INTRODUCTION
THE LANGUAGE OF KOINE GREEK
I.1. The language that you will study in this book has one of the longest histories of any known language. We can trace it backward well beyond 2000 BC, and in its various forms and transformations Greek has continued as a language to the modern form spoken in Greece today. The Koine Greek of the NT and the LXX is but one narrow slice of a much larger history. What you will learn in this book will not enable you to read or understand the oldest forms of the language, which used a totally different writing system. Nor will it enable you to communicate with people who speak Modern Greek (even if you were to learn Koine using Modern Greek pronunciation). The following summary, and it is only that, will help you understand how the narrow slice of Koine fits into the larger picture of the Greek language.[1]
The Pre-Koine History of the Greek Language
I.2. Before 2000 BC a people group who came to be called Hellenes (οἱ Ἕλληνες) came to reside in and around the Aegean. The region in which they settled was designated Hellas (ἡ Ἑλλάς), and their language the Hellenic language (ἡ Ἑλληνικὴ γλῶσσα). From where they came and exactly when remains somewhat of a mystery. The designation Greek comes from the Latin word Graeci, which the Romans used to describe these people.
The oldest known written texts in Greek, dating from the thirteenth century BC, use a form of the Greek language that is called Mycenaean Greek. They were written, not in the Greek alphabet that we know and use today, but in a script called Linear B. This was not even an alphabetic script but used glyphs representing syllables rather than individual letters—a syllabary rather than an alphabet. An inscription using this form can be seen in figure I.1.
Figure I.1. Mycenaean, Linear B Greek Tablet (TA709)
National Archaeological Museum, Athens. Photo courtesy of John S. Y. Lee
I.3. Another ancient form of writing Greek is described as being written in boustrophedon style. In this format the lines of text run alternately from left to right, then right to left. This is the origin of the term boustrophedon, which means “as the ox plows the field.” The first part of the word comes from βοῦς and means “ox”; the second part comes from στρέφειν, which means “to turn.” (After the ox drags the plow the length of the field, he turns and begins a new furrow in the opposite direction.) The oldest such writing known is from the eighth century BC. You can see a sample of this form of writing in figure I.2. The actual artifact is just over three inches square.
Figure I.2. Fragmentary Archaic Athenian Inscription, IG I3 1418
Courtesy of the L. H. Jeffery Archive, Centre for the Study of Ancient Documents, Oxford
I.4. Following the collapse of the Mycenaean civilization, the Greek language disappeared into a dark tunnel; though it did not cease to exist, there are scarcely any written remains of the language in this period. When it finally emerged from the “Greek Dark Ages” (eleventh–ninth centuries BC), we find evidence of a multitude of dialectical variations in existence in the eighth century BC. Although the details remain unclear (and disputed), it appears that during those centuries (and perhaps earlier) a range of Greek dialects spread across the area then known as Greece (the Greek mainland, Thessaly, Macedonia, the Peloponnesus, the Aegean Islands, the western edge of Asia Minor, Crete, and Cyprus). The evidence is sketchy, but as best we can determine, there were two main forms of Greek in use in the eighth century, each with multiple subdivisions, as can be seen in the following table.[2]
| West Greek | East Greek | ||
| Peloponnesian Doric | Northwest Greek | Attic-Ionic | Arcado-Cypriot |
| Doric | Aeolic | Ionic | Arcadian |
| Megarian | Boeothian | Attic | Cypriot |
| Thessalian | |||
The approximate locations in which these dialects were spoken are shown in figure I.3.
Figure I.3. Dialects of Ancient Greece. Key: bold = dialects; italics = place names
I.5. These diverse forms of the language persisted for several centuries on more or less equal footing. It was not until the seventh to fifth centuries BC that some of the dialects began to acquire a “panhellenic” status as a result of the literature written in them. The first and perhaps most important literary works in Greek are the Homeric works the Iliad and Odyssey. We know very little of their author or dates (scholars propose a wide range from the twelfth to the seventh centuries BC), but these epic poems as we know them are composed in an archaic eastern Ionic dialect with an added sprinkling of Aeolic elements for metrical purposes. The Greek epic tradition (which probably began as an oral form) culminated in the Homeric texts in the eighth century. They achieved a literary prestige that provided the foundation for widespread imitation and the beginning of some standardization favoring the Ionic dialect in the seventh century and following.[3]
The sixth and fifth centuries BC represent the flowering of Classical Greek civilization and with it the beginnings of Greek prose literature of a philosophical and scientific nature. Here we meet writers such as Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes, Heraclitus, and Herodotus, all of whom wrote in Ionic prose. Their achievements established Ionic as the prestige language for prose writing as of the fifth century. Ultimately, however, Attic, a sister dialect to Ionic, became the standard form of Classical Greek. This was due to several factors. Politically, in the fifth century Persia conquered Asia Minor, including Ionia on the western coast, greatly diminishing the influence of the major Ionic-speaking area. Athens was a key force in stopping Persian expansion westward, developing into a major maritime power at this time. Athens was also becoming an intellectual, cultural, and commercial center. Greek rhetoric originated in Athens about this time, producing noted orators such as Thucydides and Isocrates. This was the time of the great philosophers Socrates and Plato. The net result was the rise of Athens and its dialect, Attic, to become the gold standard of Classical Greek, albeit with the adoption of a number of formerly Ionic features. This change brought about the great influence and prestige of Attic Greek, which would last for centuries.[4]
I.6. Language is always embedded in and affected by history and culture. Nowhere is that more clearly seen than in the development of Koine Greek.
