Well you asked me how do I think you pronounce “h”, so I didn’t dare say something else. 
As for “sh” most Greeks have a problem pronouncing “s” and they say “sh” instead.
Interesting to see a discussion about Caragounis’ paper here, since it was reading that that helped convince me to use Modern Greek pronunciation in my Ancient Greek studies.
One difficulty I’ve faced taking that route, however, is the question of how to pronounce certain things from AG that no longer exist in MG and hence are not found in MG pronunciation charts. (For instance, how one pronounces ᾳ, ωυ, etc.) Is there a more or less standard way to pronounce such things among the modern Grecophone community, or is it simply a matter of personal taste?
Aristoklh you do have a strange (for my taste) sense of humour and I am glad to see that you assume a degree of familiarity with people you hardly even met (and we’re talking about a “net” aquaintance) that always takes me much longer to.
Hu, I am tired of explaining what’s the relation between MG and AG. Either buy a book about it or study modern Greek too and find out yourself
Kinadius, Caragounis convinced you? I am surprised really since there are quite a few mistakes in his paper.
As for ᾳ, ωυ: We either go Koine like for the first (or in other words simple alpha or pronounce it as alpha and iota. Omega ypsilon are pronounced seperatedly ( I am talking about MG pronunciation in both cases mind you)
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<?xml version="1.0"?>
Helped convince me. I was already leaning in that direction before I came upon his paper, which is how I found it in the first place. In case you’re wondering: no, it wasn’t because I believed his claims that historical linguistics verges on being junk science. 
I just agreed with the idea that a stress-accented MG pronunciation is no worse than a stress-accented English pronunciation, which is what I was contemplating using at the time. (I had already made the decision early on not to use the pitch accent, for various reasons I won’t go into here.)
Interesting. Does this practice vary from speaker to speaker, or is it more or less standard?
But that just doesn’t follow. There are several descendants of Latin, several of which can lay claim to being very close living relatives indeed, and none of them have sound systems much like Latin at all. A lot changes in a language in 2500 years, even with literacy slowing things down.
Palmer I think would be very good. Allen is quite a bit more technical, and could come now or later. Both books bear re-reading, and offer more as you know more.
I think what bernardo was suggesting was using MG to supplement the reconstructed pronunciation where necessary. MG would be the best thing to use for this, though the utility of doing so is (as you mention) limited, particularly in things like prosody where it would be needed the most.
Well, no. That’s what I’m objecting to. If we admit that MG’s sound system is quite different from Ancient Greek’s, why should the MG pronunciation be privileged?
Also, where is supplement necessary? The Ancient Greek sound system isn’t very exotic, actually, and the internal logic of it should be used to fill any missing spots.
Kinadius in general we just despense with the squiggle .
Some of us just like to add it up. When teaching I won’t pronounce it for instance (after explaining all about how it was pronounced obviously) since most of my fellow teachers don’t and it would just confuse kids.
Aristoklhs is half Greek and half Dutch. Dutch is nothing foreign to my ears.
As far as I have read in “Griechischer Lehrgang” the reconstruction doesn’t seem to be complete yet.
But I can’t help thinking two points. One that the erasmians, from the various solutions of a problem, the first they would come up with, would be a “european” solution.
The second is that except for the last 60 years, many european scholars tried to make ancient Greeks appear germanic. They said that they had blond hair, blue eyes etc. Especially Germans wanted to appear as the heirs of the greek civilization as French of the roman. I don’t remember where I got that, maybe it is just an exaggeration, but I don’t think it’s impossible.
So I am asking myself how far could the contemporary linguists separate true from false results.
Alright then. I was mainly thinking about things that aren’t known with a whole lot of certainty, but I can see now how there isn’t any input from living languages needed.
Cool, thanks for the info. 
That would be called bigotry today.
You’re quite right, A. Ever hear of Fallmerayer’s theory on Modern Greek ancestry? According to that dead windbag, Modern Greeks are anything but Greek—the Chinese are even more Greek! Thankfully, modern anthropology and DNA analysis has completetly discredited his theory.
If only they had the smarts, A. Seriously, I had one university professor with a Masters Degree in linguistics ask me once what is the expression for “happy holidays” in Greek. Normally I wouldn’t be taken aback by such a request—except that she had been a teacher of Classical Greek for over 20 years!
Do you have specific critiques of the reconstructed pronunciation? Because anxiety-causing insinuations of a Germanic conspiracy don’t naturally lead to phonological understanding. At least not for me.
I never insinuate anything. And I don’t believe in conspiracies of any kind.
I just say that linguists are human beings as well and they must be affected by their surroundings.
PS: I am an electrical engineering student.