Discussion:
So-Called Latin Pronunciation
(too old to reply)
J***@gmail.com
2005-07-08 23:50:06 UTC
Permalink
The arguments over the pronunciation of Latin and how the Romans spoke
in this forum can only make one laugh.


For the first thing the Latin we read and study was never a "spoken
language" It was a formal literary language that was used by the
educated classes and was artificially developed on Greek models. This
language was used for writing and formal speeches but was never spoken
(Much like Shakespeare is read outloud and listened to today but only a
madman would attempt to speak in that manner Just like most people
don't know what every word of Shakespeare means - so the audience of
some formal reading would also not know every word that was being
read.)

There were basically two types of spoken Latin - a type spoken mainly
in the cities and a ruder type which was spoken in the country. The
modern Romance language have all developed from this "common" type of
Latin.
So any comparison between the pronunciation of modern Romance language
with classical literary Latin should be avoided.


Second of all, no one knows how literary Latin was pronounce. Latin
writers who give us information on the pronunciation of Latin are
usually writing about the common forms of the language - not the
artifical polished literary language which was never used in everyday
conversation. People who believe that the Romans talked in the same
manner as they wrote are only fooling themselves. You would think that
people who are studying a language who take a little time to learn
about the history of that language but from the looks of this forum -
it looks like they didn't.

Latin does not need any correct pronunciation. Latin is a language that
is used today to read ancient texts and/or translate them. The only
reason anyone would need to speak Latin was if he were going to become
a priest, bishop, etc. in the Catholic Church - But the Catholic Church
uses its own form of Latin - which is not quite the same as ancient
literary Latin and has its own artifical pronunciation. I find the
attempts of people to speak Latin quite amusing - they seems to believe
that they are speaking as the Romans spoke - little realizing that they
are speaking an artitical literary language that was never spoken.

Latin should be pronounced in whatever way is most comfortable to the
reader. All this nonsense about the correct pronunciation is just
ridiculous because classical Latin today is meant to be read and/or
translated.
P&G
2005-07-09 08:33:17 UTC
Permalink
We ahve a very good idea of Roman prounuciation of Latin, froma variety of
sources and means, and it does matter, becasue we cannot appreciate the
sound of poetry or prose without it, nor can we understand the development
of the language without it.

Peter
Brian Renshaw
2005-07-09 08:54:48 UTC
Permalink
My understanding is that "silent" reading is a relatively modern phenomenon,
dating from around the birth of the romance/novel. In earlier times ALL
written material would be read aloud, even when the reader was alone.
So maybe one can pretend to be "Kikero" after all!
Paul McKenna
2005-07-09 09:31:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Renshaw
My understanding is that "silent" reading is a relatively modern
phenomenon, dating from around the birth of the romance/novel. In earlier
times ALL written material would be read aloud, even when the reader was
alone.
So maybe one can pretend to be "Kikero" after all!
That's a very profound statement. How on earth do we know that people didn't
'read to themselves'?
Brian Renshaw
2005-07-09 10:59:07 UTC
Permalink
Well, we deduce from available evidence and debate with our peers in this newsgroup -very enjoyable.
Here's a snippet from "A History of Reading" by Alberto Manguel. (available on stanford.edu website)

"To Augustine, however, such reading manners seemed sufficiently strange for him to note them in his Confessions. The implication is that this method of reading, this silent perusing of the page, was in his time something out of the ordinary, and that normal reading was performed out loud. Even though instances of silent reading can be traced to earlier dates, not until the tenth century does this manner of reading become usual in theWest."

I think there's plenty of other evidence to support this theory but of course we can't "know" about the behaviour of individuals.

Maybe you wouldn't have learned very much if you were listening outside Julius Caesar's tent!
Paul McKenna
2005-07-09 11:55:58 UTC
Permalink
Manguel's quote of Augustine is evidence that people _did_ read silently and not that they didn't. I assumed you were promoting the theory that ALL reading used to be done aloud - I can't provide definitive evidence since you have cut the original message.
Furthermore, your first sentence says 'debate with our peers in this newsgroup', can I ask which one? This message thread appears to be posted to half-a-dozen groups simultaneously.

Paul McK
"Brian Renshaw" <***@space.net.au> wrote in message news:***@news.eftel.com...
Well, we deduce from available evidence and debate with our peers in this newsgroup -very enjoyable.
Here's a snippet from "A History of Reading" by Alberto Manguel. (available on stanford.edu website)

"To Augustine, however, such reading manners seemed sufficiently strange for him to note them in his Confessions. The implication is that this method of reading, this silent perusing of the page, was in his time something out of the ordinary, and that normal reading was performed out loud. Even though instances of silent reading can be traced to earlier dates, not until the tenth century does this manner of reading become usual in theWest."

I think there's plenty of other evidence to support this theory but of course we can't "know" about the behaviour of individuals.

Maybe you wouldn't have learned very much if you were listening outside Julius Caesar's tent!
John W. Kennedy
2005-07-09 13:58:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McKenna
Manguel's quote of Augustine is evidence that people _did_ read silently
and not that they didn't.
Not "people": one person -- Ambrose of Milan. Augustine, one of the best
educated men of his generation, was /surprised/ at Ambrose's peculiar habit.
--
John W. Kennedy
"Those in the seat of power oft forget their failings and seek only the
obeisance of others! Thus is bad government born! Hold in your heart
that you and the people are one, human beings all, and good government
shall arise of its own accord! Such is the path of virtue!"
-- Kazuo Koike. "Lone Wolf and Cub: Thirteen Strings" (tr. Dana Lewis)
j***@satx.rr.com
2005-07-09 16:12:31 UTC
Permalink
The first record of it that I know
is Augustine of Hippo, noticing
that Ambose of Milan read without
moving his mouth. Cicero wrote a
letter apologizing for not reading
a letter sooner, because his voice
was horse.

Jim
Martin Edwards
2005-07-10 09:13:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@satx.rr.com
The first record of it that I know
is Augustine of Hippo, noticing
that Ambose of Milan read without
moving his mouth. Cicero wrote a
letter apologizing for not reading
a letter sooner, because his voice
was horse.
Jim
I'd have kept quiet about that, too.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
ozandy
2005-07-12 00:53:58 UTC
Permalink
Always one to take the bit between his teeth, was Tullius.
St.Cuthbert's Host
2005-07-12 17:03:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McKenna
Post by Brian Renshaw
My understanding is that "silent" reading is a relatively modern
phenomenon, dating from around the birth of the romance/novel. In earlier
times ALL written material would be read aloud, even when the reader was
alone.
So maybe one can pretend to be "Kikero" after all!
That's a very profound statement. How on earth do we know that people didn't
'read to themselves'?
well in part because St Augustine was noted as NOT reading aloud when
he read, and this was seen as highly unusual.
John W. Kennedy
2005-07-09 13:57:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Renshaw
My understanding is that "silent" reading is a relatively modern phenomenon,
dating from around the birth of the romance/novel. In earlier times ALL
written material would be read aloud, even when the reader was alone.
Not always. Augustine remarks on Ambrose's inaudibility.
--
John W. Kennedy
"Information is light. Information, in itself, about anything, is light."
-- Tom Stoppard. "Night and Day"
Bobby D. Bryant
2005-07-10 01:45:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by John W. Kennedy
Post by Brian Renshaw
My understanding is that "silent" reading is a relatively modern
phenomenon, dating from around the birth of the romance/novel. In
earlier times ALL written material would be read aloud, even when
the reader was alone.
Not always. Augustine remarks on Ambrose's inaudibility.
Which only indicates that it was a rare phenomenon, even at that late
date.
--
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
a***@white-eagle.invalid.uk
2005-07-09 16:52:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Renshaw
My understanding is that "silent" reading is a relatively modern phenomenon,
dating from around the birth of the romance/novel. In earlier times ALL
written material would be read aloud, even when the reader was alone.
So maybe one can pretend to be "Kikero" after all!
It makes sense in a certain way. The lack of spacings of most
ancient writings indicates that they were not intended to be "speed
read". Modern texts are. In the sense we read modern books without
really paying much attention to individual letters.

It would be interesting to hear from people who do actually read
manuscripts without word divisions as to how they find themselves
reading them.

Axel
Steven
2005-07-09 20:01:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@white-eagle.invalid.uk
It would be interesting to hear from people who do actually read
manuscripts without word divisions as to how they find themselves
reading them.
Not mss. without word divisions, but I do read renaissance printed
texts on a daily basis where the distinction between U/V and I/J isn't
always made - I'll take the liberty to hash the two threads together.
I find myself transposing these letters automatically in my mind when
reading, and sometimes even when typing (the rules of the job require
me to quote the text as printed). Although the Romans didn't
distinguish, I (and I suppose most people) can tell if they meant an U
or a V, so there's a 'right' and a 'wrong'.

And yes, I do move my lips when reading the longer words to 'hear' how
it sounds. It helps to see the word as a word instead of a bunch of
letters.

Regards,
Steven
John W. Kennedy
2005-07-10 01:32:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@white-eagle.invalid.uk
It would be interesting to hear from people who do actually read
manuscripts without word divisions as to how they find themselves
reading them.
Not mss. without word divisions, but I do read renaissance printed texts
on a daily basis where the distinction between U/V and I/J isn't always
made - I'll take the liberty to hash the two threads together. I find
myself transposing these letters automatically in my mind when reading,
and sometimes even when typing (the rules of the job require me to quote
the text as printed). Although the Romans didn't distinguish, I (and I
suppose most people) can tell if they meant an U or a V, so there's a
'right' and a 'wrong'.
I certainly haue no problem with those Early Modern English texts in
vvhich V and U are vsed in the reuerse of the vvay that vve vse them.
--
John W. Kennedy
"...when you're trying to build a house of cards, the last thing you
should do is blow hard and wave your hands like a madman."
-- Rupert Goodwins
D. Spencer Hines
2005-07-10 03:59:38 UTC
Permalink
<G>

Bravo Zulu!

DSH

"John W. Kennedy" <***@attglobal.net> wrote in message news:xT_ze.9061$***@fe10.lga...

| I certainly haue no problem with those Early Modern English texts in
| vvhich V and U are vsed in the reuerse of the vvay that vve vse them.
|
| --
| John W. Kennedy
| "...when you're trying to build a house of cards, the last thing you
| should do is blow hard and wave your hands like a madman."
| -- Rupert Goodwins
Martin Edwards
2005-07-10 09:15:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by John W. Kennedy
Post by Steven
Post by a***@white-eagle.invalid.uk
It would be interesting to hear from people who do actually read
manuscripts without word divisions as to how they find themselves
reading them.
Not mss. without word divisions, but I do read renaissance printed
texts on a daily basis where the distinction between U/V and I/J isn't
always made - I'll take the liberty to hash the two threads together.
I find myself transposing these letters automatically in my mind when
reading, and sometimes even when typing (the rules of the job require
me to quote the text as printed). Although the Romans didn't
distinguish, I (and I suppose most people) can tell if they meant an U
or a V, so there's a 'right' and a 'wrong'.
I certainly haue no problem with those Early Modern English texts in
vvhich V and U are vsed in the reuerse of the vvay that vve vse them.
And another thing. Did cockneys in Dickens' time really pronounce "v"
as "w" and wice wersa?
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
a***@white-eagle.invalid.uk
2005-07-10 10:36:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Martin Edwards
Post by John W. Kennedy
I certainly haue no problem with those Early Modern English texts in
vvhich V and U are vsed in the reuerse of the vvay that vve vse them.
And another thing. Did cockneys in Dickens' time really pronounce "v"
as "w" and wice wersa?
I'm not sure about Cockneys... but a 'w' sound seems to have been
the Latin pronunciation of consonental 'u'.

As "1066 and All That" (W.C. Sellar and R.J. Yeatman) points out
- that is how Caesar beat the ancient Britons so easily. He said,
"Veni, vidi, vici". Which was understood by the Britons as referring
to them as being "weeny, weedy, and weaky" and so they gave up.

Axel
Alan Jones
2005-07-10 10:44:40 UTC
Permalink
"Martin Edwards" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message

[...]

... Did cockneys in Dickens' time really pronounce "v" as "w" and wice
wersa?

We looked into this in one of the English Usage groups some time ago, and it
appears that Sam Weller's reversal of "w" and "v" is authentic. I do wonder
whether the two sounds were really much the same but alien to non-Cockney
English, so that listeners expecting a "w" thought they were hearing "v" and
vice versa.

Isnt it supposed that the "w" with which we are taught to represent Latin
"v" or consonantal "u" is only an approximation suited to English mouths,
and that the real sound had a bit of "b" in it?

Alan Jones
Lukas Pietsch
2005-07-10 11:06:01 UTC
Permalink
[soc.history.* and alt.history.* snipped]
Post by Alan Jones
Isnt it supposed that the "w" with which we are taught to represent Latin
"v" or consonantal "u" is only an approximation suited to English mouths,
and that the real sound had a bit of "b" in it?
I wouldn't guess so, on purely phonetic grounds, but I'm speculating off
the top of my head now. The sound with "a bit of 'b' in it" would be
what is technically called a bilabial approximant, more or less as it
appears in modern Spanish, right? Phonetically, such a sound would be
expected as one intermediate step within a development where a [b] sound
turns into a [w] or ultimately [v] (which is pretty common across
languages). However, I don't think Latin <V> continues earlier
(Indo-European) /b/ in many words, does it? If, as I seem to remember,
Latin <V> primarily continues Indo-European short /u/, then there would
really be no obvious phonetic reason for the semi-consonantal version to
take up that bi-labial articulation on the way. The phonetically
expectable outcome would be labio-velar, because the vowel [u] also has
labial and velar articulatory components, and a labio-velar
semi-consonant is just what English [w] is.

Lukas
ozandy
2005-07-12 01:04:10 UTC
Permalink
Lukas Pietsch wrote:
However, I don't think Latin <V> continues earlier
Post by Lukas Pietsch
(Indo-European) /b/ in many words, does it? If, as I seem to remember,
Latin <V> primarily continues Indo-European short /u/, then there would
really be no obvious phonetic reason for the semi-consonantal version to
take up that bi-labial articulation on the way. The phonetically
expectable outcome would be labio-velar, because the vowel [u] also has
labial and velar articulatory components, and a labio-velar
semi-consonant is just what English [w] is.
There are modern examples of [w] developing into bilabial [b]-ish
sound. Swedish "bok" (book) is pronounced something like bubk, if I
remember rightly.
Martin Edwards
2005-07-10 17:48:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Jones
[...]
... Did cockneys in Dickens' time really pronounce "v" as "w" and wice
wersa?
We looked into this in one of the English Usage groups some time ago, and it
appears that Sam Weller's reversal of "w" and "v" is authentic. I do wonder
whether the two sounds were really much the same but alien to non-Cockney
English, so that listeners expecting a "w" thought they were hearing "v" and
vice versa.
Isnt it supposed that the "w" with which we are taught to represent Latin
"v" or consonantal "u" is only an approximation suited to English mouths,
and that the real sound had a bit of "b" in it?
Alan Jones
Maybe. I took O Level in 1964, so I'm a little rusty. :-)
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
P&G
2005-07-11 07:18:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Jones
Isnt it supposed that the "w" with which we are taught to represent Latin
"v" or consonantal "u" is only an approximation suited to English mouths,
Yes
Post by Alan Jones
and that the real sound had a bit of "b" in it?
No, more like a little bit of "u". The consonant and vowel forms are
interchangeable (at least in poetry) in ways that are unthinkable in
English. And the early and easy loss of v between two vowels, especially
identical vowels, indicates it was much lighter than an English v.

Peter
P&G
2005-07-10 08:07:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@white-eagle.invalid.uk
It would be interesting to hear from people who do actually read
manuscripts without word divisions as to how they find themselves
reading them.
Sanskrit is still regularly printed in this sort of way - gaps are put in
where possible, but many words cannot be separated because of the script,
and you have to learn to identify different words within one glob of
letters.

Peter
rick++
2005-07-11 20:55:58 UTC
Permalink
Chinese is still written without word gaps,
though a period usually seperates sentences.
In modern chinese a word may be between
one to four syllables, i.e. characters.
You kind of read ahead to find pronouns,
main nouns and verbs, then parse the
sentence in your mind accordingly.

When you read lyrics or classical Chinese
all bets are off. Monosyllabic synonyms are
used, often with archaic meanings. Word orders
are altered from conversational usage to
fit intended alliterations and rhythms.
Its a challenge to figure out the meaning.
Larry Swain
2005-07-11 05:03:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@white-eagle.invalid.uk
Post by Brian Renshaw
My understanding is that "silent" reading is a relatively modern phenomenon,
dating from around the birth of the romance/novel. In earlier times ALL
written material would be read aloud, even when the reader was alone.
So maybe one can pretend to be "Kikero" after all!
It makes sense in a certain way. The lack of spacings of most
ancient writings indicates that they were not intended to be "speed
read". Modern texts are. In the sense we read modern books without
really paying much attention to individual letters.
It would be interesting to hear from people who do actually read
manuscripts without word divisions as to how they find themselves
reading them.
Well, at least in the Latin West, word division was invented by the
Irish and Anglo-Saxons who passed it on to the Carolingians. MOST
classical Latin texts that we have come down to us in a Carolingian or
later manuscript. I've done a little work for myself on NT papyri and I
have to say, I'm usually working through it to divide the words so that
I can translate, but maybe someone with more skill approaches it
differently than I.
P&G
2005-07-11 07:30:55 UTC
Permalink
I've done a little work for myself on NT papyri and I have to say, I'm
usually working through it to divide the words
And remember the instruction of Paul, that a church leader should be someone
who is "rightly dividing the text".

There is an interesting suggestion that the KJ bible divided the text
wrongly at Amos 6:12. Most modern versions follow the new word-division.
the old version has
Do horses run upon rocks
do you plough [there] with oxen?
So they read "do you plough with oxen" but they need something impossible,
so they add the word "there".

Modern versions split up the word "oxen" (with the usual Hebrew plural
in -im, as in cherubim etc) so that it becomes two words: "an ox" and the
word "sea" (spelt the same way as -im), and they read:
do you plough the sea with an ox?

There are also a couple of places in the NT where similar suggestions have
been made, but they are less convincing (and I forget the details).

Peter
Agamemnon
2005-07-09 10:45:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by J***@gmail.com
The arguments over the pronunciation of Latin and how the Romans spoke
in this forum can only make one laugh.
Have you noticed that all of these theories originate from Anglo-Saxon
so-called scholars and universities and not from anywhere else ?

The Anglo-Saxons can't bear to admit that they have been pronouncing other
peoples languages wrong since the year dot so they keep coming up with new
theories on how everyone else's languages were always pronounced like home
counties English so that they don't have to change their own
misspronounciaiton. Everyone else accepts that Latin was always pronounced
like Italian, after all Italy is where the Romans lived.

If a modern Greek were to pronounce Latin using modern Greek pronunciation
it would sound like an Italian speaking Latin using modern Italian
pronunciation. But an Englishman speaking Latin sounds nothing like Italian,
but more like a German so they have clearly got it wrong. They're just too
ashamed to admit to it just like they are too ashamed to admit that Greek
has always been pronounced the same way for over 3000 years since the time
of Homer.

The problem with the Anglo-Saxons steams form the fact that they have no
idea about their own alphabet. For Greeks who invented the alphabet every
letter was always pronounced the same way by every speaker. Anywhere that
you go in Greece you will always find Alpha pronounced the same way, Beta
pronounced the same way, Gamma pronounced the same way, Delta pronounced the
same way and so on. The reason for this is that when the Greek Cadman
alphabet was introduced into Greece it was introduced everywhere at the same
time and everyone spelled the Greek words as they sounded and the result was
that you could easily tell Attic, Ionic, Aeolic and Doric apart from the way
that the words were spelled.

