Koine Greek
Koine Greek () refers to the forms of the
Greek language used in post-classical antiquity (c.300 BC " AD 300). Other names are
Alexandrian,
Hellenistic,
Common or
New Testament Greek. Koine Greek is not only important to the history of the Greeks for being their first common dialect and main ancestor of
Demotic Greek. It is also significant for its impact on
Western Civilization as a
lingua franca for the Mediterranean. Koine also was the original language of the
New Testament of the
Christian Bible as well as the medium for the teaching and spreading of
Christianity. Koine Greek was unofficially a first or second language in the
Roman Empire.
Koine Greek started taking shape as a common Greek dialect within the armies of
Alexander the Great. As the allied
Greek states under the leadership of
Macedon conquered and colonised the known world, their newly formed common dialect was spoken from
Egypt to the fringes of
India. Even though Koine Greek was shaped during the late
Classic Era, the symbolic starting point of the second period of the Greek language (known as
Post-Classic) is set at the death of Alexander the Great and the beginning of the
Hellenistic era in 323 BC. The closing of
Post-Classic Greek and the passage into the next period of the
Greek language, which is known as
Medieval Greek, is symbolically assigned at the foundation of
Constantinople by
Constantine the Great in AD 330. In that respect, the
Post-Classic period of Greek refers to the creation and evolution of Koine Greek throughout the entire
Hellenistic and
Roman eras of
Greek history until the start of the Middle Ages.
Koine (), which is Greek for "Common", is a term that had been previously applied by ancient scholars to several forms of Greek speech. A school of scholars such as
Apollonius Dyscolus and
Aelius Herodianus maintained the term
Koine to refer to the
Proto-Greek language, while others would use it to refer to any vernacular form of Greek speech which deferred to the literary language. When
Koine gradually became a language of literature, some people distinguished it in two forms:
Hellenic (Greek), as the literary
Post-Classic form, and
Koine (common), as the spoken popular form. Others chose to refer to
Koine as the
Alexandrian dialect (""), meaning "the dialect of
Alexandria" (a term often used by modern Classicists).
The linguistic roots of the Common Greek dialect had been unclear since ancient times. During the
Hellenistic age, most scholars thought of Koine as the result of the mixture of the four main
Ancient Greek dialects, "" (the composition of the Four). This view was supported in the early 19th century by
Austrian linguist P. Kretschmer in his book "Die Entstehung der Koine" (1901), while the
German scholar Wilamowitz and the
French linguist
Antoine Meillet, based on the intense
Attic-Ionic elements of Koine - such as instead of () - considered Koine to be a simplified form of
Ionic. The final answer that is academically accepted today was given by the
Greek linguist G. N. Hatzidakis, who proved that, despite the "composition of the Four", the "stable nucleus" of Koine Greek is
Attic. In other words, Koine Greek can be regarded as the result of the admixture of the three
Ancient Greek dialects
and Attic. The degree of importance of the non-Attic linguistic elements on Koine can vary depending on the region of the Hellenistic World. In that respect, the idioms of Koine spoken in the
Ionian colonies of
Asia Minor and
Cyprus would have more intense
Ionic characteristics than others. The literary Koine of the Hellenistic age resembles Attic in such a degree that it is often mentioned as
Common Attic.
The first scholars who studied Koine, both in Alexandrian and contemporary times, were classicists whose prototype had been the literary
Attic language of the Classic period, and would frown upon on any other kind of
Hellenic speech. Koine Greek was therefore considered a decayed form of Greek that was not worthy of attention. The reconsideration on the historical and linguistic importance of Koine Greek began only in the early
nineteenth century, where renowned scholars conducted series of studies on the evolution of Koine throughout the entire
Hellenistic and Roman period that it covered. The sources used on the studies of Koine have been numerous and of unequal reliability. The most significant ones, are the inscriptions of the Post-Classic periods and the
papyri, for being two kinds of texts that have authentic content and can be studied directly. Other significant sources are the
Septuagint, the Greek translation of the
Old Testament, and the
New Testament. The teaching of the Testaments was aimed at the most common people, and for that reason they use the most popular language of the era. Information can also be drained from some
Atticist scholars of the
Hellenistic and Roman periods, who, in order to fight the evolution of the language, published works which compared the supposedly "correct"
Attic against the "wrong" Koine by citing examples. For example Phrynichus Arabius during the second century AD wrote:
* .
