Greek pronunciation

English translation by Bruna Pogliano

Greek pronunciation has inevitably undergone deep changes over the centuries. In this context, we will consider only the pronunciation of Greek in archaic and classical ages, in order to compare it with Greek pronunciation as it is practiced in Italian schools today.

We are not likely to ever reconstruct ancient Greek pronunciation and its variants through epochs and regions unequivocally. Yet, after studying and debating for centuries, scholars have now acquired adequate knowledge of some important aspects concerning how Greek was pronounced; such knowledge is based on various criteria:

the study of the Greek alphabet variants used in cities until the late 5th century b.C., but before the year 403 b.C., when Athens adopted the variant improperly called Ionic alphabet as its official alphabet, which then spread gradually throughout the Greek world. Such alphabet is still used to this day in writing ancient Greek texts;
the analysis of a great number of epigraphs dating back to the VIII-IV centuries b.C., where engravers not only employed local alphabet variants, but also tended to reproduce in writing the real pronunciation of texts;
the study of the history of the language and its evolution, as both can often be explained by identifying the phonetic laws underlying changes, which concern mainly the inflectional system.

The table below highlights only the phonetic instances whose archaic and classical pronunciation differed undoubtedly from today's pronunciation in Italian schools.

Click on the examples to listen.

Letters or combinations	Classical pronunciation			Today's pronunciation in Italian schools
Letters or combinations	Pronunciation	Definition	Example	Pronunciation	Example
ει	ē	e long close	ποιεῖν, do, make	ei	ποιεῖν, do, make
ου	ō	o long close	νοῦς, mind	u	νοῦς, mind
φ	p+h	voiceless labial + aspir.	φιλοσοφία, philosophy	f	φιλοσοφία, philosophy

Two considerations support the assumption that ει and ου were pronounced as shown in the table above:

ει results from contraction of ε +ε, while ου results from contraction ofο +ο; vowel contraction results typically into assimilation of the two contracted vowels, consequently, merging of two identical vowels is not likely to result into a sound made up of two distinct vowels; a logical conclusion is that ει is a graphic convention adopted in order to contrast long close e and long open e (represented by η) as well as ου contrasts o long close and long open o (represented by ω);
in archaic alphabets, Ionic excepted, such graphic convention had not yet been adopted, so both signs Ε and Ο, stood for the vowels E and O short, long, close or open indistinctly, and were employed also in contexts where we would expect to find EI and OY respectively.

Not only φ but also the other two aspirated consonants, θ e χ, must have been pronounced with marked aspiration. Evidence can be found in a number of archaic inscriptions employing alphabets different from the Ionic; these alphabets never represent the three aspirated consonants by one symbol, instead, they consistently display the related mute consonant followed by Η:

Θ = Τ + Η
Φ = Π + Η
Χ = Κ + Η

Remember that Η represented aspiration in archaic alphabets and it is such original value that was imported into the Latin alphabet, which derived from an archaic alphabet employed in Magna Grecia. Only the Ionic alphabet employed this sign to represent capital ETA. It is important to keep in mind that the Ionic dialect underwent two phonetic innovations with respect to the other Greek dialects:

psilosis, i.e.: the loss of aspiration;
transformation ofᾱ into a new sound halfway between ā and ē, i.e. the sound we call ETA, denoting a long open e.

It so happened that someone conceived the fairly well timed idea of employing the sign Η to represent the new sound; since Η had no longer any phonetic value, while there was not yet any distinct sign to represent the new sound. This is the reason underlying the different value of Η in the Greek and Latin alphabets respectively.

Evidence of such marked distinction, in aspirated consonant pronunciation, between the mute consonant and the aspiration is also traceable in the Roman spelling of imported Greek words.

Ex. φιλοσοφία >philosophia and not filosofia. This clearly shows that Greek φ was not identical to Roman F.

The same remark can be made with regard to the pronuciation of initial ρ . The Romans transliterated ρ as rh (cfr. ῥήτωρ > rhetor), which proves that the Romans perceived Greek rho as different from Roman R, probably because it was similar to French R. For this reason, the conventional spelling deriving from μεταχαρατηρισμός always features initial ρ with rough breathing.

Greek pronunciation in Archaic Age and in Classical Age