In England nobody was given the chance to record the spelling of their own
dialect but instead a standard English was imposed on everyone in the from
of the King James bible. The closest you got to dialectal spelling was the
plays of William Shakespeare whose spelling differs from that of the KJV
which came out at about the same time. But even though the KJV imposed a
standard spelling on all of the words in printed English nobody took any
notice of the pronunciation of the words and they continued to pronounce
English in the way they always did in their own dialects so instead of an
"A" being pronounced "a" as in cat in some places it was pronounced "i" as
in light and in America is was pronced "e" as in feed and so on with the
other vowels. So instead of people adopting a standard dialect as they did
in Greece with Attic Koine where the alphabet continued to be pronounced the
same way and all the words were pronounced in the same way by all speakers
because the local dialects were completely replaced by Attic, in England
none of the local dialects were replaced but instead the sounds of the
letters of the alphabet were changed to accomodate the local pronouncation
of each word.

Even before this in the Germanic languages as a whole in some places D was
pronounced T and in others it was pronounced TH and similarly in some places
P was pronounced B or as an intermediate PB but once again as standard
spelling was imposed on everyone ratter than a standard dialect so the
sounds of the letters alphabet were changed to accommodate the local
dialects.

Because of this Germanic languages CANNOT be used to derive the
pronunciation of either ancient Greek or Latin. ALL Ango-Saxon and Germanic
scholarship on the mater such as Erasmus is COMPLETELY WORTHLESS becaue
there is no standard Germanic alphabet. The only standard alphabet is the
Greek alphabet because it is the only one that has not changed its
pronunciation.
Post by J***@gmail.com
For the first thing the Latin we read and study was never a "spoken
language" It was a formal literary language that was used by the
educated classes and was artificially developed on Greek models. This
language was used for writing and formal speeches but was never spoken
(Much like Shakespeare is read outloud and listened to today but only a
madman would attempt to speak in that manner Just like most people
don't know what every word of Shakespeare means - so the audience of
some formal reading would also not know every word that was being
read.)
There were basically two types of spoken Latin - a type spoken mainly
in the cities and a ruder type which was spoken in the country. The
modern Romance language have all developed from this "common" type of
Latin.
So any comparison between the pronunciation of modern Romance language
with classical literary Latin should be avoided.
Second of all, no one knows how literary Latin was pronounce. Latin
writers who give us information on the pronunciation of Latin are
usually writing about the common forms of the language - not the
artifical polished literary language which was never used in everyday
conversation. People who believe that the Romans talked in the same
manner as they wrote are only fooling themselves. You would think that
people who are studying a language who take a little time to learn
about the history of that language but from the looks of this forum -
it looks like they didn't.
Latin does not need any correct pronunciation. Latin is a language that
is used today to read ancient texts and/or translate them. The only
reason anyone would need to speak Latin was if he were going to become
a priest, bishop, etc. in the Catholic Church - But the Catholic Church
uses its own form of Latin - which is not quite the same as ancient
literary Latin and has its own artifical pronunciation. I find the
attempts of people to speak Latin quite amusing - they seems to believe
that they are speaking as the Romans spoke - little realizing that they
are speaking an artitical literary language that was never spoken.
Latin should be pronounced in whatever way is most comfortable to the
reader. All this nonsense about the correct pronunciation is just
ridiculous because classical Latin today is meant to be read and/or
translated.
John W. Kennedy
2005-07-09 13:59:54 UTC
Permalink
Just in case there are any innocents reading who might take him
seriously, "Agamemnon" is full of shit.
--
John W. Kennedy
"Those in the seat of power oft forget their failings and seek only the
obeisance of others! Thus is bad government born! Hold in your heart
that you and the people are one, human beings all, and good government
shall arise of its own accord! Such is the path of virtue!"
-- Kazuo Koike. "Lone Wolf and Cub: Thirteen Strings" (tr. Dana Lewis)
Agamemnon
2005-07-09 14:25:30 UTC
Permalink
Just in case there are any innocents reading who might take him seriously,
"Agamemnon" is full of shit.
You are the one full of shit, proven by the fact that you have not addressed
even one of the arguments I brought up. I take it then that you agree with
me.
--
John W. Kennedy
Ed Cryer
2005-07-09 15:18:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Just in case there are any innocents reading who might take him seriously,
"Agamemnon" is full of shit.
You are the one full of shit, proven by the fact that you have not addressed
even one of the arguments I brought up. I take it then that you agree with
me.
--
John W. Kennedy
It's shit, Agamemnon.
I refer particularly two to of your claims
1. Anywhere that you go in Greece you will always find Alpha pronounced the
same way, Beta
pronounced the same way, Gamma pronounced the same way, Delta pronounced the
same way and so on. The reason for this is that when the Greek Cadman
alphabet was introduced into Greece it was introduced everywhere at the same
time and everyone spelled the Greek words as they sounded and the result was
that you could easily tell Attic, Ionic, Aeolic and Doric apart from the way
that the words were spelled.

This is refuted by itself; let alone many examples from ancient Greek
literature telling us how difficult it was for, say, an Athenian to
understand a Spartan.

2. In England nobody was given the chance to record the spelling of their
own
dialect but instead a standard English was imposed on everyone in the from
of the King James bible.

This is shit of such a low order that I feel it utterly infra dignitatem
meam to consider refuting it.

Ed
Agamemnon
2005-07-09 16:23:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by John W. Kennedy
Post by Agamemnon
Post by John W. Kennedy
Just in case there are any innocents reading who might take him
seriously,
Post by Agamemnon
Post by John W. Kennedy
"Agamemnon" is full of shit.
You are the one full of shit, proven by the fact that you have not
addressed
Post by Agamemnon
even one of the arguments I brought up. I take it then that you agree with
me.
Post by John W. Kennedy
--
John W. Kennedy
It's shit, Agamemnon.
I refer particularly two to of your claims
1. Anywhere that you go in Greece you will always find Alpha pronounced the
same way, Beta
pronounced the same way, Gamma pronounced the same way, Delta pronounced the
same way and so on. The reason for this is that when the Greek Cadman
alphabet was introduced into Greece it was introduced everywhere at the same
time and everyone spelled the Greek words as they sounded and the result was
that you could easily tell Attic, Ionic, Aeolic and Doric apart from the way
that the words were spelled.
This is refuted by itself; let alone many examples from ancient Greek
You are in need of a comprehension lesson if you think that.

The basic principle of the Greek Alphabet was to spell each word as it
sounded and that's what the Greeks did and that's why we know that there are
different Greek dialects because each dialect was preserved in the spelling.
It's why half the words in Homeric Greek are spelled differently to Koine.
The pronunciation of the Greek Alphabets letters NEVER changed with time.
Only the spelling of words did.
Post by John W. Kennedy
literature telling us how difficult it was for, say, an Athenian to
understand a Spartan.
WRONG. The Spartans spoke the Doric dialect while the Athenians spoke the
Attic dialect. That's why it was difficualt for them to understand each
other. When Attic and Doric words were written down the spelling was
different because the words were pronounced differently even if the had the
same meaning and that difference in pronounciation was recorded in the
spelling. The English alphabet on the other hand is INCAPABLE in recording
defences in pronunciation because barely any English words are written as
the are spoken. Look at the word "English" which is spelled with an E but is
pronounced with an I as Inglish. Look at the word "because" where the "au"
is pronounced as "o" and the "s" is turned in to a "z" and the "e" at the
end is lost completely to give "bekoz". And look at the name Cyrus where the
C becomes an S. Nothing like that exists in Greek.
Post by John W. Kennedy
2. In England nobody was given the chance to record the spelling of their
own
dialect but instead a standard English was imposed on everyone in the from
of the King James bible.
This is shit of such a low order that I feel it utterly infra dignitatem
meam to consider refuting it.
That's because you CANT refute it. A standard spelling was imposed on the
English by the French speaking aristocracy which bore absolutely no relation
to how the common people pronounced the language. It isn't even consistent
in the pronunciation of the same later within the same word. For example the
A at the start of Language is pronounced a as in "cat" but the A at the end
is pronounced a as in "day". In Greek A is ALWAYS pronounced Alpha.
Post by John W. Kennedy
Ed
Ed Cryer
2005-07-09 17:52:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by John W. Kennedy
Post by Agamemnon
Post by John W. Kennedy
Just in case there are any innocents reading who might take him
seriously,
Post by Agamemnon
Post by John W. Kennedy
"Agamemnon" is full of shit.
You are the one full of shit, proven by the fact that you have not
addressed
Post by Agamemnon
even one of the arguments I brought up. I take it then that you agree with
me.
Post by John W. Kennedy
--
John W. Kennedy
It's shit, Agamemnon.
I refer particularly two to of your claims
1. Anywhere that you go in Greece you will always find Alpha pronounced the
same way, Beta
pronounced the same way, Gamma pronounced the same way, Delta pronounced the
same way and so on. The reason for this is that when the Greek Cadman
alphabet was introduced into Greece it was introduced everywhere at the same
time and everyone spelled the Greek words as they sounded and the result was
that you could easily tell Attic, Ionic, Aeolic and Doric apart from the way
that the words were spelled.
This is refuted by itself; let alone many examples from ancient Greek
You are in need of a comprehension lesson if you think that.
The basic principle of the Greek Alphabet was to spell each word as it
sounded and that's what the Greeks did and that's why we know that there are
different Greek dialects because each dialect was preserved in the spelling.
It's why half the words in Homeric Greek are spelled differently to Koine.
The pronunciation of the Greek Alphabets letters NEVER changed with time.
Only the spelling of words did.
Post by John W. Kennedy
literature telling us how difficult it was for, say, an Athenian to
understand a Spartan.
WRONG. The Spartans spoke the Doric dialect while the Athenians spoke the
Attic dialect. That's why it was difficualt for them to understand each
other. When Attic and Doric words were written down the spelling was
different because the words were pronounced differently even if the had the
same meaning and that difference in pronounciation was recorded in the
spelling. The English alphabet on the other hand is INCAPABLE in recording
defences in pronunciation because barely any English words are written as
the are spoken. Look at the word "English" which is spelled with an E but is
pronounced with an I as Inglish. Look at the word "because" where the "au"
is pronounced as "o" and the "s" is turned in to a "z" and the "e" at the
end is lost completely to give "bekoz". And look at the name Cyrus where the
C becomes an S. Nothing like that exists in Greek.
Post by John W. Kennedy
2. In England nobody was given the chance to record the spelling of their
own
dialect but instead a standard English was imposed on everyone in the from
of the King James bible.
This is shit of such a low order that I feel it utterly infra dignitatem
meam to consider refuting it.
That's because you CANT refute it. A standard spelling was imposed on the
English by the French speaking aristocracy which bore absolutely no relation
to how the common people pronounced the language. It isn't even consistent
in the pronunciation of the same later within the same word. For example the
A at the start of Language is pronounced a as in "cat" but the A at the end
is pronounced a as in "day". In Greek A is ALWAYS pronounced Alpha.
Post by John W. Kennedy
Ed
You say "potato" and I say "potato". You say "tomato" and I say "tomato".
And then there's "either", "neither".

Here's Louis Armstrong's version.
Verse
Things have come to a pretty pass
Our romance is growing flat,
For you like this and the other
While I go for this and that,
Goodness knows what the end will be
Oh I don't know where I'm at
It looks as if we two will never be one
Something must be done:

Chorus - 1
You say either and I say either, You say neither and I say neither
Either, either Neither, neither, Let's call the whole thing off.

You like potato and I like potahto, You like tomato and I like tomahto
Potato, potahto, Tomato, tomahto, Let's call the whole thing off

But oh, if we call the whole thing off Then we must part
And oh, if we ever part, then that might break my heart

So if you like pyjamas and I like pyjahmas, I'll wear pyjamas and give up
pyajahmas
For we know we need each other so we , Better call the whole off off
Let's call the whole thing off.


Chorus - 2
You say laughter and I say larfter, You say after and I say arfter
Laughter, larfter after arfter, Let's call the whole thing off,

You like vanilla and I like vanella, You saspiralla, and I saspirella
Vanilla vanella chocolate strawberry, Let's call the whole thing off

But oh if we call the whole thing of then we must part
And oh, if we ever part, then that might break my heart

So if you go for oysters and I go for ersters, I'll order oysters and cancel
the ersters
For we know we need each other so we, Better call the calling off off,
Let's call the whole thing off.


Chorus - 3
I say father, and you say pater, I saw mother and you say mater
Pater, mater Uncle, auntie, let's call the whole thing off.

I like bananas and you like banahnahs, I say Havana and I get Havahnah
Bananas, banahnahs Havana, Havahnah, Go your way, I'll go mine

So if I go for scallops and you go for lobsters, So all right no contest
we'll
order lobseter
For we know we need each other so we, Better call the calling off off,
Let's call the whole thing off.

**********************

But notice; and notice well. The difference doesn't appear in the written
language. Unless, that is, you reduce it to some kind of phonetics, as in
the above. The USA drawl can't be seen; nor can the Lancashire accent, the
Yorkshire one, the Devon swirl of the Dorset whirl.

I appreciate you comments on how written English is no guide to how it is
pronounced. They are heightened by considering, for example, modern Spanish;
or even German. But with these two latter (and I call native speakers to
witness) there are vast variations in pronunciation. A modern urban
Madrileno can hardly understand a word spoken by a lorry-driver from Bogota.

Ed
D. Spencer Hines
2005-07-09 19:19:03 UTC
Permalink
Who do you think WROTE that?

Hint:

It was not Louis Armstrong.

DSH

"Ed Cryer" <***@somewhere.in.the.UK> wrote in message news:dap2tr$dp6$***@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...

| You like potato and I like potahto, You like tomato and I like tomahto
| Potato, potahto, Tomato, tomahto, Let's call the whole thing off
Ed Cryer
2005-07-09 20:44:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by D. Spencer Hines
Who do you think WROTE that?
It was not Louis Armstrong.
You're the top!
You're the Coliseum.
Ed Cryer
2005-07-09 20:46:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Cryer
Post by D. Spencer Hines
Who do you think WROTE that?
It was not Louis Armstrong.
You're the top!
You're the Coliseum.
I prefer "Colosseum"

Ed
Martin Edwards
2005-07-10 09:30:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Cryer
Post by Ed Cryer
Post by D. Spencer Hines
Who do you think WROTE that?
It was not Louis Armstrong.
You're the top!
You're the Coliseum.
I prefer "Colosseum"
Ed
I prefer King Crimson.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
Martin Edwards
2005-07-10 09:29:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by D. Spencer Hines
Who do you think WROTE that?
It was not Louis Armstrong.
DSH
| You like potato and I like potahto, You like tomato and I like tomahto
| Potato, potahto, Tomato, tomahto, Let's call the whole thing off
I sure hope it wasn't Rogers and Hart.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
Agamemnon
2005-07-09 19:05:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Cryer
You say "potato" and I say "potato". You say "tomato" and I say "tomato".
And then there's "either", "neither".
Here's Louis Armstrong's version.
Verse
Things have come to a pretty pass
Our romance is growing flat,
For you like this and the other
While I go for this and that,
Goodness knows what the end will be
Oh I don't know where I'm at
It looks as if we two will never be one
And did you know that there's also a Greek versions of this ?
Post by Ed Cryer
Chorus - 1
You say either and I say either, You say neither and I say neither
Either, either Neither, neither, Let's call the whole thing off.
You say either and I say eite, You say neither and I say oudeta
Either, eite Neither, oudeta, Let's call the whole thing off.
Post by Ed Cryer
You like potato and I like potahto, You like tomato and I like tomahto
Potato, potahto, Tomato, tomahto, Let's call the whole thing off
You like potato and I like patata, You like tomato and I like ntomata
Potato, patata, Tomato, ntomata, Let's call the whole thing off
Post by Ed Cryer
But oh, if we call the whole thing off Then we must part
And oh, if we ever part, then that might break my heart
So if you like pyjamas and I like pyjahmas, I'll wear pyjamas and give up
pyajahmas
So if you like pyjamas and I like pyzames, I'll wear pyjamas and give up
pizames
Post by Ed Cryer
For we know we need each other so we , Better call the whole off off
Let's call the whole thing off.
Chorus - 2
You say laughter and I say larfter, You say after and I say arfter
Laughter, larfter after arfter, Let's call the whole thing off,
You like vanilla and I like vanella, You saspiralla, and I saspirella
Vanilla vanella chocolate strawberry, Let's call the whole thing off
But oh if we call the whole thing of then we must part
And oh, if we ever part, then that might break my heart
So if you go for oysters and I go for ersters, I'll order oysters and cancel
the ersters
For we know we need each other so we, Better call the calling off off,
Let's call the whole thing off.
Chorus - 3
I say father, and you say pater, I saw mother and you say mater
Pater, mater Uncle, auntie, let's call the whole thing off.
I like bananas and you like banahnahs, I say Havana and I get Havahnah
Bananas, banahnahs Havana, Havahnah, Go your way, I'll go mine
So if I go for scallops and you go for lobsters, So all right no contest
we'll
order lobseter
For we know we need each other so we, Better call the calling off off,
Let's call the whole thing off.
**********************
But notice; and notice well. The difference doesn't appear in the written
language. Unless, that is, you reduce it to some kind of phonetics, as in
the above. The USA drawl can't be seen; nor can the Lancashire accent, the
Yorkshire one, the Devon swirl of the Dorset whirl.
But in Greek it can be seen. Oute can either be written Oute and Oude
depending on where you come from. Te in ancient Greek becomes De in modern
Greek, thus the change in spelling of the word reflects the change in
pronunciation/dialect unlike English.
Post by Ed Cryer
I appreciate you comments on how written English is no guide to how it is
pronounced. They are heightened by considering, for example, modern Spanish;
or even German. But with these two latter (and I call native speakers to
witness) there are vast variations in pronunciation. A modern urban
Madrileno can hardly understand a word spoken by a lorry-driver from Bogota.
Ed
Martin Edwards
2005-07-10 09:28:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by John W. Kennedy
Post by Agamemnon
Post by John W. Kennedy
Just in case there are any innocents reading who might take him
seriously,
Post by Agamemnon
Post by John W. Kennedy
"Agamemnon" is full of shit.
You are the one full of shit, proven by the fact that you have not
addressed
Post by Agamemnon
even one of the arguments I brought up. I take it then that you agree with
me.
Post by John W. Kennedy
--
John W. Kennedy
It's shit, Agamemnon.
I refer particularly two to of your claims
1. Anywhere that you go in Greece you will always find Alpha pronounced the
same way, Beta
pronounced the same way, Gamma pronounced the same way, Delta pronounced the
same way and so on. The reason for this is that when the Greek Cadman
alphabet was introduced into Greece it was introduced everywhere at the same
time and everyone spelled the Greek words as they sounded and the result was
that you could easily tell Attic, Ionic, Aeolic and Doric apart from the way
that the words were spelled.
This is refuted by itself; let alone many examples from ancient Greek
You are in need of a comprehension lesson if you think that.
The basic principle of the Greek Alphabet was to spell each word as it
sounded and that's what the Greeks did and that's why we know that there are
different Greek dialects because each dialect was preserved in the spelling.
It's why half the words in Homeric Greek are spelled differently to Koine.
The pronunciation of the Greek Alphabets letters NEVER changed with time.
Only the spelling of words did.
That's why six letters and former diphtongs are now pronouned "ee" and
two diphtongs are now a vowel and a consonant. I have even heard a
Greek refer to them as diphthongs, blissfully unaware that they are no
longer any such thing. 'fkaristo, Aggi mou, poli astios ise.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
Larry Swain
2005-07-11 05:00:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by John W. Kennedy
Post by Agamemnon
Post by John W. Kennedy
Just in case there are any innocents reading who might take him
seriously,
Post by Agamemnon
Post by John W. Kennedy
"Agamemnon" is full of shit.
You are the one full of shit, proven by the fact that you have not
addressed
Post by Agamemnon
even one of the arguments I brought up. I take it then that you agree with
me.
Post by John W. Kennedy
--
John W. Kennedy
It's shit, Agamemnon.
I refer particularly two to of your claims
1. Anywhere that you go in Greece you will always find Alpha pronounced the
same way, Beta
pronounced the same way, Gamma pronounced the same way, Delta pronounced the
same way and so on. The reason for this is that when the Greek Cadman
alphabet was introduced into Greece it was introduced everywhere at the same
time and everyone spelled the Greek words as they sounded and the result was
that you could easily tell Attic, Ionic, Aeolic and Doric apart from the way
that the words were spelled.
This is refuted by itself; let alone many examples from ancient Greek
You are in need of a comprehension lesson if you think that.
The basic principle of the Greek Alphabet was to spell each word as it
sounded and that's what the Greeks did and that's why we know that there are
different Greek dialects because each dialect was preserved in the spelling.
It's why half the words in Homeric Greek are spelled differently to Koine.
The pronunciation of the Greek Alphabets letters NEVER changed with time.
Only the spelling of words did.
Post by John W. Kennedy
literature telling us how difficult it was for, say, an Athenian to
understand a Spartan.
WRONG. The Spartans spoke the Doric dialect while the Athenians spoke the
Attic dialect. That's why it was difficualt for them to understand each
other. When Attic and Doric words were written down the spelling was
different because the words were pronounced differently even if the had the
same meaning and that difference in pronounciation was recorded in the
spelling. The English alphabet on the other hand is INCAPABLE in recording
defences in pronunciation because barely any English words are written as
the are spoken. Look at the word "English" which is spelled with an E but is
pronounced with an I as Inglish. Look at the word "because" where the "au"
is pronounced as "o" and the "s" is turned in to a "z" and the "e" at the
end is lost completely to give "bekoz". And look at the name Cyrus where the
C becomes an S. Nothing like that exists in Greek.
Post by John W. Kennedy
2. In England nobody was given the chance to record the spelling of their
own
dialect but instead a standard English was imposed on everyone in the from
of the King James bible.
This is shit of such a low order that I feel it utterly infra dignitatem
meam to consider refuting it.
That's because you CANT refute it. A standard spelling was imposed on the
English by the French speaking aristocracy which bore absolutely no relation
to how the common people pronounced the language. It isn't even consistent
in the pronunciation of the same later within the same word. For example the
A at the start of Language is pronounced a as in "cat" but the A at the end
is pronounced a as in "day". In Greek A is ALWAYS pronounced Alpha.
Um.....no. The French speaking aristocracy had no standard spelling of
their own language, or of Latin, much less imposing one for English.
The greatest impulse toward standardization for all languages was the
use of the printing press, but even there it takes some time for a
standard to develop, and then not usually "imposed".
John Briggs
2005-07-11 23:38:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Swain
Um.....no. The French speaking aristocracy had no standard spelling
of their own language, or of Latin, much less imposing one for
English. The greatest impulse toward standardization for all
languages was the use of the printing press, but even there it takes
some time for a standard to develop, and then not usually "imposed".
Bad choice of words: 'impose' and 'imposition' are technical terms in
printing :-)
--
John Briggs
Larry Swain
2005-07-12 12:49:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Briggs
Post by Larry Swain
Um.....no. The French speaking aristocracy had no standard spelling
of their own language, or of Latin, much less imposing one for
English. The greatest impulse toward standardization for all
languages was the use of the printing press, but even there it takes
some time for a standard to develop, and then not usually "imposed".
Bad choice of words: 'impose' and 'imposition' are technical terms in
printing :-)
Not at all, since if you read what I wrote I said that the greatest
impulse to standardization of orthography was the use of the printing
press. It certainly wasn't the Normans!
p***@ix.netcom.com
2005-07-09 17:21:41 UTC
Permalink
Lucius Alter Edo sal.

