Using a newer, more accurate reconstructed pronunciation system can give you a good idea of what Ancient Greek sounded like Using modern Greek pronunciation as your basis for studying Ancient or Koine Greek makes speaking Modern Greek easy. Using Erasmian accomplishes neither.
@@vattentaelt Compared to modern Greek, yes. In some regards, it gets a lot right. But if you're looking to learn a more classical pronunciation system rather than modern, then there are far more accurate period and dialect specific reconstructions than Erasmian. Even in a general sense, Fifth Century Attic reconstruction (which is what Erasmian is closest to) would be better to learn regardless since unlike Erasmian, it would at least get dipthongs and accentation more correct (even if dealing with other dialects). Erasmian's only advantage is academic inertia in most western countries But if you're dealing with Koine, modern is closer than Erasmian in most cases
@@BroadwayRonMexico I agree with you 100%, I just don't get why many people (mostly Greeks) are strawmanning Erasimian because they "hate the sound of it" despite most 5th century reconstructions being at least as much removed from the modern / late Byzantine pronunciation. It would be foolish if Greeks were to start using any reconstruction, but who cares if western academia reversed ιωτακισμός for didactical reasons?
@@vattentaelt The assertion that we should use Erasmian pronunciation for didactical reasons is just an excuse especially coming from native English-speakers. Regarding “itacism”, note the different ways the “ee” sound (IPA phonetic symbol /iː/) can be made in English: e; ea; ee; ei; ie; i; ey; ay; eo; oei as shown in the following words: even; heat; degree; receive; believe; machine; key; quay; people, onomatopoeia. So you have itacism in English. Also the "ai" is sometimes pronounced as an ε English words such as "said" and French words such as "mais". Many languages have homophones and homonyms eg in English we have the homophones: pause, paws, pores, pours, and these homonyms with different meanings but same spelling: bat, kind, bank. In French we have the homophones: poids, pois, poix. In addition, third person singular and plural sound the same eg il parle ; ils parlent even though they are spelt differently. English and French people don't get confused and learn how to spell words in their own mother tongue so why can't students of Koine Greek learn to spell if they use the Modern Greek pronunciation? Greek is a living language. I've been told so many times "Greek is a dead language". Even Koine Greek is a living language. It is the liturgical language which is still read or chanted aloud in the Greek Orthodox Church and about 23% of the liturgy of the Coptic Church is also Koine Greek.
@@learnbiblicalgreek316 You make a very good point. However, you chose the two most difficult spelling systems in the world to make it. You must agree that English and French children _do_ get confused when learning how to spell their mother tongues - at least when compared to Spanish, Finnish or Czech kids who get to have super consistent and transparent spellings (which Greek must have had back in the Classical days)
I use modern Greek pronunciation myself, since I am simultaneously learning Koine and modern Greek. It allows me to watch movies and TV shows in the language and also increase my comprehension in Koine since there is a lot of common vocabulary. One thing that is odd for me is that words like "ημιν" and "υμιν" are pronounced the same in modern Greek, but imply completely different meanings. However, what most people refer to as "Erasmian" is not what Erasmus himself would have thought he was reconstructing. It's just badly anglicized Greek, and it truly is awful and not even historically viable.
I agree with you! I also use the modern Greek pronunciation but in this video I used the Erasmian for the English speakers... Thank you for your comment!!
@@bigiladro That's not really what I'm arguing. There are few audio-visual sources for Koine Greek. And mostly only classical works really exist in that language. So learning modern Greek is helpful for immersion. Just like it is very helpful to learn a modern Romance language as a suppliment, not a replacement, for learning Latin.
Conclusion for Ancient greek use modern pronunciation and for Latin use eclesiasiastical pronunciation, since those two lines are part of the living tradition of the language.
Or do whatever you want. I use Classical for Latin but Modern Greek for Ancient Greek. There is not much verbal communication in Ancient Greek, anyways, so unless you plan on later learning modern Greek, do whatever keeps you reading Ancient Greek!
Ecclesiastical is not a living tradition, no - it only became the official pronunciation of the Church in the 20th century, and it descends ultimately from a pronunciation reform that occurred in the 9th century. The only living tradition of Latin is the romance languages.
@@Glossologia I don't know what you understand as living neither tradition, romance languages are not Latin, the living tradition of Latin is found in the Church, the Church kept Latin alive, whatever decision she makes is ok, she is the one that still uses Latin as the official language while everybody else gave up on Latin, and only recently some have been starting to copy that way of doing things, the Church never stopped.
@@irodjetson When you say that the pronunciation is a 'living tradition' you imply that it was handed down from ancient times. I am simply pointing out that this isn't true - the standard ecclesiastical pronunciation (which to be clear I have no problem with, I speak Italian fluently and I talk to ecclesiastical users all the time in Latin) is a modern convention, not a 'living tradition'. The church undeniably was critical in the preservation of Latin literature, but Latin literature both predates the church and contains enormous amounts of material that has nothing to do with the Church. Thus the Church's invaluable role in preserving Latin is not a reason to choose a pronunciation. In my case I use the restored classical pronunciation of Latin because it is the most practical pronunciation for accessing ancient metrical poetry. You must also keep in mind that well pronounced classical pronunciation and ecclesiastical pronunciation are close enough to be perfectly mutually intelligible - it is quite different from the situation of ancient greek where someone trying to do reconstruction Attic in a strong German accent won't understand someone doing modern Greek pronunciation and vice versa.
@@Glossologia You are not understanding my point because you are trying to make "truth claims" while not paying attention that you are framing reality in a very specific manner, your hermeneutic for interpreting history is a very particular one, thus when you analize facts, you pass them through your hermeneutica lenses. In the Church every single day until recently prayed in Latin, chanted in Latin, studied Latin, the very life of the common parishoner and the life of the people with religious vocations, friars, nuns, priests, bishops and the pope was a life lived in Latin for the most part within the Church, meaning that for the Church Latin has been living and has never died, now, if the Church decides to pick one pronunciation over another it is within the right of the people keeping Latin alive in the lives of their members to do that, and that's perfeclty reasonable. Now if for you keeping Latin alive means that people in academia go and study ancient Latin texts, then we have a very different way of understanding what it is for a language to stay alive, a language alive is a language spoken, sung and written by living people not just because they are scholars, but because it is part of the normal lives of people. We just have different hermeneutics, we have the same information and facts (I follow scorpio martianus and others, so I am aware of the way you approach this).
