αἰσχυντηλός, σιγηλός, σιωπηλός
(Moer. α 55, Moer. σ 13, Antiatt. α 11, Antiatt. σ 4, Antiatt. σ 5, Poll. 5.146)

D. General commentary

Various Atticist sources agree in prescribing the adjectivesAdjectives in -ηλο- αἰσχυντηλός (‘bashful’, ‘shameful’), σιγηλός (‘silent’), and σιωπηλός (‘silent’), with the noteworthy exception of Thomas Magister (B.4, B.5; but see below). The entries collected above may attest to the Atticist interest in word formation. Moeris, in particular, who clearly rejects some doublets in -ηρο-, indicating them as proper to users of ‘Greek’ as opposed to Attic (A.1, A.2), appears to be aware of the differences in the distribution and use of words formed with competing suffixesSuffixes (see also entry ἀνθρωπεία, ἀνθρωπίνη). Traces of Atticist discussions of -ηλο- and -ηρο- are likely found in other erudite sources: see B.1 and B.2, which go back to the so-called lexicon of Cyril (which included, among others, materials from Atticist sources, see e.g. Dickey 2007, 100 with further bibliography).

The prescribed adjectives – αἰσχυντηλός, σιγηλός, and σιωπηλός – are formed by means of the complex suffix -ηλο-, originating from an Indo-European primary suffix *-lo-, ‘whose basic function was to derive an adjective from a verbal stem’ (Probert 2006, 209). *-lo- must originally have held a participial value that partially survives in several adjectives in -ηλο- and -ωλο- (see Chantraine 1933, 237–9). Attic-Ionic -ηλο- has a double origin: it derives either from ā-stems (as is the case with σιγηλός: cf. Dor. σιγᾱλός) or from forms in which -η represents Proto-Greek -ē (see e.g. νοσηλός ‘morbid, diseased’ < νοσέω ‘to be sick’, ind. fut. νοσήσω). The newly formed suffix was soon attached to various nominal, verbal, and adverbial stems: see, e.g., ὑδρηλός ‘watery, moist’ (< ὕδωρ ‘water’, ὑδρο‑), ὑψηλός ‘high, lofty’ (< ὕψος ‘height’), χαμηλός ‘on the ground, creeping’ (< χαμαί ‘on the ground’). αἰσχυντηλός also ultimately derives from ἀναίσχυντος ‘shameful’ (see GEW s.v. αἶσχος). However, -λο- and -ηλο- were not particularly productive in Greek (Chantraine 1933, 237, 239, 242; Palmer 1946, 42; Probert 2006, 210).

-ηρο- is among the complex suffixes (e.g. -αρο-, -ερο-, -υρο-) originating from the Indo-European *-ro- (Nussbaum 1976, 109–10 distinguishes between ‘Caland’ -ro- adjectives and ‘non-Caland’ -ro- nouns, these ones virtually restricted to verbal roots; caution is needed, however: see Probert 2006, 157). -ηρο- derivatives were originally based on a long vowel ᾱ/η (it is possible that Proto-Greek had a suffix *-ēro- besides *-āro-, see Chantraine 1933, 231–2). Attic-Ionic -ηρο- is sometimes attached to nouns whose η derives from an ancient *ā and to verbal forms whose -η-expansion corresponds to an Indo-European *ē. More frequently, however, the derived form comes from an e/o-stem or an s-stem. Adjectives in -ηρος are rare in Homer (see Chantraine 1933, 232; Risch 1974, 69–70) but proliferate in later literature, both poetry and prose. Notably, the corpus Hippocraticum has 20 new forms. The suffix was still productive during the 4th and 3rd centuries BCE: Ptolemaic papyri include several new adjectives, ‘often denoting […] names of taxes’ (Palmer 1946, 41). Later in the koine, -ηρος eventually became unproductive (see Chantraine 1933, 231–3; Palmer 1946, 26, 40).

