Talk:ὁ

Declension

I put in a couple of tables laying out the various declensions of the definite article. I thought they would look better side by side, instead of one on top of the other, but I don't know how to format such a feat. If anyone knows how to do such a thing, I beg of you to do so. Also, those who have taken a Greek class are probably somewhat upset by the order of the cases, as genitive and dative are always taught as the second and third cases, respectively. However, the nominative, genitive, dative, accusative case order is an arbitrary decision, albeit a rather universal one. I have chosen this order based on a heirarchy which languages have. This means that if a language has a case, it most likely has all the cases above it, but not necessarily the cases below it. Thus, any language that has the dative case, most likely has a genitive, accusative, and nominative. But it's not terribly uncommon for a language to simply have a nominative and accusative. The article from which I got this info is cited in the article. The advantage of such an order is that it has more universal applications with different dialects of Greek, and more broadly, with case languages in general. If someone takes serious issue with this, feel free to debate it. Also, I decided to delete all the pages with the various declensions of the definite article and simply redirect them here. I don't feel terribly guilty because none of them had a terrible amount of substance, and, ultimately, it's all one word. Cerealkiller13 00:24, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

While I fully understand and agree with your point, for simplicity's (and standardization's) sake, would you mind terribly if the tables were organized such that they resemble textbooks? (On a side note, my understanding is that NGDA would be the generally American format.) In regards to your formatting concerns, I think that should be easy enough to fix. Medellia 04:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure if that's what you intended; if you have a problem with my formatting, please fix it to your liking or let me know on my talk page. Medellia 05:02, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Yet another thought: ought dual forms be added to the matrix? Medellia 06:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Sigh, my plans for global domination through specific declension formats have been thwarted. I suppose this is for the best. Inasmuch as I do like the NAGD order, I suppose it will simply be one confused/angry/simply wanting to standardize it person after another. In addition, I recently descovered that this is apparently the order that the Greeks themselves used, and so is probably best. I am a bit skeptical about declension templates, as they can't account for exceptions, for example the present middle/passive 2nd singular of λύω. But, as long as a specific template is correct for a particular word, I'll certainly accept it. And I would absolutely love the dual forms. My study was of Koine, which was rather lacking in duals, and so I don't have access to any of them. Cerealkiller13 08:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Regarding exceptions, I simply don't use the standardized declension template, but rather modify the format to my own use. My thought is that it would be best to bring Ancient Greek to a level of standardization comparable to Latin. (A bit futile, I realize!) Minor point of clarification: when you say declension, are you referring to conjugation? Conjugations certainly would include more exceptions than declensions, which are by and large regular and at most include 30 forms. I will do a bit of a research on the duals (I'm fairly certain I understand them, but really would like to double check.). I'm rather interested in Koine, but have not yet studied it. Furthermore, it appears we are the two main editors of Ancient Greek articles, so it would probably be best to double check each others' works in order to ensure that meanings for both 5th century B.C.E. and Koine are reflected... or something to a similar effect. Medellia 17:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

The distinction between different dialects of Ancient Greek is one thing that I have considered previously. To be honest, I sort of figured that most of the stuff would remain Koine for quite a while simply because I was the only one editing. I think that eventually, the category of Ancient Greek might become obsolete, and instead Wiktionary will have perhaps five separate categories of the Greek language, being rather an old and relatively well attested language. Or perhaps a better ultimate solution would be to simply have one category, Greek, and each word having its definitions, usages, etc. noted for different time periods. Ultimately, for the time being, I think that it would be best to note any distinctions between Attic and Koine within the single category of Ancient Greek. Two things that I think will be very helpful in coordinating efforts are Index:Ancient Greek and Category:Ancient_Greek_language (for some reason I can't make a functional link to this, but there is one on the index. If you're aware of any words that aren't in these two, please add them, so we can keep track of what's there and what's not. And please feel free to peruse them and see if their articles jive with your knowledge of the words. It's a great place I look forward to the duals. Cerealkiller13 21:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation

In the provided recording, there is no rising pitch on τό; shouldn’t there be one? CannedMan (talk) 23:18, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Inflection tables for the Article section?

Wikibooks has tables for ó as a definite article:

https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Introductory_Ancient_Greek_Language/Lesson_3

Could you, please, add these tables?

George Rodney Maruri Game (talk) 14:08, 23 January 2022 (UTC)