Eυχαριστω παρα πολύ Καθηγητε με το παπιγιον. Σαν Έλληνας που μεγάλωσε στην Αγγλία και δεν έκανε Ελληνικό σχολείο, με βοηθά πολύ να ακούω την μεγάλη γνώση σου. Καλή χρονιά.
there are so many things wrong with this. If you are a philologist, linguist, and use ancient greek to determine the sounds of another ancient languages, you can NOT mix it with modern greek pronunciation. Yes language evolution is normal, but the point of learning a language's ancient form is to reconstruct it, pronunciation included (as much as possible)
We used to unwittingly recreate the Erasmian accent as kids trying to intentionally butcher the language or intentionally make it hard to comprehend by removing vocal tones or by Anglisizing it as much as possible 😆
Erasmian does not sound right. Modern pronounciation has its pitfalls too, however, which might make it difficult to understand an ancient text. Why not settle for Lucian pronunciation? It sounds very Greek, but also maintains accents and some differences in pronouncing different letters ? Of course, no one will find it natural, in the beginning, including modern Greeks...
C'est justement par ce qu'une langue change de génération en génération qu'il est juste et bon de conserver la prononciation de l' époque des auteurs antiques.Les Grecs antiques n'auraient pas inventé le η ,- οι s'ils avaient réduit ces deux et plus lettres à Ι . Je n'aurais pas donné à ma fille le prénom Εληνη si j'avais eu à le prononcer Ιλινι ! Ιλινι viens ici ! Erasme de Rotterdam était un fin lettré et il a certainement eu des contacts avec les Grecs byzantins de son temps, victimes de la iotisation qui, à mes oreilles, est une IDIOTISATION..
The hatred Erasmian pronunciation is getting in the comments is disappointing. Phonological changes happen over time with any language. It makes sense that Modern Greek speakers are not necessarily going to speak in an affected accent for Ancient Greek texts except maybe poetry (???) I probably sound a little ridiculous with Chaucer but i try to sound somewhat more Medieval when reading him, though it has been ages. As for say, Shakespeare or Keats, I would usually only make end rhymes conform to earlier pronunciation schemes. Honestly, in my view, it comes down to personal preference. Benjamin Kantor speaks Koine which is what i am learning with a rigorously reconstructed pronunciation (using such methodology as comparing manuscripts with spelling mistakes to determine the ways words were pronounced) and although his pronunciation is probably much closer to how Jesus and the Apostles spoke Greek, since i initially learned an Erasmian (possibly more 5th Century Athenian?) pronunciation, i still prefer to speak and read in that way only because it has become more natural to me. God bless you all, and thanks for the video!
I just don't see how "phonological changes happen" becomes an argument in favor of a 15th century theologian trying to speak ancient Greek by a Dutch accent.
For those who still insists that erasmian is the right one, let them see what Plato himself says about this in "Plato Cratylus 418c" "αἱ γυναῖκες, αἵπερ μάλιστα τὴν ἀρχαίαν φωνὴν σῴζουσι. νῦν δὲ ἀντὶ μὲν τοῦ ἰῶτα ἢ εἶ ἢ ἦτα μεταστρέφουσιν, ἀντὶ δὲ τοῦ δέλτα ζῆτα, ὡς δὴ μεγαλοπρεπέστερα ὄντα." translation: "[418c] and that is especially true of the women, who are most addicted to preserving old forms of speech. But nowadays people change iota to eta or epsilon iota, and delta to zeta, thinking they have a grander sound." Of course that doesn't mean that Erasmus was a bad scholar, he actually did great job, but without having the opportunity to listen to a Greek of his time and with just a small fragment of the knowledge we have today. I recently asked an american scholar, why they keep teaching the erasmian and the best answer he had was "well it' s easier to us" What is more important though is that if we had the chance to read an ancient text to Plato using the so called modern pronunciation its quite sure that he would understand everything easily, i cant say though that listening to him would be easy for us to understand him without some practice..
Το πρόβλημα αφορά τους τόνους.Οι θιασώτες της Ερασμιας προφοράς αγνοούν εντελώς την ύπαρξη των διφθογγων.Ειναι οι τόνοι που ορίζουν εάν ένας διγθογγος είναι μακρύς ή βραχύς.
Try Philemon Zachariou ua-cam.com/video/2CyZiSrY38U/v-deo.html Learn Biblical Greek ua-cam.com/video/80wUjgbmtro/v-deo.html Speak and Read New Testament Greek ua-cam.com/video/gM3EQnsSxuY/v-deo.html Anton Tasos Channel for the reading of the Greek NT ua-cam.com/video/Pa8i-F04PKQ/v-deo.html
Biblical Koine with modern pronunciation is the norm in Orthodox churches that use Greek. In any parish in Greece or Cyprus, any Greek (and sometimes Antiochian) Orthodox parish in the west, or any Greek monastery (whether in Greece/Cyprus or the west), you'll hear Biblical Koine with modern pronunciation, and it's taught that way as well.
@@vattentaelt There's no "Ceos" either. There's no ancient Greek place name such as "Ceos" (and put aside the issue of how "C" would be pronounced). So please consult your best Greek lexica and come again.
Let's be sincere: Greeks argue in favour of their pronunciation because it's theirs. It's clearly not convenient for the rest of us. On the other hand, I use an ancient pronunciation that is based on many sound criteria, and the name of "Erasmian" is just a straw man fallacy in itself.
There are actually multiple reconstructed pronunciations, of which erasmian is probably the worst. You might find this video interesting ua-cam.com/video/Dt9z5Gvp3MM/v-deo.html
If the Erasmian pronunciation is the correct one,that leads to the conclusion that Ancient Greek sounded so HORRIBLE !!! Most of the learning books that I like ( Athenaze,Alexandros ,To Hellenikon Paidion)they use the Reconstructed Erasmian pronunciation so i don’t have the option to choose…. ………when in Familia Romana both classical and ecclesiastical are concindered correct options accompanied by audios in UA-cam respectively .
Pronouncing Ancient Greek with the modern pronunciation is as absurd as trying to read it in any reconstructed form, for diametrically different reasons. The modern pronunciation is certainly not the one used in classical times, but it has been attested for at least 1,000 years, i.e. since the Middle Ages. Its phonemic reductions and mergers obliterate certain morphological distinctions that were important to classical speakers. Proof of that is that by the time the medieval pronunciation completed its historical evolution and basically became identical to the modern one, around the X c. AD, many grammatical traits, especially in the conjugation of verbs, had all but disappeared, simply because it was impossible to keep them distinct in the spoken language. On the other hand, reconstructed pronunciations (of which Erasmian is only the most ancient and crudest form) Simply are what they are: hypotheses. Sure thing, reconstructed pronunciations enable ancient Greek morphology to fully function, but at which price? You can never be sure that you are doing it right, because you have no native speaker or reliable phonetic transcription to check. Given the above, using the modern pronunciation is an anachronism, but a tolerable one, pretty much like reading ancient Chinese texts in the modern Mandarin pronunciation. The lesser of the two evils.
