[Biblical-languages] Consonantal iota
biblang at ntresources.com
biblang at ntresources.com
Wed Aug 13 15:01:50 EDT 2003
I've responded to Peter K's queries below.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Rodney J. Decker, Th.D., Assoc. Professor/NT
Baptist Bible Seminary, Clarks Summit, PA, USA
URL: www.NTResources.com
PURL: purl.oclc.org/NT_Resources/
Email: <rdecker> at <NTResources.com>
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Kirk
> [mailto:peter.r.kirk.at.ntlworld.com at biblang.at.ntresources.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 9:49 AM
> To: Biblical Languages
> Subject: Re: [Biblical-languages] Consonantal iota
>
>
> On 13/08/2003 06:22, biblang at ntresources.com wrote:
>
> >How is consonantal iota to be represented in Unicode? There is no ...
> Is this character, as a distinct character, used in any actual texts or
> as a regular representation, or only as a local convention
> within these particular publications?
I've been pursuing this on the b-greek list as to concerns appropriate
there. Here seems to be the verdict. Carl Conrad explains the character
thus:
> There are in fact three consonantal sounds that were in older inscriptions
once
> actually represented by written characters or that have been inferred as
once
> present to have caused phonetic changes of a regular kind in the evolved
spelling
> and pronunciation of words. These are (1) initial and medial sigma; (2)
initial and
> medial consonantal iota; and (3) digamma (initial and medial "w"). I can't
give a
> full account of them here, but I've spelled out more about them in a PDF
document
> entitled "Compendium of Greek Phonology" at
> http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/Docs/CompPhon.pdf
So yes, this was an actual character. It is also represented in modern
grammars by various conventions (see below). The character has been called
by several names, including: "consonantal iota" (Mounce, et. al.), "iota
semivowel" (Smyth), & "consonantal yod" (Conrad, et. al.).
> >Two related questions:
> >
> >Are we to use 032D or 032F combined with iota (03B9) for such marks?
> >(And if so, which?)
> >
> >
> Presumably. If they are a local convention then it doesn't matter which.
> If they are used regularly, it would be good to determine which is the
> more commonly accepted form.
My conclusion/summary in this regard is as follows:
There are several conventions for representing this character in printed
texts, including:
a. A "pointed caret" (like Unicode 032D) under an iota (Mounce)
b. A "rounded circumflex" (like Unicode 032F) under an iota (Smyth)
c. The English letter 'y' (either italicized or marked with asterisk)
(McMinn, Whatmough, Allen, Sihler)
My *guess* is that the use of the 'y' might be as much for font/typesetting
purposes as any other reason. When type was handset and such items could be
handled by a good typesetter, you see the results as in Smyth. I suspect the
more recent use of the 'y' glyph is a concession to the intermediate stages
and limitations of computerized typesetting (or academics/operators not able
to represent it otherwise), otherwise we have a totally foreign glyph in
Greek. (To my knowledge, a consonantal iota never resembled a 'y' in
shape/design.)
What this doesn't tell me is whether or not the Mounce or Smyth convention
is the preferred representation. I have several references, but I'll need to
get across campus to the library to check them. Any further suggestions,
observations, comments are welcome in the meanwhile.
Rod
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/biblical-languages/attachments/20030813/7d7cdd59/attachment.htm
More information about the Biblical-languages
mailing list