I had replied to this topic during my lunch break but alas, it's gone...
Mina, I reread my post and it comes off as extremely terse! Of course God does not care about one small hazza. But in my own short time on this earth, I have already started witnessing the loss of our Coptic hymns and traditions. I can't do very much about it, but learning this hymn properly and passing it down as such is my small contribution.
As for the actual hymn, I think we can all agree that it's four, not three. I didn't mean to start such an intense discussion about cantors and tradition and whatnot. I think imikhail hit it right on the head: Cantor Ibrahim Ayad just made a mistake. Out of the hundreds (if not thousands) of recordings he's made, a small mistake here or there isn't a huge deal. Honestly, the only other one I can think of is in a recording of Evlogimenos where he accidentally repeated a line.
Thanks everyone, mystery solved :)
Sidenote #1: It's strange that on both Tasbeha.org and CopticHymns.net, there are sections for Annual Deacon Responses and Papal Hymns, but a lot of the papal hymns are under the annual section. On this site it's only Ibrahim Ayad's responses, but at CopticHymns.net there are, for example, two copies of the Great Is Pateer on the Papal Section, both not working, and then four or five copies of it under "Deacon Responses" that do work. Confusing!
Sidenote #2: Although we've solved the "mystery" of this thread, there is another bit of discrepancy a bit further into the hymn... when it comes to the third repetition of "peniot...," Ibrahim Ayad goes "short" on the "avva Shenouda," but this is probably because he goes on to say the part for the metropolitan/bishop. In other recordings, the Cantor goes "long" on the "avva Shenouda," ie. to the tune of "en-epNevma Agion. Amen." near the beginning of the hymn. Then, in another recording on CH.net, one which sounds very old, not only does the Cantor say "peniot ethowab empatriarshees," but he also doesn't go "long" on "avva Shenouda" and also doesn't say the part for the metropolitan/bishop. I'm going to stick to the HICS way, which is to go long on the "avva Shenouda" (and I'm sure when I say it there will not be a bishop) since it seems the most consistent. It's pretty amazing to see all these different ways!
What is the "proper pronunciation"? What authority is driving the changes? What are the references for the changes?
Who said that evki is wrong and evshi is correct? Who said that ebshoyce is wrong and epetchoyce is correct?
Thanks
I am glad you brought this up and I will answer your questions consecutively:
1. What is the "proper pronunciation"? "proper pronunciation" refers to you actually pronunciate the words as they appear in the text. This refers to not adding the sound "ee" in where ever the chanter feels like it to "make the tune fit the words" as I've heard people use to get out of admitting that they are pronunciating the text incorrectly. For example, in the middle of the hymn "Alleluia, Fai Pe Pi," I've heard countless pronunciations "Epshoice e thamiof" or the older version of "Epschoice e samiof." Although I do admit that Cantor Ayad used to say that older versions, he has corrected it when he says it during the Cathedral Liturgies. Refer to the links below to see my point:
2. What authority is driving the changes? What are the references for the changes? Although I cannot pinpoint an exact "authority figure" because I live in the United States, but if there were one, I would have to say the Holy Synod. Again, this is mere guess. However, if the Holy Synod were not the authoritative figure driving the charges, I would have to say mere common sense and the need to correct and better oneself in pronunciating the Coptic language so you can pray correctly. And now that we are on topic of references, why is everyone making such a big deal about "who's your reference?" when it comes to pronunciation? When you have already learned English, for instance, now speak it fluently, and you want to sound out a word that you have not encountered before, do you use an "authoritative figure?" No, just using the rules of pronunciation that you learned previously, you just sound out the word. If we do this in English, Arabic, and any other language and no one asks another "who's your reference," then why do we do it when it comes to Coptic? I agree that Coptic is not in use as often as English or Arabic, for instance, however, it is still a language.
Now when it comes to actually chanting the words or wanting to know the meaning, that is a different story and it does depend on who your reference is.
3. Who said that evki is wrong and evshi is correct? It's actually neither; it's supposed to be the "kh" sound as in when you say "Xhristos." I can't explain why people have just used the evki or evshi. Can you explain why? My explanation is that people receive what they learn without analyzing what they learn.
4. Who said that ebshoyce is wrong and epetchoyce is correct? Again, it's actually neither; it's Epchoise. My authoritative figure on this one is the HCOC. However, if it weren't them, my authoritative figure or reference would be the text. There is nothing wrong with that as I'm guessing many people are thinking. You're not coming up with your own rules; you're just looking at the word and using the rules of pronunciation, you sound out the word.
