Dear all, as far as I know, most compound adjectives lack a specific form for the feminine. My question is, does this hold only for the positive degree or rather also for the comparative and superlative degrees?
The comparatives in -ιων and so on, don’t have a feminine form. But when the form exists, like with -τερος or -τατος, etc., then even if it’s a compound adjective, the masculine and feminine are distinguished.
ὅσσον ἐγὼ μετὰ πᾶσιν ἀτιμοτάτη θεός εἰμι
I don’t know if this is violated ever, but I wouldn’t expect it.
I see, thank you for the reply.
So let me have a go: It is ἡ ἄδικος κόρη but also ἡ ἀδικοτάτη κόρη (not ἡ ἀδικότατος κόρη).
So let me have a go: It is ἡ ἄδικος κόρη but also ἡ ἀδικοτάτη κόρη (not ἡ ἀδικότατος κόρη).
Correct, except you need ἀδῐκωτάτη with omega. -ωτερος/-ωτατος if the penultimate syllable of the positive degree is short; -οτερος/-οτατος if the penultimate syllable is long (e.g. πίκρος, πικρότερος, πικρότατος).
To repeat what’s said above:
Regular comparatives and superlatives with the -τερος suffix have three terminations, e.g.
positive ἄδικος, -ον (two term.);
comp. ἀδικώτερος, -τέρα, -τερον (three term);
superl. ἀδικώτατος, -τάτη, -τατον (three term).
Comps. with the -(ί)ων -ιον suffix are two terminations, e.g.
comp. ἐλάττων (m/f), ἔλαττον (n)
(superl. ἐλάχιστος, -ίστη, -ιστον).
That’s a nice summary. Which brings me to my other question. I was thinking about starting another thread for this, but since the word is out, let me raise it here.
I am confused about syllable length. One would think this to be an easy task (syllables containing short vowels are short, syllables containing long vowels or diphthongs are long). But there seem to be quite a few exceptions.
For example, if a syllable containing a short vowel also contains a double consonant, then the syllable is considered long. I guess what is meant here is ζ, ψ, and ξ and not φ and χ, but I’m not sure.
Furthermore, diphthongs are long but for purposes of accentuation, οι and αι are considered short.
In the case of α, ι, and υ, they can be both, so I guess one would have to know the specific word.
So what is a good source to read on syllable length so that I can brush up my skills? Perhaps Smyth or some other resources would help me in this regard.
The introduction to Sidgwick’s verse composition is a good read. Morwood’s Little Greek Reader has some very straightforward sections. Pharr’s has good coverage of it in the Homeric context. (The rules for double consonants are a bit different there.)
Having read some literature on this, I still haven’t understood why it should be, say, ἀξιώτατος instead of ἀξιότατος.
Although the iota is short, the relevant syllable contains a double consonant, at least insofar as we parse the syllables out as ἀ-ξι and not ἀξ-ι. And the rules that I have read, if I have not misunderstood them, suggest that ἀ-ξι is the correct way of parsing it out, but of course I may be mistaken.
So I am confused: why is the correct form ἀξιώτατος?
Eliminating that confusion was one good thing about the old language of “vowels long by position”. For the purposes of syllable length in poetry, and for this rule, what matters is how many consonants follow the vowel. Preceding consonants never make a syllable long. Double consonants at the start of a line appear to have no effect on the rhythm.
σύν and ξύν are both short in isolation. Followed by a word beginning with a consonant, they are both long. The specific double consonant rules for Attic are covered in a clear manner in Sidgwick’s verse composition.
How the consonants adhere to the vowels don’t change the syllable length, though one would imagine that it has some sort of meaning for pronunciation. If the syllabification rules passed down from antiquity are even accurate, that is.
hairetikon: In your example, ἀξῐώτερος, the syllables divide as ἄ / ξῐ /… (probably actually ak / si / …), but the double consonant would only make a difference if it followed the iota.
Syllable length/weight is a good thing to review. You’ll get a lot more practice if you start reading poetry. Here’s an overview:
I. To divide a word into syllables:
(a) There will be as many syllables as vowels/diphthongs. Each syllable should start with a consonant when possible. So:
αἴλουρος—> αἴ / λου / ρος [3 syllables, starting with a consonant when possible]
θεοῦ —> θε / οῦ [2 syllables; the second syllable can’t start with a consonant]
(b) With a cluster of two or more consonants, the last one usually starts a new syllable:
ἄνθη—> ἄν / θη
(c) A consonant cluster with a stop (β γ δ π κ τ φ χ θ) and resonant (λ ρ μ ν) sometimes stays together:
πράγματα —> πρά / γμα / τα [not πράγ / μα / τα]
πατρί —> πα / τρί or πατ / ρί
τέκνον —> τέ / κνον or τέκ / νον
There are exceptions that you don’t need to worry about now. (Syllabification is not so straight forward when you get into it, but this will get you started.)
