About Sigma
-
- Textkit Fan
- Posts: 298
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 10:39 pm
About Sigma
I haven't read anything about it, but isn't sigma supposed to be pronounced "sinma", or "sima"? After all, gamma before my becomes nasal.
Thanks. And... hello everybody It's been a time since I posted something here.
Thanks. And... hello everybody It's been a time since I posted something here.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 903
- Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:37 am
- Location: Mountain View
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1889
- Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
- Location: Arthur Ontario Canada
Well, I guess it is Gamma before velars and nasals. Thanks.Yhevhe wrote:The remaining consonants may be pronounced as specified in the list, but γ before μ, ν ,γ, χ or ξ is called gamma-nasal, and is pronounced as n in song, as κλαγγή uproar, pronounced clahngáy.Bert wrote:Gamma plus velar becomes Nu.
I had not heard that Gamma before Mu becomes nasal, but that does not mean that it is not true.
(I should have written "Gamma plus velar becomes nasal not Nu)
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
- Location: Madison, WI, USA
- Contact:
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/ — http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm
I am curious to read those evidences, please quote them here, if it's possible. To me, it sounds absurb. Gamma before mu can stand only as gamma, or be redued to a double mu, than spoken as mu. N before M is unstable. In your examples, there we have a vowel between G and M, which became silent and G turned to M. Do not get confuse with γκ, γχ or γγ, this is a different case. In cases where G before M is a nasal NG (not many cases, I can think none at this moment), soon we saw a double M. In any case, σιγμα is pronounced sigma.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
- Location: Madison, WI, USA
- Contact:
Yeah.ThomasGR wrote:I am curious to read those evidences, please quote them here, if it's possible. To me, it sounds absurb.
In a few minutes I will be leaving to attend that great Madison Tradition, "Taste of Madison" which I myself call "Taste of Pork on a Stick." So more evidence will have to wait until this evening.
However, I would take it as a great kindness if in that time you actually present the evidence for your case, with examples rather than assertion. I would also like to know how you account for the fact that the nasal sound in -γγ- ended up with the name ἄγμα.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/ — http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1093
- Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:08 am
- Location: Toronto
- IreneY
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 800
- Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:27 am
- Location: U.S.A (not American though)
- Contact:
- IreneY
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 800
- Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:27 am
- Location: U.S.A (not American though)
- Contact:
-
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 789
- Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 7:56 pm
- Location: Boise, ID
Mmmmmmmmmm.......pork.....mmmmmmmmmmm.annis wrote:In a few minutes I will be leaving to attend that great Madison Tradition, "Taste of Madison" which I myself call "Taste of Pork on a Stick." So more evidence will have to wait until this evening.
But seriously folks! I learned sigma pronounced with the G sound. Although αγγελος was always pronounced angelos. Of course....I learned Koine first, so I might just be of no help at all.
Perhaps William, belly full of pork and pints, can shed some more light on this for us.
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm
How does it claim? It that was the case, than why did they not wrote nm, or even gm (so we can than quarrel if its even ngm)? I think n does not like to be place near plosives either. n+b gives mb and n+p makes it to mp, also n+k gives gk (the last g as ng, the others m are banalities m).But that claim is that γμ was ngm, with the ng in sing.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1093
- Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:08 am
- Location: Toronto
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm
Of course we are still after σιγμα pronunciation. Slowly I am proving that σιγμα could never have been pronounced sinma, neither singma. N (as well NG) before M becomes M, so G before M stood always as G, otherwise they would have written it from earliest times as MM (simplified perhaps to M). I think a clue gives also gramma, which probably comes from grap(h)ma, but p(h) before m stands not.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
- Location: Madison, WI, USA
- Contact:
Kopio wrote:Mmmmmmmmmm.......pork.....mmmmmmmmmmm.
