How Should Κοινή Greek Be Pronounced?

I’m going to give you two sets of overlapping opinions on this issue, one set you should listen to and then my own set.

This post is aiming mostly for the person who has no opinions on the issue, and was only dimly aware that opinions existed. You need to know there’s disagreement, and you need to have a basic grasp of why that is.

An Accredited Opinion

For a fully accredited opinion, let’s turn to trained linguist, long-time Greek teacher, published grammarian, and author of an excellent first-year grammar, the late Rod Decker:

The pronunciation of Greek in its various historical stages is debated by scholars. Several proposals have been made. This textbook provides two choices. One is a form of what is called Erasmian pronunciation. This is usually selected for its pedagogical value, not for historical purposes. Some form of Erasmian pronunciation is fairly standard in academic circles. It is not what Greek sounded like in the Koine of the first century, but it has the pedagogical advantage of distinguishing vowel sounds, many of which have similar pronunciations in other systems. Some people think Modern Greek pronunciation should be used to teach Greek, but that is anachronistic and certainly not accurate, though it may be closer to Koine than Erasmian. Others have proposed what is probably a fairly accurate reconstruction of first-century Koine. One of the better-known proposals is Randall Buth’s “Reconstructed Koine” (for further information on this system, including audio material, see his Biblical Language Center). That would be a better option than the modern system, and your teacher may prefer that you use it. If so, see the alternate pronunciation given in chapter 1 along with whatever supplemental materials your teacher may provide.

For students learning to read Koine Greek for academic or ministry purposes, pronunciation is mostly (but not entirely) a convenience. Personally I use a traditional Erasmian system, freely acknowledging that it is not an accurate representation of exactly what Jesus and Paul sounded like when they spoke Greek. If you were learning to speak Greek (either Koine or modern), then pronunciation would obviously be far more important.

Linguists such as Geoffrey Horrocks have done unbelievably detailed work in diachronic linguistics (tracing the form of a language through time) to figure out what the predominant Κοινή pronunciation rules were in given time periods. But Decker basically argues that pedagogical and ministry purposes trump strict accuracy, and I think his advice is sound. That’s a big reason Erasmian pronunciation has stuck around since Erasmus: it has demonstrated its utility, given the church’s most common purposes for learning Greek. Decker contributed to a (pricey) book of essays called Linguist as Pedagogue which deals in greater detail with the issues involved in teaching Greek.

An Overlapping Opinion

Now my idiosyncratic, loosely accredited opinion. By reading on, you agree to the terms and conditions associated with loose idiosyncratic accreditation.

Other things being equal—and they’re not—I would tend to prefer to pronounce μονογενής the way John did and δικαιοσύνη the way Paul did. I think there may be hidden value for textual criticism in the careful study of pronunciation. Just as, to this day, if I produce a typo it’s likely to be a homonym or malapropism of what I meant to say, I believe that some errors of ancient copyists might be more explicable to the amateur textual critic if he or she knew how that copyist pronounced Κοινή.

I also think, though I register Decker’s misgivings (not quoted), that Κοινή Greek should be spoken—or at least read out loud—more often than it is in American classrooms. I think there are hidden benefits for exegesis that come from knowing in one’s bones that Greek Is Not Math.

But there are natural limits to the confidence we can have in the way we’re pronouncing Κοινή. Imagine being a Swahili-speaking scholar in the year 2790, after the Great Conflagration has burned up most English literature. You will be able to provide some answers to the question, “How did English speakers of the 21st century pronounce their O’s and their R’s?” But you may miss out completely on the vocal fry of the Valley girls, the finely articulated drawl of the Charlestonians, and any other kind of dialectical (or idiolectical!) speech that somehow doesn’t survive in archaeological remains.

I applaud those who are resurrecting conversational Κοινή, but at the moment I end up going with my pragmatic American instinct. Erasmian pronunciation makes it easier for English speakers, at least, to learn the language, and there are no native Κοινή speakers around to wince or (as the French are famous for doing) look down their noses at our mistakes. If teaching Κοινή Greek as a spoken language takes off, I’ll be glad to amend my opinion. But for now I’ll stick with the tried, even if we know it’s not true.

