γογγύζω, γογγυσμός, τονθορύζω, τονθρύζω
(Phryn. Ecl. 335, Phryn. PS 115.10–1, Antiatt. γ 12, [Ammon.] 259, Thom.Mag. 352.17–353.2)

D. General commentary

In the Eclogue, Phrynichus (A.1) labels as ‘Ionic’ (and thus to be avoided) the verb γογγύζω (‘to mutter’) and the noun γογγυσμός (‘muttering’), neither of which is attested in canonical Attic authors, and advises that the reader use the synonymsSynonyms τονθρύζω and τονθρυσμός (or τονθορύζω and τονθορυσμός) instead, in light of their well-established Attic pedigree (see below). In the PS (A.2), Phrynichus himself uses γογγύζω to gloss τονθορύζω. As may be expected, the Antiatticist (A.3) contradicts Phrynichus’ preference and accepts γογγυσμός based on an occurrence in Anaxandrides (C.2).

The verb γογγύζω (‘to mutter’) is an onomatopoeic formation (cf. EDG s.v. γογγύζω; Tichy 1983, 225) formed with the compound suffix -ύζω (*-ug-i̯e/o-). The verb and its derivatives are attested almost exclusively from the Septuagint onwards, with three exceptions: the prefixed περιγογγύζωσι (‘they mutter around’) in Phocylides (C.1, A.1), the deverbative γογγυσμός (‘muttering’) in Anaxandrides (C.2, A.3), and the imperfect ἐγόγγυζε or ἐγογγύζετο (‘[the encamped army] murmured’; the reading is dubious, cf. Borrelli et al. 2019, 31) in P.Mich. inv. 3250c.6 [= TM 65628] (unknown provenance, 2nd century BCE), ‘a lyric text in ‘Euripidean’ or ‘New Music’ style’ (Borrelli et al. 2019, 22).

The interpretation of τονθορύζω (‘to mumble’, ‘to grunt’) is less straightforward: according to EDG s.v. τονθορύζω, it derives from the pre-Greek root θορ- (cf. e.g. θόρυβος, ‘noise’), with expressive reduplication, dissimilation of θ into τ in the first syllable, and nasalisation (cf. Skoda 1982, 73–4). Tichy (1983, 225–6), instead, lists τονθορύζω among the ‘pseudo-iterierte Onomatopoetika’, i.e. a type of onomatopoeic formation characterised by the presence of the nasal as the second consonant but without a proper reduplication (cf. Tichy 1983, 209–28). Regardless of its origin, τονθορύζω follows the vowel pattern ο-ο-υ that is typical of verbs that describe acts of uttering sounds, such as ὀλολύζω (‘to cry’) and ὀτοτύζω (‘to wail’; cf. Perpillou 1996, 28, 30–1). Unlike γογγύζω, τονθορύζω is clearly Attic, as demonstrated by its occurrences in Aeschylus (C.3) and Aristophanes (Ach. 683, V. 613, Ra. 747). The noun τονθορυσμός, instead, is found only in Post-classical Greek (cf. Eutecnius C.Par. 28.22). Interestingly, Pherecrates (fr. 113.4)Pherecr. fr. 113.4 used a cognate verb that carried the same meaning as τονθορύζω, i.e. the hapax τονθολυγέω (cf. Pellegrino 2000, 93–4), according to how Ath. 6.268d quotes the fragment (i.e. τονθολυγοῦντες, while the variant πομφολυγοῦντες in part of Athenaeus’ tradition is, in all likelihood, a gloss that has been erroneously inserted in the text; in Poll. 6.58Poll. 6.58, who also quotes the same line from Pherecrates, the MSS read τονθορυγοῦντες or τονθορυβοῦντες, but the spelling τονθολυγοῦντες is confirmed by Eust. in Il. 4.15.6–8; cf. Franchini 2020, 105–6). Overall, given its onomatopoeic nature, τονθορύζω is prone to formal instability (cf. Skoda 1982, 73) and several variant spellings/pronunciations are attested. One very scantily attested variant is τονθορίζω, which is only in grammatical sources (cf. A.5 and B.4) and seemingly once in Gal. De anat. administr. 8.7, if one follows the text printed by Kühn (2.689.4), while Garofalo (2000, 529) prints τονθορύζοντες. A variant with a different vowel timbre is τανθαρύζειν, but this is merely conjecture (albeit highly convincing) on the part of Valckenaer (1739, 119–23) in A.4. Moreover, Hsch. ε 1689 is the only source that attests to the prefixed ἐκτονθορύζω (glossed with τρέμω, ‘to tremble’), but the MS actually reads ἐκτανθαρυω, and an original ἐκτανθαρύζω cannot be excluded. A trisyllabic variant τονθρύζω (which may be explained as a syncope from τονθορύζω, cf. Szemerényi 1964, 261–2) occurs once in Herodas (C.4) and is accepted alongside τονθορύζω by Phrynichus (A.2); it is later attested in Babrius (1.107.3) and Oppianus (C. 2.541, 3,169). The corresponding trisyllabic noun τονθρυσμός is found only in A.1 and Hsch. σ 1048, while the Antiatticist has τονθρουσμός (A.3). It is conceivable that τονθρύζω was instrumental in the creation of the variant γογγρύζω, which occurs almost exclusively in lexicographical sources (B.1, B.4), except for the present participle γογγρύζοντες (‘muttering’) in a Philodemean text (P.Herc. 1485 fr. 6.4 = TM 80756, 1st century BCE) and the subjunctive γογγρύζωσιν (‘they mutter’) in part of the tradition of Arr. Epict. 1.29.55 (cf. Schenkl 1916, 108). It is also possible, however, that γογγρύζω is modelled on γρύζω (‘to grumble’; cf. B.1, B.4, Phot. γ 179; see Tichy 1983, 226).

