HANDBOOK OF THEMODERNGREEKVERNACULARHANDBOOKOF THEMODERNGREEKVERNACULARGRAMMAR,TEXTS, GLOSSARYBYALBERT-THUMBPROFESSOR OF COMPARATIVE PHILOLOGY IN STRASSBURG UNIVERSITYSOMETIME PROFESSOR IN THE UNIVERSITYOFMARBURGTRANSLATEDFROMTHESECONDIMPROVEDANDENLARGEDGERMANEDITIONBVS. ANGUS, M.A., Ph.D.> > J > > ;Edinburgh: T. & T. CLARK, 38 George Street1912PrintedbyMorrison&GibbLimitedFORT. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGHLONDON: SIMPKIN, MARSHALL,HAMILTON, KENT,ANDCO. LIMITEDNEWYORK: CHARLESSCRIBNER'S SONS- '^c* e*^--'TOGEORGE N. HATZIDAKISINSiNCERESTFriendship248515FOREWORD TO THEENGLISHEDITION.I HAVE been repeatedly approached from the English sidewith regard to a translation of myModern Greek Handbook.English-speaking scliolars are of course sufficiently familiarwith theGerman language to consult Germanworks in theoriginal. Butas there is alarge numberof English-speakingstudents who cannot do this, and as, besides, it is easier tomaster a foreign language in a grammar written in one'smother-tongue, I have been verypleased to give myconsentwhenMessrs. T. &T. Clark of Edinburgh desired to arrangefor a translation of the second edition of my Handbook,which was recently published and considerably enlarged.Thetranslation gives the text of the German original with-out alteration, except that afew slips have been removedpartly dueto the translator's accuracy.I desire to express mysincere thanks to Dr. S. Angusfor the carefully executed translation ; he has performed histask with great ability andwith a perfect understanding ofthe subject.Mywish is that mybook, which has gained friends inits German form, may secure new friends in its Englishdress andcontribute to anincreasedanddeepened knowledgeof Modern Greek among English-speaking scholars andstudents.A. THUMB.Strassburg,January1912.TRANSLATOR'SNOTE.'^^^Professoe Thumb's Forewords render any further wordsfromthe TransLator unnecessary. The need for such a bookas the present has been growingly felt in the English-speaking world. The works on Modern Greek with whichthe English student is familiar deal either exclusively or forthe most part with the Ka6apevov(7a, the "Atticizing"learned language of the present day. Nofair account is tohandof the modernvernacular, which reflects the chequeredhistory of the Greekpeople,and is alone the true descendantof the ancient language. It is not too much to claim thatthis book is the first in English to supplythewant,andassuch mustprove welcome to the teachersandstudents of theGreek language. Professor Thumb's aim is to be practicalin twoways,first, to present a satisfactory account of thelatest phase of Greek to those Hellenistswhoare convincedthat theymustpassbeyond the classical and the Hellenisticperiods for the study of a living language withanunbrokenhistory of three thousand years; and, secondly, to furnishaTextbook of the modern Greek vernacular for beginners,as evidenced by the division into Grammar, Texts, andGlossary.Finally, the Translator has much pleasure in placingbefore English readers the Handbook which he used inProfessor Thumb'sownModernGreekclass in Marburg.S. A.Edinburgh,February1912.FOREWORDTOTHE FIRST GERMANEDITION.Thepast century witnessed the publication ofmodernGreekgrammars in large numbers. This output correspondsin a certain measure to the sympathy which, during thedifferent decades of the century, Europe bestowed uponmodernGreece. Weshall find thatthenumberofgrammars,pocket-dictionaries, elementary text-books increased in thoseperiods in which the Greeks to a special degree attractedthe eyes of Europe,so that the mere statistics of publishingfirms could furnish an exact index of the interest of theWest in the people of Greece; and, if we are to trust ourindex, this interest appears to havegrownmoreintense againduring the past lustrum. But notwithstanding the enor-mous output in this field, only a small proportion is ofpractical service, not a single one of the existing helps beingadequate to therequirementswhich science imposes evenonagrammarwhichprofesses to serve only a practical purpose.Indeed, one sometimes receives even the unpleasant impres-sion that the book in his hand is a work"made to order,"owing its existence solely to the speculation of