Share
Written by
Mark Ward

Christian, husband, father, writer, ultimate frisbee player when possible.

View all articles
47 comments
  • I believe you misused the term synchronic. Horrock’s work, in reality, is a diachronic (a study through history) analysis of the Greek language. Synchronic studies have to do with a particular “slice” in time.

  • It is true that there are “no native Κοινή speakers around,” there are scholars and the clergy in the Orthodox Church who use the Greek language all the time and they most certainly do not use the Erasmian greek but rather what they believe to be the origonal Koinη passed down over the centuries. And how can they be certain? They can’t I suppose but the Orthodox Church uses ‘conversational κοινη’ daily, so within that context I think that is the correct pronunciation. And you are correct, it is more similar to modern greek pronunciation.

    • No doubt Greek in I AD was spoken differently in every city in the Eastern Roman empire, just as English is spoken differently around the world today. In the southern USA I is pronounced Ah. In England you will hear wot for American whut. And Canadians say, “What’s it all aboot.”

      If you have some proof that Greek orthodox speak Koine Greek to each other, I would like to see that proof. I do not believe it.

      • I have studied Classical, Koine, Byzantine, and modern Greek. What I heard at the linked site sounded to me like modern Greek (no rough breathing & use of itacism). I do not believe that either classical or Koine writers generally wrote one way & spoke another (like we do in modern English).

        I don’t know what the author of this article means by “Erasmian.” I am aware that some apparently still hold to a somewhat German pronunciation of ei. And some probably can’t pronounce chi as the ch in Loch or Bach.

  • I am pretty sure that “tracing the form of a language through time” would be diachronic, not synchronic, linguistics.

  • My Greek prof back in the late 70’s introduced the idea of reading the Greek out loud. We did just talk about individual words most of the time because he introduced diagraming as a tool for proper interpretation. I guess we used erasmaian pronunciation but we talked about maybe modern Greek language pronunciation would be better.

  • Greek is NOT a dead language….it is best to learn Greek as the Greeks speak it today(which some years back I chose to learn). Hearing Erasmian Greek pronunciations sounds wierd & strange at best….especially if one understands how Erasmus came up with his errant system. AND because WE HAVE NO AUDIOS of how Koine Greek was spoken at the time…….just because it has been taught that way (incorrectly doesn’t justifying continuing to do so).
    Spirits Zohiates had a great learning system out….not sure if still available.

    • *Κοινή* Greek is dead. Pronouncing it according to modern Greek pronunciation conventions is an option I’ve seen some people go for. But though we can’t know precisely how individual New Testament authors—and the church members who first read their Gospels and letters—pronounced Κοινή words, it seems we can know that the modern Greek option is just as wrong as Erasmian (see Horrocks).

      • Hello,

        My eye caught sight of something intriguing: “ ‘Κοινή’ Greek is dead.” For a moment I felt that 92% of what the average Greek knows or understands of Κοινή today is suddenly gone. I wonder how you arrived at this verdict on Greek. For, if Neohellenic Κοινή, which I thought came directly from the Κοινή of NT times, was born on its own—fatherless, that is—for goodness’ sake, whose genes is today’s Greek carrying?

        I am sure that the death verdict pronounced on Κοινή is based on some scientific findings such as diachronic linguistic comparisons between NT Κοινή and Neohellenic Κοινή entailing vocabulary, grammatical structure, syntax, morphology, semantics, phonology, and orthography. If so, would you kindly provide me with that scientific information?

        Appreciative,

        Phil Zachariou

    • Not sure this is true. Knowing modern English doesn’t help me pronounce old English very well. It doesn’t really help me pronounce modern Scottish or Newfoundland either

  • Thanks. I think you meant diachronic instead of synchronic in the comment about Horrocks.

    • How embarrassing! I’ll return my diploma while I change “synchronic” to “diachronic.” Hopefully they’ll send it back to me once I make the change… =) They can check my dissertation, which uses the correct words.

