREEK .

R A SM IA N E U C HL I N I A N . E . R G erm an cu in heu ; E nglish

0g in b oy G erm an i English e in b e .

Germ an ii Fre nch u Ge rm an i E nglish 6 in b e .

m n au in rau n ish n ish a b ut b e fore m e dials G er a F E gl E gl f ,

w h i ui s and vowe s av. o in o w l q d , l ,

m n ea in heu n ish n ish e b ut e ore m e ia s Ger a ; E gl E gl f b f d l ,

in b o i ui s and vowe s ev. 0g y l q d l , r7v The sam e as e v English i v in eve ning .

One of the principal objections brought forward by the E a -E rasmi ns , or quasi rasmians , who use the pronunciation of their own language for Greek is the frequency of the iota sound

(expressed as our e in be in the traditional Greek pronuncia — h tion t e Iotacism or Itacism . This repetition of the same vowel sound for different vowels or combination of vowels is

m a ua not peculiar to Greek , but ay be found in most l ng ges .

The Greek language, far from exceeding all others in the repetition of the same sound when three vowels and three

has diphthongs are pronounced as iota, been shown to have fewer é sounds than Latin when pronounced by Italians—and a than other langu ges have other predominating vowel sounds .

d D r v u R e an . E angab ngel ha e caref lly counted these sounds , w and furnished us with interesting results , sho ing that the iota sound in the traditional pronunciation is not in excess of some

v other owels in other languages .

i ’ C ice ro s i a Ca i e h ro In F rst Oration ag inst til ne ( . and in P

ne v 31 1 Jil ilo . i 2 8 (ch out of owels are sounds, or 7 per cent .

’ I Sallust s C atiline 470 v 1 39 n the beginning of , of owels are i —2 6 sounds 9 per cent .

’ ’ a B ellum Cicile C . . a 1 In esar s (ch xxi and h lf of xxii . ) 50 v i — 30 3 owels sounds per cent . 1 6 O F THE PRONUNCIATION GREEK .

’ ia i — vi . 44 In Tacitus Germ an (chaps . vi . and ) 7 vowels 1 86 i

— D r s ounds 2 5 per cent . . Engel has counted and found

’

I C r D e Oratore . . . . n ice o s , book i chaps i and ii , vowels — i 8 4 28 r t . 3 i . 88 7 e . sounds p cen ; book ii chap , vowels 2 i —2 2 t 33 6 . . . . sounds per cen ; book iii chaps i and ii , — — vowels 387 i sounds 287 per cent .

’ llum al e . 5 I C ae B G l . . . 76 n sar s , book i chaps i and ii , vowels 2 2 i —2 1 t ii 5 2 3 9 . . . . 0 sounds per cen ; book chaps i and ii ,

—1 i —2 8 er vowels 35 sounds 6 p cent .

P u i E . ven in lautus , who so often employs for , in act i of the

T rinum m us —304 i —25 9 . , vowels sounds per cent The result of these calculations is that out of vowels in

i 2 7 6 . Latin , are sounds , or per cent Such words as the following show the frequency of the i

-inim icitiis 1 n1m 101 ss1m i s didicisti dix isti t ristitiis sound , , , , , divitiis , and very many others . A lso such verses as

D ic mihi ui e ci ni si non sa ie nte r amavi , q d f , p

” i r m fi ui ssi I m N cc t u li n ge a e ri q d po t ad si .

mihi e di P rove niant m e dii sic saep es.

uid ibi vis m uli e ni ris di nissima ba ris Q t , r, g g r

ui fie s s e ie ue m i i can i i Q d , A t r , q t b d d ” i u v Favo nii P rim o re st t e nt ere .

im i i i r uo si m e l ricis vatib us inse ris su s e am vert ce si e a. Q d y , bl f r d

i s inimi ci a ira ti i Sin a e r e ue i . l t , tq t b

From ancient Greek read with the traditional pronunciation

:i c t 7 6L o r U U L we get the following results . . , 7, , , , , pronounced as our 5 in be as follows

A nabasis 1 -8 8 2 —222 X . . 3 enophon , book i . chap i , vowels — é sounds 266 per cent .

18 H F R T E PRONUNCIATION O G EEK . loses its force as soon as it is investigated with a certain amount

a of ccuracy .

’ ’ S 7 7 dk fl l ‘ tbs dlethédé s 7 7 O LGLT uch words as 79 n n ns , 79 V ) ? tés égééés have been cited against the traditional pronunciation

h e v r I n a t es , howe er, happen to be fo ms of the o ic di lect , but do these sound any better with the Erasmian or English pro nunciatio n There are in all languages some not very pleasing

a sounds, but the general euphony of a l nguage is not judged

s by its exception .

There is nothing to lead us to suppose that the Gree k

a u f m v a l ng age dif ered , or differs, fro others in having se er l

r a a signs to epresent the s me sound , and th t very early the

e the one sound of in be , iota sound , was expressed by several

six :i 7 U e t 0 L U L signs as it is at present by the following , 7, , , , , which are all now pronounced in most cases exactly alike . In English the same sound is frequently expressed by several l — i t signs as t he e sound in the fo lowing words (big, bi ch) ;

e ea cc se e ci l n e y (lynx) (be) (beach) ; (bee , ) ; (cei i g) ; g (key) ;

E ub oea ui . i e (field) ; 09 (ZEne as) (BX ) (biscuit)

i ie ieh ‘ ihr In G e rm an the e sound is expressed by , , , in , sie , A

flie he n . w 0. In French the sound of our in mate , ith but very slight a m odifications from the lips of those who try to m ke them , but wholly unnoticed in general reading and conversation , may be

’ —e e 6 ct él est ci ai es ais expressed by the following signs , , , , , , , , , ,

” :0 o 03 ot ots i t Ots ost 0 , , , , , , , , t aient . The sound can be written ai ,

' z auz aut ants and auds o . n aux eau caua, , , , , , a , , ,

These examples are sufficient to Show, that the Greeks are by no means isolated in having several signs to express one sound

the a a a a and that the argument of Er smians g inst the tr ditional

vi a i we l ht l v 7 f t 0 6 , g , pronunciation of , , 7, , , can h ve but l ttle r 1 9 T HE PRONUNCIATION o GREEK .

especially as we know they were pronounced as they are now b e fore t he C hristian e ra.

Objections are also mad e to the har sh sounds in such words

’ - - e ix o xo z z e fk olo s e zio r wro éfst rot os e t as i q and p s , and y Eras mians do not complain of words like dar e i e vouai pronounced in

' - a ast e i-e uom ai E a i -uom i alr e i rai Germ n , nglish st or , German

ait e itai E l i i i o i 6173300 0 7 0 7. vio i he u e uro ste u , ng ish t t ; or 77 , German ii e u E ur5st o wh o e é e i dei q a e ue ide is , nglish hoy y y y ; , Germ n ,

uidis a English . To those who speak Greek the Erasmi n pro nunciatio n of these and such words appears m ost harsh and

a w d unple sant, hereas with the tra itional pronunciation they fl n o w easily and are eupho ious . The Erasmians assert that the ancient Greeks must have originally t ried to represent the sounds of their language by

sa a the letters of their alphabet, and y th t the simple and

“ as a natural rule , Write you spe k , is never transgressed d without some good reason . In other wor s the primitive

e v v alphab t must ha e been phonetic . The Greeks howe er

e P a borrow d their alphabet from the hoenicians , and ad pted it as well as possible to represent the sounds of their own language approximately ; after some considerable time they added a few signs of their own to express some sounds more m a correctly, we y suppose . But neither modern nor ancient alphabets appear to be phonetic but in a very limited sense . Two of the oldest we

C a C an h are know are the ret n and ypri , w ich far from being

n if m pho etic, being phonetic eans having a separate Sign for each separate sound .

C h l e and C n The retan has eig teen tters the yprian only fiftee , and consequently it is most likely that the same Sign frequently

e n repr se ted different sounds . 20 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

C a a d a The yprian lph bet oes not distinguish the tenues , medi e

and has a the five v e as iratae . or p , no spiritus sper Besides ow l sounds a e i o h are a ls t l r n m v z , , , , g , t ere only ten conson nts , , , p , , , , , j , , ,

(c and h a was , yet with t is p ucity of signs it able to express all

- w a a that was necessary . It is a well kno n fact th t ncient

a ha are v an v lp bets generally defecti e , and it is only in ad anced

v z ha a a e stage of ci ili ation t t lph bets are mad more phonetic . A ccordi ng to Pliny and Tacitus the Greek alphabet had

a a w - origin lly only sixteen signs (inste d of the later t enty four) ,

according to A ristotle eighteen we m ay infer th e refore that the

alphabet was very far from being phonetic (and yet with this

meag re orthography th e y gave to the world the P rom etheus

1E sch lus t he A nti one S of y , g of ophocles, and other monuments

of literary labour which have remained unsurpassed . )

kl i . w I a h E u e de s 403 B C . a as n the rc onship of , an ddition

a A a a E o m de to the ttic lph bet . The sigh which had hithert

a served to denote the spiritus sper, was employed to represent

a w h w e a e r. long sound , hich implies a necessity for t is ; lso hich

e e wan d o v had b fore been represented by , and which had both

0 a ad been represented by . These dditions were no doubt m e

v on phonetic principles , and remo ed some of the existing

e w t he d ficiencies , but they ere far from rendering alphabet

a all phonetic , th t is , capable of expressing the sounds in the a l nguage .

a v We may f irly , howe er, suppose that the historical ortho

a graphy, for the most p rt, remained unchanged and in many a t a c ses opposed to strict phonetic laws , notwi hst nding the

introduction of these four new signs . There is in every country a strong conservative tendency to retain historical orthography

has do one generation writes as the former one taught it to ,

and does no t stop to inquire whether the signs still correctly O F 2 1 THE PRONUNCIATION GREEK .

t are ~ express the sounds hey supposed to represent . If gram a A mari ns and etymologists were wanting in ttica, there were h a priests, statesmen , and jurists who would wis to bide by the historical orthography such as they saw in their archives and in in script ions ; in a state where so much reverence was paid

the e a and ai to due p rform nce of religious rites, the m ntenance

i a a of old customs , there would ex st kind of superstitious dre d against changing the time-honoured spelling which their fathers and forefathers had used and handed down to them .

The Greek of the fifth century was a modern lang uage to the people then livin cr and they spelt their words as they saw a had h had former gener tions done . T ey their Homer and H A S h w esiod, their lcman and imonides as t eir classical riters, and a w nk n probably m ny contemporaneous riters now u now ,

th h and which would serve as standards of or ograp y, the few additional letters which had gradually grown into use and 4 av a a a C . supposed to h e been gener lly ccepted bout 03B . would a m h a not m ke uc alter tion .

a v a , a The Erasmi ns, howe er, ssert that the Greek pronunci tion has changed in the course of time many are satisfied with the

“ mere assertion the ancient Greeks could never have spoken

t he s as . they do now But Reuchlinian , or defenders of the

a a a tradition l pronunci tion, do not deny th t the pronunciation m ay have changed from what it was originally ; they wish however to find some definition or approximation of t he limit

e a a a and a e of time . To sp k of origin l pronunci tion nci nt Greeks

“ i and a t he u v . E is ery indefin te, le ds us into nknown st ridiculum e a a hab e m us n h uee re re ae , ad , qu e , i il dicere ; q , qu habe re non possumus ; e t de ho m inum memoria tacere; ” lit t e rar um fla itare memoriam g . T N N T N G HE PRO U CIA IO OF REEK .

We have not sufficient data by which we can decide as to t he a w n v t m a av origin l pronunciation, he e er tha y h e been , nor t o make clear what it was when the Gree ks adopted the P a hoenici n alphabet . For all practical purposes it is sufficient

it we can obtain an approximate idea of what it was in the

fourth and fifth century B . C .

The oldest extant documents are ne w thought to belong to

ni and v B C . the nth century . , it is generally belie ed that the

Greeks adopted the Phoenician alphabet in the ninth centu ry

' l fanual o B . Gr eek Hist ical nscri . or I C . H , if not earlier (v icks f p tions ) . Thus it is possible that by the fifth or fourth the had pronunciation changed , or settled down to some kind of

i a un formity . Of the origin l pronunciation of the language we

a a c nnot know anything definite , and it is a mist ke to speak of

l av the original pronunciation , as if it must necessari y h e been

B t . C . d e ntical with that of the fourth and fif h centuries , an

error into which the defenders of the Erasmian pronunciation

at times seem to fall .

The diphthongs may ha ve been pronounced ori ginally as

diphthongs, but it does not follow that they were thus pro n o unce d l Z a r a in the c assical period ; indeed che , a st unch a Erasmi n, admits that they were fast becoming monophthongs

l was at that time , and that the genera tendency of the language all to change diphthongs into monophthongs , thus implying

was n and that a change goi g on , that the pronunciation became ,

sa B . C . so to y, fixed in the fourth and fifth centuries We need

not therefore trouble ourselve s about the pronunciation anterior

e and to this p riod , but limit our researches to the classical

- a a \Ve ha i post cl ssic l times . s ll examine this in deta l when

we treat of the pronunciation of the l e tters and diffe rent vowel

sounds . THE PRONUNCIATION O F GREEK . 2 3

d A D The Erasmians a mit, that in the second century . . the

pronunciation was t he same as that used by t he Greeks of to

a o f e 7 day, with the exception perh ps the lett r 7. Thus during

v e se enteen centuries, and those most troubl d and disturbed ,

n va and va the cou try in ded ra ged by the Goths, plundered by N a C the orm ns, conquered by the Latins , onstantinople taken

H and by the Turks , destroying the centre of ellenic culture , E scattering its learned men over Western urope, the rule of

the Turks almost crushing out the nationality, the language

a and D retained its vit lity its pronunciation . uring these long and dark ages the language might well have become changed

t he and pronunciation wholly altered by foreign influences, yet

it s a a such is wonderful tenacity and power, th t the pronunci tion

v f a does not seem to ha e suf ered , but rem ins as it was in the

D x A . . second century , and even the admi ture of foreign words

into the written language is very few in number . We have a very curious and interesting memorial of the

4 D h h h at a 8 A . . ye r 7 , w ic shows t at at th time , more than

was as o a years ago, not only the pronunciation the same t d y ,

a a o but that e ven the same gr mmatic l err rs were in use . It is an inscription on a stone slab built into the wall of the little

church of Orchomenos .