the book-selling trade. The peculiar literary conditions of Greececontribute partly to this lack of really serviceable helps.Theterm"modern Greek," as is well known,designates twoforms of languagefirst, the living languagespokenby thepeopleand split up into numerous dialects or patois, whichformaloneproperly deserves thenameof modernGreek;and,secondly, the literary language, the Kadapevovaa, i.e."purespeech," which is a literary and learned revival of the moreor less modernised ancient Greek common language,and istherefore a product of art by no means of recent date, butthe result of the written usage of centuries reaching backxiiFOREWORD TO THE FIRST GERMAN EDITIONbeyond Byzantine days. The extent to which this stereo-typed form of ancient Greek admitted and still admitsmodernelementsborrowed fromthe popular languagevariednot only in different times, but still varies also accordingto author and locality. The majority of modern Greekgrammarshave this in common, that theypresent neither theone nor the other form of language exclusively, but selectas a working basis either the learned language or the ver-nacularwithout confining themselves further strictly to thestandard chosen. Those who prefer the literary languageare in themajority: ordinarily this form is taughtin suchawayas if it were /carefo;^?;v"the Greek language of thepresent day." And yet this literary complexion is not ex-clusively the dominantone even in the province of artisticliterature, while lyrical and epic poetry belong almostentirely to the vernacular, which continues also to gaingroundin otherdepartments(comedyand narrative).A combined account of both forms of the languagesuffers fromwantof clearness, quite apart from the fact thatin mostcases the vernacular in this way is denied fair treat-ment. Mitsotakis^so far has best succeeded in treatingboth together; but he, like all the others, displays a lack ofthe training in philology necessary to do justice to the morerigorous scientific demands: he also lacks the necessary dis-criminationof the essential distinction between the popularand the literary language. The former is by no meanssatisfactorily treated, and in his grammar appears but toofaintly as a pronounced independent form of language. Theonlyelementary grammar of recent date which has essayedthe task of presenting the popular language is that of Wied.^This little volume, the popularity of which is attested bytheimmediate appearance of a second edition, is to be highlycommended to the beginner for a rapid introductory sketchof themodernGreekvernacular; but certainly thosewhotryto gain from it a complete knowledgeof the copious popularliterature of modern Greece,or to become acquainted with*Mitsotakis, PraJctische Grammatikder neugriechischenSchrift-und Urn-gangssprache. Stuttgart and Berlin, 1891 (Speniann). xii and 260pp.(12Marks).Cf.myreviewintheDeutscheLiteraturzcifAing, 1893, col. 235f.2Wied, Die Kunst, die neugricchische VolkHS2rracheditrch Selhstunterrichtschnell und leicht zu lernen. Vienna: Ilartleben, inthe scries"KunstderPolyglotten," pt. xi. (2 Maiks).FOREWORD TO THE FIRST GERMAN EDITIONxiiithe structure of the speech of thecommon people, will soonbe disappointed. There exists no text-book that can supplyreliable andto someextentample information uponthe factsof the modern Greek popular language. An adequatetext-bookshould be expectednot only to introduce every scholarto anunderstanding of the abundant treasures of the modernGreek national and vernacular literature, but also to makethe linguist and the philologist familiar with the principleof the growth of the language. To fill this breach is theobject ofmyHandbook.I havealready in a separate brochure^pointed out thatthe vernacular,andnot the literary, language should be firstlearned, together with the reasons for this view. Torepeatbriefly : thosewhoare familiar with ancient Greek andthenlearn the modern vernacular possess all that is essentialto understand the modern Greek literary language; whilethosewhodo notknowancient Greek will nevergain a cleargrasp of the linguistic conditions of Greek literature of thepresent time. MyGrammaris not intended for readerswhoare complete strangers to ancient Greek. Nevertheless, Ihave fully adopted