Koine Greek[a] (ἡ κοινὴ διάλεκτος,hē koinḕ diálektos,lit.'the common dialect'),[b] also variously known asHellenistic Greek,common Attic, theAlexandrian dialect,Biblical Greek,Septuagint Greek orNew Testament Greek, was thecommon supra-regional form ofGreek spoken and written during theHellenistic period, theRoman Empire and the earlyByzantine Empire. It evolved from the spread of Greek following the conquests ofAlexander the Great in the fourth century BC, and served as thelingua franca of much of the Mediterranean region and the Middle East during the following centuries[which?]. It was based mainly onAttic and relatedIonic speech forms, with various admixtures brought about throughdialect levelling with other varieties.[6]
Koine Greek included styles ranging from conservative literary forms to the spoken vernaculars of the time.[7] As the dominant language of the Byzantine Empire, it developed further intoMedieval Greek, which then turned intoModern Greek.[8]
Literary Koine was the medium of muchpost-classical Greek literary and scholarly writing, such as the works ofPlutarch andPolybius.[6] Koine is also the language of theSeptuagint (the 3rd century BC Greek translation of theHebrew Bible), the ChristianNew Testament, and of most early Christian theological writing by theChurch Fathers. In this context, Koine Greek is also known as "Biblical", "New Testament", "ecclesiastical", or "patristic" Greek.[9] TheRoman EmperorMarcus Aurelius wrote his private thoughts in Koine Greek in a work that is now known asMeditations.[10] Koine Greek continues to be used as the liturgical language of services in theGreek Orthodox Church and in someGreek Catholic churches.[11]
The English-language nameKoine is derived from the Koine Greek termἡ κοινὴ διάλεκτος (hē koinḕ diálektos), meaning "the common dialect".[5] The Greek wordκοινή (koinḗ) itself means "common". The word is pronounced/kɔɪˈneɪ/,/ˈkɔɪneɪ/, or/kiːˈniː/ in US English and/ˈkɔɪniː/ in UK English. The pronunciation of the wordkoine itself gradually changed from[koinéː] (close to theClassical Attic pronunciation[koi̯.nɛ̌ː]) to[cyˈni] (close to theModern Greek[ciˈni]). In Modern Greek, the language is referred to asΕλληνιστική Κοινή, "Hellenistic Koiné", in the sense of "Hellenisticsupraregional language").[12]
Ancient scholars used the termkoine in several different senses. Scholars such asApollonius Dyscolus (second century AD) andAelius Herodianus (second century AD) maintained the termkoine to refer to theProto-Greek language, while others used it to refer to any vernacular form of Greek speech which differed somewhat from the literary language.[13]
When Koine Greek became a language of literature by the first century BC, some people distinguished two forms: written as the literary post-classical form (which should not be confused withAtticism), and vernacular as the day-to-dayvernacular.[13] Others chose to refer to Koine as "the dialect ofAlexandria" or "Alexandrian dialect" (ἡ Ἀλεξανδρέων διάλεκτος), or even the universal dialect of its time.[14] Modern classicists have often used the former sense.
Dark blue: areas where Greek speakers probably were a majority
Light blue: areas that were significantly Hellenized
KoineGreek arose as a common dialect within the armies ofAlexander the Great.[13] Under the leadership ofMacedon, their newly formed common variety was spoken from thePtolemaic Kingdom of Egypt to theSeleucid Empire ofMesopotamia.[13] It replaced existingancient Greek dialects with an everyday form that people anywhere could understand.[15] Though elements of Koine Greek took shape inClassical Greece, the post-Classical period of Greek is defined as beginning with the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC, when cultures under Greek sway in turn began to influence the language.
