[B-Greek] Questions regarding accentuation

Randall Buth randallbuth at gmail.com
Sun Jul 20 12:57:41 EDT 2008


Vasile EGRAPSE
>
My perception is that all languages we hear today are using pitch
accentuation >

Actually, very many languages in the world are 'tonal', and generally the
term accentuation refers to non-tonal languages. The pitch/tone of a
tonal determines different lexemes and structures. I speak one.

> - some with graphic signs in writing, such as Spanish and
French and some without. Stress accentuation would mean - as I understand
the process - a kind of robot talking, with the audio volume increasing some
when accenting a syllable.>

your interpretation of a 'stress' accent language is too resricted. Stress
languages are not 'robotic' and usually include tone as part of the stress.

> So, since pitch accent is common place for us
today (supposing my perception is true), why should we struggle to force it
out from Koine Greek? The result would be in contradiction even with modern
languages.>

as mentioned above, Koine Greek "stress" would naturally include pitch
distinctions, just not the ones describe by the PERISPWMENOS//OKSUS
distinction. No pitch is being forced out.

> Moreover, why should we stick with the entropic tendencies in the
language that were manifest around the 1st century and later? >

You appear to be changing the evidence. The tendencies that you mention
were already manifest in the 4th century BCE, especially in colloquial Attic
Greek, and become fixed as the KOINH around the Mediterranean in the ears
350-150 BCE.


>Why not adopt the position of the traditionalists of that time who maintain
the old classic features of the language even though the practice of
pronounciation were altering the old system? >

On the one hand, you are free to use a Sopheclean accent for later periods,
though that may actually be doing an 'unnatural' thing, a concept you
mention in your other notes below.
However, more to the point, the assumption that there were
"traditionalist" speakers in the first century begs data not in evidence.
Just who and where were anybody speaking the 'ancient' system in the
first century? Abundant evidence contradicts the assumption.
And who today or during the last 350 years communicates
in pre-Vowel-shift English? (see below.)
This week our SXOLH class will be reading the Emperor's decree on tomb
robbing from the mid-first century CE. the so-called Nazareth inscription.
Well-chiseled for the State by a professional. He spelled αμετακεινητους
AMETAKEINHTOYS 'untransferable', επιδιξη EPIDIKSH 'point out', τειμαν
TEIMAN 'to honor', μετακεινησαι METAKEINHSAI 'to transfer'. All of these
were considered good spellings in the first century and they show
up in all of our early manuscripts and papyri to the NT. Including
the very professional and conservative Vaticanus, also P75. Check out
the name PEILATOS and HLEIA, as I've pointed out on this list. (The
Nestle-Aland and UBS texts had Westcott-Hott respelled, supposedly
"according to first century practice" but actually according to medieval and
modern practice. Westcott-Hort had already done quite a bit of
regularization, in any case, of which I don't mind.) I assume that you
are reading these correctly. Last week we read an inscription at Caesaria
of Rom 13:1-3 where φοβισθαι FOBISQAI 'to be fearing' occurs
and the name ΣΗΛΒΑΝΟΥ SHLBANOY Silvanus. How do you
want students to read these? Next week at Tsippori they will see TEKNON
(plural = TEKNWN) and KE=KAI, among many others. These can be multi-
plied by the ten-thousand from Rome, Athens, the Dead Sea, and Egypt.

> Yes, we have the modern Greek today as a
landmark, but I believe the process that led to it is not entirely natural,
given the internationalization of the language prompted by Alexander the
Great and the 1000 years of Byzantine rule followed by another 500 years of
Ottoman occupation.>

Again, one should read the documents of the time. The 'watershed' between
old classical and 'modern' pronunciation was 350-150 BCE, before the
Byzantine rule and before the Ottoman occupation. After that time, 150 BCE,
only two more vowels dropped out: HTA dropped out by the third century CE
and merged with EI/I. Then OI/Y dropped out and merged with EI/I/H during
the 5-10 c CE. Such a process is entirely natural. Languages do not
go thru changes uniformly at a standard rate, but may go through turbulent
restructuralizations and relatively stable periods. English vowels went
thru a drastic change 1400-1550 and have remained relatively stable
since then.

ERRWSO
IWANHS

-- 
Randall Buth, PhD
www.biblicalulpan.org
randallbuth at gmail.com
Biblical Language Center
Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life


More information about the B-Greek mailing list