**
"Basilissa (Queen), none of the Ancients said, but
Basileia or
Basilis".
* .
**
"Dioria (deadline), badly illiteral, instead use
Prothesmia".
* .
**
"Pantote (always) do not say, but
Ekastote and
Dia pantos".
Other sources can be based on random findings such as inscriptions on vases written by popular painters, mistakes made by
Atticists due to their imperfect knowledge of pure
Attic, or even some surviving Greco-Latin glossaries of the Roman period [
1], e.g:
* " - Bono die, venisti?" (Good day, you came?).
* " - Si vis, veni mecum." (If you want, come with us).
* " - Ubi?" (Where?).
* " - Ad amicum nostrum Lucium." (To our friend Lucius).
* " - Quid enim habet?" (What does he have?"What is it with him?).
* " - Aegrotat." (He's sick).
Finally, a very important source of information on the ancient Koine Greek is the
Modern Greek language with all its dialects and its
Koine form and idioms, which have preserved most of the ancient language's oral linguistic details that the written tradition has lost. For example the
Pontic and
Cappadocian dialects preserved the ancient pronunciation of etc), while the
Tsakonic preserved the long α instead of η ( etc) and the other local characteristics of
Laconic. Idioms from the Southern part of the Greek-speaking regions (Dodecanese,
Cyprus etc), preserve the pronunciation of the double similar consonants (), while others pronounce in many words υ as ου or preserve ancient double forms ( etc). Linguistic phenomena like the above imply that those characteristics survived within Koine, which in turn had countless idiomatic variations in the Greek-speaking world.
The study of all sources from the six centuries that are symbolically covered by Koine reveals linguistic changes from
Ancient Greek on phonology, morphology, syntax, vocabulary and other elements of the spoken language. Most new forms start off as rare and gradually become more frequent until they are established. From the linguistic changes that took place in Koine, Greek gained such a resemblance with its
Medieval and
Modern successors that almost all characteristics of
Modern Greek can be traced in the surviving texts of Koine. As most of the changes between
Modern and
Ancient Greek were introduced with Koine, today
Modern and Koine Greek are almost mutually intelligible.
Phonology
Koine Greek is phonologically a transition period: at the start of the period, the language was virtually identical to Classical Ancient Greek, whereas in the end the language had phonologically a lot more in common with Modern Greek than Ancient Greek.
The three most significant changes during this period were the loss of vowel length distinction, the substitution of the pitch accent system with a stress accent system, and the monophtongalization of most diphtongs.
Remember that the diachronic descriptions below are reconstructions. One big caveat is the fact that at a given time, locutors from different places or background could have different pronunciation.
Loss of vowel quantity distinction
The ancient distinction between long and short vowels was gradually lost, so that all vowels became isochronic.
The date of this transition is discussed by scholars. From the 2nd century BC, errors in non-literary Egyptian papyri suggest stress accent and loss of vowel length distinction, but it may be a peculiarity of Egyptian speech
[Allen, Vox Graeca, page 94, note 9.], all the more since non-native speakers of Greek were more likely to discard tonal accent and vowel length if their native language did not feature them. The widespread confusion between and in Attic inscriptions starting in the 2nd century AD may be caused by a loss of vowel length distinction, but might be caused by a mere loss of vowel quality distinction, too
[Allen, op. cit., page 94.].
However, for phonological reasons, this transition is likely to be linked to the transition to stress accent and therefore to have occurred by the 3rd century AD
[Allen, op. cit., page 94.].
Transition to stress accent
The means of accenting words changed from
pitch to
stress, meaning that the accented syllable is not pronounced in a musical tone but louder and/or stronger.
The date of this transition is discussed by scholars. From the 2nd century BC, errors in non-literary Egyptian papyri suggest stress accent and loss of vowel length distinction, but as already noted above it may be a peculiarity of Egyptian speech. More evidence of stress accent appears in poetry starting from the late 2nd century AD " early 3rd century AD
[Allen, op. cit., page 130.].
