By being both an Attic and a conservative Koine system, the Alexandrian System respects the centrality of classical Athens while also acknowledging the need for broader applicability – the very concerns which drove the formation of Koine in the first place.
Introduction to the Alexandrian System
This article presents a system for the pronunciation of Ancient Greek, called the “Alexandrian Koine System,” which is designed for readers focusing primarily on works written before 150 BC.
The Alexandrian Koine System is a system of both Attic and Koine pronunciation. Koine Greek came into existence when “the Macedonian kings, in search of a ‘civilization’ to underpin their growing military and political power,…established the study of classical Greek literature, much of it literary Attic, as a central plank of their educational system and adopted contemporary Great Attic as their own official language of state” (Horrocks 2014: 80). The dialect of ancient Greek spread by Alexander the Great, which became the Greek of the Hellenistic kingdoms, more or less was Attic Greek (see Horrocks (2014: 82 ff.) for the differences). Moreover, in Ptolemaic Egypt, the royal court at Alexandria maintained a highly conservative pronunciation – more conservative even than Athens (Horrocks 2014: 166). An Alexandrian Koine pronunciation system, therefore, is appropriate for Classical Athens as well.
Key Features
- An ultra-conservative and a majority variant, in which ῃ = the diphthong [eːi] 1 and [iː], respectively.
- ει = [iː] except pre-vocally, where it is [eː]. υι is a diphthong [yi] (approx.), as it was in pre-4th-century BC Attica, but may optionally be monophthonized into [yː].
- The ι element of the long diphthongs ᾳ and ῳ are pronounced.
- Aspirated φ, θ, and χ, rather than the later fricative sounds of Modern Greek.
- Velarization and labialization of ν at the end of words when followed by initial velars and labials (e.g. ἐμ πόλει for ἐν πόλει)
- Phonemic vowel length is preserved, and pitch accent is encouraged.
- Follows the sounds of Reconstructed Attic (as presented by Allen and Threatte) as much as possible.
- No need to worry about “spurious” v.s. “non-spurious” diphthongs, a distinction irrelevant after 350 B.C (Threatte 180: 299).
The preference for an Alexandrian pronunciation rather than an early 4th century BC Athenian system is partially an acknowledgement of the role of the Alexandrians in textual transmission. According to Marrou, “it was only in the generation following Aristotle and Alexander the Great that education assumed its classical and definitive form; thereafter it underwent no substantial change” (1956: 137). It was in this period, in Alexandria especially, that canonization (e.g. the “Ten Attic Orators”) took place. And thereafter, it was in Alexandria that old books – including official copies “borrowed” from Athens and elsewhere- were copied and even stolen for the library (Barnes 2004: 65). According to Graham Shipley, “the library [of Alexandria] became the main source of reliable texts of authors such as Homer, who were increasingly acknowledged to be classics” (2000: 240).
But the preference for an Alexandrian pronunciation is also a recognition of the need for a system to be broadly applicable. Attic pronunciation underwent many changes during the classical period from 500-350 B.C. (especially if one follows Theodorsson’s (1974) reconstructions), such that one using Attic pronunciation(s) accurate to the time of authorship would require a slightly different pronunciation for Aeschylus, Xenophon, and Aristotle. This problem is only compounded if one also wishes to read non-Attic texts, such as Homer, Sappho, and Herodotus, both because their pronunciations differed substantially from 5th century B.C. Attic and, more importantly, because our MSS and texts likely tell us more about how the Alexandrians would have pronounced their words than the authors themselves (see Horrocks (2014: 62-63 ff.), “we may be quite sure that the markings of initial aspiration [in Herodotus] is purely editorial, not only because eastern Ionic was psilotic but because there is no trace of the aspirate in compounds”). Only the most narrowly focused of classics scholars could plausibly use a historical pronunciation accurate to the time of authorship of his focus; anyone who reads more broadly needs an alternative solution.
I propose the Alexandrian Koine System as the alternative. First, the Alexandrian System is an Attic system – especially in its conservative variety. Secondly, the Alexandrian system is a broadly applicable historical pronunciation system, which achieves its breath of applicability by reconstructing the pronunciation of the readers of classical Greek texts who were alive when the texts first became the cornerstone of western literature. Effectively, the preference for an Attic pronunciation accurate to Aristotle and Demosthenes rather than Sophocles or Xenophon allows one to use the same historically valid pronunciation system to read all texts from Homer to Polybius – including the Septuagint. By being both an Attic and a conservative Koine system, the Alexandrian System respects the centrality of classical Athens while also acknowledging the need for broader applicability – the very concerns which drove the formation of Koine in the first place.