  • The Modern period of Greek began after Alexander the Great with the influx of new speakers from the easttern territories that were added to the greater Hellenistic world. You know you have an ancient language when the modern period started in 323 BC… Never the less the iotaization of Modern Greek dates to this period. Indeed there is internal evidence in the New testament that Modern pronunciation is closeto what is used by John (and Paul). Jesus in speaking to Nicodemus rhymes! This only works if you know Modern Pronunciation though. Eli and Eloi are pronounced the same in Modern which reconciles the diparity in spelling of the parallel passages. Saying that Koine is dead is misguided. Greek is Greek and there are 10 million seakers still speaking Greek and anyone with a high school education in Greece can read not just the New Testament but also Homer (and as a point of national pride will engage you in acritical discussion of either.) To say Koine is dead is as of the mark as saying the English of Shakespear or King James is dead. It is not dead just a little out of date Indeed there is less difference between Koine and current Greek as there is between King James’ English and current English. If you have someone trained in how to deliver KJV English (like a Shakespearean actor…) it actually sounds quite current (see Alec McCowan’s “The Gospel According to St Mark”.) Same with Modern Greek. Just because you learned it wrong there is no justification for precedence. Erasmus devised a system of pronunciation that was convenient for Latin speakers (Eucharist-not Evcharist etc) But most English words of Greek origin follow Modern pronunciation (Evangelist not Euangelist) Plus if you learn Modern Greek you can use it in Greece and in academic discussions with Greek speakers, even if they are not Greek. Greek is alive and well despite your eulogy (Evlogos) (indeed the Greek words that came through Latin have the Latin pronunciation…) The Erasmian argument is rather moribund though! (Erasmus actually spoke English and lived in England, he lived with his best friend Sir Thomas More!)

  • The Modern period of Greek began after Alexander the Great with the influx of new speakers from the eastern territories that were added to the greater Hellenistic world. You know you have an ancient language when the modern period started in 323 BC… Never the less the iotaization of Modern Greek dates to this period. Indeed there is internal evidence in the New testament that Modern pronunciation is close to what is used by John (and Paul). Jesus in speaking to Nicodemus rhymes! This only works if you know Modern Pronunciation though. Eli and Eloi are pronounced the same in Modern which reconciles the diparity in spelling of the parallel passages. Saying that Koine is dead is misguided. Greek is Greek and there are 10 million speakers still speaking Greek and anyone with a high school education in Greece can read not just the New Testament but also Homer (and as a point of national pride will engage you in a critical discussion of either.) To say Koine is dead is as off the mark as saying the English of Shakespear or King James is dead. It is not dead just a little out of date. Indeed there is less difference between Koine and current Greek as there is between King James’ English and current English. If you have someone trained in how to deliver KJV English (like a Shakespearean actor…) it actually sounds quite current (see Alec McCowan’s “The Gospel According to St Mark”.) Same with Modern Greek. Just because you learned it wrong there is no justification for precedence. Erasmus devised a system of pronunciation that was convenient for Latin speakers (Eucharist-not Evcharist etc) But most English words of Greek origin follow Modern pronunciation (Evangelist not Euangelist) Plus if you learn Modern Greek you can use it in Greece and in academic discussions with Greek speakers, even if they are not Greek. Greek is alive and well despite your eulogy (Evlogos) (indeed the Greek words that came through Latin have the Latin pronunciation…) The Erasmian argument is rather moribund though! (Erasmus actually spoke English and lived in England, he lived with his best friend Sir Thomas More!)

  • Which so called, ‘Erasmian pronunciation’ or rather which variation of the so called ‘Erasmian system’ should we go with? Although, not comprehensive here is a Chart of Major Conventions of the Erasmian Pronunciation( http://www.biblicalgreek.org/links/erasmian.php ) .

    In, university before I took Biblical Greek I tried to get a head start by using the Greek Tutor CD-Rom by Parsons and Dr Ted Hildebrandt. Unfortunately, Dr Ted Hildebrandt used a pronunciation of Erasmian Greek very different from that I would hear in the class room especially in regards to vowels. I was left feeling that Erasmian pronunciation is rather arbitrary. I still wonder what pronunciation did Desiderius Erasmus actually use?