Both -ηλο- and -ηρο- were thus recessive in Moeris’ time. -ηρο-, however, exhibited greater vitality, which may account for Moeris' condemnation of αἰσχυντηρός and σιγηρός as typical of the ἝλληνεςἝλληνες – here, likely a marker addressing the users of cultivated koine Greek (see Maidhof 1912, 319–38; entry Moeris, Ἀττικιστής). The distribution of αἰσχυντηλός/αἰσχυντηρός and σιγηλός/σιγηρός must also have been instrumental in this regard. αἰσχυντηλός is attested for the first time in Plato (C.1, Pl. Chrm. 158c.6, 160e.4; Lg. 665e.9). It occurs in Aristotle (9x) and in later technical prose. John Chrysostom uses it four times in addition to αἰσχυντηρός (6x, two of which are Biblical quotations). The latter is found in the Septuagint (3x) and occurs primarily in lexicographical interpretamenta (e.g. Hsch. α 1777, δ 433) and Biblical quotations.

σιγηλός occurs in both poetry (Pindar, Euripides, Sophocles) and prose. Although Pellegrino (2013, 74) argues that σιγηλός is a ‘high-caliber poeticism’, its attestation in the comic poet Nicophon (C.3), together with several stereotypical expressions, such as those found in some tragic dialogues (see C.2, Soph. Ph. 741, Eur. Supp. 567), suggest that the adjective may also have belonged to colloquial languageColloquial language (for further detail, see the discussion of A.3 below). Poll. 5.147Poll. 5.147 has σιγηλῶς, which Pollux himself condemns as φορτικόν ‘vulgar’ in 6.209Poll. 6.209: however, this is likely because in 6.209, σιγηλῶς is unduly referred to the semantic field of ‘unclarity’, while it literally pertains to that of ‘silence’. Nevertheless, σιγηλός is attested throughout the history of Ancient Greek, albeit scarcely, perhaps because of the competition mounted by σιωπηλός and, above all, σιγῶν, the participle of σιγάω ‘to be silent’. σιγηρός, for its part, occurs for the first time in the Septuagint (once) and has a few attestations from the imperial age onwards.

To sum up, Moeris found αἰσχυντηλός and σιγηλός in several of his canonical authors (Plato, Euripides, Sophocles; about Plato in Moeris’ lexicon, however, see entries ἀνθρωπεία, ἀνθρωπίνη and Moeris, Ἀττικιστής). He might have thought it necessary to rely on these authors to prevent uncertainties between -ηλο- and -ηρο-, whenever two alternative forms of the same adjective were attested. Indeed, confusion between -ηλο- and -ηρο- was possible, considering that λ and ρ interchange frequently (see Gignac 1976, 102–7, underlying the notion that such an interchange in Greek papyri may occasionally be due to the influence of the Fayyumic dialect, which is characterised by lambdacism, see e.g. Kasser 1991; AGP vol. 2, Phonology). Moreover, dissimilation may have been instrumental in the distribution of both -ηλο- and -ηρο-. As Lejeune (1955, 130) noted, the suffix -ro- is preferred to -lo- when the root contains an l. As a point of comparison, we may cite BGU 3.781 (= TM 25637) [1st–2nd century CE], in which ὀρθηρός (‘tall, straight’) ‘occurs a number of times’ and ‘is possibly an orthographic variant of ὀρθηλός’ (Palmer 1946, 41). Such phenomena were already known to ancient grammarians: Herodian himself may have dealt with ὑψηλός/ὑψηρός and σιγηλός/σιγηρός in connection with a discussion of *ἀλγαλέος (ἄλγος ‘pain’) > ἀργαλέος ‘painful, troublesome’ (B.3). See also schol. Apoll.Rh. 1.308b: συγγενὲς γὰρ τὸ λ τῷ ρ, ὡς ὑδρηλοὶ ἀντὶ τοῦ ὑδρηροί (‘For λ is akin to ρ, as [is the case with] ὑδρηλοί [Hom. Od. 9.133] instead of ὑδρηροί’).