II. Now, it’s important to distinguish between the length (short/long) of a vowel for accentuation and the weight (light/heavy) of a syllable. Sometimes the latter is called syllable length (as opposed to vowel length), but I’ll talk about syllable weight (light/heavy).
A syllable will count as heavy if it contains:
(a) a long vowel (ᾱ, η, ῑ, ῡ, ω: note the macrons over α ι υ; that marks them as long. You can find vowel length marked in a dictionary or decent grammar);
or (b) any diphthong;
or (c) if the vowel is followed by two or more consonants or the double consonants ζ, ξ, ψ. **
If none of the above apply, the syllable will be light.
So, ἀξῐώτατος [note the ῐ is short] is analyzed as follows:
ἀξ [heavy; vowel followed by double consonant] / ῐ [light] / ω [heavy; long vowel] / τα [light] …
III. For comparatives and superlatives in -ότερος or -ώτερος (as I outlined in my previous post):
Go the positive degree of the adjective and find the stem. If the last syllable of the stem is heavy, the comparative will be -οτερος. If the last syllable of the stem is light, the comparative will be -ώτερος.
πικρότερος: the positive degree is πικρός; the stem is πικρ-. The last (and only) syllable of the stem is heavy [vowel followed by two consonants], thus -ότερος.
ἀξῐώτερος: the positive degree is ἄξιος (ἄ/ξῐ/ος); the stem is ἄξῐ-. The last syllable of the stem (ξῐ) is light, thus -ώτερος.
As much as I love Sidgwick, I do not recommend the chapter Joel mentioned as an introduction to scanning poetry. (It is, however, a great book if at some point you want to learn to compose trimeters).
**Note on (c): when analyzing meter, it’s best to think about a syllable being heavy if it ends in a consonant. A syllable that ends in a consonant is called a closed syllable (like the ἄν- in ἄνθη). A syllable that ends in a vowel is called an open syllable (like the -θη in ἄνθη). But for your question, it’s better to stick with what I’ve outlined.
If anyone would like to practice, here’s a short exercise:
Write the comparative and superlative of the following adjectives. You may have to use a dictionary if you don’t know the quantity of some of the vowels.
δίκαιος, -α, -ον
ἱκανός, -ή, -όν
λεπτός, -ή, -όν
ἰσχυρός, -ά, -όν
χρήσιμος, -ον
probably actually ak / si
Phonetically, this might be a reasonable way to talk about a mute and liquid, if you’re trying to signal junctions with glottal reinforcement from those without (“fork left” from “four clefts”). However, unlike mute-liquid combinations, the Attic Greeks found that ξ (and ψ, ζ, πτ, etc) made the previous syllable heavy/long even when it was word-initial on the next word. Compare τὸ ξίφος and τοξότης with τὸ κλέος and ὀκλάζω and ἐκ λαύρας. It is a different phonetic phenomenon from the mute-liquid combination and behaves differently. Equating them with a simple graphical scheme (one that ignores usual phonetic syllabification concerns) leads to people thinking that ξ in τὸ ξίφος and τοξότης is the same as “ink stand” in both, when that is likely true in neither.
Sidgwick’s language is a bit old fashioned, and you’ll have to explain the trimeter separately, but it’s not as damaging for a phonetic understanding of the language as that syllabification scheme.
All that’s needed is to recognize that ξ is actually two consonants (kappa-sigma), regardless of syllabication. Likewise ζ and ψ. It makes no difference whether they come at the beginning of a word or not.
Miute+liquid combinations don’’t come into it. They variably function as single or double consonants.
As for -ότερος & -ότατος vs. -ώτερος & -ώτατος, the governing principle is one of binary contrast: a preceding heavy syllable leads to -ο(τερος), a light one to -ω(τερος). So e.g μωρότατος vs. σοφώτατος.
In αξιωτατος, the ι is short, hence -ωτατος not -οτατος. (The αξ- doesn’t come into it,)
They variably function as single or double consonants.
Metrically. Mechanically/phonetically, they are always two consonants, both fully shaped by the speech organs, with a variable degree of glottal stop between them that heightens their perception as separate (or not).
I am still surprised to hear that ξύν is considered a short syllable (Joel mentioned this). So if ξυνός is an adjective (apparently, it is an older form of κοινός), what would its comparative or superlative be? I guess we need an omega, that is, assuming that the υ is a short one. It seems strange that the ξ, which is necessarily a part of the relevant syllable (well, there is no other syllable), does not matter, but I have to accept this. As far as I can tell from what I have been told by you guys, it is only the consonants after the vowel that matter; the ones before the vowel do not make a difference.