the standpoint of modern Greek: for adescriptive grammarand such mine professes primarily tobemust treat a language only in its own light. It is, onthe other hand, a confusing anachronism in a grammar ofmodernGreek to lay down rules, e.g., on the longandshortvowels and77,o and w, orfor the"diphthongs"at, ot, ei,, orfor the spiritus asper, the circumflexandacute accents, whichpossess no longer any meaning for the language of the-present day, enjoying only a conventional existence in writ-ing. The grammars of modern Greek with which I amfamiliar are simply drawnup on the model of ancient Greek,,because the authors for lack of proper scientific knowledgeof the languagewerenot aware of thewide gulfbetween the-ancient Greek orthography and the form of the presentlanguage. It is in the departmentof"phonetics," or ratherin that of"characters," that our grammars betray this un-fortunate habit most glaringly and senselessly; but evenmorphology cannot escape being crushed into this Pro-crustean bed to such an extent that its harmony and^Die neugriecJii'che Sprache wid Hire Erlernung: Beilage to AUgemeincZeitung, Aug.6, 1891.XIVFOREWORD TO THE FIRST GERMANEDITIONsymmetry are quite obscured. Thus, e.g., declension istreated according to the scheme of ancient Greek types ofdeclension, that which is specifically modern Greek beingattached as an accidental patch. Descriptive grammardemands, on the contrary,"that homogeneous phenomenashould be grouped. But the criterion of what is to beregarded as homogeneous must not be sought in antiquityor in etymology, but in the ever-living genius of the lan-guage."^ My classification of modern Greek declensionsatisfies, I believe, this requirement by treatingandbringingtogetherundera uniform point of view those elements which,in the consciousness of those who speak the language, falltogether into groups, and consequently formally react uponone another. Deffner's,- as also Psichari's,^ proposed classi-fication of the declension forms appears to meless lucid thanthat which I have adopted. I myself have, however, onlycarried into effect a suggestion put forward by W. Meyer-Ltibke in his commentary on the grammarof Simon Fortius(p.125)a suggestion which he himself did not eitherfollow up or carry out in his own classification of modernGreek declensions(p.118). On the classification of verbstherecan exist no doubt since the appearance of Hatzidakis'finearticle"iiber diePriisensbildungimNeugriechischen,"^inwhich the formation of the present stemand its relation tothe aoristare clearlystated. Forthebenefitof thosewholiketo play with the term"practical," and who, in no waytroubled with exact knowledge,regard"scientific"and"un-practical"as almostsynonymousideas,letmeremarkthattheclassificationof the contents of a language basedupon itsowninner laws facilitates theacquiring of alanguagemorethan agrammarthat presents the languageonsome external model.I neednot specially emphasisethat I havenotattemptedan exhaustive account of the treasures of modern Greek,asis clear from the concise compass of my Grammar. But,notwithstanding, it contains considerably more than othergrammarsof greater size, and is above all a grammarof the^G. V. d. Gabelentz, DieSpraehwissenschaft(Leipzig,1891), p.92.2In his review of Legrand's Grammar, Jcnaer Literaturzcitung,1879,p.302.^Psichari, EssaisdeOrammairehistoriqueneogrecque, i. 88(Paris, 1886).*Kuhn's Zeitschrift/.vergl.Sprachf. xxvii.p.69 ff., and Einl. in dieiieugriech, Grammatik(Leipzig,1892),p.390ff.FOREWORD TO THE FIRST GERMAN EDITION XVvernacular Greek"KoLvrj" Theexistence of acommonanduniform type of the"popular speech"(Volkssprache) is, ofcourse, denied by some, it being maintained rather thatbeside the affected archaic written language there exist onlydialects. The latter assertion I dispute, and I maintainthatwearejustified in speaking of amodernGreek"Koivrj"the language of the folk-songs in the form in which theyare usually published being nomore a specific dialect thanthattype of language of such popular poets as Christopulos,Drosinis, Palamas,and many others, can be dubbed dialect.Aperfectuniformity is admittedly not yet to be found, forjust as sometimes on the one hand equally correct, i.e.equally wide-spread, forms occur side by side, so on theother many poets (as, e.g., Vilaras) manifest a marked pro-pensity for dialect elements;yet in spite of all this wemayspeak of the "vernacular" in contrast to the dialects.Manyfolk-songs in the course of extensive diffusion, passingfromplace to place, must have had their dialectic peculiari-ties reduced to a minimum, so that by a quite spontaneousprocess a certain average speech resulted. Quite recentlyPothr]^ has also made a similar assertion, guided, however,more by instinct than by any scientific sense, and conse-quentlyhe has overshot themarkin disputing absolutely theexistence of dialects.