The passage into the next period, known asMedieval Greek, is sometimes dated from the foundation ofConstantinople byConstantine the Great in 330 AD, but often only from the end oflate antiquity. The post-Classical period of Greek thus refers to the creation and evolution of Koine Greek throughout the entire Hellenistic and Roman eras of history until the start of the Middle Ages.[13]
The linguistic roots of the Common Greek dialect had been unclear since ancient times. During theHellenistic period, most scholars thought of Koine as the result of the mixture of the four main Ancient Greek dialects, "ἡ ἐκ τῶν τεττάρων συνεστῶσα" (the composition of the Four). This view was supported in the early twentieth century byPaul Kretschmer in his bookDie Entstehung der Koine (1901), whileUlrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff andAntoine Meillet, based on the intense Ionic elements of the Koine –σσ instead ofττ andρσ instead ofρρ (θάλασσα – θάλαττα, 'sea';ἀρσενικός – ἀρρενικός, 'potent, virile') – considered Koine to be a simplified form ofIonic.[13]
The view accepted by most scholars today was given by the Greek linguistGeorgios Hatzidakis, who showed that despite the "composition of the Four", the "stable nucleus" of Koine Greek is Attic. In other words, Koine Greek can be regarded as Attic with the admixture of elements especially from Ionic, but also from other dialects. The degree of importance of the non-Attic linguistic elements on Koine can vary depending on the region of the Hellenistic world.[13]
In that respect, the varieties of Koine spoken in theIonian colonies ofAnatolia (e.g.Pontus, cf.Pontic Greek) would have more intenseIonic characteristics than others and those of Laconia and Cyprus would preserve someDoric andArcadocypriot characteristics, respectively. The literary Koine of the Hellenistic age resembles Attic in such a degree that it is often mentioned asCommon Attic.[13]
The first scholars who studied Koine, both in Alexandrian and Early Modern times, were classicists whose prototype had been the literaryAttic Greek of the Classical period and frowned upon any other variety ofAncient Greek. Koine Greek was therefore considered a decayed form of Greek which was not worthy of attention.[13]
The reconsideration on the historical and linguistic importance of KoineGreek began only in the early 19th century, where renowned scholars conducted a series of studies on the evolution of Koine throughout the entireHellenistic period andRoman Empire. The sources used on the studies of Koine have been numerous and of unequal reliability. The most significant ones are the inscriptions of the post-Classical periods and thepapyri, for being two kinds of texts which have authentic content and can be studied directly.[13]
Other significant sources are theSeptuagint (the Greek translation of theHebrew Bible) and the GreekNew Testament. The teaching of these texts was aimed at the most common people, and for that reason, they use the most popular language of the era.
Other sources can be based on random findings such as inscriptions on vases written by popular painters, mistakes made by Atticists due to their imperfect knowledge of Attic Greek or even some surviving Greco-Latin glossaries of the Roman period,[16] e.g.:
Καλήμερον, ἦλθες; Bono die, venisti? Good day, you came?
Ἐὰν θέλεις, ἐλθὲ μεθ' ἡμῶν. Si vis, veni mecum. If you want, come with us.[c]
Ποῦ; Ubi? Where?
Πρὸς φίλον ἡμέτερον Λύκιον. Ad amicum nostrum Lucium. To our friend Lucius.
Τί γὰρ ἔχει; Quid enim habet? Indeed, what does he have? What is it with him?
Ἀρρωστεῖ. Aegrotat. He's sick.
Finally, a very important source of information on the ancient Koine is themodern Greek language with all its dialects and its ownKoine form, which have preserved some of the ancient language's oral linguistic details which the written tradition has lost. For example,Pontic andCappadocian Greek preserved the ancient pronunciation ofη as ε (νύφε, συνέλικος, τίμεσον, πεγάδι for standard Modern Greekνύφη, συνήλικος, τίμησον, πηγάδι etc.),[d] while theTsakonian language preserved the long α instead of η (ἁμέρα, ἀστραπά, λίμνα, χοά etc.) and the other local characteristics ofDoric Greek.[13]
Dialects from the southern part of the Greek-speaking regions (Dodecanese,Cyprus, etc.), preserve the pronunciation of the double similar consonants (ἄλ-λος, Ἑλ-λάδα, θάλασ-σα), while others pronounce in many words υ as ου or preserve ancient double forms (κρόμμυον – κρεμ-μυον, ράξ – ρώξ etc.). Linguistic phenomena like the above imply that those characteristics survived within Koine, which in turn had countless variations in the Greek-speaking world.[13]
There has been some debate to what degree Biblical Greek represents the mainstream of contemporary spoken Koine and to what extent it contains specificallySemiticsubstratum features. These could have been induced either through the practice of translating closely fromBiblical Hebrew orAramaic originals, or through the influence of the regional non-standard Greek spoken by originally Aramaic-speakingHellenized Jews.
Some of the features discussed in this context are the Septuagint's normative absence of the particlesμέν andδέ, and the use ofἐγένετο to denote "it came to pass". Some features of Biblical Greek which are thought to have originally been non-standard elements eventually found their way into the main of the Greek language.