Cultus divi Stercori, ut mihi videtur, cum sterquilinia passim
inveniantur ut adiuvet ut Agamemnon ibi ludat et sterceia careat ad
imaginem anticipatam culi perpurgendam, sacerdotibus non deest.

"Beta
pronounced the same way, Gamma pronounced the same way, Delta
pronounced the
same way and so on."

Res itacisma ad tempus Alexandri, quamquam verba scribuntur eadem quae
ad tempus Periclis inveniuntur, etiam incepit ut <ei,>, <i> etc. fiant
unus sonus. Similiter <B> ad tempus Augusti fit <f>.

Agamemnon considerare 'gamma' <G> in talibus verbis:

AGGELEIN et ANAGKAZW.

" In England nobody was given the chance to record the spelling of
their
own
dialect but instead a standard English was imposed on everyone in the
from
of the King James bible."

Sunt plurimi codices ex temporibus Anglosaxonibus in quibus
conserventur orthographiae regionum variarum (exemplum est hymnus
Caedmonis qui conservatur in codicibus Bedae at qui saepe imprimitur in
versionibus Occidenalibus Saxonicis), sed discipuli qui linguam veterem
discunt phonologiam et orthographiam legere coeperunt quae in formas
Occidentales Saxonicas translatae sunt. Si opera Chauceriana aut poema
Gawaine consideraverimus, dialecti sunt praeclari. Etsi Gower, Dunbar,
Ancren Riwle, etc. legimus, artifacta temporis et dialecti invenimus:
nisi lexerimus, non inveniemus.


"This is shit of such a low order that I feel it utterly infra
dignitatem
meam to consider refuting it. "

Est natura stercoris, propter originem et portam ad mundum, esse
depressa, sed ludere in merda est infantibus res catulisque ut
regressionem puerilem ad sterquilinium et ad ludum stercoreum
reiiciamus magis quam naturam quae culi et animi sensus non confundit.

Valeas.
v***@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com
2005-07-10 23:33:13 UTC
Permalink
Once a common national body of literature appears, a language
solidifies into a reference form (call it "Classical") and change
become very slow. People on the street, while not expert, generally
have a good idea of what Classical texts are about. This applies to
all languages: Greek, English, Latin, Hebrew &al What messes things up
is when grubmints get involved and try to impose an artifical
language. What really sucks with how Greek is handled is that Classics
should really also involve Hebrew, Sanskrit, and Chinese - and when
interactions with these cultures are studied more closely (rather
than, say only Greek-Latin) the crazier theories (that the Greeks
themselves oppose) about Greek vanish.

Byzantine Achievement, Robert Byron, Russell, 1964 [orig 1929]
p9 Fallmerayer, whose history of the Morea, published in the
thirties [1830s], convinced a Europe anxious to believe it that the
"Modern Greek" was of Slavonic origin. WIth sensation of relief, it
was decided that the descendants of Pericles and Pheidias were
extinct.. From then onwards the world at large, eyes riveted on the
dead pillars of the Parthenon, has discounted the inhabitants beneath
them as the unmoral refuse of mediaeval Slav migrations, sullying the
land of their birth with the fury of their politics and the
malformation of their small brown bodies
p11 The theory of Slavic origin, derived from a superficial
observation of village names.. simultaneously forgotten that chiselled
noses, proud lips and rounded chins are still Greek features
p13 In the country a regular formula of personal interrogation is the
preliminary to all hospitality. The results from the insatiable
attitude of enquiry, a universal, and to the Briton, extraordinary,
respect for learning, for books as books, and for any aspect of
cultural ability. From the highest to the lowest, even to the
illiterate, this national trait has endured through the ages
p18 In face of common-sence euphony, they persist in maintaining a
pronounciation invented by the ignorant English scholars of the
sixteenth-century, which utters "basilews" for basileus instead of
"vassilefs," "kilioy" for xilioi instead of "hilii" - thus rendering
moribund a language which, after two milleniums, differs from
Euripedes considerably less than modern English from Chaucer

Biddle [later Bank of US prez], Greece 1806, ed McNeal, PennStateU 1993
p91 dogeared dirty volume & finding it a Greek collection of Aesop's
fables, Musaeus & some othe classic pieces. THe learned pedantry of our
Hellenists would have been very disconcerted at finding his boasted treasures
thus degraded, & finding a ragged boy a better commentator than the
disciplined pedagogues of Oxford.. ought not to omit that for the first time
I hear a shepherd's boy yhe sound of a flageolet [klarino], that rural music
so sweet so famous yet so little heard. I had never heard a note from a Swiss
peasant whilst watching his fold. Instead of music they love only tobacco, &
from their pipes nothing issues but smoke
p116 same character distinguishes the people of Greece as formerly, The
Boetians are still a heavy, clownish and vicious people but the Athenians
have not these vices & are compararively polite and affable.. (& sic)
Spartans are rude and uncivil. All over this country are scatered Albanese
villages of which people speak no Greek but a peculiar language of their own,
a mixture of Sclavonic & other languages. These are very inudustrious
people..
p146-7 With regard to language the Athenian thinks Mt F is the softest -
it is little Italicised. For instance, they pronounce the K like our CH, the
Italian C. The Moreans {are} more harsh & the Constantinopolitans still more
harsh, tho; they laugh at Athenian pronounciation. There is a dispute about
the present Greek pronounciation, whether it be the proper standard of the
ancient language. Let us see. The principal difference is this. The B (beta)
is pronounced like our V. THe D (delta) like our TH. e & n (epsilon & eta) the
reverse of our way, n being pronounced out I & the epsilon like our A (as in
bad). the Z (zeta) like our S. The K like CH (tho' this an Athenian custom
rather). Y (upsilon) like our B or rather F. They pronounce EY EF; AI like A
simple, EI like E; after N, tau is pronounced like D.. Can a foreign people
dictate to the descendants of the Greeks how Greek is to be read? It ought
not to be so. It is said that the Greeks themselves pronounce
differently.. The controversy turns around the Beta. The moderns pronounce it
V, to make our sound of B they write M/7 (MP).. As to Roman translation from
Greek it is to be remarked that the Romans most probably knew the Greeks
first by their writing {and} the Greeks first {knew the Romans} by
intercourse with the Romans. The Greeks therefore copied from actual hearing,
the Romans from books; and finding a Greek geographer the name of a town they
put it into Latin by substituting the same letter of their alphabet, &
afterwards pronounced them as they chose. In the same way as do the French &
English now

- = -
Vasos-Peter John Panagiotopoulos II, Columbia'81+, Bio$trategist
BachMozart ReaganQuayle EvrytanoKastorian
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/vjp2/vasos.htm
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Fooey on GIU,{MS,X}Windows 4 Bimbos] [Cigar smoke belongs in veg food group]
Agamemnon
2005-07-11 00:24:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by v***@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com
Once a common national body of literature appears, a language
solidifies into a reference form (call it "Classical") and change
become very slow. People on the street, while not expert, generally
have a good idea of what Classical texts are about. This applies to
all languages: Greek, English, Latin, Hebrew &al What messes things up
is when grubmints get involved and try to impose an artifical
language. What really sucks with how Greek is handled is that Classics
should really also involve Hebrew, Sanskrit, and Chinese - and when
interactions with these cultures are studied more closely (rather
than, say only Greek-Latin) the crazier theories (that the Greeks
themselves oppose) about Greek vanish.
Byzantine Achievement, Robert Byron, Russell, 1964 [orig 1929]
p9 Fallmerayer, whose history of the Morea, published in the
thirties [1830s], convinced a Europe anxious to believe it that the
"Modern Greek" was of Slavonic origin. WIth sensation of relief, it
was decided that the descendants of Pericles and Pheidias were
extinct.. From then onwards the world at large, eyes riveted on the
dead pillars of the Parthenon, has discounted the inhabitants beneath
them as the unmoral refuse of mediaeval Slav migrations, sullying the
land of their birth with the fury of their politics and the
malformation of their small brown bodies
p11 The theory of Slavic origin, derived from a superficial
observation of village names.. simultaneously forgotten that chiselled
noses, proud lips and rounded chins are still Greek features
p13 In the country a regular formula of personal interrogation is the
preliminary to all hospitality. The results from the insatiable
attitude of enquiry, a universal, and to the Briton, extraordinary,
respect for learning, for books as books, and for any aspect of
cultural ability. From the highest to the lowest, even to the
illiterate, this national trait has endured through the ages
p18 In face of common-sence euphony, they persist in maintaining a
pronounciation invented by the ignorant English scholars of the
sixteenth-century, which utters "basilews" for basileus instead of
"vassilefs," "kilioy" for xilioi instead of "hilii" - thus rendering
moribund a language which, after two milleniums, differs from
Euripedes considerably less than modern English from Chaucer
Biddle [later Bank of US prez], Greece 1806, ed McNeal, PennStateU 1993
p91 dogeared dirty volume & finding it a Greek collection of Aesop's
fables, Musaeus & some othe classic pieces. THe learned pedantry of our
Hellenists would have been very disconcerted at finding his boasted treasures
thus degraded, & finding a ragged boy a better commentator than the
disciplined pedagogues of Oxford.. ought not to omit that for the first time
I hear a shepherd's boy yhe sound of a flageolet [klarino], that rural music
so sweet so famous yet so little heard. I had never heard a note from a Swiss
peasant whilst watching his fold. Instead of music they love only tobacco, &
from their pipes nothing issues but smoke
p116 same character distinguishes the people of Greece as formerly, The
Boetians are still a heavy, clownish and vicious people but the Athenians
have not these vices & are compararively polite and affable.. (& sic)
Spartans are rude and uncivil. All over this country are scatered Albanese
villages of which people speak no Greek but a peculiar language of their own,
a mixture of Sclavonic & other languages. These are very inudustrious
people..
p146-7 With regard to language the Athenian thinks Mt F is the softest -
it is little Italicised. For instance, they pronounce the K like our CH, the
Italian C. The Moreans {are} more harsh & the Constantinopolitans still more
harsh, tho; they laugh at Athenian pronounciation. There is a dispute about
the present Greek pronounciation, whether it be the proper standard of the
ancient language. Let us see. The principal difference is this. The B (beta)
is pronounced like our V. THe D (delta) like our TH. e & n (epsilon & eta) the
reverse of our way, n being pronounced out I & the epsilon like our A (as in
bad). the Z (zeta) like our S. The K like CH (tho' this an Athenian custom
Interesting. So the Cypriot pronunciation of K was used in Athens as well.
Post by v***@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com
rather). Y (upsilon) like our B or rather F. They pronounce EY EF; AI like A
simple, EI like E; after N, tau is pronounced like D.. Can a foreign people
dictate to the descendants of the Greeks how Greek is to be read? It ought
not to be so. It is said that the Greeks themselves pronounce
differently.. The controversy turns around the Beta. The moderns pronounce it
V, to make our sound of B they write M/7 (MP).. As to Roman translation from
Greek it is to be remarked that the Romans most probably knew the Greeks
first by their writing {and} the Greeks first {knew the Romans} by
intercourse with the Romans. The Greeks therefore copied from actual hearing,
the Romans from books; and finding a Greek geographer the name of a town they
put it into Latin by substituting the same letter of their alphabet, &
afterwards pronounced them as they chose. In the same way as do the French &
English now
- = -
Vasos-Peter John Panagiotopoulos II, Columbia'81+, Bio$trategist
BachMozart ReaganQuayle EvrytanoKastorian
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/vjp2/vasos.htm
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Fooey on GIU,{MS,X}Windows 4 Bimbos] [Cigar smoke belongs in veg food group]
Walter Constantin Gogu Costica Brincoveanu Mitty
2005-07-11 12:01:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by v***@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com
Once a common national body of literature appears, a language
solidifies into a reference form (call it "Classical") and change
become very slow. People on the street, while not expert, generally
have a good idea of what Classical texts are about. This applies to
all languages: Greek, English, Latin, Hebrew &al What messes things up
is when grubmints get involved and try to impose an artifical
language. What really sucks with how Greek is handled is that Classics
should really also involve Hebrew, Sanskrit, and Chinese - and when
interactions with these cultures are studied more closely (rather
than, say only Greek-Latin) the crazier theories (that the Greeks
themselves oppose) about Greek vanish.
Byzantine Achievement, Robert Byron, Russell, 1964 [orig 1929]
p9 Fallmerayer, whose history of the Morea, published in the
thirties [1830s], convinced a Europe anxious to believe it that the
"Modern Greek" was of Slavonic origin. WIth sensation of relief, it
was decided that the descendants of Pericles and Pheidias were
extinct.. From then onwards the world at large, eyes riveted on the
dead pillars of the Parthenon, has discounted the inhabitants beneath
them as the unmoral refuse of mediaeval Slav migrations, sullying the
land of their birth with the fury of their politics and the
malformation of their small brown bodies
p11 The theory of Slavic origin, derived from a superficial
observation of village names.. simultaneously forgotten that chiselled
noses, proud lips and rounded chins are still Greek features
p13 In the country a regular formula of personal interrogation is the
preliminary to all hospitality. The results from the insatiable
attitude of enquiry, a universal, and to the Briton, extraordinary,
respect for learning, for books as books, and for any aspect of
cultural ability. From the highest to the lowest, even to the
illiterate, this national trait has endured through the ages
p18 In face of common-sence euphony, they persist in maintaining a
pronounciation invented by the ignorant English scholars of the
sixteenth-century, which utters "basilews" for basileus instead of
"vassilefs," "kilioy" for xilioi instead of "hilii" - thus rendering
moribund a language which, after two milleniums, differs from
Euripedes considerably less than modern English from Chaucer
Biddle [later Bank of US prez], Greece 1806, ed McNeal, PennStateU 1993
p91 dogeared dirty volume & finding it a Greek collection of Aesop's
fables, Musaeus & some othe classic pieces. THe learned pedantry of our
Hellenists would have been very disconcerted at finding his boasted treasures
thus degraded, & finding a ragged boy a better commentator than the
disciplined pedagogues of Oxford.. ought not to omit that for the first time
I hear a shepherd's boy yhe sound of a flageolet [klarino], that rural music
so sweet so famous yet so little heard. I had never heard a note from a Swiss
peasant whilst watching his fold. Instead of music they love only tobacco, &
from their pipes nothing issues but smoke
p116 same character distinguishes the people of Greece as formerly, The
Boetians are still a heavy, clownish and vicious people but the Athenians
have not these vices & are compararively polite and affable.. (& sic)
Spartans are rude and uncivil. All over this country are scatered Albanese
villages of which people speak no Greek but a peculiar language of their own,
a mixture of Sclavonic & other languages. These are very inudustrious
people..
p146-7 With regard to language the Athenian thinks Mt F is the softest -
it is little Italicised. For instance, they pronounce the K like our CH, the
Italian C. The Moreans {are} more harsh & the Constantinopolitans still more
harsh, tho; they laugh at Athenian pronounciation. There is a dispute about
the present Greek pronounciation, whether it be the proper standard of the
ancient language. Let us see. The principal difference is this. The B (beta)
is pronounced like our V. THe D (delta) like our TH. e & n (epsilon & eta) the
reverse of our way, n being pronounced out I & the epsilon like our A (as in
bad). the Z (zeta) like our S. The K like CH (tho' this an Athenian custom
Interesting. So the Cypriot pronunciation of K was used in Athens as well.
GorreGt

Now tell us why you FuGGin top-post ArKyrou you stupeed KreeK Cypriot
Gunt ?