Erasmian is far worse. In that orientalist system a native English speaker, a native German, native Danes, native French all sound mutually incompatible to each other when trying to use Erasmian out loud. You can hear the various native accents shine through. On librivox there was some native Greek who uploaded some quality work and at the beginning of one of his audio works he gave the case for why he used some modified pronunciation of modern Greek that has the best indication of being accurate. I don't really feel like searching through the Erasmian hell of librivox to found that gem again, though.
NikephorosPhokas, foreign accents would shine through even if we non-Greeks were to use the modern pronunciation, And the same is true In every language. According to your logic, if a decent number of proficient, well prepared native Greek speakers uploaded audio files in some sort of a reconstructed pronunciation, then would you find it more acceptable? If I understand you correctly, what you despise is not the reconstructed pronunciation in se, but the fact that it sounds not Greek enough.
@@MouYijian This is so insulting. If a German speaker uploaded something in Erasmian Greek, then an English speaker uploaded the same text -- neither would be able to understand the audio of the other. You can also see from multiple UA-cam videos that almost no one is fluent in the Orientalist Erasmian pronunciation and they stutter and stammer all over the place. I actually looked it up and the orientalist Erasmian pronunciation was based on a joke played on Erasmus by a Swiss scholar Henricus Glareanus. Erasmus himself denounced it but anti-Greek bias was and is still so strong Greeks have to argue with arrogant fools like you 500 years later. See: apostolicbible.com/un-greek.pdf www.tmin.org/pdfs/A_Grk_2016_2nd_Ed.pdf wp.lps.org/mmelchi/blog/2011/05/01/pronunciations-of-greek/
NikephorosPhokas, I guess you should read back my original post: I actually SUPPORT modern pronunciation as the lesser of two evils. For good or for bad, it is the only one that is attested for sure and still has native speakers as a support. What is unacceptable, even by fools like me, is the assumption that Ancient Greek was pronounced like modern Greek is today, just because modern Greek speakers say so. The fact that reconstructed pronunciations “offend” the Greeks doesn’t make those reconstructions less credible. You can discuss them, criticize them, but please take the “offense” element out of the debate, as no offense came from what I wrote. I’ll tell you one: in a Roman catacomb I visited in Rome there were many tombs of early Christians from the 2nd c. AD with the word KITE carved onto their tombstones. Turns out KITE actually is κεῖται, meaning “(here) lies”. How can we deny that epsilon-iota was obviously pronounced as /i/ and alpha-iota as /e/? And the name of one Valerius (Latin name, by that time certainly pronounced /va-/ and not /wa-/) is rendered in an inscription I saw as ΒΑΛΕΡΕΙΟΣ. Did you understand? I personally SAW inscriptions that “told” me: “No, Erasmian doesn’t work for us”.
However, the same inscriptions NEVER mix eta and epsilon-iota, and more importantly, never mix those two with omicron-iota. Instead, I saw one instance of ψυχή misspelled as ΨΟΙΧΗ. I am afraid I can’t talk intelligently about how eta was pronounced back then, but certainly had not become ita yet, or at least not universally. So what was it? I insist: I don’t know. But that doesn’t mean that modern Greek supporters automatically have the answer either. A Greek passport grants no privilege of ownership over a language that ceased to be spoken as a living language many centuries ago. Plus, how stupid is this idea of “owning” a language in the first place? There were more native speakers of koine Greek in Magna Graecia, Anatolia, the Levant and Egypt than in Greece proper. Pythagoras technically was a Sicilian, the largest Greek library of the antiquity was in Alexandria, many Greek protophilosophers came from what is called Turkey today. But the very fact I have to be wasting my time and yours reminding all the above probably proves that mine is a lost cause.
I miss the ancient vowels that have been ioticized in Modern Greek. Euripides ran strings of vowels (assonance) and in Modern pronunciation they are mostly all "i". The music of tragedy was important and the original sounds have a trace of it.
They are not ioticized though. There's still difference between η, ι, ει and οι, provided the speaker speaks Greek properly - it may be miniscule, but it's there.
In English you (singular) and you (plural) are the same and the verb is the same eg you write (singular) and you write (plural) ..... nice ..... but in Greek :we write /ἡμεῖς γράφομεν; you write ὑμεῖς γράφετε. The verb ending tells you whether it is "we" or "you". As English dropped the "thou", you now have to add "all" to clarify you mean plural, "y' all". In Haitian Creole, "nou" is used to refer to first and second person plural i.e. we and you plural, and the verb form does not change. Why don't they get confused? Somehow they manage. If anyone knows how, please tell us. You shouldn't judge other languages by the standards and rules of your own language.
@@learnbiblicalgreek316 I know, I actually read Attic and Koiné with modern pronunciation. There is ambiguity, though, and that’s precisely why, when the pronunciations converged, Medieval Greek and beyond began to use different forms. Ambiguity is mostly to be found in the non-nominative cases, where verbal morphology is of no help, only context is. προσέρχεται προς ημας/υμας or λοιδορήσει υμιν/ημιν… I still use the modern pronunciation, because it is more fluent for me, and 100% of my interaction with Ancient Greek is via reading, so orthography disambiguates any confusion there. But it is an imperfect system (similar to the Ottomans writing Turkish with Arabic letters)
@@learnbiblicalgreek316 You sg. and you pl are spelled - and therefore: pronounced - the same. The problem you address exists in English (and apparently in Haitian Creole) but has nothing to do with morphology, whereas the Ancient Greek words for we and you are clearly spelled differently. No way any scribe in 5th century BC Athens would consider it acceptable to use y-psilon and eta for the same sound (or omikron-iota, y-psilon-iota and e-psilon-iota). That's why they were different sounds, which we can also clearly learn from old latin translations in which y-psilon is never transcribed as u. Modern pronunciation is simply wrong, but that should not have to make it unacceptable. As long as we are aware of the differences. iIt is my experience that many Greek people get almost furious when you try to explain this to them.
