Papers of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens — 4.1885-1886

Seite: 270
Zitierlink: i
http://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/ascsapapers1885_1886/0285
Lizenz: Creative Commons - Namensnennung - Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen Nutzung / Bestellung
0.5
1 cm
facsimile
270

J. McKEEN LEWIS,

of all Attic inscriptions of the fourth century, we might well find that
stonecutters had, in the absence of any orthographic standard, here
and there written o-KeX.r> and o-KeA.ee for o-Ke'Ae, just as they wrote
XoAA^St?? for XoXXySrji, and 'AAaiees for 'AArnJs. As it is, however, in
view of the unparalleled elaborateness of the Greek vowel-system, the
comparative infrequency of such errors bears witness to the mar-
vellous accuracy of the Attic ear.

It is thus evident from the interchangeableness of e, et, with e, ee, 77,
in the fourth century, that e was not changed, in pronunciation as in
writing, to et, but that, conversely, the diphthong must have become
simplified until its symbol could represent both sounds. This degra-
dation began earlier, and was more quickly consummated, where et
was followed by a vowel — a well-known instance is the word 8u>pad,
later Attic Sojpeu.1 This change is only a manifestation of one of the
most important laws of Attic speech, — that law by which a semi-
vocal t is avoided through the dropping of t between almost any pair
of vowels. As et before vowels becomes e at a very early date,2 so
words like cAata, kA<xiu>, Iletpatevs, crrota, 7rotet, vto's, yeyovuto, lose their

l by the best Attic usage. The same principle is observed in all
erases where final t occurs, as in Ka/xoi, ov-ixwpwi, ^JSt™?, rrjKKX-qirLi^
twttlovti? But the degradation of diphthongal et, independently of
this law, is illustrated by the equal corruption of -qi to et or e during
the fourth century.

Confusion of rji with e and et. Not long after the year of Eucleides,
and simultaneously with the falling together of e and et, the diphthong
7)i becomes interchangeable with these. After 375, such forms as
7rdA?7 for 71-oA.et, f3ov\d for f3ov\fj, grow frequent; for rjpeOr/ is found

with e. Probably the dual of ti6Xis in Attic was Tr6\e (7r<iAei); if ir6hr) arose by
contraction, its parent form was not Tr6\ee, but 7roA?je.

1 Older and newer forms are sometimes found side by side, as Supelav, Swptav,
II. I b (circa Eucl. arm.), Upias, tepeias, 573 b (circa 350?) ; the difference in these
•cases is, of course, merely orthographic, et and e standing alike for a simple closed
^-sound. Cf. Meisterh., p. 19 and notes.

2 Cf. Alvea, I. 478 (sixth century); TleAeaTat, 230 (450), AiVecurat, 234 (446);
Te'Aeoj, IV. 3 (before 444); Neaj/Spea, I. 240 (440); BpvAAeauot, 247 (432);
'AAanre/tee?, 184 (412); 'AvSpea, 324 (408); Trpvrayeov twice, II. I b (c. Eucl. ann.),
iepea, IV. 553 a, 3 (fourth century).

3 So there is every reason to write in Attic rovTuii, ixetvoi, etc., in place of
the unpronounceable tovtou, Ixeivoit
loading ...