*LMFAOAY*

PS More GayG Vicar ?
Seanie O'Kilfoyle®™/Yiorgos Spodbwoy Chicken George Tsolakis
2005-07-11 12:29:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Walter Constantin Gogu Costica Brincoveanu Mitty
Post by Agamemnon
Post by v***@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com
Once a common national body of literature appears, a language
solidifies into a reference form (call it "Classical") and change
become very slow. People on the street, while not expert, generally
have a good idea of what Classical texts are about. This applies to
all languages: Greek, English, Latin, Hebrew &al What messes things up
is when grubmints get involved and try to impose an artifical
language. What really sucks with how Greek is handled is that Classics
should really also involve Hebrew, Sanskrit, and Chinese - and when
interactions with these cultures are studied more closely (rather
than, say only Greek-Latin) the crazier theories (that the Greeks
themselves oppose) about Greek vanish.
Byzantine Achievement, Robert Byron, Russell, 1964 [orig 1929]
p9 Fallmerayer, whose history of the Morea, published in the
thirties [1830s], convinced a Europe anxious to believe it that the
"Modern Greek" was of Slavonic origin. WIth sensation of relief, it
was decided that the descendants of Pericles and Pheidias were
extinct.. From then onwards the world at large, eyes riveted on the
dead pillars of the Parthenon, has discounted the inhabitants beneath
them as the unmoral refuse of mediaeval Slav migrations, sullying the
land of their birth with the fury of their politics and the
malformation of their small brown bodies
p11 The theory of Slavic origin, derived from a superficial
observation of village names.. simultaneously forgotten that chiselled
noses, proud lips and rounded chins are still Greek features
p13 In the country a regular formula of personal interrogation is the
preliminary to all hospitality. The results from the insatiable
attitude of enquiry, a universal, and to the Briton, extraordinary,
respect for learning, for books as books, and for any aspect of
cultural ability. From the highest to the lowest, even to the
illiterate, this national trait has endured through the ages
p18 In face of common-sence euphony, they persist in maintaining a
pronounciation invented by the ignorant English scholars of the
sixteenth-century, which utters "basilews" for basileus instead of
"vassilefs," "kilioy" for xilioi instead of "hilii" - thus rendering
moribund a language which, after two milleniums, differs from
Euripedes considerably less than modern English from Chaucer
Biddle [later Bank of US prez], Greece 1806, ed McNeal, PennStateU 1993
p91 dogeared dirty volume & finding it a Greek collection of Aesop's
fables, Musaeus & some othe classic pieces. THe learned pedantry of our
Hellenists would have been very disconcerted at finding his boasted treasures
thus degraded, & finding a ragged boy a better commentator than the
disciplined pedagogues of Oxford.. ought not to omit that for the first time
I hear a shepherd's boy yhe sound of a flageolet [klarino], that rural music
so sweet so famous yet so little heard. I had never heard a note from a Swiss
peasant whilst watching his fold. Instead of music they love only tobacco, &
from their pipes nothing issues but smoke
p116 same character distinguishes the people of Greece as formerly, The
Boetians are still a heavy, clownish and vicious people but the Athenians
have not these vices & are compararively polite and affable.. (& sic)
Spartans are rude and uncivil. All over this country are scatered Albanese
villages of which people speak no Greek but a peculiar language of their own,
a mixture of Sclavonic & other languages. These are very inudustrious
people..
p146-7 With regard to language the Athenian thinks Mt F is the softest -
it is little Italicised. For instance, they pronounce the K like our CH, the
Italian C. The Moreans {are} more harsh & the Constantinopolitans still more
harsh, tho; they laugh at Athenian pronounciation. There is a dispute about
the present Greek pronounciation, whether it be the proper standard of the
ancient language. Let us see. The principal difference is this. The B (beta)
is pronounced like our V. THe D (delta) like our TH. e & n (epsilon & eta) the
reverse of our way, n being pronounced out I & the epsilon like our A (as in
bad). the Z (zeta) like our S. The K like CH (tho' this an Athenian custom
Interesting. So the Cypriot pronunciation of K was used in Athens as well.
GorreGt
Now tell us why you FuGGin top-post ArKyrou you stupeed KreeK Cypriot
Gunt ?
*LMFAOAY*
PS More GayG Vicar ?
Robert Stonehouse
2005-07-11 22:54:32 UTC
Permalink
On 11 Jul 2005 05:29:54 -0700, "Seanie O'Kilfoyle®™/Yiorgos
...
Post by v***@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com
What really sucks with how Greek is handled is that Classics
should really also involve Hebrew, Sanskrit, and Chinese
...
At my college, a person accused of an offence against
politeness at dinner (such as speaking in a foreign
language, talking shop or mentioning a woman's name) could
escape having to pay for three gallons of beer by an appeal
to the High Table in Latin, Greek, Hebrew or classical
Chinese. (I suspect on the more thinly attended nights the
High Table might have been in trouble with Chinese; but then
the Latin they got was usually so bad that 'non intellego'
was almost a standard answer.)

I don't remember Sanskrit, though.
Panta Rhei
2005-07-11 17:33:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Walter Constantin Gogu Costica Brincoveanu Mitty
GorreGt
Now tell us why you FuGGin top-post ArKyrou you stupeed KreeK Cypriot
Gunt ?
*LMFAOAY*
PS More GayG Vicar ?
Check, above, Beanie Tinfoil's deteriorated Turkish mind in full action on
July 11th, 2005! LMAO!

Check ANY of his other postings for similar loony content by the village
idiot of Usenet! LOL
--
Living the life of a ridiculed, bitchslapped loony on usenet helps Beanie
Tinfoil (right now: "Walter Mitty" <BG>) forget the failures in his life.
a***@white-eagle.invalid.uk
2005-07-11 12:44:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by v***@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com
Once a common national body of literature appears, a language
solidifies into a reference form (call it "Classical") and change
become very slow. People on the street, while not expert, generally
have a good idea of what Classical texts are about. This applies to
all languages: Greek, English, Latin, Hebrew &al What messes things up
is when grubmints get involved and try to impose an artifical
language. What really sucks with how Greek is handled is that Classics
should really also involve Hebrew, Sanskrit, and Chinese - and when
interactions with these cultures are studied more closely (rather
than, say only Greek-Latin) the crazier theories (that the Greeks
themselves oppose) about Greek vanish.
Sanskrit should certainly be added to the list of Classical languages,
... I understand that it is very cognate with those tongues and
have a couple of books on order. But neither Hebrew nor Chinese
are connected, being from entirely different language families.

By the way a crazy theory I came across many years ago while delving
in my university library was that by Leo Wiener whose books espoused
the theory that Gothic literature is based upon Arabic sources and
that "no literary documents in Anglo-Saxon, Norse, and Old High
German exist which do not show the influence of the Arabicised
Gothic language".

Seriously weird. I have managed to pick up vols 2 & 3 of his work
(as a reviewer at the time pointed out, thankfully no longer printed
by Harvard UP), but am still looking for the first.

Axel
Martin Edwards
2005-07-10 09:22:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Just in case there are any innocents reading who might take him seriously,
"Agamemnon" is full of shit.
You are the one full of shit, proven by the fact that you have not addressed
even one of the arguments I brought up. I take it then that you agree with
me.
--
John W. Kennedy
He may not have realized that there were any arguments.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
Martin Edwards
2005-07-10 09:22:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by John W. Kennedy
Just in case there are any innocents reading who might take him
seriously, "Agamemnon" is full of shit.
The boy from Northampton is. The play is quite good. Check my Website
for the start of my translation.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
George Durbridge
2005-07-10 07:37:49 UTC
Permalink
Aggie,

Start taking the tablets again. You display an ignorance of Greek almost
as complete as your ignorance of English. I have snipped portions of your
post which were too silly for words.
Post by Agamemnon
Greek
has always been pronounced the same way for over 3000 years since the
time of Homer.
This is wrong, to your knowledge. Greek pronunciation has varied over
space and time, and stll varies. For example, the loss of the letter
digamma and of the words and inflections which depended on it reflected a
permanent change in spoken Greek. But you seem not to mean that: below,
you mention that C5th BC Doric differed from Ionic and so on. From what
you say below, you seem to mean something different i.e. that the sound
associated with each letter of the Greek alphabet has been the same,
wherever and whenever Greek was written, so that dialect was faithfully
reflected in local spellings.

On the evidence of modern Greek, that isn't true either. Modern Greek is
nearly as bad as English at associating one sound with one letter, and for
much the same reason: inherited spellings, which no longer coincide with
the spoken language. You have, for instance, five ways of writing the
sound for which iota stands: iota, ypsilon, epsilon-iota, omicron-iota,
eta. On the other hand, ypsilon can be pronounced in at least three
completely different ways: like iota, standing alone, like beta, following
alpha or epsilon, or like English oo in book, following omicron.

These letters are respectively redundant and over-defined, from the point
of view of expressing the sounds of modern Greek. The commonest spelling
mistakes in modern Greek consist of substituting one redundant letter for
another. They begin to make sense, when you observe that, for instance,
in antiquity, Greeks and Romans alike treated ypsilon as equivalent to
Latin u (except in inflections).

The redundant forms are kept because they express meaning which is
current, even if the sounds are lost. For instance, although nowadays
omicron and omega sound the same, and are often written in place of one
another, the articles and the genitive plural in omega-nu are generally
spelled correctly.
Post by Agamemnon
For Greeks who invented the alphabet
every letter was always pronounced the same way by every speaker.
Anywhere that you go in Greece you will always find Alpha pronounced the
same way, Beta pronounced the same way, Gamma pronounced the same way,
Gamma is pronounced three different ways, to this day, often in the same
word.
Post by Agamemnon
Delta pronounced the same way and so on. The reason for this is that
when the Greek Cadman alphabet was introduced into Greece it was
introduced everywhere at the same time and everyone spelled the Greek
words as they sounded and the result was that you could easily tell
Attic, Ionic, Aeolic and Doric apart from the way that the words were
spelled.
The simultaneous introduction of the alphabet is plainly wrong. Cyprus
used a script derived from Linear A into Hellenistic times, as you have
mentioned in this group. There is no reason to believe that the different
sounds of the different dialects were precisely or completely captured by
the local differences in spelling. The usual experience is that one
dialect has sounds for which the other dialect has no standard letter.
Post by Agamemnon
Even before this in the Germanic languages as a whole in some places D
was pronounced T and in others it was pronounced TH
Very similar things happen in Greek. Delta has changed from equivalent to
Latin d in Ancient Greek, to the equivalent of one of the th sounds in
English today. You can get a d sound in modern Greek, however, by writing
nu-tau, and otherwise lost accusative final nu can often be heard this
way, because the d can be heard even when the nu is the last letter of one
word and the tau the first letter of the next.
Agamemnon
2005-07-10 10:11:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Durbridge
Aggie,
Start taking the tablets again. You display an ignorance of Greek almost
as complete as your ignorance of English. I have snipped portions of your
post which were too silly for words.
Post by Agamemnon
Greek
has always been pronounced the same way for over 3000 years since the
time of Homer.
This is wrong, to your knowledge. Greek pronunciation has varied over
space and time, and stll varies. For example, the loss of the letter
NO IT HAS NOT !
Post by George Durbridge
digamma and of the words and inflections which depended on it reflected a
permanent change in spoken Greek. But you seem not to mean that: below,
WRONG. That did NOT change the pronunciation of Greek whatsoever. It is as
idiotic as saying that the introduction of the word sokolata (chocolate)
into the Greek language has changed its pronunciation which clearly it
hasn't. Words which used the digamma were NO LONGER written with a digamma
when the digamma went out of use so unlike in English which has silent
letters, Greek does not have anything of the king thus the pronunciation DID
NOT CHANGE, the SPELLING changed instead.
Post by George Durbridge
you mention that C5th BC Doric differed from Ionic and so on. From what
you say below, you seem to mean something different i.e. that the sound
associated with each letter of the Greek alphabet has been the same,
Doria and Ionic were different dialects and the words were spelled
differently to show the way they were pronounced. Get it inot you head that
the proncoied of the Greek alphabe has ALLWAYS remeined the same since the
time of Homer. It is NOT like the English alphabet were everyone pronounces
the vowels and consonants differently In the Greek alphabet ALL of the
letters have names and since those names are Semitic in origin everyone had
to learn the correct Semitic pronunciation of the names of the letters that
was used by the Cadmians who introduced the alphabet into Greece. Since they
all learned the pronounciation from a single source and the names of the
letters were foreign the Greeks could not do as the English did and change
the sounds of the letters to fit into existing dialectal pronunciation but
had to learn the correct proscription from the start. After that the SPELLED
EACH WORD AS IT SOUNDED !
Post by George Durbridge
wherever and whenever Greek was written, so that dialect was faithfully
reflected in local spellings.
On the evidence of modern Greek, that isn't true either. Modern Greek is
WRONG. It is perfectly true.
Post by George Durbridge
nearly as bad as English at associating one sound with one letter, and for
WRONG.
Post by George Durbridge
much the same reason: inherited spellings, which no longer coincide with
the spoken language. You have, for instance, five ways of writing the
sound for which iota stands: iota, ypsilon, epsilon-iota, omicron-iota,
eta. On the other hand, ypsilon can be pronounced in at least three
completely different ways: like iota, standing alone, like beta, following
alpha or epsilon, or like English oo in book, following omicron.
All the "i" sounds in Greek are pronounced differently and have different
breathings, but an ignorant Anglo-Saxon that thinks ancient Greek was
pronounced like home counties English couldn't possibly notice that.

The diphthongs in Greek are ALWAYS pronounced the same way and JNOT randomly
like in English. "AU" is always av as in averse and "OU" is always "oo" and
I will NOT use the example book because everyone know perfectly well that
some people pronounce the oo in book as a short sound and others pronounce
it as a very long sound as in food, which once again proves my point about
the completely random way in which English is pronounced. In fact it is
impossible to describe the Greek "ou" sound in English because of this. All
that I can say is that it is a short oo sound.
Post by George Durbridge
These letters are respectively redundant and over-defined, from the point
of view of expressing the sounds of modern Greek. The commonest spelling
WRONG. The letters are all pronounced differently and save having to use
accents like in French.
Post by George Durbridge
mistakes in modern Greek consist of substituting one redundant letter for
another. They begin to make sense, when you observe that, for instance,
in antiquity, Greeks and Romans alike treated ypsilon as equivalent to
Latin u (except in inflections).
WRONG.

NOBODY in Greece makes the mistake of substituting u for i. The only common
mistake is the substitution of iota for ita and that is because they usually
forget the breath at the end of words ending in ita. Those kind of spelling
mistakes stem from the use of English which has an inadequate number of i
sounds.
Post by George Durbridge
The redundant forms are kept because they express meaning which is
current, even if the sounds are lost. For instance, although nowadays
omicron and omega sound the same, and are often written in place of one
another, the articles and the genitive plural in omega-nu are generally
spelled correctly.
WRONG AGAIN.

Omicron is a short O sound while Omega is a long O sound, hence the micro
and the mega. These letters habe NOT lost their pronciation. The mistakes in
spelling stems form the fact that some students are to lazy to check out the
lengths of these sounds in the words before writing them.
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
For Greeks who invented the alphabet
every letter was always pronounced the same way by every speaker.
Anywhere that you go in Greece you will always find Alpha pronounced the
same way, Beta pronounced the same way, Gamma pronounced the same way,
Gamma is pronounced three different ways, to this day, often in the same
word.
WRONG.

Gamma is only pronounced ONE way. The only time the sound changes is when it
is in combination with itself as gg where the sound changes to ng and this
is a standard rule and NOT random.
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
Delta pronounced the same way and so on. The reason for this is that
when the Greek Cadman alphabet was introduced into Greece it was
introduced everywhere at the same time and everyone spelled the Greek
words as they sounded and the result was that you could easily tell
Attic, Ionic, Aeolic and Doric apart from the way that the words were
spelled.
The simultaneous introduction of the alphabet is plainly wrong. Cyprus
used a script derived from Linear A into Hellenistic times, as you have
And that is way Cypriot pronounciation is are variance with the rest of
Greece, which proves my point.
Post by George Durbridge
mentioned in this group. There is no reason to believe that the different
sounds of the different dialects were precisely or completely captured by
the local differences in spelling. The usual experience is that one
dialect has sounds for which the other dialect has no standard letter.
WRONG. Linear B proves that this is NOT POSSIBLE since in Mycenaean Greek
L's and R's were not distinguished nor were P's and B's or T's and TH's (ie.
A-TA-NA is also Athana = Athena, and E-RA is also Ela but ) or K's and G's.
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
Even before this in the Germanic languages as a whole in some places D
was pronounced T and in others it was pronounced TH
Very similar things happen in Greek. Delta has changed from equivalent to
Latin d in Ancient Greek, to the equivalent of one of the th sounds in
NO IT HAS NOT !

Delta has ALWAYS been pronounced with a "the" sound because it is
represented by its own individual symbols in Linear B. If it had a D sound
as in English it would have been part of the T/TH/D group instead !

It is the Latin "D" sound which has changed in GERMANIC languages such as
English that what is causing you to make this mistake. When the Franks
invaded Italy the Latin D suffered from a degree of consonantal shift, but
as can be heard when talking to a native Italian the Italian D sound is
closer to the Greek delta sound in their accent than to the English D, which
proves that the Greek delta sound has remained constant.
Post by George Durbridge
English today. You can get a d sound in modern Greek, however, by writing
nu-tau, and otherwise lost accusative final nu can often be heard this
way, because the d can be heard even when the nu is the last letter of one
word and the tau the first letter of the next.
Nonsense. The Greek delta was always a soft "the" and the Greek tau was the
hard d sound, which is made softer by the inclusion of the n before it to
give nt.

Don't give me lectures on consonantal shit in Greek when you are using as
you base line a Germanic language which is riddled with consonantal shift.
Consonantal shift as a mark of Germans languages and NEVER took place in
Greek after the introduction on Cadmian script since Cadmian script solved
the problem which was inherent in Linear B by introducing new letters from a
foreign Semitic language that did not suffer from consonantal shift to
distinguish each sound individually. From this we know that the Greek kappa
sound was NOT like the English k but like the g as in modern Greek since it
was part of the K/G group in Linear B. We also know that There was ALWAYS a
Theta sounds whcih as part of the T/TH/D group and there was ALLWYS a Delta
sound that was part of the "d" group, and that there was ALWAYS a phi sound
since it had a letter of its own. And futher still we know that the Greek
beta was ALWAYS pronounced V since the word Baslileus is spelled QA-SI-RE-U
in Linear B and there is NO WAY that QA could have possibly become a hard B
sound as in English when it was converted in Cadmain script therefore Beta
must have ALWAYS been Vita since the loss of Quoppa or Qa in this case was
replaced by Va or Vita !

So take your Anglo-Saxon linguistic theory and SHOVE IT. Greek has always
been pronounced the same way since the time of Homer and the above example
prove it. Linguistic theory base on Germanic languages which ALL suffer from
consonantal and vowel shifts is not worth the paper its written on. Its time
that you learned to pronounced Greek properly and use that is the basis for
all linguistic theory instead.
George Durbridge
2005-07-10 12:12:44 UTC
Permalink
Aggie,

Go back to the tablets. Screaming nonsense doesn't make it true.

This is how real Greeks speak and write. They can't hear these gradations
of length and breathing with which you delude yourself. That's why they
have stopped writing the breathings.

You imagine other languages have imposed archaic orthographic
straitjackets on themselves, and then pretend that spoken Greek contains a
different sound for everything written in katharevousa.

You have forgotten that in my own name gamma is pronounced first as a
vowel and second as a consonant.

You haven't even noticed that the reference point I used for temporal
change was Romance, not Germanic.