@@var-vrijeacademievoorrecht2977 I quote from two Greek scholars who aren't native Greeks. GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT IN THE LIGHT OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH BY A. T. ROBERTSON “η and υ. Since these two vowels came to be pronounced alike as in modern Greek, it was to be expected that some interchange would come, though any early examples are wanting. However, by the second century A.D. the inscriptions give many instances such as θήρα (θύρα), μηστήριον (μυστ.), σκυπτρον (σκηπτρον) etc. is already in the Egyption koine according to Thumb. Hence we are not surprised to see the N. T. MSS. get mixed over ημεις and υμεις. Especially in 1 Peter does this itacism lead to a mixing of the historical standpoint as in 1:12, where υμιν is read by אABCL, etc., ημιν by K and most cursives Syr Cop. In 1 Pet. 5:10 the MSS. similarly support υμας and ημας. In 2 Cor. the personal relations of Paul and his converts are involved in this piece of orthography as in 8:7 ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐν ἡμῖν (אCDE, etc.) or ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐν ὑμῖν (B 30, 31, 37, etc.). See especially καθ’ ημας in Ac. 17:28 (B 33 Cop., etc.) which reading would make Paul identify himself with the Greeks on this occasion.” "Greek - A History of the Language and its Speakers" by Geoffrey Horrocks 4.11.2 Phonological developments Horrocks uses the following: a papyrus letter written by one Apollonios to his elder brother (‘father’in the piece is a conventional form of address to a man older than oneself), dated c.152 BC (P. Par. 47/UPZ 70). He refers to this as (22). “On the other hand, the word for ‘ us ’(normally ημας) is spelled υμας, the word for ‘ you ’ . Since this is a not uncommon error in the papyri of the period, it seems that in certain circumstances (e.g. in initial pretonic syllables, particularly where a labial context would encourage dissimilation of a rounded front vowel) and/or in certain words of high frequency (e.g. personal pronouns) changes had already gone through that otherwise took effect much later. Thus despite the absence of confusion between υ and η elsewhere, it seems that in these words at least both letters represented the same sound, namely [i], and that the two pronouns were therefore homophonous. This naturally led to the eventual replacement of the classical forms (see chapter 6and Part II).”
2 роки тому+2
the level of egolatrism "it's the same language" no it isn't, it's like a spanish speaker don't giving a damn about classical latin pronunciation
actually, they are the same language. Koine Greek is extremely understandable by modern Greek speakers so, if ancient Greek is a different language to modern Greek, then you basically say that ancient Greek is a different language to Koine Greek which is ,and this is not meant to be offensive, stupid
@@TheProfessorwiththeBowTie @11:23 Yes. Like way, way back. Dr. Philemon Zachariou shows from Plato's writing and from a decree in stone from the 5th century BC that Omicron and Omega were pronounced the same.
The Omega is pronounced as Omikron and vice versa taken from a clay fragment that was used for exostracismo that had written the name of Κίμων / Kimon in a wrong way (Κίμον).
😀😀😀😀 the greek with Iranian roots speak ancient greek but ancient greek never existed the greek language was created by church 13th 14th century and was called koine greek 😀😀ΔΙΕΛΛΙ Ο ΑΤΑ ΔΙ Ι ΣΩΤΗ ΠΛΩΤ👈🏻if you understand translate me what does means these words just Arvanites can translation these words
Πολύ μεγάλο λάθος να προσφέρουμε τα αρχαία με την μοντέρνα ελληνική προφορά. Παρά πολύ μεγάλο λάθος. Ελπίζω να κάνεις την απαραίτητη δουλειά που χρειάζεται για να αποκτήσεις έστω τις βασικές γνώσεις πάνω στο θέμα
Άρα όλοι οι καθηγητές των πανεπιστημίων της Ελλάδας που προφέρουν έτσι τη γλώσσα δεν διαθέτουν βασικές γνώσεις. Δυστυχώς δεν είμαστε απολύτως σίγουροι για το πώς προφερόταν ακριβώς και δεν μπορούμε να φανατιζόμαστε υπέρ τη μιας ή της άλλης άποψης!! Για μένα είναι σεβαστές όλες οι προσπάθειες ανασύστασης της αρχαίας ελληνικής προφοράς όπως σεβαστή είναι και η προφορά της με βάση τη σύγχρονη γλώσσα αφού κάθε γλώσσα εξελίσσεται με την πάροδο του χρόνου. Ποτέ δεν θα θεωρήσω λανθασμένη την ερασμική προφορά αλλά ούτε και τη νέα ελληνική! Η αλήθεια είναι κάπου στη μέση!!
@@COMIS26 Η ερασμιακή προφορά είναι θεωρία του 1800. Η επιστήμη έχει προχωρήσει σε τέτοιο βαθμό που μπορούμε πλέον σήμερα να ανακατασκευασουμε την μητρική ινδοευρωπαικη γλώσσα και έχουμε πολύ καλή ιδέα πως προφέρονται τα αρχαία, και spoiler alert, δεν έχουν καμία σχέση με τα μοντέρνα ελληνικά.
Using a newer, more accurate reconstructed pronunciation system can give you a good idea of what Ancient Greek sounded like
Using modern Greek pronunciation as your basis for studying Ancient or Koine Greek makes speaking Modern Greek easy.
Using Erasmian accomplishes neither.
True, but today, even Greek scholars admit that Erasmian is closer to what they consider the 'reconstructed pronunciation'
@@vattentaelt Compared to modern Greek, yes. In some regards, it gets a lot right. But if you're looking to learn a more classical pronunciation system rather than modern, then there are far more accurate period and dialect specific reconstructions than Erasmian. Even in a general sense, Fifth Century Attic reconstruction (which is what Erasmian is closest to) would be better to learn regardless since unlike Erasmian, it would at least get dipthongs and accentation more correct (even if dealing with other dialects). Erasmian's only advantage is academic inertia in most western countries
But if you're dealing with Koine, modern is closer than Erasmian in most cases
@@BroadwayRonMexico I agree with you 100%, I just don't get why many people (mostly Greeks) are strawmanning Erasimian because they "hate the sound of it" despite most 5th century reconstructions being at least as much removed from the modern / late Byzantine pronunciation. It would be foolish if Greeks were to start using any reconstruction, but who cares if western academia reversed ιωτακισμός for didactical reasons?
@@vattentaelt The assertion that we should use Erasmian pronunciation for didactical reasons is just an excuse especially coming from native English-speakers. Regarding “itacism”, note the different ways the “ee” sound (IPA phonetic symbol /iː/) can be made in English:
e; ea; ee; ei; ie; i; ey; ay; eo; oei as shown in the following words: even; heat; degree; receive; believe; machine; key; quay; people, onomatopoeia.
So you have itacism in English. Also the "ai" is sometimes pronounced as an ε English words such as "said" and French words such as "mais".
Many languages have homophones and homonyms eg in English we have the homophones: pause, paws, pores, pours, and these homonyms with different meanings but same spelling: bat, kind, bank. In French we have the homophones: poids, pois, poix. In addition, third person singular and plural sound the same eg il parle ; ils parlent even though they are spelt differently. English and French people don't get confused and learn how to spell words in their own mother tongue so why can't students of Koine Greek learn to spell if they use the Modern Greek pronunciation?
Greek is a living language. I've been told so many times "Greek is a dead language". Even Koine Greek is a living language. It is the liturgical language which is still read or chanted aloud in the Greek Orthodox Church and about 23% of the liturgy of the Coptic Church is also Koine Greek.
