From: Randall Buth (ButhFam@compuserve.com)
Date: Thu Jan 31 2002 - 19:47:34 EST
shalom Michael,
>The spelling error argument seems to hinge on uniformity (within
>any one of many dialects, true) but real language isn't that
>uniform WITHIN dialects.
Actually, the whole thing is quite simple. It requires differentiating
static from patterns. Anything can happen once or twice. That is
static. Background noise. But when it starts happening over and
over and over, with different words and in different environments--
you need a rational explanation.
The one that every investigator has come up with is that
broadly speaking for Roman period Koine
EI = I
AI = E
W = O
OI = U
A = A
OU = OU
H = H and I
(aha!, diversity/instability! to find out what to do, see Living Koine
Greek for Everyone, vol. 1, pp. 158-167.)
>Besides that, the methodology can only EVER lead in one
>direction ... to reduce the number of distinct sounds.
Well, first, the language ended up with only five vowels. That is not
an argument or debate, just a long, historical fact. One cannot complain
that water runs downhill, one should just look for good water.
On the other hand, if the language had produced new vowels, then
they could have developed new symbols and/or new di-graphs or
spelling conventions. Where do you think U-psilon and W-mega came
from? Not from Phoenician. There was no external constraint in the Koine
period, but they didn't need new letters because the language itself was
already in a reduction mode. Again, the primary cause/catalyst was the loss
of length.
Ironically, Greek before the Koine period, and especially before 403
BCE, had an under-differentiated spelling system, since long A was
phonemic against short A, but only one symbol was used, likewise long E
(later written H) from short E, long I from short I, long U from short U.
Then, for a couple of hundred years after 403 BCE, "H" was brought in to
mark 'long E' and W to mark 'long O'. They became the historical spelling
and stayed on even after length dropped out and even when merged with
other vowels.
>To me,
>it is far safer to maintain diversity
Safe? Should I pronounce this SAh-FEh ?
>You say an Erasman ends up with a bear of an accent, but I think
>quite the opposite
A chacun son gout.
Actually, it's the Greeks themselves that complain about 'rasmian. The
academic stuff sounds "positively kakophonic".
Greeks have told me that the phonemic Koine that I use sounds
like "Greek",
though a bit different from modern, to be sure. Someone thought it to be a
reasonable compromise, if not using 'modern'.
My point is that pointing at diversity confuses the issue: we can know
what was phonemic even if we cannot know what was phonetic.
For anyone who wants to internalize the language well enough to think with
it, then they should be encouraged to develop something that has a little
more contact with the natural, historical use of the language. Even if that
is different from Erasmian and 75% of the way towards modern.
KAI DIA TI DEI HMIN PANTOTE DIALOGIZESQAI EN BARBARH,
TOIS ECOUSI KAI FILOUSI THN ELLHNIKHN; DUNASAI, DYNAMEQA, PROFEREIN TAS
FWNAS WS BOULH/BOULOMEQA.
MH DE FOBOU AMARTIAS, PTAIOMEN GAR APANTES KAI HGOUMAI EGWGE OTI TW MAQANTI
GLWSSAN DEI POIHSAI DEKA MURIADAS "PARAPTWMATWN" GLWSSHS.
ERRWSO
Randall Buth
www.biblicalulpan.org
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:17 EDT