Dear kmeka001, It appears you have not been following the post titled "Great Lent by Ibrahim Ayad", otherwise you would have found answers to the questions you post. I encourage you to do that, and this is the link for the fifth page, most relevant to your comments: http://tasbeha.org/content/community/index.php/topic,11113.60.html
I also include here my responses to Minatasgeel, which I hope you find formative:
Mina, ok, before getting on to the red comments earlier, I wish to point this out to you: the "s" replacing "th" in Arabic is not actually a Coptic characteristic, but a French characteristic that passed into the colloquial Arabic due to the French occupation in late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century and afterwards. Hence "saotokos" and "masalan" and "saneyan", "salesan", etc. Please note those words were not so common in Arabic before the nineteenth century, but the other widespread words in Arabic were pronounced like this in Egyptian Arabic e.g. "etnein", "talata", "ta'lab", "medallem", "dalma", "toum", "te'ban", "tanya (crease)", and "tamanya".
You said "it is taught that the word "eu,y" is purely greek....so the the letter is a she." for example, we call the hymn Evshes for "Eu,ec" and not evkes. also other greek words like metanoia which we say metaneia and not metanoia. and the many old books that kept kai instead of ke" In fact, Mr. Erian Guirguis in his book comments on the Egyptians (as though he wasn't one) and says "the Egyptians pronounce the word prayer as /owka/ but clearly that is not the correct way". The guy is making fun of how the word is actually pronounced. Anyway, I suppose it may have been also pronouced as /ewsheya/ with the plural /awashy/ as you can clearly see the Egyptian tongue cannot pronounce the 'v', but still he likes to teach his subordinates that it is pronounced /evshi:s/ = /evshees/!!!! Very strange. In fact, in support to what imikhail says in his last post, you notice the Egyptians say /barawa/ for the Italian 'bravo' - what does that tell you?
You said: "first, lets look at the sh and ch. the letter is always taught to "ch"....we say ti-echerombi ethnesos or etitshocee (which should et-chocee). "`P[oic" should be Ep-chois "`e`P[oic" or "`m`P[oic" should be e-ep-chois or em-ep-shois....but not much people say that. they mixed it all together and say e-pet-shois or a e-mep-shois. they remove the jinkum on the pi and mix it with the actual word "chois"....it's a movement towards GB. that e at the end is not part of the word but it is added much in hymns to conduct harmony in a lahn. like hos erof ari-ho-oo chasfe (should be chasf)." This is not about the deficit in Arabic language actually. The letter /shima/ was used to be pronounced as you rightly point out /ch/. Then in Sa'idic it was /dj/. Both those diphthongs laxed over the years, and became /sh/ and /j/ as in the French 'j' respectively. So even /chromba/, or /chasaf/ are wrong, or rather not the natural evolution of how we received the language, and so is /chois/. Now, fallaciously you owe the 'e' after /shasaf/ and /ebshois/ to harmony in hymns. The fact of the matter is that the vowels in hieroglyphics, hieratic and consequently demotic, and later Coptic, were often not written but pronounced. OK, but I am not talking about vowels now, am I? No, but what happens is that there are subtle connections between words with vowel-like conjunctions. That is why you see the Egyptian people struggling to pronounce English the way the native speakers do. They usually insert a subtle pause between words, so "first step" becomes /first e step/. Exactly, that is it. That is most probably the origin of the emergence of jinkims in the latter ages (can't remember when exactly), but even the jinkim is used differently in Sa'idic as opposed to Bohairic Coptic. Bottom line is people who sing arebsalen according to HCOC do it improperly: Coptic is becoming more and more Anglicised, not even Hellenised!!!! God bless us all and have mercy on His Church, and its treasures including the language our forefathers used to speak in. Oujai
Sorry forgot to comment on this "epetshois" as GB enthusiasts like to pronounce is not because the jinkim was shifted but because the letter shima (according to them) is pronouced /ech/, not just /ch/, because it is ETCHima. Funny? Or maybe not? Oujai
Now comment on "authority figure" and proper pronunciation. Kmeka, there are no fixed rules for pronouncing any language. Tell me what is the rule for "ow" in English, in these examples: row vs row - bow vs bow - mow vs down. What are the rules for "ou" as in: dough vs gout vs bought vs wrought. What are those for "c" in: cell vs cello (oh my bad, the latter is not really an English word, is it? Hehe). What about "g" as in: get vs gem. If you would have been taught in an Arabic school that the people is pronounced /bi:bol/ and then you travel to America, do you need an authority figure? If you for the first time meet with the word schizophrenia, would you need an authority figure? Oujai
Coptic is a language like English and any other language has rules for pronunciation. My questions were for you to start thinking of the changes that Coptic is undergoing. There is a history behind the variation that I brought up.
