Do modern editions of the Iliad contain any digammas at all?
Line 33 is definitely missing a digamma in ἔδϛεισεν, and, as a result, the line no longer scans. Is it known whether performances in 5th century Athens would have involved the digamma-sound in words such as this?
The most recent book I have that prints the digamma in the body of the poem is a 1907 “American Book Company” edition. If I recall correctly, it’s not entirely clear Homer would have pronounced the digamma any longer.
Line 33 is definitely missing a digamma in > ἔδϛεισεν> , and, as a result, the line no longer scans. Is it known whether performances in 5th century Athens would have involved the digamma-sound in words such as this?
Probably not. Based on hints from orthography, various things were tried to make the verses scan where possible. I’m used to seeing your example given as ἔδδεισεν, or least listed so in the ap.crit. (West, somewhat boldly in my opinion, spells it so in the main body of his Iliad).
Ah, cheers… ἔδδεισεν, that’ll work. 
If he didn’t, he’d have to have his own way of making the syllable long. Wouldn’t that result in it becoming an official “epic” form of that word?
Various things 
So, what do we do if the necessary digamma came at the beginning of the word?
Respelling (as in the example above), shuffling words, changing words, introducing decorative and hiatus-breaking δ’, τ’. There might be more.
What do you mean?
Let’s say the words were κακὸν vέργον, and so the digamma was required to make the second syllable long.
It seems somehow less kosher to double the nu in this case, making it κακὸν νέργον.
Ah. I hope Chad has something to say about this. Because my mind really latches onto linguistic minutia, the Homeric dictionary that lives in my brain has most of the digammas. I pronounce them but I’m not sure others should follow my lead in this.
That’s not a bad practice, I think. After all, you could end up accidently writing down νέργον somewhere else, but there’s probably no chance of writing vέργον and not noticing the mistake.
hi, digamma is a tricky one. on top of the fact that it’s not known whether it was pronounced or not (and therefore i don’t pronounce it) it’s not clearcut how it worked as a “consonant”. e.g. with w(/j which had digamma, it makes position in most cases: e.g. 2.190:
δαιμόνῑ οὔ σε ἔοικε κακὸν ὣς δειδίσσεσθαι
and many other cases. however it can allow elision: e.g. 5.78
ἀρητὴρ ἐτέτυκτο, θεὸς δ’ ὣς τίετο δήμῳ
and in other cases as well.
my guess is that the greeks didn’t pronounce it but were mentally aware of it. from what i’ve seen of inscriptions, they didn’t rely on the spelling of words for scansion: they didn’t need to see/write a digamma or another delta to know how to read the 1st syllable in e)/deisen in line 33 (nor do we), but that’s just a guess. i’m guessing that a lot of the double-deltas and things like that were added by medieval copyists or modern editors.
Hmmm… As well as those modern copyists, I wonder how much of the Iliad was Atticised by the Athenians themselves.
I have one further question, this time about the /w/ sound, not the letter digamma itself.
I know that upsilon can indicate a /w/ sound if it is part of a diphthong preceding another vowel, and also that a /w/ follows ου if ου precedes another vowel. Vox Graeca does not mention o or ω in its digamma section, but it does say on page 96 that /w/ can follow o as well.
My question is, does /w/ follow ω, and do any of ε, η, and α have /y/ following them too?
hi, i remember that vox graeca discusses the /y/ think if that means consonantal i, i don’t know that standard pronunciation/phonetic symbol thing.
vox graeca discusses this, if you have it it’s in there somewhere, i remember he talks about )Axaioi/ and other words, re diphthongs ending in iota followed by vowels or something.
IIRC, the consonantal ‘y’ sound duplicated certain letters, such as thalattos, but I can’t remember where I read this from.
Ok, I found it now, it’s about Verbs with a suffix in the present stem. What happens is the k/g/ch + y > tt; p/b/ph + y > pt; t/d/th + y > z. Like gaurd (phulake) becomes phulatto but fut. phulaxo.
I think, technically, the symbol should be /j/, but the Wox uses both.
Cweb, I have absolutely no idea what you’re saying. 
k/g + 2x ≥ √cos(iy^2)
(OK, I see you bunched similar consonants together, but when do you add y?)
EDIT: Spelling
Sorry, it was making nouns like phulake into verbs, which you get phulatto, this is the result of the lost /y/ sound in Greek. 
Oh, well I was asking about semivowels that did exist, not semivowels that had existed.
Well, I was merely showing you where it was and that it still had an impact.
Hmmm… I thought I knew what you were saying, but now I know I don’t.
“the line no longer scans” (Eureka)
The lines always scan, Eureka; Homer wrote them. There’s many things that we don’t know about his poetry, but we know its rhythm. If a verse starts with a dactyl, especially if it’s a standard like ΩΣ ΕΦΑΤ, what follows is going to be the start of the second foot. As such, it is going to hit the ground. In the case of line A33, if you make de first E of édeisen long and keep going at the rhythm, you’ll get to the end.
Why Homer thought that it was OK to start the second foot with édeisen, I don’t know.
I just remembered this little poem by George Starbuck:
HIGH RENAISSANCE
"Nomine Domini
Theotocopoulos,
None of this prelates can
Manage your name.
Change it. Appeal to their
Hellenophilia.
Sign it ‘El Greco.’ I’ll
Slap on a frame."