' ’ ' r U i 7 0 Havayna Be ar d/cc o ur} 7 6 uo vo y e vfi O O lug 60 791. 7 17

- ' ao v So vh o v A éwvm 9 Baat hum b IIp0 7 w0 7ra9apio v x é 677 7) 7 611

} u /61512 ) as 7 17 i 7t 7 d7 v 7 é/cvv av7 o i) 7 013 o i/cna/cciiv 0 01 7 2 o r 9 9 ¢ 9 9 ,

' - ’ i n vrcdo v K ai 77 770 7 60 9 acryl ic 7 m dvax 7 caaV7 0 9 7 51} abv dry/t wp

’

a A 7 v. v by . u 7 ,

' v 7 = cl 7 = t v = o c 0 : a) and vice i ersd Here we ha e 7 , 7 , , , w U L 6 : at and L 7 v so t xo u , , 7 ; and even the geniti e used i nstead of the dative exactly as it is among the uneducated of

e a the pr sent d y . 2 1 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

If then the pronunciation has re mained practically unchanged

h v w t he throug sixteen or se enteen centuries , during hich country

so vi wh has undergone many cissitudes, y should we suppose it to have changed so i m mensely in the six or seven preceding

is B . C . centuries, that , from the fourth or fifth centuries to the

A D n ai h first or second . . The Erasmia s maint n t at in the fifth

ll as d B C . century . the diphthongs were sti pronounced broa

a t he and A D diphthongs , where s in first second century . . they

is admit they were pronounced as monophthongs . How it

a possible , we naturally ask , that such a gre t change , one that

a a l alters the whole character of the sound of the l ngu ge , shou d

v u six ha e taken place j st in those or seven centuries, when the

r count y enjoyed comparative peace and prosperity, and the language reached its greatest development in the works of its t ? most eminent writers, orators, philosophers , and poe s

v It is possible , as we ha e admitted , that in the centuries

B v preceding the fifth . C . the pronunciation may ha e changed

i z considerably, when the nation was st ll in a rude and uncivili ed

B C . state . But even before the fifth century . the Rhapsodists H H by reciting the works of omer , esiod , and other poets , must

have assiste d to keep the pronu nciation to a great extent

uniform , even in the Greek colonies and settlements far from

the mother country .

How are we to account for the great change between the

A . D . B . C . fifth and fourth centuries and the first or second , which the Erasmians assert to have taken place ? A change

so a great , as to entirely alter its sound and make it ppear

S o a . like another l nguage , and that not a kindred one much

a t h u C . so that Greek of e fourth century B . if he were acc stomed

E s a to ra mian pronunciation, would not have been ble to

a A D . underst nd a Greek of the first century . and could not

26 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

who e a w Romans , r dily used Greek ords to supply the de

ficie ncie s o wn a m of their tongue , especi lly ter s pertaining — to t he arts and sciences so that Horace could write :

rascia ca a e um victore m ce i e t artcs G pt f r p t, ” I r i nt ulit ag e sti Lat o .

a But during this period , even by the dmission of the E I a m a rasmians themselves, t cis was f st establishing itself,

a and thus the tr nscriptions of this time , would be , for them , no trustworthy evidence of the pronunciation of the fourth

h e B C . and fift centuri s . Words were introduced then in different ways as they are no w when taken from one language into 1 t another . . Greek words were introduced without any or ho i a b a graph cal change , e ch Greek letter eing represented as ne rly as n an possible by its correspondi g Latin one , without y atten

to a tion being paid the pronunci tion of the whole word , which may have been simply expressed with a Latin pro nunciat io n as , as we do in the case of such foreign names

Pari l e to s, Ber in , and very many oth rs . It is important notice that though the Latins may have transcribed Greek words

v the wo rds f letter for letter, they may ha e pronounced dif erently

’ ’ ’ ’ A 97 vai e m cx m a from the Greeks . Thus because 7 and n were transcribed in Latin as A thenae and ecclesia ; and census and

k 76 17 0 0 o fc 7 7 w Lucretius were written in Gree as 7 9 and p 7 9, it does not follow that 77 e in Latin ; if it does necessarily

a 7 was 5 follow th t 7 pronounced like Latin , then the Latin

’ words transcribed Fidias and Piraeus for ( De i bi c wand He i pai e v9

v 66 i all prove conclusi ely that the Greek Latin , which

Erasmians are not willing to admit . 5 a But 77 is not only used to transcribe the Latin , it lso

a l n P t kes the p ace of the Lati i . olybius in the second century 2 7 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK.

- ' lwn [co y for S P Il aX nM a C . B . writes E y cipio, and lutarch writes

P l and Z e o m c ; S e rvilius. , for a ilia, p i for These examples though they do not afford us any correct clue to the manner in which the Latins pronounced the words , yet indicate that

6 72 a 77 had a sound which fluctuated between and in L tin, with perhaps a greater resemblance to the latter .

S a was econdly, some ch nge made in the spelling of the word to represent more clearly the Greek pronunciation ; these may assist us considerably in judging of the reciprocal vowel sounds of the two languages . Examples of such changes

’ l e atvu a occur in O Z/co vopo g Oeconomus ; o oestrus ; yp ,

aenigma , and numerous other words .

Perhaps we m ay consider the transcription of e n by 73in

the Latin a more radical change, as representing Greek

’ ’’ e i wve ca e cx wv diphthong by a single vowel, as in p , ironia ; , ’ l e i8coxo v idO urn . icon ; ,

e v Th se transcriptions , though they may not give a positi e (or absolute) clue to the ancient Greek pronunciation in con a sequence of our ignorance of the Latin pronunci tion , yet t hey give us indirect evidence through the traditional Italian h t pronunciation, and in t ose sounds of Latin vowels abou

' i difle rence f which there exists l ttle of opinion , they a ford

v e the 72 h positi e evid nce , as in the case of Latin sound of w ich

in Italian and all Latin languages is pronounced as our 3 in

ea se e e r was b e or in . This would prove that the Greek

at v a 73 pronounced , a ery early d te , like the Latin and in

a n ow Al the same m nner as the Greeks pronounce it . though

these transcriptions cannot be used as examples of t he pro

nunciat ion h and B C of the fourt fifth centuries . . , since few

t he h B C . t of them go as far back as third century . , vet ey

prove that this pronunciation existed at that time . 2 8 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

I is o a w t difficult to supp se th t , bet een the time of the

a and as earliest of these tr nscriptions the cl sical period , so great an alte ration can have taken place in the pronunciation

e r a a 73 wine as of as to ch nge its sound from th t of our in , b E s 6 e . the rasmian pronounce it, to that of our in

A s an example of the at sound we m ay suppose such a word

’ as K aLO ' a wh and a w p, ich was used by Greeks L tins , ould be

e the pronounced alike by both , and cons quently of the Latins , which is no w generally admitted to have been something like

a in da w a our y y, ould f irly represent the Greek sound . The similarity of the sound of this word in the mouths of both

Greeks and Latins would be further increased if we suppose

a x a k th t the present Greek sound of before , as j was then in

hi a 1c v a c existence , for t s p latal is ery simil r in sound to that of

ia a I c . in tal n , which prob bly is the traditional sound of in Latin

T hough the transcriptions m ay not enable us to decide absolutely with respect to t he Greek pronunciation of the

a a w classic l period , they certainly indic te ith considerable

a a precision , th t the present pronunci tion of Greek does not

a at C a e ra differ much from th t the beginning of the hristi n ,

u r e and probably for a cent ry or two befo e this p riod .

a w a The mist kes we find in inscriptions, hen sound has been

a a v a represented phonetic lly, inste d of by the recei ed orthogr phy , may frequently assist us in j udging of the sounds represented

v a by the letters , which ha e been repl ced by others through

a a t h ignor nce or c relessness of e writer . Inscrip tions on stone or bronz e are naturally done more slowly than writing on

a in v a p pyrus , and would be general engra en from copy , which in t he case of public inscriptions would be written out first by

some public functionary ; but still sometimes , through the want 29 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

a t a av of tten ion on the p rt of the engr er or stonemason , we find

a a orthographic l mist kes in the inscriptions , and these errors ,

h t a curiously enoug , of en give us a cle rer insight into the pronunciation than the correct writing . Such assistance as would be given to a foreigner in the case of English words like

“ ” ” u h h saw lou h and eno e . p g g , if them written plow and enuf

h an a When , t erefore , we find on inscription twenty ex mples of

’ - ’ N avwa/cn wv and N aF'n afcu wv written correctly, one written ,

a a h we infer th t the stonemason, in moment of t oughtlessness, cut the letter F to represent the sound he usually employed in pronouncing the word ; anoth e r illustration of the same sound

" ’ — o e zide ro C h - a is E Fde r q for q upon a orint ian terra cott tablet .

av a p ci h o un d 0 57 6 am} a We h e lso for , and for , the l tter two

a v o r showing clearly the simil rity of sound expressed by and .

Such orthographical mistakes are found in sufficient number to

a Ma a enable us to dr w conclusions . ny of these mist kes do not

a a appear to rise from carelessness , but from ignor nce of the

D r t he received spelling . . Engel says that conclusion to be

w a a v dra n from inscriptions is, th t, bo e all doubt, there is no

a peculi rity of the modern Greek pronunciation of the vowels, which cannot be traced back at least as far as the fourth

B C . century . in one or more of the dialects of ancient Greece ; l whi st, on the other hand , there are no inscriptions which a support the Erasmi n pronunciation .

co nso nnificat ion e and 1. 6 c u L e a 7 The of the sounds ( , , , , 7)

a v a before owel is frequent in ncient Greek , and very common D a in modern emotic poetry and in the langu ge of the people . This feature does not appear to have been sufficiently noticed

a a o ns nnifi either by Er smi ns or Reuchlinians . By c o catio n of

e r e 6 the and sounds, is meant that the or sound is pronounced T HE 30 PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

E o like the nglish y, or German j, bef re the vowel which follows h and in . F t n it , to w ich it is joined pronunciation or ins a ce ,

' h w as wak aré ci via ve o e suc ords e , p , , are not pronounced

— ’ - ’- wa-Kar-d a -vi a ve -o waX - o d v é v 69 q, p , g , but y q , p y , y in ordi nary conversation and reading by the mass of the people . This is generally indicated in D emotic poetry by a curved line under

’ v w d m a 8rd the two o els , j oining them together as p in the

r t ci common language is frequently written y , a corruption of t h- a v y ; the iota is often ery slightly heard , and the word “ a sounds something like the German j . C onsonnificatio n i s known to h ave been very common among

R s e a the oman , and it xercised great influence on the form tion i of words in the Romance languages . From Q uint lian we

“ “ ” at R a and learn , th the om n i j had originally the same a sound , and for a long time uncert inty existed as to the use

a of these two letters . Brachet tells us, this is why the L tin “ i ” in some cases has become “ j 3) in French (or “ g ” soft

Hierosol m a sim ia dinrnus cin which is the same thing) . g , , , de mia v Jerusalem sin e our i 'enda e , ha e passed into , g , j , g , proving clearly that the popular pronunciation of these words was

“ ” im a ( nrnus vindem a crosol ma s . l g/ , j , Zj , j This change of the i

“ ” into the soft sibilant j of the French brings t wo consonants

P IPI O N E M together, and into a sort of collision , becoming

i n m p pj o e . In such cases the first of the two consonants dis

a SU BJE C T U S s et ’ D O RS UM d03 a appe rs ; becomes nj , , ; and simil rly & i n m tib a wed es &c. P IJ O N E M T I A R AJES c o c J . p pj , j , g , , become , , , ,

e a i eon ti e r a a &c — F rench wh nce gain come p g , g , g , . (Brachet,

r am m ar G . )

“ I the m P t is also found in Ger an pronunciation of hysiologie ,

” “ e e a Ph s olo ie in g n r lly sounded y j g , and all words where an i

o m f 0 c es be ore an . 31 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

The principle of con sonnification affords most important assistance in explaining many peculiarities of orthography found

G o rt nian and . O in inscriptions, difficulties of metre n the y

’ ’ ion/T L éwvn xwk iwvn mk e wvn inscription we find for , [ for p , which orthographical diffe rence is easil y explained by admitting the consonnificat io n of the z and e ; the same is also found in

‘ “ ” e the transcription of Key eciwe q for legion s . It is this same phonetic peculiarity of the e and i sounds whi ch appears in the warnings of the Latin grammarians against writing i for e before a vowel wh e re consonnification assimilates

a b ratt ia a e . the sounds of the two letters, g . br ttea non , vine ” — a h L ate inische Ortho ra hic non vinia . (Bramb c , g p , p .

