MrMikeTheMan89 2500-3000 years

Well there is linear B and it dates back to mycean times but thats a different story

Well there is linear B and it dates back to mycean times but thats a different story

Not quite. Texts from Germanic languages 400 years ago are easy to understand today. Even go back to Chaucer, 600 years ago, its not that difficult for a modern English speaker to follow. Yes, Greek is "basically understandable" 2,000 years later, but 2,500 years later its more difficult, and 2,800 years later its quite difficult. It also depends on the dialect - Sappho's Aeolic Greek is more difficult for a modern Greek speaker than Homer.

You'd love Chinese...

Fábio Lima da Silva because the greeks had to revive it. you have to remember that greeks had to revive their language because bulgars, slavs, Albanians and turks replaced most of population

I am interested to learn ancient Greek should I learn modern Greek before? or it is not necessity?

Modern greek totally different than ancient (real) greek. Pontusian is the closest one to real greek but it is extinct now.

Konos P lol athens was albanian and your second largest city was muslim and jewish with some bulgarians in it

Konos P they were the majority not greeks. the actual greeks had to hide in islands and mountains to avoid being turkifed and replaced by albanians

Σας ευχαριστώ πολύ!

@George Raptis και γιατί ανοησίες;

Ancient Greeks were Albanians 🇦🇱 PROOF ---> Olympia = O Lumt Shpia = Glories House Aphrodite = Afer dita = Near day Hera = Era = Wind Apollo = Apelon = Appeal Rhea = Reja = Clouds. Pandora = Pun dore = Handmade Zeus = ZEU & Zot -> Voice & God Pegasus = Prej nga Zeus = Comes from Zeus Ares = Are = Field. Demeter = Dimer = Winter Hestia = Vjeshta = Autumn Poseidon= Posedon = Owns Triton = Driton = Light Up Thetis = Deti = Sea. Fortuna = Furtuna = Storm Kronos = Krijoj = Create Amalthea = Tamel Dhia = Goat Milk Odyssey = UDHES = Travel Hephaestus = Sefa e Stuse = Joy and Rise Alexander = Aj le si Ander= Born a Dream Hippocrates = Hapi Krahet = Spread your Wings Herodotus = Era e Dites = Day Wind Aristotles = Ari do te les = Born Gold Pericles = Pari ka le = First Born Hercules = Hekur ka le = Iron Born Achilles = Ne Quill les = Born in The Sky Medusa = Me Dy Sy --> With 2 eyes Oracles of Pythia = Ora/Oda ku Len Nje Pytje = Room where you ask a Question Delphi =Selvije = A most beautiful women Together it says = The room where you to ask the most beautiful women a question. SPARTA = Shpata = Sword an Philip 2nd = Prince The Second Alexander was Philip the Third Arvanites: Live in Greece for thousands of years, and speak 🇦🇱 Arbëreshë: Live in Italy for thousands of years, and speak 🇦🇱 Arnavut: Live in Turkey for thousands of years, and speak 🇦🇱 Alexander’s Hunza ,Kalash , Pamir , Tokhari people: Live in Asia for thousands of years, and use Albanians words 🇦🇱 Where are the Greek Speakers, that settled somewhere in the World, for thousands of years, and speak Ancient Greek ????? WAKE UP People !!! ANCIENT GREECE SPOKE ALBANIAN!! @ancient_albania Instagramahddgs

@@dalina25 r/ijusthadastroke

So you are going to teach the kids in school what you learned in youtube 🤣 what a joke

Thank you

Ciao dalla Grecia e migliori auguri per il tuo paese!

Ofcourse now days internet is full of non legit information. Political propaganda, falsification of History etc etc. As a result those beautiful things are the first victims of this chaotic degeneracy we live in.

Normans' French HUGE influence on the language.

dalitis dalitis λαλείς σωστά όπως και εμείς οι Πόντιοι που ομιλούμε τα Ρωμαϊκά

Λέτε ,πάτε Εις την θαλασσαν,όχι πάτε άις την θάλασσαν όπως αυτή που πιστεύουν οι Ερασμους μαλακες!

@@charalampostsouflidis7212 Στους υποστηρικτές της Ερασμικής να πείτε να προφέρουν την πρόταση "οι ποιηταί ποίησιν ποιοῦσι". Το αποτέλεσμα μάλλον θα ακουσθεί σαν κινέζικη γλώσσα και όχι ελληνική

@@andrem1403 αν το πεις λυρικά όπως υποστηρίζεται από αυτούς μια χαρά ελληνικότατο ακούγεται.

I hear Pontic Greek speakers are even closer.

Philopator On It's how I impress people by reading the pottery at the museum. "But that's ancient Greek!"

Chinese can be traced back to a hypothetical Sino-Tibetan proto-language. The first written records appeared over 3,000 years ago during the Shang dynasty...Greek linear B ...the oldest Mycenaean writing, dates to about 1450 BC. older than Chines...

i agree, it isnt different like old english and modern day english

which chinese?

belinskii Greek is better documented and Ancient Chinese evolved into different languages.

I always thought it was “ο άνθρος” in Modern Greek, but I’m by no means an expert. Perhaps someone else can explain this to me?

@@jimelihel Never heard of that. There is the dated demotic variant ἄθρωπος which already occurred during mid Koine. Or maybe you are confusing it with the genitive of ἀνήρ (ἀνδρός). Today we say just ἄνθρωπος.

Megas Alexandrous. Konstantinoupoli. Athena.

Different languages are more innovative and/or conservative in various areas. Similar how Italian looks very similar to Latin, and an Italian speaker can be able to understand the general idea of a sentence, it's not the same for a french person, since French changed much more from latin than Italian or Spanish or Romanian for example. English is one of the most innovative Germanic languages, thus it's not surprise. If you look at German however, the difference between old language and the modern one is much smaller and one is able to get a general sense of the meaning. Lithuanian is even more conservative than Greek.

@@wothin English isn't conservative because the British were constantly being invaded and had influence from French, German, and North Germanic languages (they were awful fighters). I doubt an Italian would be able to for a lot of sentences given the fact that all of the cases and one gender was lost. Lithuanian is probably going to be the next language I learn, the fact it's so conservative and close to PIE is appealing to me. That's a few years down the road however.

@@cfroi08 Being invaded may be a factor, but many language are more innovative and more conservative in certain areas of their language, just because without much reason. French for example is much more innovative than English, and it wasn't invaded by other forces a whole lot. Lithuanian and Latvian were invaded for the last centuries, however one can't really see them becoming much more innovative, especially not Lithuanian. Good luck learning Lithuanian, however. It's kind of hard, since there isn't that much learning material out there, comparably speaking.

@Jim K **The reason why some make the argument that modern and ancient Greek are different language has to deal with racism towards Greeks.** No that's just greeks placing pride over logic. Modern Greek is to ancient Greek as is Italian or Romanian (or the other languages derived from that) to Latin. The difference is that unlike Latin, Greek didn't spread across the Mediterranean thus there seems to be only one major Greek variant, thus people didn't have a need to differentiate as it is in the case of Latin. Most say that technically two variants of languages are then two different languages if there is a low intelligibility. Most Greeks can't understand Ancient Greek except some words just reading it, most modern Greeks will understand even less ifd Ancient greek is spoken in reconstructed Ancient pronunciation. The change was gradual over the years, as is the vase in all languages, but if a modern greek can't understand Ancient Greek if it is spoken with the reconstructed pronunciation, then it's a different language. * Such people typically don't apply their own alleged rules of "different language" to their own native language which typically has far less in common with ancient counterparts than Greek does. They typically do this with culture as well... ignoring they have far less on common culturally with their claimed ancient counterparts than Greeks. Then come the biology arguments. The Nazis who claimed themselves pure Aryans wheres they argued Greeks were too mongrelized to be "real" Greeks.* That is really irrelevant to the discussion about language. Stop using a straw man. * What people that stress differences are really trying to say is modern Greeks today are unrelated to ancient Greeks. The Fallmerayer myth sadly continues to be mainstream despite modern DNA testing showing modern Greeks are closely genetically related to ancient Greeks. There has been some admixture of course but after two thousand years every ethnic group has some.This would include ironically Fallmerayer who glossed over modern Germans received genetic inputs from Slavs, Normans, Celts, Greeks, Romans, and others over the ages.* What? Whether modern greeks are related to ancient greeks is really irrelevant to linguistics. Modern day greeks are mostly descendants from Ancient greeks similar how modern day Egyptians are the descendants of ancient egyptians, even though most don't speak the language derived from Ancient Egyptian (that would be coptic, but it's dying out). I don't know who this Fallmerayer is, but he is irrelevant to linguistics and nobody cares about him.

@Jim K * Oh irony you lecture on logic Tuk... a word with a Greek etymology... You are proving my point about rational inconsistency with your ad-hoc analogies..* Lol, oringinally it has a Proto-Indo-European etymology. Get off your high horse. The reason why we even use Greek words, is because of the Roman Empire. *What is framed as "Old English" has LESS in common with modern Greek than Alexanderian era Koine Greek has modern Greek. Do modern English claim old English is a "different language" despite that it has more in common with ancient German than modern Englsh? Not usually. Ditto for pretty much any language that has been around from 1000 year or more. * Yes, it is considered a different language, because it's unintelligible to a modern English speaker. Similar how Ancient Greek with the correct reconstructed pronunciation is unintelligible to a Modern Greek speaker. There are no hard borders between what's a language, what's a variant and what's a dialect, but at least if one can't really understand it, it's practically speaking a different language. Also it has more in common with German, but it's still unintelligible. *Just one more gibberish ad-hoc narration that ignores actual genetic facts. Greeks have more n common genetically with ancient Greeks than most of those that lecture Greeks on this issue have in common with their own claimed ancestors. * Did you even read what I wrote? I said Modern Greeks are mostly the descendants of the Greeks who lived on that land for thousand of years. *The same unprincipled approach applies to culture.. Greeks ty[icall have far more in common culturally with ancient Greeks than any of our patronizing detractors have in common with their claimed roots.* Not really. Be it, Slavs, Germanics, Latin people or Greeks, culturally speaking they are vastly differently, especially because of Christianity. Many traditions we have all over Europe come from Christianity, it's the same with Greeks. *You hold Greeks to a different standard than you do yourselves. You look for impurities and discontinuities with Greeks... and ignore the more glaring impurities and discontinuities in yourself. Hypocrisy isn't much of an argument dude. It's called prejudice for a reason. * No. I hold the greeks to the same standard as everybody else. Italian is also a different language from Latin, Similarly how all the Germanic languages are different languages from Proto-Germanic. It's the same with Ancient Greek and modern Greek.

Ευχαριστώ πολύ!

@@cfroi08 Re-read your own comment carefully. The "they" or your first sentence is not the same "the English" as the "they" of your second sentence! The "English" that were invaded by Vikings and Normans were a mixture of romanised Britons and Anglo-Saxons. The invaders, particularly the latter, than became the ruling class, and it is these "they" that led the expanse of the British Empire. To this day, Brits will lecture me on their eternal war with the French, prompting me to think - if you knew your own history, you would realise you _are_ the French. I never say this out loud, because there is no hope of having a reasonable conversation with an Englishman.

Deipatrous what the hell was that? French may have influenced English, but it’s definitely not the mother language of English. English may look and sound more Romance that other Germanic languages, but the grammar of English, specifically the syntax, is very similar to other Germanic languages. And what the hell is romanized Britons and Anglo-Saxons? Latin did not have a major influence on Britonnic and Germanic languages within the British Isles. The Romance influence on English came from the Normans. They were not romanized beforehand. tl;dr, you don’t know English history either

Would archaic forms still be seen as correct in greek schools? Not only the infinitive but also things like γράφομεν, εις, γαρ, νυν, μεν - δε, ίνα [...] I wasn‘t raised in Greece. So i am curious :D

@@enyalios316 Depends, really. Some archaistic expressions are seen as "okay" and "highly formal", some of them (or excessive use of them) can be considered "bad"

Thank you!

Risi cum scriptum tuum legerem, ignosce me. Sed miratus sum hominem qui latine scribere potest videre ^^

Ita est! Pulcherrimum est posse facere ut antiqui, qui loquebantur de Graeca lingua et de rebus antiquis, utentes Latinam et Graecam linguam

Dude this sounds like latin .?? Wth

@@bilosan97 It is Latin.

Thanks for the kind words!

Rogelio Toledo πως έχεις τους τόνους στο πληκτρολόγιο σου;

Σου έχω χάρη.

Ela twra re Prepei arxaia ellinika

Thank you! You're right, I should have mentioned these as well, but I didn't want the video to get too long. I'll add these too the description

Not really. A modern Greek won't simply be able to understand the new testament without problems if it is simply recited in the reconstructed pronunciation, given that he didn't learn that period of Greek.

@@wothin they won’t understand it ‘cause using the Ancient Greek Reconstructed Pronunciation butchers it...in fact, it’s even proven by scholars that Biblical Koine pronunciation was basically pronounced like Modern Greek.

@@wothin according to scholars, the Reconstructed Pronunciation is only acceptable to use with Ancient Greek.

In isolated parts of Turkey you can still hear the whispers of the infinitive here and there in Greek. I'm not a pro, but my best guess would be yes, but by way of Turkish so the chain might go Arabic->Turkish->Greek.

Flavius Belisarius: you just have to memorize the ditthongous. Latin has it too , just like greek have always had it! So just study here: ει, οι = i αι = e ου = u αυ = av/ af ευ = ev/ ef

Thanks! I think you'll get a feel for what I've been up to in my upcoming videos...

I think ancient greek sound like gaelic

I’d like to know this, too. Interestingly, my father, who was from Athens, told me the exact same pronunciation differences that you state at the beginning of your video. But I always wondered how anyone knew! Perhaps it is because there are certain groups of people, perhaps eastern orthodox monks, who maintained the ancient pronunciation throughout the ages? If so, of course, we just have to trust that things did not evolve within that small Society as well.

We know this because of a) Spelling errors in inscriptions b) Evidence from comparison with other Indo-European languages c) Evidence from transcriptions of Greek words into Latin d) Statements of Ancient Greek grammarians (who, for example, inform us about the diphthongal pronunciation of αι, οι, αυ, ευ) There are certainly a lot more, which means we have a pretty clear picture of what Greek in the 4th or 3rd century BC sounded like

The problem Yoho is that modern Greeks' whole sense of worth and identity is based on getting the modern West to acknowledge their personal right to the legacy of the ancient Greeks. That's why when somebody decides to stress the way the language changed (legitimate) they freak out and start yelling nonsense about Erasmus and I dunno what else, but when someone stresses the continuity of the language (also legitimate) like in this video, they make spectacles of themselves falling over themselves praising and adoring that analyst and oh, someone knows what he's talking about and thank you so much and blah blah. And I say this as a Greek myself. Of course there's no problem just admitting that languages change over time, but contemporary Greeks are too insecure to accept that.

Pimsleur has 30 classes, it is a great course.

Duo lingo (an app) seems pretty good as a way to learn a language. I used it mostly a few years back for Portuguese. I will say, however that it’s not something for tourists, I. E., It doesn’t teach you all the conversational stuff you need right away. I looked over the Greek lessons, and they looked OK. But I already know a little bit of Greek so I am not an impartial judge.

(I should not have said “resulting“. The breathing mark was still in the written language until demotic became official in the 1980s, I think.)

And yet, try a little experiment. Try applying a reconstructed pronunciation of Ancient Greek to modern Greek texts. You'll probably understand it 😂 Who's to say the Ancients couldn't at least understand some of a Modern Greek reading out, say, Plato's Republic in the Modern pronunciation?

@@E45F678 Ancient Greek has tens of grammatical constructions that just don’t exist in modern Greek; sure, if you cherry-pick a very basic text that happens to use words will little spelling change and preserved declension as well as verbs that don’t actually make use of ancient Greek’s full conjugation system, then I, as well as other modern Greek speakers, may be able to understand it to a very basic degree, but this is the exception not the rule. Ancient authors loved to make use of the huge conjugation system available to them to craft sentences that would be completely unrecognizable to a modern speaker. Ancient vocabulary is generally recognizable, but it’s nearly impossible to identify the function of a word in a sentence unless it’s of a preserved conjugation, less forget that the ancient Greeks had more cases for declension available to them when compared to the modern and simplified system. Lastly, the pronunciation of Ancient Greek is a whole rabbit hole, but to pronounce ancient texts with modern pronunciation rules makes pretty much no sense give the pentastress system used in Ancient Greek, which doesn’t really translate to the simplified stress system of modern Greek in a manner that actually preserves the identity of words. I can go out right now and ask a modern Greek speaker to read Plato’s republic, and as you said, they may claim to understand it, but if I ask them to give me a proper and correct translation of such text into modern Greek, they’d be stumped; why? Because they don’t actually understand the function of any of the grammar, they are just cherry-picking words which they may recognize to some degree and trying to guess at the meaning of the sentence, which often isn’t correct due to shifts in the meaning of certain words as well as the complete lack of any understanding of how a sentence in Ancient Greek comes together.

@Glorious Illyria ok next time learn what etymology actually is (its a science) and try to do it with the actual alphabet, the Greek one not the Latin, or you can just keep showing your ignorance and maybe use the Chinese Syllabograms, the result will be the same!

Antpaok Κοινή is pronounced "kiní" today, but anciently it wasn't. Actually, when the κοινή διάλεκτος was created, "κοινή" was spelled "koinè", or, at least, "koenè".

Απλά δεν θα μπορούν να το προφέρουν

Antpaok Yes, the “oy” pronunciation for “oi” had already died out in common speech by the 4th-3rd centuries BC. Biblical/Byzantine Greek was pronounced more or less the same as modern Greek. It annoys Greeks very much that non-Greek speaking people tell them how koine was spoken as they’ve been preserving it liturgically since forever. There is much written on the massive re-evaluation that non-Greek scholars have been doing in recent years. It’s been a long time coming.

He knows

In Roman-period Koiné pronunciation, οι was /ü/, and it would appear that η was /e/ among most speakers. For details see www.biblicallanguagecenter.com/koine-greek-pronunciation/.

I never used had i seen him. Im not native english speaker. Thanks for the lesson

"I could care less." Uhh... I think you actually mean the exact opposite.

In the UK just in the last decades they have virtually dropped the subjective entirely, with sentences like "I demand that he comes" considered correct even in writing. In US usage this is still jarringly wrong. That's apart from dropping the subjective with "to be", which seems accepted on both sides of the Atlantic now. ("If I was him" instead of "If I were him" - which in fact have two very different meanings - now lost on most people.) Less educated native speakers in both countries seem not to know any past participles: "I've went there before." Combined with billions of non-native speakers and their common mistakes, this language is coming apart at the seams.

Tall T.S.S oh that’s really interesting! I didn’t expect that. Thanks! I think I’m going to practice on Duolingo and see how much I can understand and try to automate the pronunciation. Thanks a lot!

That's not true. They certainly weren't pronounced the same. If you give a modern greek speaker the audio of an ancient Greek text and that person cannot understand it to a big amount, it's simply not the same language. That's how it works.

@@wothin I insist, its the same. It passed through the centuries from generation to generation. It is wrong to believe that suddenly one morning the Greeks woke up and started to speak and pronounce greek differently than their ancestors did! You are completely wrong. Let the native greek speaking people to know much more about it.

@@rooker56 Because "languages" are human classification. In nature, be it species or languages nothing has a hard border. When language changes, every generation doesn't really notice the language changing, but in the end it does change. That's how language change happens, with gradual steps. That's how what we call Proto-Indo-European evolved into languages like Greek, Armenian, Hindi, German, English, Iranian, Kurdish etc. With gradual changes. According to your thinking, French, Italian, Spanish, Romanian, etc speakers all speak Latin, because they experienced pretty much the same thing as Greeks. The only difference is that Latin was so widespread and survived that it had thousands of variations with certain ones becoming dominant in certain regions, while the Greek mainly survived in Greek proper, with all the other variations slowly being lost, like Cappadocian, Tsakonian, Pontic Greek etc,. If you, as a Modern Greek speaker, can't understand a text without firstly learning its language, it means that said text isn't mutually intelligible to you. Let alone if said text would be pronounced in its likely reconstructed pronunciation, after all Greek writing is very conservative.

@Capri Ama > Because as far as I know that's not the linguistic consensus. Then you know incorrectly. The difference between dialect and language is fluent though, however the bigger the unintelligibility is the more something is a "language" and not a dialect. That's why linguists regard "Chinese dialects" as separate languages, because the various "Chinese dialects" do not understand each other, while linguists do regard the three different "languages" called Croatian, Serbian and Bosnian, as the same language with dialect continuum. Modern Greek is a descendant of the Attic dialect of Ancient Greek. They aren't the same language though, because a modern speaker can't even understand Ancient Greek texts without firstly learning Ancient Greek, while keep in mind that because of the Greek conservative orthography it's heavily simplified. Let alone would a Modern Greek person understand the speech of Ancient Greek the way how most linguists have reconstructed it. Ergo, they are different languages. Similar how Latin is a different language from Italian. Also, why shouldn't I compare them? The same applies to all languages. Greek isn't special. Also Greek did split. There are many present day mutually unintelligible dialects of Greek, thus de-facto languages. They are dying out however. There are Tsakonian (the most divergent from Modern Greek), Cappadocian, Pontic, Griko etc. Some are more mutually intelligble than other, but it doesn't change the fact that they can be regarded as their own languages, similar how Spanish and Italian are also to a certain extend mutually intelligible, yet are considered different languages (or Russian and Ukrainian, German and Dutch, etc). Also, even if those dialects never survived or died out in a few decades, how would it change stuff? If hypothetically all Romance languages die out, except the Italian language, does Italian become Latin suddently, because it did not split? Or what if after the fall of Rome, people stopped speaking Romance languages in France, Romania, Spain etc, then Latin wouldn't have split either, would Italian be suddently the same language as Latin? No it wouldn't because a present day Italian can't read Latin without learning it, except a few words here and there which look familiar, nor can he understand reconstructed Latin. The same applies to Modern Greeks. If Modern Greeks, were able to read or even understand reconstructed Ancient Greek, without studying it in school, then you would have a point, but otherwise, no. Also, in regards to the reconstructed pronunciation. While those are only guesses, those guesses are still better estimations than simply reading Ancient Greek with Modern Greek pronunciation. This doesn't really matter however, because modern Greek people, can't understand Ancient Greek even if it is read with a modern Greek pronunciation, unless they studied it.

@Capri Ama > I don't see how exactly what I said is incorrect. Horrocks, Adrados, Mirambel, Browning, Babiniotis etc (I could go on and on) are only a few of the well-known linguists that are supporting what I already said: that ancient and modern Greek are the same language and not two different languages. So, since you didn't give me an answer the first time I asked could you perhaps give me now the names of the linguists, like I did, that are supporting your claim? And can you give me their arguments, why exactly that is the case? Simply saying "but a certain authority is agreeing with me" without actually giving arguments as to why exactly and how, is called appeal to authority and is a logical fallacy. I don't need authority because I can use my own arguments, independent of them. Now try doing the same. I only care about the arguments and not the authority. > I'm not sure what gave you that impression but everything that you mentioned until now are Greek dialects, not different languages. And of course what I'm saying is according to what the linguists are saying. Greek unlike Latin never split. A cypriot that speaks the Cypriot dialect and a Cretan that speaks the Cretan dialect can understand each other because they're both speaking greek. On the other hand a Spaniard can't understand french just because he is a native speaker of a romance language. That's because Spanish and french are two different languages. What you said about the native greek speakers isn't correct either. A Greek can understand ancient Greek in varying degrees depending on the writer, the period and the dialect. Firstly, I'm not talking about Cypriot and Cretan dialects. I was talking about Tsakonian, Griko, Pontic Greek, Cappadocian Greek, etc. "dialects". Greek speakers can understand them with only great difficulty (maybe if they speak very slowly) and in some cases not at all. Meaning the Greek language did split up. Why are you ignoring those "dialects" or rather languages? Also why did you simply ignore my argument towards the whole "splitting up" idea? I mean if you don't even react to those arguments and simply repeat the same thing, what is the point of you writing this? No, a Greek, without learning Ancient Greek at school cannot understand it sufficiently. Understanding some words here and there or some phrases, is not the same as understanding the language. Also with Ancient Greek, I do not speak of Koine Greek, but even Koine Greek, a Greek without studying it would have a hard time understanding it. I live in Germany and where I live I have many Greek friends. Most of them grew up in Germany, thus they could only speak Modern Greek as taught at home. And they cannot understand Ancient Greek at all, with Koine Greek being easier, but it's essentially they would not be able to understand if they read a text, except maybe the base ideas. That does apply to the Greeks who grew up in Greece. If you grew up in Greece and you learned Ancient Greek or Koine Greek at school and you managed to learn a very good amount, than good for you, you still had to learn to understand it. I'm also rather linguistically gifted and I can learn languages rather easy, doesn't mean that other people can do the same. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eJiWhbeEnaq-aIk.html Here is a guy who interviews Greek people on the street, if you do not believe my story. So no, they can't understand it. And those Greeks grew up in Greece, meaning they did have that in school, thus there is certain familiarity, because they learned it. Greeks I'm speaking of, speak only Mordern Greek and never went to school in Greece, meaning they never had Ancient or Koine Greek. > As for the reconstructed pronunciations, they are just that: reconstructions. But at the end of the day no matter how different the actual ancient Greek pronunciation (and not the reconstructed) was from the standard modern Greek pronunciation, it's of no importance. There is not one modern Greek pronunciation the same way that there was not only one ancient greek pronunciation. There were and still there are different Greek dialects with different pronunciations and the pronunciation differs from region to region. But the differences in the pronunciation never stopped the speakers of the same language from communicating with each other. It is important. The reconstruction is with high probability very correct. Maybe not everywhere, but it's close, it's at least closer to the actual deal, than simply pronouncing Ancient Greek as if it was Modern Greek. If a Modern Greek can't understand a person reading Ancient Greek in their reconstructed pronunciation it means that if a Modern Greek were to be teleported to 500 BC Athens, they wouldn't understand the people speaking there and they would not understand him or her, meaning they would speak totally different languages.

*Vulgar latin and Italian.

We also say "θυρωρός", doorman/doorkeeper

Depends on the writer

Yes it is possible (even kind of moving sometimes)! I mean if you consider that there are ancient greek words which are being used in the exact same way in modern Greek it makes it even easier. I am not saying it's like a piece of cake let's say but if you put effort into it, it can be done! I was always wondering the same about Latin and Modern Italian language but I assume something similar is possible for you as well. Greetings from Greece!

In teoria posso leggere tutto il greco che c'e' scritto sulla Stele di Rosetta e capisco il significato delle prime 20 parole ma non riesco a capire quello che segue perche' le parole sono attaccate l'una l'altra. I can read all the Rosetta stone and understand the meaning of the first 20 words but then I lose it because the words have no spaces between them.

@@electrachristidi Thank you Electra! Latin and Italian are more different, of course the majority of words in Italian is coming from latin, but the construction of the sentences and the grammar are completely different. If an Italian that has never been studying latin tried to translate a simple excerpt from a classic author he couldn't understand more then 10%

@@massimopalaja The fact that the construction of the sentences and the grammar changed a lot makes sense to me if you consider the timelessness of the language through the origin of its words. I mean, it kind of makes sense to me (because unfortunately I don't speak Italian) but 10% is still a good percentage, don't you think? Thanks for the explanation anyway!

@@NataliaYaremchuk0816 Hello, that's not really a coincidence. Many Roman emperors were from Illyrian origins. Enea Dardani the young prince from Troy, is said to be one of the founders of Rome, also Illyrian origin.

​@@NataliaYaremchuk0816 Hi, a myth originates from the saying "me the" and "te thashe", meaning that "you told me and I told you". A myth may never be proven as a complete fact, but it may never be completely dismissed either. Just like in modern day anybody can be from that certain country as long as they have citizenship, but your own origins never change. Yes, it does not mean that if those emperors were from different places originally then Rome was then Gothic or Hispanic or Illyrian or something else for that matter, but it was definitely ruled by those emperors with different ethnicities at that time and even kept alive for so long according to history. Those emperors from different ethnicities and there was A lot of them also brought in their own cultures, traditions and language of course. Romans adopted Illyrian military, their ships for instance the "Liburna ship" and language too, but it would be too long to explain. Greek culture was not the only culture that existed in that timeline. Greece had tribes that were Illyrian tribes in the region. Many of the tribes in Greece came down from the north as well. Culture was all mixed back then just like it is today. Also, if we didn't give any of the myths some attention, then we shouldn't read any literary works from universities, or other libraries either because we would dive in with the idea that they must not be true all the time then and many works that we have from the Ancient Greek world is not really true either then. Myths and History together come in hand to hand. Nothing I was saying was based on nationalistic conclusions. I'm from Athens, but I'm able to view something in a different perspective and understand something more when I read something more. There is way more history to be uncovered, but we just have to wait.

The same stem is in use, but since the -mi verbs don’t exist in MG, the endings have been replaced: 1) by the passive voice endings (-mai, -sai, -maste, -ste) for 1st and 2nd person and 2) by the ancient infinitive “einai” for 3rd person. (εγώ είμαι, εσύ είσαι, αυτός/αυτή/αυτό είναι, εμείς είμαστε, εσείς είστε, αυτοί/αυτές/αυτά είναι) (egó eímai, esy eísai, autós/autí/autó eínai, emeís eímaste, eseís eíste, autoí/autés/autá eínai)

Nothing is ever really thrown out in the Greek language. There are also some active participles which still can be declined ἐνδιαφέρων, -ουσα, -ον. I also often see more formal variants like ἔχων, γράφων, λέγων etc. and it's declined variants

@@enyalios316 Exactly. There are also all sorts of perfect participles. Here is just a random example, clearly defined as such in wiktionary with declination and all: el.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CE%B5%CE%BE%CE%B1%CF%83%CE%BA%CE%B7%CE%BC%CE%AD%CE%BD%CE%BF%CF%82

It means both spiritual and workmanship but mostly that word is ascosiated with ''Poetry'' which i believe it comes from the poiemasin itself as an origin.

Philopator On / Interesting answer, thanks. The reason I asked about 'poiemasin' was that in KJV Bible, as well as in other Bible versions in English, in Rom.1:20 it reads that God's invisible properties are being perceived and understood through "the things that are made" (i.e. 'poiemasin' is translated "things made"). However, in for instance Weymouth New Testament, the Swedish official Bible of 1917 and the Croatian Bible, in Rom.1:20 it reads that God's invisible properties are being perceived and understood through " His works" (i.e. 'poiemasin' is translated "works"). The difference between the two alternative translations is substantial, because "the things that are made" can only mean material things in the Creation whereas "His works" can also mean things that God does within humans to reveal his invisible spiritual properties to humans. Something spiritual and invisible, such as God's Power, Lordship, Love, Holiness, Blissfulness and the Word, cannot be perceived and understood through external observation of material things. Someone who within himself has spiritually experienced God, can see that the Creation reflects some of God's properties, but a person who did not have any inner spiritual experiences, cannot just by observing "the things that are made" through his external senses, perceive and understand God's spiritual properties. Hence my conclusion is that in the context of Rom.1:18 - 21 'poiemasin' can only mean "works" whereas the translation "the things that are made" is an arbitrary and misleading paraphrase. Would you agree on that conclusion?

Note that any kind of work/creation Human or God made comes from within, from our spiritual ego.

Philopator On / I do not know what you are talking about. Your reply is completely incomprehensible, not to say absurd.

SPARTAN PRIDE They told you so because they were never taught that the pronunciation of Greek had change during the last 2500 years. Beta was actually a B and theres a lot of evidence to support this.

Sure. All these evidence also suggest that the Greeks got their pronunciation from the English.

In modern Greek B is pronounced like V as you say.. However in ancient greek texts we can see that Ancient Greek pronounced that the same way as English. In a text of Cratinus is says "Ὁ δ’ ἠλίθιος ὥσπερ πρόβατον βῆ βῆ λέγων βαδίζει!". It actually implies that the sound of sheep was "βῆ βῆ" that would be read "vi vi" in modern Greek... As mush as we know the sound of sheep hasn't changed the last 10000 years, so it's the sound of the letters that changed... B was like the english B and Η was like double E.

Lone Ranger​ I feel like you havent even spent an hour of your life to learn whats going on with the history of the Greek language.

so sorry but Greeks from Greece told me no, the B was always a V sound.

not denying though that theres lots of conservative features in modern greek, thats in part do to having a continuous line of written standard language for so long

Wenn du wüsstest, was für einen hanebüchenen Unfug du hier verbreitest.

Hafsa.boumi Hafsaboumi Yes.Actually hellenistic period of new testament is about the same.

In modern Greek is pronounced 'kiní', where í is the stemmed vowel. 😊

@@steliopapakonstantinou674 You are a blessing! Thanks for enlightening me. I'm learning Greek and it's unique!

Because of the universal degeneration all languages (and everything else in the universe) become quantified and lose quality, ultimately reaching binary and then only a single unit or a mass, until the cycle starts again. For more information, see René Guénon - The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times

It's just Indo-European ones that are, for example, there are many languages that have (and are) gained cases, Finnish has 15 and Hungarian 18 whilst Proto-Uralic is believed to only have 6

Ancient greek has nothing to do with today's greek. Completely different. Today's greek is koine language ancient greek is more like Latin.

Thanks for the recommendation! I'll to order a copy. I'll post some more videos of me speaking Greek (ancient and modern) and Latin in the near future.

I've never read the book written by W. Moleas, but from reviews I got an impression that it was not so good (pre-Byzantine parts had some errors), that it was not useful for classical philologists and linguists, and that it was intended for general audience with interest in Greek language. Positive aspects of the book are that it is concise, has good literary examples with english translation and the language used in this book is not too technical. The best introductory book onthis topic is still - Medieval and Modern Greek - R. Browning - 1983. Horrock's book is more detailed and updated - Greek: A History of the Language and its Speakers - G. Horrocks - 2014. Histoire du grec moderne: La formation d'une langue - H. Tonnet - 2003 - is useful. Reference books (about Ancient Greek history, concluding with Koine): A Companion to the Ancient Greek Language - 2014 A History of Ancient Greek: From the Beginnings to Late Antiquity - 2007 There is a new book (though I didn't have a chance to look through this book, but from the contents its mostly dealing with Ancient Greek, and has one final chapter dedicated to Byzantine and Modern Greek) - A Brief History of Ancient Greek - S. Colvin - 2014.

IIRC, Modern Greek is a descendant of that dialect. Because of sociopolitical reasons of that era.