The Antiatticist (A.3, A.4, A.5) also prescribes αἰσχυντηλός and σιγηλός (together with σιωπηλός, which the lexicon attributes to the comic poet Aristonymus [5th–4th century BCE], see Orth 2013, 123). Note that in A.3, the lemma αἰσχυντηλὸς εἶ does not correspond to any locus classicus in Plato’s Gorgias, where αἰσχυντηλοτέρω is found instead (Grg. 487b.1 = C.1). Sicking (1883, 13) suggests that the Antiatticist wished to use a Platonic passage to defend an everyday expression. Such a hypothesis is attractive, since similar expressions (e.g. σιγηλὸς εἶ) are found in tragic dialogues and appear to be colloquialColloquial language: see C.2, Soph. Ph. 741, and Eur. Supp. 567. In this sense, Sicking’s idea may be elaborated: perhaps the author of the Antiatticist wished to defend a (colloquial?) expression found in an Attic author not belonging to the restricted canon promoted by other Atticists, ennobling it by means of a reference to the Platonic adjective αἰσχυντηλός.

Thomas Magister apparently adopts an oppositional stance to that of Moeris and the Antiatticist. He likely found the form αἰσχυντηροτέρω in the manuscripts of the aforementioned passage of Plato’s Gorgias (C.1) that he had at his disposal and consequently recommended it (B.4). As for σιγηλός and σιωπηλός (B.5), he does not reject these forms outright but rather considers them οὐ ῥητορικά – that is, unsuitable for an orator: in this regard, it is noticeable that ῥητορικόνῥητορικός in Thomas Magister is opposed to both ποιητικόν (Thom.Mag. 130.14 and 254.4) and κοινόν (Thom.Mag. 288.6 and 333.2), thus indicating a kind of ‘golden mean’ with which every orator should comply. Note that σιγηλός and σιωπηλός (possibly considered to have ‘poetic’ allure? See above and C.2, C.3, C.4, C.5) are scarcely attested in Thomas Magister’s canonical authors (see Ritschl 1832, CIII–CIV; entry Thomas Magister, ’Ονομάτων Ἀττικῶν ἐκλογή): among them, Libanius normally uses the participle σιγῶν – that is, the form prescribed by Thomas (more than 30 instances) – while σιγηλός occurs only once (see also Thom.Mag. 372.5–7, where ὑπνηλός ‘drowsy’ occurring in Libanius is recommended).

E. Byzantine and Modern Greek commentary

Although neither -ηλο- nor -ηρο- is particularly productive in Greek (see section D.), several adjectives in -ηλος are very well attested throughout the history of Ancient and Byzantine Greek. Apart from the frequent ὑψηλός, see also, for example, ἀπατηλός ‘canny’, which already occurs in Homer and gains traction from the imperial age onwards. Regarding -ηρο-, Palmer (1946, 41) points out that its use in Ptolemaic papyri – where it often denotes names of taxes (see D.) – ‘anticipates the function of the suffix in M[edieval] Gr[eek], where […] it denotes only qualities of things, whereas in ancient Greek it is also applied to personal qualities’.

αἰσχυντηλός is more frequent than αἰσχυντηρός, but it is impossible to detect a stylistic connotation in either of these. The same may be said of σιγηλός and σιγηρός. The former occurs in prose writing (12x in Eustathius) but is also attested in the poems of Meletius (13th century, 1x) Manuel Philes (13th–14th century, 3x), and Stephanus Sachlices (14th century, 2x). σιγηρός/σιγερός is rare (for the graphic variant, see Lampe 1961 s.v. σιγηρός). It is used in the Ptochoprodromica (12th century) as well as in Constantinus Manasses’ Carmen morale 242. σιγερός also occurs in The Tale of Livistros and Rodamne (a 13th–14th-century romance written in vernacular Greek) and in Philelphus’ De psychagogia 1.12.27 Maltese.

F. Commentary on individual texts and occurrences

N/A