Development of Koine
In the fourth century BC, Macedonia rose to power and came to dominate the Greek mainland under the leadership of Philip II. It is disputed whether the language of Macedonia should be considered a Greek dialect (if so, it was characterized by greater divergence from Attic than any of the other Greek dialects) or was another Indo-European language closely related to Greek. To provide a basis for political power in Greece, however, Philip’s administration adopted Attic as the language of government and education. This was the natural culmination of the growing Hellenization (or perhaps better, Atticization) of Macedonian culture, a process that had begun in the fifth century.[5]
I.7. Building on his father’s power base in Greece, Alexander III (356–323 BC), best known as Alexander the Great, accomplished a spectacular conquest of the ancient world: Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Persia, and the frontiers of India. In accomplishing this, the young military and political genius spread Greek language and culture over a vast area. The language in use as this triumph began was standard Attic. The process of assimilating many other cultures (as well as large numbers of foreign troops into the ranks of the Greek army) had a deep impact on the language, becoming Koine Greek (κοινὴ διάλεκτος, “the common dialect”), the lingua franca of the Alexandrian Empire. “For the first time the notion of ‘Greek,’ which hitherto had unified the dialects only as an abstraction, acquired a more or less concrete instantiation in the form of the standard written, and increasingly spoken, Koine.”[6]
The language changed as it spread, absorbing some non-Attic features and being simplified grammatically. Learning this language became imperative for indigenous populations, whether to enable military or civil service in the new regime or simply to do business with their new neighbors and masters. Koine, which was imposed top-down by the Greek rulers in the administrative centers of the empire, served a unifying function “by cementing in place the idea of a common Greek culture based on a common intellectual heritage expressed in a common Greek language.”[7] Even through the political and military maneuvering of the second and first centuries BC, in which Rome emerged as the new world power, having defeated all the various divisions of Alexander’s empire, Koine Greek remained the lingua franca despite the formal position of Latin as the language of Rome. Greek language (and to a lesser extent Greek culture) remained the de facto standard for most areas of life under Roman rule for several centuries. The Greek language as spoken by the Jews is sometimes called Hellenistic Greek, but this language is no different from Koine, and many scholars use the term for all Greek of the Hellenistic period.
Characteristics of Koine
I.8. Three major characteristics distinguish Koine Greek from Classical Greek.[8] The first is semantic change. Languages change continually; new words are created or borrowed, and old words take on new meaning or disappear altogether. This is evident in Koine. To note only a few examples: In Classical λαλέω meant “I babble,” but in Koine it becomes the usual verb used to refer to normal speaking. Βάλλω could formerly refer to a somewhat violent throwing, “I hurl.” This meaning is toned down in Koine, in which the word means simply “I throw,” or even “I put” or “I send.” The careful Classical distinction between εἰς and ἐν is giving way in Koine, where εἰς begins to encroach on the semantic territory of ἐν. Likewise with conjunctions, ἵνα, which in Classical always indicated purpose, is broadened in the Koine and used for content, purpose, result, or temporal reference.
I.9. Second, the grammar is also simplified in Koine. Although Classical Greek had many conjunctions, Koine uses relatively few, the most common of which is καί. Word formation is simplified. Older μι verbs are replaced with ω forms. Irregular formations of both verbs and nouns are regularized; for example, the second singular of οἶδα was formerly spelled οἶσθα, but in Koine it follows the regular endings and is spelled οἶδας. Attic verbs spelled with γιγ- are simplified to γι- (e.g., γίγνομαι and γιγνώσκω become γίνομαι and γινώσκω). Forms with θη begin to replace the usual aorist middle forms -σαμην and -ομην, serving as dual-voice aorist middle/passive forms. The Attic preference for -ως as the ending for some second-declension masculine nouns shifts to -ος. Some forms either disappear altogether or are used much less frequently. For example, the use of three grammatical numbers (singular, plural, and dual) is simplified to two (singular and plural). Use of the optative and the future participle falls off significantly.
