[B-Greek] re: Koine and Homeric
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Tue Apr 13 06:21:24 EDT 2004
I appreciate the perspectives brought to this subject by Randall Buth and
Micheal Palmer--particularly that Micheal, who is not a list-member,
accepted the invitation to contribute to this discussion. Randall's
observations, for which I have immense respect, are always welcome. I too
would surely recommend Geoffrey Horrock's book on the history of the Greek
language; I have found it very useful for my own work.
I don't dispute any of what Randall has noted here; what I would reiterate,
however, is one of the key points I was making in my own earlier comments
on Koine Greek as a language in flux: inasmuch as language--particularly in
an international setting of cross-cultural influence--is always in flux, I
believe there is more variation in usage, even within a particular NT
writer, than the student who learns from standard primers and intermediate
grammars grasps. I would therefore re-state Rod Decker's admonition to be
careful about overdoing diachronic aspects of NT Greek usage and complement
it with a comparable admonition to be careful about overdoing the
synchronic aspects of NT Greek usage. Or to apply the old French adage to
an even older phase of Greek language: "plus ça change, plus c'est la même
chose!" There's no question that the language of Plato and the language of
Mark's gospel are the same--and any literate 21st-century English-speaker
can read Shakespeare with relative ease, n'est-ce pas?
At 6:41 AM +0200 4/13/04, R Yochanan Bitan Buth wrote:
>XAIREIN
>
>
>
>Just a balancing note on stability and change with Koine.
>
>
>
>>in a particularly intense state of flux
>
>
>
>Koine went through changes but I would characterize it as relatively stable
>during the Roman period. Koine period writings reflect many registers,
>levels of writing expertise. However, the big change occurred before the
>Roman period. It was the 4th to the 2nd centuries BCE that the major spread
>of the "common dialect" Greek took place. You can see some of the simplified
>forms (read that as regularizations of previously highly irregular verbs)
>show up in writers like Josephus or the NT Luke and Paul (e.g. EDWKAN 'they
>gave') yet they read very much like Attic Greek and I cannot think that
>Plato would have had any trouble reading them (except for Jewish cultural
>background). I suspect that the same first century authors could listen to a
>dialogue of Plato read outloud (and certainly could have read) and would
>have followed right along. Some of this, of course, can be attributed to
>these authors being literate, which entails studying the older dialect with
>its broad vocabulary.
>
>
>
>> People tended to write the way they spoke. When speech changed, so did
>written documents.
>
>
>
>Yes and no.
>
>In terms of writing, Greek maintained a historical orthography. This can be
>demonstrated today where many modern words that have been pronounced
>differently for 2000 years still preserve the shape of the word found in
>Homer. EIRHNH never became IRINI, HDH is not IDI, though almost anything can
>be found in the history of manuscripts and spelling lapses over the
>millennia. (TWI OIEIWI [100CE] 'to the son' [=TW UIW] still gets chuckles or
>surprise from friends)
>
>Of course, some of the intolerable clashes eventually led to homonym
>reduction: UMEIS and HMEIS were being pronounced the same during the last
>half of the first millennium CE [imis] by more and more people and this led
>to two consequences. (a) Manuscripts of old documents would be confused
>sometimes (note how many examples of textual instability there are of
>UMEIS/UMWN/UMIN/UMAS versus HMEIS/HMWN/HMIN/HMAS in the NT manuscripts). (b)
>Spoken Greek developed new plural forms, ESEIS and EMEIS, as extensions of
>the more stable singulars.
>
>Especially with written Greek, one might argue that it is one of the most
>conservative/stable languages in the world. Up to the 16th-20th centuries
>there were still people writing in a dialect that could be considered a
>mutually intelligible extension of the old Koine or even Attic before it.
>One cannot say that for French or Spanish (though "yes" for academic Latin).
>(Written Hebrew and Arabic have shown more resiliency than Greek.)
>
>Stability even got out of hand with Greek. Note the resurgence of 'attic'
>Greek in authors like Plutarch, Philostratus, and many of the church fathers
>with the onset of what is termed the Second Sophistic (the atticizing
>movement from just after the end of the NT era).
