coptichymns.net - Sharing the Joy of Coptic Hymns Around the World

egyptianhomeboy

posted on Mar 12, 2008 - 04:48 AM

From Remnkemi:Butchering is pronouncing Coptic in an artifical, fabricated way that took 50-100 years to destroy what took hundreds of years to naturally develop. If Greek pronunciation is so precious to everybody, then go to the Greek church and see if they'll notice you're a foreinger. Then have them write down for you and see if you can read it. We are abandoning our natural Coptic pronunciation of Greek hymns and precious Coptic linguistic tradition and valuing a pronunciation that modern Greeks will not easily recognize or understand (and probably ancient Greeks too).

George

Hey George, are you talking about GB?

_________________
Your Servant,
Michael Fam

Saint Marina Coptic Orthodox Church

Joined: Jul 28, 2003 | Posts: 776
Location: California

Remnkemi

posted on Mar 19, 2008 - 04:13 PM

Interesting,

I get a lot of responses on why we should use Greek rules and after I respond, the discussion stops. Did I convince everybody? Do you no longer care? Or are my arguments so obtuse that they don't merit an acknowledgment or response? Guys, what happened? Keep the discussion going or acknowledge that the topic is not important any more.

Joined: Apr 07, 2003 | Posts: 662
Location: Boston, MA USA

Remnkemi

posted on Mar 19, 2008 - 04:13 PM

From egyptianhomeboy:

Hey George, are you talking about GB?
Yes, I was.

_________________
Administrator for Coptic Studies
coptichymns.net
Sharing the Joy of Coptic Hymns Around the World
Need help? - Post here.
Comment or criticism? - Use our Feedback Form

Joined: Apr 07, 2003 | Posts: 662
Location: Boston, MA USA

Epideacon

posted on Mar 19, 2008 - 09:08 PM

From Remnkemi:Interesting,

I get a lot of responses on why we should use Greek rules and after I respond, the discussion stops. Did I convince everybody? Do you no longer care? Or are my arguments so obtuse that they don't merit an acknowledgment or response? Guys, what happened? Keep the discussion going or acknowledge that the topic is not important any more.

Sorry, man. It was just too much arguing. I think everyone just needed a break from all that critical thinking.

Joined: Apr 26, 2006 | Posts: 85

mzaki

posted on Mar 20, 2008 - 01:03 PM

From Remnkemi:Interesting,

I get a lot of responses on why we should use Greek rules and after I respond, the discussion stops. Did I convince everybody? Do you no longer care? Or are my arguments so obtuse that they don't merit an acknowledgment or response? Guys, what happened? Keep the discussion going or acknowledge that the topic is not important any more.

George,

I respect your position, but in my mind, I still don't see the logic in pronouncing a Greek hymn according to GB, OB, or any other Coptic pronunciation scheme.

My only point is that we can not change the fact that the hymn is Greek. If we are able to pronounce Greek words as Greek, then I feel it would be foolish not to - like speaking English with an Arabic accent when you are able to speak it without one.

I would expect the same courtesy from our Greek brothers, that if they were to borrow a piece of Coptic hymnology from us, that they would make every effort to pronounce it correctly.

Regarding the GB vs. OB pronunciation discussion, I can honestly say that my own ignorance about the evolution of the Coptic language prohibits me from making any legitimate contribution to that element of the discussion.

_________________
mina.

Joined: Apr 09, 2003 | Posts: 210
Location: Troy, MI

Ramez Mikhail

posted on Mar 21, 2008 - 04:55 PM

George,

I did not respond because I feel that we have both made our points clear to each other. You are not saying anything new, but simply giving more explanation and examples.

In the end, I agree with mzaki completely. Greek belongs to the Greeks and any other group that claims Greek as their native language. Just like English is claimed by the British, the Americans, Canadians, and Australians. These different groups each possess their own dialects (pronunciation, vocabulary, grammatical differences). Non-native speakers however can only aspire to imitate native speakers. An Indian living in India in 1940s cannot seriously claim to be speaking the Indian dialect of English, but only to copy to the best of his ability the speech of his British superiors. Same with our Egyptian parents and grandparents who I am sure were not so arrogant as to claim their broken English to be a legitimate Egyptian dialect of English. For me, thats the end of story. Egyptians in history, and even more so today, were not native speakers of Greek and therefore they can only attempt to speak Greek like native Greeks.