I.10. Third, there is an increased explicitness and clarity in Koine, probably a reflection of the lack of intuitive understanding of bilingual, second-language users and the consequent need to spell out matters that native speakers assumed. As a result compound verbs become more common. Pronouns are supplied more frequently as subjects of verbs. Prepositions are used more frequently where formerly case alone was considered adequate for use by native speakers. The dative case in particular occurs less frequently on its own, being supplanted by various prepositional phrases. Direct discourse is now more common than indirect discourse. Redundancy in the language increases—for example, using the equivalents of “the very same” and “each and every.”
Later Forms of the Greek Language
I.11. The later forms of the Greek language will not be considered in any detail here.[9] Following the Koine period is Byzantine Greek, from the fourth century AD to the fall of Byzantium/Constantinople in AD 1453. The Roman Empire divided into East and West during this period (AD 395), with the East retaining Greek as the common language but the West turning increasingly to Latin. It is during this period that by far the largest number of extant NT manuscripts were copied, most of them in Byzantium, using the new minuscule handwriting style that was invented in the ninth century (see chap. 1).
After 1453 the language is called Modern Greek. In the earlier history of Modern Greek there were two dialects: Katharevousa (καθαρεύουσα), the official language of government, education, and church; and Demotic (δημοτική), the common, spoken language of every day. These reflect an attempt to restore a form of the language based on ancient Attic on the one hand (Katharevousa) and the continued developments in the Koine on the other (Demotic).[10] In 1976 the Demotic form was legislated as the official language of Greece and is now referred to as Standard Modern Greek.[11] An additional change was implemented in 1982, when the previous system of multiple diacritics was abandoned for a simpler, monotonic system. The older, polytonic Greek employed three accents, two breathing marks, and a diaeresis. Standard Modern Greek is now written with only one accent (the tonos), an occasional diaeresis, and no breathing marks. To note a few of the differences in Standard Modern Greek when compared with the Koine, there are now only three main cases: nominative, genitive, and accusative; the dative has disappeared except in a few set expressions. The perfect and future tense forms have been dropped, their function being replaced by the use of auxiliary verbs. The optative mood, infinitives, and μι verb forms have been eliminated. Only a past participle remains.
Nature of the Greek of the New Testament
I.12. How are the “anomalies” of the Greek found in the NT to be explained, since they differ from Classical Greek at many points? The answer to that question is evident in light of the preceding discussion, but the question was debated prior to the twentieth century. It is worth noting here so that you can read older works with some understanding of their limitations. Formerly, three common explanations were offered. The Hebraists argued that the unusual constructions found in the NT (when compared with Classical Greek) were due to Hebrew influence. The purists insisted that the anomalies were really good, Classical Greek, so the goal was to search for Classical parallels to such constructions (even if such parallels are rare and sometimes forced). The third proposal was Holy Spirit Greek: scholars such as Cremer and Thayer suggested that the Holy Spirit changed the language of any people who received a divine revelation so that it would be adequate to communicate divine revelation. Thayer, for example, listed hundreds of unique NT words that were necessary to express the message exactly. Since Thayer’s time, however, almost all these words have been found in earlier Greek literature. His work was prepared before the discovery of a wide range of biblical papyri, so he had no knowledge of the vast quantity of material that would be published shortly after his lexicon came off the press.[12]
I.13. In the twentieth century it was argued that the NT was written in standard Koine Greek. This was the conclusion of scholars such as Deissmann and Moulton, who initially studied the papyri. Two scholars have more recently suggested qualifications or refinements to the Deissmann-Moulton judgment. Rydbeck compares the NT to the Fachprosa, the technical prose writers of the Koine period.[13] He contends that in the first century AD there was an intermediate level of Koine Greek between that of popular Greek and the literary. He appeals to the technical, scientific prose writers of the early imperial era such as Theophrastus and Dioscurides, arguing that their style is neither that of the popular, spoken language of the time nor that of the literary writings. This was the language of the scientist as well as government.
Wallace has argued that the language of the NT should be understood as conversational Greek.[14] That is, Koine Greek has within it a range of expression, ranging from the “high” literary Greek of a writer like Polybius or Plutarch to the speech of illiterate people on the street (see fig. I.4). Between these two extremes is the conversational Greek of educated people—essentially Rydbeck’s Fachprosa. There is a full range of options along this spectrum, and the NT writers (as do the LXX translators) take their places in the central area. Some texts such as Luke-Acts, James, and 1 Peter lie toward the right side of the conversational portion of the spectrum. Toward the left end of this span are the books with simpler Greek such as Mark and John. The Pauline writings and Matthew sit squarely in the middle. There are perhaps, as Wallace suggests, three overlapping factors necessary to account for the Greek of the NT. The vocabulary is largely shared with the vernacular Greek of the day. The grammar and syntax, however, are closer to the literary Koine. Also relevant is the style, which in the case of the NT (and LXX even more so due to its nature as a translation) is Semitic.
Figure I.4. Nature of Koine Greek