  • I am sure that koine Greek was pronounced differently around the Hellenistic world; perhaps even between Paul and Luke.

  • Purists want ….purity right? Context is everything! Should a variance from such be allowed or accrue……this answer will always “dictate” the preference! Freedom to vary is it’s own judge!

  • “Erasmian punctuation makes it easier for English speakers, at least, to learn the language”. From my own experience, I’d have to respectfully disagree. I learnt Greek first as an undergrad, using Erasmian. It just never really stuck very well, and I didn’t get far with fluency of reading. Having just done it again at seminary some years later, using the reconstructed Koine pronunciation, I have to say I have found it a far better way for getting the language to really stick.

    Because Erasmian is artificial, it will only ever lead to slow and stilted reading aloud. But fluency of reading aloud is pretty key to really internalising the language. It seems to me that Randall Buth has plenty of good evidence for this gleaned from well established second language acquisition studies and practices.

    Yes, the sounds are more foreign to my (British) tongue, but that doesn’t really take long to get over, and the benefits outweigh the cost.

    • This is a valid argument. I’ll have to give it some more thought.

      A couple of my other posts have shown how much sympathy I have for the living-language approach (and more posts are planned on this theme). And you’ve crystallized one big reason why I have that sympathy.

      • I was an Arabic linguist in the United States Army. I was trained at the World renowned Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center in Monterey, CA. After having gone through the Arabic school and obtaining a 3,3,3, language proficiency in only 63 weeks and maintaining it for over 20 years, I can say that proper pronunciation is key. If one breaks done the way that you learn your native language it is through mimicking your parents. One tries to produce the sounds that your parents produce and as your abilities increase your parents correct your language and pronunciation. The lnatibe language always begins with pronunciation and vocabulary. Yet, when second languages are taught they get bogged down in grammer and formality. This is not the way to learn a language. First you must be able to properly pronounce/speak the language and build a vocabulary. Then, you start working on grammer. And the grammer must be eased into with simple sentence structure advancing as your vocabulary grows. Now, here is a question. Do you ever read in your native language without pronouncing the words silently in you mind? Pronunciation is the key to reading a foreign language as well. Likewise, when learning vocabulary, one needs to learn the definition of the word and not just its English equivalent. Do not fall into the one word translation trap. You must fully understand the nuance of the word and its contextual meanings. I studied Latin in high school and was a Worldwide exam 2nd place winner and also placed twice on the National Latin Exam. I am looking forward to learning Koine Greek. I am offering my experience in liguistics learning. I have decided to learn Reconstructed Koine pronunciation.

        • All the arguments you mentioned seemed to support learning Koine Greek as a living language (using the modern pronunciation). Why would you decided to learn the Reconstructed Koine pronunciation?

        • I am enjoying this conversation from the past on day one of my discovery that there is something called Koine Greek. I see your point about how we learn from our parents, but sometimes we learn that we don’t want to say something like our parents and learn to say it differently. My examples are my mother who says “warsh” which my sister and I laughed at, but we both say “y’all” while mom says “you all”. I think internet entertainment has vastly unified English pronunciation and made it more popular worldwide while at the same time expanding English vocabulary with things like Cockney rhyming and saying “aboot” like the Canadians because it’s fun. I still cannot understand Scots English. I say Julius Kaiser defeated the Kelts but watch two Swedish kids who make keramic kirks (churches) on YouTube with slight accents to half of their English words, the rest is just like us Merkans. All this is to say you may never be speaking Koine like an ancient but if you have fun learning/trying… Lastly, my nephew who learned Arabic in the military (Monterey) is writing letters to his friend in Iraq who shows them off to local teachers and clergy who say that an American could not of written it – it’s too good. Peace.

  • For the vast majority of learners, the choice of pronunciation makes no difference. They are using the Grammar-Translation method of learning a language. In that method, Greek is never spoken without a text in front of the student or teacher’s eyes. As long as the pronunciation serves the purpose of cuing my eyes to the correct spot in the text, it serves its purpose.

