Greek Accent and Quantity

Greek Accent and Quantity

The work explores the distinction between accent and quantity in the context of Greek language and verse recitation. It posits that while ancient Greeks recognized this distinction, everyday speech was primarily governed by accent rather than the length of syllables. The author argues that it is impractical to separate the two in spoken language, as both tone and duration are intertwined in natural conversation. The text critiques the notion that accent marks were solely for teaching pronunciation, suggesting that the length of syllables should also have been indicated. It raises questions about the inconsistency in marking quantity, especially in words where the penultimate syllable's length is not visually represented. The author references the modern Greek practice of conflating accent and quantity, labeling it a historical barbarism that reflects a shift in pronunciation over time. The discussion includes references to ancient authorities, such as Dionysius of Halicarnassus, who made nuanced distinctions in syllable length while asserting that the essence of speech differs from musical recitation only in the number of tones used. Anecdotes about Demosthenes illustrate the sensitivity of Athenian audiences to accent in prose, highlighting the importance of correct pronunciation in public oratory. The work ultimately argues for a more integrated understanding of accent and quantity, suggesting that both elements are crucial for accurate pronunciation and comprehension in the Greek language. It challenges existing theories that prioritize one over the other, advocating for a holistic approach to the study of Greek phonetics and prosody.

By Samuel Taylor Coleridge · First published 1895 · Genre: Linguistics, Philology, Classical Studies · 1,081 words

First lines

The distinction between accent and quantity is clear, and was, no doubt, observed by the ancients in the recitation of verse. But I believe such recitation to have been always an artificial thing, and that the common conversation was entirely regulated by accent. I do not think it possible to _talk_ any language without confounding the quantity of syllables with their high or low tones[1]; although you may _sing_ or _recitative_ the difference well enough. Why should the marks of accent have been considered exclusively necessary for teaching the pronunciation to the Asiatic or African Hellenist, if the knowledge of the acuted syllable did not also carry the stress of time with it? If _[Greek: **anthropos]_ was to be pronounced in common conversation with a perceptible distinction of the length of the penultima as well as of the elevation of the antepenultima, why was not that long quantity also marked? It was surely as important an ingredient in the pronunciation as the accent. And although the letter omega might in such a word show the quantity, yet what do you say to such words as [Greek: lelonchasi, tupsasa], and the like -- the quantity of the penultima of which is not marked to the eye at all? Besides, can we altogether disregard the practice of the modern Greeks? Their confusion of accent and quantity in verse is of course a barbarism, though a very old one, as the _versus politici_ of John Tzetzes [2] in the twelfth century and the Anacreontics prefixed to Proclus will show; but these very examples prove _a fortiori_ what the common pronunciation in prose then was.

What this Textopian page supports

Greek Accent and Quantity is listed on Textopian as an essay by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, dated 1895 CE.

This source record anchors work identity, reading entry points, and catalog context for checking claims about the work.

Good citation fit

Similar titles

Genres

Tags

Greek language · accent · quantity · poetry · prosody · linguistics · recitation · pronunciation · ancient Greece · literary analysis · Coleridge · classical studies

More by Samuel Taylor Coleridge