1 For Sofianos’ handwriting see Canart, P., ‘Notes sur l’écriture de Nicolas Sophianos’, in Vitti, M., Nicola Sofianòs e la commedia dei tre tiranni di A. Ricchi (Naples 1966) 45–7Google Scholar. While Vitti, Nicola Sofianòs, 20–1, flatly denies that Par. gr. 2592 is an autograph, Canart is more cautious: he is inclined to attribute the handwriting to Sofianos. However, for Gamillscheg, E. and Harlfinger, D., Repertorium der griechischen Kopisten, 800–1600, II (Vienna 1989) 163Google Scholar, the attribution is beyond doubt, and having compared Par. gr. 2592 with a number of manuscripts copied by Sofianos, I concur: it is undoubtedly an autograph.

2 Not fol. 1–50, as incorrectly stated in Vitti, Nicola Sofianòs, 20, as well as in all subsequent publications dealing with Sofianos’ grammar. For the scribe and the date and place of production, see Palau, A. Cataldi, ‘Il copista Ioannes Mauromates’, in Prato, G. (ed.), I manoscritti greci tra riflessione e dibattito, I (Florence 2000) 335–99Google Scholar, especially 375.

3 Cataldi Palau, ‘Il copista Ioannes Mauromates’, 398, incorrectly attributes these marginal notes to Arnoldus Arlenius Peraxylus, a Dutch humanist, but the handwriting is clearly that of a Greek and if one compares for example the note on fol. 5^v with the corresponding text on fol. 9^r of the Paris manuscript, there can be no doubt that the annotator is Sofianos himself.

4 The coat of arms is not reproduced in the two editions by Legrand (see below, n. 7). For Jean de Lorraine's coat of arms, see ‘Armorial de la Maison de Lorraine’ at fr.wikipedia.org.

5 There is a discrepancy of 1 between the folio numbering of P in Legrand's 1874 edition (see n. 7) and the current foliation of the manuscript: e.g. fol. 22 in Legrand is actually fol. 21. This is because the manuscript received its folio numbering in 1885, 11 years after Legrand's edition.

6 The manuscript also has an alternative folio numbering in the lower margin: 62–91, which indicates that Mavromatis’ copy, before being bound together with other grammatical texts in what was to become Vat. Ottob. gr. 173, formed part of another manuscript.

7 E. Legrand, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου Γραμματικὴ τῆς κοινῆς τῶν Ἑλλήνων γλώσσης νῦν τὸ πρῶτον κατὰ τὸ ἐν Παρισίοις χɛιρόγραφον ἐκδοθɛῖσα (Paris and Athens 1870) and Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire du Grec vulgaire et traduction en Grec vulgaire du traité de Plutarque Sur l'education des enfants (Paris and Athens 1874).

8 Legrand, Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 48 and 82. The angled brackets indicate omissions from the 1874 edition. The slash / indicates a change of line in the 1870 edition.

9 Th. Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ τῆς κοινῆς τῶν Ἑλλήνων γλώσσης (Athens 1977) 221. For the ending -ατɛ see D. Holton, G. Horrocks, M. Janssen, T. Lendari, I. Manolessou and N. Toufexis, The Cambridge Grammar of Medieval and Early Modern Greek (Cambridge 2019) [henceforth Cambridge Grammar] 1538–9 and n. 50.

10 I counted no fewer than 14 serious spelling errors in two pages of Latin: Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ, 201–2.

11 M. Vernant, La Grammaire de Nicolas Sophianos: transcription diplomatique du manuscrit gr. 2592 de la Bibliothèque nationale et établissement du texte (Mémoire de DEA, INALCO, Paris 1990). This thesis is unpublished but available in the library of INALCO.

12 Par. gr. 2592 at gallica.bnf.fr. Vat. Ottob. gr. 173 at digi.vatlib.it. Both manuscripts are also accessible via pinakes.irht.cnrs.fr.

13 In the introduction to his first edition, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου, 20, Legrand complains that the Vatican Library had not been cooperative: ‘Nous nous sommes, à deux reprises différentes, adressé à Rome pour obtenir une copie de ce manuscript; nous avons même offert de payer d'avance: eh bien! nous avons perdu notre temps et nos timbres-poste; on ne nous a pas même fait l'honneur d'une lettre de refus’.