>
>The problem with documenting Greek historical change is that the spoken
>language diverged more and more from the written language. This can be
>demonstrated over the last two thousand years but is a difficult job that
>requires careful analysis of the literary remains. The book by Geoffrey
>Horrocks (Classics, Cambridge), Greek, A History of the Language and its
>Speakers (Longmans 1997), is very well done. He keeps tab of both the
>written and spoken varieties and tries to evaluate the changes from what is
>known about general linguistics so that his conclusions are well taken.
>
>
>
>Randall Buth
>
>
>
>Randall Buth, PhD
>
>Director, Biblical Language Center
>
>www.biblicalulpan.org <http://www.biblicalulpan.org/>
>
>
>
>From: Micheal W.Palmer <mwpalmer at greek-language.com>
>
>Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Koine and Homeric
>
>>
>
>Here are a few observations relevant to Bert's question to Carl about
>
>Koine Greek being a "langauge in flux."
>
>
>
>As you note, all language are to some extent "in flux." They all change
>
>over time. I believe a solid case can be made for viewing Koine Greek
>
>as a language in a particularly intense state of flux, though.
>
>
>
>The Hellenistic-Roman period was one of tremendous cultural change, and
>
>language change is accelerated when cultural change is intense.
>
>Beginning with the conquests of Alexander the Great in the 300s BCE,
>
>many local cultures (and local language groups) were absorbed into the
>
>widening area of Greek influence. When the Romans came to dominate some
>
>of these same regions, a second wave of cultural changed followed
>
>(though Latin never had the impact that Greek did in the East).
>
>
>
>There are, of course, similar examples of cultural change in the modern
>
>world, but the language change they cause is sometimes mediated or
>
>masked by the presence of a constraint that Koine Greek did not face:
>
>the prominent role of print media. The invention of the printing press
>
>allowed a standardization of writing conventions that was not present
>
>before that point, so change in WRITTEN language slowed down to some
>
>extent as literacy and availability of books became more widespread. Of
>
>course, writing conventions cannot prevent language change, but they
>
>can artificially retard the change of the written form of the language.
>
>The amazing difference between the way English is spoken and written is
>
>a direct result of this phenomenon. Why do we still spell the past
>
>tense of "teach" as "taught," for example, even though no one has
>
>pronounced it with a gutteral fricative (the "gh") for over 250 years?
>
>Koine Greek did not face this artificial retardation of change in the
>
>writing system. People tended to write the way they spoke. When speech
>
>changed, so did written documents.
>
>
>
>The impact of print media on language change will almost certainly be
>
>reduced in the years to come by the presence of electronic
>
>communication, where writing conventions are much looser.
>
>
>
>
>
>On Sunday, April 11, 2004, at 08:54 AM, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>
>
>
>> At 6:51 AM -0400 4/11/04, <bertdehaan at gosympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>> Carl,you wrote;
>
>>>
>
>>> .... I've argued
>
>>>> often enough on earlier occasions on this list that students who
>
>>>> concern
>
>>>> themselves only with a synchronic study of Koine Greek are likely
>
>>>> not to
>
>>>> appreciate the extent to which Koine Greek is a language in flux, a
>
>>>> language some of whose users/writers who are conscious of the
>
>>>> heritage of
>
>>>> the tradition will employ constructions and usages that have already
>
>>>> become
>
>>>> rare if they haven't vanished from the spoken language, while other
>
>>>> users/writers are commonly employing constructions and usages that
>
>>>> will
>
>>>> become standard in the centuries thereafter.....
>
>>>
>
>>> Several times you have written about Koine being a language in flux. I
>
>>> thought that you meant languages in general.
>
>>> (The Dutch language has undergone some changes in the 25 years since I
>
>>> left The Netherlands)
>
>>> But I am getting the impression that you specifically meant Koine
>
>>> Greek.
>
>>> Are the changes in koine more drastic than in other Greek, or in
>
>>> languages
>
>>> in general?
>
>
>
>---
>B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
>B-Greek mailing list
>B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
--
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list