H. St. J. Thackeray, inA Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek According to the Septuagint (1909), wrote that only the five books of thePentateuch, parts of theBook of Joshua and theBook of Isaiah may be considered "good Koine". One issue debated by scholars is whether and how much the translation of the Pentateuch influenced the rest of the Septuagint, including the translation of Isaiah.[17]
Another point that scholars have debated is the use ofἐκκλησίαekklēsía as a translation for the Hebrewקָהָלqāhāl. Old Testament scholarJames Barr has been critical ofetymological arguments thatekklēsía refers to "the community called by God to constitute his People". Kyriakoula Papademetriou explains:
He maintains thatἐκκλησία is merely used for designating the notion of meeting and gathering of men, without any particular character. Therefore, etymologizing this word could be needless, or even misleading, when it could guide to false meanings, for example thatἐκκλησία is a name used for the people of God, Israel.[18]
The authors of the New Testament follow the Septuagint translations for over half their quotations from the Old Testament.[19]
The "historical present" tense is a term used for present tense verbs that are used in some narrative sections of the New Testament to describe events that are in the past with respect to the speaker. This is seen more in works attributed toMark andJohn thanLuke.[20] It is used 151 times in theGospel of Mark in passages where a reader might expect a past tense verb. Scholars have presented various explanations for this; in the early 20th century some scholars argued that the use of the historical present tense inMark was due to the influence ofAramaic, but this theory fell out of favor in the 1960s. Another group of scholars believed the historical present tense was used to heighten the dramatic effect, and this interpretation was favored in theNew American Bible translation. In Volume II of the 1929 edition ofA Grammar of the New Testament, W.F. Howard argues that the heavy use of the historical present inHerodotus andThucydides, compared with the relatively infrequent usage byPolybius andXenophon was evidence that heavy use of this verb tense is a feature of vernacular Koine, but other scholars have argued that the historical present can be a literary form to "denote semantic shifts to more prominent material."[21][22]
The termpatristic Greek is sometimes used for the Greek written by theGreek Church Fathers, theEarly Christian theologians in late antiquity. Christian writers in the earliest time tended to use a simple register of Koiné, relatively close to the spoken language of their time, following the model of the Bible. After the 4th century, when Christianity became thestate church of the Roman Empire, more learned registers of Koiné also came to be used.[23]
During the period generally designated as Koine Greek, a great deal of phonological change occurred. At the start of the period, the pronunciation was virtually identical toAncient Greek phonology, whereas in the end, it had much more in common withModern Greek phonology.
The three most significant changes were the loss of vowel length distinction, the replacement of thepitch accent system by astress accent system, and the monophthongization of several diphthongs:
The ancient distinction between long and short vowels was gradually lost, and from the second century BC all vowels were isochronic (having equal length).[13]
The diphthongsᾱͅ,ῃ,ῳ/aːieːioːi/ were respectively simplified to the long vowelsᾱ,η,ω/aːeːoː/.[13]
The diphthongsαι,ει, andοι becamemonophthongs.αι, which had already been pronounced as/ɛː/ by the Boeotians since the 4th century BC and written η (e.g.πῆς, χῆρε, μέμφομη), became in Koine, too, first a long vowel/ɛː/ and then, with the loss of distinctive vowel length and openness distinction/e/, merging with ε. The diphthongει had already merged withι in the 5th century BC inArgos, and by the 4th century BC inCorinth (e.g.ΛΕΓΙΣ), and it acquired this pronunciation also in Koine. The diphthongοι fronted to/y/, merging withυ. The diphthongυι came to be pronounced[yj], but eventually lost its final element and also merged withυ.[25] The diphthong ου had been already raised to/u/ in the 6th century BC, and remains so in Modern Greek.[13]
The diphthongsαυ andευ came to be pronounced[avev] (via[aβeβ]), but are partlyassimilated to[afef] before thevoiceless consonantsθ, κ, ξ, π, σ, τ, φ, χ, and ψ.[13]
Simple vowels mostly preserved their ancient pronunciations.η/e/ (classically pronounced/ɛː/) was raised and merged withι. In the 10th century AD,υ/οι/y/ unrounded to merge withι. These changes are known asiotacism.[13]