Now go away.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
Aggie,
Start taking the tablets again. You display an ignorance of Greek
almost as complete as your ignorance of English. I have snipped
portions of your post which were too silly for words.
Post by Agamemnon
Greek
has always been pronounced the same way for over 3000 years since the
time of Homer.
This is wrong, to your knowledge. Greek pronunciation has varied over
space and time, and stll varies. For example, the loss of the letter
NO IT HAS NOT !
Post by George Durbridge
digamma and of the words and inflections which depended on it reflected
below,
WRONG. That did NOT change the pronunciation of Greek whatsoever. It is
as idiotic as saying that the introduction of the word sokolata
(chocolate) into the Greek language has changed its pronunciation which
clearly it hasn't. Words which used the digamma were NO LONGER written
with a digamma when the digamma went out of use so unlike in English
which has silent letters, Greek does not have anything of the king thus
the pronunciation DID NOT CHANGE, the SPELLING changed instead.
Post by George Durbridge
you mention that C5th BC Doric differed from Ionic and so on. From
what you say below, you seem to mean something different i.e. that the
sound associated with each letter of the Greek alphabet has been the
same,
Doria and Ionic were different dialects and the words were spelled
differently to show the way they were pronounced. Get it inot you head
that the proncoied of the Greek alphabe has ALLWAYS remeined the same
since the time of Homer. It is NOT like the English alphabet were
everyone pronounces the vowels and consonants differently In the Greek
alphabet ALL of the letters have names and since those names are Semitic
in origin everyone had to learn the correct Semitic pronunciation of the
names of the letters that was used by the Cadmians who introduced the
alphabet into Greece. Since they all learned the pronounciation from a
single source and the names of the letters were foreign the Greeks could
not do as the English did and change the sounds of the letters to fit
into existing dialectal pronunciation but had to learn the correct
proscription from the start. After that the SPELLED EACH WORD AS IT
SOUNDED !
Post by George Durbridge
wherever and whenever Greek was written, so that dialect was faithfully
reflected in local spellings.
On the evidence of modern Greek, that isn't true either. Modern Greek is
WRONG. It is perfectly true.
Post by George Durbridge
nearly as bad as English at associating one sound with one letter, and for
WRONG.
Post by George Durbridge
much the same reason: inherited spellings, which no longer coincide
with the spoken language. You have, for instance, five ways of writing
the sound for which iota stands: iota, ypsilon, epsilon-iota,
omicron-iota, eta. On the other hand, ypsilon can be pronounced in at
least three completely different ways: like iota, standing alone, like
beta, following alpha or epsilon, or like English oo in book, following
omicron.
All the "i" sounds in Greek are pronounced differently and have
different breathings, but an ignorant Anglo-Saxon that thinks ancient
Greek was pronounced like home counties English couldn't possibly notice
that.
The diphthongs in Greek are ALWAYS pronounced the same way and JNOT
randomly like in English. "AU" is always av as in averse and "OU" is
always "oo" and I will NOT use the example book because everyone know
perfectly well that some people pronounce the oo in book as a short
sound and others pronounce it as a very long sound as in food, which
once again proves my point about the completely random way in which
English is pronounced. In fact it is impossible to describe the Greek
"ou" sound in English because of this. All that I can say is that it is
a short oo sound.
Post by George Durbridge
These letters are respectively redundant and over-defined, from the
point of view of expressing the sounds of modern Greek. The commonest
spelling
WRONG. The letters are all pronounced differently and save having to use
accents like in French.
Post by George Durbridge
mistakes in modern Greek consist of substituting one redundant letter
for another. They begin to make sense, when you observe that, for
instance, in antiquity, Greeks and Romans alike treated ypsilon as
equivalent to Latin u (except in inflections).
WRONG.
NOBODY in Greece makes the mistake of substituting u for i. The only
common mistake is the substitution of iota for ita and that is because
they usually forget the breath at the end of words ending in ita. Those
kind of spelling mistakes stem from the use of English which has an
inadequate number of i sounds.
Post by George Durbridge
The redundant forms are kept because they express meaning which is
current, even if the sounds are lost. For instance, although nowadays
omicron and omega sound the same, and are often written in place of one
another, the articles and the genitive plural in omega-nu are generally
spelled correctly.
WRONG AGAIN.
Omicron is a short O sound while Omega is a long O sound, hence the
micro and the mega. These letters habe NOT lost their pronciation. The
mistakes in spelling stems form the fact that some students are to lazy
to check out the lengths of these sounds in the words before writing
them.
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
For Greeks who invented the alphabet
every letter was always pronounced the same way by every speaker.
Anywhere that you go in Greece you will always find Alpha pronounced
the same way, Beta pronounced the same way, Gamma pronounced the same
way,
Gamma is pronounced three different ways, to this day, often in the
same word.
WRONG.
Gamma is only pronounced ONE way. The only time the sound changes is
when it is in combination with itself as gg where the sound changes to
ng and this is a standard rule and NOT random.
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
Delta pronounced the same way and so on. The reason for this is that
when the Greek Cadman alphabet was introduced into Greece it was
introduced everywhere at the same time and everyone spelled the Greek
words as they sounded and the result was that you could easily tell
Attic, Ionic, Aeolic and Doric apart from the way that the words were
spelled.
The simultaneous introduction of the alphabet is plainly wrong. Cyprus
used a script derived from Linear A into Hellenistic times, as you have
And that is way Cypriot pronounciation is are variance with the rest of
Greece, which proves my point.
Post by George Durbridge
mentioned in this group. There is no reason to believe that the
different sounds of the different dialects were precisely or completely
captured by the local differences in spelling. The usual experience is
that one dialect has sounds for which the other dialect has no standard
letter.
WRONG. Linear B proves that this is NOT POSSIBLE since in Mycenaean
Greek L's and R's were not distinguished nor were P's and B's or T's and
TH's (ie. A-TA-NA is also Athana = Athena, and E-RA is also Ela but ) or
K's and G's.
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
Even before this in the Germanic languages as a whole in some places D
was pronounced T and in others it was pronounced TH
Very similar things happen in Greek. Delta has changed from equivalent
to Latin d in Ancient Greek, to the equivalent of one of the th sounds
in
NO IT HAS NOT !
Delta has ALWAYS been pronounced with a "the" sound because it is
represented by its own individual symbols in Linear B. If it had a D
sound as in English it would have been part of the T/TH/D group instead
!
It is the Latin "D" sound which has changed in GERMANIC languages such
as English that what is causing you to make this mistake. When the
Franks invaded Italy the Latin D suffered from a degree of consonantal
shift, but as can be heard when talking to a native Italian the Italian
D sound is closer to the Greek delta sound in their accent than to the
English D, which proves that the Greek delta sound has remained
constant.
Post by George Durbridge
English today. You can get a d sound in modern Greek, however, by
writing nu-tau, and otherwise lost accusative final nu can often be
heard this way, because the d can be heard even when the nu is the last
letter of one word and the tau the first letter of the next.
Nonsense. The Greek delta was always a soft "the" and the Greek tau was
the hard d sound, which is made softer by the inclusion of the n before
it to give nt.
Don't give me lectures on consonantal shit in Greek when you are using
as you base line a Germanic language which is riddled with consonantal
shift. Consonantal shift as a mark of Germans languages and NEVER took
place in Greek after the introduction on Cadmian script since Cadmian
script solved the problem which was inherent in Linear B by introducing
new letters from a foreign Semitic language that did not suffer from
consonantal shift to distinguish each sound individually. From this we
know that the Greek kappa sound was NOT like the English k but like the
g as in modern Greek since it was part of the K/G group in Linear B. We
also know that There was ALWAYS a Theta sounds whcih as part of the
T/TH/D group and there was ALLWYS a Delta sound that was part of the "d"
group, and that there was ALWAYS a phi sound since it had a letter of
its own. And futher still we know that the Greek beta was ALWAYS
pronounced V since the word Baslileus is spelled QA-SI-RE-U in Linear B
and there is NO WAY that QA could have possibly become a hard B sound as
in English when it was converted in Cadmain script therefore Beta must
have ALWAYS been Vita since the loss of Quoppa or Qa in this case was
replaced by Va or Vita !
So take your Anglo-Saxon linguistic theory and SHOVE IT. Greek has
always been pronounced the same way since the time of Homer and the
above example prove it. Linguistic theory base on Germanic languages
which ALL suffer from consonantal and vowel shifts is not worth the
paper its written on. Its time that you learned to pronounced Greek
properly and use that is the basis for all linguistic theory instead.
Agamemnon
2005-07-10 12:51:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Durbridge
Aggie,
Go back to the tablets. Screaming nonsense doesn't make it true.
This is how real Greeks speak and write. They can't hear these gradations
of length and breathing with which you delude yourself. That's why they
have stopped writing the breathings.
WRONG. The breathing marks are included in all lower case Greek and will not
pass through a Greek spellchecker otherwise. Get an education and actually
learn the language properly. Anyone who has lived in Greece can distinguish
the lengths and breathings.
Post by George Durbridge
You imagine other languages have imposed archaic orthographic
straitjackets on themselves, and then pretend that spoken Greek contains a
different sound for everything written in katharevousa.
You have forgotten that in my own name gamma is pronounced first as a
vowel and second as a consonant.
NONSENSE. There is only ONE gamma in Agamemnon. Have you forgotten how to
count as well ? Or are you referring to Aggie.... LOL.... Aggie is NOT Greek
its an Anglicisation.....HA......In Greek its spelled Aki, because the Greek
k is pronounced g and always has been since Mycenaean times since they
shared the same symbol !
Post by George Durbridge
You haven't even noticed that the reference point I used for temporal
change was Romance, not Germanic.
WRONG. Your reference is Germanic since you are writing in English. You have
NO IDEA what native Italian sounds like. All you can speak is tourist
French, Spanish and Italian complete with the ridiculous British accent. The
British and the Americans are the last people to be in any position to
comment on other peoples languages since they can't even pronounce their own
language of English consistently and can't be bothered to learn any foreign
languages or show non-English popular films on TV. Next to them come all the
speakers of Germanic language which all suffer from random consonantal and
vowel shifts and DON'T have a standard pronunciation for the letters of
their alphabet unlike Greek which is the only language which has a standard
alphabet and spells all words as they are spoken.
Post by George Durbridge
Now go away.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
Aggie,
Start taking the tablets again. You display an ignorance of Greek
almost as complete as your ignorance of English. I have snipped
portions of your post which were too silly for words.
Post by Agamemnon
Greek
has always been pronounced the same way for over 3000 years since the
time of Homer.
This is wrong, to your knowledge. Greek pronunciation has varied over
space and time, and stll varies. For example, the loss of the letter
NO IT HAS NOT !
Post by George Durbridge
digamma and of the words and inflections which depended on it reflected
below,
WRONG. That did NOT change the pronunciation of Greek whatsoever. It is
as idiotic as saying that the introduction of the word sokolata
(chocolate) into the Greek language has changed its pronunciation which
clearly it hasn't. Words which used the digamma were NO LONGER written
with a digamma when the digamma went out of use so unlike in English
which has silent letters, Greek does not have anything of the king thus
the pronunciation DID NOT CHANGE, the SPELLING changed instead.
Post by George Durbridge
you mention that C5th BC Doric differed from Ionic and so on. From
what you say below, you seem to mean something different i.e. that the
sound associated with each letter of the Greek alphabet has been the
same,
Doria and Ionic were different dialects and the words were spelled
differently to show the way they were pronounced. Get it inot you head
that the proncoied of the Greek alphabe has ALLWAYS remeined the same
since the time of Homer. It is NOT like the English alphabet were
everyone pronounces the vowels and consonants differently In the Greek
alphabet ALL of the letters have names and since those names are Semitic
in origin everyone had to learn the correct Semitic pronunciation of the
names of the letters that was used by the Cadmians who introduced the
alphabet into Greece. Since they all learned the pronounciation from a
single source and the names of the letters were foreign the Greeks could
not do as the English did and change the sounds of the letters to fit
into existing dialectal pronunciation but had to learn the correct
proscription from the start. After that the SPELLED EACH WORD AS IT
SOUNDED !
Post by George Durbridge
wherever and whenever Greek was written, so that dialect was faithfully
reflected in local spellings.
On the evidence of modern Greek, that isn't true either. Modern Greek is
WRONG. It is perfectly true.
Post by George Durbridge
nearly as bad as English at associating one sound with one letter, and for
WRONG.
Post by George Durbridge
much the same reason: inherited spellings, which no longer coincide
with the spoken language. You have, for instance, five ways of writing
the sound for which iota stands: iota, ypsilon, epsilon-iota,
omicron-iota, eta. On the other hand, ypsilon can be pronounced in at
least three completely different ways: like iota, standing alone, like
beta, following alpha or epsilon, or like English oo in book, following
omicron.
All the "i" sounds in Greek are pronounced differently and have
different breathings, but an ignorant Anglo-Saxon that thinks ancient
Greek was pronounced like home counties English couldn't possibly notice
that.
The diphthongs in Greek are ALWAYS pronounced the same way and JNOT
randomly like in English. "AU" is always av as in averse and "OU" is
always "oo" and I will NOT use the example book because everyone know
perfectly well that some people pronounce the oo in book as a short
sound and others pronounce it as a very long sound as in food, which
once again proves my point about the completely random way in which
English is pronounced. In fact it is impossible to describe the Greek
"ou" sound in English because of this. All that I can say is that it is
a short oo sound.
Post by George Durbridge
These letters are respectively redundant and over-defined, from the
point of view of expressing the sounds of modern Greek. The commonest
spelling
WRONG. The letters are all pronounced differently and save having to use
accents like in French.
Post by George Durbridge
mistakes in modern Greek consist of substituting one redundant letter
for another. They begin to make sense, when you observe that, for
instance, in antiquity, Greeks and Romans alike treated ypsilon as
equivalent to Latin u (except in inflections).
WRONG.
NOBODY in Greece makes the mistake of substituting u for i. The only
common mistake is the substitution of iota for ita and that is because
they usually forget the breath at the end of words ending in ita. Those
kind of spelling mistakes stem from the use of English which has an
inadequate number of i sounds.
Post by George Durbridge
The redundant forms are kept because they express meaning which is
current, even if the sounds are lost. For instance, although nowadays
omicron and omega sound the same, and are often written in place of one
another, the articles and the genitive plural in omega-nu are generally
spelled correctly.
WRONG AGAIN.
Omicron is a short O sound while Omega is a long O sound, hence the
micro and the mega. These letters habe NOT lost their pronciation. The
mistakes in spelling stems form the fact that some students are to lazy
to check out the lengths of these sounds in the words before writing
them.
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
For Greeks who invented the alphabet
every letter was always pronounced the same way by every speaker.
Anywhere that you go in Greece you will always find Alpha pronounced
the same way, Beta pronounced the same way, Gamma pronounced the same
way,
Gamma is pronounced three different ways, to this day, often in the
same word.
WRONG.
Gamma is only pronounced ONE way. The only time the sound changes is
when it is in combination with itself as gg where the sound changes to
ng and this is a standard rule and NOT random.
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
Delta pronounced the same way and so on. The reason for this is that
when the Greek Cadman alphabet was introduced into Greece it was
introduced everywhere at the same time and everyone spelled the Greek
words as they sounded and the result was that you could easily tell
Attic, Ionic, Aeolic and Doric apart from the way that the words were
spelled.
The simultaneous introduction of the alphabet is plainly wrong. Cyprus
used a script derived from Linear A into Hellenistic times, as you have
And that is way Cypriot pronounciation is are variance with the rest of
Greece, which proves my point.
Post by George Durbridge
mentioned in this group. There is no reason to believe that the
different sounds of the different dialects were precisely or completely
captured by the local differences in spelling. The usual experience is
that one dialect has sounds for which the other dialect has no standard
letter.
WRONG. Linear B proves that this is NOT POSSIBLE since in Mycenaean
Greek L's and R's were not distinguished nor were P's and B's or T's and
TH's (ie. A-TA-NA is also Athana = Athena, and E-RA is also Ela but ) or
K's and G's.
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
Even before this in the Germanic languages as a whole in some places D
was pronounced T and in others it was pronounced TH
Very similar things happen in Greek. Delta has changed from equivalent
to Latin d in Ancient Greek, to the equivalent of one of the th sounds
in
NO IT HAS NOT !
Delta has ALWAYS been pronounced with a "the" sound because it is
represented by its own individual symbols in Linear B. If it had a D
sound as in English it would have been part of the T/TH/D group instead
!
It is the Latin "D" sound which has changed in GERMANIC languages such
as English that what is causing you to make this mistake. When the
Franks invaded Italy the Latin D suffered from a degree of consonantal
shift, but as can be heard when talking to a native Italian the Italian
D sound is closer to the Greek delta sound in their accent than to the
English D, which proves that the Greek delta sound has remained
constant.
Post by George Durbridge
English today. You can get a d sound in modern Greek, however, by
writing nu-tau, and otherwise lost accusative final nu can often be
heard this way, because the d can be heard even when the nu is the last
letter of one word and the tau the first letter of the next.
Nonsense. The Greek delta was always a soft "the" and the Greek tau was
the hard d sound, which is made softer by the inclusion of the n before
it to give nt.
Don't give me lectures on consonantal shit in Greek when you are using
as you base line a Germanic language which is riddled with consonantal
shift. Consonantal shift as a mark of Germans languages and NEVER took
place in Greek after the introduction on Cadmian script since Cadmian
script solved the problem which was inherent in Linear B by introducing
new letters from a foreign Semitic language that did not suffer from
consonantal shift to distinguish each sound individually. From this we
know that the Greek kappa sound was NOT like the English k but like the
g as in modern Greek since it was part of the K/G group in Linear B. We
also know that There was ALWAYS a Theta sounds whcih as part of the
T/TH/D group and there was ALLWYS a Delta sound that was part of the "d"
group, and that there was ALWAYS a phi sound since it had a letter of
its own. And futher still we know that the Greek beta was ALWAYS
pronounced V since the word Baslileus is spelled QA-SI-RE-U in Linear B
and there is NO WAY that QA could have possibly become a hard B sound as
in English when it was converted in Cadmain script therefore Beta must
have ALWAYS been Vita since the loss of Quoppa or Qa in this case was
replaced by Va or Vita !
So take your Anglo-Saxon linguistic theory and SHOVE IT. Greek has
always been pronounced the same way since the time of Homer and the
above example prove it. Linguistic theory base on Germanic languages
which ALL suffer from consonantal and vowel shifts is not worth the
paper its written on. Its time that you learned to pronounced Greek
properly and use that is the basis for all linguistic theory instead.
Martin Edwards
2005-07-10 17:53:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
Aggie,
Go back to the tablets. Screaming nonsense doesn't make it true.
This is how real Greeks speak and write. They can't hear these gradations
of length and breathing with which you delude yourself. That's why they
have stopped writing the breathings.
WRONG. The breathing marks are included in all lower case Greek and will not
pass through a Greek spellchecker otherwise. Get an education and actually
learn the language properly. Anyone who has lived in Greece can distinguish
the lengths and breathings.
They haven't been printed in most things published since 1980. When
they were nine Greeks out of ten had no idea why.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
Agamemnon
2005-07-10 18:42:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
Aggie,
Go back to the tablets. Screaming nonsense doesn't make it true.
This is how real Greeks speak and write. They can't hear these gradations
of length and breathing with which you delude yourself. That's why they
have stopped writing the breathings.
WRONG. The breathing marks are included in all lower case Greek and will
not pass through a Greek spellchecker otherwise. Get an education and
actually learn the language properly. Anyone who has lived in Greece can
distinguish the lengths and breathings.
They haven't been printed in most things published since 1980. When they
were nine Greeks out of ten had no idea why.
UTTER HOGWASH