^ This average popular speechwhichreadily arises particularly in the larger centresserves asameans of communication which is intelligible not only inPatras, Athens,andConstantinople, but also in the country.The collection of Texts served me as a guide for thelimitation of my material : the less common (or dialectic)phenomenaare in general only treated so far as theyoccurin these texts. Thestudent will thereforenotexpect to find,e.g., the Greekdialects of LowerItaly or those of Pontustosay nothing of Zaconiangiven in any exhaustive manner.I haveexceeded the dialect material contained in the Textsonlywhensome linguistic phenomena of special interestonmoregeneral grounds {e.g. the history of the language) calledfor attention. Of course, such a selection remains alwaysmore or less subjective and influenced by the personal^Poi5i7s, Ta EiSwXa. VXidaaiKT] fieKeTq (Athens,1893), p.180ff. It wasnaturallyaneasy matter for Hatzidakis to refute the"scientific"groundsofPotSijs'thesis; cf.'Adrjva, vii. 224tf.xviFOREWORD TO THE FIRST GERMAN EDITIONequation. I considered ifc imperative to cite patoisphenomena not only to produce an approximately correctconception of the diversity of patois, but also efficiently tofacilitate the study of modern Greek popular literature.When, however, either in Granwiar or Glossary, T mentiona definite region (e.g. Naxos, Velvendos, Cyprus) as exhibitingcertain philological points, it is not to be understood thatthese occur onh/ in those regions : such particulars, givengenerally in connection with the texts, mean nomorethanthat aformor usage is locally restricted.Inthe explanatorynotes on the history of the languageI confined myself to a selection of material on the sameprinciples on which I made a selection from the dialectmaterial. The relations between the ancient Greek formsand those of modern Greek are referred to in their salientcharacteristics. Myobject was to sketch in general outlinetheirinnerconnection as the established result of the investi-gationuponmodernGreekof thepresent time,and toputthereaderon the right track, rather than to explain in detail allthe separate linguistic points. Thosewho possess a scientificknowledge of philology will, with the aid of mydirections,experience no difficulty in explainingmanya detail. Iaimedespecially at presentinga clear account of the preservation orthedisappearance of ancient, as wellas the rise of new,types.Afurther consideration was to safeguard thosewhoapproachthe study of modern Greek against such misconceptions ashavebeen really exploded for science through the indefatig-able exertions of Hatzidakis, but whichmisconceptions unfor-tunately still haunt the brains of unscientific dilettanti. Inordernot to frustrate my main objectto produce a text-book of the modern Greek vernacularI have avoided thecitation of scientific apparatus (literature, discussions, etc.),.and have restricted to the smallest possible compass theemployment of philological terminologyexcept the mostcommongrammatical terms. The beginner will do well onthe first reading to omit the section on Phonetics togetherwith the notes and to go through the conjugation of theverbs before paragraphs 140-164[175-212 of thenewedition]. Theannotationson dialect peculiarities will some-times be best impressed on his mind by the reading of thetexts. Letmerefer thosewhoseek information on the aims^FOREWORD TO THE FIRST GERMAN EDITIONxviimethod,and tasks of investigation in modern Greek tomylittlebook,DieneugriechisclieSprache(Freiburg, 1892,36pp.),Vwhich will serve as an introduction to the present Grammar.Theolder as well as the