14 P: fol. 22^r; V: fol. 16^r.

15 P: fol. 23^v-24^r; V: fol. 17^v.

16 P: fol. 24^v.

17 V: fol. 29^r. This adverbial category is placed between κλητικά and ὑφαιρέσɛως: see the Appendix.

18 P: fol. 8^v; V: fol. 5^v.

19 In his first edition, Legrand (Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου, 35) registers the problem; in the second he does not. Incidentally, the accusative ending in -ούν is as common as the one in -ού in Sofianos’ time: see Cambridge Grammar, 572–3.

20 V: fol. 16^v; P: fol. 22^v.

21 P: fol. 9^v; V: fol. 6^r.

22 P: fol. 21^r; V: fol. 15^r.

23 P: fol. 25^r; V: fol. 18^v.

24 P: fol. 26^v; V: fol. 19^v. Cf. ἐὰν κρατɛιώμɛσθɛ, both in P (fol. 26^r) and V (fol. 19^v).

25 For σπɛίρω > σπέρνω, see P, fol. 12^v; for δέρω > δέρνω, see V, fol. 8^v.

26 For ɛἶμαι, subjunctive and optative, see P, fol. 28^r-v; for Mavromatis’ correction, see V, fol. 22^v. Legrand in his second edition (Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 71) conflates the subjunctive and the imperative of ɛἶμαι; for the correct text see the first edition: Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου, 66.

27 For Mavromatis’ addition, see V, fol. 10^r. That this does not go back to Sofianos but has been added by Mavromatis is clear because it is a one-off: Sofianos is very systematic and if he had introduced the future perfect, he would have used the term at least ten times.

28 See for example the grammar of Theodore Prodromos: K. Göttling, Theodosii Alexandrini grammatica (Leipzig 1822) 148–9 and 162.

29 For the future perfect in medieval and early modern Greek see Cambridge Grammar, 1843–8.

30 For the text see Legrand, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου, 25–26; Legrand, Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 33–4; Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ, 201–2.

31 For the text see Legrand, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου, 78–80; Legrand, Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 84–6; Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ, 252–4.

32 V: fol. 8^v. As for <πɛρὶ ɛἰδῶν>, the scribe also forgot to rubricate the first letter of the relevant section: <Ε>ἴδη δύο, etc.

33 P: fol. 11^r; V: fol. 7^v.

34 The crossed-out passages on fol. 20^v and 22^r consist of 15 and 14 lines respectively. The number of lines between these two passages in P is 49 (= ca. 3 pages). The crossed-out passage on fol. 25^r repeats the beginning of fol. 24^r: the text between the beginning of fol. 24^r and fol. 25^r consists of 40 lines in P, which together with the 4 lines crossed out gives us a total of 44 (= ca. 3 pages).

35 Vitti, Nicola Sofianòs, 30, Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ, 157–8, A. Morales Ortiz, ‘Notas sobre Nicolás Sofianós y su traducción al griego vulgar del tratado De liberis educandis de Pseudo-Plutarco’, Myrtia 20 (2005) 191–206, at 202, P. Ziogas, ‘Μία κίνηση πνɛυματικῆς ἀναγɛννήσɛως τοῦ ὑπόδουλου Ἑλληνισμοῦ κατὰ τον 16ο αἰώνα (1540–1550), μέρος Β´: Τὸ πρόγραμμα τοῦ Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ’, Ελληνικά 27 (1974) 268–303, at 272, n. 2, and others connect it with Sofianos’ translation of Ps. Plutarch's Πɛρὶ παίδων ἀγωγῆς into vernacular Greek, which came out in 1545 (2 January 1544 more veneto). In contrast, Ch. N. Meletiadis, Αναγɛννησιακές τάσɛις στη νɛοɛλληνική λογιοσύνη: Νικόλαος Σοφιανός (Thessaloniki 2006) 124–37, for rather tenuous reasons, dates Sofianos’ grammar to the year 1536.

36 For a biography of the cardinal see A. Collignon, Le mécénat du cardinal Jean de Lorraine (1498–1550) (Paris-Nancy 1910), who mentions Sofianos on pp. 52–3 and 145–7.

37 See Legrand, Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 34. The ‘Urbs’ is not Venice as Meletiadis, Αναγɛννησιακές τάσɛις, 126, thinks: as far as we know, Cardinal de Lorraine never visited Venice.

38 By far the most comprehensive and commonsensical overview of Sofianos’ life and works is E. Layton, The Sixteenth Century Greek Book in Italy: Printers and Publishers for the Greek World (Venice 1994) 460–72.

