[B-Greek] Greek NT audio
Leonard Jayawardena
leonardj at live.com
Sat Sep 27 06:30:04 EDT 2008
I have read the recent posts on the above thread and write to contribute my two cents worth.
As a student of NT Greek, I would strongly recommend the Erasmian (or academic) system of pronunciation of Greek because I think it helps the student with acquisition of vocabulary quickly, which, I think, is the single most important factor in developing fluency in any language. The one-to-one correspondence between the phonemes and the graphemes enables the student to recognize words easily when read and provides aural reinforcement of the written words in a way that other systems of pronunciation cannot. Additionally, it enables the student to correctly visualize the spellings of words he has not even come across before when he listens to them being read.
The phoneticity of Greek with the Erasmian system of pronunciation is one of the "small mercies" of learning this otherwise not-so-easy-to-learn language. Contrast this with the difficulties of learning an unphonetic language like English. The fact that "believe" and "receive" are spelt the way they are despite the fact that the second vowel is pronounced identically poses no great problem for many native users of English because of their total immersion in that language, but irregularities like that make life difficult for learners of English. Rules like "'i' before 'e' except after 'c'" don't help you much either because there are so many exceptions to those rules. The fact that the same phonemes are represented by different graphemes under the modern and Koine Greek pronunciation systems imposes an unnecessary strain on beginning students of ancient Greek.
In his article hH KOINH PROFORA, where Dr. Randall Ruth presents his case for the use of his reconstruction of the historical Koine Greek pronunciation, he makes the following statements in the introductory paragraph:
Quote
When a person wants to use living language methods to learn a language, one is required to make some choices about what kind of pronunciation system to use. As long as students only need to write Greek or to look at Greek on a printed page, the pronunciation system is not a very
important issue. As soon as students set their sights on a higher goal and want to include language learning methodologies that will lead to a fluent control of the language, they must come to grips with the need to include audio and oral material in a program. And audio material for an ancient language means that decisions must be made about the kind of pronunciation system to be used.
Unquote
Pronunciation is not an issue if you rely solely on visual memory to learn the words of a language. There must be many educated non-native speakers of English who know, for example, the word "boatswain" and recognize it when they see it in print, but they would never guess that it was originally pronounced BOSN (with a long "o"). A spelliing pronunciation for that word is now available. Do those who know and use only the spelling pronunciation know and understand this word any less than those who pronounce it BOSN? There are many pronunciation differences between, for example, American and British English, involving not only vowels but also consonants, yet these differences have not led to one group of speakers being any less fluent than others. Therefore even if attempts were made in our day to revive the old Koine Greek as a "living language" by speaking it, I don't see how the users of the Erasmian system would be any less fluent than those using the supposed historical or the modern pronunciation.
Those who learn Greek with a teacher need to easily recognize Greek words when they are spoken by him. This is most efficiently accomplished by a phonetic system of pronunciation--the Erasmian system. Students who wish to augment their learning with audio materials are best served by a system of pronunciation that provides aural reinforcement of the written words, as mentioned above.
Indeed the very basis on which Dr. Randall Ruth has reconstructed the vowel system used in Koine Greek, i. e., by studying the O/W confusion, etc., is actually an argument AGAINST adopting the assumed historical pronunciation for the study of NT Greek: If fluent and life-long users of Koine Greek sometimes confused certain vowels, what would be the plight of hapless modern students who adopt that system of pronunciation? The possibility of confusion of certain vowels as evidenced in ancient manuscripts was, I think, a defect of the language, an indication that the language had degenerated by losing certain phonemes that had existed before. I am sure that linguists like Dr. Ruth will acknowledge that not every change in a language is for the better.
The fact that in certain versions of the Erasmian system certain vowels are not distinguished is pointed out as a defect of that system. But in the version I learnt NT Greek with ("The Elements of NT Greek" by J. W. Wenham), EI and H and distinguished, with the former pronounced as a diphthong (as in "late" /leit/), and U and OU are pronounced to rhyme with "put" and "route" (British pronunciation of course!) respectively. This leaves only EU and HU, which are pronounced identically. O is pronounced as the "o" in "lot" (again, as in the British pronunciation, not /la:t/ as in the standard American pronunciation!).
Dr. Randall Ruth wrote in a post:
Quote
Consider French, with spelling quite a bit trickier than Koine Greek. "French for Reading" is sometimes taught to grad students in Erasmian 'pronounce each graph', but never for students of French lit. And 'French for Reading' students do not develop toward fluency. What French department would ever consider giving a student 1-2-3 years of French according to Erasmian pronunciation rules, and then saying, "by the way, you can change to the French system if you ever get the urge"? I think the serious students would feel betrayed.
Unquote
I think this is an argument by false analogy. French is a living language. True fluency in French is achieved by not only by reading French writings but also by listening to spoken French and speaking it, the last two of which require that you have the ability to recognize French words when spoken by a fluent speaker and to pronounce words in an acceptable manner. The student of French--and this applies to other living languages--is not at liberty to choose the system of pronunciation he will use because it has already been decided for him by others who speak the language. And he must master the pronunciation of those whom he wishes to communicate with--whether he likes it or not-- if he is to develop true fluency in that language.
But the case of Koine Greek is quite different. Koine Greek is a dead language with no living speakers. Those who speak it today do so basically in classroom situations, i.e., role play, as a learning aid. But why cannot we use the Erasmian system in role play? Unlike in the case of a living language, students of NT Greek ARE at liberty to choose the system of pronunciation. Dr. Randall Ruth's contention would be valid if there was AT LEAST ONE LIVING KOINE SPEAKER LEFT ON EARTH from whom we could learn and on whom we could practice our Koine.
I think that the real motives for advocating a reconstructed or the modern system of pronunciation in the study of NT Greek are probably more psychological than practical: The artificiality of the Erasmian system somehow makes one feel that one is not speaking "real" Greek resulting in a sense of dissatisfaction--perhaps the linguistic equivalent of the psychological difference involved in wearing, say, an original Levi vs. wearing a "Levi" that the wearer is aware is fake, even though the latter may be more comfortable to wear?!
We must never lose sight of the fact that the main purpose of learning NT Greek is to be able to read and understand the NT and related ancient writings. An authentic pronunciation is important only when we want to communicate with speakers of a living language. That learning NT Greek with the modern Greek or the Koine Greek pronunciation can confer some benefits on the student is not denied (i.e., in the areas of textual criticism, word play and, in the case of the modern pronunciation, an easy transition to modern Greek), but the issue is: Are the advantages of learning NT Greek with the historical or the modern pronunciation such that they far outweigh the advantages of using the Erasmian system? The answer has to be an emphatic No. I think pragmatic rather than purist considerations should carry more weight in our decision on which pronunciation system to adopt when teaching and learning Koine Greek.
Leonard Jayawardena
Sri Lanka
_________________________________________________________________
News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get it now!
http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list