As the vowel language before it was imprecise, the heavy syllable language is also imprecise about what it’s trying to describe. It’s not the syllable timing that matters so much as the time (perception) between when peak aperture opening is reached (that is, the time that is perceived between the beginnings of vowel output). This perceived time between isn’t the same as vowel length, and but isn’t quite syllable length/weight either, and isn’t really even a time measure.
Thank you phalakros for the informative and in-depth reply.
Here are my guesses for the comparative:
δίκαιος: δῐκαιότερος (the αι is considered as short for accentuation purposes but, I guess, not in this context)
ἱκανός: ἱκανώτερος (checked the dictionary, the alpha is short)
λεπτός: λεπτότερος (because double consonant)
ἰσχυρός: ἰσχυρότερος (checked the dictionary, the upsilon is long)
χρήσιμος: χρήσιμώτερος (checked the dictionary, the iota is short)
Perfect–you’ve got it now.
For ξυνός/κοινός the comp would be ξῡνότερος/κοινότερος (the upsilon is long; ξ is irrelevant, as you said). mwh and I are saying the same thing.
[This post can be ignored. It’s just to say I think Joel’s posts here may be unnecessarily confusing. I said that mute+liquid combinations variably function as single or double consonants. And that is the case. Joel ignores functional considerations and insists that phonetically they are always two consonants, and he continues to address the mechanics of phonetic production, as if that’s what matters. But what we’re concerned with is not phonetics but phonemics.
The circumstances under which mute+liquid combinations (to use the old terminology) function as single or double consonants is a fairly complex matter, and falls beyond the scope of this thread. We can go into it if people want, but I reckon the waters have already been muddied enough.]
The fem. comparative ending -τέρη is Ionic and Homeric. In Attic and other dialects it’s -τέρα.
Thank you for alerting me to the τέρη typo. Good eye. I’ve edited my post accordingly.
[Yes, I’m afraid some of the other posts here have been unnecessarily confusing for the topic and an impediment for learners (current and future) looking to use the “Learning Greek” forum efficiently. I think that discussion should be moved to another thread. For regular comparatives and superlatives, stop + resonant has double value, as it usually does in poetry before Attic correption (and sometimes still in choral lyrics). My initial explanation of syllabification—stop + resonant “sometimes” stays together (e.g. πατρι, τεκνον); “syllabification is not so straight forward when you get into it, but this will get you started”, etc—was written with such exceptions in mind. Some textbooks just say that stop + consonant is always divided as pa/tri, which is incorrect.]
I can split the thread later on, of course. You may want to relax and enjoy yourself here though. I keep decent database backups, but phpbb boards are not a format destined for eternity. It’s a certain amount of continuous work to keep them from sinking into the sea of spam, and it has taken a fair amount of digital forensics to even recover the posts from a decade ago.
Now, this syllabification scheme (which I take to be equivalent to the one outlined in West and Probert) is simply a way to encode the following true statements:
-
There are long and short positions in the meter
-
Two consonants separated by a word boundary always postfix a long position
-
Two consonants found in a single word sometimes postfix a long position, sometimes a short
Then you register short and long positions by moving the second consonant back and forth across the syllable boundary.
But the muddle comes in when you have to deal with syllabification elsewhere in the language. Take ἐκλείπω and κλείσω in Euripides. As you might expect, the first syllable of ἐκλείπω is generally at a long position metrically, and the first syllable of the augmented and reduplicated forms of κλείσω are generally at a short or anceps position. A natural explanation would be that in regular speech ἐκ-λείπω has guttural reinforcement (“fork left”) and ἐ-κλῇσα less (“four clefts”). This is nice correspondence between meter and normal speech, as I would think that anyone would expect that the syllabification in regular speech would follow this in regards to augment and prepositions.
But Euripides also violates this, somewhat rarely, in both directions. Both words get the opposite position every now and then. What’s the explanation for that? Well, the syllabification scheme being suggested says to write ε-κλει- or εκ-ληι- and call it a day. Uncomplicated minds, who don’t realize that this scheme is only about the phonemics, might expect that to mean that the words reversed their normal prose pronunciation depending on their metrical context. (One might have thought though that even phonemics would differentiate between the prepositions and the augment.) A special metrical pronunciation is a possibility, of course, but it’s more or equally likely that they words were pronounced the same as they normally were, but could fit into both metrical contexts.
So I say that the pen and paper system is likely misleading students trying to learn to pronounce the language and to correctly attack the meter with their tongue and ear. At the very least, it’s implying a position that an instructor might rather stay neutral on.