The consonants also preserved their ancient pronunciations to a great extent, exceptβ, γ, δ, φ, θ, χ andζ.Β, Γ, Δ, which were originally pronounced/bɡd/, became the fricatives/v/ (via[β]),/ɣ/,/ð/, which they still are today, except when preceded by a nasal consonant (μ, ν); in that case, they retain their ancient pronunciations (e.g.γαμβρός > γαμπρός[ɣamˈbros],ἄνδρας > άντρας[ˈandras],ἄγγελος > άγγελος[ˈaŋɟelos]). The latter three (Φ, Θ, Χ), which were initially pronounced asaspirates (/pʰtʰkʰ/ respectively), developed into the fricatives/f/ (via[ɸ]),/θ/, and/x/. Finally ζ, which is still metrically categorised as a double consonant with ξ and ψ because it may have initially been pronounced as σδ[zd] or δσ[dz], later acquired its modern-day value of/z/.[13]
The Koine-period Greek in the table is taken from a reconstruction by Benjamin Kantor of New Testament Judeo-Palestinian Koine Greek. The realizations of most phonemes reflect general changes around the Greek-speaking world, including vowel isochrony and monophthongization, but certain sound values differ from other Koine varieties such as Attic, Egyptian and Anatolian.[26]
More general Koine phonological developments include the spirantization ofΓ, with palatal allophone before front-vowels and a plosive allophone after nasals, andβ.[27]φ, θ andχ still preserve their ancient aspirated plosive values, while the unaspirated stopsπ, τ, κ have perhaps begun to develop voiced allophones after nasals.[28] Initial aspiration has also likely become an optional sound for many speakers of the popular variety.[29][e] Monophthongization (including the initial stage in the fortition of the second element in the αυ/ευ diphthongs) and the loss of vowel-timing distinctions are carried through. On the other hand, Kantor argues for certain vowel qualities differing from the rest of the Koine in the Judean dialect. Although it is impossible to know the exact realizations of vowels, it is tentatively argued that the mid-vowelsε/αι andη had a more open pronunciation than other Koine dialects, distinguished as open-mid/ɛ/ vs. close-mid/e/,[30] rather than as true-mid/e̞/ vs. close-mid/e̝/ as has been suggested for other varieties such as Egyptian.[31] This is evidenced on the basis of Hebrew transcriptions ofε withpataḥ/qamets/a/ and nottsere/segol/e/. Additionally, it is posited thatα perhaps had a back vowel pronunciation as/ɑ/, dragged backwards due to the opening ofε. Influence of the Aramaic substrate could have also caused confusion betweenα andο, providing further evidence for the back vowel realization.[32]
The following texts show differences from Attic Greek in all aspects – grammar, morphology, vocabulary and can be inferred to show differences in phonology.
The following comments illustrate the phonological development within the period of Koine. The phonetic transcriptions are tentative and are intended to illustrate two different stages in the reconstructed development, an early conservative variety still relatively close to Classical Attic, and a somewhat later, more progressive variety approaching Modern Greek in some respects.
The following excerpt, from a decree of the Roman Senate to the town ofThisbae inBoeotia in 170 BC, is rendered in a reconstructed pronunciation representing a hypothetical conservative variety of mainland Greek Koiné in the early Roman period.[33] The transcription shows raising ofη to/eː/, partial (pre-consonantal/word-final) raising ofῃ andει to/iː/, retention of pitch accent, and retention of word-initial/h/ (therough breathing).
peri hoːn tʰizbîːs lóɡuːs epojéːsanto; peri toːn katʰ hautùːs praːɡmátoːn, hoítines en tiː pʰilíaːi tiː heːmetéraːi enémiːnan, hópoːs autois dotʰôːsin hois ta katʰ hautùːs práːɡmata ekseːɡéːsoːntai, peri túːtuː tuː práːɡmatos húːtoːs édoksen; hópoːs ˈkʷintos ˈmainios strateːɡòs toːn ek teːs syŋkléːtuː pénte apotáksiː, hoi an autoːi ek toːn deːmosíoːn praːɡmátoːn kai teːs idíaːs písteoːs pʰaínoːntai
Concerning those matters about which the citizens of Thisbae made representations. Concerning their own affairs: the following decision was taken concerning the proposal that those who remained true to our friendship should be given the facilities to conduct their own affairs; that our praetor/governor Quintus Maenius should delegate five members of the senate who seemed to him appropriate in the light of their public actions and individual good faith.
The following excerpt,the beginning of the Gospel of John, is rendered in a reconstructed pronunciation representing a progressive popular variety of Koiné in the early Christian era.[34] Modernizing features include the loss of vowel length distinction, monophthongization, transition to stress accent, and raising ofη to/i/. Also seen here are the bilabial fricative pronunciation of diphthongsαυ andευ, loss of initial/h/, fricative values forβ andγ, and partial post-nasal voicing of voiceless stops.