While τονθορύζω/τονθρύζω has no documentary attestation, γογγύζω (in the prefixed form καταγογγύζω) is attested once in an inscription that bears an apocryphal letter from King Abgar to Jesus (I.Ephesos 46.5, 5th–6th century CE: οἱ Ἰουδέοι καταγογγύζουσίν σου, ‘the Jews murmur against you’) and three times in documentary texts dating between the 3rd century BCE and the 3rd century CE: P.Petr. 3.43.20 (= TM 7442) [Arsinoites, 241 or 240 BCE], O.Claud. 1.126.9 (= TM 24138) [Mons Claudianus, Eastern Egypt, ca. 107 CE], and P.Ross.Georg. 3.2.11 (= TM 17952) [Alexandria, ca. 270 CE].

In light of these forms’ distribution, Phrynichus’ stance (A.1, A.2) is unsurprising: although he acknowledges their antiquity (demonstrated by Phocylides, C.1), he rejects γογγύζω and γογγυσμός on the grounds that they lack any reliable Attic attestations (see above) and were widespread in the koine (e.g., γογγύζω – also in the prefixed version διαγογγύζω – occurs 28x in the Septuagint and 10x in the New Testament; γογγυσμός is found 13x in the Septuagint and 4x in the New Testament). Meanwhile, among the forms prescribed by Phrynichus (i.e. τονθρύζω, τονθρυσμός, τονθορύζω, and τονθορυσμός), the only form that is supported by authoritative Attic attestations is the four-syllable verb τονθορύζω, while the remaining three are undoubtedly later (see above) but may have been perceived as equally acceptable in light of their close connection to τονθορύζω. The identification of this verb as Attic is found also in the synonymic lexica (A.4), which, however, use the spelling τονθορίζω (a variant found only in Galen, cf. above). Only the spelling with iota is taken into consideration by Thomas Magister (A.5), whose entry aims to promote the trisyllabic τονθρίζω (and the corresponding noun τονθρισμός) against τονθορίζω and τονθορισμός as the proper Attic forms.