I do however acknowledge the impractical aspects of this discussion regarding church usage. I think the best choice for the church is to start educating the congregation that we have Greek hymns and Coptic hymns, teach Greek alphabet and orthography alongside Coptic, and ultimately print books with fully Greek hymns typed in Greek letters. Until then, we can just acknowledge that for people to understand, we could keep on writing Greek in our books in Coptic letters and orthography (monophthongization and all), but we have to admit that this is only done for the sake of people to be able to use the books, just like books were printed with Copto-Arabic for decades simply because not too many Copts knew how to read their Coptic.

As far as GB vs. OB. This discussion is too old and unnecessary. The church hierarchy,the cantors, practically everyone uses GB. It may be illogical, unacademic, whatever. But as far as I know, there is no comparable hostility towards proper Greek pronunciation, as we can see Ibrahim Ayaad himself is starting to review his recordings. Call it inconsistency, but I don't see that as unnatural or wrong. I chose to study Greek academically and not Coptic, and it's normal that I more sensitive for Greek.

Joined: Sep 15, 2002 | Posts: 1779

Remnkemi

posted on Mar 21, 2008 - 05:01 PM

Ramez, you're right. There is nothing new but I really, really love reading what you write in these forums. Thanks.

Joined: Apr 07, 2003 | Posts: 662
Location: Boston, MA USA

Ramez Mikhail

posted on Mar 21, 2008 - 05:24 PM

I enjoy reading your posts too

One last detail. To be perfectly honest, proper Greek pronunciation is really not that different from strict GB. Only very rarely would the Greek sound very peculiar. For me, the most noticeable difference between Greek and our Coptic pronunciation of it is the Jenkems. There are no Jenkems in Greek whatsoever, and consonants colliding for the most part is no problem phonetically. But I think Jenkems in Coptic are also haphazard and not very original (am I right?) and so I dont think its a big deal when I pronounce Greek with no Jenkems.

Anywho. My point is, when all is said and done, it makes a very subtle difference, especially when the rules for GB are very unclear themselves (can anyone tell me once and for all how I am supposed to pronounce Chi according to GB?) I personally hardly ever get any comments about my pronunciation of Greek, only quick looks from very few observant deacons

Joined: Sep 15, 2002 | Posts: 1779

ophadeece

posted on Mar 22, 2008 - 09:59 AM

Dear Ramez Mikhail,
I think your and Remnkimi's discussions go back to what he said before that Coptic and Greek had such a unique relationship not found in today's connected languages. That is why I don't really think that Indian and English or Arabic and English are typical examples of what you have been discussing. I do envy you however because you studied Greek. It sounds like a very nice language, and philosophically I have a hunch that it is the most expressive language on earth, even that is quoted by church fathers, isn't it?
Dear Remnkimi,
I was convinced down to every piece of me by your argument; you now made me realise that all what I learnt of the "Coptic" alphabetical pronunciation rules is just a vague mixture of two languages, and can't be used for Coptic per se. But let me ask your opinion however about this: if we come to know at least the pronunciation rules of the olden Greek (Koine Greek I believe), which only matters as Coptic was originally descended from it (as I seem to have understood from your previous posts, not only in this thread), so why not to avoid confusion (at least for the so many people that were taught in the same way that I was) pronounce the "pure" Greek hymns that way? As I will find it very hard pronouncing "Ekristos", rather than "Ekhristos"; it will be a more uphill task for you to convince me that olden Copts didn't pronounce it this way in the first place
God bless you all and pray for us a lot

Joined: Oct 01, 2007 | Posts: 91
Location: Wolverhampton, UK

Ramez Mikhail

posted on Mar 22, 2008 - 06:33 PM

The relationship between Coptic and Greek is not that special if you think about it. Most European languages share a similar alphabet as well as vocabulary by virtue of being Romance languages descendant of Latin, or simply through cultural exchange. Yet, it would be naive to argue for Spanish to be pronounced like French, or for German to follow Italian rules.

