Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Dobrodoli na forum Meduslovjanskogo jezyka! elajemo vam mnogo prijemnosti.
Добродошли на форум Меджусловјанского језыка! Желајемо вам много пријемности.
Welcome to Interslavic! We hope you enjoy your visit.

Sejčas pogledajete nae forum kako gosť. To znači, e imajete ograničeny dostup do někojih česti forum i ne moete koristati vse funkcije. Ako li pristupite v nau grupu, budete imati svobodny dostup do sekcij preznačenyh jedino za členov, na pr. zaloeňje profila, izsylaňje privatnyh poslaň i učestničstvo v glasovaňjah. Zapisaňje se jest prosto, bystro i vpolno bezplatno.

Сејчас погледајете наше форум како гость. То значи, же имајете ограничены доступ до некојих чести форум и не можете користати все функције. Ако ли приступите в нашу групу, будете имати свободны доступ до секциј презначеных једино за членов, на пр. заложеньје профила, изсыланьје приватных послань и учестничство в гласованьјах. Записаньје се јест просто, быстро и вполно безплатно.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Pristupite v nau grupu! Приступите в нашу групу! Join our community!
Ako li u jeste člen, prijavite se, e byste mogli koristati vse monosti:
Ако ли уж јесте член, пријавите се, же бысте могли користати все можности:
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
j/'; The use of i, j or ' after consonants
Topic Started: Aug 18 2008, 01:33 PM (4,109 Views)
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
"Norvegski Rolf"
 
See your point. I guess the same goes for zsiveti instead of zsit' then. How about smijati se/smejeti se?


RU - смех, смеяться
UA - сміх, сміятися
PL - śmiech, śmiać się
CZ - smích, smát se
SK - smiech, smiať sa
SLO - smeh, smejati se
SH - smeh, smejati se
MK - смеа, се смее
BG - смях, смея се

From the above, one would expect the forms smeh for "laughter" and smejat' se for "to laugh".

"iopq"
 
zsiveti actually sounds like a good idea, then the regular form would be zsivu/zsivem instead of the unpalatable zsiju (I chew?)


Glad to see my ZS in use! :)

But frankly, I don't see what is unpalatable about zsiju. Besides, I can't see how zsivet'/zsivu would be regular, as long as we assume that rozumet'/rozumeju and videt'/vidzsu are regular, too. But let's have a look, because I've made a list for live/life as well:

RU - жить, жизнь
UA - жити, життя
BY - жыць, жыццё
PL - żyć, życie
CZ - žít, život
SK - žiť, život
SLO - živeti, življenje
SH - živeti, život
SK - живее, живот
BG - живея, живот

As far as the infinitive is concerned, we have zsit' (4 votes) vs. zsivet' (2 votes). Now, Russian may have a present tense stem жив-, but AFAIK Ukrainian doesn't (know know about the other WS and ES languages). Which, for the present tense, would lead us to a 3/3 vote. Since zsit'/zsivu would be irregular and zsit'/zsiju would be regular, why pick the irregular form?

I could imagine zsiv as an optional present tense stem, though.

Things become harder in the case of "life". In terms of votes, we get:
zsivot - 2 1/2 vote
zsitje - 2 vote
zsizn' - 1 vote
zsivjenje - 1/2 vote

Keeping in mind that the Slovene form is a regular verbal noun from "to live", we might as well say that zsivot and zsitje end up equally.

I prefer zsitje for three reasons:
- it is the regular verbal noun of "zsit'" and therefore obvious to anyone who knows that zsit' means "to life";
- while zsivot would be understandable to a Pole, the verbal noun zsivjenje evokes connotations with "to feed", but not at all with "to live";
- it's what we have been using thus far (including in several tables).

Jan
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno to bude trudno s vsim inim.

Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански
[čćч]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
Ukrainian does have живу
Check Vasmer's next time ;)
Belarussian has жыву as well

Czech has žiji, Slovak has žijem
OCS has жити, живѫ
Slovenian has živeti, živejem
Bulgarian has живея

the v is etymological (cf. Latin vivo), so West Slavic forms are regularizations of the first person form
South Slavic forms regularized the infinitive instead

As far as your "regular" point goes... živet' - živu is as regular as nest' - nesu, močt' - mogu, begat' - begu, klast' - kladu, krast' - kradu, zvat' - zovu, brat' - beru, lgat' - lgu...

in other words the entire first ...
BRACE FOR IMPACT
the entire first conjugation


basically we can sort verbs into three categories:
verbs that have endings on u/eš/e/eme/ete/jut
verbs that have endings on ju/ješ/je/jeme/jete/jut
verbs that have endings on ju/iš/i/ime/ite/jat

if we follow your logic, we can condense the first two conjugations into soft and hard roots
but we have to somehow distinguish between the two conjugations that use e and i since not only do they differ by the vowel, they also differ by the nasal in the third person plural form

we've already agreed on zsit'e before, though
Bo v c'omu žytti pomiž baletom i svobodoju zavždy potribno vybyraty svobodu, navit' jakščo ce čehoslovac'kyj general.
Sergij Žadan "Anarchy in the Ukr"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
"iopq"
 
Ukrainian does have живу
Check Vasmer's next time ;)
Belarussian has жыву as well

Czech has žiji, Slovak has žijem
OCS has жити, живѫ
Slovenian has živeti, živejem
Bulgarian has живея


Alright, in that case it seems like zsit' should be our infinitive, and zsiv- our present tense stem. I can live with that.

Quote:
 
As far as your "regular" point goes... živet' - živu is as regular as nest' - nesu, močt' - mogu, begat' - begu, klast' - kladu, krast' - kradu, zvat' - zovu, brat' - beru, lgat' - lgu...


I can see your point. Basically, it would be zsiv(e)t' (forget my earlier idea about ë).

However, I can't see how nest'/nesu and klast'/kladu are regular at the same time, i.e. without introducing a separate present tense stem. In this case, I'd much rather use a form like klad(e)t'.

Quote:
 
in other words the entire first ...
BRACE FOR IMPACT
the entire first conjugation


:lol:

Quote:
 
basically we can sort verbs into three categories:
verbs that have endings on u/eš/e/eme/ete/jut
verbs that have endings on ju/ješ/je/jeme/jete/jut
verbs that have endings on ju/iš/i/ime/ite/jat


So, where do you leave the a-stems?

I mean, delajesz instead of delasz is something I could perhaps live with, but delajem instead of delam?

Quote:
 
if we follow your logic, we can condense the first two conjugations into soft and hard roots


Well, that's a good thing.

Quote:
 
but we have to somehow distinguish between the two conjugations that use e and i since not only do they differ by the vowel, they also differ by the nasal in the third person plural form


Eh? Could you explain that?

Quote:
 
we've already agreed on zsit'e before, though


Good!

Jan
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno to bude trudno s vsim inim.

Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански
[čćч]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
I mean l'ubit' has oni l'ubjat but delat' has oni delajut
the -i verbs have a ja in the third person plural, the rest have -ju

in terms of the other forms, the correct form is delaješ, but a lot of languages just shortened it to delaš

so we can shorten in the cases like aje, eje and so forth with a lot of vowels
the nest'/klast' thing is why I wanted to make it nesti/klast' so that -sti would signify s roots and -st' would signify d/t roots
Bo v c'omu žytti pomiž baletom i svobodoju zavždy potribno vybyraty svobodu, navit' jakščo ce čehoslovac'kyj general.
Sergij Žadan "Anarchy in the Ukr"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
Quote:
 
I mean l'ubit' has oni l'ubjat but delat' has oni delajut
the -i verbs have a ja in the third person plural, the rest have -ju


Please, no more secondary forms! If Slovianski is to be a hyper-naturalistic language, if would be a different story, but it still needs to be highly simplified. That's why I want to avoid conjugations, and that's why I'm very much again a 3rd person plural that sometimes has the ending -ut and sometimes the ending -at.

Look at the Slavic languages:

RU - -(j)ut/-jat
UA - -(j)ut'/-jat'
BY - -(j)uc'/-jac'
PL - -(j)ą
CZ - -ou/-(j)í
SK - -(j)ú/-ia
SLO - -jo
SH - -(j)u, -e
MK - -at
BG - -at

As you can see, four languages have only one ending in the 3rd person plural. I know that prošat would be more common than prošut, but I'd rather avoid conjugation-dependent endings.

Quote:
 
in terms of the other forms, the correct form is delaješ, but a lot of languages just shortened it to delaš


In fact, only the East Slavic languages have delaješ. ALL the others have delaš or something similar to that.