more recent literature upon thissubject will be found collected there and in my reviews intheAnzeigerderIndogermanischenForschungen, as also in thefirst part of G. Meyer'sNeugriechisclie Studien}It is almost superfluous to remark how much I haveprofited bythe successful labours bestowed upon investiga-tion in modernGreekphilology during the past fifteen years.First in importance come the achievements of Hatzidakis,the fruits of which,as I hope, are apparent in this Grammar.Another work which I have frequently consulted with thegreatest profit should also be gratefully acknowledged, viz.thecommentaryof W. Meyer (Llibke)^on the grammarofy^Simon Fortius. This commentaryis the solitaryattempt tofurnish a brief but comprehensive account of the results ofmodernGreekphilology. Its association with SimonFortiuswas a happy thought. His grammar (although of theseventeenth century) not only compares favourably for aclear grasp of the materialwiththe modernGreekgrammarsof the past century,butsurpassesthemin scientific spirit.The Texts, the requirements of which were constantlykeptin view in the Grammar, offer a selection of pieces ofpoetryandprose from the vernacular, and from that sectionof the artistic literature which is based uponthe vernacular.That the latter is more or less affected by the literarylanguagewill appearfroma rapid comparisonbetweenFartI.andFart 11. of the Texts. Inthe Grammaror the GlossaryI have drawn attention to those elements of the literarylanguage which formally betray themselves as such (andwhicharenotaltogether wanting in Part I. of the Texts) inorder topreventanydoubt as to whatisgenuinelyvernacular.TheTable of Contentsgives the sourceswhence I have takenmytexts. Frommyown collections I admitted three pieces^G. Meyer, NeugriechisclieStudien. I. "Versuch einerBibliographiederneugriech. MundsLYteiiforsclnrng";Sitzungsherichte der Wiener AkademiederWissenschaft. Phil.-hist. Kl. cxxx.(1894).^Simon Fortius, Grammatica linguae Graecae viUgaris. Reproduction de/"I'edition de 1638, suivie d'un commentnire grammatical et historique parWilhelmMeyer. With anIntroduction byJ. Psichari, Paris,1889, Yieweg;Iviand256pp.xviiiFOREWOED TO THE FIRST GERMAN EDITIONtogether with a distich; of these I have already pubhshedIII. 4 elsewhere, while I. d. 7 and III. 13 (b) are inedita.Unfortunately no specially superior or authentic editionswere at my command for the selections horn, some of thepoets, still no real disadvantage can have, I believe, resulted.Ingeneral, I retaiued the texts in the form in whichtheywere found in the editions which I used, in somecases withthe alteration or addition of the headings. In purely ortho-graphical matters which in no wayaffect the pronunciation(so especially in regard to vowels) the orthographyadoptedin theGrammar is systematically carried out. In the firstpart Ihavetaken the liberty to makesomeother alterationsi.e. corrections, thus, e.g., in the case of final v, in order topresentthe normally correct popular form in harmonywithmy Grammar. I have, however, in this respect practisedconsiderablecaution{e.g. I. a. 21,whereformslikeavy-^oiprjrd,earcoaavare borrowedfrom the ecclesiastical language). Inthe Texts of the artistic literature the orthography of theliterary language is retained in cases like a6instead of err,ktfor %T, v8 for vr, final v, etc., if suchwerefoundinmycopy;theGrammarwill be found to furnish adequate informationupon these deviations from the vernacular language andorthography. In the text of Psichari (II. b.1)the author'sorthographyremains absolutely unaltered, so as to present atthesame time a sample of his proposals toward reform oforthography. Myselection of texts wasdeterminednotonlybythelanguage itself, but also byhavingin consideration thehistory of literature and culture; on these principles theattempts toward the creation of a popular prose, or thoseselections which reflect wide-spread literary tendencies inmodern Greek dress, are inserted; and, again, the admissionof Eangavis' song (II. a. 14) was determined by its affinitywith the ballad literature(cf.I. a. 4).Thebrief biographicaldates for the poets will prove useful to fix their place andtime; unfortunately I was not able to ascertain the datesfor 'I. Tv7raXBo