Effectively, the preference for an Attic pronunciation accurate to Aristotle and Demosthenes rather than Sophocles or Xenophon allows one to use the same historically valid pronunciation system to read all texts from Homer to Polybius – including the Septuagint.
This system won’t be appropriate for everybody. For example, those focused on the New Testament, the Apostolic Fathers, or Roman period texts, should consider my Caesarian System. Further, teachers might reasonably prefer to continue with an Erasmian system for the sake of instructional ease. But for those whose primary interests lie with Greek texts from Homer to about 150 BC, and who have a special interest in Attic and Hellenistic literature, I submit that my Alexandrian System might be most appropriate.
The System1
| Grapheme | IPA Representation (w/ links to audio) | “As in…” (Approx.) | Evidence |
| α | [a], [aː] | father | Dionysius of Halicarnassus De Compositione Verborum, xiv [born 60 B.C.], “Again, of the long vowels themselves the most euphonious is α, when prolonged; for it is pronounced with the mouth open to the fullest extent, and with the breath forced upwards to the palate.” “The openness of the long vowel is expressly mentioned by Dionysius of Halicarnassus (De Comp. xiv, pg. 51 UR), but there is no evidence for many marked difference of quality between the long and the short; for both lengths α represents and is represented by Latin a in transcriptions” (Allen 1987: 62-3). |
| β | [b] | boy | Cicero, Ad Familiares. ix. 22. 3, “When we say terni [Lat.: triple] in talking, there is nothing shocking in what we say ; but when we say bini [Lat.: double; Grk.: f***] it is obscene. ‘Yes,’ you will remark, ‘to the Greeks.’…” The β in βινεῖ must therefore have been pronounced the same as the B in the Latin bini. “The grapheme β [for Latin u] becomes common in the second century A.D…Even after 150 A.D. β is never universal” (Threatte 1980: 442). |
| γ | [g] | gold | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De. Comp. xiv. “Of the so-called “voiceless letters,” which are nine in number, three are smooth, three rough, and three between these. The smooth are κ, π, τ; the rough θ, φ, χ; the intermediate, β, γ, δ…The three remaining mutes are spoken with the tongue rising to the palate near the throat, and the windpipe echoing to the breath. These, again, differ in no way from one another as regards formation; but κ is pronounced smoothly, χ roughly, γ moderately and between the two.” [Dionysius’ system of smooth, rough, and intermediate refers to unvoiced and un-aspirated, un-voiced and aspirated, and voiced and un-aspirated consonants, respectively. See Allen (1987: 30).] |
| δ | [d] | dente (Italian) | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De. Comp. xiv. “Of the so-called “voiceless letters,” which are nine in number, three are smooth, three rough, and three between these. The smooth are κ, π, τ; the rough θ, φ, χ; the intermediate, β, γ, δ…The next three are pronounced by the tongue being pressed hard against the extremity of the mouth near the upper teeth, then being blown back by the breath, and affording it an outlet downwards round the teeth. These differ in roughness and smoothness, τ being the smoothest of them, θ the roughest, and δ medial or common.” [Dionysius’ system of smooth, rough, and intermediate refers to unvoiced and un-aspirated, un-voiced and aspirated, and voiced and un-aspirated consonants, respectively. See Allen (1987: 30).] |
| ε | [e] | pet | “There is little evidence to establish positive values for these symbols [η and ει] in classical Attic. That they were different is shown by the fact that they later develop differently, the sound represented by ει soon becoming a close front vowel [ῑ], whereas the sound of η remains for some time in the mid region. These developments further indicate that the sound of ει was always closer than that of η. This situation is reflected in the transcription of Greek words in Latin, where η is represented as ē until a late date, whereas ει is represented by ī, ” Allen (1987: 70). |
