Questions on pronunciation, metric feet.

Greek Learning Greek
1

Hello, friends!

I beg your attention for some doubts that have been born out of my recent incursions in Ancient Greek pronunciation. Having been won over by the rhetoric of the many essays and posts urging the use of musical pitches in reading (something diametrically opposite to what I am being taught), I come to you for help. I have two questions, both of which I humbly bring to your knowledge and wisdom!


\

  1. I find the first line of the Iliad,

Μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος

being scanned as

Μῆνιν ἄ | ειδε θε | ὰ Πη | ληϊά | δεω Ἀχ | ιλῆος

and being listed as “dactyl, dactyl, spondee, dactyl, dactyl, spondee”. However, I do not understand several things. One of those is how “δεω Ἀχ” can be classified as a dactyl and not a ( x / x ) – am I missing something, or are the syllables just naturally inverted? The same problem with ιλῆος being a spondee.




2. Now a question regarding pronunciation. I have learnt that Ancient Greek took in account both quantity (length of syllables). I now know I should pronounce, thus, short syllables for one “length” or mora, ε ; long syllables for two morae, η; and long circumflexed syllables ῆ (or circumflexed diphthongs) for three morae. One of my questions is related to this is the following: How should I give circumflexed diphthongs a raise-hold-drop pitch if they are composed of two distinct sounds? I can envision, for example, reading η(low),η(high),η(low) when reading ῆ, but how to do the same when finding οῖ?

Another problem is just something I need to make sure is right, lest I start learning wrongly and am forced to later unlearn. Quantity and tonality are the only aspects to consider in both poetry and prose, correct? By that I ask if intensity, or accentuation, is in any way expressed independently from those. The Iliad line I posted above confused me. If I am to read the “ἄ” in “ἄειδε” as quantitatively short to obey the dactyl, does that mean that quantity and tonality also work independently from each other? And, then, the “ὰ” in “θεὰ” is accented to mark what? Certainly not quantity. And obviously not pitch, since it is a grave accent. Perhaps it is a grave accent merely to say that it would be in normal terms θεά (with pitch), but the context made the accent shift, and thus it would be un-pitched?-- or does it still hold importance (-- in the shape, perhaps, of intensity; this is the reason of this paragraph)?



3. This last question is likely easily answerable. Do all metric feet need have a pitched syllable? I assume not, but ask nonetheless, related in a way to the question above on whether there is a relation between quantity and tonality.



Many many thanks in advance, and apologies if my question are illogical and/or ignorant – I wouldn’t be surprised! :blush:

Miguel

2

Miguel, I think I can help with question 1, but I have another question I’d like to add to yours.
In question 1, I believe your scansion is wrong. The epsilon and omega in the fifth foot join into one long vowel by synizesis. The iota which starts your sixth foot is really the last syllable in the fifth foot. That should bring everything into line there.

As for three morae, I was always taught that there were only two types: short and long and that a long was about twice as long as a short.
The question I’d like to add is, if a syllable containing a short vowel can be made long by position (i.e. having a consonant cluster or doubled consonant after it, what was the pronunciation of a vowel long by nature followed by a such consonant combinations? Did it take three beats or only two? Or was the time allotted to such syllables adjusted to fit the needs of the meter, sort of like modern songs where a single can glide over several notes just to fill out the musical meter?
And I’ll await, with you, the comments of our more learned freinds from Textkit.

3

Hi,

A good source that I learned a lot from is annis’s Reciting the Heroic Hexameter pdf, and I hope that he (or anyone else) will correct me if I say anything wrong.

I would say that mora applies to the vowel part of a syllable. So a short vowel has one mora, a long vowel or diphthong has two morae, and the logical thing would be for the “long diphthongs” (i.e. ᾳ, ῃ, and ῳ) to have three morae (although if you express the restrictions on the placement of the accent in terms of morae, I believe you need to treat them as having only two – that’s one of the reasons that I personally don’t see what is gained by introducing the term mora for Greek but that’s another topic). I don’t believe the kind of accent comes into it.

One of my questions is related to this is the following: How should I give circumflexed diphthongs a raise-hold-drop pitch if they are composed of two distinct sounds? I can envision, for example, reading η(low),η(high),η(low) when reading ῆ, but how to do the same when finding οῖ?