To bring you up to speed the Church adopted the Greek sounds for the alphabet and since Copts cannot pronounce these sounds correctly, the result are these variations. The change took place in 1857 by Aryan Mofta7. You can read about it here http://rochcopts.org/BohairicPronunciation.php
You can also listen to the original Coptic at www.speakcoptic.org
What is the criteria we should possess to make any assessment about any topic?
I don't think there is a set of criteria. The only thing I hold as criteria is if you are a cantor or not. If you aren't then don't say one cantor is wrong and the other isn't etc. Have you ever thought of different schools of thought? Does that mean that since the Alexandrian tune for Tishori is not valid because Cantor Mikhail never recorded it or HICS for that matter? Surely not. I think we can discuss things and put things frankly without cutting anyone down. I've read many times on this forum from various people that Ibrahim Ayad has done more to hurt the church than help. That is outrageous. I don't care if you like OB or GB better or if you think is pateer should have 3 hazzat or 100. Why are we even chanting these hymns if we don't have brotherly love for one another and appreciation for the countless hours these cantors spend to preserve what heritage we have left. Instead we criticize and sit on our high horses and pass judgment. In the end Alhan does not get you to heaven, knowing OB over GB is not going to get you to heaven. Don't let the means to an end become the end all be all. These are tools to use in worship not tools for worship.
Thanks jdeacon for your insights which I agree with. However, to protect our heritage and hand over what we have learnt to the future generation with honesty, we have to discern between what is added, deleted or changed. After all our Church is an Orthodox one.
If we have been handed down certain hymns with certain way of saying, we should follow that what we have received as it is. That is how our Church stands in the face of foreign teachings through the received Tradition.
"He who is faithful in what is least is faithful also in much; and he who is unjust in what is least is unjust also in much."
Comments
Thanks.
Mina, I reread my post and it comes off as extremely terse! Of course God does not care about one small hazza. But in my own short time on this earth, I have already started witnessing the loss of our Coptic hymns and traditions. I can't do very much about it, but learning this hymn properly and passing it down as such is my small contribution.
As for the actual hymn, I think we can all agree that it's four, not three. I didn't mean to start such an intense discussion about cantors and tradition and whatnot. I think imikhail hit it right on the head: Cantor Ibrahim Ayad just made a mistake. Out of the hundreds (if not thousands) of recordings he's made, a small mistake here or there isn't a huge deal. Honestly, the only other one I can think of is in a recording of Evlogimenos where he accidentally repeated a line.
Thanks everyone, mystery solved :)
Sidenote #1: It's strange that on both Tasbeha.org and CopticHymns.net, there are sections for Annual Deacon Responses and Papal Hymns, but a lot of the papal hymns are under the annual section. On this site it's only Ibrahim Ayad's responses, but at CopticHymns.net there are, for example, two copies of the Great Is Pateer on the Papal Section, both not working, and then four or five copies of it under "Deacon Responses" that do work. Confusing!
Sidenote #2: Although we've solved the "mystery" of this thread, there is another bit of discrepancy a bit further into the hymn... when it comes to the third repetition of "peniot...," Ibrahim Ayad goes "short" on the "avva Shenouda," but this is probably because he goes on to say the part for the metropolitan/bishop. In other recordings, the Cantor goes "long" on the "avva Shenouda," ie. to the tune of "en-epNevma Agion. Amen." near the beginning of the hymn. Then, in another recording on CH.net, one which sounds very old, not only does the Cantor say "peniot ethowab empatriarshees," but he also doesn't go "long" on "avva Shenouda" and also doesn't say the part for the metropolitan/bishop. I'm going to stick to the HICS way, which is to go long on the "avva Shenouda" (and I'm sure when I say it there will not be a bishop) since it seems the most consistent. It's pretty amazing to see all these different ways!
kmeka001,
What is the "proper pronunciation"? What authority is driving the changes? What are the references for the changes?
Who said that evki is wrong and evshi is correct? Who said that ebshoyce is wrong and epetchoyce is correct?