| ζ | [zː] | wise (lengthened) | “…the continuation of the [zd] value up to the 5th and early 4th century is indicated by the use of ζ to represent Iranian zd (e.g. Ὠρομαζης [sic.] [Alc. 122a] = Auramazda in Plato, Ἀρταοζος = Artavazda in Xenophon.) Later in the 4c. we begin to find ζ replacing σ used for Iranian ζ, and in Greek inscriptions there begin to be some confusions between Z and σ. This suggests that some time in the 4c. the change to the modern Greek value as [z] was already taking place; indeed it is probably referred to by Aristotle (Met., 993a) when he says that, whereas some people would analyze ζ into σ+δ, others consider it a separate sound which does not comprise already recognized elements. It has been plausibly suggested by G. Nagy that this change does not represent a normal phonetic development but rather a dialectical replacement from the Koine (just as σσ replaced ττ). Such a [z] would presumably have arisen from an earlier [dz], and after short vowels at least the original quantitative pattern is likely to have been preserved by gemination, i.e. [zz]; this is also indicated by its representation as ss in the early Latin borrowing massa = μάζα.” (Allen 1987: 58-9) |
| η | [eː] | pet (lengthened) | “There is little evidence to establish positive values for these symbols [η and ει] in classical Attic. That they were different is shown by the fact that they later develop differently, the sound represented by ει soon becoming a close front vowel [ῑ], whereas the sound of η remains for some time in the mid region. These developments further indicate that the sound of ει was always closer than that of η. This situation is reflected in the transcription of Greek words in Latin, where η is represented as ē until a late date, whereas ει is represented by ī, ” Allen (1987: 70). Teodorsson (1977: 252) “In the Attic inscrr., an interchange of η and ι is attested from A.D. 150 on (MS, 19-20), and η is an alternative representation of /i/ by the second cent. A.D. in Asia Minor (Schweizer, 46-47). An itacistic pronunciation is just beginning to be reflected in the Herc. papp. (Cronert, 25-26)” Gignac (1976: 242). η merges with /i/ around 2nd century A.D (Gignac 1976: 242). |
| θ | [th] | top (But pronounced as a dental rather than an alveolar) | Gignac (1976: 98-101) |
| ι | [i], [iː] | [i] = bit; [iː] = bead | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De Comp., xiv, “Last of all stands ι: for the impact of the breath is on the teeth as the mouth is slightly open and the lips do not clarify the sound.” “There is not strong evidence that the long and short vowels differed in quality, both being close front unrounded; and the narrow opening of the long vowel is expressly mentioned by Dionysius of Halicarnassus” (Allen 1987: 65). |
| κ | [k] | tack | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De Comp., xiv, “Of the so-called “voiceless letters,” which are nine in number, three are smooth, three rough, and three between these. The smooth are κ, π, τ; the rough θ, φ, χ; the intermediate, β, γ, δ. They are severally pronounced as follows: … The three remaining mutes are spoken with the tongue rising to the palate near the throat, and the windpipe echoing to the breath. These, again, differ in no way from one another as regards formation; but κ is pronounced smoothly, χ roughly, γ moderately and between the two.” |
| λ | [l] | like | “There are no useful descriptions of this sound by the grammarians. Dionysius of Halicarnassus simply mentions that it is produced by the tongue and palate, and that, by contrast with ρ, it is soothing to the ear and the sweetest of the continuant sounds (De Comp. xiv, pp. 53 f. UR) But from comparison with cognates in other languages, and from its value in modern Greek, we may safely say that it was a lateral [l] sound,” Allen (1987: 40). |
| μ | [m] | mead | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De Comp., xiv, “They are severally pronounced somewhat as follows:…μ by the mouth being closed tight by means of the lips, while the breath is divided and passes through the nostrils.” |
| ν | [n] | net | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De Comp., xiv, “They are severally pronounced somewhat as follows:…ν by the tongue intercepting the current of the breath, and diverting the sound towards the nostrils.” |