' O D e ff ak e i e i s‘ ax e is n lphic inscriptions the di erent forms X , x n ,

' ak e ei are hi X s found indiscriminately, w ch by the principle of ” u a —i co nsonnification would al l be prono nced as C h l y s.

i v a» e o e . r r . The simplification of , , before a follow ng owel , g

’ T e k e t a ‘ r ék e o do dk e t a do dk e a i h s, q ; , is better expla ned by t is principle than by supposing that t he e r lost its 6 sound and

’ ’ ’ became pure e ; 6581 11 for éhv ; e vve ia for e uve a; would come under the same rule .

’ A A i eci a 446 B . C . v r i I A On an ttic inscription of we find (C . 234 ' - A 425 B . A i e Lci rai C t C y I . ) and on ano her of . ( here again the variance m ay be explained by reading e r and e as consonant y.

The co nso nni ficat ion of the e and L sounds tends to remove many metrical difficulties which have been unsatisfactorily

” “ n r i & s ze e s s a c. I explained by the terms y , cr sis, n fact Homer can only be properly read metrically with the traditional a a pronunci tion ; at the s me time, it must be remembered that Homer was in ancient times always recited or intoned with a

a a v wa music l c dence, and quantities frequently have to gi e y to 32 T T G K HE PRONUNCIA ION OF REE .

a the music . The inton tion of the Greek pri ests in reciting the

a e a S h pr yers and r ding the criptures in their churc es, and the

a w M a a K a m nner in hich ussulm ns re d the or n in the mosques , m ay to some extent indicate the way in which Homer was

add a v recited , but to which we must the me sures of the erse to

wa A s which everything else had to give y . instances of lines

ffi a a v which present di culties of metric l reading , e sily remo ed by the co nso nnificat io n m a principle of , we y cite

' ’ -‘ - 1 5 vae t ivil o x m r o fe at Rio 0 67 0 ri / a H. c w t T i . , xp p n pg g

T ' “ vae c a a here xp p must be re d as a dissyllable , and is usu lly

’ a e o f a explained by s ying that g su fers syn eresis , but which is

chr s- d really due to its being pronounced y y .

’ ’ ’ I 1 2 w e I . 5 Se vd e e d e o r 5 d X e i t de o a . d ie c v 7r v iai . iii , p fi é y p

dendr - d Where 8€v8pépc must be read y .

l w e a 7 Other lines seem to present greater difficu ty, hen an or 7 has to be elided or contracted with the following vowel to suit

are as al the metre , but which e y enough and more rhythmic

7 C n when the 7 is read as our g . ases of this kind are fou d not

nl in o y in Homer , but also the classical poets ; from Homer we may cite

” ’ ’' ' iv 2 a l a x a a d. m 0 . 35 o v e 7re t o ii a bw cs e r e e o cr E 8 , o g p g n c /4 m

’ h e e t o f} e - o n W ere w must be pronounced p g .

’ ’ ' ' f d 682 H e iwé e ai B w o w 0 3v0 o 0 de co w. 0 . . v iv , n p fi 7 9

’ ‘ i m enai H sin e/re vert must be pronounced ye pe . A nd from Sophocles

3x ak di ‘ a /621 A nti 9 7 0 0 0 } 13881 (50 7 6 0 1 e r 1 . . . 7 0 57 1 0 1 g l , w) s

34 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK . be supposed that it would have been introduced into the

h 1. and alphabet t en , if it had been pronounced exactly like long

r could have been epresented by L , nor if it had been pronounced

6 h just like long , for t en it could still have been represented

e as had 7 by , it been till that time . From this it follows that 7 was Z not exactly similar in sound either to E or .

Blass is of opinion that the educated classes pronounced it ha k 6 A D . d li e till the fourth century if this been the case , we should find at least a few instances of its being interchanged either with e or with cu (which is allowed to have been pro n unce A D o d 6 t . . like from the first cen ury onwards) , but such an

no t A interchange is once found on ttic inscriptions , it is only

o 7 at found in B eotia, where 7 was always written for .

its a c Of e rly tendency to become , or rather of the close resemblance between the sounds which were later represented

7 6 v by 7 and respectively , we seem to ha e instances in the

’ ’ ’ a 7 1m ) ix w £7 7 630 e m oxo 7 67 m p rallel forms 3 and , 5, q and B q , m e A and m im e which we find in H mer . In ttic Greek the

’ d a r o ci LCL L‘HS 7 4 Z i Kdr vo collateral forms y fn q and / E Q , 55 9 and f c, yn q

’ X do vvo ‘ r awr and / s, and q show the same resemblance

7 between 7 and L .

Line 7 from the Batraehonn/om achin

‘ ’ ’ f r f ' I nye ve wv 81 v e urg e d/4.61 mi épya ye d v

may also be cited . The inscriptions supply us with some valuable examples of

L 7 the interchange of and 7.

o I n er r an N 2 s t . 6 In R hl ( . g . o . ) we find

c I t I ' 1 7 a 7 f0 1 L x a 7 77r7ro xp 7 79 7r7ro p r 79.

1 his and se ve a o he inscri io ns which have inser e in the e x T r l t r pt , I t d t t, i w r k n iv n m b D r n e o f Be r n . e e i dly g e e y . E g l l THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK . 35

I nger r er ud N 2 4 . 6 C hi Ross ( g . . o . ) gives a arpat an inscription

' ’ B w i i ai w a ai w . C . v of uncertain date in h ch p st nds for fip v.

A n A L e Bas I nser inscription from ndros (see . v . which

C r has dates from before the h istian era ,

- - - a a a 7 W g Lg pe x29 for v c 79 ciper fie.

t The most interes ing examples , however, are to be found in

Gort n ian i i the y nscr ption, which is ascribed to the fifth century

’ a azon c ark at 4 B . C . m w d . , and where stands for fi xi (ed .

’ ’ - ’ ai e oM ix m oM o m aat 2 8. a . e . Bann ck Bros ) and p for a j , T hen turning to inscriptions of the C hristian era we find in

' Fr hn nser ec da Louvre i o i o e r I . r . . nré e e o ( g , p p, x q for xfiq ,

’ ’ and drak r tpco v for NP‘CLX ’TflpLO U on an inscription of the second - ’ ’ a i e zz D . nd si e 7r e m 1 A A . n n 3 3 . D century , p s for p 79 on one of .

(cf. p .

' ~ f S K oum anoude s A r ruca2 ém a ai. teph . records in his yp cp

é 1 2 if r wer fi o o 6 . afit (pp . 7 ) the va ious forms

’ ’ ' ’ ’ H t a3t H7\e Za H 0 7n c13n H7r 7 M . 7p 9, p 9, and , 7 9

t of Bas 243 a O . n an inscription from Gy heion ( Le , , ) of circa 1 5 A ara i w 87 vci t a Sw . 6 D . p is tw ce ritten for 7 p - I N att ch e ; x d i t o emetic o s n the ew Testament , also, a for nfl g , m

’ - - ’ ’ - ’ ’ ’ - e k effe rwe e veo co e fvwv o w h for , v for g n , t ough no doubt errors

in li 7 L . spel ng , show the prevalence of the confusion of 7 and

A 7 e r e gain, that 7 and wer very similar in sound , is rendered highly probable by the fact that they were each held to be the

a ve e n a represent ti of a long , and that they were i terchange ble - d even within the limits of the same ialect . Thus we have

‘ ‘ x i i/0 x e ivo [ch ef xX 103 7 6 x k e e rds. A s v i 9 for g , s or fiq , 7 9 or e en the

e i Erasmians now admit that e r. from the end of the th rd

B C h n 7 a h century . . , t is i terchange of 7 and shows that the t ree ml 7 e r L . sounds 7, , and were very closely, if not exactly, si i ar

0 2 36 U THE PRON NCIATION OF GREEK .

The most interestin g of the inscriptional proofs that we have

i t a 7 of this n erch nge of 7 and e r. is that of the old Sigean inscrip

’ I 8 ' ' 0 . G w é tion ( . . No . ) on which e find m ie we v for e m ino e u

7 v w although 7 is used as a o el elsewhere in the inscription . - I nsor r i n cZ 2 4 i . . e 6 x ai In Ross ( g . iii . ) i re occurs for e r on an

t i B C inscrip ion belong ng to the first century . .

A s 7 e r further examples of the interchange of 7 and in the ,

’ ’ ’ ’ a A tt ic e e n de c e n de c same di lect , we may mention the imperf ct c, .

h v M a w ich , as Gusta eyer says in his Greek Gr mmar (first

3 4 a a ff . 7 7 edition pp , ) seems to be only orthogr phic lly di erent

£ 7 v indi w r 7 59 . e e r f om 7. E en in the pres . we find e

n t d t h S e . o i s ea of as termination of the second pers . sing

P hil 2 : A n 4 3:S E lec 9 r ide r S . t 0 . S . . 9 fl in oph , s oph , oph , 5 f 96 e w. ,

The subjuncti ve in is also written -€ L on inscriptions of the

A 4 1 0 w a th B C . . 9 w de i four century . , , , here p x occurs for

n I A 1 24 w wa ao x e vao fie i a a d C . w d . . 6 p x fi, , , here p occurs for

«7 877 oth e r example s of this can be easily found on inscriptions

the a d of s me perio .

he in C I A 4 3 38 we av dvar e d x or wv 292 . 0 Furt r . . . ii , h e n (

’ 4 0 1 and 80 duar e de rx aaw w in I A . 7 7 C . . hilst . ii , is w ritten .

B C . 7 1 1} On an inscription of t he first century . we have 7 - ’ w e o i av w e a e cav and a 266 B . C . se e p Bj for p B , on nother one of (

' ' f A 332 a a9 T ii e i T fi 7 62 7 . 0 . I . . . ii ) y 77 x for xy , and for 77

e A . D . A fte r the first century , the examples of this int rchange t t are frequent ; for ins ance , the inscription on the monumen to

' ' A am e avade i ve t o v t he wife of Herodes tticus has n; (for n) , (for - ' m ci rpe ie q (for ctr /35769) and 71 771) (for W V) ; it date s fro the

hn r N A a an Fro e . e A . D . second c ntury ( , o g in , on inscription

N . 47 from Olbia of the time of Tiberius (Latyshev, o ) we read R N N C IA T I LT 37 THE P O U O OF GREEK .

' ' ’ ' w7t 7 o va ‘ 7r7t e i o va e 7rt r ci87 0 v 7 a9 7 s (for 9) , 7 (for xp 7 (for

' ’ d a w o xpe eaq) and do aafiwr o v (for o ae c r v) .

a 7 1. e r A s other arguments for the simil rity of 7 to and , we

C rat las may adduce two etymologies from the g , the first being

' ' w h A 7 10 7 7 SLS u, r t at of 7/ 7 7p from / and afi np, the second that of " ’ a all l e i e w. p 9 from p They are obviously f lse , but the p ausi b ility they have is derived from the resemblance in sound

87 Sr 7 GL between 7 and , 7p and p

i t h P aw 92 5 s S o A r s o . in p , , the point of the pun depend on the ” d a a 1 28 a o t an . 9 resembl nce in sound between B and g in , ,

" ' ' zz 7 a between i nand 7vt .

ai /l s 41 8 C P a a 0 5 év a aedr ar m i é av 7 7 11 In C r g i b . l to s ys a px a p 7

’ ’ / e av e x dk o vv o i 8é e e ar} 0 5 Se vfiv é av a fin p , y p , fia p ; this rem rk seems to indicate that there was a slight difference between

’ i é a e a h wh it was a a p and fin p , thoug ether in quality or qu ntity we cannot tell .

7 wa E l In Latin 7 is nearly al ys transcribed by , consequent y

E 7 6 E the rasmians say , 7 was pronounced like , that is like nglish

“ “ ” a a a ha l e x vao ‘ y in day . Bl ss s ys t t transliterations ik fi s

o /c r t o e a a f for census, pfi q , Ath n e , ecclesi are su ficient proof

7 ro nounce d . lik e 5 A t that 7 was p . first sight this statement m a e and y seem p rfectly correct credible , but on closer examina

we a a tion , sh ll find re son to take some exception to it .

v a a h Firstly, we have spoken abo e of the f ct, th t t ough a word m ay be transcribed from one language into another without any

t a change in the spelling, it does not necessarily follow h t it is

th an f P e o . F pronounced alike in two l guages, aris in the rench

E Y a and and nglish pronunciation , acht in the Germ n ,

a e 7 English . The Romans would naturally tr nscribe the Gre k 7 5 by their corresponding letter , even if the sounds of the two letters were not exactly similar ; hence it is not a necessary 38 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

“ ’ ’ a A a A 97 va7 10 11 0 0 consequence th t then e and 7 , 7 9 and census ,

should have been pron ounced exactly alike because they are t wri ten alike .

S 7 was econdly, 7 used not only to transcribe Latin but also

i e t io S e rvilius Latin . Thus in Plutarch we find E po wfi q for

Ha>t 7 7t t a P l P was 7 for a ilia ; olybius, who a personal friend of

’ ’ S as EK TN wv S Pl cipio s , always writes his name fl , trabo and utarch

l 7 do ikewise . From this it would seem that 7 was an inter

d (2 i mediate soun between Latin and .