@@learnbiblicalgreek316 You make a very good point. However, you chose the two most difficult spelling systems in the world to make it. You must agree that English and French children _do_ get confused when learning how to spell their mother tongues - at least when compared to Spanish, Finnish or Czech kids who get to have super consistent and transparent spellings (which Greek must have had back in the Classical days)
I use modern Greek pronunciation myself, since I am simultaneously learning Koine and modern Greek. It allows me to watch movies and TV shows in the language and also increase my comprehension in Koine since there is a lot of common vocabulary. One thing that is odd for me is that words like "ημιν" and "υμιν" are pronounced the same in modern Greek, but imply completely different meanings.
However, what most people refer to as "Erasmian" is not what Erasmus himself would have thought he was reconstructing. It's just badly anglicized Greek, and it truly is awful and not even historically viable.
I agree with you! I also use the modern Greek pronunciation but in this video I used the Erasmian for the English speakers... Thank you for your comment!!
Erasmian is the preferable approach. Thank you.
I think it's not really correct. By this idea then as A Italian I should not learn Latin as Italian is basically the evolved latin language
@@bigiladro That's not really what I'm arguing. There are few audio-visual sources for Koine Greek. And mostly only classical works really exist in that language. So learning modern Greek is helpful for immersion. Just like it is very helpful to learn a modern Romance language as a suppliment, not a replacement, for learning Latin.
Conclusion for Ancient greek use modern pronunciation and for Latin use eclesiasiastical pronunciation, since those two lines are part of the living tradition of the language.
Or do whatever you want. I use Classical for Latin but Modern Greek for Ancient Greek. There is not much verbal communication in Ancient Greek, anyways, so unless you plan on later learning modern Greek, do whatever keeps you reading Ancient Greek!
Ecclesiastical is not a living tradition, no - it only became the official pronunciation of the Church in the 20th century, and it descends ultimately from a pronunciation reform that occurred in the 9th century. The only living tradition of Latin is the romance languages.
@@Glossologia I don't know what you understand as living neither tradition, romance languages are not Latin, the living tradition of Latin is found in the Church, the Church kept Latin alive, whatever decision she makes is ok, she is the one that still uses Latin as the official language while everybody else gave up on Latin, and only recently some have been starting to copy that way of doing things, the Church never stopped.
@@irodjetson When you say that the pronunciation is a 'living tradition' you imply that it was handed down from ancient times. I am simply pointing out that this isn't true - the standard ecclesiastical pronunciation (which to be clear I have no problem with, I speak Italian fluently and I talk to ecclesiastical users all the time in Latin) is a modern convention, not a 'living tradition'. The church undeniably was critical in the preservation of Latin literature, but Latin literature both predates the church and contains enormous amounts of material that has nothing to do with the Church. Thus the Church's invaluable role in preserving Latin is not a reason to choose a pronunciation.
In my case I use the restored classical pronunciation of Latin because it is the most practical pronunciation for accessing ancient metrical poetry.
You must also keep in mind that well pronounced classical pronunciation and ecclesiastical pronunciation are close enough to be perfectly mutually intelligible - it is quite different from the situation of ancient greek where someone trying to do reconstruction Attic in a strong German accent won't understand someone doing modern Greek pronunciation and vice versa.
@@Glossologia You are not understanding my point because you are trying to make "truth claims" while not paying attention that you are framing reality in a very specific manner, your hermeneutic for interpreting history is a very particular one, thus when you analize facts, you pass them through your hermeneutica lenses. In the Church every single day until recently prayed in Latin, chanted in Latin, studied Latin, the very life of the common parishoner and the life of the people with religious vocations, friars, nuns, priests, bishops and the pope was a life lived in Latin for the most part within the Church, meaning that for the Church Latin has been living and has never died, now, if the Church decides to pick one pronunciation over another it is within the right of the people keeping Latin alive in the lives of their members to do that, and that's perfeclty reasonable. Now if for you keeping Latin alive means that people in academia go and study ancient Latin texts, then we have a very different way of understanding what it is for a language to stay alive, a language alive is a language spoken, sung and written by living people not just because they are scholars, but because it is part of the normal lives of people. We just have different hermeneutics, we have the same information and facts (I follow scorpio martianus and others, so I am aware of the way you approach this).
Σας ευχαριστούμε που κάνατε αυτά τα υπέροχα βίντεο. Ο Αμερικανός φίλος σου Γρήγορε
Ευχαριστώ κι εγώ για τα καλά λόγια!! 🙂🙂
Eυχαριστω παρα πολύ Καθηγητε με το παπιγιον. Σαν Έλληνας που μεγάλωσε στην Αγγλία και δεν έκανε Ελληνικό σχολείο, με βοηθά πολύ να ακούω την μεγάλη γνώση σου. Καλή χρονιά.
Καλή χρονιά!! Εύχομαι υγεία, αγάπη κι ευτυχία!!😀
there are so many things wrong with this. If you are a philologist, linguist, and use ancient greek to determine the sounds of another ancient languages, you can NOT mix it with modern greek pronunciation. Yes language evolution is normal, but the point of learning a language's ancient form is to reconstruct it, pronunciation included (as much as possible)
Nice video. You should be very proud of your cultural heritage!!
Thank you very much! Yes, I am proud and I respect all people who show respect for their traditions.
Mαθαίνω αρχαία ελληνικά. Αλλά η προσφορά Erasmian που χρησιμοποιείται στην τάξη με πονάει στα αυτιά, και δεν είμαι καν'ελληνας χαχα
😂😂😂 Τέλειο σχόλιο!!!
Πες τους να προφέρουν τη λέξη "ευοίωνος" με Erasmian για να γελάσεις. Εουοιονος, 6 φωνήεντα στη σειρά!
@@dekenlst 😂😂😂
😂Now imagine how Greek ears feel with those "poi" "koi" "moi" sounds...
@@dekenlst Αιάντειος!
We used to unwittingly recreate the Erasmian accent as kids trying to intentionally butcher the language or intentionally make it hard to comprehend by removing vocal tones or by Anglisizing it as much as possible 😆
🤣🤣🤣
Erasmian does not sound right. Modern pronounciation has its pitfalls too, however, which might make it difficult to understand an ancient text. Why not settle for Lucian pronunciation? It sounds very Greek, but also maintains accents and some differences in pronouncing different letters ? Of course, no one will find it natural, in the beginning, including modern Greeks...
Exactly this comment I was expecting to find. Good job!
C'est justement par ce qu'une langue change de génération en génération qu'il est juste et bon de conserver la prononciation de l' époque des auteurs antiques.Les Grecs antiques n'auraient pas inventé le η ,- οι s'ils avaient réduit ces deux et plus lettres à Ι . Je n'aurais pas donné à ma fille le prénom Εληνη si j'avais eu à le prononcer Ιλινι !
Ιλινι viens ici !