| ξ | [ks] | box | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De Comp., xiv, “The sound of the three remaining semi-voiced letters is of a mixed character, being formed of one of the semi-voiced letters (σ) and three of the voiceless letters (δ, κ and π)…Of the three other letters which are called “double,” ζ falls more pleasurably on the ear than the others. For ξ and ψ give the hiss [of σ] in combination with κ and π respectively, both of which letters are smooth, whereas ζ is softly rippled by the breath and is the noblest of its class. So much with regard to the semi-vowels.” |
| ο | [o] | forense (Italian) | Teodorsson (1977: 150-9, 233-4) |
| π | [p] | top | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De. Comp. xiv, “Of the so-called “voiceless letters,” which are nine in number, three are smooth, three rough, and three between these. The smooth are κ, π, τ; the rough θ, φ, χ; the intermediate, β, γ, δ. They are severally pronounced as follows: three of them (π, θ, β) from the edge of the lips, when the mouth is compressed and the breath, being driven forward from the windpipe, breaks through the obstruction. Among these π is smooth, φ rough, and β comes between the two, being smoother than the latter and rougher than the former.” [Dionysius’ system of smooth, rough, and intermediate refers to unvoiced and un-aspirated, un-voiced and aspirated, and voiced but un-aspirated consonants, respectively. See Allen (1987: 30).] |
| ρ | [r] | [r] as rojo (Spanish) | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De. Comp. xiv, “They [the simple semi-vowels] are severally pronounced somewhat as follows:…ρ by the tip of the tongue sending forth the breath in puffs and rising to the palate near the teeth.” Plato, Cratylus 426e, “…for he observed, I suppose, that the tongue is least at rest and most agitated in pronouncing this letter, and that is probably the reason why he employed it for these words.” Allen (1987:41), “Generally speaking [r] is a voiced sound, but in certain environments in classical Attic it seems to have been voiceless. What we are actually told by the grammarians is that ρ was aspirated at the beginning of a word, and that when a double ρρ occurred in the middle of a word the first element was unaspirated and the second aspirated (e.g. Herodian, I, pp. 546 f. L). These descriptions are followed in the Byzantine practice of writing initial ῥ and medial ῤῥ…” |
| σ | [s], [z] (before β, γ, δ, μ) | [s] = sing; [z] = cosmos | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De. Comp. xiv, “They [simple semi-vowels] are severally pronounced somewhat as follows:…σ by the entire tongue being carried up to the palate and by the breath passing between tongue and palate, and emitting, round about the teeth, a light, thin hissing.” Allen (1987: 45-6) |
| τ | [t] | tale (Italian) | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De Comp., xiv, “Of the so-called “voiceless letters,” which are nine in number, three are smooth, three rough, and three between these. The smooth are κ, π, τ; the rough θ, φ, χ; the intermediate, β, γ, δ. They are severally pronounced as follows: … The next three are pronounced by the tongue being pressed hard against the extremity of the mouth near the upper teeth, then being blown back by the breath, and affording it an outlet downwards round the teeth. These differ in roughness and smoothness, τ being the smoothest of them, θ the roughest, and δ medial or common.” Allen (1987: 16-7) |
| υ | [y], [yː] | tu (French) | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De. Comp. xiv, “Still inferior to this is υ; for, through a marked contraction taking place right round the lips, the sound is strangled and comes out thin.” Allen (1987: 65-9) |
| φ | [ph] | pot | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De. Comp. xiv, “Of the so-called “voiceless letters,” which are nine in number, three are smooth, three rough, and three between these. The smooth are κ, π, τ; the rough θ, φ, χ; the intermediate, β, γ, δ. They are severally pronounced as follows: three of them (π, θ, β) from the edge of the lips, when the mouth is compressed and the breath, being driven forward from the windpipe, breaks through the obstruction. Among these π is smooth, φ rough, and β comes between the two, being smoother than the latter and rougher than the former.” [Dionysius’ system of smooth, rough, and intermediate refers to unvoiced and un-aspirated, un-voiced and aspirated, and voiced but un-aspirated consonants, respectively. See Allen (1987: 30).] Gignac (1976: 98-101) |