Quote:
 
so we can shorten in the cases like aje, eje and so forth with a lot of vowels


That would hardly solve the problem. In that case, most infinitives on -at' would have a present-tense stem on -aj-. But then, we'd have a first person singular *delajem. Such a form doesn't exist in ANY Slavic language:

RU -aju, -aješ, -ajet, -ajem, -ajete, -ajut
UA -aju, -aješ, -aje, -ajemo, -ajete, -ajut'
BY -aju, -aješ, -aje, -ajem, -ajece, -ajuc'
PL -am, -asz, -a, -amy, -acie, -ają
CZ -ám, -áš, -á, -áme, -áte, -ají
SK -ám, -áš, -á, -áme, -áte, -ajú
SLO -am, -aš, -a, -amo, -ate, -ajo
SH -am, -aš, -a, -amo, -ate, -aju
MK -am, -aš, -a, -ame, -ate, -at
BG -am, -aš, -a, -ame, -ate, -at

And for the record:
HSB -am, -aš, -a, -amy, -aće, -aju/-aja
DSB -am, -aš, -a, -amy, -aśo, -aju

Honestly, I wouldn't be in favour of adding even more contraction rules besides the one we already have, the one that leads to proszu instead of prosiju.

Let's face it, the Slavic languages have a few infinitive classes and a few present tense classes, but a huge number of possible combinations of those. I'm not in favour of having a dictionary with entries like:
delat' IIIc "to make, to do"
pisat' Ib "to write"
because it means a person will have to learn two pieces of information for EVERY verb, and the second piece will only start to have meaning once he opens the grammar.

The idea behind Slovianski is that a Slavic person can read it without looking at the grammar at all and only sporadically check the dictionary. But also, that a person can write it easily without really knowing it, i.e. with the help a short and simple grammar and the dictionary.

I think therefore that my system of infinitives with only SOMETIMES an extra present tense stem is way easier to work with. If a reader sees the form piše in a text, he can instantly find it in the dictionary under pisat' (piš-). Likewise, if a writer is looking for it, these two babies will tell him all he needs to know. If there is no second form, he will automatically know that delat' has the present tense stem dela-.

Besides, let's face it: there are thousands of words of the delat' type, and much less of the pisat' type.

Now, the opposite is the case for words on -et'. Words like umret'/umr- are more numerous than words like umet'/ume-. One possible solution would be to reverse the whole thing here. In other words, in these cases we don't remove just the -t' to obtain the present tense stem, but the whole ending -et'. For cases like umet' we can therefore have a dictionary entry like:
umet' (ume-) "can, to know how to"

Quote:
 
the nest'/klast' thing is why I wanted to make it nesti/klast' so that -sti would signify s roots and -st' would signify d/t roots


The idea is surely not bad, but just like all 3rd persons plural should have the ending -ut, I think all infinitives should have the ending -t'. Besides, it doesn't really solve anything, because people still won't know whether to pick -t- or -d-. Which means the secondary form will be needed anyway. Besides, the change -st' > -d- will be one more "rule" people will have to learn.

What if we adopt infinitives like kradet', kladet', gnetet' (and possibly even neset', vezet')? If we go for the solution I proposed above (verbs on -et' are consonantal stems), all these words become fully regular verbs: kradu, kradeš, krade ... kradut; kradl; kradeni. Now THAT's a solution I could live with!

Jan
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno to bude trudno s vsim inim.

Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански
[čćч]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Silmethule
Member Avatar

My idea for delasz/delajesz - IMO the simplest solution is: after vowel, if ending starts with vowel - add -j-; after consonant, if ending starts with consonant too - add -e-. Clear and simple, imho.

Delat', stem: dela, dela + u = dela-j-u; dela + m = dela-m; dela + sz = dela-sz; dela + ut = dela-j-ut.

kradnut', stem: kradn, kradn + u = kradn-u; kradn + m = kradn-e-m; kradn + sz = kradn-e-sz; kradn + ut = kradn-ut (or kradet', kradu, kradem, kradesz, kradut)

Then we have only 1 conjugation. What's the problem?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
Silmethule
Sep 22 2008, 04:26 PM
My idea for delasz/delajesz - IMO the simplest solution is: after vowel, if ending starts with vowel - add -j-; after consonant, if ending starts with consonant too - add -e-. Clear and simple, imho.