Thanks
I am glad you brought this up and I will answer your questions consecutively:
1. What is the "proper pronunciation"?
"proper pronunciation" refers to you actually pronunciate the words as they appear in the text. This refers to not adding the sound "ee" in where ever the chanter feels like it to "make the tune fit the words" as I've heard people use to get out of admitting that they are pronunciating the text incorrectly. For example, in the middle of the hymn "Alleluia, Fai Pe Pi," I've heard countless pronunciations "Epshoice e thamiof" or the older version of "Epschoice e samiof." Although I do admit that Cantor Ayad used to say that older versions, he has corrected it when he says it during the Cathedral Liturgies. Refer to the links below to see my point:
Cathedral recording: http://tasbeha.org/mp3/Hymns/Major_Feasts_of_the_Lord/Resurrection/2004_Liturgy_at_Cathedral.html: very first link.
Teaching recording: http://tasbeha.org/media/index.php?st=Hymns%2FAnnual%2FCongregation_Responses%2FIbrahim_Ayad%2Fpart1%2F06_Alleulia_Fai_Pe_Pe.1416.mp3
2. What authority is driving the changes? What are the references for the changes?
Although I cannot pinpoint an exact "authority figure" because I live in the United States, but if there were one, I would have to say the Holy Synod. Again, this is mere guess. However, if the Holy Synod were not the authoritative figure driving the charges, I would have to say mere common sense and the need to correct and better oneself in pronunciating the Coptic language so you can pray correctly. And now that we are on topic of references, why is everyone making such a big deal about "who's your reference?" when it comes to pronunciation? When you have already learned English, for instance, now speak it fluently, and you want to sound out a word that you have not encountered before, do you use an "authoritative figure?" No, just using the rules of pronunciation that you learned previously, you just sound out the word. If we do this in English, Arabic, and any other language and no one asks another "who's your reference," then why do we do it when it comes to Coptic? I agree that Coptic is not in use as often as English or Arabic, for instance, however, it is still a language.
Now when it comes to actually chanting the words or wanting to know the meaning, that is a different story and it does depend on who your reference is.
3. Who said that evki is wrong and evshi is correct?
It's actually neither; it's supposed to be the "kh" sound as in when you say "Xhristos." I can't explain why people have just used the evki or evshi. Can you explain why? My explanation is that people receive what they learn without analyzing what they learn.
4. Who said that ebshoyce is wrong and epetchoyce is correct?
Again, it's actually neither; it's Epchoise. My authoritative figure on this one is the HCOC. However, if it weren't them, my authoritative figure or reference would be the text. There is nothing wrong with that as I'm guessing many people are thinking. You're not coming up with your own rules; you're just looking at the word and using the rules of pronunciation, you sound out the word.
It appears you have not been following the post titled "Great Lent by Ibrahim Ayad", otherwise you would have found answers to the questions you post. I encourage you to do that, and this is the link for the fifth page, most relevant to your comments:
http://tasbeha.org/content/community/index.php/topic,11113.60.html
I also include here my responses to Minatasgeel, which I hope you find formative:
Mina, ok, before getting on to the red comments earlier, I wish to point this out to you: the "s" replacing "th" in Arabic is not actually a Coptic characteristic, but a French characteristic that passed into the colloquial Arabic due to the French occupation in late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century and afterwards. Hence "saotokos" and "masalan" and "saneyan", "salesan", etc. Please note those words were not so common in Arabic before the nineteenth century, but the other widespread words in Arabic were pronounced like this in Egyptian Arabic e.g. "etnein", "talata", "ta'lab", "medallem", "dalma", "toum", "te'ban", "tanya (crease)", and "tamanya".
You said "it is taught that the word "eu,y" is purely greek....so the the letter is a she."
for example, we call the hymn Evshes for "Eu,ec" and not evkes. also other greek words like metanoia which we say metaneia and not metanoia. and the many old books that kept kai instead of ke"
In fact, Mr. Erian Guirguis in his book comments on the Egyptians (as though he wasn't one) and says "the Egyptians pronounce the word prayer as /owka/ but clearly that is not the correct way". The guy is making fun of how the word is actually pronounced. Anyway, I suppose it may have been also pronouced as /ewsheya/ with the plural /awashy/ as you can clearly see the Egyptian tongue cannot pronounce the 'v', but still he likes to teach his subordinates that it is pronounced /evshi:s/ = /evshees/!!!! Very strange. In fact, in support to what imikhail says in his last post, you notice the Egyptians say /barawa/ for the Italian 'bravo' - what does that tell you?