| χ | [kh] | cat | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De Comp., xiv, “Of the so-called “voiceless letters,” which are nine in number, three are smooth, three rough, and three between these. The smooth are κ, π, τ; the rough θ, φ, χ; the intermediate, β, γ, δ. They are severally pronounced as follows: … The three remaining mutes are spoken with the tongue rising to the palate near the throat, and the windpipe echoing to the breath. These, again, differ in no way from one another as regards formation; but κ is pronounced smoothly, χ roughly, γ moderately and between the two.” Gignac (1976: 98-101) |
| ψ | [ps] | lapse | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De Comp., xiv, “The sound of the three remaining semi-voiced letters is of a mixed character, being formed of one of the semi-voiced letters (σ) and three of the voiceless letters (δ, κ and π)…Of the three other letters which are called “double,” ζ falls more pleasurably on the ear than the others. For ξ and ψ give the hiss [of σ] in combination with κ and π respectively, both of which letters are smooth, whereas ζ is softly rippled by the breath and is the noblest of its class. So much with regard to the semi-vowels.” |
| ω | [oː] | Cambodia (General American English) | Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De Comp., xiv, “Third [of the long vowels] comes ω: in pronouncing this the mouth is rounded, the lips are contracted, and the impact of the breath is on the edge of the mouth.” Teodorsson (1977: 150-9, 233-4) |
| – | |||
| αι | [ai] (diphthong) | high | Transcriptions into and out of Latin, e.g. Καίσαρ (Caesar) and Aegyptus. αι eventually monophthongizes into [e], seemingly as a consequence of the collapse of quantitative vowel distinctions. Threatte (1980: 294-99) Gignac (1976: 192-93) |
| αυ | [au] (diphthong) | how | Teodorsson (1977: 230-1) “[D]iphthongs in Greek cannot strictly be distinguished as ‘short’ or ‘long’; for accentual purposes they all have the same value of 2 morae (time-units), as for a long simple vowel” (Allen 1987: 85). As a consequence, while the so-called “long diphthongs” will have the same time-value as regular long vowels and diphthongs, the relative proportion of the elements will shift to roughly a 2:1 ratio. |
| ᾱυ | [aːu] (diphthong) | how | “May be pronounced as αυ…with little ambiguity” (Allen 1987: 88). |
| ευ | [eu] (diphthong) | europeo (Spanish) | Teodorsson (1977: 229-30) |
| ηυ | [eːu] (diphthong) | europeo (Spanish) | “[D]iphthongs in Greek cannot strictly be distinguished as ‘short’ or ‘long’; for accentual purposes they all have the same value of 2 morae (time-units), as for a long simple vowel” (Allen 1987: 85). As a consequence, while the so-called “long diphthongs” will have the same time-value as regular long vowels and diphthongs, the relative proportion of the elements will shift to roughly a 2:1 ratio. “May be pronounced as…ευ with little ambiguity” (Allen 1987: 88). |
| οι | [oi] (diphthong) | coin | Teodorsson (1977: 227-9) |
| υι | [yi] (diphthong; approx.) / [yː](Atticizing var.) | huit (French) | There isn’t sufficient evidence to prove that υι was pronounced as anything other than a diphthong by the majority in Ptolemaic Egypt (Teodorsson 1977: 227). In Attica, however, υι had completely monophthongized into [yː] by the 4th century B.C. (Threatte 1980: 338). This pronunciation was, according to Herodian, seen as especially Attic: “υἱὸς καὶ φυιός, ταῦτα δὲ οἱ Ἀττικοὶ ἄνευ τοῦ ι γράφουσιν” (ibid., 376). Modern speakers with a strong penchant for Atticism may nonetheless monophthonize, for “small groups of speakers [in Ptolemaic Egypt] may have had a monophthongal pronunciation, above all perhaps in the 3rd century (Teodorsson 1977: 227). |
| ωυ | [οːu] | owe | Teodorsson (1977: 150-9, 233-4) “[D]iphthongs in Greek cannot strictly be distinguished as ‘short’ or ‘long’; for accentual purposes they all have the same value of 2 morae (time-units), as for a long simple vowel” (Allen 1987: 85). As a consequence, while the so-called “long diphthongs” will have the same time-value as regular long vowels and diphthongs, the relative proportion of the elements will shift to roughly a 2:1 ratio. |
| – | |||
