Euphony

Here you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Greek, and more.
Post Reply
User avatar
calvinist
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 474
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 7:24 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Euphony

Post by calvinist »

This is a test. I'm trying to restart the thread from the Koine board over here. That board is no longer safe. Mr. I'msick Nuisance watches it like a hawk waiting to turn any and every discussion into an epic theological debate. I think that we are off of his radar over here. If he cannot be banned, then maybe the best option is to have discussions about Koine over here.
Last edited by calvinist on Fri Aug 07, 2015 8:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Markos
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2966
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Euphony in Romans

Post by Markos »

1 Cor 10:10: Αἱ ἐπιστολαὶ μέν, φησίν, βαρεῖαι καὶ ἰσχυραί...
οὕτως δοκεῖ ἐμοί, Ιωηλ καλῶς ἀναγιγνώσκοντος.
οὐ μανθάνω γράφειν, ἀλλὰ γράφω τοῦ μαθεῖν.

Qimmik
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:15 pm

Re: Euphony in Romans

Post by Qimmik »

Change the heading to just "Euphony".
Last edited by Qimmik on Fri Aug 07, 2015 1:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Euphony in Romans

Post by jeidsath »

I think that this thread may be a mistake. I would delete it before trouble bleeds over.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4791
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Euphony in Romans

Post by mwh »

A valedictory proposition, then: There is no euphony in Romans.

demetri
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 4:33 am

Re: Euphony in Romans

Post by demetri »

jeidsath wrote:I think that this thread may be a mistake. I would delete it before trouble bleeds over.
Chuckle...I find the "Ignore" function works very well here, and for exactly the same reason (without naming names :wink: )

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Euphony in Romans

Post by jeidsath »

@demetri -- I have it enabled for myself, but it hasn't stopped him from killing discussion on that board. I'd rather he not kill this board the same way.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

User avatar
calvinist
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 474
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 7:24 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Euphony in Romans

Post by calvinist »

I have him on ignore now as well, but he will continue to post even without provocation. I don't think he watches this board at all, that's why I mentioned it. If you look at the bottom of the page it shows the users who are logged on and viewing any board. Every time I come on here he's on the Koine board, but I've never seen him on this board and he's never posted on it. It seems that he stays logged on monitoring the Koine board all day. I'm pretty sure that we can safely discuss Koine/NT topics over here without him ever noticing. Worst case he finds us over here, but he only cares about NT topics, it's not like he's going to start posting his nonsense on a thread about Aristotle or Xenophon. So, we'd just be back at square one. It seems to me there's nothing to lose.

I took your advice Qimmik and changed the heading.

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4791
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Euphony

Post by mwh »

So what is the topic then? The original one was exhausted I thought. So
Euphony in Greek?,
Historical Pronunciation of NT Texts?,
Best Practice for Pronunciation of NT Texts?,
or what?

On the historical pronunciation, I’m basically with calvinist (with largely unknowable allowance made for regional, chronological, and individual variation and for difference due to education and other socio-cultural factors). Is there any real (i.e. informed) dispute about that?

At the same time, pronouncing koine texts that way (or trying to) loses many distinctions respected in the written text, as calvinist again pointed out. That raises a whole other set of issues. My own preference is for just reading the text without bothering much about authentic true-to-period pronunciation. Texts are more easily and quickly understood by eye than by ear in any case.

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Euphony

Post by jeidsath »

On the historical pronunciation, I’m basically with calvinist (with largely unknowable allowance made for regional, chronological, and individual variation and for difference due to education and other socio-cultural factors). Is there any real (i.e. informed) dispute about that?
Sure. Horrocks, from whom everyone else seems to crib, is more or less one long cite of Teodorsson for this material [The phonemic system of the Attic dialect 400-340 BC, The phonology of Ptolemaic Koine, and The phonology of Attic in the Hellenistic period]. It has been criticized. Here's Ruijgh on the Attic material:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4430767?&se ... b_contents

For those of you who don't have the advantage of a wife that speaks French, I'll post a Google Translate version in a bit once I've corrected the OCR.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

Qimmik
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:15 pm

Re: Euphony

Post by Qimmik »