Diphtongs
=Pseudo-diphtongs
=
Before consonant, diphtong had started to become monophtongal in Attic as early as the 6th century BC, and pronounced like , probably as []. From the late 4th century BC in Attic, pseudo-diphtong (now notating both etymological and etymological ) came to be pronounced like , probably as [] (with the
quality that the
digraph still has in modern Greek)
[Allen, op. cit., page 69"72. Diphthong had already merged with in the 5th century BC in regions such as Argos or in the 4th c. BC in Corinth (e.g. ) (Reference missing). It was also the case in Boeotia in the early 4th century BC (Allen, op. cit., page 74).].
Before vowel, diphtong did not follow the same evolution as pre-consonantic
[Allen, op. cit., page 72"73.]. One theory to explain this difference is that pre-vocalic may have kept a diphtongal value [] until the 4th century BC, the [] being progressively perceived as a glide from [] to the next voyel
[This perceived glide would explain why, in the 5th and 4th centuries BC in Attic, though there was no pre-vocalic that may have been confused with, was often written as ; indeed, while the confusion seems to have ceased after the 4th century BC, several etymological pre-vocalic remain in altered form in Koine Greek. Such a perceived glide may actually be even older, since in Homeric verses etymological pre-vocalic is often written either as a short or a long . Allen, op. cit., page 83"84.]. From the late 4th century BC, pre-vocalic diphtong came to be confused with , which implies that, unlike before consonant, it conserved a value of [], with probably a loss of openness distinction with
[Allen, op. cit., page 72"73.]; for later evolution, refer to below.
Starting from the 6th century in Attic, diphthong had been monophtongalized and confused with . While its initial value had probably been [], it must have evolved to [] quite early (possibly in the 6th century BC, and at any rate before 350 BC); this later value was preserved through modern times, as far as vowel quality is concerned
[Allen, op. cit.'', page 75"78.].
=Short-first-element diphtongs
=
Diphtong must have kept a diphtongal value until Roman times, as it is transcribed as æ in Latin, and Latin æ is transcribed as , too
[Allen, op. cit., page 79.]. At a later date, diphtong probably evolved to a [], as it had earlier in Boetian
[Boeotian spelling of for (e.g. , , (Reference missing)) indicates that the transition of to [] had taken place in Boeotian but not in Attic in the early 4th century BC (Allen, op. cit., page 74).]; the confusion between and starting from c. 125 AD in Attic suggests that this transition took place in the early 2nd century AD in Attic
[Allen, op. cit., page 79.]. The transition to [] (i.e. loss of openness distinction with ) is thought to have taken place later, because while both and are confused with , is not confused with
[Allen, op. cit., page 79. The transition would then have taken place after the transition of to []/[] was over in mainstream Greek, that is to say no earlier than the early Middle Ages. The author of these lines has not found any information on the topic of whether the transition may have happened earlier in certain contexts or for locutors of certain backgrounds or not.].
Diphthong was monophtongalized as [] or [] (depending on when the loss of vowel length distinction took place)
[with possible intermediate states [] and []], which is attested by a spelling for found in a text dated from early 2nd century AD and another from c. 240 AD
[Diphtong was spelt as in Boeotia as early as the 3rd century BC, but it was most probably a dialectal trait. Allen, op. cit., page 81.]. (Look up note on evolution of for subsequent evolution.)
Koine Greek initially seems to feature diphtong , which had been progressively monophtongalized to [] (written for ) in Attic from the 6th century BC to the 4th century BC but retained in other Greek dialects
[Allen, op. cit., page 81, note 54.]. It was later monophtongalized as [] or [] (depending on when the loss of vowel length distinction took place). I have not found any reference on when this change took place, but this transition may be phonologically linked to, and at any rate is quite unlikely to have taken place after, the similar transition of to []/[]. (Look up note on evolution of for subsequent evolution.)
=Short-first-element diphtongs
=
It is mostly unknown when diphthongs and lost their ancient value of [] and [] and acquired their modern pronunciation of [] and [] (partially
assimilated to [], [] before
voiceless consonants , , , , , , , , and )
[An intermediate stage [] and [] has been proposed by some. (Reference missing)]. Jewish catacombs inscriptions still show a diphtongal value in the 2nd"3rd century AD, so this transition may be a late development
[Allen, op. cit., page 80, note 47.]. This development may be connected to the change of from [] to [], but the date of this transition is unkown as well
[Allen, op. cit., page 80.].