Well, I didn't see the need to repeat modus.irrealis' fine points.Perhaps William, belly full of pork and pints, can shed some more light on this for us.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/ — http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm
M is voiced, so χ has to become voiced. X turns to a voiced X, a G. This could give reasons to say that ancient-Greek's G was never that hard-sounding G as in Latin or English, but a soft one, a voiced X. There are words with χμ, but in this case we have also the ypsilon before, working as a voiced semi-vowel (or semi-consonant?).Why wouldn't it just stay as χ?
Edit: this is also an excellent example why one should never reject Modern Greek so easily. Why we have here GM and not XM, is easy to think if we take modern pronunciation into account. In Modern Greek the pronunciation would be τεβγμα, so we speak βγμ, no place is left for χμ. Astrong clue that ancient υ was never a u, not in such combinations as in this example.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
- Location: Madison, WI, USA
- Contact:
You simply assert over and over that because it's not in modern Greek it's "un-Greek" tout court. This isn't proof.ThomasGR wrote:I could go on and on proving that NM (and NGM) is simple un-Greek pronunciation.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/ — http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
- Location: Madison, WI, USA
- Contact:
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/ — http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm
I use examples only from Ancient Greek. There are no words with NM, and whenever a n+m occurs, suddenly we have MM. There is no GM tracing back to NM. NM (and NGM, not to forget it) is simple un-Greek. either you take it granted, or not.annis wrote:You simply assert over and over that because it's not in modern Greek it's "un-Greek" tout court. This isn't proof.ThomasGR wrote:I could go on and on proving that NM (and NGM) is simple un-Greek pronunciation.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
- Location: Madison, WI, USA
- Contact:
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/ — http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
- Location: Madison, WI, USA
- Contact:
Here we go...
From Allen's Vox Graeca, 3rd ed., pp35-36 (I omit references to his Vox Latina). Since not everyone will have an IPA font, I will use [N] in addition to the usual IPA [ŋ] (the ng in sing not anger).
"We have already mentioned that, in addition to the dental and bilabial nasals, there was in Greek, as in, for example, English and Latin, a velar nasal sound, occurring before velar plosive consonants, where it is represented by γ — e.g. ἄγκυ?α, ἔγχος, ?γγύς. Varro identified this with the sound of the n in Latin angulus etc., which was clearly a velar nasal (described by Nigidius Figuls as `inter litteram n et g' and as not involving contact with the (hard) palate). The use of n to indicate this sound, as in Latin, is understandable enough, since the velar pronunciation is automatic before velar plosives; and similar spellings with ν are found in Attic inscriptions (regularly before 5 c., e.g. c. 550 ενγυσ). But the normal Greek spelling with γ for [N] ([ŋ]) is on the face of it remarkable, since it is as though we were to write e.g. English ink, finger as igk, figger. There is nothing in the nature of a velar plosive that would account for the nasalization of a preceding plosive; so that the only logical explanation for such spellings would be if γ had this nasal [N] ([ŋ]) value in some other environment where it was phonetically intelligible; from such a context the writing with γ could then have been transferred to other positions (on the principle, familiar also to some modern schools of phonology, that a given sound must always be allotted to the same phoneme).
The most obvious candidate for providing such an environment is the position before a following nasal, that is, if γμ and/or γν were pronounced [Nm, Nn] ([ŋm, ŋn]) (like the ngm, ngn in English hangman, hangnail), as in the case of Latin magnus etc.
There is in fact a tradition, preserved by Priscian (+Gl, ii, p. 30 K) as ascribed by Verro to Ion (probably of Chios), that the [N] ([ŋ]) sound represented by γ in ἄγκυ?α etc. had a special name in Greek, and that this name was ἄγμα; since the Greek names of letters are otherwise related to the sounds they represent, such a name makes sense only if it is pronounced [aGma] ([aŋma]), that is, if the γ is pronounced [N] ([ŋ]) in the position before the nasal μ."
He then goes on to give the perfect passive examples given earlier.
Interestingly, all three of the authors I consulted — Sihler, Allen, Palmer — say that in the case of -γν- the [ŋn] interpretation might be right, but it's much less certain.
