Chapter Three: THE REPRESENTATION OF VOWELS IN ANCIENT GREEK 3.0 Introduction This chapter is devoted to some Important aspects of the phonology of Ancient Greek. It consists of a characterization of the vowel system within underspecif Ication theory and of an account of the rules pro- viding the necessary evidence for the characterization proposed. The variety of Greek being described is the Attic dialect as spoken between about 800 and 500 B.C. This dialect developed into 'classical' Attic, that is, the dialect of Athens and its vicinity (around 400 B.C.). At various stages in the discussion we will use evidence from outside the Attic dialect, but only when direct Attic evidence is unavailable. The historical development of the Ionic-Attic vowel system will summon our prime attention in section 3.1, which deals with the major changes that took place between the end of the second millennium and the post-classical period (about 350 B.C.). The aim of this discussion is to establish the exact properties of the dialect to be described. Next, we will outline a proposal for the Attic vowel system as it existed between 800 and 500 B.C., along the lines of the underspecif ication framework developed in chapter 1. Arguments in favor of this particular theory will be put forward in section 3.3. The most compelling piece of evi- dence for our hypothesis will be postponed until chapter 4, in which we will deal with the description of vowel coalescence. 3.1 The dlachronic evolution of the Ancient Greek vowel system The Proto-Indo European vowel system is often assumed to have consisted of the vowels *e and *o, and possibly the long vowels *e and * · Furthermore, *i and *u are considered to have been allophones of the glides /y, w/. The Proto-Greek ten-vowel system *i, *e, *a, *o, *u, *I, *e, *a, *3, *u is the result of the loss of the Indo-European laryngeals *dl, *32, *33· 1° broad outline, the so-called laryngeal theory posits three laryngeals, where *81 probably was [+constricted] (· /?/), *32 [+spread, +low] (» /h/), and *33 [+spread, +round] (-/hw/). In the last phase of Indo-European, the laryngeals disappeared with concomitant changes of the adjacent vocoids. These changes took roughly the fol- lowing form: (1) a: 3ieC > eC 32eC > aC 33eC > oC b: ^ 2 3 1C > 1C ed-jC > eC e32C > äc eSßC > ÖC i 3^ 2 3 c > ^c The simple ten-vowel system of Proto-Greek is preserved, or better, restored in a small group of dialects like, for Instance, (i) the Ar— cado-Cypriot group, (11) Lesbian and Thessalien, and (ill) the 'strict' Doric dialects. In most other dialects a system with seven, rather than five, long vowels arose· It seems plausible, however, that the dialects referred to under (1-iil) went through such a vowel system too (cf. Ruijgh 1984:67). In these dialects the sequences e+ey, o+ey show up as 95 Copyright © ${Date}. ${Publisher}. All rights reserved. © ${Date}. ${Publisher}. Copyright ey and oy, respectively, just as in Ionic-Attic, whereas e+e, e+o are contracted into [ε, 3] in the peripheral dialects and into [e, 5] in Ionic-Attic. If the dialects under (i-iii) had not gone through a stage in which seven long vowels existed, we would have expected the long diphthongs *ey and *5y as the result of the former contractions. In the majority of these dialects the opposition between [ε, I] and [o, ] had already been neutralized before the oldest Inscriptions. In the Attic dialect, and by the same token in the Ionic dialect, the opposition between the long open and closed mid vowels persisted until approximate- ly the post-classical period. Towards the end of the second millennium B.C., Proto-Greek *5 was fronted to *ae in most Ancient Greek dialects, including the Ionic and Attic dialects. However, the front *ae was not very stable, and raising to [ε] took place around 550 B.C. at the latest. As a consequence of these changes the distinction between Proto-Greek *e ([ε]) and *5 was neutralized. An exception to this is the Attic dialect where the dis- tinction remained after the sounds [r, i, e] because of the so-called "R ckverwandlung" (cf. pepramay º am sold' vs. pepremay º am set on fire'). The most radical changes were caused by processes like Vowel Contrac- tion and Compensatory Lengthening. The three-grade vowel system, con- taining only the mid vowels *e, *o, *e, and *o (phonetically [ε] and [3]) expanded into a four-grade system in which four long mid vowels became distinctive: besides the open mid vowels [ε, 3] their closed counterparts [e, 5] arose. Moreover, the vowel [a] was reintroduced as a result of the same processes. We can establish the following relative chronology: (2) a: First Compensatory Lengthening: esmi > emi º am' krosnos > kr nos 'spring, fountain' b: Vowel Contraction: treyes > tree 'three' genea > gens 'race'(n.a.pl.) c: Second and Third Compensatory Lengthening: pans > pas 'all' kalwos > k los (ion.) 