6 . Thirdly , the pronunciation of Latin is itself uncertain

I e i t often represented an and , on the other hand , tended to ” become i , and therefore very probably closely resembled it in

“ ” “ ” “ ” sound :thus we have tristes from t rist e is ; Ve rgilius “ ” Vir ilius a P so . A written g and on g in , the grammarian robus 6 a h A .D . t e ( . second century ) warns ag inst wrong spellings

“ ” im a e de mi dius dim idius sinatus emago (for g ) , (for ) ; (for

S S re co m senatus) and erena (for irena) . Other grammarians

m filix end the spelling (for felix) .

The strongest argument, however , that the Erasmians adduce

“ ” 7 a 7 to prove that 7 was pronounced like y in day , is the B7,

B77 which C ratinus uses to represent the bleating of a sheep in

the we ll a k nown line

’ ' - ’ 7 ' 7 7 a ad/ c 6 8 7u9t o 650 7 7r 6 aro v Ke w e . 7 c, e p B , B7 B7 g/ B é

“ “ the sheep, they say, cry bay, bay and not bee , bee . The

first objection we make to this argument is that C ratinus hi e e e e ee t he 7 mself in all probability wrote B , B or B , B as 7 was not l l used as a long vowe in the Attic a phabet in his time ,

and thus the 77 was introduced in the place of e by the careless

v copiers of a later age , whereas it ought not, perhaps , to ha e a been ch nged . 39 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

O a l C ratinus n the other hand , it is just prob b e that may

have used the Ionic alphabet which already possessed 77 as a

7 7 long vowel , and have written B7, B7 in this case he may have

7 i i v chosen 7, wh ch from all ev dence seems to ha e been an inter

e i e mediate sound between and L, as be ng the best adapt d to

i ul - express an indefin te , inartic ate animal cry .

“ 3 F l 7 ina ly, even if 7 was a distinct e sound , we may

“ “ remark that this same 5 sound is found in our verb to ” bleat .

The grammarian Sextus says that the shortened form of

77 is e and the lengthened form of e is 77 here he is probably

re ferring to the fact that etymologicall y 77 often represents the

e e . . lengthening of as g in the augments of verbs , and contrae

’ - ’ ' ’' ’ e wr di 7 c6'r7 0 a e f e i w 7 f e t a r e r e e tions as p , 7p 7 , y p , 7y p , and x ,

can He hardly be referring to the pronunciation of the letters,

D w l A . . as he did not live ti l the third century , hen there is hardly any doubt that 77 was generally pronounced like iota .

7 6 S That 7, when shortened, often becomes , as extus says, can

and . we be shown both from ancient modern Greek , thus have

’ e ci I avade a c wcid aa f p q , onic for a for m , and in modern

’ de lo a e ra a d e a Greek , p y for B p / for d ny , gb p a for

955mm

is t if t In modern Greek , too, it of en d ficul to tell whether the 77 in an unaccented syllable partakes more of the e or L

’ m t o v sound , for instance , when the word 7p is pronounced by

r sa 7 a Greek , it is ve y hard to y whether the 7 sounds more like 6 or L . a This is, however , partly due to the f ct that it is immediately h followed by an accented syllable, on whic the stress of t he so 7 so voice is laid, that the 7 sound is not clearly

e distinguish d . 40 T N N T G HE PRO U CIA ION OF REEK .

F all v w 7 the rom this collected e idence it ould seem that 7, in h t B . C . u e i four century , was an intermediate so nd between and ,

I. e now pronounced just like or English in be .

“ ” “ N t 6 ow pronounced jus like or English e in be .

In very early times it would seem that v was pronounced

like o u (German u or English but as e arly as t he fifth

B . C m . L v we century we find written instead of , fro which may

assume that gradually the sound of u had come to be some thing

o u L ii F between that of and , perhaps like the German or rench

1, a va 11 . The sound ppears to have pre iled more and more until

C h e ra at the beginning of the ristian , if not sooner , there was

ff v e no perceptible di erence between and . We might conclude ,

v therefore , that the pronunciation of passed , as it were , through

r a :0 0 ii e e —we a th ee st ges , , find the s me three gradations in

funf in H fiinf G . O . S German , , now , which in outh Germany

finf is pronounced .

We find instances of the interchange of v and 6 at an early

v A no t period e en in ttic . This interchange was general but

’

e . t M o v only occurred in a few words , g . in B B (a foreign word)

’ '’ i u an in 7 v s M o v d acr CI A . which also written B B , 77 which in . ii ,

3 8 B and A 45 7 .C . 1 7 . , , an inscription of on all later ones is

w t/av ritten fia ; beyond these words, it occurs in proper names

’ ' M o vvv t wv M o vvt cwv of obscure meaning , thus we have x and x ,

’ A a uc7 150 ve , ¢ e and

I v L n some cases and were interchanged in the same word , such interchange m ay perhaps be due to assimilation and there

m ay have been variation in pronunciation as well as in writing ; for

’ ' v t a a x M vn x a s v . ex mple , we ha e wri ings such nm and n n

42 T NC T G HE PRONU IA ION OF REEK .

“ y , v r 0 0 time by thus we ha e mus f om sus from 7 , cuprum m i ’ vr o v, r he r llum é vrvk k o v from p and onyx f om py from p , C K a- yprus for n p09 . We cannot conclude much from the former of

an a a these tr sliter tions , as we do not know wh t the exac t pronunciation of the Latin 71 was ; but that it was not the

v l exact equivalent for the Greek , we learn from Q uinti ian

x ii. 1 0, 2 7 a : ( ) who , speaking of the Latin language , s ys “ Iu undissim c as ex Grae cis lit t e ras non hab e m us ( U e t qt) ” nullaa l r a quibus apud eos du cins spi nt .

In the modern language there is no difference between the

w 0 t sounds of and , they are both pronounced alike , somewha

’ 0 as the English in core .

The Greeks themselves and all Reuchlinians are agreed in

t a h was thinking , hat in the classic l period t ere more distinction between them ; and the most palpable proof of this is that, if a co (0 and had been pronounced alike , would not have been

i l 4 B C . introduced nto the a phabet in 03 . ; but whether the

i l is d stinction was only one of quantity or also one of qua ity , it

e sa impossibl to y .

0 Its early tendency to become , especially in unaccented

u syllables, seems to be shown by the accentuation of s ch words as o véx e w wéx e w -e w -e wv p p q , fi p g and of the genitives in 9 and , e wék e w v d e wv . g. , e, a .

O e . . E utside Greece proper, g , in gypt, the greatest confusion prevailed in the usage of o and w as early as the third and

B C P aa second centuries . . ; thus on papyri of the tolem e n period

' - l as z cb ci rae e i wv we find such spe lings p , a f , THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK. 48

d‘ &c o w l e fio wo w . p p s, This interchange of and is a so found

e on Greek inscriptions, but not v ry frequently on those of the best time .

‘ ’ at e e is now pronounced like or English g in they . The Erasmians maintain that it was pronounced as a diphthong till

30 B C . . , if not later, because Dionysius of Halicarnassus finds

’ ' ’ ‘ w in i hr zcai. A 97 vai v fault w th the p ase 7 Thucydides because ,

“ ” a 1. a as he s ys , the sounds of the and do not blend . But

a ? at n what does that me n If be pronounced as a diphtho g ,

’ ’ whyshould the a of A ¢977varco v not sound well after the z of

‘ feat be x ai ? h the , which pronounced as a diphthong would T ere ” - I a/e o ia r d a. e . . g e 6 are many words, g , x , p , in which follows without producin g a disagreeable effect . The objection seems to be meaningless and unworthy of any serious consideration ; Dionysius did not even know how Thucydides pronounced the

- words , and yet he tries to correct him .

‘ S ns at econdly, some grammaria , in order to distinguish from ’ - ’ 7 at 877590 0 9 7 é o vo a 7 5 l, e x vo zf evo v a, call the former 7 7 7 7 7 X t a and this definition does not seem applicable to at pronounced

e r n like . These g ammarians may, however, o ly have been

i to t at L referr ng the fact tha in the was sometimes pronounced , i e . l r at . , in those cases where we shou d w ite it , whereas in a

was it never pronounced .

O r a s at ther g ammarians, gain , di tinctly state that was not

at. F a pronounced or inst nce, the illustrious grammarian , a Herodian , who lived in the e rlier half of the second century ,

A . D e at . draws a distinction between words spelt with and ,

/ ' e . . W sBat K e r/6 7ra28e x awd g , between , 9 and s, q by saying that 44 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

wr the itten as, 7 0 6 e « X o fi the 7a former should be t , latter 8

7 7 at 8t 06 0 v v 79 ¢ 7 7 , which pro es that in his time the educated

A e at Greeks of lexandria and Rome pronounced and alike .

' S E m iricus at 506 0 o vo e t 87 extus p , too, calls a 9 7 7 9 a 7e and a

' O T O LX GZO V. In the language itself the numerous collateral forms of

at e a words spelt with either or , fford strong proof of the

early resemblance between t he sounds at and e ; such forms

’ ’ ’ aio3a P e aS a S t ai va e va are p ( lato) , and p , ( ophocles), q f and gb f,

' ’ ’ ’ ’ aZoMt w e cxw avar at o v civay e o v and , y and y , and the derivatives, - v é r a o r e cé e r o and h the r uia e c c . y yp p e, y p p e ot ers from word y This interchange of at and e is also found on A ttic and other in

scriptions ; thus on nearly all the A ttic inscriptions of t he

’ B C Ho n Se cir at fifth and fourth centuries . . we find the form

244 an e 4 B C . . C . 36 . e .g . (in . I . A . i ) on inscription of . (cf also

A 240 241 z C . . . . I i , , but on the bron e stand of the gold

tripod which t he Greeks dedicated at D elphi in the year 475

ta at Ho r t da r . B C . . the form is used F urther, we find for on two

4 0 B C . A . C . . . 6 373 B . C . . I inscriptions, one of , the other of (v

’ ’ f) a n A 7ucae wm 80 v 433 i . . . and i p and ag i , on one of the

r A B . C . . C . . earlier half of the fourth centu y (cf I .

A i k e am e occurs for A nk at am e on two inscriptions of the 2 2 f A . . 9 A n o C . . B . C . . fifth century ( I , i and inscription

' B . C . IC é/C U W T G Sae from Megara of the third century has p , f s and

' ’ ' u a 1 051 a 6 m / . G C . v ce x e x wr r e 5 t e . I . p p q for p , 5 ; and p p (v , , d 24 i ne . nscr r . 6 Ross (I . g . iii ) gives an inscription of

‘

C x i re e r ar. B . the first century . on which r occurs for

I n the Septuagint the Hebrew e is regularly transcribed

’ A ixa B ai d x . h at e . . E by t e Greek , g , n for Bethel , a for lam

C e ra the On the inscriptions of the hristian , examples of this 4 5 T HE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

ar t a ave interchange e much more frequent ; for ins nce , we h

' Frohn e r 2 9 w o dv éo v o v aco v 2 1 1 A D . v . p p e for wp d p e on one of ( , )

‘ La h v f 2 1 A D . v w o . and A nvéwvo q for A nvai vo s on another 0 ( tys e ,

’ I nger 7 a e t nt P e nt E uca N . or e s e . . . g . p , o

Further e vidence against t he broad pronunciation of at is

v A a i a gi en us by ristoph nes , in the follow ng pass ge from the

C louds 11 8 0 ff , 7 , .

' ' « PHID e l x e at o e . . p a y

’ ' ’ S O C R i) x ae Ci) 7 7n deo u éc de f ar o . 580 é p a , ? 7 fi yf

'

a T o ia e fit e aw St e v /co aw. K i, e x pp n

Only the Erasmian pronunciation of at as German ai suits

this description . ‘’ ae the r al67 I n Latin at was a ae e . . tr nscribed by , g , from 7p,

- aeni ma dwa a m usac o de ac were Fat g from ya , from n , from , and

as the pronunciat ion of Latin ae is now almost universally

‘ ’ admitted to have been like the German (313or English ay in ‘ ’ w w m h a day, it ould follo fro t is transcription th t the Greek

‘ ’ ‘ ’ at was a da a also pronounced like our y in y, th t is like the

e e P a ae e at Gre k . lutarch tr nscribes both Latin and by , for

‘ ’ a w awéo r a C ae cilius K al le /M o fenestr he rites ¢ p , for , e, but

’ a K n/M a as at /C lt l a S o D e K l . lso well as too, ionysius of

- a a 3 H eve o r l o e Pra n ini H . 0 v e e st licarn ssus (fl writes p for ,

w S a and H awe ar lvo e : in hereas , tr bo others write p and on

scriptions and coins of the time of the Caesars e is often put

’ '

a e . n A D . t . o N 69 . . H o 7r7re o e for , g , a coin of ero s of , is writt n - Ho w alt z w for w . These examples sho that there was apparently

no difference in pronunciation between the Latin ae and the

Greek at and e .