Erasme de Rotterdam était un fin lettré et il a certainement eu des contacts avec les Grecs byzantins de son temps, victimes de la iotisation qui, à mes oreilles, est une IDIOTISATION..
hey, what about the Lucian or the reconstructed pronunciation?
nope
The hatred Erasmian pronunciation is getting in the comments is disappointing. Phonological changes happen over time with any language. It makes sense that Modern Greek speakers are not necessarily going to speak in an affected accent for Ancient Greek texts except maybe poetry (???) I probably sound a little ridiculous with Chaucer but i try to sound somewhat more Medieval when reading him, though it has been ages. As for say, Shakespeare or Keats, I would usually only make end rhymes conform to earlier pronunciation schemes. Honestly, in my view, it comes down to personal preference. Benjamin Kantor speaks Koine which is what i am learning with a rigorously reconstructed pronunciation (using such methodology as comparing manuscripts with spelling mistakes to determine the ways words were pronounced) and although his pronunciation is probably much closer to how Jesus and the Apostles spoke Greek, since i initially learned an Erasmian (possibly more 5th Century Athenian?) pronunciation, i still prefer to speak and read in that way only because it has become more natural to me. God bless you all, and thanks for the video!
I just don't see how "phonological changes happen" becomes an argument in favor of a 15th century theologian trying to speak ancient Greek by a Dutch accent.
I really do not like Erasmian pronunciation. I am a Koine Greek reader and I always use modern
For those who still insists that erasmian is the right one, let them see what Plato himself says about this in "Plato Cratylus 418c" "αἱ γυναῖκες, αἵπερ μάλιστα τὴν ἀρχαίαν φωνὴν σῴζουσι. νῦν δὲ ἀντὶ μὲν τοῦ ἰῶτα ἢ εἶ ἢ ἦτα μεταστρέφουσιν, ἀντὶ δὲ τοῦ δέλτα ζῆτα, ὡς δὴ μεγαλοπρεπέστερα ὄντα."
translation: "[418c] and that is especially true of the women, who are most addicted to preserving old forms of speech. But nowadays people change iota to eta or epsilon iota, and delta to zeta, thinking they have a grander sound."
Of course that doesn't mean that Erasmus was a bad scholar, he actually did great job, but without having the opportunity to listen to a Greek of his time and with just a small fragment of the knowledge we have today. I recently asked an american scholar, why they keep teaching the erasmian and the best answer he had was "well it' s easier to us"
What is more important though is that if we had the chance to read an ancient text to Plato using the so called modern pronunciation its quite sure that he would understand everything easily, i cant say though that listening to him would be easy for us to understand him without some practice..
Very good point!!! 😍😍😍
ΕΠΙΤΕΛΟΥΣ!
Το πρόβλημα αφορά τους τόνους.Οι θιασώτες της Ερασμιας προφοράς αγνοούν εντελώς την ύπαρξη των διφθογγων.Ειναι οι τόνοι που ορίζουν εάν ένας διγθογγος είναι μακρύς ή βραχύς.
My biggest problem with Ancient Greek is the use of pitch accent rather than stress accent.
It is a common problem. It needs time and effort. 🙂
What happens at 5:27? Is it another translation??
I’d like to learn modern pronunciation it’s just hard to find someone teaching biblical Greek with the modern pronunciation
Hello! Usually Greek teachers use the modern pronunciation...
@@TheProfessorwiththeBowTie do you know of any that teach biblical Greek - also known as koine Greek
Try Philemon Zachariou
ua-cam.com/video/2CyZiSrY38U/v-deo.html
Learn Biblical Greek
ua-cam.com/video/80wUjgbmtro/v-deo.html
Speak and Read New Testament Greek
ua-cam.com/video/gM3EQnsSxuY/v-deo.html
Anton Tasos Channel for the reading of the Greek NT
ua-cam.com/video/Pa8i-F04PKQ/v-deo.html
Biblical Koine with modern pronunciation is the norm in Orthodox churches that use Greek. In any parish in Greece or Cyprus, any Greek (and sometimes Antiochian) Orthodox parish in the west, or any Greek monastery (whether in Greece/Cyprus or the west), you'll hear Biblical Koine with modern pronunciation, and it's taught that way as well.
why did the erasmian pronunciation come about? how come scholars think that Ancient Greek would ever sound so different from modern greek?
It was an effort to reconstruct the musicality of ancient Greek language definitely gone from modern Greek!!
Erasmus was wrong, surely, but he was closer to the restored rendering than the modern / late byzantine pronunciation. Take a look at the epigram of Simonides of Ceos:
Κείμενο: Ὦ ξεῖν, ἀγγέλλειν Λακεδαιμονίοις ὅτι τῇδε κείμεθα, τοῖς κείνων ῥήμασι πειθόμενοι.
Επανασυντεθειμένη αρχαία προφορά (restored ancient): [ɔː kseːn aŋgelleːn lakedaimonioːs hoti tɛːide keimetʰa, tois keinɔːn r̥ɛːmasi peitʰomenoi]
Ερασμική προφορά (Erasmian): [ο ksein aŋgelein lakedaimoniois oti teide keimeta/keimeθa, tois keinon remasi peitomenoi/peiθomenoi]
Υστεροβυζαντινή / νεοελληνική προφορά (modern): [ο ksin aɲ'ɟelin laceðemon'iis 'oti t'iðe 'cimeθa, tis 'cinon 'rimasi pi'θomeni].
@@vattentaelt There's no such person as a "Simonides of Kleion"
The rest of your argument is just as flawed as this 1st line of yours.
@@geogeo2299 You're right, but there was a Simonides of Ceos. Can you elaborate on other flaws?
@@vattentaelt There's no "Ceos" either. There's no ancient Greek place name such as "Ceos" (and put aside the issue of how "C" would be pronounced). So please consult your best Greek lexica and come again.
Let's be sincere: Greeks argue in favour of their pronunciation because it's theirs. It's clearly not convenient for the rest of us.
On the other hand, I use an ancient pronunciation that is based on many sound criteria, and the name of "Erasmian" is just a straw man fallacy in itself.
( I’m the professor with bow tie ) My favorite part always ....
It is evident that I like bow ties so much!! 😂 Thank you!!
I only use the Erasmian pronunciation; but thanks for posting.
Your English accent very nice😍
Thank you!! 🙂
There are actually multiple reconstructed pronunciations, of which erasmian is probably the worst. You might find this video interesting ua-cam.com/video/Dt9z5Gvp3MM/v-deo.html
Thank you!! 👍👍
@@TheProfessorwiththeBowTie you're welcome!
If the Erasmian pronunciation is the correct one,that leads to the conclusion that Ancient Greek sounded so HORRIBLE !!!
Most of the learning books that I like ( Athenaze,Alexandros ,To Hellenikon Paidion)they use the Reconstructed Erasmian pronunciation so i don’t have the option to choose….
………when in Familia Romana both classical and ecclesiastical are concindered correct options accompanied by audios in UA-cam respectively .