Take a look at

http://www.athens2004.com/athens2004/page/home?lang=el

And stop making things up.
Martin Edwards
2005-07-11 17:52:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
Aggie,
Go back to the tablets. Screaming nonsense doesn't make it true.
This is how real Greeks speak and write. They can't hear these gradations
of length and breathing with which you delude yourself. That's why they
have stopped writing the breathings.
WRONG. The breathing marks are included in all lower case Greek and will
not pass through a Greek spellchecker otherwise. Get an education and
actually learn the language properly. Anyone who has lived in Greece can
distinguish the lengths and breathings.
They haven't been printed in most things published since 1980. When they
were nine Greeks out of ten had no idea why.
UTTER HOGWASH
Take a look at
http://www.athens2004.com/athens2004/page/home?lang=el
And stop making things up.
You look at it. There aren't any breathings.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
Agamemnon
2005-07-11 19:18:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Martin Edwards
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
Aggie,
Go back to the tablets. Screaming nonsense doesn't make it true.
This is how real Greeks speak and write. They can't hear these gradations
of length and breathing with which you delude yourself. That's why they
have stopped writing the breathings.
WRONG. The breathing marks are included in all lower case Greek and will
not pass through a Greek spellchecker otherwise. Get an education and
actually learn the language properly. Anyone who has lived in Greece can
distinguish the lengths and breathings.
They haven't been printed in most things published since 1980. When they
were nine Greeks out of ten had no idea why.
UTTER HOGWASH
Take a look at
http://www.athens2004.com/athens2004/page/home?lang=el
And stop making things up.
You look at it. There aren't any breathings.
They are breathings.
Post by Martin Edwards
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
Ed Cryer
2005-07-11 20:22:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Martin Edwards
You look at it. There aren't any breathings.
They are breathings.
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. 2
οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόν. 3 πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ
ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν. ὃ γέγονεν 4 ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν, καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν
ἀνθρώπων· 5 καὶ τὸ φῶς ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ φαίνει, καὶ ἡ σκοτία αὐτὸ οὐ κατέλαβεν.
6 Ἐγένετο ἄνθρωπος ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ θεοῦ, ὄνομα αὐτῷ Ἰωάννης·
(from the NT gospel of St. John)


Αυτοί οι Αγώνες έσπασαν πολλά ρεκόρ. Η Αθήνα φιλοξένησε 11.099 αθλητές, τους
περισσότερους συνολικά, αλλά και τις περισσότερες γυναίκες αθλήτριες, στην
ιστορία των Ολυμπιακών Αγώνων. Εκπροσωπήθηκαν 202 χώρες, περισσότερες από
κάθε άλλη διοργάνωση. Η Ολυμπιακή φλογα για πρώτη φορά ταξίδεψε σε όλο τον
κόσμο. Για πρώτη φορά, γυναίκες αγωνίστηκαν στην Ολυμπία, στο αγώνισμα της
Σφαιροβολίας
(taken from page http://www.athens2004.com/athens2004/page/home?lang=el)


Notice any difference, Agamemnon? Well, I do. The first has breathing marks;
the latter doesn't.

Ed
Agamemnon
2005-07-11 21:47:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Martin Edwards
You look at it. There aren't any breathings.
They are breathings.
?? ???? ?? ? ?????, ??? ? ????? ?? ???? ??? ????, ??? ???? ?? ? ?????. 2
????? ?? ?? ???? ???? ??? ????. 3 ????? ??' ????? ???????, ??? ????? ?????
??????? ???? ??. ? ??????? 4 ?? ???? ??? ??, ??? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ???
????????? 5 ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ?????? ??????, ??? ? ?????? ???? ??
?????????.
6 ??????? ???????? ???????????? ???? ????, ????? ???? ????????
(from the NT gospel of St. John)
????? ?? ?????? ??????? ????? ?????. ? ????? ?????????? 11.099 ???????,
????
????????????? ????????, ???? ??? ??? ???????????? ???????? ?????????, ????
??????? ??? ?????????? ??????. ?????????????? 202 ?????, ???????????? ???
???? ???? ??????????. ? ????????? ????? ??? ????? ???? ???????? ?? ???
???
?????. ??? ????? ????, ???????? ??????????? ???? ???????, ??? ???????? ???
????????????
(taken from page http://www.athens2004.com/athens2004/page/home?lang=el)
Notice any difference, Agamemnon? Well, I do. The first has breathing marks;
the latter doesn't.
They are generically termed berating marks in both cases. Greek does not use
accents like French and never did. End of subject.
Ed
Paul McKenna
2005-07-11 21:56:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Ed Cryer
Notice any difference, Agamemnon? Well, I do. The first has breathing marks;
the latter doesn't.
They are generically termed berating marks in both cases. Greek does not
use accents like French and never did. End of subject.
Well, I for one, surely hope it is. You Agamemnon have consistently
displayed a lack of understanding, any ability to read critically, and most
importantly, any inability to interact with other members of the human race
on a decent level.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Ed Cryer
Ed
Agamemnon
2005-07-11 22:09:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McKenna
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Ed Cryer
Notice any difference, Agamemnon? Well, I do. The first has breathing marks;
the latter doesn't.
They are generically termed berating marks in both cases. Greek does not
use accents like French and never did. End of subject.
Well, I for one, surely hope it is. You Agamemnon have consistently
displayed a lack of understanding, any ability to read critically, and
most importantly, any inability to interact with other members of the
human race on a decent level.
BALDERDASH

I have proven my case and you have been unable to refute it. You have lost.
Ancient Greek and modern Greek are one completely homogeneous and isotropic
language whose pronunciation has not changed since the time of Homer. Live
with it and learn. Give up your nonsensical Anglo-Saxon home counties
pronunciations and stop trying to defend them and pronounce Greek correctly
like its always been pronounced.
Post by Paul McKenna
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Ed Cryer
Ed
Martin Edwards
2005-07-12 14:53:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Paul McKenna
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Ed Cryer
Notice any difference, Agamemnon? Well, I do. The first has breathing marks;
the latter doesn't.
They are generically termed berating marks in both cases. Greek does not
use accents like French and never did. End of subject.
Well, I for one, surely hope it is. You Agamemnon have consistently
displayed a lack of understanding, any ability to read critically, and
most importantly, any inability to interact with other members of the
human race on a decent level.
BALDERDASH
I have proven my case and you have been unable to refute it. You have lost.
Ancient Greek and modern Greek are one completely homogeneous and isotropic
language whose pronunciation has not changed since the time of Homer. Live
with it and learn. Give up your nonsensical Anglo-Saxon home counties
pronunciations and stop trying to defend them and pronounce Greek correctly
like its always been pronounced.
Constant repetition is not the same thing as proof. Get back to the
General Grivas Coffee House.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
VtSkier
2005-07-12 16:18:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Martin Edwards
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Paul McKenna
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Ed Cryer
Notice any difference, Agamemnon? Well, I do. The first has breathing marks;
the latter doesn't.
They are generically termed berating marks in both cases. Greek does
not use accents like French and never did. End of subject.
Well, I for one, surely hope it is. You Agamemnon have consistently
displayed a lack of understanding, any ability to read critically,
and most importantly, any inability to interact with other members of
the human race on a decent level.
BALDERDASH
I have proven my case and you have been unable to refute it. You have
lost. Ancient Greek and modern Greek are one completely homogeneous
and isotropic language whose pronunciation has not changed since the
time of Homer. Live with it and learn. Give up your nonsensical
Anglo-Saxon home counties pronunciations and stop trying to defend
them and pronounce Greek correctly like its always been pronounced.
Constant repetition is not the same thing as proof. Get back to the
General Grivas Coffee House.
Just to jump in here and keep things stirred up a bit.

Agamemnon states that Greek has been pronounced exactly the same in
Homer's time as it is now. I assume that he also states that it has
been spelled the same then as now, notwithstanding word additions
for modern technology (How did Homer spell and pronounce the Greek
word for 'Television'?).

Now, It should be fairly easy to prove that Greek is spelled the
same now as then and I won't get into it, since I can't read Greek
in any form.

Further, I'll give you the fact that Greek is pronounced (I'll even
give you a "more or less" here) and is spelled the same everywhere
today. This stands to reason since the Greek homeland is rather
small and highly chauvinistic (not necessarily a bad thing) about
its place in history and if Greeks abroad want to keep up their
language, would send for an instructor or go back to Greece for
instruction and this doesn't even get into liturgical language.

Now we have had a discussion here about the FACT that there were
DIFFERENT Greek dialects and presumably accents before the
development of the Koine. Was the Koine prevalent in Homer's time?
Wouldn't there have been a period of time where people used their
"native" tongue for everyday discourse and the Koine for trade
and public dialog?

I would also posit that PROVING that Greek has been pronounced
the same then as it is now is a difficult task and one that would
not be undertaken lightly.

Now, if the Greeks had conquered the world in the 17th and 18th
centuries of the common era, then Greek would have been dispersed
widely, as it probably was in Alexander's time. But that was
not recently enough to avoid the influx of Central Asian languages
to a largely Greek-speaking area. Or at least an area that used
Greek for trade and politics.

Now the comparison. If Greek had been widely dispersed only a few
hundred years ago through conquest and colonization as Spanish
was, with the local populations adopting Greek as their "mother
tongue", and then the colonies broke free of the parent country
and further developed on their own, there certainly would be
a wide variation in at least spoken Greek, if not spelling and
grammar as there is in Spanish as it is spoken around the world
today.
Ed Cryer
2005-07-12 16:56:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by VtSkier
Just to jump in here and keep things stirred up a bit.
Agamemnon states that Greek has been pronounced exactly the same in
Homer's time as it is now. I assume that he also states that it has
been spelled the same then as now, notwithstanding word additions
for modern technology (How did Homer spell and pronounce the Greek
word for 'Television'?).
Now, It should be fairly easy to prove that Greek is spelled the
same now as then and I won't get into it, since I can't read Greek
in any form.
Further, I'll give you the fact that Greek is pronounced (I'll even
give you a "more or less" here) and is spelled the same everywhere
today. This stands to reason since the Greek homeland is rather
small and highly chauvinistic (not necessarily a bad thing) about
its place in history and if Greeks abroad want to keep up their
language, would send for an instructor or go back to Greece for
instruction and this doesn't even get into liturgical language.
Now we have had a discussion here about the FACT that there were
DIFFERENT Greek dialects and presumably accents before the
development of the Koine. Was the Koine prevalent in Homer's time?
Wouldn't there have been a period of time where people used their
"native" tongue for everyday discourse and the Koine for trade
and public dialog?
I would also posit that PROVING that Greek has been pronounced
the same then as it is now is a difficult task and one that would
not be undertaken lightly.
Now, if the Greeks had conquered the world in the 17th and 18th
centuries of the common era, then Greek would have been dispersed
widely, as it probably was in Alexander's time. But that was
not recently enough to avoid the influx of Central Asian languages
to a largely Greek-speaking area. Or at least an area that used
Greek for trade and politics.
Now the comparison. If Greek had been widely dispersed only a few
hundred years ago through conquest and colonization as Spanish
was, with the local populations adopting Greek as their "mother
tongue", and then the colonies broke free of the parent country
and further developed on their own, there certainly would be
a wide variation in at least spoken Greek, if not spelling and
grammar as there is in Spanish as it is spoken around the world
today.
Quite agree. In fact Greece did have quite a vast colonisation program.

"As Greece recovered economically, its population grew beyond the capacity
of its limited arable land, and from about 750 BC the Greeks began 250 years
of expansion, settling colonies in all directions. To the east, the Aegean
coast of Asia Minor was colonised first, followed by Cyprus and the coasts
of Thrace, the Sea of Marmara and south coast of the Black Sea. Eventually
Greek colonisation reached as far north-east as Ukraine. To the west the
coasts of Albania, Sicily and southern Italy were settled, followed by the
south coast of France, Corsica, and even northeastern Spain. Greek colonies
were also founded in Egypt and Libya. Modern Syracuse, Naples, Marseilles
and Istanbul had their beginnings as the Greek colonies Syracusa, Neapolis,
Massilia and Byzantium."

(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greece)

Ed
Agamemnon
2005-07-12 17:26:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Cryer
Post by VtSkier
Just to jump in here and keep things stirred up a bit.
Agamemnon states that Greek has been pronounced exactly the same in
Homer's time as it is now. I assume that he also states that it has
been spelled the same then as now, notwithstanding word additions
for modern technology (How did Homer spell and pronounce the Greek
word for 'Television'?).
Now, It should be fairly easy to prove that Greek is spelled the
same now as then and I won't get into it, since I can't read Greek
in any form.
Further, I'll give you the fact that Greek is pronounced (I'll even
give you a "more or less" here) and is spelled the same everywhere
today. This stands to reason since the Greek homeland is rather
small and highly chauvinistic (not necessarily a bad thing) about
its place in history and if Greeks abroad want to keep up their
language, would send for an instructor or go back to Greece for
instruction and this doesn't even get into liturgical language.
Now we have had a discussion here about the FACT that there were
DIFFERENT Greek dialects and presumably accents before the
development of the Koine. Was the Koine prevalent in Homer's time?
Wouldn't there have been a period of time where people used their
"native" tongue for everyday discourse and the Koine for trade
and public dialog?
I would also posit that PROVING that Greek has been pronounced
the same then as it is now is a difficult task and one that would
not be undertaken lightly.
Now, if the Greeks had conquered the world in the 17th and 18th
centuries of the common era, then Greek would have been dispersed
widely, as it probably was in Alexander's time. But that was
not recently enough to avoid the influx of Central Asian languages
to a largely Greek-speaking area. Or at least an area that used
Greek for trade and politics.
Now the comparison. If Greek had been widely dispersed only a few
hundred years ago through conquest and colonization as Spanish
was, with the local populations adopting Greek as their "mother
tongue", and then the colonies broke free of the parent country
and further developed on their own, there certainly would be
a wide variation in at least spoken Greek, if not spelling and
grammar as there is in Spanish as it is spoken around the world
today.
Quite agree. In fact Greece did have quite a vast colonisation program.
"As Greece recovered economically, its population grew beyond the capacity
of its limited arable land, and from about 750 BC the Greeks began 250 years
of expansion, settling colonies in all directions. To the east, the Aegean
coast of Asia Minor was colonised first, followed by Cyprus and the coasts
of Thrace, the Sea of Marmara and south coast of the Black Sea. Eventually
Greek colonisation reached as far north-east as Ukraine. To the west the
coasts of Albania, Sicily and southern Italy were settled, followed by the
south coast of France, Corsica, and even northeastern Spain. Greek colonies
were also founded in Egypt and Libya. Modern Syracuse, Naples, Marseilles
and Istanbul had their beginnings as the Greek colonies Syracusa, Neapolis,
Massilia and Byzantium."
LOL.... The dates are completely wrong.

Greek colonisation began in 1660 BC with the Inachid colonisation of Egypt
then in 1460 there was the first Arcadian colonisation of Italy (followed by
further colonisations) and the Cretan colonisation of Troy. In 1400 the
Cretans colonised Lycia and in 1183 the Achaeans colonised Italy along with
the Trojans. Then in 1124 the Aeolian colonisation of Asia-Minor began and
in 1071 the Ionian colonisation of Asia Minor followed by the second Aeolian
colonisation in 1050.
Post by Ed Cryer
(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greece)
Ed
Agamemnon
2005-07-12 17:19:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by VtSkier
Post by Martin Edwards
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Paul McKenna
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Ed Cryer
Notice any difference, Agamemnon? Well, I do. The first has breathing marks;
the latter doesn't.
They are generically termed berating marks in both cases. Greek does
not use accents like French and never did. End of subject.
Well, I for one, surely hope it is. You Agamemnon have consistently
displayed a lack of understanding, any ability to read critically, and
most importantly, any inability to interact with other members of the
human race on a decent level.
BALDERDASH
I have proven my case and you have been unable to refute it. You have
lost. Ancient Greek and modern Greek are one completely homogeneous and
isotropic language whose pronunciation has not changed since the time of
Homer. Live with it and learn. Give up your nonsensical Anglo-Saxon home
counties pronunciations and stop trying to defend them and pronounce
Greek correctly like its always been pronounced.
Constant repetition is not the same thing as proof. Get back to the
General Grivas Coffee House.
Just to jump in here and keep things stirred up a bit.
Agamemnon states that Greek has been pronounced exactly the same in
Homer's time as it is now. I assume that he also states that it has
been spelled the same then as now, notwithstanding word additions
for modern technology (How did Homer spell and pronounce the Greek
word for 'Television'?).
Now, It should be fairly easy to prove that Greek is spelled the
same now as then and I won't get into it, since I can't read Greek
in any form.
Further, I'll give you the fact that Greek is pronounced (I'll even
give you a "more or less" here) and is spelled the same everywhere
today. This stands to reason since the Greek homeland is rather
small and highly chauvinistic (not necessarily a bad thing) about
its place in history and if Greeks abroad want to keep up their
language, would send for an instructor or go back to Greece for
instruction and this doesn't even get into liturgical language.
Now we have had a discussion here about the FACT that there were
DIFFERENT Greek dialects and presumably accents before the
There were NO accents in ancient Greek. Accents are a thing peculiar to
Germanic languages where consonantal and vowel shifts take place that bared
no resembles to the sound of the alphabet. In Greek every word was spelled
as it was pronounced so any Attic Greek reading a document written in Doric
would have pronounced in without the slightest hint of an accent.
Post by VtSkier
development of the Koine. Was the Koine prevalent in Homer's time?
Wouldn't there have been a period of time where people used their
"native" tongue for everyday discourse and the Koine for trade
and public dialog?
Koine is irrelevant. The Greek alphabet had a STRANDED pronunciation since
the time of Cadmus. Every letter had its own name and those names were NOT
Greek but Semitic and originated from Egypt in 1800 BC, thus when Cadmus
introduced the Alphabet to Greece in 1450 BC ALL the Greeks learned the
Cadmian pronunciation of the alphabet from the Semitic speaking Cadmians who
all pronounced it the same way. There was no such thing as printing to
impose a standard spelling on every Greek that bore no relation to how the
words sounded, which is what occurred in England. The Dorains spelled their
words the way the sounded and used DIFFERENT letters from the Ionian Greeks
for words which sounded different in their dialeced even though the had the
same meaning and originated form the same a thousand years earlier.
Post by VtSkier
I would also posit that PROVING that Greek has been pronounced
the same then as it is now is a difficult task and one that would
not be undertaken lightly.
No its not. It's extremely simple. Get a Greek to speak Latin using Greek
pronunciation and compare them with an Italian speaking Latin with Italian
pronunciation and a Englishman speaking Latin with English pronunciation. Of
all of these people the GREEK will sound closest to the Italian and the
Englishman or any other Germanic the furthest away proving that Greek
pronunciation HAS NOT CHANGED one iota since the time of Homer since it was
the Greeks who introduced the Latin alphabet to the Romans in the firsts
place after the Trojan war so it would follow that the Italian would used
the Greek pronunciation that they were taught..
Post by VtSkier
Now, if the Greeks had conquered the world in the 17th and 18th
centuries of the common era, then Greek would have been dispersed
widely, as it probably was in Alexander's time. But that was
not recently enough to avoid the influx of Central Asian languages
to a largely Greek-speaking area. Or at least an area that used
Greek for trade and politics.
Now the comparison. If Greek had been widely dispersed only a few
hundred years ago through conquest and colonization as Spanish
was, with the local populations adopting Greek as their "mother
tongue", and then the colonies broke free of the parent country
and further developed on their own, there certainly would be
a wide variation in at least spoken Greek, if not spelling and
grammar as there is in Spanish as it is spoken around the world
today.
But there wasn't because they didn't and the Greek speaking convention of
SPELLING EACH WORD AS IT SOUNDED precluded any change from taking placed
that was not recorded. From analysis of spelling variations it had been
proven that Attic Greek was spelled the SAME way as modern Greek.