From Allen's Vox Graeca, 3rd ed., pp35-36 (I omit references to his Vox Latina). Since not everyone will have an IPA font, I will use [N] in addition to the usual IPA [ŋ] (the ng in sing not anger).
"We have already mentioned that, in addition to the dental and bilabial nasals, there was in Greek, as in, for example, English and Latin, a velar nasal sound, occurring before velar plosive consonants, where it is represented by γ — e.g. ἄγκυ?α, ἔγχος, ?γγύς. Varro identified this with the sound of the n in Latin angulus etc., which was clearly a velar nasal (described by Nigidius Figuls as `inter litteram n et g' and as not involving contact with the (hard) palate). The use of n to indicate this sound, as in Latin, is understandable enough, since the velar pronunciation is automatic before velar plosives; and similar spellings with ν are found in Attic inscriptions (regularly before 5 c., e.g. c. 550 ενγυσ). But the normal Greek spelling with γ for [N] ([ŋ]) is on the face of it remarkable, since it is as though we were to write e.g. English ink, finger as igk, figger. There is nothing in the nature of a velar plosive that would account for the nasalization of a preceding plosive; so that the only logical explanation for such spellings would be if γ had this nasal [N] ([ŋ]) value in some other environment where it was phonetically intelligible; from such a context the writing with γ could then have been transferred to other positions (on the principle, familiar also to some modern schools of phonology, that a given sound must always be allotted to the same phoneme).
The most obvious candidate for providing such an environment is the position before a following nasal, that is, if γμ and/or γν were pronounced [Nm, Nn] ([ŋm, ŋn]) (like the ngm, ngn in English hangman, hangnail), as in the case of Latin magnus etc.
There is in fact a tradition, preserved by Priscian (+Gl, ii, p. 30 K) as ascribed by Verro to Ion (probably of Chios), that the [N] ([ŋ]) sound represented by γ in ἄγκυ?α etc. had a special name in Greek, and that this name was ἄγμα; since the Greek names of letters are otherwise related to the sounds they represent, such a name makes sense only if it is pronounced [aGma] ([aŋma]), that is, if the γ is pronounced [N] ([ŋ]) in the position before the nasal μ."
He then goes on to give the perfect passive examples given earlier.
Interestingly, all three of the authors I consulted — Sihler, Allen, Palmer — say that in the case of -γν- the [ŋn] interpretation might be right, but it's much less certain.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/ — http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm
So the only clue we have is this: since it is called agma, so it had to be pronounce angma. I disagree, I'm not convinced. Do we have any mispelling for γμ (e.g. νμ, νγμ)? No, never was one. Priscian, as a genuine grammarian, wanted to remodel the langauge according to his ideal. Thanks God, it did never happen. I find it remarkable, there are other interesting mispellings even to our days: συνγνωμη versus συγγνωμη vs. συγνωμη.had a special name in Greek, and that this name was ἄγμα; since the Greek names of letters are otherwise related to the sounds they represent, such a name makes sense only if it is pronounced [aGma] ([aŋma]), that is, if the γ is pronounced [N] ([ŋ]) in the position before the nasal μ."
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
- Location: Madison, WI, USA
- Contact:
What a shock.ThomasGR wrote:So the only clue we have is this: since it is called agma, so it had to be pronounce angma. I disagree, I'm not convinced.
And it is patently not the only clue we have — it's merely one of several, all of which work together nicely. Why must we do this absurd epistemology tango every time this subject comes up?
Have you read Allen's Vox Graeca? Do you have access to a copy? Would you read it if I arranged to have one get to you, if you haven't already? Or are all linguists and grammarians, like Cretans, liars to you?
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/ — http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
- Location: Madison, WI, USA
- Contact:
Blogger denies me access to these images.ThomasGR wrote:Consonants: Attic Combinations:
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/ — http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
- IreneY
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 800
- Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:27 am
- Location: U.S.A (not American though)
- Contact: