Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:29:52.190Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Influence of Katharevousa on the Phonology of Modern Greek

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2016

Margaret Kofod
Margaret Kofod*
Affiliation:
Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, The Netherlands
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Much has been written on Greek diglossia and the language struggle (between katharevousa and dhimotiki). Defenders of katharevousa have emphasized the importance of the language’s roots in ancient Greek, opponents of katharevousa have emphasized the idea that the Greek language should be first and foremost ‘the language of the people’.

Type
Articles
Information
Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies , Volume 16 , 1992 , pp. 84 - 109
Copyright
Copyright © The Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies, University of Birmingham 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Philippaki-Warburton, I., ‘Greek diglossia and some aspects of the phonology of Common Modern Greek’, Journal of Linguistics 16 (1979) 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2. Tsopanakis, A.G., (Thessaloniki 1982) 270–301.Google Scholar

3. Petrounias, E., ‘ The Modem Greek Language and Diglossia ’, in Byzantina kai Metabyzantina, Vol I: The ‘Past’ in Medieval and Modem Greek Culture, ed. Vryonis, Speros (Malibu 1978) 193–220.Google Scholar

4. Hatzidakis, G.N., (Athens 1905).Google Scholar

5. Roussel, L., Grammaire descriptive du roméique littéraire, (Paris 1922).Google Scholar

6. Newton, B., The Generative Interpretation of Dialect: a Study of Modern Greek Phonology (Cambridge 1972).Google Scholar

7. Cf. Hatzidakis (1905) 161; Triantafyllides, M.A., (Athens 1941) 86.Google Scholar

8. See Setatos, M., (Thessaloniki 1969) for many other examples.Google Scholar

9. Triantafyllides, M.A., (Athens 1941) 86.Google Scholar

10. There are doublets like /ko′limbi/ (swimming) and /kolimvi’tis/ (swimmer), both of which seem to be stable.

11. However, these proclitics form one unit with the following word, e.g. [to’nandra], [tomba’tera], , so that is not really a final n in these cases.

12. M. Setatos (1974) 10.

13. Petrounias, E., (Thessaloniki 1977) 397.Google Scholar

14. Petrounias, E., Differences between Dhimotiki and Katharevusa (Thessaloniki 1981) 6.Google Scholar

15. Secondary school in Greece consists of 3 years of yimnásio followed by 3 years of lίkio.

16. However, a very high percentage of Greek children attends lίkio.

17. Many of the words elicited in the questionnaire are included in the list of words containing learned and demotic consonant clusters in the (Athens 1976) 214-17.

18. My own impression, based on casual observation of speech outside Thessaloniki, is that the constraints do still function in many dialects of modern Greek, especially in the speech of generations older than those interviewed for this project, i.e. the ‘old people’ referred to by the informants.