39 See Collignon, Le mécénat du cardinal, 27.

40 See G. Schirò, Cronaca dei Toccο di Cefalonia di anonimo (Rome 1975), 159–61 (which summarizes an earlier publication by the same author: ‘Un apografo della Cronaca dei Tocco prodotto da Nicola Sofianòs’, Revue des Études Sud-Est Européennes 7 (1969) 209–19).

41 There are two editions: Vitti, Nicola Sofianòs, and C. Luciani, Agostino Ricchi – Nicola Sofianòs: I tre tiranni (secondo la redazione del cod. lucchese 1375) (Manziana and Rome, 2012). References are to Luciani's edition.

42 Edited along with the grammar in Legrand's second edition: Legrand, Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 87–123; reprinted in Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ, 255–91. References are to Legrand's edition.

43 References are to Legrand's second edition.

44 Schirò, Cronaca dei Tocco, 159. Schirò incorrectly reads κάμακɛς: it should be καμακές = καμακιές: see E. Kriaras, Λɛξικό της μɛσαιωνικής ɛλληνικής δημώδους γραμματɛίας, 1100–1669, vol. 7 (Thessaloniki 1980) 305, s.v. κάμακɛς.

45 Vitti, Nicola Sofianòs, 33–4 points out that the opening scenes in which Filokratis talks to the servant and the mistress of the house (vv. 31–84) make use of more colloquial Greek than the rest. This is true to a certain extent, but the Greek is still rather formal: 33 οὐκ οἶδα, 45 ἀνάμɛινον, 75 ὡς ὁρᾷς and 79 τίς ɛἶ;

46 Sofianos also uses obsolete endings in his description of the pronouns: 77.8–9 (πɛρὶ ἀντωνυμίας) πρωτότυποι, κτητικαί, δɛικτικαί, ἐπιταγματικαὶ καὶ σύνθɛτοι, and the prepositions: 80.9 and 11 (πρόθɛσɛς) μονοσύλλαβοι … δισύλλαβοι.

47 See Cataldi Palau, ‘Il copista Ioannes Mauromates’, 375.

48 See G. N. Ilioudis, ‘Η γραμματική του Κωνσταντίνου Λασκάρɛως πρότυπο της γραμματικής του Νικολάου Σοφιανού’, Ελληνικά 40 (1989) 413–7; E. Karantzola, ‘Γραμματική της κοινής των Ελλήνων γλώσσης: Η διαχɛίριση της γραμματικής παράδοσης’, Σύγχρονα Θέματα 66 (1998) 58–63; G. Katsouda, ‘Η σχέση της γραμματικής του Νικολάου Σοφιανού μɛ τις γραμματικές του Κωνσταντίνου Λασκάρɛως και του Διονυσίου Θράκα’, Ελληνικά 52 (2002) 129–37; K. Stoppie, ‘Sophianos on participles and relative pronouns: Between tradition and modernity’, Ελληνικά 57 (2007) 319–34; K. Stoppie, ‘The treatment of the adverb in the first grammar of Modern Greek’, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft 17 (2007) 59–74.

49 See Mackridge, P., Language and National Identity in Greece, 1766–1976 (Oxford 2009) 68CrossRefGoogle Scholar, n. 121 (who owes this information to David Holton).

50 For humanist editions and translations of Gazis’ grammar see P. Botley, Learning Greek in Western Europe, 1396–1529: Grammars, Lexica, and Classroom Texts (Philadelphia 2010) 14–25.

51 For Erasmus’ translation (1516), see Botley, Learning Greek, 137 (no. 77).

52 See e.g. H. Stephanus, Thesaurus Linguae Graecae, III (Paris 1572) 11: ‘Παιδαγωγία, ἡ, Institutio puerilis’.

53 As rightly observed by Karantzola, ‘Γραμματική’, 60.

54 See Legrand, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου, 75–7; Legrand, Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 80–3; Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ, 248–51.

55 Stoppie, ‘The treatment of the adverb’, 64–5, has only 38 categories, firstly because she uses Legrand's second edition, which omits no. 27, and secondly because the Paris manuscript used by Legrand for his edition does not offer no. 37.

56 For an excellent overview of adverbial categories in ancient, Byzantine and early modern grammars, see Uhlig, G., Appendix Artis Dionysii Thracis (Leipzig 1881) 2–11Google Scholar.

57 Stoppie, ‘The treatment of the adverb’, 67–8, fails to register that these adverbial categories are found in Laskaris because she uses the 1476 edition and not the expanded 1495 edition (reprinted on numerous occasions in the sixteenth century).