    Likewise, a teacher who is fully invested in Grammar-Translation methods (such as Decker) should not be taken as an authoritative voice in this realm.

    The comment that Erasmian has some pedagogical value is hard to swallow. The statement could only be defended if we have reduced language acquisition down to the ability to spell.

    Restored Koine pronunciation is not a wild guess, but a reconstruction based on the evidence. In contrast, Erasmus himself knew that he was choosing sounds that were not used by Greeks, but chose them anyway because he wanted a distinct sound for each letter. But all of this is well attested to for anyone who wants to research the topic. Those who are and will use Grammar-Translation methods to learn or teach Greek should not bother to look further. With the text before the eyes continually, you could have a mix of all major pronunciation schemes in the room without any loss of comprehension: Erasmian (with its 3 varieties, Amer, Germ, English), Restored Attic (with its ridiculous tonal reproduction), Modern Greek (with its iotacized υ, οι, ι, ει, και η), or Restored Koine.

    • I’m really listening. This is very good stuff. I’m not sure Internet by-laws allow commenters to make constructive suggestions and posters to listen and learn… You’re supposed to be flaming me and I’m supposed to be deleting you. =)

      I have experience only in the GT method, but good training (I think) in that method has actually led me to be very interested in living language methods—not because I truly know anything about second-language acquisition (though I just did some reading in that area in preparation for another post), but because I’m very much attuned to exegetical fallacies, and I think the GT method sort of naturally tends toward them unless students are inoculated properly. Perhaps I should say this: if you’re going to use GT, I prefer Erasmian.

      As I told another constructive commenter, I’m going to have to process some of the thoughts I’m being presented with. You both managed to say things that hadn’t come up in my reading.

    • Okay, then, a question: have you seen the living language method (or any alternative to grammar-translation) issue in direct value for the church through sound exposition? Like, have you experienced it directly? I’ve seen those trained in the GT method pick up knowledge about exegetical fallacies and still manage to preach and do theology in a way that I take to be sound. I simply don’t know any people trained in other methods, so I don’t know what the end result is.

  • In my opinion the Direct method, Stephen Krashen’s comprehension approach, and the Audio-lingual method are all superior alternatives to the Grammar-Translation method (as well as the stop and parse method) if actually being acquire a foreign language and cognitively internalize that language apart from heavy reliance on one’s mother tongue is the goal.

    • I’m not sure that is the goal… I think that it should be and hold out hope that it can be, but my (not excessively broad) experience suggests to me that cognitive internalization is not what most of my fellow Greek students got out of their training.

      I have often reflected on the fact that I took about the same amount of Greek as I did Spanish, if you measure it in semesters, but I came out of my training with greater reading fluency in Spanish (and certainly greater speaking fluency) than in Greek. I always chalked it up to Spanish’s proximity to English, and to the fact that I was generally reading and saying things from and to a culture not too different from my own—or at least not as different as Paul’s was from my own. But as I’ve grown in my knowledge of language in general, I’ve wondered whether that was an adequate explanation. Perhaps training methods really are to blame. I hesitate to conclude that, though, because my teachers really knew their stuff. They are model practitioners of the exegetical craft.

      • Mark, thank you for your honest and thoughtful reply. It is responses like the above that make me wish there was a thumbs up button at the bottom of each post.

        I have not done any scientific research on this subject, but here are a few of my observations. I have been living in Japan since 2001 and have watched as modern English is(and has been traditionally) taught in public schools using the grammar translation method. More, than a few leave school with a vast knowledge ‘about’ English grammar, can write out English paradigms, and usually diagram a sentence. The purpose in learning all that is be able to pass entrance exams into high schools and colleges here and maybe the Toiec.

        However, despite all of that knowledge the ‘average’ graduate here has trouble understanding vocabulary from context, can not communicate in English, enjoy a movie without subtitles, nor can read a news paper or novel. In short most aren’t able to do anything enjoyable with the language.