Pronouncing Ancient Greek with the modern pronunciation is as absurd as trying to read it in any reconstructed form, for diametrically different reasons. The modern pronunciation is certainly not the one used in classical times, but it has been attested for at least 1,000 years, i.e. since the Middle Ages. Its phonemic reductions and mergers obliterate certain morphological distinctions that were important to classical speakers. Proof of that is that by the time the medieval pronunciation completed its historical evolution and basically became identical to the modern one, around the X c. AD, many grammatical traits, especially in the conjugation of verbs, had all but disappeared, simply because it was impossible to keep them distinct in the spoken language.
On the other hand, reconstructed pronunciations (of which Erasmian is only the most ancient and crudest form) Simply are what they are: hypotheses. Sure thing, reconstructed pronunciations enable ancient Greek morphology to fully function, but at which price? You can never be sure that you are doing it right, because you have no native speaker or reliable phonetic transcription to check. Given the above, using the modern pronunciation is an anachronism, but a tolerable one, pretty much like reading ancient Chinese texts in the modern Mandarin pronunciation. The lesser of the two evils.
Erasmian is far worse. In that orientalist system a native English speaker, a native German, native Danes, native French all sound mutually incompatible to each other when trying to use Erasmian out loud. You can hear the various native accents shine through.
On librivox there was some native Greek who uploaded some quality work and at the beginning of one of his audio works he gave the case for why he used some modified pronunciation of modern Greek that has the best indication of being accurate. I don't really feel like searching through the Erasmian hell of librivox to found that gem again, though.
NikephorosPhokas, foreign accents would shine through even if we non-Greeks were to use the modern pronunciation, And the same is true In every language. According to your logic, if a decent number of proficient, well prepared native Greek speakers uploaded audio files in some sort of a reconstructed pronunciation, then would you find it more acceptable? If I understand you correctly, what you despise is not the reconstructed pronunciation in se, but the fact that it sounds not Greek enough.
@@MouYijian This is so insulting.
If a German speaker uploaded something in Erasmian Greek, then an English speaker uploaded the same text -- neither would be able to understand the audio of the other. You can also see from multiple UA-cam videos that almost no one is fluent in the Orientalist Erasmian pronunciation and they stutter and stammer all over the place.
I actually looked it up and the orientalist Erasmian pronunciation was based on a joke played on Erasmus by a Swiss scholar Henricus Glareanus. Erasmus himself denounced it but anti-Greek bias was and is still so strong Greeks have to argue with arrogant fools like you 500 years later.
See:
apostolicbible.com/un-greek.pdf
www.tmin.org/pdfs/A_Grk_2016_2nd_Ed.pdf
wp.lps.org/mmelchi/blog/2011/05/01/pronunciations-of-greek/
NikephorosPhokas, I guess you should read back my original post: I actually SUPPORT modern pronunciation as the lesser of two evils. For good or for bad, it is the only one that is attested for sure and still has native speakers as a support. What is unacceptable, even by fools like me, is the assumption that Ancient Greek was pronounced like modern Greek is today, just because modern Greek speakers say so. The fact that reconstructed pronunciations “offend” the Greeks doesn’t make those reconstructions less credible. You can discuss them, criticize them, but please take the “offense” element out of the debate, as no offense came from what I wrote. I’ll tell you one: in a Roman catacomb I visited in Rome there were many tombs of early Christians from the 2nd c. AD with the word KITE carved onto their tombstones. Turns out KITE actually is κεῖται, meaning “(here) lies”. How can we deny that epsilon-iota was obviously pronounced as /i/ and alpha-iota as /e/? And the name of one Valerius (Latin name, by that time certainly pronounced /va-/ and not /wa-/) is rendered in an inscription I saw as ΒΑΛΕΡΕΙΟΣ. Did you understand? I personally SAW inscriptions that “told” me: “No, Erasmian doesn’t work for us”.
However, the same inscriptions NEVER mix eta and epsilon-iota, and more importantly, never mix those two with omicron-iota. Instead, I saw one instance of ψυχή misspelled as ΨΟΙΧΗ. I am afraid I can’t talk intelligently about how eta was pronounced back then, but certainly had not become ita yet, or at least not universally. So what was it? I insist: I don’t know. But that doesn’t mean that modern Greek supporters automatically have the answer either. A Greek passport grants no privilege of ownership over a language that ceased to be spoken as a living language many centuries ago. Plus, how stupid is this idea of “owning” a language in the first place? There were more native speakers of koine Greek in Magna Graecia, Anatolia, the Levant and Egypt than in Greece proper. Pythagoras technically was a Sicilian, the largest Greek library of the antiquity was in Alexandria, many Greek protophilosophers came from what is called Turkey today. But the very fact I have to be wasting my time and yours reminding all the above probably proves that mine is a lost cause.
It's difficult to learn proper pronunciation when the text's are being read quickly.
Yes, you are right!! You have to listen to Greek language constantly and practice everyday... 📚📚
I miss the ancient vowels that have been ioticized in Modern Greek. Euripides ran strings of vowels (assonance) and in Modern pronunciation they are mostly all "i". The music of tragedy was important and the original sounds have a trace of it.
They are not ioticized though. There's still difference between η, ι, ει and οι, provided the speaker speaks Greek properly - it may be miniscule, but it's there.
@@geogeo2299 Thanks, I will try to hear it from native speakers.
The voices in my head speak attic , I speak erasmian big problem!
you ‘imís’ we ‘imís’ nice
In English you (singular) and you (plural) are the same and the verb is the same eg you write (singular) and you write (plural) ..... nice ..... but in Greek :we write /ἡμεῖς γράφομεν; you write ὑμεῖς γράφετε. The verb ending tells you whether it is "we" or "you".
As English dropped the "thou", you now have to add "all" to clarify you mean plural, "y' all".
In Haitian Creole, "nou" is used to refer to first and second person plural i.e. we and you plural, and the verb form does not change. Why don't they get confused? Somehow they manage. If anyone knows how, please tell us.
You shouldn't judge other languages by the standards and rules of your own language.
@@learnbiblicalgreek316 I know, I actually read Attic and Koiné with modern pronunciation. There is ambiguity, though, and that’s precisely why, when the pronunciations converged, Medieval Greek and beyond began to use different forms.