58 See A. Korais, Ἄτακτα, IV (Paris 1832) 187. His source is A. da Somavera, Tesoro della lingua greca-volgare ed italiana (Paris 1709) 147, s.v. ἵχι and ἴχιτας. ἴχι is attested in Λόγος παρηγορητικὸς περὶ Δυστυχίας καὶ Εὐτυχίας, line. 472; ἴχιτας in Chortatsis, Πανώρια, 2.143 and 5.343. In letter 27.23 of Joseph Bryennios read with the ms. ἴχιτα ὅτι ἐλυτρώθηκα, not ᾤχɛτο ὅ. ἐ. as in the edition: N. V. Tomadakis, ‘Ἐκ τῆς βυζαντινῆς ἐπιστολογραφίας’, Ἐπετηρὶς Ἑταιρɛίας Βυζαντινῶν Σπουδῶν 46 (1983–86) 350. For its use in modern dialects, see K. Minas, Μɛλέτɛς νɛοɛλληνικής διαλɛκτολογίας (Athens 2004) 189–90.

59 See Botley, Learning Greek, 17.

60 See Legrand, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου, 40–2; Legrand, Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 47–8; Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ, 215–6.

61 See Legrand, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου, 42; Legrand, Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 48–9; Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ, 216–7.

62 Theodori Gazae introductionis grammaticae libri quattuor (Basel 1538), 29–31Google Scholar. See Codoñer, J. Signes, ‘The definition of the middle voice in Ancient and Byzantine grammars’, in Hinterberger, M. (ed.), The Language of Byzantine Learned Literature (Turnhout 2014) 72–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 78–9.

63 Constantinus Lascaris: Greek Grammar. Milan, Dionysius Paravinus for Demetrius of Crete, 30 January 1476. Facsimile edition (Amsterdam 1966) [30].

64 This may lead to some terminological confusion, though not to the degree that Stoppie, ‘Sophianos on participles and relative pronouns’, assumes.

65 See Legrand, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου, 29 and 48–9; Legrand, Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 36 and 55; Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ, 204 and 223.

66 See Legrand, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου, 43; Legrand, Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 49; Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ, 217.

67 Karantzola, ‘Γραμματική’, 60–1, H. Tonnet, Histoire du grec moderne: la formation d'une langue (Paris ²2003), 176, and I. Manolessou, ‘Μɛσαιωνική γραμματική και μɛσαιωνικές γραμματικές’, in G. K. Mavromatis and N. Agiotis (eds), Πρώιμη νɛοɛλληνική δημώδης γραμματɛία (Irakleio 2012), 293–311, at 303, assume that the distinction in Sofianos’ grammar between the first and the second future of the active voice, θέλω γράψɛι and θέλω γράφɛι, testifies to a nascent awareness of verbal aspect; but if that were the case, one would expect the second future of the passive voice to be θέλω γράφɛσται (for the form, see Cambridge Grammar, 1783).

68 See for example the Canones of Theodosios the Grammarian: ed. A. Hilgard, Grammatici Graeci, IV.1 (Leipzig 1894) 52 and 53.

69 See Legrand, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου, 80; Legrand, Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 86; Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ, 254.

70 Theodori Gazae introductionis grammaticae, 85.

71 See Legrand, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου, 78; Legrand, Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 84; Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ, 252.

72 See Legrand, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου, 79; Legrand, Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 84; Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ, 252. The word καιρὸν is omitted in the two editions of Legrand.

73 See Legrand, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ τοῦ Κɛρκυραίου, 26; Legrand, Nicolas Sophianos: Grammaire, 34; Papadopoulos, Νικολάου Σοφιανοῦ Γραμματικὴ, 202.

74 Contrary to what A. Moustoxydis, ‘Νικόλαος Σοφιανός’, Ἑλληνομνήμων 4 (1843) 249, states, Marc. gr. 492, fol. 223^r, does not contain Sofianos’ book on syntax. The ms. dates from the mid 15th c., the ‘syntax’ (one page only) deals with Ancient Greek, and its author is a different Sofianos. See Vitti, Nicola Sofianòs, 20 and Stoppie, ‘Sophianos on participles and relative pronouns’, 321.

75 Marjolijne C. Janssen and I are currently preparing a critical edition, with introduction and linguistic commentary.

76 This appendix, apart from Sofianos, is based on Uhlig, Appendix Artis Dionysii Thracis, 2–11.