=Long-first-element diphtongs
=
Diphtong
[note that the subscript notation is medieval, the is adscript in ancient texts where it appears] had started to become monophtongal in Attic at least as early as the 4th century BC as it was often written and probably pronounced []. In Koine Greek, most were therefore subjected to the same evolution as other classical [] and came to be pronounced []. However, in some inflexional endings (mostly 1st declension dative singular and subjonctive 3S), the evolution was partially reverted from c. 200 BC, probably by analogy of forms of other cases/persons, to and was probably pronounced [] at first (look up note on evolution of for subsequent evolution)
[Allen, op. cit., page 85"86.].
Other long-first-element diphthongs ( and
[once again, the subscript notation is medieval] became monophtongal by the 2nd century BC, as they were written and
[Allen, op. cit., page 86. However, when augmented from in verbs, diphtong had been altered to instead (Allen, op. cit., page 87, note 70).]; the former was probably pronounced [], while the later may have been pronounced [] at first if openness distinction had not been lost yet, and was eventually pronounced [] at any rate (look up discussion of single vowels and below for details).
=Long-first-element diphtongs
=
When augmented from in verbs, diphtong had been altered to from the 4th century BC
[Allen, op. cit., page 87, note 70.].
Other long-first-element diphtongs (, and ) had become monophtongal from the 1st century BC, as they were written as , and
[Allen, op. cit., page 87.]; the first was probably pronounced [], while the two later may have been pronounced [] and [] at first if openness distinction had not been lost yet ([] and [] otherwise), and were eventually pronounced [] and [] at any rate (look up discussions of single vowels and and single vowel below for details).
Single vowel quality
Apart from , simple vowels have better preserved their ancient pronunciation than diphtongs.
As noted above, at the start of the Koine Greek period, pseudo-diphtong before consonant had a value of [], whereas pseudo-diphtong had a value of []; these vowel qualities have remained unchanged through Modern Greek. Diphtong before vowel had been generally monophtongalized to a value of [] and confused with , thus sharing later developments of .
The quality of vowels , and have remained unchanged through Modern Greek, as [], [] and [].
Vowels and started to be regularly confused in Attic inscriptions starting in the 2nd century AD, which may indicate that the quality distinction was lost around this time. However, this may as well indicate the loss of length distinction, with an earlier or simultaneous loss of quality distinction. Indeed, the fact that some less systematic confusion is found in Attic inscriptions from the 4th century BC may alternatively point to a loss of openness distinction in the 4th century BC, and the systematization of the confusion in the 2nd century AD would then have been caused by the loss of length distinction
[Allen, op. cit., page 94.].
The quality distinction between and may have been lost in Attic in the late 4th century AD, when pre-consonantic pseudo-diphtong started to be confused with and pre-vocalic diphtong with
[Allen, op. cit., page 73. This evolution had probably happened by the early 4th century AD in Boeotian but definitively not in Attic, as shown by e.g. Boeotian vs Attic (Allen, op. cit., page 74).]. C. 150 AD, Attic inscriptions started confusing and , indicating the appearance of a [] or [] (depending on when the loss of vowel length distinction took place) pronunciation that is still in usage in standard Modern Greek; however, it seems that some locutors retained the []/[] pronunciation for some time, as Attic inscriptions continued to parallely confuse and , and transcriptions into Gothic and, to some extent, old Armenian transcribe as e
[Allen, op. cit., page 74"75.].
Koine Greek adopted for vowel the pronunciation [] of Ionic-Attic. Confusion of with appears in Egyptian papyri from the 2nd century AD, suggesting a pronunciation of [], but this is probably a regional trait
[Allen, op. cit., page 68.]. Transcriptions into Gothic and, to some extent, Armenian suggest that still retained a [] pronunciation, and the transition to [] in mainstream Greek is thought to have taken place at the end of the 1st millennium
[Allen, op. cit., page 68. Allen, op. cit., page 68, note 14.].