A glance at Ruijgh's review suggests that his criticism is directed toward Teodorson's conclusions--that 4th century Attic pronunciation of vowels was almost that of modern Greek--rather than at the data T. assembled, which R. praises. Without having gone into this myself, I'm would be very surprised if Horrocks merely regurgitates T.'s conclusions uncritically, or dismissed R.'s review out of hand; I would expect that H.'s views are based on his own critical re-examination of the evidence. Personally, I'd be careful not to dismiss H. so quickly. And while Ruijgh was an eminent scholar, he was not necessarily an oracle: his views on some topics are not necessarily widely accepted--for example, his placement of the Homeric poems in the 9th century. That doesn't mean he's wrong on Attic pronunciation, but his review of T. is not necessarily the last word, either.
My own preference is for just reading the text without bothering much about authentic true-to-period pronunciation. Texts are more easily and quickly understood by eye than by ear in any case.
I couldn't have said it better.

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Euphony

Post by jeidsath »

PDF of Ruijgh's article:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B23NN- ... sp=sharing

Corrected OCR Text (I wasn't perfect about the IPA -- I don't seem to have rounded ē̩ on my keyboard.) And I probably missed a few mistakes in the French:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B23NN- ... sp=sharing

Google Translated Text (I haven't done anything to this, so just use at as reference against the original PDF if you don't know French):

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B23NN- ... sp=sharing

As far as Qimmik's comments go, Horrocks was not uncritical about Teodorsson -- there are a reservations stated in his text, including a cite of Ruijgh's article, but Horrocks doesn't do anything new with the Teodorsson material either.
Texts are more easily and quickly understood by eye than by ear in any case.
That's only true for the first year or so of reading aloud. After that it's the other way around. Not too much Greek poetry works for me yet. Sophocles seems to be the easiest to feel, although he's hard to understand. If I come across a few lines of Sophocles anywhere, I tend to recognize it from how it sounds. For poetry reading, pitch accent and vowel length seem to matter, but probably not vowel quality. Maybe aspirated θ, φ, χ, matter versus fricative, but not much if so.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Euphony

Post by jeidsath »

Some relevant quotes from Ruijgh:
He sees himself forced to admit, however, that until the Byzantine period, cultivated men continued to use the older pronunciation, spelling system on which had originally been founded: this is what results of observations grammarians and teachers of rhetoric. According to MT, this is an esoteric group, concerned about literature and distinct from the majority of the population. It is this elite language that would account for the orthographic form of loans: p. ex. Latin Demosthenes (not Dimostenis), Greek Λουκρήτιος (not Λουκραίτιος).
Ruijgh clearly does not think that this theory of elite Greek (which is also presented by Horrocks) is likely.
Moreover, it is a priori unlikely that 80% of the vocalism changes occurred between +/- 700 BC. BC and the present time is to be made over three centuries, while the following 23 centuries have featured in 20%, ie the merger of E (ε) with E (αι), the O (ο) with O (ω) and the ü (οι) with i.
The fundamental fault in MT therefore is to project all these confusions about one form of hypothetical language he then assigns to the majority of the population.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

User avatar
calvinist
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 474
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 7:24 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Euphony

Post by calvinist »

I think the fact of regional and individual variation needs to be taken into account as mwh said, especially during the Koine period. My initial point was that I find it hard to accept that Paul, a Jew who most likely spoke Greek as a second language, spoke a variety with phonemic vowel length.

The idea of an "elite" pronunciation that maintained vowel length isn't the only option. It's quite possible (even likely) that there were different varieties during the Koine period, some of which maintained vowel length and some which didn't. We know that at some point vowel length collapsed, and I think the best candidate for the cause of that was the influx of non-native speakers during the Koine period.

There's an analogue to this going on right now in English (which is in its Koine period). English is a stress-timed language, but many non-native speakers turn it into a syllable-timed language, e.g. the characteristic sound of Indian English. Ancient Greek was a mora-timed language which became a syllabe-timed language. It seems to me that the most likely reason for the shift was that during the Koine period many people were learning Greek as a second language who spoke a syllable-timed or possibly stress-timed language. These learners would have an incredibly hard time hearing and producing the subtle vowel length distinctions. Eventually the number of non-Greeks speaking Greek must have eclipsed the number of native Greeks, and we have a perfect storm for the collapse of vowel length.