ˈen arˈkʰi in o ˈloɣos, ke o ˈloɣos im bros to(n) tʰeˈo(n), ke tʰeˈos in o ˈloɣos. ˈutos in en arˈkʰi pros to(n) tʰeˈo(n). ˈpanda di aɸˈtu eˈʝeneto, ke kʰoˈris aɸˈtu eˈʝeneto ude ˈen o ˈʝeɣonen. en aɸˈto zoˈi in, ke i zoˈi in to pʰos ton anˈtʰropon; ke to pʰos en di skoˈtia ˈpʰeni, ke i skoˈti(a) a(ɸ)ˈto u kaˈtelaβen
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
^The Latin gloss in the source erroneously has "with me", while the Greek means "with us".
^On the other hand, not all scholars agree that the Pontic pronunciation ofη asε is an archaism. Apart from the improbability that the sound change/ɛː/>/e̝(ː)/>/i/ did not occur in this important region of the Roman Empire, Horrocks notes thatε can be written in certain contexts for any letter or digraph representing/i/ in other dialects–e.g.ι,ει,οι, orυ, which were never pronounced/ɛː/ in Ancient Greek–not just η (c.f. όνερον, κοδέσπενα, λεχάρι for standard όνειρο, οικοδέσποινα, λυχάρι.) He therefore attributes this feature of East Greek to vowel weakening, paralleling the omission of unstressed vowels. Horrocks (2010: 400)
^For convenience, the rough breathing mark represents/h/, even if it was not commonly used in contemporary orthography. Parentheses denote the loss of the sound.
^abBubenik, V. (2007). "The rise of Koiné". In A. F. Christidis (ed.).A history of Ancient Greek: from the beginnings to late antiquity. Cambridge: University Press. pp. 342–345.
^Horrocks, Geoffrey (1997). "4–6".Greek: a history of the language and its speakers. London: Longman.
^Κοπιδάκης, Μ.Ζ. (1999).Ελληνιστική Κοινή, Εισαγωγή [Hellenistic Koine, Introduction].Ιστορία της Ελληνικής Γλώσσας [History of the Greek Language] (in Greek). Athens: Ελληνικό Λογοτεχνικό και Ιστορικό Αρχείο. pp. 88–93.
^Evans, Craig A.; Tov, Emanuel (2008-10-01). "Introduction".Exploring the Origins of the Bible (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology): Canon Formation in Historical, Literary, and Theological Perspective. Baker Academic.ISBN978-1-58558-814-5.
^Porter, Stanley E.; Pitts, Andrew (2013-02-21). "Markan Idiolect in the Study of the Greek New Testament".The Language of the New Testament: Context, History, and Development. Brill.ISBN978-90-04-23477-2.
^Osburn, Carroll D. (1983). "The Historical Present in Mark as a Text-Critical Criterion".Biblica.64 (4):486–500.JSTOR42707093.
^Strickland, Michael; Young, David M. (2017-11-15).The Rhetoric of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark. Fortress Press.ISBN978-1-5064-3847-4.
^A concise survey of the major differences between Attic and Koine Greek can be found in Reece, Steve, "Teaching Koine Greek in a Classics Department",Classical Journal 93.4 (1998) 417–429.
^Gignac, Francis T. (1970). "The Pronunciation of Greek Stops in the Papyri".Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association.101:185–202.doi:10.2307/2936047.JSTOR2936047.
Kantor, Benjamin (2023),he Pronunciation of New Testament Greek Judeo-Palestinian Greek Phonology and Orthography from Alexander to Islam, Eerdmans,ISBN9780802878311.
Smyth, Herbert Weir (1956),Greek Grammar, Harvard University Press,ISBN978-0-674-36250-5.
Bakker, Egbert J., ed. 2010.A companion to the Ancient Greek language. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Blass, Friedrich, and Albert Debrunner. 1961.Greek grammar of the New Testament and other early Christian literature. Translated and revised by R. W. Funk. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Christidis, Anastasios-Phoivos, ed. 2007.A history of Ancient Greek: From the beginnings to Late Antiquity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Colvin, Stephen C. 2007.A historical Greek reader: Mycenaean to the koiné. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Easterling, P. E., andCarol Handley. 2001.Greek Scripts: An Illustrated Introduction. London: Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
Evans, T. V., and Dirk Obbink, eds. 2009.The language of the papyri. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
Gignac, Francis T. 1976–1981.A grammar of the Greek papyri of the Roman and Byzantine periods. 2 vols. Milan: Cisalpino-La Goliardica.
Palmer, Leonard R. 1980.The Greek language. London: Faber & Faber.
Stevens, Gerald L. 2009.New Testament Greek Intermediate: From Morphology to Translation. Cambridge, UK: Lutterworth Press.
.jpg)
