Scribo wrote:No it's awful and so strongly Americophonic. I can see where Daitz is trying to draw from leading research but he's certainly not articulating anything spoken in the Mediterranean - outside of American tourists, Germanic condottieri etc.
pster wrote:You more or less singlehandedly turned me off to Diatz!
...
Daitz does however have the largest set of recordings.
pster wrote:Scribo wrote:No it's awful and so strongly Americophonic. I can see where Daitz is trying to draw from leading research but he's certainly not articulating anything spoken in the Mediterranean - outside of American tourists, Germanic condottieri etc.
You more or less singlehandedly turned me off to Diatz! I guess discovering Hagel didn't hurt. But I think the problem with Daitz is that Greek couldn't have sounded like that because no language sounds like that. No language sounds that exaggerated. Even ones that seem a bit exagerated like Texan English or Québecois French have more of a droning twang than a continual bobbing and weaving where every third syllable seems emotionally fraught.
Daitz does however have the largest set of recordings.
pster wrote: But I think the problem with Daitz is that Greek couldn't have sounded like that because no language sounds like that. No language sounds that exaggerated.
Qimmik wrote:It's worth taking a look at these Wikipedia articles on Swedish and Norwegian phonology. Like ancient Greek, Swedish and Norwegian have two tone accents. The article gives some idea of the complexity of the Swedish and Norwegian situations, and we have no way of knowing in any detail what the situation might have been like in ancient Greek.
It's also worth bearing in mind that for the most part, the diacritical marks for the pitch accents in ancient Greek weren't invented or assigned to words until the period when the language was shifting to a stress-based accent--the diacritical marks were supposedly intended to help readers who may not have been fully used to the tonal accent system.
Well done to Daitz for trying to produce something, but can perhaps a speaker of modern Greek used to tonal languages offer a superior version, based on the philology that has been done?
jeidsath wrote:Having worked on pitch for a number of weeks now, I have to state that it is *far* easier to read a text when there is whole-word involvement and a bit of rhythm. Also, the rising accent at the end of sentences (as in Norwegian) seems to really fit the Greek.
annis wrote:The acute was not an across-the-board rising accent. In most of the world's pitch accent system, the pitch accent is not identified by being at a higher pitch than previous syllables, but because the following syllable is at a lower pitch. So, using 1-9 as a rough pitch guide,
ἄνθρωπός τις 545 4 (possibly 3 for 4)
Only on a long vowel or diphthong would the acute represent what sounds like a rising pitch. And the circumflex was very probably just a falling pitch, not a rise then fall. The grave was merely the absence of a pitch accent — definitely not a falling contour in any interpretation of the evidence.
It is too hard for me to untangle, and I don't know of any verbal models (like your YouTube videos) that I really trust.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 86 guests