I wouldn't be surprised if Luke (assuming he was a native Greek) spoke a variety that was mora-timed, while a Jew like John spoke a variety that was syllable-timed, and Paul possibly sounded different from both, being from Tarsus and well educated.

Lastly, I don't think we need to assume that language change is linear. Languages do have periods of rapid change followed by stability. I would expect that during the Koine period (when the language was exposed to many non-natives) the language would experience much more change than in later centuries when it was relatively more isolated. It just doesn't make sense to me that vowel length survived the pressures of the Koine period and then collapsed afterward when the pressures were gone.

User avatar
Paul Derouda
Global Moderator
Posts: 2292
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Euphony

Post by Paul Derouda »

Ruijgh's review article is not very relevant to the question of the pronunciation used by Paul, as the subject there is Attic pronunciation in the 4th century, a period as removed from the New Testament as modern English is from Shakespeare. I skimmed it through though, and the examples given from Aristophanes, among other things, were very interesting.

Mwh and Calvinist: Sidney Allen seems to advocate (Vox Graeca, p. 130) that the melodic accent persisted until perhaps the end of the 2nd century, but apparently that's much too late -- as far as I understand, vowel length distinction is a prerequisite of melodic accent, and so by necessity vowel length distinction would have disappeared at the same time or earlier than Greek changed to stress accent.

The confusion of ο/ω ε/αι υ/οι and ι/ει in papyri seems to be clear evidence of the disappearance of vowel length distinctions, but when did those appear? Can you give a rough figure? (And I know, it happened at different times in different places, but that's why I said "rough figure" ;) ) (Should probably read Horrocks, the book has been waiting in my book shelf for at least a year now)

But if indeed vowel length distinctions disappeared so early on, there are some things I have difficulties understanding: how did the melodic accent system ever make it to our times, in the form that Greek texts are still accentuated in our day? The epitaph of Seikilos is another wonder (if indeed it's "probably first century AD", as advocated by Allen), but of course music scores can survive for many generations, and might have been composed a lot earlier than it was engraved.

User avatar
Paul Derouda
Global Moderator
Posts: 2292
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Euphony

Post by Paul Derouda »

jeidsath wrote:Some relevant quotes from Ruijgh:
He sees himself forced to admit, however, that until the Byzantine period, cultivated men continued to use the older pronunciation, spelling system on which had originally been founded: this is what results of observations grammarians and teachers of rhetoric. According to MT, this is an esoteric group, concerned about literature and distinct from the majority of the population. It is this elite language that would account for the orthographic form of loans: p. ex. Latin Demosthenes (not Dimostenis), Greek Λουκρήτιος (not Λουκραίτιος).
Ruijgh clearly does not think that this theory of elite Greek (which is also presented by Horrocks) is likely.
I think Ruijgh's point is different -- what he means is that a hypothetic elite group was not in position to impose esoteric spellings of Greek names on Latin speakers or Latin names on Greek speakers, but that these spellings reflect by necessity the state of the pronunciation at the time these spellings came about. This doesn't mean by any means that elite groups could not have maintained archaic spelling and even pronunciation variants for centuries. I'm sure such pronunciation variants abound in English.

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4791
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Euphony

Post by mwh »

Just a point of clarification about my post. I was speaking of the historical pronunciation of the NT texts, as I hoped the context made clear. The nature of the evidence for that—1st—2nd cent.AD, say—is very different from the evidence for e.g. 4th-cent.BC Attic, which I didn’t think we were discussing at all. Paul makes the point. Let’s not muddy the waters.

The evidence for extensive collapse of long:short vowels in koine is abundant, and it seems a pretty safe bet that the shift to a stress-based phonology was in some sense responsible. Just how widespread the quantitative levelling was is harder to say; the conservatism of the educational system ensured that the binary vocalic distinction continued to be operative even in subliterate versification and in ordinary writing after the language became stress-based, and I can well imagine that educated speakers—Paul included—observed it in their every-day speech, even as they stressed accented syllables. As to the shift to stress itself, I’d hesitate to attribute it wholly to non-native Greek-speakers, but I’m sure there’s much in what calvinist says.