        This in turn is why there are a lot of EFL institutions around the country and a few international schools. Now, I fully realize that the goal of most Koine class has nothing (or very little) to do with communication, but I can’t help feeling the similarities between the way Biblical languages are often taught and the way English is taught in Japan.

  • Hi,

    An important discussion here. In my recent “Koine Greek Grammar: A Beginning-Intermediate Exegetic and Pragmatic Handbook” (my apologies for citing myself!), I present the reconstruction of Koine Era Pronunciation (KEP) following Michael Halcomb who is a student of R. Buth. Michael teaches a conversational approach that is found at the Conversational Koine Institute. I provide several reasons for using KEP in ch.2. Among these are 1) Greek is a historical language and should be studied as such; 2) the sounding of the text would have produced aural impact, which was intended, and we ought to do our best to study this impact which would have contributed to mood, atmosphere, and tone. Additionally, in my grammar approach (see this in the Baylor Handbook on 2 Corinthians), I identify marked, emphatic, and prominent constructions. In my mind, I understood authors/writers composing using these constructions. As I have continued to ponder them, however, I began to realize that what may be driving the use of these constructions equally or sometimes primarily is the aural impact of the reoccurring sound patterns–for example, appositional statements often provide overloading of titles/important details of some referent, and do so through repeating the same ending, which produces aural impact. The 2nd attributive position, which I take generally as more marked, repeats the article and often then increases aural impact through the reoccurring sound. I could provide other examples of the intersection of the textual and the oral, and will continue to research and publish on such things (Lord willing!).

    Although pronunciation of Greek was certainly not uniform across the Roman empire, with probably greatest variation occurring with the vowels, monophthongs, and diphthongs, and the stresses of words (cf. British vs. American) (and Doric was still spoken), still, there would have been a homogenizing effect of a broadly used trade language such as Greek was.

    Finally, to illustrate how reconstruction is possible–those reading this post would be interested to see an artifact dated to early 2nd century AD. In my grammar I include dozens and dozens of artifacts, and ran across this wax tablet that I included in Ch.1: https://goo.gl/ILbveq. The teacher has written out a line of verse from Menander, and the pupil has copied it twice. However, the last word was misspelled by them both: πιστευεται rather than the grammatically correct πιστευετε. Why? because -αι and -ε where pronounced the same at this time–“eh.”

    So, KEP is preferred to any form of Erasmian because KEP reflects more likely at least one viable Koine era pronunciation; as such, too, it more naturally rolls off the human tongue than do the Erasmian pronunciations, which were never “living” languages used in conversation in which language speakers naturally use/change the language for communicative efficiency and effect.

    Although I am trusting the reconstruction of others—C. Caragounis, R. Buth, M. Halcomb, it is this sort of evidence that collectively contributes to

    • Hi, let me clarify that Michael Halcomb had taken some classes taught by R. Buth and others, and has learned and teaches a Koine Era Pronunciation informed by much research. So it is not strictly correct to indicate that Michael “is a student…”

  • Some practical considerations worth noting:

    1. So -αι and -ε pronounced as “eh”? But how is “eh” pronounced? One problem I have encountered in teaching Greek has been that no matter which grammar I use or which theory of pronunciation it employs, they all describe the Greek sounds in terms of English letters/words, but my students do not all pronounce the English the same way. So however your text describes the sounds of Greek, unless your students have mastered the International Phonetic Alphabet. it is a bit ambitious to saying that they are learning it just the way that Paul or Peter spoke it.

    2. Yes, new tools and computer programs let us escape the limitations of written English and actually to demonstrate the sounds of Greek for students to hear without us having to be in the same room with them. But not all of my students hear the sounds the same. Some can easily hear to difference between the words “which” and “witch” while others cannot. Likewise, to many of my students, the names “Don” and “Dawn” are homophones, yet they have very distinct pronunciations to me. Now those trained in phonetics can learn to overcome their subconscious phonological systems, but my first year Greek students do not have that advantage.