Loss of aspirate
The aspirate breathing (
aspiration), which was already lost in the
Ionic idioms of
Asia Minor and the
Aeolic of
Lesbos [Reference missing.], later stopped being pronounced in Koine Greek. Transcriptions into foreign languages and consonant changes before aspirate testify that this transition must not have occurred before the 2nd century AD, but transcriptions into Gothic show that it was at least well under way in the 4th century AD
[Allen, op. cit., page 53.].
Consonants
Among consonants, only , , and are certain to have changed from Classical Greek. Consonants , , (and, with lesser probability, ) may have changed, too, but there is no clear evidence of this in the Koine Greek period.
Consonant , which had most probably a value of [] in Classical Attic and at least some other dialects
[Allen, op. cit., page 56. Allen, op. cit., page 58, note 115.], acquired the sound [] that it still has in Modern Greek, seemingly with a geminate pronunciation [] at least between vowels. Attic inscriptions suggest that this pronunciation was already common by the end of the 4th century
[Allen, op. cit., page 58.].
Digraph is much more frequent than Attic in Koine Greek
[Allen, op. cit., page 13"14.].
Consonants , , which were initially pronounced as
aspirates [] and [], developed into fricatives []
[An intermediate stage of has been proposed by some, but there is no specific evidence support this (Allen, op. cit., page 25).] and []. On the other hand, there is no specific evidence of the transition of consonant from aspirate [] to fricative []/[] in the Koine Greek period. There is evidence for fricative in Laconian in the 5th century
[e.g. Aristophanes , l. 214, for . Allen, op. cit., page 26.], but this is unlikely to have influenced Koine Greek which is largely based on Ionic-Attic. The first clear evidence for fricative and in Koine Greek dates from the 1st century AD in Pompeian inscriptions
[Particularly meaningful is lasfe found for . Allen, op. cit., page 23.]. Jewish catacomb inscriptions of the 2nd"3rd century AD suggest a pronunciation of [] for , [] for and [] for , which would testify that the transition of to affricate was not yet general at this time, and suggests that the transition of to affricate may have happened before the transition of and
[Allen, op. cit., page 24.]. Armenian transcriptions transcribe as [] until the 10th century AD, so it seems that was pronounced as aspirate by at least some locutors until then
[Allen, op. cit., page 25.].
It is not known with accuracy when consonants , and , which were originally pronounced as [], [], [], acquired the value of []
[An intermediate stage of [] has been proposed by some. (Reference missing)], [] and [] that they have in Modern Greek
[except when preceded by a nasal consonant (μ, ν); in that case, they retain their ancient sounds (e.g. γαμβρός " [], άνδρας " [], άγγελος " [])]. Though some evidence of fricative after a front vowel go as far back as the 4th century BC, it does not seem to have been a standard pronunciation, and it is not known if modern pronunciation derives from this
[Allen, op. cit., page 31"32.]. Ancient grammarians describe the plosive nature of these letters, is transcribed as b, not v, in Latin, and Cicero still seems to identify with Latin b
[Allen, op. cit., page 31.]. Evidence from non-literary papyri suggests a fricative pronunciation in some contexts (mostly intervocalic) from about the 1st century AD; however, it may be a dialectal trait, possibly caused by foreign influences through non-native speakers
[Allen, op. cit., page 32, note 46.]. The first evidence of a fricative value in mainstream Greek is the fact that cyrillic в, part of an alphabet developed in the 9th century AD, has a value of []
[Allen, op. cit., page 32]. It is not before the 10th century AD that transcriptions of as fricative v or as voiced velar l are found in Armenian, which suggests that the transition took place at the end of the 1st millennium, but previous transcriptions may have been learned transcriptions
[Allen, op. cit., page 32, note 45.].
"Biblical Koine" refers to the varieties of Koine Greek used in the Christian Bible and related texts. Its main sources are:
* the
Septuagint, a 3rd century B.C. Greek translation of the
Hebrew Bible, which includes the
Deuterocanonical books, a series of books that were not part of the Hebrew scriptures but considered part of the Bible by Greek-speaking Jews of the era, and later accepted as part of the
Old Testament by
Christians. Most of the texts are translations, but there are some portions and texts composed in
Greek. Sirach, for instance, has been found in Hebrew, but the additions to Daniel are almost certainly composed in Greek;
* the
New Testament, composed originally in Greek (although some books may have had a Hebrew-Aramaic substrate and contain some Semitic influence on the language).