Shall I make it clearer for you by actually spelling English as it sounds.

To be or not to be
that is the question
whether it is nobler
in the mind to suffer
the slings and arrows
of outrageous fortune
or to take arms against
a sea of troubles and
by opposing end them.

Using standard Greece pronunciation the above would be spelled like this if
it were Greek.

NTou mpi wr nont ntou mbi
dant iz de kouesntyon
oueder int iz nombler
in de ma'i'nt ntou syfer
de slinkz ant arwwz
ob aountraioitzas forntoun
wr nto ntaioink aarmz akaioinsnt
a si ob ntrnmples ant
mba'i' ompwzink ent dem.
VtSkier
2005-07-12 17:59:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by VtSkier
Just to jump in here and keep things stirred up a bit.
Agamemnon states that Greek has been pronounced exactly the same in
Homer's time as it is now. I assume that he also states that it has
been spelled the same then as now, notwithstanding word additions
for modern technology (How did Homer spell and pronounce the Greek
word for 'Television'?).
Now, It should be fairly easy to prove that Greek is spelled the
same now as then and I won't get into it, since I can't read Greek
in any form.
Further, I'll give you the fact that Greek is pronounced (I'll even
give you a "more or less" here) and is spelled the same everywhere
today. This stands to reason since the Greek homeland is rather
small and highly chauvinistic (not necessarily a bad thing) about
its place in history and if Greeks abroad want to keep up their
language, would send for an instructor or go back to Greece for
instruction and this doesn't even get into liturgical language.
Now we have had a discussion here about the FACT that there were
DIFFERENT Greek dialects and presumably accents before the
There were NO accents in ancient Greek. Accents are a thing peculiar to
Germanic languages where consonantal and vowel shifts take place that bared
no resembles to the sound of the alphabet.
You will notice that my example is NOT a Germanic language.
Post by Agamemnon
In Greek every word was spelled
as it was pronounced so any Attic Greek reading a document written in Doric
would have pronounced in without the slightest hint of an accent.
Meaning in language is what the speakers of a language agree
that it is. Further, the sounds in a language shift and the
meanings remain the same. Further, spelling can very often
remain the same if the population is literate.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by VtSkier
development of the Koine. Was the Koine prevalent in Homer's time?
Wouldn't there have been a period of time where people used their
"native" tongue for everyday discourse and the Koine for trade
and public dialog?
Koine is irrelevant. The Greek alphabet had a STRANDED pronunciation since
the time of Cadmus. Every letter had its own name and those names were NOT
Greek but Semitic and originated from Egypt in 1800 BC, thus when Cadmus
introduced the Alphabet to Greece in 1450 BC ALL the Greeks learned the
Cadmian pronunciation of the alphabet from the Semitic speaking Cadmians who
all pronounced it the same way. There was no such thing as printing to
impose a standard spelling on every Greek that bore no relation to how the
words sounded, which is what occurred in England. The Dorains spelled their
words the way the sounded and used DIFFERENT letters from the Ionian Greeks
for words which sounded different in their dialeced even though the had the
same meaning and originated form the same a thousand years earlier.
The pronunciation can remain the same while sounds may change.
In other words the sound represented by a letter may not
always be the same down through the ages. You are expecting us
to believe that the sounds in Greek have not changed in almost
three thousand years.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by VtSkier
I would also posit that PROVING that Greek has been pronounced
the same then as it is now is a difficult task and one that would
not be undertaken lightly.
No its not. It's extremely simple. Get a Greek to speak Latin using Greek
pronunciation and compare them with an Italian speaking Latin with Italian
pronunciation and a Englishman speaking Latin with English pronunciation. Of
all of these people the GREEK will sound closest to the Italian and the
Englishman or any other Germanic the furthest away proving that Greek
pronunciation HAS NOT CHANGED one iota since the time of Homer since it was
the Greeks who introduced the Latin alphabet to the Romans in the firsts
place after the Trojan war so it would follow that the Italian would used
the Greek pronunciation that they were taught..
Please tell me how having a Greek speaker speak Latin can possibly
tell/show me that Greek has always sounded like it does now.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by VtSkier
Now, if the Greeks had conquered the world in the 17th and 18th
centuries of the common era, then Greek would have been dispersed
widely, as it probably was in Alexander's time. But that was
not recently enough to avoid the influx of Central Asian languages
to a largely Greek-speaking area. Or at least an area that used
Greek for trade and politics.
Now the comparison. If Greek had been widely dispersed only a few
hundred years ago through conquest and colonization as Spanish
was, with the local populations adopting Greek as their "mother
tongue", and then the colonies broke free of the parent country
and further developed on their own, there certainly would be
a wide variation in at least spoken Greek, if not spelling and
grammar as there is in Spanish as it is spoken around the world
today.
But there wasn't because they didn't and the Greek speaking convention of
SPELLING EACH WORD AS IT SOUNDED precluded any change from taking placed
that was not recorded. From analysis of spelling variations it had been
proven that Attic Greek was spelled the SAME way as modern Greek.
Shall I make it clearer for you by actually spelling English as it sounds.
To be or not to be
that is the question
whether it is nobler
in the mind to suffer
the slings and arrows
of outrageous fortune
or to take arms against
a sea of troubles and
by opposing end them.
Using standard Greece pronunciation the above would be spelled like this if
it were Greek.
NTou mpi wr nont ntou mbi
dant iz de kouesntyon
oueder int iz nombler
in de ma'i'nt ntou syfer
de slinkz ant arwwz
ob aountraioitzas forntoun
wr nto ntaioink aarmz akaioinsnt
a si ob ntrnmples ant
mba'i' ompwzink ent dem.
I find this fascinating, but what, really, does it prove?

Martin Edwards
2005-07-12 14:51:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Martin Edwards
You look at it. There aren't any breathings.
They are breathings.
?? ???? ?? ? ?????, ??? ? ????? ?? ???? ??? ????, ??? ???? ?? ? ?????. 2
????? ?? ?? ???? ???? ??? ????. 3 ????? ??' ????? ???????, ??? ????? ?????
??????? ???? ??. ? ??????? 4 ?? ???? ??? ??, ??? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ???
????????? 5 ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ?????? ??????, ??? ? ?????? ???? ??
?????????.
6 ??????? ???????? ???????????? ???? ????, ????? ???? ????????
(from the NT gospel of St. John)
????? ?? ?????? ??????? ????? ?????. ? ????? ?????????? 11.099 ???????,
????
????????????? ????????, ???? ??? ??? ???????????? ???????? ?????????, ????
??????? ??? ?????????? ??????. ?????????????? 202 ?????, ???????????? ???
???? ???? ??????????. ? ????????? ????? ??? ????? ???? ???????? ?? ???
???
?????. ??? ????? ????, ???????? ??????????? ???? ???????, ??? ???????? ???
????????????
(taken from page http://www.athens2004.com/athens2004/page/home?lang=el)
Notice any difference, Agamemnon? Well, I do. The first has breathing marks;
the latter doesn't.
They are generically termed berating marks in both cases. Greek does not use
accents like French and never did. End of subject.
Ed
The former pitch accent became a stress accent, and until about 1980 all
three were *written* but performed the same function. The breathings,
which looked like an apostrophe and a reversed apostrophe, were written,
but were redundant for centuries. I ask again, how well do you read
SMG? I have no doubt that some people may call accents breathings, but
that does not mean that they know what they are talking about.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
Martin Edwards
2005-07-12 14:44:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Martin Edwards
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
Aggie,
Go back to the tablets. Screaming nonsense doesn't make it true.
This is how real Greeks speak and write. They can't hear these gradations
of length and breathing with which you delude yourself. That's why they
have stopped writing the breathings.
WRONG. The breathing marks are included in all lower case Greek and will
not pass through a Greek spellchecker otherwise. Get an education and
actually learn the language properly. Anyone who has lived in Greece can
distinguish the lengths and breathings.
They haven't been printed in most things published since 1980. When they
were nine Greeks out of ten had no idea why.
UTTER HOGWASH
Take a look at
http://www.athens2004.com/athens2004/page/home?lang=el
And stop making things up.
You look at it. There aren't any breathings.
They are breathings.
Every mark above a vowel is the former accute accent, now a stress mark.
If they were breathings, there would be one or the other above *every*
initial vowel. How well do you read SMG?
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
George Durbridge
2005-07-10 20:04:05 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 13:51:05 +0100, Agamemnon wrote:

[A lot of silliness that I've snipped, and ...]
Post by Agamemnon
WRONG. The breathing marks are included in all lower case Greek and will
not pass through a Greek spellchecker otherwise. Get an education and
actually learn the language properly. Anyone who has lived in Greece can
distinguish the lengths and breathings.
The breathings are no longer written. The only accents in common usage,
even in official written Greek, are diacriticals and accent markers. The
reason why they are no longer written is that they no longer reflect the
pronunciation.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
You have forgotten that in my own name gamma is pronounced first as a
vowel and second as a consonant.
NONSENSE. There is only ONE gamma in Agamemnon.
MY NAME, half-wit.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
You haven't even noticed that the reference point I used for temporal
change was Romance, not Germanic.
WRONG. Your reference is Germanic since you are writing in English. You
have NO IDEA what native Italian sounds like.
No, I checked for sound-shift in Greek by using transliterations adopted
in Antiquity between ancient Greek and Latin. And you have no idea what
my native language is, or when or how I learned Italian.

Now go away.
Agamemnon
2005-07-10 21:39:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Durbridge
[A lot of silliness that I've snipped, and ...]
Post by Agamemnon
WRONG. The breathing marks are included in all lower case Greek and will
not pass through a Greek spellchecker otherwise. Get an education and
actually learn the language properly. Anyone who has lived in Greece can
distinguish the lengths and breathings.
The breathings are no longer written. The only accents in common usage,
even in official written Greek, are diacriticals and accent markers. The
reason why they are no longer written is that they no longer reflect the
pronunciation.
BOLLOCKS. You have no idea about the usage of preaching marks or the
provocation of Greek ancient or modern.

http://www.athens2004.com/athens2004/page/home?lang=el
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
You have forgotten that in my own name gamma is pronounced first as a
vowel and second as a consonant.
NONSENSE. There is only ONE gamma in Agamemnon.
MY NAME, half-wit.
So you mean Giwrgos.

When gamma is followed by an iota or an epsilon or eta or ypsilon its always
pronounced y because of phonetic laziness in the combiation, its easire to
say yi or ye than gh i or gh e etc., so get an education you TWAT. The are
NO random changes in Greek pronunciation as there are in English where G in
George is pronounced J but in Get its pronounced G even when its followed by
an e in both cases, and in Gibe it's a J again but in Gift it's a G. What
sort of idiotic language is that which has no consistent pronunciation rules
? An impure language is what it is which can form NO BASIS for linguistic
theory unlike Greek which is a completely pure language which has ALWAYS
been pronounced the same way since Homer.
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
You haven't even noticed that the reference point I used for temporal
change was Romance, not Germanic.
WRONG. Your reference is Germanic since you are writing in English. You
have NO IDEA what native Italian sounds like.
No, I checked for sound-shift in Greek by using transliterations adopted
in Antiquity between ancient Greek and Latin. And you have no idea what
my native language is, or when or how I learned Italian.
You have no idea how to pronounce Latin or Greek so transliterations would
be of no use to you. Keep speaking like an English tourist and you'll be
treated like a tourist.
Post by George Durbridge
Now go away.
George Durbridge
2005-07-10 22:10:51 UTC
Permalink
Aggie,

You have sufficiently proven that you have no idea what either of us is
talking about. You may scream abuse, if you like, but this correspondence
is at an end. In other words, go away.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
[A lot of silliness that I've snipped, and ...]
Post by Agamemnon
WRONG. The breathing marks are included in all lower case Greek and will
not pass through a Greek spellchecker otherwise. Get an education and
actually learn the language properly. Anyone who has lived in Greece can
distinguish the lengths and breathings.
The breathings are no longer written. The only accents in common usage,
even in official written Greek, are diacriticals and accent markers. The
reason why they are no longer written is that they no longer reflect the
pronunciation.
BOLLOCKS. You have no idea about the usage of preaching marks or the
provocation of Greek ancient or modern.
http://www.athens2004.com/athens2004/page/home?lang=el
Look again, half-wit. There are no rough or smooth breathings on that
page, and no accents other than a single stress-mark per word, exactly as
I told you. So you don't even remember the accents, as they were written
30 years ago.

Thank you for the Freudians "preaching" and "provocation", by the way.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
You have forgotten that in my own name gamma is pronounced first as a
vowel and second as a consonant.
NONSENSE. There is only ONE gamma in Agamemnon.
MY NAME, half-wit.
So you mean Giwrgos.
When gamma is followed by an iota or an epsilon or eta or ypsilon its always
pronounced y because of phonetic laziness in the combiation, its easire to
say yi or ye than gh i or gh e etc., so get an education you TWAT. The are
NO random changes in Greek pronunciation as there are in English where G in
George is pronounced J but in Get its pronounced G even when its followed by
an e in both cases, and in Gibe it's a J again but in Gift it's a G. What
sort of idiotic language is that which has no consistent pronunciation rules
? An impure language is what it is which can form NO BASIS for linguistic
theory unlike Greek which is a completely pure language which has ALWAYS
been pronounced the same way since Homer.
Ah, now I understand. If g softens before e or i in English, it is
inconsistency, but the same phenomenon in Greek is purest consistency.
It's a good thing for Greece that real Greeks make better sense than you.
Post by Agamemnon
You have no idea how to pronounce Latin or Greek so transliterations would
be of no use to you.
On the contrary, I have a pretty good idea how Latin sounded, based on
the uniformities in the living Romance languages.
Post by Agamemnon
Keep speaking like an English tourist and you'll be
treated like a tourist.
Whereas you would be treated as an alien out of a reactionary nightmare?
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
Now go away.
Agamemnon
2005-07-10 23:48:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Durbridge
Aggie,
You have sufficiently proven that you have no idea what either of us is
talking about. You may scream abuse, if you like, but this correspondence
is at an end. In other words, go away.
You are talking out of your rectum.
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
[A lot of silliness that I've snipped, and ...]
Post by Agamemnon
WRONG. The breathing marks are included in all lower case Greek and will
not pass through a Greek spellchecker otherwise. Get an education and
actually learn the language properly. Anyone who has lived in Greece can
distinguish the lengths and breathings.
The breathings are no longer written. The only accents in common usage,
even in official written Greek, are diacriticals and accent markers.
The
reason why they are no longer written is that they no longer reflect the
pronunciation.
BOLLOCKS. You have no idea about the usage of preaching marks or the
provocation of Greek ancient or modern.
http://www.athens2004.com/athens2004/page/home?lang=el
Look again, half-wit. There are no rough or smooth breathings on that
page, and no accents other than a single stress-mark per word, exactly as
I told you. So you don't even remember the accents, as they were written
30 years ago.
IMBECILE. The text contains marks on almost every word so that proves that
you are talking BULLSHIT. You can give them fancy names if you like but they
are breathing marks none the less because that's is what they are there for.
They are NOT accents as in French because they do not change the sound of a
vowel. They only change the stress and the timing. I have texts from over 40
years ago so I know what I talking about. All religious texts even today
contain all of the breathing marks from Hellenistic times but it was
difficult to include all of them on typewriter keyboards for the average
typists so most of them were dropped. This of course makes no difference to
the pronunciation since any native Greek speaker knows how to pronounce
their own language and always knew how to dio so before these marks were
invented in the first place, because the marks were put there for the
BARBARIANS to use because they couldn't speak the language properly. And
that's one more good reason why speakers of Germanic languages are in no fit
position to lecture people on how to speak ancient Greek. The ancient Greeks
already labeled them unfit speakers of Greek over 2000 years ago. So don't
give me any more crap about ancient Greek sounding like home counties
English because it didn't.
Post by George Durbridge
Thank you for the Freudians "preaching" and "provocation", by the way.
IDIOT. Cant you tell a spellchecker error when you see one.
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
You have forgotten that in my own name gamma is pronounced first as a
vowel and second as a consonant.
NONSENSE. There is only ONE gamma in Agamemnon.
MY NAME, half-wit.
So you mean Giwrgos.
When gamma is followed by an iota or an epsilon or eta or ypsilon its always
pronounced y because of phonetic laziness in the combiation, its easire to
say yi or ye than gh i or gh e etc., so get an education you TWAT. The are
NO random changes in Greek pronunciation as there are in English where G in
George is pronounced J but in Get its pronounced G even when its followed by
an e in both cases, and in Gibe it's a J again but in Gift it's a G. What
sort of idiotic language is that which has no consistent pronunciation rules
? An impure language is what it is which can form NO BASIS for linguistic
theory unlike Greek which is a completely pure language which has ALWAYS
been pronounced the same way since Homer.
Ah, now I understand. If g softens before e or i in English, it is
inconsistency, but the same phenomenon in Greek is purest consistency.
It's a good thing for Greece that real Greeks make better sense than you.
RETARD. In English there is NO consistency. It is completely RANDOM . DON'T
YOU GET IT. G as a G and not as a J in Get but its J in Gem. There is no way
you can devise rules for the change in sound because its completely
haphazard. English is so inconsistent that you can't even tell me if I'm
Rowing or Rowing. Come one tell me. Am I asking you to propel a boat with
oars first or am I saying I'm arguing with you. You don't know and you cant
know because the spelling neither reflects the pronunciation or the meaning.
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
You have no idea how to pronounce Latin or Greek so transliterations would
be of no use to you.
On the contrary, I have a pretty good idea how Latin sounded, based on
the uniformities in the living Romance languages.
Go on Inspector Clausau tell us ?
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
Keep speaking like an English tourist and you'll be
treated like a tourist.
Whereas you would be treated as an alien out of a reactionary nightmare?
You are out of your crazy little mind.
Post by George Durbridge
Post by Agamemnon
Post by George Durbridge
Now go away.
B.T. Raven
2005-07-11 02:54:30 UTC
Permalink
The[re] are
NO random changes in Greek pronunciation as there are in English where G in
George is pronounced J but in Get its pronounced G even when its followed by
an e in both cases, and in Gibe it's a J again but in Gift it's a G. What
sort of idiotic language is that which has no consistent pronunciation rules
? An impure language is what it is which can form NO BASIS for
linguistic
theory unlike Greek which is a completely pure language which has ALWAYS
been pronounced the same way since Homer.
In the Elysian fields Homer is Shakespeare's cup-bearer. And he is proud
of his job.

Eduardus
P&G
2005-07-10 08:14:07 UTC
Permalink
The only standard alphabet is the Greek alphabet because it is the only
one that has not changed its pronunciation.
A surprising statement.
Do you personally still pronounce all three accents, all differently?
Do you personally still distinguish between smooth and rough breathings?
Do you still distinguish omega with iota subscript from omega without?
Do you still distinguish in pronunciation the 8 different ways of writing
the sound /i:/ in modern Greek?
What nonsense! Of course you don't.
It is very well known that Greek pronunciation has changed radically. We
can even date the time of the changes.

Peter
Agamemnon
2005-07-10 08:48:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by P&G
The only standard alphabet is the Greek alphabet because it is the only
one that has not changed its pronunciation.
A surprising statement.
Do you personally still pronounce all three accents, all differently?
Do you personally still distinguish between smooth and rough breathings?
Do you still distinguish omega with iota subscript from omega without?
Do you still distinguish in pronunciation the 8 different ways of writing
the sound /i:/ in modern Greek?
What nonsense! Of course you don't.
It is very well known that Greek pronunciation has changed radically. We
can even date the time of the changes.
You are talking out of your ANAL RECTAL ORIFICE !

