daler wrote:oh NOW you're being pedantic. : ) I have little interest in anything after Byzantine Greek.
like, I posted originally. Hellenistic period. So... you're saying that the ideal was to emulate Attic by most people writing in Greek during that time. Now, I know most people writing latin in the middle ages were thinking they were trying to emulate golden age latin, but not always succeeding, hence people studying church latin more for reading texts from that time period.
You are implying to me that Attic was still closer to what people were writing in at the time than Koine.
If I want to read Polybius and Plutarch and Lucian, I should study Attic because their writing is closer to that than Koine?
Well it never hurts to study whatever you can. Hellenistic literature is a broad term...Kallimakhos is considerably more difficult than, say, Plutarch which is very easy going. I think Attic is definitely the way to go since, as I say, it was still the literary standard, provides a sounder philological base and..well gives you broader access. It's easy to pick up bits of the common dialect with the aid of a student commentary/having learnt Attic first then the other way around.
I don't think the relationship between Latin and its later emulative forms and Greek is in any way comparable, incidentally. Certainly not as early as the Hellenistic period.
Any of the books on this site should be a good start. If you're looking to spend some cash though the JACT Reading Greek is good, especially if you have some experience.