The acce ntuation of words end i ng in -o u and the treatment

of at in prosody also argue against the broad pronunciation = ai as ai . ai n of it German For, if , how can the acce tua 46 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

’ ’ x alvv ai e m o r d evat Kuaao é at S m c tion of words like y , a , , u a ,

Ss'/k arat be reconciled with the fact that the Greeks never accented a word on the prope nult im at e unless the final syllable was short ? It is very h ard to imagine that a ” broad sound like t he German ai or English 7 in wine could

t t e be accounted shor in prosody, yet it must be done if h

E a a ~ ae r smi n pronunciation is correct , for is constantly scanned

‘ as a short syllab le whe n it is a flexional ending and even f in real in Homer . These dif iculties at once disappear if

a a at e as the tr dition l pronunciation of as be accepted correct,

at e for then can be equivalent to either long or short , as

- or a the metre ccentuation requires . The arguments to be drawn from Elision and Crasis may t nex be considered .

l -ai l can The syl able , when it is a verba ending , in most ff h cases su er elision , and examples of t is elision are numerous,

H the A not only in omer, but even in ttic comedians and

’ 7 1 o k o A rist h N ub 1 1 d o . . 80 e . 7 . . . 7 prose , g i , B a p ,

’ ' ' 7 h d a' ai v r e wv at 71 7 V x a e io d w . i 7 , yf an p x The of the

’ x ae v fre word is also elided sometimes , though not ery A quently, at least in ttic ; as instances of its elision we may

’ ’ ’ ' ' ' A nti 344 x o rrBEv cwd an ro v Se i vo r e o v 7re7t e i :S . . give oph g , p p ,

’ i h N uh 1 1 81 o lo 7 61) vib A r st o . . v y O and p , X n the

’

h B . n 5t C . frat x G ortynia inscriptions ( cent . ) becomes before ’d é e . x v a vowel almost without exception , g . , p,

3 & c 1 6 . The Erasmians argue that this elision can be easily ex

at as plained from the pronunciation of German ai ; ai ,

sa i a they y, easily loses its sound and becomes and then — this a is e lide d z but how can this assertion be proved ?

A ~ l at at as much more p ausible explanation is th was , now , 47 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

6 pronounced like , and that this simple vowel sound was i a a dropped before a sim l r or stronger vowel sound . The question of C rasis seems a very difficult one to

a and a o expl in , does not appe r to be of much use for as er taining the pronunciation of the vowels and diphthongs

C f v concerned . In rasis quite a di ferent owel sound seems often to be produced rather than a combination of the two original sounds ; thi s may be ill ustrated by such Crases as

’ a r a real el 'ra o dan y e t d from , and p from n for, if the separate words be pronounced either accordin g to the E a adi rasmi n or the tr tional pronunciation, in either case the contracted form contains a vowel soun d which is not heard

" M e C in the separate words . ost probably th se rases were li ttle used in speaking but were stereotyped forms of writ

the n mi ing, based on principle of droppi g the ddle one of

w e the three vo els, wh n there were three , and contracting

r the other two according to the regula rules for contraction . A a a C whi very good ex mple of rasis, in ch the two original - if hi vowel sounds are replaced by quite a d ferent one , and w ch

as wri ddr e o v can hardly have been pronounced it is tten , is p

’ e from ér pov.

' “ ” “ L now e or l in 6 Eng ish e b e .

E mi ns i ei E 77 The ras a pronounce it l ke German or nglish long ,

no was so but there are proofs whatever that it ever pronounced, and they themselves admit that its pronunciation had become a B C . quite ssimilated with that of iota, by the second century . On the other hand we have numerous proofs of its resem A blance to 6. large number of very old words are wri tten with 48 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

’ ' ’ f t e e iw ice ar e c m an w either or L , . g . and , B and B ; and in Homer

’ ’ H we a e ix exo and ix ek o and esiod find the collater l forms q e ,

' ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ r e t vo ae LVO LLCLL e lao i0 0 e e cx w e cx w y u and V I , e and 9, p and p .

th v in In e Boeotian dialect l. is found for e e on ery early scrip

’ ' ‘ e a - . Zfc n fc e a . e i o o l tions , g (for ) , (for

G o rt nian f t B C . On the y inscription ( if h century . ) 7rpe ty is

' ' wh im/0 W M o va W X e Zo v 7r7t e co vo found for and 9, for , s,

’ wk e ro va v respecti ely.

On many Elean inscriptions of the classical period 1. occurs

9 ' ' “ : 6L e 1 E l L ‘ c Lo e e c Lei T r . . i b B v ( e cd o v r s c . for , g pm for p S , g for p , / for a e

’ e r e l cm v T e e Lai ‘ all The forms un , / s are found on nearly the

C t he C G 51 1 ff arian inscriptions in I . pp . .

’ That e t was pronounced like L in Plato s time can be inferred from the t wo following etymologies

’ ’ - rat l 4 2 E ch H o t L a 0 . vd ao e o e oi a ( b O G LS S v W GG O (i m . C . V v ( ) y , u e /

i ' ’ ’ 4 B 7 r b 8 . l t 8 ?) uc 0 e m 7 0 73e l e w éo e x e xk e v . ( ) , 7 y p e p na n A A L gain , on ttic inscriptions we only find the forms in of

' } X o 4 0 X i co C G . 0 e v 11 1 660 c . 7 0 0 8 1 w I . and p (cf , p is only

e once found on an unr liable inscription .

’ A 4 3 h o lx n w C . 6 In I . i we ave p for

' —7 7 a - 7\ 7 u 8 7c e l e . /c 5 . The ending 79 is often found inste d of 79 , g

’ l n ehr 2 1 a c a D ia I s . 31 X u M S . ( . ) p e

n A of t A B . C thenian inscription of the end the fif h century .

’ ’ ’ 7r o 1 8 i r o . . 9 e do vr o e e 90v . has m for (cf Fr hn p ,

v v a B C . e From 200 . there se ms to ha e been ery gre t confusion w k ’ 61. e e as e e . wo e c 7 . F . r in the use of and requently put for , g ne, wa a : ' s e. . rrw and thus a wrong orthography propag ted , g should

' ' ' ' r e rm and a o l/c're t w o lfcr c co t d'rt o v be , prob bly p should be p , and u , e l dr t o v F f p . or further examples we may re er to an inscription

‘ v G 55 4 w B . C I 9 C . . of the second century . ( ) here the forms

z w S n/6 e l i a. d e m pz stand side by si e ith [ 7 , h ; and to the

50 T C T G EEK HE PRONUN IA ION OF R .

. l pronunciation shows no distinction We have, according y,

i i c L . E uninterrupted evidence for its pronunc ation as ( . as nglish u ’ “ 2 000 r e in be for a period of more than yea s .

N “ “ ow pronounced like t , or our English e in be .

This diphthong is one of the oldest in the. Greek langu age

i i b 4 B 3 . C . s 0 61. and found on inscr ptions long efore , when and o v it n were first introduced ; therefore had, at the begi ning of

B nalr d a . C . e a v the fourth century , bee sever l centuries in use , and its sound m ay by that time have already become assimilated

n ori inall to that of iota, eve if g y the two distinct sounds of o w and L ere heard in its pronunciation .

We have not , however, any proofs that it ever was pronounced

at 0 a like or g , all the evidence we h ve tends to prove its

l v L great simi arity to the and sounds .

Its close relationship to v and L is demonstrated by the

fco l avo x v t o e ci and X o u ci kindred words p e and p e , yp e y e, and the

r c xo la mu h o la. Ma collateral forms t and e , w and y , and many a others which we have in Attic . Very m ny old words in all the dialects can be corr ectly written either with o r or u ; such are

' ' Ict o v K fzk o v 83157 7 S o l 0 2611 0 » « o lo. or , 7 7 and p m, and p or

o S E ea o l/co es . t , p g or p s ome dialects , especially the olic,

’ e v 0 7 e z) ream) ofte n writ for Attic ; thus the Boeotians write u , ,

’ ’ ’ ’ ' a o c 7 0 2 Zimt o c e o 7 17 t v e u A e o e 9 c t . g q, x , for ttic y , , , x The belief that it was pronounced more like v than any other vowel is strengthened by the fact that the grammarians named

’ f f k } it v 87a8t ¢96y yo v to distinguish it from {Ma e r .

The interchange of o r and v is also found on the papyri of the B C Liz/15 67 6 3”; second century . . ; thus 7 and v on one of THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREE K. 51

a B C A D . 1 60 . . In the first and second centuries the ex mples of

this interchange on Greek inscriptions are numerous ; thus

- Kv'zrd ve wwvdiv 7re 7r157 t at h o rn d ve wwo cchv 7re 7ro l7 at , , 77 , for , , 7a , are i A h I G 282 4 G . found on nscriptions from p rodisias (v . ,

- a 1 2 D Bull de 73 6 6 A . 0 571 27 (for 77 ) on a Lydian one of the ye r . . (v.

’‘ corr he ll dufi al air/75 7 m . . viii . also g and 5 on one fro

hal l nia C G C e p e ( I . T he most conclusive argument for establishing the similarity

in sound of o r and l and for refuting the assertion that in the

days of P ericles 0 6 was pronounced oy is to be taken m T 54 . . . . H fro hucydides, bk ii ch ere , in speaking of the pestilence which ravaged A thens during the first years of the

P a war a A an eloponnesi n , he s ys that the thenians began to recall old oracle which had foretold a disaster of the kind in the words :

” ’ c Sw cafcb 7rd7\ euo e K at h al l) M 1 69 d avr c e p e , a ; (or 7 ) a fi,

a sa and fter quoting the oracle, he goes on to y that the people

u M d Kat e d q estioned whether it was a e, a famine, or / s, a pesti ’ ' - ’ e f e ve ro 0 011 6 7 0 2 civ6 a3 lence , that had been foretold ( y pm 9 p - wo r h o dy chvo do dat 51} 7 3fir st 1577 5 7 631} 7ra7t ardiv t a e m7 w u 9 ,

' ; t M ath Now if h at /1. 69 had at that im e b e e n pronounced ” lo m os M ri was y whilst a e pronounced leemos, the sounds of

the words would have been so very difle re nt that there could

. I not have been any doubt as to which had been said t proves , c e at onsequently , that and were either pronounced exactly alike ,

or that the difference was so very slight as to be almost

imperceptible to the ear .

From A ristophanes we get further evidence agai nst the

a 0 6 as at P ar 1 932 broad pronunci tion of ; in the , . one man

’ ’ jeers at another for exclaimi ng o t and calls it an Ia>vuc5v 73777471 ;

’ Zva res ma and a few lines further down, /

D 2 5 2 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

r B C . That o n was in the thi d century . pronounced just the same as 77 and consequently as l (because 77 at that time was

' probably t ) we can infer from a passage in the Il epl ep/u r

' ’ ve l as‘ of D emetrius Phale re us :the words are 511 o i77v o f;

f - dvo u Be a b é o v r a r d. d r a r a dk xa[cal 0 5 7 0 7 6 er) a g p yp p / , 7x , p

‘ - Sem i/ dSé x l k d did re ol f) ci é o ra. elven w v . F 9, p s, a rom this it is clear, a tw in the first pl ce , that Demetrius speaks of only o syllables in

’ o i7 v— n o r — 7 and thus co siders a monophthong and , in the second

c r n i t pla e , that, when d awi g attention to the diss milari y of the

o c -7 v nl two syllables and 7 , he refers to it as being o y one of i orthography, not of pronunciation . Th s conclusion seems l i perfectly eg timate , because on any other supposition there would have been no necessity for his dr awing attention to the all fact at . Other evi dence for its similarity to the i sound is derived from its Latin substitute often being i ; thus the case-ending of

n m l s o . a . the . plur of m sc . and fem nouns of the second dec en ion,

is - in d e l ai i i l o e i in e . u Greek and Latin, g . / and an m ; a so

’ ’ l - ~ is -is n c o i u o s we c . the dat . p ur . s in Lati , a q , an mis We f rther

‘ i o l/co i fr . r as olvo . o have such words v num fr . e , vicus fr s, mib n ;

’ l a li ism u in rse nius a so mira for po rp in Sidonius and so c s A .

d o r. is ll s oe e . . On the other han , genera y tran cribed by , g

o e n0 olus s o lx o vé o o lvo wdk o ol ar o e oeconomus, p , oestru , from a q , q, p ,

and s s a 06 from this tran cription some Era mi ns, who think that

w l A D as a rea diphthong as late as the second century . argue that

w v o r oe as . must have been a diphthong as long as Howe er, the

pronunciation of ac is unknown ; it may perhaps have been

0 e t i an intermediate sound between and , some h ng like the

a all is was Germ . we know for certain about it , that it con

“ ” l u v lura loe ra tant . s y interchanged with Thus we ha e p and p , ” ” m ia m oe nio Punicus and o e n and munia, and munio, THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK . 53

‘ “ c Poe nicus i &c , uti and oet sometimes it is even inter

“ “ ” i l oe b e rtas . e . . F changed with , g and libertas rom this it foll ows that the transcription oe for at does not prove anything a bout the pronunciation of o r. The Erasmians adduce C rasis also as a means of proving t hat

’ ’ o cz o e C o zz awv r ear l y . They argu that in a rasis like a f om y

0 6 0 u i if pronounced like g co ld easily lose its sound, and then the o + e of ear l y would produce the sound o u but is it not rather a petitio principii to take it for granted that 0g in certain cases becomes 0 ? Is it not more probable that the form 71.0 50 7 i tells us nothing about the pronunciation in writing

l the middle one of the three vowels, , was naturally dropped ,

o e l o u. and the and coming together were, as a ways , written

’ C do axrt o v 7 5 l dn o v Again, they argue that the rasis m from u

the o ll t proves that sound y was pronounced as we as wri ten . C an we not maintain with greater probability that the t wo v b ut 0 owels were kept in writing, in Speaking the short of that

ni l so u mportant word, the artic e, was scarcely, if at all, , ,heard do c dn o v that the 1. alone was distinctly heard and u was pro nounce d Ol dr co v ? t like a On the o her hand, if after contraction, the contraction itself was still pronounced thoym ation in such a

o way as to let both the and t sounds be distinctly heard, then

C l and no real rasis had taken p ace , for the pronunciation , the a L spirate of the would hardly have affected the r . We may safely say that Crases at the best prove but very

’ ' little :if o cz og why should e fyd) olaac not produce e goim ai instead of egom ai since the sound oy is fuller and stronger than that of 6 ? We have still to take into consideration the question as to

at how was treated in prosody.