Ambiguity is mostly to be found in the non-nominative cases, where verbal morphology is of no help, only context is. προσέρχεται προς ημας/υμας or λοιδορήσει υμιν/ημιν…
I still use the modern pronunciation, because it is more fluent for me, and 100% of my interaction with Ancient Greek is via reading, so orthography disambiguates any confusion there. But it is an imperfect system (similar to the Ottomans writing Turkish with Arabic letters)
@@learnbiblicalgreek316 You sg. and you pl are spelled - and therefore: pronounced - the same. The problem you address exists in English (and apparently in Haitian Creole) but has nothing to do with morphology, whereas the Ancient Greek words for we and you are clearly spelled differently. No way any scribe in 5th century BC Athens would consider it acceptable to use y-psilon and eta for the same sound (or omikron-iota, y-psilon-iota and e-psilon-iota). That's why they were different sounds, which we can also clearly learn from old latin translations in which y-psilon is never transcribed as u. Modern pronunciation is simply wrong, but that should not have to make it unacceptable. As long as we are aware of the differences. iIt is my experience that many Greek people get almost furious when you try to explain this to them.
@@var-vrijeacademievoorrecht2977 I quote from two Greek scholars who aren't native Greeks.
GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT IN THE LIGHT OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH BY A. T. ROBERTSON
“η and υ. Since these two vowels came to be pronounced alike as in modern Greek, it was to be expected that some interchange would come, though any early examples are wanting. However, by the second century A.D. the inscriptions give many instances such as θήρα (θύρα), μηστήριον (μυστ.), σκυπτρον (σκηπτρον) etc. is already in the Egyption koine according to Thumb. Hence we are not surprised to see the N. T. MSS. get mixed over ημεις and υμεις. Especially in 1 Peter does this itacism lead to a mixing of the historical standpoint as in 1:12, where υμιν is read by אABCL, etc., ημιν by K and most cursives Syr Cop. In 1 Pet. 5:10 the MSS. similarly support υμας and ημας. In 2 Cor. the personal relations of Paul and his converts are involved in this piece of orthography as in 8:7 ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐν ἡμῖν (אCDE, etc.) or ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐν ὑμῖν (B 30, 31, 37, etc.). See especially καθ’ ημας in Ac. 17:28 (B 33 Cop., etc.) which reading would make Paul identify himself with the Greeks on this occasion.”
"Greek - A History of the Language and its Speakers" by Geoffrey Horrocks
4.11.2 Phonological developments
Horrocks uses the following: a papyrus letter written by one Apollonios to his elder brother (‘father’in the piece is a conventional form of address to a man older than oneself), dated c.152 BC (P. Par. 47/UPZ 70). He refers to this as (22).
“On the other hand, the word for ‘ us ’(normally ημας) is spelled υμας, the word for ‘ you ’ . Since this is a not uncommon error in the papyri of the period, it seems that in certain circumstances (e.g. in initial pretonic syllables, particularly where a labial context would encourage dissimilation of a rounded front vowel) and/or in certain words of high frequency (e.g. personal pronouns) changes had already gone through that otherwise took effect much later. Thus despite the absence of confusion between υ and η elsewhere, it seems that in these words at least both letters represented the same sound, namely [i], and that the two pronouns were therefore homophonous. This naturally led to the eventual replacement of the classical forms (see chapter 6and Part II).”
the level of egolatrism "it's the same language" no it isn't, it's like a spanish speaker don't giving a damn about classical latin pronunciation
actually, they are the same language. Koine Greek is extremely understandable by modern Greek speakers so, if ancient Greek is a different language to modern Greek, then you basically say that ancient Greek is a different language to Koine Greek which is ,and this is not meant to be offensive, stupid
This is a good proof that vowels (e.g., Omicron and Omega) sounded the same. ua-cam.com/video/wYtrVlpnpg4/v-deo.html
Yes, after a certain period of time the letters started to have the same sound.
@@TheProfessorwiththeBowTie @11:23 Yes. Like way, way back. Dr. Philemon Zachariou shows from Plato's writing and from a decree in stone from the 5th century BC that Omicron and Omega were pronounced the same.
The Omega is pronounced as Omikron and vice versa taken from a clay fragment that was used for exostracismo that had written the name of Κίμων / Kimon in a wrong way (Κίμον).
@@ΑπόλλωνΘηρευτής Love it. Shows Erasmus' pronunciation has no historic grounds.
@@ΑπόλλωνΘηρευτής Great example. Are there anymore? Erasmus created such a mess in the Western world.
😀😀😀😀 the greek with Iranian roots speak ancient greek but ancient greek never existed the greek language was created by church 13th 14th century and was called koine greek 😀😀ΔΙΕΛΛΙ Ο ΑΤΑ ΔΙ Ι ΣΩΤΗ ΠΛΩΤ👈🏻if you understand translate me what does means these words just Arvanites can translation these words
Ευχαρισω πολι, Ελλινικα ειναι μεγαλιτερα γλοσσα!
Κι εγώ ευχαριστώ που το είδες και για το σχόλιό σου! 🙂
@@TheProfessorwiththeBowTie you are welcome.
... ό,τι χειρότερο... ' Πιο χειρότερο ' δεν είναι σωστό.
Πολύ μεγάλο λάθος να προσφέρουμε τα αρχαία με την μοντέρνα ελληνική προφορά. Παρά πολύ μεγάλο λάθος. Ελπίζω να κάνεις την απαραίτητη δουλειά που χρειάζεται για να αποκτήσεις έστω τις βασικές γνώσεις πάνω στο θέμα
Άρα όλοι οι καθηγητές των πανεπιστημίων της Ελλάδας που προφέρουν έτσι τη γλώσσα δεν διαθέτουν βασικές γνώσεις. Δυστυχώς δεν είμαστε απολύτως σίγουροι για το πώς προφερόταν ακριβώς και δεν μπορούμε να φανατιζόμαστε υπέρ τη μιας ή της άλλης άποψης!! Για μένα είναι σεβαστές όλες οι προσπάθειες ανασύστασης της αρχαίας ελληνικής προφοράς όπως σεβαστή είναι και η προφορά της με βάση τη σύγχρονη γλώσσα αφού κάθε γλώσσα εξελίσσεται με την πάροδο του χρόνου. Ποτέ δεν θα θεωρήσω λανθασμένη την ερασμική προφορά αλλά ούτε και τη νέα ελληνική! Η αλήθεια είναι κάπου στη μέση!!
Non Greeks having a more educated opinion about Greek than Greeks. Typical westerner
Η εφεύρεση της ερασμικής προφοράς έγινε για πολιτικούς λόγους...
@@COMIS26 Η ερασμιακή προφορά είναι θεωρία του 1800. Η επιστήμη έχει προχωρήσει σε τέτοιο βαθμό που μπορούμε πλέον σήμερα να ανακατασκευασουμε την μητρική ινδοευρωπαικη γλώσσα και έχουμε πολύ καλή ιδέα πως προφέρονται τα αρχαία, και spoiler alert, δεν έχουν καμία σχέση με τα μοντέρνα ελληνικά.
@@Lara__ Ο Ερασμος έγραψε για την θεωρία αυτή, το 1528 .
Πώς είναι θεωρία του 1800 ;
Who is interesting for modern greek pronunciation?