Regional and ethnic pronunciation must certainly have varied considerably (though Paul for one was apparently intelligible wherever he went), but literate Greek-speakers throughout the Empire all wrote more or less the same kind of Greek. Not that I mean to downplay the differences among the NT writers; no-one would confuse Luke with Mark, let alone Hebrews with Revelation!

Sorry no time to engage with Paul’s posts, except to say that those vowel collapses are attested well before first cent., and that the accentual system has remained essentially unchanged thoughout the entire history of Greek. It’s just the manner of its actualization that shifted.

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Euphony

Post by jeidsath »

The reason that I've muddied the waters is that vowel length distinction is actually far more of a regional question than it's usually presented.

We know that the papyri show vowel length collapse early (beginning as early as 350 BC?). This is regional evidence, however, and from the edge of the Greek-speaking world, an area highly influenced by Coptic.

If the same thing was going on in Attica in the early centuries B.C., then you have your argument for a Standard Koine pronunciation without vowel length or pitch accent, and this is indeed what Horrocks presents. If, however, the papyrus evidence is regional, the picture becomes far more muddied, because the inscriptional evidence isn't nearly as good as the papyrus, and Attic lasted for a very very long time among the "elites."

As far as the authors of the NT, and regional variation, we have at least 3 Pauls in the NT. There is Luke's Paul in Acts. There is the Paul of the Epistles. There is the Paul of the Pastorals. (There is even the fourth Paul of Hebrews, traditionally attributed to him.)

Luke is certainly a product of the Western Church (whatever it looked like in the very early 2nd century) -- apparently a reader of Josephus? -- while Mark is just as clearly a product of the Eastern Church. The Pauline Epistles are a product of where exactly? Was Paul of the Epistles a Jerusalem Jew or a Diaspora Jew? How much can we believe of the auto-biography in Galatians?

If Paul's language is different from Mark's it bears on the questions.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4791
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Euphony

Post by mwh »

We know that the papyri show vowel length collapse early (beginning as early as 350 BC?). This is regional evidence, however, and from the edge of the Greek-speaking world, an area highly influenced by Coptic.
If you want to make the implied argument, Joel, then make it, but this is no way to do so.

Granted most of the papyrus evidence is from lower Egypt (including Alexandria). That’s well known, as are the problems of extrapolation associated with that. But Alexandria was more the center than “the edge” of the Greek-speaking world in the 3rd-2nd century BC. And I think you’d have a very hard time convincing anyone of significant influence of Coptic on Greek in Egypt at any period, and certainly not in the 4th-3rd century when vowel collapses start to show up. So far as we can tell, the influence was all in the other direction (borrowed alphabet, Greek words, etc. etc.). You imply the quantitative leveling in Greek is only regional and is due to Coptic. Much is uncertain about Coptic phonology, but one thing we do know is that Coptic retained the distinction (whatever phonetic form it may have taken) between ο and ω and ε and η.

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Euphony

Post by jeidsath »

mwh: And I think you’d have a very hard time convincing anyone of significant influence of Coptic on Greek in Egypt at any period...
I'm following Horrocks on Coptic, and don't know anything about it beyond what I have read in his book. Twice he mentions the switch from pitch to stress accent, and twice he mentions Coptic's stress-accent as a causal factor (and neglecting to mention any others).
mwh: ...and certainly not in the 4th-3rd century when vowel collapses start to show up.
If Attic really did lose vowel distinction at that time. To quote Horrocks on this (though he presents this only as a reservation to the theory that he offers in the main course of the chapter):
Horrocks (pg. 163): Much inevitably hinges on the interpretation of the significance of what remains a small number of documents exhibiting the relevant errors, and the overall picture depends in particular on the extent to which we can be sure that the mistakes in question were committed by local native speakers rather than by resident aliens, including many non-native speakers of Greek, who may have had difficulty with the subtleties of the Attic dialect (cf. Ruijgh (1978b) and Threatte (1980) for less radical views about the chronology of change, especially in the popular varieties).
mwh: Much is uncertain about Coptic phonology, but one thing we do know is that Coptic retained the distinction (whatever phonetic form it may have taken) between ο and ω and ε and η.
Again, I'm following Horrocks:
Horrocks (pg. 112): Similarly, interchanges between a and e/ai, a and o/w, and o/w and e/ai in unaccented (i.e. by now unstressed) syllables imply some assimilation of the low/mid unstressed vowels [a], [e] and [o] to the of Coptic.
If you want to make the implied argument, Joel, then make it...
I think that I already have. But here is my thesis: Elite Attic is an exaggerated phenomenon. Instead I believe that the Koine exhibited more regional variation than is described by, say, Randall Buth. And vowel length distinction and a pitch accent quite possibly survived, regionally, into the very early centuries A.D.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