We shall find when so doing that there is no uniform treat 54 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

a a l ment ; but that sometimes it is counted as short syll b e ,

h a h a s . w ere s at ot ers, and more frequently, it reckons a long one

Now it is true that its tr e atment in prosody as a long

a a syll ble is more frequent th n its usage as a short one , but on the other hand if we could concei ve a long diphthong of the

0 v t e full sound 77 to ha e been accounted shor in m tre , we should have to subvert all our notions about long and short

a . I H at a syll bles n omer , however, is scanned as a short syll ble

no t fle x ional w only when it is a ending , or an unaccented ord , but even when it is the accentuated and principal syllable of

a word .

’ ’ ' d x iv 2 : 1 7 7 ao e h a e . O s 2 4 7\7\d a e e 7r er . A 02 l l 1 6 ( g y . . p 7 9 7p 7 t t

o a n v.

' -’ ’ ' Od s vn 31 2 :T 0 20 60711 0 76 50 0 1 7 d r e o ve wv d r e f a) y . . 9 , 9 , gbp y

e w p.

’ ’ ‘ ' ‘ ’ l l 2 5 d e r i v 0 70 e o' at r c o e 7 T afir a X e f e o dal . xiii . 7 0 28 p 7 9 xp 7 y ;

' I l 4 k a a d a f ' a (130 68 t l o c 6m m , e u k [c l vde l ve r t . . . r ii p , ch y y 7 77

I A n o r l n the ttic tragedians and —comedia s , is a so constantly r o co firo 0 70 r e found short in the word q , and the phrase 9 , and

even in 7rat e 2v and one or two other words .

’ S Oed T r 1 428 o ude i o ld ‘T G 77931) e o i} e e w e . . ( g oph . . y . e e 7 u t p

Bpo r dm.

’ ’ w h d 0 l7 0 e wr i. 7 601} e l év v. i e T r . 4 :020 (b 7r 0v O . 5 3 9 . y e 7 ; pna

'

ih d T r 1 4 z lcd d T o caur e l t T r m e lv 9e7t at . 06 . . 0 v . y a y x p u p

Whilst there would be considerable difficulty in treating 0 7

as a e n we a e it ro nun short syllabl in sca sion , if g v the broad p 55 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK . ciat io n 0g there is not the same difficulty in making its “ ” quantity long if we pronounce it as our e in be, that is

i l i ts . l ke , to which modern pronunciation is equivalent

“ ” “ now a . pronounced like iot , that is like English e in be

0 6 was se - l s and a cal ed purious diphthong, only found before

a an a vowel in the ordin ry l guage , and it very soon was

i to v A e simpl fied . In ttic there is hardly a trac of it left in t he B h . C t e a fourth century . On inscriptions of th t century

’

0 e vt e . 50 v v . 7 i0 .Q e l9 a is always writt n for , g 9 for 9, p for

' Kl e ldvl a feare af iia w vla we 7r7t e v/c15a p , y (for y ) , 9

O A vi n the ttic inscriptions of the fifth century still occurs,

vio P e isist rat o s C A 3 e . 3 I . 7 thus we have c on the altar of ( iv ) ,

’ ’ n v a t A 2 a d e aeh t dvc C I . 3. fl q repea edly in i . 7

In Hellenistic Greek the writing U L before a vowel was

in A brought again , and was thus reintroduced into the ttic

? I o a A o authors . t als re ppears occasionally on ttic inscripti ns

B C and a t e . . e f er the s cond century , in the time of the mperors it is much more frequent in words where it had originally stood

v than the simple .

’ That it was a single sound even as early as Homer s time is pro ved by the fact that U L always counts as one syllable in his poe ms (and we may also notice in the word vibe its quantity is g enerally short) .

f l 1 : I . . 30 0 73 a o . 06 0 7383:A éavr o vib a ar e b vi y p, p e e, p p e

f ‘ c o zfpyo s.

’ ’ ’ ' l 4 3:E u9 e ay A v 6at w ‘ I . . 7 9 v0 vidu T eha oivco A la iv B , 9 u s s.

‘ I l : -a d . 4 H t . 7 E re r vie o eo A l l r d dk a r e vii p, p p , ufi w r v 56 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

‘ I A vlcr n ttic poetry ; is always written and scanned as 1509.

U 6 v v U The and seem to ha e been contracted into long . The

iv s C A . 3 2 1 I . 3 8 7 . is also long on metrical inscription , as in ,

vc a a is also interchanged with e . Thus on the Her clean tables

’ ’ ’ é r e ca v m e 7 1 we have ppny e se en ti es for pp 77 vt a9 ; and also 7 67 0 1 620.

' f e ' vla A o v B . C for y y on an ttic inscription of the second century . A 4 C I . 55 (v. ii . ,

all v vi al v From e idence, therefore , was equiv ent to in the

A r e its ttic language of the fou th century, and henc sound was

v i . ery nearly, if not quite , the same as that of

av, GU .

These are now prono unced like English a!; ef, except l when they come before a vowel , a iquid or a medial and then

av ev they are pronounced like , , respectively .

The Erasmians pronounce them like German an and eu

n the u respectively, for they maintai that in these diphthongs

“ must have had it s original u sound (like English 00 in boot

72. F u and cannot have been German or rench , as the modern

l not ait cu pronunciation cou d have developed itself from , ,

so au eu whereas it could have done from , . This explana

e s l tion is v ry unsati factory, difficult to understand and on y

based on a hypothesis ; but, on the other hand , we have

definite proofs that av and e u early tended to become av and

ev . , as they are now l The most important proof is , that there are many examp es

F v a e of being written instead of after and . The greatest number of these are to be found on the Cretan inscriptions

where F is constantly written instead of v or placed before or

’ -” ' ' dF é ci v d f e . cb l ré aé ré r F r v e Fe e o la after it ; g . ) ; c ; ; py e ;

58 T T G K HE PRONUNCIA ION OF REE . found in Greek but also plays an important part in all the

an a Romance l gu ges . Turning from substitution and in terchange in the language t a itself to transcrip ion in a foreign tongue , we find that the L tin av and cv were at first transcribed into Greek by ao v and

’ - e o v e O fcrdo vt 0 ~ e o v o a n . . E H , g s, fip e, but from the time of dria

’ u e O fcr dveo ~ av e . . onwards they are rendered by and , g s and

i r t h Ee v o . I s e fip q t certain , therefore , that f om second century

d cv A D av e u av an . . and were

D a K ara an s v i . o 3 O . n an nscription from odon (v p , xxxi ) the

' v E vav8o name E andros is transcribed sometimes by p q , at others

' E v a o by B v q .

lfil r av e u av ev A U as , gain , regularly transc ibes , by , Thus

av a we h e trustworthy evidence that , for at le st sixteen or seventeen centuries av and e v have been pronounced as th e y

-da are pronounced to y, whereas we have none at all to support the assumption that they were ever pronounced like German

e n i c ow an and ( . . English and

an We have still to consider the questions of accent d prosody.

A s regards the accent, the argument brought against the

av andcv . pronunciation of these diphthongs as , is that if they had b een so pronounced when accents were introduced , they

v would never ha e been marked with a circumflex . To this

a av e u may be nswered that , are only signs, and by force of analogy they were accented in the same manner s s o u or any o ther diphthong.

T he t IS question connec ed with prosody a less simple one , b ut here also it does not seem a matter of very great difli culty

t he n to account satisfactorily for their quantity , on assumptio

a was av cv that their pronunci tion as that of English , , or Greek

a e a e . E B, B The rasmians argue that if pronounced as B, B 59 T HE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

av cv a a . ( , ) their quantity in prosody should lw ys be short But is this necessarily so ? W hat is there to prevent us from saying

a av e v 2 0 E a e th t , may B or B, B, as an and may always be pronounced either long or short, and then the one vowel being long would account for their usual quantity in

prosody .

A nother consideration to be borne in mind is that av and e v

re a a as a not alw ys long, but are lso scanned short syllables , not o nly in Homer, but even occasionally in authors of the classical period .

’ e Ho rn l 20 334 :0 a' e v d e x e raaw K a . l v i, t re o . . . t g , 9 u p , q p e afia a v r o wt .

’ " rn I l . : 0) . . 595 0 Ho xxiv 2 1. 3 at) 67 real

0 9 I " 0 0 0 GW GO L/C GV.

’ l P P th 2 f d . 5 : 7t A . 7ro v a9ée t a. m y {1 0 so in in ar , g ii y s 287 79 e le a d a v e d a d r v wp ct vo v.

l 1 4 06d. C o 3:Z e ii dk e r S . o oph . ffi p.

l A nd P P th 48 axa ' . . :w t o l dre o m e l ve vwv in indar, g viii / y p x ’ ar adek e o v u p ct e .

’ ' l ve wv o l ve wv m etri ratid h Where some read x or x g , but suc an a a e v cv I n lteration is not necess ry, if be pronounced .

' A a aile t o at lcman we lso find p uev . A nd it is to be noticed that in the scansion of such lines it

a if av is practically impossible to m ke the syllable sound short ,

e u En ow o and are pronounced as glish and y . To those who deny that such an explanation is convincing we

a a av e v can at least reply th t it seems less str nge that , , pro

no unce d av cv l , , should be generally ong in metre than that 60 TH P T G K E RONUNCIA ION OF REE .

C t at l 0 and Z , pronounced like Eng ish 7/ should very frequently

be short .

v av e u Finally, the of and is frequently dropped before a i l consonant , and th s can on y be satisfactorily accounted for on

s av e u as no w the a sumption that and were , they are , pronounced

a c av cv like f, f, or , . Whoever has heard Greek spoken by

Greeks, will have noticed that they only pronounce the v sound

av so of and very slightly before a consonant , in fact it can

is scarcely be heard and thus often omitted in writing. With ’ ' - ' - ar ci airra in H cit rail e aro fi the ancient forms p for p omer, , (for ' - 6117 0 0 e au ro v , ) , which are frequently found after the first

’ ‘ r r B . C . e a e v a century , we can compare the modern ones y a for y a ,

' é o o ié La e al a &0 b . u pg e for f / for p / ,

co av i Again , the substitution of for which is somet mes found D i e . . x ar awar co in ancient oric , g from , may be paralleled by the following forms from the modern popular

' :di o bo 6 0 0 e v o o language u pg e and p p¢ 9 for a pgb s.

w v . B now Engl . in ever, or Germ in ewig in other

in . words, B the Greek of the present day is a spirant The Erasmians contend that i n ancient Greek this consonant

m ute t was a , and they adduce four definite arguments agains l the possibi ity of its having been a spirant . These objections P : cf. a are as follows firstly , lato calls B a mute ( The etetus ,

4 03 v l , secondly, the Latin is not transcribed by B unti

A D o u 7 7 re re the second century , but by thirdly , the B7, B7, p

’ C ratinus senting the sheep s cry in the line from , cannot be

vee vee b t t he read , , u the B must be hard and fourthly , Greek

B is transcribed by the Latin 0. 6 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK . 1

Dealing with each objection separately, we shall first take

“ ”

P . the statement that lato calls B a mute This is true , but it remains to be shown whether his statement is strictly

a h accur te , and w ether he was taking into account its pro

a N v nunciation in all p rts of Greece . ow it can be easily pro ed

i as that his statement s not absolutely true, we find that in s a was everal p rts of Greece B very early used as a spirant , for F “ in certain dialects it replaces the , and in others the spiritus ” F asper . Thus in the Laconian dialect B is used for the ,

e . la d e rni . o o/c e . v B E g . w , e, also in the lean, g B ; whilst the

ZEolians and Dorians used it as the simple aspirate before p, e fiwv S , /co id/co 571 0 . 7 g . d ( appho) for d e for [ g, 6 9 for

’ do 330 df v t df v l e v t . also before vowels B q for 9, B y a for yv /

’ M i e B 7 u o I t . . l 7r7r n the acedon an dialect it is used for q , g s,

’ ' B t r e B e ewx

n so correct, as we have insta ces of its being transcribed as

B C . early as the second century .

’

1 80 B . C . A o v On a Delphian inscription of the names c , ’ i B t l o v . Viv us B are found for the Lat Livius, . A 1 5 D P . 6 H gain, olybius (fl ionysius of alicarnassus 30 . B . C (fl and other writers of the two last centuries . ,

n e w A ' v . . v ev e o v render Lati by B, g d p for Varro, B or

-' o e o v A ve ntinum P l v rlv for . lutarch a most always writes h ’ t e v e . P a e a 7 . . vv R M v B for Lat , g B for avenna, B7 for velum,

' h av o v ve lab rum e l o S &c Bfi p for , E pB q for ervius, .

t he 7 7 C rat inus The argument founded on B7, B7, of is at the i best very unrel able, as are all conclusions drawn from the cries — of animals as interpreted by written characters witness the different representations of the cries of the same animal in 62 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

° difle re nt co unt rie s Besides this , the distinction between the

sound of the labial b and the spirant v is so small as to be of

a a no pr ctical account in these inst nces of onomatopeia, which are in any case only approximate renderings of the original

sound .

av a a Lastly, we h e to consider the rgument, that B is tr n

6 m a a v scribed by the Latin . To this we y reply, th t e en if

I) n e t he B and did not exactly correspo d in sound , th y held

a in t he a and al same pl ce two lphabets, were natur l y looked

a v t h nd a s e . A upon equi alents, one for other gain , we cannot

La 17 wa av v t . s be sure how the pronounced , but we h e e idence

a v at to show that if not ctually , it was least so soft as to

e . be interchange able with it ; g . on ancient inscriptions we find

e b ix it vix it ve n e m e rit us b e ne m e ritus serbus s rvus) , ) , ) ,

am avile amabile) , and on a document dating from the reign ” J v of Numa Jobis occurs for o is . This tendency of Latin 0 to be come v is also shown by the

a has v fact that in the Romance l nguages it often become ,

a oi r avere habere . v . e . . . F I . g Lat , r , tal

A a a nother f ct, which seems to indicate th t B at a very early

v period was similar in sound to , is that many words , which are

t a common to b o h Greek and L tin , are written in Greek with

’ w ve nio lo t v e . . at v B g a B, in La in with a , g B and , and vivo,

’ ' arm cw and vo rax B l ato v o vk o at Bp , and iolo, B a and volo , and

many others .

