ART. III. GENERAL VIEW Of the Greek LANGUAGE AND

ITS DIALECTS.*

From Buttmann's Greek Grammar. Translated by the Editor.

1. The Greek language (povn Envix) was anciently spread abroad not only over Greece, but also over a large portion of Asia Minor, Southern Italy, Sicily, and still other regions, where there were Greek colonies. Like all other languages, it had its various dialects (dialexroi), all of which however may be referred back to two principal ones, viz. the Doric (ń Awqızń, Awois) and the Ionic (n lovin, 'Iás), which belonged to the two great Grecian tribes of the like names.

2. The Doric tribe was the largest, and sent abroad the most colonies. Hence the Doric dialect prevailed in the whole interior of Greece, in Italy, and in Sicily. It was harsher, and made upon the ear, in consequence of the predominant long α, an impression which the Greeks call nλarεiαouós, broad pronunciation. It was on the whole a less cultivated dialect. A branch of it was the Aeolic (ý Alodizń, Aiolis); which, particularly in the Aeolic colonies of Asia Minor and the neighboring islands (Lesbos etc.) arrived early at a considerable degree of refineThis however did not probably extend beyond the lim

ment.

its of poetry.

3. The Ionic tribe in the earlier ages chiefly inhabited Attica, and sent out from thence colonies to the coasts of Asia Minor. These colonies took the lead both of the mother tribe and of all the other Greeks in general improvement; and hence the names Ionians and Ionic came to be applied chiefly and at last exclusively to them and their dialect; while the original Ionians in Attica were now called Attics and Athenians.— The Ionic dialect is the softest of all, in consequence of its many vowels. The Attic (ǹ 'Arriań, 'Ardis) which also was afterwards cultivated, soon surpassed in refinement all the other dialects; avoiding with Attic elegance and address both the harshness of the Doric and the softness of the Ionic. But although the Attic

* See the Preliminary Remarks prefixed to the preceding article, p. 640. The following article has been already translated and published by Professor Patton, as an Appendix to his edition of Thiersch's Greek Tables.

tribe was the real mother-tribe, yet the Ionic dialect of these Asiatic colonies is regarded as the mother of the Attic dialect; inasmuch as it was cultivated at the period when it varied least from the old Ionic, the common source of both.

NOTE 1. The elegance and address of the Attic dialect is most visible in the Syntax, where it is distinguished, not only above all the other dialects, but also above all other languages, by an appropriate conciseness, by a most effective arrangement of the constituent parts, and by a certain moderation in asserting and judging, which passed over from the polite tone of social intercourse into the language itself." NOTE 2. Other minor branches of these dialects, such as the Boeotic, Laconic, Thessalian, etc. are known only from single words and forms, and through scattered notices, inscriptions, etc.

* Another source of the charm of the Attic language lies, where very few look for it, in its individuality; and in the feeling of affection for this and for nationality in general, which the Attic writers possessed. However well adapted for the understanding, and for the internal and external sense of beauty a language may be, which every where exhibits a correct logic, follows a regular and fixed analogy, and employs pleasing sounds, still all these advantages are lifeless without the charm of individuality. This however consists wholly in occasional sacrifices of these fundamental laws, especially of logic and general analogy, in favour of idioms or modes of speech which have their source partly in certain traits of national character, and partly also incontestably in an apprehension of those ground rules, not exactly conformed to the usage of the schools. In this way anomalous forms of expression had arisen in the Attic, as in every other language; and these the cultivated writers did not wish to change, out of respect to antiquity and for the ear of the people which had now become accustomed to such forms and turns of expression; and also, as above remarked, out of a cherished regard for individuality. When in other languages irregularities of style occur, we see at once that they result from inaccuracy or want of skill; while among the Attics, who are so distinguished for address and skill, we perceive that they did not wish to make the correction. Indeed they felt, that by removing anomalies they should deprive their language of the stamp of a production of nature, which every language really is; and thus give it the appearance of a work of art, which a language never can become. It follows here of course, that intentional anomalies, by which a language is made to assume the appearance of a mere plaything, can never be taken into the account; however ready the older grammarians often were with this convenient mode of explanation. No. IV. 88

4. As the common source of all the dialects, we must assume an ancient original Greek language; of which, however, it is only through philosophical investigation, that any definite forms. of words can be made out, or, to speak more correctly, presupposed. Each dialect naturally retained more or less out of this ancient language; and without doubt, each for itself must have continued to possess from it much that was by degrees lost in the others. In this single consideration we have at once an easy explanation, how the Grammarians can talk of Doricisms, Aeolicisins, and even Atticisms, in the old Ionic Greek of HoGenerally, however, it was customary to call that which was usual or frequent in any one dialect, by the name of that dialect; even when it happened to occur in the others. In this way must be explained, e. g. the so called Doricisms in Attic writers, and the Attic forms in writers who otherwise did not employ the Attic dialect.*

mer.