You said: "first, lets look at the sh and ch. the letter is always taught to "ch"....we say ti-echerombi ethnesos or etitshocee (which should et-chocee).
"`P[oic" should be Ep-chois
"`e`P[oic" or "`m`P[oic" should be e-ep-chois or em-ep-shois....but not much people say that. they mixed it all together and say e-pet-shois or a e-mep-shois. they remove the jinkum on the pi and mix it with the actual word "chois"....it's a movement towards GB.
that e at the end is not part of the word but it is added much in hymns to conduct harmony in a lahn. like hos erof ari-ho-oo chasfe (should be chasf)."
This is not about the deficit in Arabic language actually. The letter /shima/ was used to be pronounced as you rightly point out /ch/. Then in Sa'idic it was /dj/. Both those diphthongs laxed over the years, and became /sh/ and /j/ as in the French 'j' respectively. So even /chromba/, or /chasaf/ are wrong, or rather not the natural evolution of how we received the language, and so is /chois/. Now, fallaciously you owe the 'e' after /shasaf/ and /ebshois/ to harmony in hymns. The fact of the matter is that the vowels in hieroglyphics, hieratic and consequently demotic, and later Coptic, were often not written but pronounced. OK, but I am not talking about vowels now, am I? No, but what happens is that there are subtle connections between words with vowel-like conjunctions. That is why you see the Egyptian people struggling to pronounce English the way the native speakers do. They usually insert a subtle pause between words, so "first step" becomes /first e step/. Exactly, that is it. That is most probably the origin of the emergence of jinkims in the latter ages (can't remember when exactly), but even the jinkim is used differently in Sa'idic as opposed to Bohairic Coptic. Bottom line is people who sing arebsalen according to HCOC do it improperly: Coptic is becoming more and more Anglicised, not even Hellenised!!!!
God bless us all and have mercy on His Church, and its treasures including the language our forefathers used to speak in.
Oujai
Sorry forgot to comment on this "epetshois" as GB enthusiasts like to pronounce is not because the jinkim was shifted but because the letter shima (according to them) is pronouced /ech/, not just /ch/, because it is ETCHima. Funny? Or maybe not?
Oujai
Now comment on "authority figure" and proper pronunciation. Kmeka, there are no fixed rules for pronouncing any language. Tell me what is the rule for "ow" in English, in these examples: row vs row - bow vs bow - mow vs down. What are the rules for "ou" as in: dough vs gout vs bought vs wrought. What are those for "c" in: cell vs cello (oh my bad, the latter is not really an English word, is it? Hehe). What about "g" as in: get vs gem.
If you would have been taught in an Arabic school that the people is pronounced /bi:bol/ and then you travel to America, do you need an authority figure? If you for the first time meet with the word schizophrenia, would you need an authority figure?
Oujai
Coptic is a language like English and any other language has rules for pronunciation. My questions were for you to start thinking of the changes that Coptic is undergoing. There is a history behind the variation that I brought up.
To bring you up to speed the Church adopted the Greek sounds for the alphabet and since Copts cannot pronounce these sounds correctly, the result are these variations. The change took place in 1857 by Aryan Mofta7. You can read about it here http://rochcopts.org/BohairicPronunciation.php
You can also listen to the original Coptic at www.speakcoptic.org
Thanks.
Oujai
What is the criteria we should possess to make any assessment about any topic?
I don't think there is a set of criteria. The only thing I hold as criteria is if you are a cantor or not. If you aren't then don't say one cantor is wrong and the other isn't etc. Have you ever thought of different schools of thought? Does that mean that since the Alexandrian tune for Tishori is not valid because Cantor Mikhail never recorded it or HICS for that matter? Surely not. I think we can discuss things and put things frankly without cutting anyone down. I've read many times on this forum from various people that Ibrahim Ayad has done more to hurt the church than help. That is outrageous. I don't care if you like OB or GB better or if you think is pateer should have 3 hazzat or 100. Why are we even chanting these hymns if we don't have brotherly love for one another and appreciation for the countless hours these cantors spend to preserve what heritage we have left. Instead we criticize and sit on our high horses and pass judgment. In the end Alhan does not get you to heaven, knowing OB over GB is not going to get you to heaven. Don't let the means to an end become the end all be all. These are tools to use in worship not tools for worship.
If we have been handed down certain hymns with certain way of saying, we should follow that what we have received as it is. That is how our Church stands in the face of foreign teachings through the received Tradition.
"He who is faithful in what is least is faithful also in much; and he who is unjust in what is least is unjust also in much."