Delat', stem: dela, dela + u = dela-j-u; dela + m = dela-m; dela + sz = dela-sz; dela + ut = dela-j-ut.

kradnut', stem: kradn, kradn + u = kradn-u; kradn + m = kradn-e-m; kradn + sz = kradn-e-sz; kradn + ut = kradn-ut (or kradet', kradu, kradem, kradesz, kradut)

Then we have only 1 conjugation. What's the problem?

That's indeed one way of putting it. And that's essentially what I'm after, anyway.

Jan
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno to bude trudno s vsim inim.

Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански
[čćч]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
What about verbs like cvesti? We'll make it cvetet'?
Bo v c'omu žytti pomiž baletom i svobodoju zavždy potribno vybyraty svobodu, navit' jakščo ce čehoslovac'kyj general.
Sergij Žadan "Anarchy in the Ukr"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
iopq
Sep 22 2008, 07:46 PM
What about verbs like cvesti? We'll make it cvetet'?

Either that, or *cvetnut'.

By the way, I'm not sure if we ever discussed this, but does Slovianski really need to have this kind of palatalisation? As far as I know, the changes kv/gv > cv/zv is mostly a South Slavic phenomenon (that via OCS made its way into quite a lot of Russian words as well). It would be more logical to have: kvetet' or kvetnut'.

Jan
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno to bude trudno s vsim inim.

Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански
[čćч]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Silmethule
Member Avatar

There was such a discussion somewhere on the forum, but there wasn't AFAIR any ending conclusions... ;).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
Actually, only West Slavic has gwiazda
East Slavic has a native zvezda

Also, while kvit means "flower" in Ukrainian, it's actually a West Slavic loan, and cvit means "color" which is the native reflex

Don't believe everything you read on Wikipedia ;)
Bo v c'omu žytti pomiž baletom i svobodoju zavždy potribno vybyraty svobodu, navit' jakščo ce čehoslovac'kyj general.
Sergij Žadan "Anarchy in the Ukr"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
According to Comrie, second palatalisation before [ w ] occurs in South Slavic and part of East Slavic, but he doesn't specify which parts of East Slavic. Anyway, it's not a big deal to me. I don't have a problem with cv/zv. So cvet and zvezda it shall be!

To be or not to be, that's the cvestion...

Jan
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno to bude trudno s vsim inim.

Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански
[čćч]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
but English has a [kw] sound not a [kv] sound D:
Bo v c'omu žytti pomiž baletom i svobodoju zavždy potribno vybyraty svobodu, navit' jakščo ce čehoslovac'kyj general.
Sergij Žadan "Anarchy in the Ukr"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gabriel Svoboda

Quote:
 
Serbian national variant:
д'авол, пл'уjу


Well, isn't ' in Cyrillic rather a separator than a softener?

Maybe we could just go by etymology for the Serbian national variant:

d' > ђ (Slovianski Mad'arska > Serbian Мађарска)
l' > љ
n' > њ
r' > р (Slovianski lekar' > Seriban lekar, Slovianski bur'a > Serbian bura)
t' > т (Slovianski -ost' > Serbian -ost)

I know, ђ has a wrong pronunciation, and р, т deletes a distiction that Slovianski has. But we can't sometimes avoid this in the national variants, just as we must also delete the e/je distinction in Bulgarian.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gabriel Svoboda

Quote:
 
- or to keep the infinitive videt' and give it an (irregular) present-tense stem vidi-.


OK.

Quote:
 
In any case, come and have a look at a program a wrote during the past few days: a conjugation program: http://steen.free.fr/slovianski/conjugator.html


Great work!

Quote:
 
Look at Interlingua: a pretty naturalistic-looking language, but its entire grammar is a matter of just a few pages.


Don't forget that Interlingua has cheated by having English as a control language + the rule that any grammatical feature must be present in all source languages to be present in Intelingua. If creators of Interlingua had admited that English is a Romance language by vocabulary, but not by grammar, they would have to have gender, present tense conjugation etc.

Quote:
 
Alright, in that case it seems like zsit' should be our infinitive, and zsiv- our present tense stem. I can live with that.


OK. I suppose this concerns all monosyllable -it' verbs: ja pivu pivo, ti pivesz pivo, on pive pivo, mi piveme pivo, vi pivete pivo, oni pivut pivo.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fonologija i pravopis · Next Topic »
Add Reply