"Do you still distinguish omega with iota subscript from omega without?"

What sort of complete MORON would write a statement like this ?

I'll tell you who. Someone who knows nothing about the pronunciation of
ancient Greek. The ' subscript on the w in ancient Hellenistic Greek was put
there for one reason alone at that was to signify the original dative ending
was "wi" which had fallen out of popular usage by Hellenistic times. It had
absolutely NOTHING to do with the pronunciation of w since w was ALLWAYS
pronounced the same way.

There are NO accents in Greek. They are called BREATHINGS MARKS and
breathing marks are still in use in modern Greek so people still distinguish
the correct breathings even today. The breathing marks in the word La'i'ka
are there to make it clear that ai is should not be pronounced e as is
normally done but that all the letters a and i are pronounced separately.

Accents are for languages like French which do not have an adequate number
of vowels. In Greek there are plenty of vowels and therefore the 8 different
"i" sounds do not need accents like they would in French.

Greek pronunciation has NOT changed one iota since the time of Homer ! The
Greek language is completely homogenous and has been that way for over 3000
years because Greeks understood from the very beginning that the letters of
the Alphabet could only be pronounced in one way and one way only because
they invented it. That's why the letters of the Greek alphabet all have
NAMES given to them unlike Latin or French or English because in Greek each
letter or combination of letters only has ONE sound and ONE sound alone and
that sound do not change at random like in English. The breathing marks in
Hellenistic Greek made sure that everyone pronounced it properly.
Post by P&G
Peter
Paul McKenna
2005-07-10 09:18:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by P&G
The only standard alphabet is the Greek alphabet because it is the only
one that has not changed its pronunciation.
A surprising statement.
Do you personally still pronounce all three accents, all differently?
Do you personally still distinguish between smooth and rough breathings?
Do you still distinguish omega with iota subscript from omega without?
Do you still distinguish in pronunciation the 8 different ways of writing
the sound /i:/ in modern Greek?
What nonsense! Of course you don't.
It is very well known that Greek pronunciation has changed radically. We
can even date the time of the changes.
You are talking out of your ANAL RECTAL ORIFICE !
"Do you still distinguish omega with iota subscript from omega without?"
What sort of complete MORON would write a statement like this ?
I'll tell you who. Someone who knows nothing about the pronunciation of
ancient Greek. The ' subscript on the w in ancient Hellenistic Greek was
put there for one reason alone at that was to signify the original dative
ending was "wi" which had fallen out of popular usage by Hellenistic
times. It had absolutely NOTHING to do with the pronunciation of w since w
was ALLWAYS pronounced the same way.
There are NO accents in Greek. They are called BREATHINGS MARKS and
breathing marks are still in use in modern Greek so people still
distinguish the correct breathings even today. The breathing marks in the
word La'i'ka are there to make it clear that ai is should not be
pronounced e as is normally done but that all the letters a and i are
pronounced separately.
Accents are for languages like French which do not have an adequate number
of vowels. In Greek there are plenty of vowels and therefore the 8
different "i" sounds do not need accents like they would in French.
Greek pronunciation has NOT changed one iota since the time of Homer ! The
Greek language is completely homogenous and has been that way for over
3000 years because Greeks understood from the very beginning that the
letters of the Alphabet could only be pronounced in one way and one way
only because they invented it. That's why the letters of the Greek
alphabet all have NAMES given to them unlike Latin or French or English
because in Greek each letter or combination of letters only has ONE sound
and ONE sound alone and that sound do not change at random like in
English. The breathing marks in Hellenistic Greek made sure that everyone
pronounced it properly.
Post by P&G
Peter
Agamemnon,
The reason that nobody here (humanities.classics & alt.language.latin) takes
you seriously is that any discussion that you get involved in very quickly
degenerates into the sort of invective that you have just shown.
Lack of knowledge is not a crime and is perfectly excusable, but what is not
excusable is the appalling manners that you show.
Learn some humility and then you have the potential to learn much Greek,
believe me there _is_ much you could learn.

Paul
Martin Edwards
2005-07-10 09:32:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by P&G
The only standard alphabet is the Greek alphabet because it is the only
one that has not changed its pronunciation.
A surprising statement.
Do you personally still pronounce all three accents, all differently?
Do you personally still distinguish between smooth and rough breathings?
Do you still distinguish omega with iota subscript from omega without?
Do you still distinguish in pronunciation the 8 different ways of writing
the sound /i:/ in modern Greek?
What nonsense! Of course you don't.
It is very well known that Greek pronunciation has changed radically. We
can even date the time of the changes.
You are talking out of your ANAL RECTAL ORIFICE !
"Do you still distinguish omega with iota subscript from omega without?"
What sort of complete MORON would write a statement like this ?
Someone who knows the subject, Aggy, not someone who has learned the
little he knows from aging fascists.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
p***@ix.netcom.com
2005-07-10 16:50:25 UTC
Permalink
Lucius Alter AANAKTI ANDRWN s.p.d.

Scripseras:

"The ' subscript on the w in ancient Hellenistic Greek was put
there for one reason alone at that was to signify the original dative
ending
was "wi" which had fallen out of popular usage by Hellenistic times. It
had
absolutely NOTHING to do with the pronunciation of w since w was
ALLWAYS
pronounced the same way. "

"Greek pronunciation has NOT changed one iota since the time of Homer
!"

Hanc rem recte non scribis et fatuose proponis.

Plurimi sunt doctrinae magnae auctoritatisque severae qui rem aliter
intellegant. Unus ex illis est Leonard Palmer in suo libro docto
"Lingua Graeca":

"De lingua IndoEuropeana linguae Graecae haeredi sunt diphthongae
longae et aliae intus se Graecam esonuum litterarumque compendio
oriebantur: <AI>, <HI>, <WI>. Nonnullo tempore illae diphthongae
breviandove amittendove elementi secundi amovebantur. noster modus
autem quo iota sub litteris vocalibus longis <A, H, W> oritur ex
moribus Byzantinis." (207)

Iterum scriptores idem qui sunt Sturtevant, Allen, Palmer, Buck etc.
rem aliter intellegunt: Litteratura Graeca non orta est ex capite
Iovis, at a litteratura septentrionali semitica ducta est et formis et
nominibus litterarum, et nomina quibus vocantur plurimae litterae per
aeva mutata sunt: e.g., <o> vocabatur <ou> et <u> ante u psilon modo
vocabatur <u>, et litteratura antiqua conservabat litteram consonantem
<q> quae vocabatur <qop> ex littera semitica septentrionali <qop>.
(203)

Apud epigraphiam invenimus ANKURA quandoquidem apud papyrologiam
invenimus AGKURA.. In Attica pristina et alibi <H> erat sonus glottae
fricativus, sed in dialecto Ioniae orientalis , qui per psilosem
aspirationis notam amiserat , littera <H> utebatur pro sonu vocali et
depresso et orto ex oris fronte.

Si rem itacismam consideraveris, plurima mutationis exempla
invenientur.

Valeas.
P&G
2005-07-11 07:33:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
There are NO accents in Greek.
Amazing! We even have from Classical Greece the description of an actor
who got the accent wrong, giving the word a different meaning, so that he
was laughed off the stage.
Perhaps you should read a book?

Peter
Agamemnon
2005-07-11 09:13:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by P&G
Post by Agamemnon
There are NO accents in Greek.
Amazing! We even have from Classical Greece the description of an actor
who got the accent wrong, giving the word a different meaning, so that he
was laughed off the stage.
Which accent would that be. The one of the Persians or the Scythes or the
other barbarians in Aristophanes ?

There are NO accents in ancient Greek. PERIOD !

The alphabet was pronounced the SAME WAY by EVERYONE and EVERY word was
spelled as it was pronounced. They only thing you had were dialects !
Post by P&G
Perhaps you should read a book?
Get an education.
Post by P&G
Peter
Martin Edwards
2005-07-11 17:54:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by P&G
Post by Agamemnon
There are NO accents in Greek.
Amazing! We even have from Classical Greece the description of an actor
who got the accent wrong, giving the word a different meaning, so that he
was laughed off the stage.
Which accent would that be. The one of the Persians or the Scythes or the
other barbarians in Aristophanes ?
Ton kipriakon.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
p***@ix.netcom.com
2005-07-11 23:34:08 UTC
Permalink
Lucius Alter ANAKTI ANDRWN s.p.d.

"There are NO accents in ancient Greek. PERIOD ! "

Aristoteles, in suo libro "De Sophisticis Elenchis", maxima cum
diligentia et tam eloquenter de captioninus linguae (captiones numeri,
accentus, etc.) ut mihi putandum sit te describere alienam linguam quam
Aristoteles non intellegat.

Valeas.
Agamemnon
2005-07-12 07:41:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@ix.netcom.com
Lucius Alter ANAKTI ANDRWN s.p.d.
"There are NO accents in ancient Greek. PERIOD ! "
Aristoteles, in suo libro "De Sophisticis Elenchis", maxima cum
diligentia et tam eloquenter de captioninus linguae (captiones numeri,
accentus, etc.) ut mihi putandum sit te describere alienam linguam quam
Aristoteles non intellegat.
There are no such things as accents in Greek. Stop confusing accent with
dialect. Every Greek pronounced the alphabet the same way so there can be no
accent by definition. Each word in ancient Greek was spelled as it is
pronounced hence Doric, Ionic, Attic and Aeolic used different spellings for
words with the same meanings. Stop assuming that Greek is like English.
Post by p***@ix.netcom.com
Valeas.
Ed Cryer
2005-07-12 11:35:28 UTC
Permalink
In Reply to: Re: turn a blind eye posted by R. Berg on March 29, 2001

: : Where can I find confirmation that the origin of this expression is
Admiral Nelson's action in disobeying the order from the flagship to
disengage, by putting his eyeglass to his blind eye to read the message,
only to go on to defeat the enemy.

: The article on Nelson in "The Oxford Companion to Ships & the Sea" (1976)
mentions the event:

: The Tsar was assassinated and his policy reversed by his successor,
Alexander I, but before the momentous news had become known, Nelson, with a
detachment of ships of the fleet of comparatively light draught, attacked
and defeated the Danish fleet at the hard-fought battle of Copenhagen on 2
April 1801. At a critical stage of the action, Hyde Parker signalled to the
engaged portion of the fleet to break off the action, an order that Nelson
refused even to see since, as he remarked, he had a blind eye and sometimes
had a right to use it. To have obeyed Hyde Parker's signal at that moment
would have been to court disaster, so critical was the squadron's position
in shoal waters.

: However, the Oxf. Comp. doesn't say that "turn a blind eye" was the exact
phrase that Nelson used; or that, if it was, he invented it; or that,
whether he used it or not, it became popular after his remark was
publicized. In fact, raising a telescope to one eye needn't involve turning
the head. A biography of Nelson might have the exact quotation.

TURN A BLIND EYE - "To deliberately ignore something when you know it is
going on. The expression is said to have been inspired by a famous incident
at the Battle of Copenhagen. Admiral Nelson had been ordered by flag signal
from his superior to halt the bombardment of enemy ships. He deliberately
placed his telescope to his blind eye, ignored the order as if he had not
seen it, and proceeded to win the day for England." From "Encyclopedia of
Word and Phrase Origins" by Robert Hendrickson (Facts on File, New York,
1997)

TURN A BLIND EYE TO - "Overlook deliberately. This expression almost
certainly originated in 1801, when Lord Nelson, then second in command of
the English fleet, was besieging Copenhagen. He decided that his squadron
should attack, but his lieutenant pointed out that the flagship had sent up
signals to withdraw. Reluctant to obey this order and eager for a victory,
Nelson, who had lost the sight of one eye at Calvi, put the telescope to his
blind eye and said that he could see no such signal. He did attack, and the
French were forced to surrender, a triumph in his career second only to the
Battle of Trafalgar." From "Fighting Words: From War, Rebellion, and other
Combative Capers" by Christine Ammer (NTC Publishing Group, Chicago, Ill.,
1989, 1999).





(Copied from http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/8/messages/288.html)
Ed
Jack O'Malley
2005-07-12 12:09:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Agamemnon
Post by p***@ix.netcom.com
Lucius Alter ANAKTI ANDRWN s.p.d.
"There are NO accents in ancient Greek. PERIOD ! "
Aristoteles, in suo libro "De Sophisticis Elenchis", maxima cum
diligentia et tam eloquenter de captioninus linguae (captiones numeri,
accentus, etc.) ut mihi putandum sit te describere alienam linguam quam
Aristoteles non intellegat.
There are no such things as accents in Greek. Stop confusing accent with
dialect. Every Greek pronounced the alphabet the same way so there can be no
accent by definition. Each word in ancient Greek was spelled as it is
pronounced hence Doric, Ionic, Attic and Aeolic used different spellings for
words with the same meanings. Stop assuming that Greek is like English.
I for one think that this general reluctance on the part of some soi-disant
classical adepts to credit the insights which Agamemnon has proferred
bespeaks a blinkered view of the history of the Greek language. Agamemnon,
despite a glaring deficiency in protreptic powers, is certainly spot on in the
profounder truth of his hypothesis. The only thing lacking up to now is
unambiguous documentary evidence to support it. To which end I forthwith
offer the following fragment which I laboriously copied and translated from
an Ox and Rhino papyrus plucked from the Nilotic sands. it is a tour de force
which would have turned Ventris himself green as the grass with envy.

The scene is from the « Agamemnonos Nostos » by an anonymous and
otherwise deservedly lost tragicomedian. (Since the Greek particles, which
are still in abundant DAILY use in the UNCHANGED Greek language, have no
counterpart in the BARBARIAN tongues, I will leave them in together with
the accents with which Ari the Byzantine (a crypto Scythe no doubt) DEFILED
the language and DID NOT EVER AT ANY TIME EXIST IN GREEK.)

Scene: a grove near the palace at Mycenae.

Cassandra: So, Aggie, your (mèn) wife seems greatly miffed at my presence.
Agamemnon: Miffed, say you? Her nose (dè) is out of joint. She'll
(dè:) get over it.
Cassie: Perhaps it is not account of me that she is angering herself.
Aggie: Not? Why then?
Cassie: Maybe she seethes because your brother got his bimbo wife back
and she is minus a daughter?
Aggie: Apage! I never thought of that.
Cassie: I predict grave things will befall Mycenae, Aggie.
Aggie: I don't believe that, Cassie. Don't trouble your pretty little Phrygian
head about it.
Cassie: This is a lovely grove, Aggie. We had nothing like this on the
parched Turkic plain beneath the citadel of lofty Ilion.
Aggie: The ideal grove, Cassie, my love. I (mèn) spent [1] many pleasant hours
here in my boyhood; as a vigourous ephebe (dè) I even "made love" [2] for the
first time right there under that old birch tree.
Cassie: (gasps) (âra) you "made love" under that tree?
Aggie: I made. Her mother observing from right over there. [3]
Cassie: (nearly swoons) O ye gods! (coming to herself) What (mèn)
did her mother say?
Aggie: (sheepishly) Veee, veee.

This linguistic nugget shows clearly that neither the language of the
Greeks themselves nor indeed of Greek sheep has changed one iota.
(or more to the point, beta or eta)

Dzek
(I ought that I admit [4] that I am an Eggliss spoikigg mparmparuian)



[1] Second aorist. The exquisitely subtle sense of this rhematic
form cannot of course be captured in a BARBARIAN tongue.

[2] A sense of decorum compels me to translate Ag's verb by
this evfimizm. Nothing should be construed as to deprecate
that sublime love which only GREEKS CAN FEEL, as the divine
Plato describes in the Fedhon and is alien to us mere metics
dwelling in the shadow of the ANCIENT and UNCHANGING
glory of Greece.

[3] Genitive absolute. What hope to render this UBIQUITOUS
and hallowed Hellenism in .... a BARBARIAN tongue? Too sublime,
too sublime.

{4] Infinitive defective. Observe that Greek DOES NOT
now have and NEVER has had an INFINITIVE!
p***@ix.netcom.com
2005-07-12 17:26:03 UTC
Permalink
Dionysius Halicarnassi tres linguae Graecae accentus maxima cum cura
describit et descriptio sua non est dialectorum sed est trium vocum:
vox acuta, vox gravis, et vox media.

Desine opinari te cognoscere aliquid tibi ignotissimum.

Valeas.
Agamemnon
2005-07-12 17:36:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@ix.netcom.com
Dionysius Halicarnassi tres linguae Graecae accentus maxima cum cura
vox acuta, vox gravis, et vox media.
None of which are accents. The are breathings and stresses which DO NOT
rotate the sound of a vowel or consonant. Vowel or consonant is a
peculiarity of Germanic languages NOT Greek. Greek has no accents.
Post by p***@ix.netcom.com
Desine opinari te cognoscere aliquid tibi ignotissimum.
Valeas.
Martin Edwards
2005-07-10 09:20:52 UTC
Permalink
Agamemnon wrote:

Balls, balls and more balls. Theous men eto apallagin ponon. Knock it
on the head, Aggy. Go and run some errands for the EOKA veterans club.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
St.Cuthbert's Host
2005-07-12 17:05:51 UTC
Permalink
dear god,

what utter tripe.

You really have no idea what you are talking about.
VtSkier
2005-07-12 17:39:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by St.Cuthbert's Host
dear god,
what utter tripe.
You really have no idea what you are talking about.
It would be informative to know who/what
you are responding to.
Bobby D. Bryant
2005-07-10 01:44:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by J***@gmail.com
The arguments over the pronunciation of Latin and how the Romans spoke
in this forum can only make one laugh.
Why should we accept your notions instead of the notions that scholars
have put together by actual research?
Post by J***@gmail.com
Latin should be pronounced in whatever way is most comfortable to the
reader. All this nonsense about the correct pronunciation is just
ridiculous because classical Latin today is meant to be read and/or
translated.
Unless you deal with the Catholic liturgy, why would anyone be interested
in the Latin language but not interested in its historical pronunciation?
--
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
Martin Edwards
2005-07-10 09:11:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by J***@gmail.com
The arguments over the pronunciation of Latin and how the Romans spoke
in this forum can only make one laugh.
<snip>
Post by J***@gmail.com
Latin should be pronounced in whatever way is most comfortable to the
reader. All this nonsense about the correct pronunciation is just
ridiculous because classical Latin today is meant to be read and/or
translated.
My Latin master gave us this example. A general still half asleep heard
someone shout "Cownayaaaaas!" He thought that he had heard "Cave ne
eas", or "Make sure you don't go", so he did not march that day. It was
actually a huckster shouting "Cauneas!" In the "New Pronunciation" they
sounded the same, but in the "Old Pronunciation" very different.
Incidentally, one of my best friends was a Catholic. The discovery that
the Latin used in church was wrong was a factor in his lapse.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
B.T. Raven
2005-07-10 14:43:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Martin Edwards
Incidentally, one of my best friends was a Catholic. The discovery that
the Latin used in church was wrong was a factor in his lapse.
This makes as little sense as if a matricide were to claim that his
crime should be excused because he had discovered that his mother
shopped at K-Mart rather than Target.
Surely you jest.

Eduardus
p***@ix.netcom.com
2005-07-10 22:43:40 UTC
Permalink
"This makes as little sense as if a matricide were to claim that his
crime should be excused because he had discovered that his mother
shopped at K-Mart rather than Target.
Surely you jest. "

Deus, ut a philosopho Theodisco philologoque scriptum est, si fuisset,
lingua Graeca melius usus esset.

Valeas.
Loading...