There seem to be a lot of views about what the accents actually meant but I believe the majority position is that the circumflex simply represents a falling accent, or perhaps high pitch on the first mora and then falling on the next. This makes sense because there’s evidence that the original accent was a high pitch on one vowel followed by falling pitch on the next vowel, and as the circumflex accent is in many cases the result of an accented vowel contracting with a following vowel, it does make sense.

Another problem is just something I need to make sure is right, lest I start learning wrongly and am forced to later unlearn. Quantity and tonality are the only aspects to consider in both poetry and prose, correct? By that I ask if intensity, or accentuation, is in any way expressed independently from those.

You mean like a stress? I think the “official” answer is that stress is not a factor in Greek at all – well, I’m sure when they spoke they did use stress but there was no predetermined word-stress like there is in English for example. For poetry, the metre is based entirely on the quantity of syllables and from what I’ve read, even the accent is not taken into account in any way. (Personally I think that there was stress involved in the recitation of poetry, but even if that’s not a result of my misunderstanding the quantitative metre, the majority opinion seems to be that stress just wasn’t there.)

The Iliad line I posted above confused me. If I am to read the “ἄ” in “ἄειδε” as quantitatively short to obey the dactyl, does that mean that quantity and tonality also work independently from each other? And, then, the “ὰ” in “θεὰ” is accented to mark what? Certainly not quantity. And obviously not pitch, since it is a grave accent. Perhaps it is a grave accent merely to say that it would be in normal terms θεά (with pitch), but the context made the accent shift, and thus it would be un-pitched?-- or does it still hold importance (-- in the shape, perhaps, of intensity; this is the reason of this paragraph)?

In this case I’ve seen it accented θεά (with an acute) because it’s usually punctuated with a following comma, but in general, again, there seem to be various opinions on what the grave accent represented, but the majority opinion seems to be it represents the suppression of the acute accent and so it’s un-pitched as you say.

  1. This last question is likely easily answerable. Do all metric feet need have a pitched syllable? I assume not, but ask nonetheless, related in a way to the question above on whether there is a relation between quantity and tonality.

The answer should be no. Even in the first line there, the second foot (ειδε θε) has all unaccented syllables.

4
<?xml version="1.0"?>
5

Thank you for your answers to our questions. With all of the reference material, aids, etc., available from Textkit I hadn’t seen this one yet but I just downloaded it and will read it immediately.

Textkit is great.

6

Bob Manske, thank you very much! That does bring things into place, I should learn more before posting scansions like this.

modus.irrealis, such priceless help!

First, thank you for the link posted.

I would say that mora applies to the vowel part of a syllable. So a short vowel has one mora, a long vowel or diphthong has two morae, and the logical thing would be for the “long diphthongs” (i.e. á¾³, ῃ, and ῳ) to have three morae (although if you express the restrictions on the placement of the accent in terms of morae, I believe you need to treat them as having only two – that’s one of the reasons that I personally don’t see what is gained by introducing the term mora for Greek but that’s another topic). I don’t believe the kind of accent comes into it.

I believe I understand. You sparked new questions, however. I have always been taught that the subscript iota was not read. Is it commonly read? Was it always ignored but in writing? Or did it gradually become unread with the passing of times?

And you say that the kind of accent does not come into it. This I do not understand. I thought that the circumflex raised the length of the vowel to 3. Are you saying that the circumflex only changes the “mora” (for lack of a better word, then) which is raised (1st for circumflex, 2nd for acute)? As you said, it possibly represents an high pitch on the first and falling on the next. In improper diphthongs, then, is the iota (if read) always unpitched? And the two earlier morae being pitched according to the accent?

Again, many thanks for your time and availability.

7

What we write as the subscript iota probably stopped being pronounced at the end of the Classical period. Later Greeks used the subscript to indicate where an iota had been even though they themselves did not sound it.

Usually in American schools students are taught not to pronounce it. I myself generally do since most of my reading is in Archaic and early classical works.

I thought that the circumflex raised the length of the vowel to 3.

No, no. The pitch accents do not change vowel length at all, rather vowel length determines the accent.

As you said, it possibly represents an high pitch on the first and falling on the next. In improper diphthongs, then, is the iota (if read) always unpitched? And the two earlier morae being pitched according to the accent?

Hurry a bit through the long diphthongs. :slight_smile: While some languages and poetries do recognize short, long, extra-long, Greek is content with short and long. For Greek metrical purposes, extra long is just a long in all the standard literature (I will not bore you with some strange and disputed cases where extra-long might have been different).