'beautiful1 (cf. att. kalos) d: Vowel Contraction: tlma-ete > tlmite 'you honor' These changes led to the Early Ionic-Attic vowel system in (3). We observe that the short vowel system remained relatively stable, while 2 the long vowel system underwent some drastic changes: 96 Copyright © ${Date}. ${Publisher}. All rights reserved. © ${Date}. ${Publisher}. Copyright (3) Early Ionic-Attic (1000-800 B.C.) ieaouleeiäööu high + + + + low + + + ATR + + - + + + + + + round + + + + + back + + + + + + + In the classical period (5th c.) the three-way contrast / , , ä/ was reduced to a two-way contrast / , ä/ by raising of /i/. Consequently, the classical Attic vowel system can be represented as in (4): (4) Classical Attic ieaouleüäööü high + + + + low + + ATR + + - + + + + + + round + + + + + back + + + + + + + Sommerstein (1973), Bubenik (1983) and Wetzels (1986) assume a slightly different classification of the classical Attic vowel system. They propose a system in which the long vowels / , ä, 5/ are specified as [+low]. This change in [low] allows an elimination of the feature [ATR], since it is fully redundant as can be concluded from the classi- fication below: (5) Classical Attic (alternative) ieaouleeäoöu high + ++ + low -- + + + + -- ATR + + - + + + + + + round + + + + + back + + + + + + + Either the feature specification in (4) or that in (5) is suitable for the analysis of vowel coalescence and related phenomena. In this thesis, we will assume the classification in (5), because it allows us to eliminate the feature [ATR]. However, nothing crucial hinges upon this decision. Below, in section 3.2, we will argue that the feature [back] is redundant, and that the features [high], [low] and [round] suffice to distinguish the underlying vowel system. During the period up until 350 B.C. some additional developments occurred. First of all, the high round vowels were fronted to [ii, 3]. It is uncertain when exactly this change took place. According to Schwyzer (1939) it occurred quite early in the 7th century. Bartonek (1966), how- ever, suggests that the change was not fully accomplished until as late as 400 B.C. Schwyzer (1939:183) states that "Fürs Attische deutet auf Y- ü die Schreibung KY [where K is the [-back] allophone of /k/, WdH], nicht 9Y [where? is the [+back] allophone of /k/, WdH] schon auf den 97 Copyright © ${Date}. ${Publisher}. All rights reserved. © ${Date}. ${Publisher}. Copyright ältesten Inschriften...". In diphthongs, whether underlying (basilews 'king') or derived by contraction (Sw 'well'), the off-glide remains a velar. At a later date, which cannot be determined with certainty, the second element of the diphthongs [aw, ew] developed a fricative pro- nunciation. We will take the observation that the off-glide remains a velar, particularly in cases where the diphthong is the result of vowel coalescence, as a strong indication that all round vowels were still [+back] at the time when vowel coalescence was productive. With respect to vowel coalescence proper, the fusion of two vowels into a single long vowel, the dorsal properties of the high round vowels are not particu- larly crucial, because high vowels are in general unaffected by this process. The change of /5/ to [ü] also took place in the post-classical period. Ruijgh (1984:71) argues that "au debut du IIIe s. av. J-C n'avait pas encore abouti ä u ferme." This change is therefore irrele- vant to the present discussion. Finally, we will briefly discuss the status of the diphthongs. The long diphthongs /äy, öy/ became monophthongs in the post-classical (Hel- lenistic) period. The development of /ey/ is more complex. In lexi- calized, non-transparent forms like kleys > kles 'key', leytörgiä > letörgiä 'liturgy' the diphthong /ey/ was changed into the half-closed monophthong. In derivationally transparent forms, on the other hand, the diphthong underwent the same change, but /ey/ was restored by analogy. Subsequently, the long diphthong /ey/ became [ ]. The long diphthongs /ey, öy/ did not come Into existence in any of the Ancient Greek dia- lects, although we would have expected them to arise by means of vowel coalescence from e+ey and o+ey. These sequences, however, had already been altered by an independent phenomenon called hyphaeresis, which reduced a sequence of two mid vowels to a single short mid vowel before another vowel. The monophthonglzation of the homorganic diphthongs /ey, ow/ took place somewhere between the 7th and the 4th century B.C. It is usually assumed that this process, which caused the merger of e and ey, and and ow, was not fully accomplished until 400 B.C. Our main purpose is to give a full and adequate account of the mechanisms underlying the phenomenon of vowel coalescence in the Attic dialect in the light of the general theory outlined in chapter 2.