“ ” “ 7 is now pronounced like the German g in Tage

t l a sound between g and h ; b e fore e and it is ike Germ . 7 or

Engl . g . THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK . 63

Most Erasmian s now admit that it became a spirant at a very

early period ; this is proved by its b e ing frequently omitted when it comes between two vowels and also wrongly insert ed

a ns a to avoid a hi tus . We have numerous i t nces of this on the

' vf ef ai veaive vv t al ve t xk alv w a . e . e e p pyri , g y y c and for y ; y for

’ r &c i ch w 07t lo a . l v xk ac ; q for ms, In the Boeot an stands for

’ ’ ’ ’ The form cuy77ryoxa is sometimes found for cvy77oxa ; thus it

an C G Z E e . I . . occurs twice on an g inscription (v .

For thi s same omission of «7 between two vowels we may

’ w w dco d' w & ne X e b ( c. compare the modern forms for y , q for fi Y : T he jokes of the comedians at the time of the Peloponnesian war against Hyperbol es for his pronunciation of (ix/7 0 9 as 61 70 9

w 7 A a also sho that 7 was already a spirant at that time . g in , the D oric use of 77 to replace an initial F clearly demonstrates

r in D 1 was e . . 0 21 0 that it by nature a spi ant , g oric we find 7 9

9 A 3‘ I 3! I - o we afio 7 80 e a e a er o 67 0 &c s, y e 7 9, y p p, y p 9, .

8.

8 E i th then is now pronounced like ngl sh in .

It evidently was a spiran t in very early times in some dialects as a E B . C . on some le n inscriptions of the sixth century , we find

’ ’ ' 8 e é ar . . Z re m Z e Be é and interchanged , g j , fi , for ,

' ’ “ Bt fcat a O ) t v l 7n d8w A l l , 7 v, .

“ S l a in I ni and r 8 n imi rly, o c Do ic t, and are often i terchanged

’ thus A e vg is Doric for Z e vg :dpléfiflt o e and gap/e ds are Ionic for : ti /57 k So /ed . a f a p 7 “ and p s, cf modern Greek g f for da dél . In

n 0 8is A 8 Doric , agai , written for the ttic C, which shows that

’ u t e . . o va/0 8a) At o vcr w m st have been pronounced sof , g n tic a lé ,

’ - ' ’ - ek co Be rat A eM e'Jat a ttic u é . 64 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

’ - a v C rat lu 4 81 . a 7 P s 1 8 C . vfiv s t 0 73Sexm lato s st tement ( y , ) - ’ - ” {77 a y e r ao rpe ct o vo w compels us to believe that 8was pro no unce d th A like the spirant even in ttica, as it would hardly

” av a h e been interch nged with t, if it had been pronounced hard l l cl ike our Eng ish . An other conclusive proof of the soft pronunciation of 8 is derived from the fact that it is often inserted to gi ve a softer or

’ ’ c we o ctr/S ri a v as 1 5 871 fuller sound to a word , p q becomes p g ; d erbs , 7 7

’ f t a x Ba. x vba from p y , p from p q .

- ' C 560 11 ewT o dSLo v SclBLG T O can ontracted forms like 7 , p e for p , [ C also only be explained by assuming 8to have been pronounced as a spirant .

a hi e 8 The name medi e , w ch was given to the lett rs B , 7 , , l by the grammarians , a so seems to show that they were neither t hard mu es, nor real aspirates , but that they partook of the

i . nature of both , in other words, that they were sp rants

g.

i l l Th s etter is pronounced quite soft by the Greeks , ike the

2 z English in ebra.

There has been much controversy about the nature and

e quality of it , as some maintain d that it was a double letter

- ts ds composed of the two consonant sounds or , others that it

was 3d l formed from , and others , again , that it had a ways been a

- single letter pronounced as it is to day .

is The first notion now exploded , for the second there is some

thing to be said , but the third seems to be the correct one . That it had just the same soft sound in the ancient lan guage

ffi v as it has in the modern , seems to be su ciently pro ed by the one

or fact that C is often written for before and y , thus in old

66 T P C T N G K HE RONUN IA IO OF REE .

v not be brought into the hexameter verse , if the final owel l the preceding word were to be engthened . 24 e 1 1. . 8 .g . ii

’ ' ' " O ffSé Z ek e t av aco {z a 41 ' 7 év v vr l 711 58 ve ca ro v 1879.

A nd there is one line in the A ntho logy where this rule is

ed transgress ,

I 7 d I A I awr ¢ e r at ' ' ) Ha ar o v 8 v n v e n o m. T O U v B § q v .

9 .

“ “ 9 is pronounced like English th in thi n both by the

E b ut Greeks themselves and in ngland , in Germany it is pro

“ ” no un ce d a like or t, though there is pparently no foundation for so pronouncing it .

Its character as aspirate is sufficiently atte sted by the circum s a tho E tance th t olians substituted another aspirate , for it ,

' ' as ( a ( h afm w O HM w. pap , p , q B for fip, B

A a 9 as w g in , unless were pronounced an aspirate , there ould be no sense in the ridicule A ristophanes bestows upon a

S l sm o hor iaz ousae x ci ao v ‘v rir' cythian in the p for saying m , y

‘ d' v 11 d x a e é e L . ro v x a re fioe t d x fi ao v Gw r t o v fi S . p , , instea of n , y p , ( 1 1 83

77 A N D

” 7 : t . E b af er p is pronounced by the Greeks like the nglish , and 7 u i t after l ke the English d similarly, B af er p , and

3after v are pronounced hard .

The Erasmians say that such a pronunciation of rn r and v7 c as h annot possibly have existed in ancient Greek , it would t en have been impossible to draw a distinction between words like 67 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

’ ’ a /S 811 7 69 and é vdcfiam o v and cw az ov. The simple a e h nswer to this obj ction is , that t ey were easily distinguished re n a . by their ccent The G eks pronou ce , and , it is to be pre a a sumed , always have pronounced , the ccented syll ble of a word

a are v very strongly, whilst the un ccented ones comparati ely

h u f in little eard , hence there wo ld be no di ficulty distinguishing

a a f a words th t were simil rly pronounced but di ferently ccented . In support of the argument that the same modification of

e in the a m a sound took plac ancient l nguage , we y compare the

’ d e vr ek e ém évSeX e i n A t he d wor s x and X fig ristotle , and ouble

’ a/c forms and cz /Lv a/ce iv and dy BX e Zv.

m S t a w h EZ ' T The na e amboul lso, hic is a corruption of Q n ” ’ - fl oaty e a‘ 7 9 71 6M v is 71 , or rather s m , another illustration of after ” P4 :having been pronounced as b .

” a' a s is has the same sound as our h rd hissing , and it only

“ ” a ha sof s ss in Germ ny t t it is still pronounced as a ; Bla ,

v re aso n' for howe er, admits that there is no not accepting the

d a tra ition l pronunciation .

t a a It must be pronounced sof before liquid or a medi l , and that this was the same in the ancient language is shown by 2;

“ « u. e Z 8 . . uva often being written for it before B, , , y, or , g , p p and

E fi va em/v t a o u p , {H i and That it was always pronounced hard is con firmed by the fact tha t on old A ttic and other inscriptions 0 0 is sometimes found

’i - ’’ and mice versé 0 0 h hav c co ar a cz for , , 0 for ; t us we e p pwr a

C A d0' 0' 7 da I . 7r w a ( . i 79 for nq on an Olympi n inscription ;

' ' A éo a ii 2 c i ' ' o v A e O o v C I A . 5 and W c awv 7r ci0 0 m B B ( , ) ; p for p v

‘ an O unt ian u a B C on p inscription of ncert in date . . 68 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

h A s irat T e p e .

T he chief dispute with reference to the rough breathing turns on the fact that its pronunciation is now entirely neglected ; and this is used as an additional proof that the present pronunciation of Greek differs essentially from that of

v v a the classical period . There are , howe er , se er l points to be

v considered relati e to its usage in antiquity, which must con side rab ly modify any conclusions that m ay have been formed as to the distinction between its ancient and modern pronunciation .

I a v v a t n the first pl ce , we ha e se eral f c s which serve to show that it was probably not sounded e ven in the fifth and fourth h B C . e it a . s centuries , or t at, if sound d at all , pronunci tion was

v very fluctuating and slight . The most con incing proof of this

a a 4 B C had v 03 . . H is the f ct th t when in , which till then ser ed as e n g the sign of the rough br athi o . was introduced into the

A al a e n v w n e w ttic ph b t as a lo g o el , no sign was added to mark 1 1 w t w the rough breathing . The signs and ( hich af er ards

e d as A o h b came and were first use , it seems , by rist p anes of

z a wh 2 0 B . o 0 C . By ntium lived c .

A a a B C ttic , g in , of the fifth century . . often omit .inscriptions A iv 53 a is a H C I . . , thus on the one in , , it only ret ined in the word Zepéu and omi tted in all o ther words where it should have been written . A w S o v . C I . , too , the long inscription ( hich contains the accounts for the building of the E re chthe io n and dates from

a B w t a h e 4 04 C . the ye r , sho s us more h n one undred cas s where

n a e . é7 r2 H a . the (spiritus sper) is inserted in the wro g pl ce , g ,

’ ' " ' & 174 0 01 51 E zioo o c é aaa ue vro &c. c. 5 5 f , py y ‘ close to , THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK . 69

Blass says that this inscription is evidently the work of a foreigner— but there seems to be no suffi cient ground for this assertion .

’ ’ On the Heraclean tables the two writings iao q and iao q F hi i h occur . rom t s ev dence it is clear , not indeed t at the rough breathing was never sounded,but that it was certainl y

n i B C . not invariably sounded the fifth and fourth centuries . a I Secondly, we must be r in mind that neither the onic nor

the the ZEolic dialect had rough breathing , nor is it found in the G ortynian and C yprian inscriptions . The weakness of the rough breathing is further demonstrated

’ by the existence of kindred words like fip epa and finap ;

ch 8a 0 20 62 i Phafim 'm ro fi eand m 9 and 9, and by derivatives l ke q

0 from 77 7 9 .

f the a A With re erence to spiration of the tenues in ttic, Blass is of opinion that thi s proves that the breathing must still have

been sounded , though perhaps very weakly . This, however, does not necessarily follow, as in modern Greek the rough breathing still causes the preceding tenuis to be changed into

a u b a i has as its corresponding aspirate , ltho gh this re th ng , even E 2000 the rasmians admit, been mute for nearly years ; the

’ ’ ' sa cic) ébv x afi e av Greeks of the present day always y j fip , fip p ,

’ ’ x afiék o v e b e c , q np pq, although they never sound the rough

n breathi g .

In some dialect s it may have been sounded up to a late r

a e as h d t , it is regularly represented in Latin by ; but even in Latin the h was often misplaced from the first

B C century . .

F a w t he 7 0 8a in lly, the grammarians, who rite about 3x 9 m , nearly all lived at a time when it is almost certain that the

was l rough breathing no onger sounded . 70 A THE PRONUNCI TION OF GREEK .

A sa o Ph l a e re us 2 5 B . 3 C . ha pas ge fr m Demetrius (fl . ) s some times been adduced to prove that the rough breathing was still sounded in his time , but on careful examination it seems rather to prove j ust the contrary ; the passage is the following

’ ’ ' ’ 3 i / ! ' E v 7 o v o f; oi o z 8L a o a. d. 81 <; e v T 7 e a rw 7t h }. 9 n p 1 p , - a 7 8a uk “ “ fr t o f 0 6 23v a i) 6 Be e (filo re wol f} dvé o ra, 3x L , p 9, d s, p

e Zvac. E a s sa v a This , the rasmi n y, pro es that the rough bre th had ing was still sounded . But, on the contrary , if it still been

wh l t a sounded , y should he ca l at ention to the f ct, that the one syllable of the word had a rough breathing and the other a ? H smooth one e is evidently speaking of the orthography, not

to t he of the pronunciation, and wishes draw attention to fact that in wr iting the fir st syllable should have the rough i breath ng .