| ᾳ | [αːi] | high | “[D]iphthongs in Greek cannot strictly be distinguished as ‘short’ or ‘long’; for accentual purposes they all have the same value of 2 morae (time-units), as for a long simple vowel” (Allen 1987: 85). As a consequence, while the so-called “long diphthongs” will have the same time-value as regular long vowels and diphthongs, the relative proportion of the elements will shift to roughly a 2:1 ratio. |
| ῳ | [oːi] | coin | “[D]iphthongs in Greek cannot strictly be distinguished as ‘short’ or ‘long’; for accentual purposes they all have the same value of 2 morae (time-units), as for a long simple vowel” (Allen 1987: 85). As a consequence, while the so-called “long diphthongs” will have the same time-value as regular long vowels and diphthongs, the relative proportion of the elements will shift to roughly a 2:1 ratio. |
| – | |||
| ει | [iː] (before consonants or word-boundary), [eː] (before vowels) | [iː] = beat; [eː] = pet (lengthened) | ει before consonants or word-boundaries is pronounced the same as ῑ or ῃ. ει before vowels is pronounced the same as η. ει is a digraph, not the diphthong [eːi]. According to Allen (1987: 70), “The development of ει to [iː] is revealed by occasional confusion between ει and ι from the late 4 c. B.C., becoming common in the 3 c.” |
| ῃ | [iː] / [eːi] (conservative var.) | [iː] = beat; [eːi] = hay | ῃ is pronounced the same as ῑ and non-prevocalic ει. Modern speakers with a strong penchant for conservative Attic may also pronounce ῃ as [eːi], for which there is some evidence, and which corresponds with the pre-4th century B.C. value of Attic ῃ (Teodorsson 1977: 222). Teodorsson (1974: 286-99), whose analysis probably gives too much weight to progressive variants, holds that ῃ = [i] by 350 B.C in Attica. Allen (1987:86) more conservatively argues that it became [iː] around the beginning of the 3rd century B.C. |
| ου | [uː] | ooze | |
| – | |||
| γγ | [ŋg] | angle | |
| γκ | [ŋk] | anchor | |
| γξ | [ŋks] | sphinx | |
| νχ, γχ | [ŋkh] | anchor (with aspiration) |
Other features
- νγ, νκ, νξ, νχ = γγ, γκ, γξ, γχ should apply across word-boundaries (e.g. τὸγ γραμματέα for τὸν γραμματέα) (see Allen (1987: 34) & Threatte (1980: 616-636).)
- νβ, νπ, νφ = μβ, μπ, μφ should apply across word-boundaries (e.g. ἐμ πόλει for ἐν πόλει) (see Allen (1987:33-4) & Threatte (1980:616-636).)
- Pitch accentuation should be attempted to the best of the speaker’s ability, but can be emphasized (less desirably) with stress. If the speaker cannot produce an accurate pitch accent at all, a stress accent can be used, provided that proper vowel lengths are maintained. (English speakers erroneously tend to lengthen stressed syllables.)
- Vowel quantity should be preserved as diligently as possible.
- The rough breathing mark (῾) = [h] was probably only gently pronounced in pre-450 B.C. Attic, but confounding variables (e.g. adoption of the Ionic writing system) complication the evaluation of the progression of its loss (Threatte 1980: 494). Nonetheless, it was “progressively lost during the period of the Koine” (Horrocks 2014: 171). I recommend pronouncing it at the beginning of clauses, but either pronouncing it more lightly or omitting it altogether mid-clause.
Bibliography
Allen, W.S. (1987) Vox Graeca, Cambridge.
Barnes, Robert (2004) “Cloistered Bookworms in the Chicken-Coop of the Muses: The Ancient Library of Alexandria,” in R. Macleod (ed.) (2004) The Library of Alexandria: Center of Learning in the Ancient World, London.
Gignac, Francis T. (1976) A Grammar of the Greek Papyri of the Roman and Byzantine Periods: Vol. 1 Phonology, Milan.
Horrocks, Geoffrey (2014) Greek: A History of the Language and its Speakers, Oxford.
Marrou, H.I. (1956) A History of Education in Antiquity, New York.
Ruijgh, C.J. (1978) Review of S.-T. Teodorsson (1974) in Mnemosyne 31, 79-89.
Shipley, Graham (2000) The Greek World: After Alexander, London.
Teodorsson, S.-T. (1974) The Phonemic System of the Attic Dialect 400-340 BC, Göteborg.
Teodorsson, S.-T. (1977) The Phonology of Ptolemaic Koine, Göteborg.
Threatte, Leslie (1980) The Grammar of Attic Inscriptions I: Phonology, Berlin.
Notes
- Brackets ([ ]) and slashes (/ /) contain information expressed using the International Phonetic Alphabet. Some audio samples – but not most – are of words containing the represented sounds, rather than the sounds themselves. Audio samples only capture appropriate quality, not quantity or aspiration.