    3. Does the pronunciation that we use have pedagogical value? From my first day in Congo, as I learned Swahili, I knew how to write every new word that I heard spoken in conversation without having to ask someone how to spell it. That is because every sound in Swahili corresponds to a single written form. But things are different for those learning English. When they hear a word with a very simple pronunciation like “tu,” they not only must ask how to spell it, but they must tell us the sentence that they heard it in before we can tell them whether it is “to,” “two,” or “too.” My point is that the correspondence between a language’s written form and its pronunciation greatly effects how difficult it is to learn to read and write that language. Those who have engaged in Bible translation for pre-literate language groups know how important it is to develop an orthography that is appropriate to the language’s phonological system if they want people to quickly learn to read their new Bibles with understanding. Likewise, a student of Greek may ask “What is the proper form of the Greek word for “believe” in the present active indicative second person singular?” When the teacher replies, “πιστευετε,” will the student, in hearing that answer, know to write “πιστευετε” and not “πιστευεται” or “πhστευετε” or several other homophonic possibilities in modern Greek pronunciation? Please remember, that as teachers of Greek, you have come to know the correct forms so well that you would not even imagine the student making such a mistake, but your new learners do not have that advantage — and they may well never get to that point if they become so discouraged that they stop studying Greek as soon as they can.

    • Mark, good follow up questions and concerns.
      1. Yes, it is unreasonable to expect students to learn the international phonetic system. So, the sounds will most likely need to be mediated through a normalized system, and what better system (although, true, still mediated) than the common tongue, which for your students and mine, is English. Also, it is true that English comes in many flavors (my wife is Canadian, “abouut” which I have “beeeen” subjected to many conversations over proper pronunciation), with most variations being in vowels and monophthongs and sometimes in stress. But, what is a teacher to do? So, perhaps the most important thing is to help students recognize that some vowels and vowel combinations were pronounced very similarly, if not identically, and were sometimes confused in writing. Why is that important? Textual Criticism. Also, these similar sounds become important to discern patterns of alliteration, etc. So, although we cannot be confident that we are exactly speaking like Paul might have beeeen, at least we are much closer than using Erasmian. FYI, in my Greek textbook I provide English words as well as these simplifications like “eh”–but “eh” alone would not be sufficient. So, with epsilon is supplied “mikveh” and for αι is supplied “eh as in said.”
      2. I think that speech and text and text and speech go together when teaching. And it is important to talk about similarities of sounds; this crops up often for textual criticism once again; the “aural” (heard) dimension of the text comes into play here even with a single scribe copying, because he/she would “hear” the words/phrase first when seeing it (hearing in their mind’s ear) and then also “hear” the words/phrase a second time when composing. So, yes, let’s talk about “Don” and “Dawn” and how that might impact how we read/hear/interpret our texts. One of the most enjoyable evenings I have ever had was listening to Kenyan friends from different tribes talk and banter with each other about words, sounds, slightly different meanings, etc. They would laugh and sometimes (not often) enter into their native language (Swahili) and then pop out to explain things to me. Language is fun.
      3. Does Pronunciation have Pedagogical value? Absolutely–historical reconstruction, discerning alliteration and other patterns, textual criticism, more “natural” fluency in pronunciation. How to prevent students getting frustrated—a serious concern. I find that most “issues” like this need to be treated compassionately (as you know), and also these situations are an opportunity and have pedagogical value. For instance, in the case of saying “πιστευετε” and how to properly spell it—said alone with no grammatical context, someone might very well misspell it. But with grammatical context, the proper spelling will normally be made clear. Returning to the Wax tablet—what if the teacher intentionally misspelled the text (to πιστευεται) to see if the student would correct it from grammatical context to πιστευετε? Probably not, but there would be pedagogical value in that.