User avatar
calvinist
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 474
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 7:24 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Euphony

Post by calvinist »

Joel, something that I just thought about is the "Christ Hymn" in Colossians 1:15. Many scholars consider this to be a quotation of an early hymn or poem. There are some other fragments in the NT that are believed to be taken from hymns of the early christian community, but I think that one is the longest. It runs from verse 15 to verse 20. I couldn't find any discussion about vowel length but it would be something to look into. I don't know verse well enough to recognize if there are any patterns that would indicate a sensitivity to vowel length.

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: Euphony

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

calvinist wrote:Joel, something that I just thought about is the "Christ Hymn" in Colossians 1:15. Many scholars consider this to be a quotation of an early hymn or poem. .
a search on: Hymn Colossians 1:15 greek meter in Google, top hit was

The Colossian Hymn in Context: An Exegesis in Light of Jewish and Greco ...
By Matthew E. Gordley, pp 181ff "Metrical Analysis" where the author begins his argument by saying "One dimension that is completely overlooked in modern discussions of the Colossian hymn is the issue of meter and rhythm."

Others will need to evaluate if Matthew E. Gordley has anything to offer. It's outside my domain.

Larry W. Hurtado, How on Earth Did Jesus Become a God?: Historical Questions about Earliest … p 85, commenting on Phil. 2:6-11 "Clearly, the passage does not exhibit the formal features of poetry, such as poetic meter. … In the earliest period of Christianity, the use of meter and melody … was looked down on by Christians as pagan …"


Larry W. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity, p506

commenting on Col. 1:15ff " The error in trying to 'reconstruct' the hymn on the basis of Greek poetic meter is the assumption that classical Greek poetic conventions are relevant. Among many Greek-speaking Jews and Christians of the time … the Greek Old Testament was scripture … [which had a] strong influence on their vocabulary and discourse patterns … The principal stylistic feature of Colossians 1:15-20 is in fact parallel structure that is also the primary poetic feature of the Psalms."

I think Hurtado has nailed it. Hebrew parallelism reflected in the Greek versions of the Old Testament is the right place to start if you are looking for poetry in the New Testament.
C. Stirling Bartholomew

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Euphony

Post by jeidsath »

I came across two interesting passages in Allen's Vox Graeca, that I had probably been thinking of in the above.

The first, on pg. 92, says that between 100 B.C. and 100 A.D., the use of ει for long ι in papyri can be used to discover hidden vowel qualities in some words, such as ῥιπτω (ῥειψαι in in an Herculaneum papyrus). After 100 A.D. ει begins to be used for short ι as well.

Later, on pg. 94, Allen says that the movement towards a stress accent (and no vowel length distinctions) began to accelerate around 100 A.D. and "was complete by about the middle of the 3 C...the loss of distinctive vowel-length may also be placed most probably in the 2-3 C. A.D."

In a footnote, he writes:
In non-literary papyri the loss of length distinctions and interchange of vowels in unaccented syllables from the 2 C. B.C. suggests the effects of stress; but this could be a peculiarity of Egyptian speech (cf. Gignac, p. 142 of article cited p. 81, n. 53 above; also C. M. Knight, 'The change from the Ancient to the Modern Greek accent', JPhil Cambridge), 35 (1920), pp. 51 ff. (56 ff.)).
The cited Gignac article is "'The language of the non-literary Greek papyri', Proc. XII Int. Cong. of Papyrology (= Amer. St. in Papyrology, vol. 7, 1970), pp. 139 ff. (141)."

I will see if I can get a hold of any of these articles -- I'm typing this from the airport, so it may be sometime next week before I have any results.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

Post Reply