5. To the same ancient language belong also, for the most part, the so called poetic forms and licenses. It is indeed true that the poet contributes to the formation of a language; and that through him a language first becomes cultivated, i. e. is formed to a melodious, expressive, copious whole. Nevertheless, the poet does not derive the innovations, which he finds necessary, simply from himself; for this would be the surest way to displease. The earliest Greek bards merely selected according to their wants from the variety of actual forms, which they found already existing. Many of these forms became obsolete in common usage; but the later poet, who had these old bards before his eyes, was not disposed to yield his right to these treasures. In this way, that which was originally a real idiom of the language, came to be poetic peculiarity or the so called poetic license, and is therefore properly to be reckoned among the dialects.†

* E. g. The Doric future in Goat, oua; the Attic form of declination in os etc. the Attic' guv for our, and the like.

+ This is however not to be so understood, as if every single word which occurs in the older poets, was also once used in common life. The privilege, which also the modern poet even in the most copious language retains, of forming new words and of remodelling old ones, must have belonged in a still wider extent to the ancient bard in those times of poverty. His only restriction was, that the material from which, and the form in which he modelled his inno

6. In all cultivated nations, some one of their dialects usually becomes the foundation of the common written language, and of the language of good society. Among the Greeks this was not at first the case. They began to improve in culture, while they were yet divided into several different states, separated both by geographical position and by political relations. Hence, until about the time of Alexander, each writer employed the dialect in which he had been educated, or that which he preferred; and thus were formed Ionic, Aeolic, Doric, and Attic poets and prose writers, of whose productions more or less are still extant.

NOTE 3. Only the great works of poetic art, which excited universal attention, such as epic and dramatic poetry, constitute here an exception. The first authors in these walks, it is true, made use of the dialect of their own country; but still, an imitation of them in any other dialect, not to say that this would have required an almost equal degree of creative talent,-would not have been successful; because the Greeks of all the tribes were now familiarised to these sounds in this species of composition, and were no longer able to separate the one from the other. That dialect therefore in which the first master-pieces of any particular species were written, remained the dialect of that species. See Text 10, 11.

NOTE 4. To the Ionic dialect belong the earliest poets, Homer, Hesiod, Theognis, etc. whose language nevertheless has more of that apparently mixed character, which approaches nearest to the ancient language, and which afterwards continued to mark the language of poetry in most of its species. The proper though later Ionic dialect is found in the prose writers, of whom Herodotus and Hippocrates are the principal; though both were of Doric origin. The Ionic dialect had already in their time acquired, in consequence of its peculiar softness and early culture, a certain degree of universality, especially in Asia Minor, even beyond the limits of poetry.

NOTE 5. Among the poets of that period the lyric writers were at home in all the dialects. The earliest and most celebrated were the Aeolic lyric poets; and of these the chief were Sappho and Alcaeus; from whom however only a few fragments have come down to us. Anacreon sung in Ionic; of him also we have only a few remains, and these partly mere fragments, and partly of

vations, must be drawn not from himself, but from the existing stores and analogies of the language. Of course also the right of softening down the usual forms, which belongs even to the man of common life, cannot be denied to him in whom melody is a duty, and who is moreover fettered by metre.

doubtful authenticity. The other lyric writers were mostly Doric; and each created at will, as it were, his own language out of the copious variety of forms in this widely extended dialect. Of these last, Pindar is the only one from whom any thing entire has come down to us.

NOTE 6. Of Doric prose there is very little still extant, and that chiefly relating to mathematics and philosophy.-For the Attic writers, see the following notes.

7. In the mean time Athens had raised herself to such a pitch of political importance, that for a while she exercised a sort of sovereignty (nynuovia) in Greece; and at the same time became the centre of all literary and scientific culture. The democratic constitution, which was no where else so pure, secured to the popular eloquence of Athens, and to the Attic stage, entire freedom; and this it was, in connexion with other advantages, which raised to the highest point of perfection not only these two branches of literature, but also the sister ones of history and philosophy; and at the same time gave to the Attic language a completeness and comprehensiveness, to which no other dialect attained.

NOTE 7. The principal prose writers of this golden period of Attic literature are Thucydides, Xenophon, Lysias, Isocrates, Demosthenes, and the other Orators. For the Attic poets, see 10 and note 11.

8. Greeks from all the tribes repaired now to Athens to obtain an education; and even in those parts of literature which were most cultivated, the Athenian master-pieces were yet considered as models. The consequence was, that the Attic dialect, which now took rank of all the others, became, in those kingdoms which arose out of the Macedonian monarchy, both the court language and the general language of books; and was henceforth almost exclusively employed by the prose writers of all the Grecian tribes and countries. This language was now also taught in the schools; and the Grammarians decided, according to those Attic models, what was pure Attic, and what was not. The central point of this later Greek literature, however, formed itself under the Ptolemies at Alexandria in Egypt.

9. Along with this universality of the Attic dialect, began also the period of its gradual decay. On the one hand, writers mingled with the Attic much that was derived from the dialect of their own country; on the other, instead of anomalies peculiar to the Athenians and expressions which seemed farfetched, they