  • I am a mature christian who who has had a newberry bible for years and decied to learn new testament greek this year.To my surprise I encounted the problem of how to pronounce greek
    Thanks to utube and modern phones and ipads we have the best of both worlds,all the advantages of new testament grammer in textbooks and a bible school teacher who will more than likely teach you the way he was taught. you can go to utube and get 3 more teachers to illumate you so you can grasp the material with further comprehension,but why would want to learn greek different from the way modern greeks speak it today. Ok learning the spelling will take greater effort but i have the advantage of modern greek lessons that make this effort fun
    and broaden your understanding, yes i also have to deal with some grammer and meaning changes welcome to the real world.
    My greek friend calls bible greek, cowboy greek they can understand you but they fully realise the inconsistancies. I want instant resources that I can touch type greek words and hear modern greek pronouncation to enhance my speed learning and one day i will relate to greek speaking people.I believe the bible collage world needs to came to terms with the new resources now and this means learning greek that is constant to the way 10 million greeks speak.Dont get left behind teaching method have changed.So what out there that consistant to my needs i have already have 20 odd textbooks

  • This is all really stupid. Unless and until someone can produce a recording of the spoken Koine Greek that dates back to the days when Koine Greek was spoken, we will never know how it was pronounced. You only have to look at all the various pronounciations of the English language today (American, British, Australian, South African, etc.) as well as the various dialects within those countries to know this is true. They are all written the same but pronounced differently. So why all the fuss? Who cares how it was pronounced at that time as long as we can interpret the written word today? If anyone wants to speak it, I suggest they use the Modern Greek pronounciation since it is likely to be the closest to the Ancient. Any other pronounciation schemes are just speculation.

    • There was no doubt dialectal diversity in various regions of the Mediterranean in the Koine period just as there is dialectal diversity with many modern language today. However, we are actually able to access this in many instances so that we are even aware of the dialectal diversity in ancient times as well.

      In fact, based on the methods that we have, we are able to discern with a high degree of certainty what the vowel phonemes were in Koine Greek in Egypt and Palestine around the time of the New Testament. There is sufficient evidence for that.

      What you may be addressing, however, is the allophones and specific phonetic realizations of the vowels. That, of course, is beyond what we can access with certainty, since we do not have a recording.

      However, I stress that the vocalic phonemes are quite clearly indicated through the ancient documentary and epigraphic evidence.

      Here is a very simple explanation of the methodology:

      https://youtu.be/KhuUc3N_Z9o

      Here is a page with some resources on the subject as well:

      https://www.KaineDiatheke.com/koine-pronunciation

      There are, of course, many more factors (ancient transcriptions, modern dialectology, ancient phonetic descriptions in grammatical treatises, etc.) that helps us learn about ancient pronunciation.

      However, having conducted much primary research on the subject myself, I would say that we have more evidence for the vocalic phonemes of Koine Greek in Egypt and Palestine of the late roman period than we do for many historical events from that time period.

  • I think it is important to distinguish between phonetics and phonology here. It is true that we do not have recordings and cannot access the “phonetics” of the language.

    However, I am more than ready to defend the position that we have more evidence for the vocalic phonemes (i.e., which vowel sounds distinguished meaning and were significant) of Egyptian and Palestinian Koine Greek than we have for some historical events of the same period.

    There is more on this (including a 2 minute video on the methodology) here:

    https://www.KaineDiatheke.com/koine-pronunciation

  • “…freely acknowledging that it is not an accurate representation of exactly what Jesus and Paul sounded like when they spoke Greek”. How do you know Jesus even spoke Greek? He was born and raised in Galilee and Judea in a non-hellenistic working class family. Propably he spoke only Aramaic, as other Galileans, and Hebrew, as other Judeans. Dead Sea Scrolls testify that Hebrew was still a spoken language in Judea during Jesus time.

      • Great point, Leonard. I suppose there could have been a translator, but it sure doesn’t sound like there was one, and it is very common for people to learn the language of the powerful class in their area.

  • One commentator actually quoted the article with: “Erasmian punctuation makes it easier for…” etc. And, rightfully so, you replied to what was really on his mind, but could you now please tell us if your use of the word “punctuation” was supposed to be humorous in some way, or just a typo slip up? (I suspect simply an error.)

    • An enemy hath done this. He has come and sown malapropisms in my prose while I was sleeping.

      No. You simply caught an error that, somehow, no one else caught. How embarrassing! But now this tare has been weeded from the garden, thanks to you.

Written by Mark Ward
theLAB