A v va s b fter ha ing reviewed the riou letters singly , it may e interesting to note a few peculiarities which have persisted in

v v the language since ery ancient times , and which help to pro e that even in details it has changed very little since the classical

we period . In the present form of the language find the same interchanges of letters and the sam e modifications of soun ds as E l in the ancient language . Thus the ancient Doric and o ic ' ‘ 7t e 7 m o v X é a o v Ke c m o v l wrote 7 for B, 7 p or 7 ¢ p for B / p paralle ’ ’ - r o w e to this is the modern form yM m for BX e w . The int rchange of x and p is also a feature common both to the ancient and the present language ; from the ancient we may adduce the kindred

’ w wafi o t afi o ‘ c afih o ci éh ' w d e f w ords , p s or g p s and h q p y and y py ,

dSe bé é 8e>t o and from the modern , the popular forms pg q for ¢ ky

fia k fio v fip for fi .

A s an instance of continuity in modification of sounds we find

a v ar an e th t in modern Greek , the final of the ticle , or of y oth r

d is c l d short unimportant wor , hanged into a, if the fo lowing wor 7 1 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

an t 7r r commences with i or , and we have numerous proofs f om

h e inscriptions that this same c ange took place in classical tim s .

41 B G 6 9 . C . . 7 Thus on an Attic inscription of c . . (cf ) we find

’ ' ci u. o v 37 a . we e . 7ro7t e l. i s / w , m p, p and many s milar examples,

'

w a“ u. G G 82 é e 37 7re 7r I . o n aflc a v . others, m and , , y (cf and

t nian B 7 63 G or . C . and on the y inscription, fifth century , “ ’i wok z ar c v.

d wl We have en eavoured to show, within narro imits , that the

and present pronunciation used by the Greeks is no novelty, is

“ ca improperly called modern, since tradition and philologi l research show that in most par ticulars it reaches far back into

a v the most flourishing times of Hell s, and is e en traceable in t he Epics of Homer . There has been an unbroken tradition for nearly two thousand years in favour of the present pro nunciat ion v w n , and this we ha e endeavoured to sho rests upo d no mere hypotheses . Tra ition itself, as seen in the living

of - a a the language to day, is a f ct th t pleads powerfully for heirloom that has been handed down to the Greek nation from

c its ancestors , for perhaps nothing lings more tenaciously to a nation than the pronunciation of its language . a t The Erasmians themselves dmi , that the present pro nunciatio n is much the same as that which was in use at the commencement of the Christian era ; and with regard to the t P J continui y of the Greek language we may quote rofessor ebb,

M odem Gr eece .54 , p . Old and new Greece are bound together l by anguage . Latin passing into Romance languages was more

was or less disintegrated . Greek for centuries rude and nu

a l . I grammatic l, but it was always itself, and itse f alone n the organic matters of structure and syntax Greek has never

i i an l made a comprom se W th y other anguage . During the 72 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK. last eighty years the Greek langu age has been returning more

s f and more to the old cla sical type . The chief di ference now remaining between old and modern Greek is one which — exists between old and modern l anguages generally the old is

l has synthetic , the modern ana ytic . Thus it been the unique

s e a t o v had de tiny of the Gre k langu ge ha e , from prehistoric

N is times down to our own , an unbroken life . ot one link ” wanting in this chain which binds the new Greece to the old .

The O pinion of so distinguished a scholar both in ancient and

is modern Greek most weighty . im i F i l Mr . . tn ht S a . A or l r testimony is borne by E Freeman , g y

“ R eview F l st 1 8 9 : , ebruary , 7 There is something more in the

Greek tongue , something more abiding, something which more

a al k is ne rly touches the gener history of man ind , than to be

i l as found in that view of it wh ch ooks on it dead , ancient,

o ff m t k . I a classical , cut from odern interes s of every ind cl im l for the Greek its p ace on the exactly opposite ground , because

is d l — e is is ae it not dea but iving b cause , if it ancient, it medi val ” and modern no less .

u P P Pharm aco o ul o s M Well co ld rofessor A . . p , teacher of odern

U v N a his u Greek in the ni ersity of aples , bo st in ina gural lecture 1 8th 1 885 :“ e delivered December , La nostra lingua non la

fi lia l a n u la g del li g a antica, ma lingua antica stessa sotto una

' difi e re nt e forma, non nelle parole , nei verbi e nelle loro de

clinaz ioni z as , ma nello stile , an i oggidi usiamo fr i che si

‘ i in incontrano negli scrittori antichi p ii classici . La l gua

’ ” d e a a mo erna non che l ntica stess ,

We , however, for a long time have been applying to Greek

t he a l rules of pronunciation of nother language , name y the

v z n Latin , and the ocali atio of our own tongue , until we have lost all analogy with the sound and rhythm of the Greek

4 7 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

important , since the opponents of the study of Greek in our s v a and chools and uni ersities are daily on the incre se , the M t number of students becoming less . os students of mathe m e and a ati s of natural science, professors and pupils like , would banish Greek from the necessary curriculum of studies at our

v v to W e uni ersities, and ha e already some extent succeeded . have already got so far that French or German may in some if examinations be substituted for Greek , and in a short time ,

t e c we con inue the present system of t a hing the language ,

il an a Greek w l become option l subj ect, except perhaps in the

a case of theological students . No wonder th t the opposition

and a exists, that many argue th t the study of Greek entails

a in eight or nine years of useless l bour, which this country is

B ut can almost true . the opposition hardly be said to be — against the Greek language itself which most of the oppo nents f ta — do not, or only indi ferently, unders nd but against the waste of time and the poor results of so many years of often dis

—a u S C agreeable labour labo r of isyphus , as onstantine Reyer

it— o of Trieste calls both for profess rs and pupils . We think

the only way to preserve the study of Greek is to render its

acquisition more agreeable and rapid , and the results more

to u the d satisfac ry, by introd cing a radical change in metho of

teaching it.

To bring about a thorough reform , it must be learned and

a as t as t ught a living ongue , and much as possible spoken, and

n a b e studied in its entirety, beginning with the moder l nguage ,

- t as in which there is sufficient well wri ten literature, incre ing

S T ricou is R an ab é Bik e los da . ily, in the works of p , g , , Lambros,

has a a . Vl chos, and m ny others When the student fairly l m astered the modern sty e, which he would do as easily as

d as he does French or German , he should go backwar , it were, N 5 THE PRONUNCIATIO OF GREEK . 7

to the ancient authors , thus becoming gradually acquainted with the more archaic grammatical constructions and forms

o n of expression , which will present little or no difficulty, but, the contrary , prove an interesting study . This method of

studying is the most useful and agreeable way of learning the

an a a l guage, and en bles the student to underst nd and appreciate the classical writers a thousandfold better than by the present system .

This is the true way of learning t he ancient literature of any li ving tongue ; we do not begin to teach or to study French

h Chanson ale R oland a d un Gu r . wit the , nor Germ n with We a a wa know th t many will be ready to say , th t though this y ma to y apply very well to other languages, yet it does not

' the inno vation m a Greek , and y seem too great or too bold . i We, however, th nk that it would apply better to Greek than to a most other l nguages of Europe that we know of, because there is very much less difference between the Greek of to-day

n a F and that of classical times, tha between medi eval rench ,

E and a h German, and nglish , these langu ges as t ey are spoken

R om an de la R ose and written at the present time . The ,

Gndrun N ibelun enlled Chaucer ff , g , and di er much more from

a a ar t the l ngu ges of which they are the e ly represen atives, than Homer does from the language now spoken and written in

“ sa : n Athens . Of Greek we may truly y La li gua moderna

. ’

e . non che l antica stessa The grammar, accidence , and

a a l as a synt x , remains pr ctical y the same in classic l times .

Indeed , the grammars used in the Gymnasia of Greece are similar to those used in t he Gymnasia of Germany and the

M transla public schools of England . any of them are simply

s tion from the German . Therefore to study Greek as a living language would require no change of grammar ; the slight 76 T P U C T G HE RON N IA ION OF REEK . differences in the future and infinitive of the verbs could easily fi m a r ace as . be explained , they present no dif culty The

f te principal dif erence is in the style of the writ n language , a which is simpler th n the classical , to which it thus forms

v a an easy introduction . But e en with reg rd to style , we should consider that the classical works which have sur vi ved the wreck

n of ages , do not give us the more popular writte and spoken

a ah' e ad language of their times . It is to be remembered th t y

B C . a in the fourth century . , but especi lly in the A lexandrian

d v perio , many pro incial peculiarities were being introduced

and m a a into the Attic dialect, fro this combin tion rose in the

- B . C . 7 no wr Bl dae x r o in third century the common dialect, 5 ) s,

ffe which di rent degrees of development are to be noticed , t h according to the time in which the writers lived , as in e .

P D io dorus P C writings of olybius, , ausanias , and Dio assius . The present language is nothing else than a somewhat modern iz e d no w? Sadae fcr o form of the ) c of antiquity , and it is with

the this that we propose study of Greek should begin . We venture to think that this method would render the study of the language much easier , and make it much more interesting w to the pupil, who would thus cease to look ith awe upon a language which has hitherto been considered dead and fraugh t with difficulties . Life and interest would be given to the study, m l ore especially if the anguage were not only read but spoken . N all d early the words , at least the roots and simple wor s, with

the la many expressions of present spoken and written nguage ,

would be constantly met with in the after-study o f the classical

ffi z authors , thus removing di culties and giving a est to the

study . By this system the difficulty with regard to accentuation

l l t l v m wou d be a mos entire y remo ed , because, fro the very 77 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK .

commencement, the pupil would be taught to accentuate the

a a words right by re ding aloud with the proper pronunciation , which necessarily includes accentuation , and by which words of ff r similar orthography, but di ering in meaning acco ding to the a E are ccentuation, which occur in Greek as in nglish , readily

’' ' f ix a e w c w e . . . cz v A distinguished , g y , leading ; y , a cont st wrong accent in pronunciation would soon be as easily distin

uishe d E g in Greek as in nglish , and if the student had any doubt he would only have to pronounce the word aloud to

v remo e the difficulty . A t present the great majority of English students of Greek

are at the a quite a loss about accentu tion . They learn the m rules , but the practice re ains most difficult , and to the

v a N maj ority an unsol ed enigm to the end . o wonder that

f . this should be so, for the majority of words are dif erently

a a E i a are ccentu ted in the ngl sh , pronunci tion from what they

the A in Greek . curious example of this is found in an edition t h e . C of some of Greek tragedies, some years ago , by T W . .

E w v ordo t he d ards , in which he gi es an of the words with

n English accentuatio , that the pupil should read the text properly ! What should we think of some Germ an author being treated in this way to suit some English theory of pronouncing that language ? If it would be absurd to do this

so ? with German , why should we do with Greek It is true we do not accent Greek words in writing according to the f English pronunciation , but we make it even more di ficult for

our students , for we insist upon their accentuating their written

as a w Greek the Greeks do, and on their re ding it ith another,

and a f . I often tot lly di ferent accentuation f it were not a fact,

a v we could sc rcely belie e such a thing credible .

T he difficul ty of introducing the study of Gre ek as -a li ving 78 H T E PRONUNCIATION OF GREEK . language with the proper pronunciation would not be great as

e regards the pupils , for they would learn to pronounce Gre k F w more easily than they do rench , but it ould be with the

a who a m jority of teachers , from h bit and prejudice would be unwilling to adopt a ne wmethod of te aching the language and S l a new pronunciation . ti l there might be found some , and

il a we trust there soon will be some , who w l appreciate the m ny

' advant age s o f teaching the most beautiful language of antiquity

A a fe w as a living tongue . te cher could in a hours learn the

a n a n pronunci tio , and by re di g a few modern books, and learning

l e i a good dia ogues, be enabl d in a short t me to m ke some

v progress in con ersation . t h To in roduce t is system fully and to make it a success , there should be an educated Greek attached to each of our public

a a schools , to te ch the pronunciation , to hear the pupils re d

t o aloud , and converse with them . The critical elucidation

as of the language should remain , at present , in the hands of

ul c . the reg ar tea hers , using the proper pronunciation We venture to think that such a reform in the te aching of a i Greek would much f cilitate its acqu sition , and render its study

e v add much mor attracti e to pupils , and considerably to its utility ; for those pupils who might never acquire any facility in

w t i a a t l reading the ri ngs of the ancient dr m tis s, might sti l be able to make out the meaning of most of what they might find

e in a Greek newspaper or modern book , and if busin ss or ak pleasure should t e them to Greece or the Levant , they could with little difficulty make themsel ves understood to the Greeks

c l a with whom they came in conta t . It might not be c assic l

t a sa w A e Greek altogether h t they used , but we may y ith mp re ,

“ E n il v ar le un tout cas, aut mieux de p ler Grec comme

’ ' mendiant d A thene s que comme un he lle nist e de Rotterdam . E 79 THE PRONUNCIATION OF GRE K .

With regard to learning Greek in this m anner Professor a k “ I l Bl c ie says, undertake to prove that by earning Greek

a wa l n in the n tural and true y as a iving la guage , by a direct

a e ar appe l to the and response by the tongue , thinking and a speaking in Greek from the first lesson, a greater f miliarity with that noble language will be acquired in five months than N is done now by the assiduous labour of as many years . ature is always right ; schoolmasters and scholars are sometimes ” l wrong . We hope that the learned and genial professor wil not remain, what he has been for many years , with regard to

clam antis this question , a vox in deserto .

no t at m We may have s isfied the critical demands , or re oved

d v a all the ifficulties, or even any from the minds of the ad oc tes m t f of the old syste , but we trus we have shown su ficiently, that we have some basis for the view we have taken of Greek

“ . I sa C E filio pronunciation n conclusion we y with icero , x ” a at re m udico a loc tum esse p j , sic m jores .

HE T EN D .

R IC HA R D C LA Y A N D SO N S LIM IT E D LO N D O N A N D B U N G X Y , , .