There has been some debate to what degree Biblical Greek represents the mainstream of contemporary spoken Koine and to what extent it contains specifically
Semitic substratum features. These could have been induced either through the practice of translating closely from
Hebrew or
Aramaic originals, or through the influence of the regional non-standard Greek spoken by the originally Aramaic-speaking Jews. Some of the features discussed in this context are the Septuagint's normative absence of the particles μεν and δε, and the use of εγενετο to denote "it came to pass." Some features of Biblical Greek that are thought to have originally been non-standard elements eventually found their way into the main of the Greek language.
''Note: The phonetic transcriptions aim to represent an intermediate stage during the evolution of Greek phonology from
Ancient to Hellenistic.
#
And so it happened, after Alexander (son) of Philip the Macedonian, he came out of the land of Cethim, and smote Darius ruler of Persians and Medes, and reigned in his stead as the ruler of Greece.#
And he waged many wars, conquered strongholds and slew Kings of the Earth.#
And he went to the edges of the Earth and received the spoils of many nations, and the Earth went quiet before him, and his heart was risen and lifted up.#
And he gathered strength and power, and he conquered countries of nations and tyrants, and they all became his subjects.#
And after all of these, he fell down upon his bed, and he knew that he was meant to die.#
And he summoned his noble servants that were brought up with him in youth, and he divided his Kingdom between them while he was still alive.#
And Alexander ruled for twelve years, and he died.#
And his servants ruled in his stead, each in his own place.#
And they all took crowned themselves after his death, and so did their sons after them for many years, and evils were increased on the earth.#
And out of them came an evil offspring, Antiochus the Illustrious, son of King Antiochus, who had been a hostage in Rome, and ruled in the hundred and thirty-seventh year of the kingdom of the Greeks.:
'Our Father, the [One] in the heavens, let Your name be regarded as holy.'
'Let Your kingdom come; let Your will be done, as in heaven, [so] also on the earth.'
'Give us today the bread sufficient for the day.'
'And forgive us our debts [fig., sins], in the same way as _we_ also forgive our debtors [fig., the ones having sinned against us].'
'And do not lead us into temptation, _but_ deliver us from evil [or, from the evil
one.'
'Because Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory into the ages [fig., forever]!'
'So be it'
[Translation from www.e-sword.net.]Transcription in Post-Classic pronunciation as used by the
Greek Orthodox Church:
Pater imon, o en tis ouranis, aghiasthito to onoma sou;:eltheto i basilia sou; ghenithito to thelima sou, os en ourano, ke epi tis ghis;:ton arton imon ton epiousion dos imin simeron;:ke afes imin ta ofilimata imon, os ke imis afiemen tis ofiletes imon;:ke mi isenengis imas is pirasmon, ala rise imas apo tou ponirou.:Oti sou estin i basilia, ke i dunamis, ke i doksa is tous eonas;:amin.
With English translation from the
Book of Common Prayer:
I believe in one God, the Father Almighty Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible: :
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by Whom all things were made: :
Who for us men and for our salvation came down from Heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man::
And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; he suffered and was buried::
And the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures::
And ascended into Heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father::
And he shall come again, with glory, to judge both the quick and the dead: Whose Kingdom will have no end::
And I believe in the Holy Ghost the Lord, and Giver of Life, Who proceedeth from the Father (
and the Son) Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, Who spake by the Prophets.:
And I believe in One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church,:
I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins.:
And I look for the Resurrection of the Dead::
And the Life of the world to come.:
Amen.
* Abel, F.-M.
Grammaire du grec biblique* Andriotis, Nikolaos P.
History of the Greek language* Smyth, Herbert Weir,
Greek Grammar, Harvard University Press, 1956. ISBN 0-674-36250-0
* Cornybeare, F.C, and Stock, St. George.
Grammar of Septuagint Greek: With Selected Readings, Vocabularies, and Updated Indexes* Allen, W. Sidney,
Vox Graeca: a guide to the pronunciation of classical Greek " 3rd ed., Cambridge University Press, 1987. ISBN 0-521-33555-8