Joined: Sep 15, 2002 | Posts: 1779

ophadeece

posted on Mar 22, 2008 - 08:36 PM

Yes Ramez Mikhail; but French didn't descend from Spanish, or German from Italian, while Coptic descended from Greek. Please correct me if I am wrong.
God bless you and pray for us a lot

Joined: Oct 01, 2007 | Posts: 91
Location: Wolverhampton, UK

Ramez Mikhail

posted on Mar 22, 2008 - 09:07 PM

Coptic did not descend from Greek. Coptic is Egyptian, in its pure unadulterated form and in its basics. All that connects Coptic to Greek is the usage of a modified Greek alphabet and the heavy borrowing of Greek words. Most people think that Greek loan words are simply words that have theological or religious usage for Christianity, but I have noticed a large number of religiously-neutral words in Coptic that I recognize as Greek in origin.

At any rate, I am not arguing anything to do with Coptic or Coptic texts. I am simply saying that Greek passages are Greek and should ideally be written in Greek and pronounced in Greek. There is no relation between a hymn written entirely in Greek grammar and vocabulary and the Coptic language. Once you have a piece written in Greek, Coptic becomes a non-issue and of no relevance. Just like Latin hymns for example are simply Latin and have nothing to do with Spanish, French, or Italian whether in pronunciation, spelling or otherwise.

Joined: Sep 15, 2002 | Posts: 1779

ophadeece

posted on Mar 22, 2008 - 09:26 PM

Dear Ramez Mikhail,
Yes you are right and I was wrong - I know that of course Coptic is the Egyptian language and it didn't descend from Greek, and as you said the only connection is the letters, and the loan words that you mentioned. Thanks for enlightening me, and I hope you keep doing this; but in all honesty, although I support Remenkimi's argument generally, but I agree that "meghalou" should be pronounced in a genuine Greek way. These are my impressions based on no studies, just a personal opinion. I hope you bear with me (both you and Remenkimi).
God bless you all and pray for us a lot

Joined: Oct 01, 2007 | Posts: 91
Location: Wolverhampton, UK

Remnkemi

posted on Mar 23, 2008 - 03:52 AM

From Ramez Mikhail:I am simply saying that Greek passages are Greek and should ideally be written in Greek and pronounced in Greek. .

Let's agree with your idea. Greek hymns should be written and pronounced in Greek. What do you do with hymns that are predominately Greek? I'm not talking about one or two loan words. I'm talking about the Liturgy of St. Basil, for example. The priest parts are predominately Coptic and the deacon parts are predominately Greek. According to your pronunciation conventionsk the deacons parts should also follow the rule: Greek letters and Greek pornunciation, while the Coptic parts should follow GB Coptic rules. And I can agree with that (although I prrefer OB Coptc rules).

But the line gets blurrier with other hymns. What about hymns like Aripsalin. A few verses in Greek with predominate Coptic. And there is also some verses that have Greek in the beginning and Coptic in the end. And then there are verses that have half of the sentence in Greek and Coptic in the middle and end of the sentence. For example, Uperetwn is Greek; Vnou] is Coptic; `mmyi is Greek; nem is Coptic; ni'u,y is Greek with Coptic grammar (and nobody knows how to pronounce it); `nte is Coptic; ni`;myi s Coptic. That is only half the sentence.

It seems most people have no second thoughts about Mighalo's pronunciation (ie, all agree to pronounce it Greek). But other hymns pose a challenge to a pure Greek pronunciation and orthography. This would only make reading and pronouncing Aripsalin harder and more complicated. Will you not have two pronunciations for certain Greek words, ie, a word like ar,iereuc found in Mighalo and many Coptic only hymns? Now you're going to run into linguistic barriers which, in my opinion, were already "addressed" or naturalized into the OB Coptic pronunciation scheme.

What are your thoughts?
George

_________________
Administrator for Coptic Studies
coptichymns.net
Sharing the Joy of Coptic Hymns Around the World
Need help? - Post here.
Comment or criticism? - Use our Feedback Form

Joined: Apr 07, 2003 | Posts: 662
Location: Boston, MA USA

ophadeece

posted on Mar 23, 2008 - 05:38 PM

Dear Remnkimi,
If I may voice my opinion here, and in spite of what I am used to doing (pronouncing Greek words in aripsalin as Greek (not so modern anyway) and the rest as Coptic, based on maybe wrong teaching), I think that hymns which are purely Greek should be pronounced in Greek as paying some respect to the Greek church we emanated these hymns from, even though the attempts were not as fruitful as first thought. And maybe keep those "mixed"hymns pronounced in pure Coptic (me preferring OB). I would like to hear more ideas on my opinion.
God bless you all and pray for us a lot

Joined: Oct 01, 2007 | Posts: 91
Location: Wolverhampton, UK

Remnkemi

posted on Mar 23, 2008 - 08:37 PM

From ophadeece:I think that hymns which are purely Greek should be pronounced in Greek as paying some respect to the Greek church we emanated these hymns from, even though the attempts were not as fruitful as first thought.

