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

104 on greek versification in inscriptions.

Sy?iizesis of ea :

/3acnA.eas ( =/3acriXetas), pent., 768 (Xanth. iv).

AlokXem, cxxh (Phars. v).

[AioJxAea, Fick, )

2 " > same: neither certain.

[MevejKXia, Cauer,)

MeyaxAe'a, 860 (Chios iv-ii).

With this last compare fiaaiXrj, pent., 846 (Arg. iv), and 'Epfjaovrj,
pent., 926 (Herm. iii).

Synizesis of iw, wv: only in epigrams of the clumsier sort.
'Ao-K(A.)a7riLO)]i, xcvi (Epid. vi-v).

Kvrrpiov tov, 188 (Aeg. v).
4 ~ 5

SaAa/xivi'ou, same.

Aiovvo-lov tSiv, 66 (Att. Mac).

4 ~ 5

Tlv6 twv, 26 (Att. iv).
On the possibility of KaXX(a, cxxiv, see p. 76.1

Other cases: all doubtful.

Xqp(") ra(v)Se (ko-o-ta-te'), lxxviii (Cypriote) ; see p. 77.
vy<s, 760 (Att. v) : but see p. 55. us, contracted, occurs xi.
vlos as monosyllable, 778, is utterly improbable : see p. 46.

Significant, as regards the pronunciation of these combinations,
are the fifth example of to, and the second of ecu. It is clear that
£o was a long syllable, consequently that e was not consonantized.2
The sound intended was diphthongal, and cannot have differed much
from that elsewhere expressed by ev. That -ecu, on the other hand
(and perhaps even -cut: see p. 103 near bottom), can be shortened
before a vowel, bears on cases like xpvo-twi dm a-Kr/TrTpuiL (A 15),
and is easiest understood if .we suppose a consonantal <r.

Synizesis between words will be treated under Crasis.

1 Compare QeiSias XapptSov vlbs 'Atomics p.' iiro'triae, Paus. v, IO, 2.

2 Compare ' ApiaTotyavtos oiiKtrt _v/ w--w —), Pind. Nem. iii. 35.