The Antiatticist’s defence of γογγυσμός (A.3) relies on the 4th-century comic playwright Anaxandrides, an author who is quoted a further eleven times in the lexicon. A.3 belongs to a broader group of entries that promote nouns in -σμός-σμός derived from verbs in -άζω-άζω or -ίζω-ίζω (cf. Antiatt. β 12Antiatt. β 12 re. βιασμός, γ 10Antiatt. γ 10 re. γυναικισμός, ε 36Antiatt. ε 36 re. ἐθισμός, ε 37Antiatt. ε 37 re. ἐξετασμός, ε 126Antiatt. ε 126 re. ἐμπυρισμός, on which cf. entry ἐμπυρισμός, ἐμπρησμός, κ 9Antiatt. κ 9 re. κραυγασμός, on which, cf. entry κεκραγμός, κραυγασμός, κράζω, π 30Antiatt. π 30 re. πλησιασμός), a category of substantives that Phrynichus appears to have scrutinised closely in his works, as attested by the following entries: Ecl. 311Phryn. Ecl. 311, where Phrynichus openly condemns ἐμπυρισμός and prescribes ἐμπρησμός instead (see entry entry ἐμπυρισμός, ἐμπρησμός); Ecl. 314Phryn. Ecl. 314, where he proscribes κραυγασμός in favour of κεκραγμός (see entry κεκραγμός, κραυγασμός, κράζω); Ecl. 394Phryn. Ecl. 394, where he lists ὀψωνιασμός among the ‘spurious and unlearned expressions’ (κίβδηλα [...] καὶ ἀμαθῆ) used by Menander’s enthusiasts (see entry πορνοκόπος, πορνοκοπέω); PS 65.2–3Phryn. PS 65.2–3, where he seems to recommend three almost unattested alternatives with the suffix -σις as replacements for the common corresponding nouns in -σμός/-γμός (i.e. δέσις for δεσμός, ἅρπασις for ἁρπαγμός and λόγισις for λογισμός); PS 56.9–10Phryn. PS 56.9−10, where he prescribes γαργαλισμός (on which see entry γάργαλος, γαργαλισμός, γαργαλίζω, γαγγαλίζω); PS 58.14–59.4Phryn. PS 58.14–59.4, where he recommends γρυλισμός and χρεμετισμός (see also Phryn. Ecl. 72Phryn. Ecl. 72 and entry γρυλίζω, γρυλισμός); PS 66.5–6Phryn. PS 66.5–6 and 104.14Phryn. PS 104.14, where he deals with ἑσμός; and PS 104.5Phryn. PS 104.5, where he recommends πιθηκισμός (clearly because of its attestation in Ar. Eq. 887).

E. Byzantine and Modern Greek commentary

In spite of Phrynichus’ prescription, γογγύζω and γογγυσμός remain widely in use throughout the late antique and Byzantine periods along with several (more or less synonymous) prefixed variants, such as ἀναγογγύζω (cf. ILNE s.v.), ἀπογογγύζω (Theodorus Studites 1x), διαγογγύζω (e.g., Photius 5x, Theophylactus 5x), ἐκγογγύζω (Athanasius I Patriarcha 1x), ἐπιγογγύζω (Iosephus Genesius 1x, Alexius Macrembolites 1x), καταγογγύζω (e.g., Georgius Syncellus 2x, Georgius Cedrenus 4x), συγγογγύζω (Pseudo-Gregentius 1x), and ὑπογογγύζω (e.g., Eustathius 1x); cf. LBG s.vv.; Kriaras, LME s.vv. The simple γογγύζω and γογγυσμός are retained in Modern Greek in the sense ‘to complain’, ‘complaint’ (cf. LKN s.v.).

τονθορύζω and its cognates (in particular ὑποτονθορύζω) also have continuations in Byzantine Greek but in considerably fewer attestations beyond lexicographical and grammatical works (see e.g. Aristaenetus 1x, Theophylactus Simocatta 2x, Constantinus VII Porphyrogenitus 1x, Michael Psellus 7x, Anna Comnena 4x, Nicetas Choniates 10x). They subsequently occur sporadically up until the 18th century (Demetrius Mostratus 1x, Parthenius Patriarcha 1x), but do not survive in Modern Greek.

F. Commentary on individual texts and occurrences

N/A