The majority of Greek only hymns in the Coptic Church are original Coptic hymns, not borrowed from the Greek Church. Mighalo is one of them. So there is no need to go out of our way to "respect" the Greek Church because nothing was emanated from them.

Also, the handful of Greek only hymns found in the Coptic church do not necessarily come from the Greek Church, unless you're using the term loosely. In other words, we know Tou dipnou came from Constantinople. I don't consider the 5th century Church of Constantinople as the modern day Greek Orthodox Church. Other hymns, we don't know where they came from. It could have been Antioch, Rome, Jerusalem, Alexandria, etc. These churches aren't considered the Greek Orthodox Church either.

George

_________________
Administrator for Coptic Studies
coptichymns.net
Sharing the Joy of Coptic Hymns Around the World
Need help? - Post here.
Comment or criticism? - Use our Feedback Form

Joined: Apr 07, 2003 | Posts: 662
Location: Boston, MA USA

Epideacon

posted on Mar 23, 2008 - 11:53 PM

From Remnkemi:From ophadeece:I think that hymns which are purely Greek should be pronounced in Greek as paying some respect to the Greek church we emanated these hymns from, even though the attempts were not as fruitful as first thought.

The majority of Greek only hymns in the Coptic Church are original Coptic hymns, not borrowed from the Greek Church. Mighalo is one of them. So there is no need to go out of our way to "respect" the Greek Church because nothing was emanated from them.

Also, the handful of Greek only hymns found in the Coptic church do not necessarily come from the Greek Church, unless you're using the term loosely. In other words, we know Tou dipnou came from Constantinople. I don't consider the 5th century Church of Constantinople as the modern day Greek Orthodox Church. Other hymns, we don't know where they came from. It could have been Antioch, Rome, Jerusalem, Alexandria, etc. These churches aren't considered the Greek Orthodox Church either.

George

I agree with Remenkimi. Just because it was written in Greek, doesn't mean it came from the Greeks. On the contrary, it probably means that it came from Alexandria or Constantinople to say the least. I also don't think that the Greeks will be mad at us if we don't pronounce their language fully correctly in the COPTIC HYMNS of the COPTIC church. I am emphasizing that we are Copts and that we should pronounce hymns and language however which way we want. It's not up to the Greeks. The question is HOW? How do we want to pronounce the words? Do we just use the same pronounciation as the Greek language or (just for argument's sake do we go off in our own direction and create a new and different pronounciation for our own purposes?

I for one favor OB. But I've said too much. happy khawagat easter everybody.

Joined: Apr 26, 2006 | Posts: 85

Ramez Mikhail

posted on Mar 24, 2008 - 04:40 AM

George,

To answer your question on what my thoughts are, I would go with Coptic pronunciation for mixed hymns, reserving Greek pronunciation for pieces that are full Greek, written in Greek grammar that makes sense in Greek. That is mainly because it would be too messy to pronounce or write hymns like Aripsalin in Greek.

Ophadeece and Epideacon,

The issue has nothing to do with respecting the Greeks or expressing Coptic Orthodox autonomy as you may be arguing, respectively. It has nothing at all to do with Churches or hymns. Its simply a matter of language. Do you intentionally pronounce a different language wrong simply to assert your own ethnic identity? Do you go to work and intentionally speak English with an accent because you have Egyptian blood in you? Just like we pray English hymns in our church in proper English and it has nothing to do with respecting British or American people or the British Anglican Church, in the same way, pronouncing Greek properly has nothing to do with respecting the Greek Orthodox Church or whether a certain hymn came from the Constantinople or was written in Egypt.

Joined: Sep 15, 2002 | Posts: 1779

Ramez Mikhail

posted on Mar 24, 2008 - 05:11 AM

Also, I have no problem writing the deacon's replies in Greek, and the priest parts in Coptic. Wasnt that intention in the beginning? Our ancestors decided to have the deacon responses be in Greek, may be for the catechumens to understand...i dont know, but they could have easily written those responses in pure Coptic with the common loan words like the priests prayers. Instead, they wrote them in pure Greek. Why not embrace that duality of language in our church and point out the fact that Greek and Coptic are two distinct languages?

Do you know how many people have no idea regarding this issue? There are some who think its all Coptic, and some who think that Coptic and Greek are basically the same language, or at least there are those who understand there is a difference but cannot tell which is Greek and which is Coptic. And why? because our books write it all in the same way and same alphabet, and only a person who is educated in one language or the other will be able to tell the difference. Let's embrace the duality of languages in our Church with no shame and educate people on what is properly our linguistic heritage and what is Greek. But of course that would take a huge church-wide effort, and until then, we can keep the books the way they are, but at least pronounce Greek the way it should sound. Who knows, you might incite a question by some people and have a chance to explain the difference between Coptic and Greek.

Joined: Sep 15, 2002 | Posts: 1779

ophadeece

posted on Mar 24, 2008 - 03:33 PM

Dear all,
How enriching this argument is becoming. Yes, to the extent that I cannot get to a conclusion at all of what I, at least, should be doing . In any case I find myself inclined to agree best with epideacon although both Remenkimi and Ramez Mikhail pose very well informed and clearly opposite arguments . Now, I don't know which side I will be with, unless epideacon voices their opinion again, and then I may find myself going by his words... Please keep up the argument; I am learning loads...
God bless you all and pray for us a lot

Joined: Oct 01, 2007 | Posts: 91
Location: Wolverhampton, UK

Ramez Mikhail

posted on Mar 26, 2008 - 03:47 PM

And now when I responded, people become quiet

Any thoughts, anyone?

Joined: Sep 15, 2002 | Posts: 1779

ophadeece

posted on Mar 26, 2008 - 04:15 PM

Dear Ramez Mikhail,
I am interested in knowing how every body feels now about pronouncing those hymns. I have been thinking about "Ekhrestos Anesti", and the question posed to Remenkimi now how does he think it was pronounced in the past. Was it pronounced "Ekristos", and if so, doesn't that contradict the leftovers of the Coptic common words in the Egyptian culture between Egyptians everywhere; what are your views on that Ramez as well?
God bless you all and pray for us a lot

Joined: Oct 01, 2007 | Posts: 91
Location: Wolverhampton, UK

Ramez Mikhail

posted on Mar 26, 2008 - 09:05 PM

I dont quite follow your question. Can you give me more details?

Joined: Sep 15, 2002 | Posts: 1779

Epideacon

posted on Mar 27, 2008 - 12:57 AM

From ophadeece:Dear Ramez Mikhail,
I am interested in knowing how every body feels now about pronouncing those hymns.

Well, ever since a young age, I have trained myself to say a word in its original pronounciation. So for example, if I was singing the Commemoration of the Saints from the Basilian Liturgy, I would start with Epidy P=o=c using Old Bohairic. And when I'd get down to Nipatriar,yc > niprovytyc I would say those two words as if I was talking Greek or GB (nipatreearshees). I know that that's "wrong" and doesn't sound really natural and all that stuff that was mentioned before about not being linguistically correct, but it helps me distinguish between what is an original Coptic word and what is a word borrowed from Greek. Since Coptic is a dead language anyway, I don't care about being linguistically correct. But that's just my opinion.

Joined: Apr 26, 2006 | Posts: 85

amakar55

posted on Mar 27, 2008 - 03:50 PM

Actually, Epideacon, that is not wrong at all. You might actually understand the meaning better (knowing if it comes from Coptic or Greek and pronouncing the word in its mother language).

_________________
An`dreac
Piagnwctwc `nte Vnou]
Pima `mpatriar,yc `nremen,ymi `nor;odoxoc
}ek`klycia `nte vye;ouab Markoc nem Abba Piswi `nte {i,ajw
Andrew, Reader of the Most High God

Joined: Jun 25, 2006 | Posts: 12