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

Sejčas pogledajete naše forum kako gosť. To znači, že imajete ograničeny dostup do někojih česti forum i ne možete koristati vse funkcije. Ako li pristupite v našu grupu, budete imati svobodny dostup do sekcij preznačenyh jedino za členov, na pr. založeňje 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 našu grupu! Приступите в нашу групу! Join our community!
Ako li už jeste člen, prijavite se, že byste mogli koristati vse možnosti:
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
o/e rule
Topic Started: Sep 7 2008, 01:27 PM (2,325 Views)
Norvegski Rolf

S DOBREJU ZSENOJU!?
Are the final Us really necessary?

I presume that TOT and KTO will still be declined with -O-?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
yes the final u is necessary, read Ukrainian grammar

also, how the hell are you going to tell genitive or dative from instrumental? Do you want us to have -oj in all forms?

We're already breaking rules by using kem, might as well go all the way and use kego.
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
 
Norvegski Rolf

Well, seeing that e.g. Russian feminine adjectives have OJ/EJ in 4 cases including Instrumental and that the Russian noun is ZSENOJ in the instrumental, I still do not see a need for the Us. And what else can ZSENOJ be but Instrumetal?

Apart from Ukrainian I can find this -OJU only in Belarusian. Of course there are -JU in the Instrumental of the feminine I-nouns, but they are already in a separate and different paradigm.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
Well, we have zsenoju so it matches -oju in dobreju
otherwise we're picking one from column A and one from column B

if you have a better suggestion to disambiguate from dobreju and dobrej, let's hear it

btw, dative and prepositional must match, the best form for accusative is -ej
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:
 
Apart from Ukrainian I can find this -OJU only in Belarusian. Of course there are -JU in the Instrumental of the feminine I-nouns, but they are already in a separate and different paradigm.


Well, Polish has , and the final -u in -oju is the only thing that corresponds with it. I wouldn't be happy to see it dropped.

Mind, my original proposal was slightly different: s dobrju zsenju. Not based on any language in particular, but it seemed like a nice middle-of-the-road solution. Later, I adopted Iopq's -oju. I can live with both options.

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

Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански
[čćч]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gabriel Svoboda

Quote:
 
Svezsest'? Honestly, I didn't know Russian was THAT consequent!


Well, even Czech has svez'est. :-) Although here it is rather an inconsequence, we still have oranz'ovi, for example.

Quote:
 
Like I said, for me option B is unacceptable, because it would double our number of declension.


Well, we also have only two conjugations, not dozens of them, because the rest are rules for present tense stem creation, phonological processes ... Why not take the same approach for declensions? Why not just say that we have four declensions that are sometimes affected by additional rules?

To say it aloud, I prefer the option A from your original post.

Quote:
 
Please, don't forget that Slovianski is meant to be SIMPLIFIED: it's based on material that the Slavic languages have in common, and not all Slavic languages have -ev.


And not all Slavic languages have six cases. If their absence in Bulgarian/Macedonian is negligible for Slovianski-N, why not regard the partial absence of the o/e rule in the same way?
(But anyway, Slovianski-P should of course respect the Slovianski-N phonology, only grammar should be different.)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
We can get rid of the e/o rule as long as we avoid words that would apply it
So in my current version of Slovianski we have svezsost', znajomi, etc.
but we avoid it in cases like pl'uvat' instead of pl'evat' or pl'ovat' because both sound odd to other respective languages
we also avoid it declension by using -em in every case

also if we connect words like obczeslovjanski we also always use the letter e to connect words
in Russian it's kind of inconsequential: kon'eval but konokrad
we should probably always have kon'ekrad/kon'eval if we have these words (which is of course a totally different discussion)

I also don't think we should take out ' if it's followed by e or i
we should just leave them in logical places
so if we have kon' and we add something to the end of the word, we should still have kon' in the beginning
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:
 
I also don't think we should take out ' if it's followed by e or i
we should just leave them in logical places
so if we have kon' and we add something to the end of the word, we should still have kon' in the beginning


Oh ... we have already had long discussions about this long ago. As far as I remember, finally I left my absurd opinion that there is no palatalisation at all and that every palatalisation = "j" (allowing no palatalisation at the end of the word), and you left your absurd opinion that e/i are hard unless specially marked as soft.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
If we allow free variation between soft i/e shouldn't we specify which words are soft for the people who use the hard variant? Example:
jego, do n'ego

this word is soft in every language but Bulgarian/Macedonian, even Ukrainian (n'ogo)
so the people who distinguish between hard and soft variants in their pronunciation of Slovianski SHOULD have the information that in this case it is soft, and in other cases it should be hard

Unless you want to FORCE me to say it soft every time or write e and sometimes say it soft and sometimes say it hard
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:
 
Well, we also have only two conjugations, not dozens of them, because the rest are rules for present tense stem creation, phonological processes ... Why not take the same approach for declensions? Why not just say that we have four declensions that are sometimes affected by additional rules?


Sure, if we really nééd them (as in the case of prošu instead of prosiju, for instance). But I completely don't see the additional value of having those extras over not having them. The idea of Slovianski-N is: every case has one simple ending that is present in virtually all Slavic languages, which does not mean that it should have all Slavic endings. Slovianski-N shouldn't have any phonological rules at all. What good does it do, anyway? That the sequence -jo- looks odd to a Russian doesn't matter at all, because Slovianski is not Russian.

Quote:
 
And not all Slavic languages have six cases. If their absence in Bulgarian/Macedonian is negligible for Slovianski-N, why not regard the partial absence of the o/e rule in the same way?


For the very same reason: the majority principle (languages voting and the like) applies to the creation of words and the picking of the best options for endings. It does not apply to phonological rules, because, like I said, Slovianski shouldn't have any. That is typical natlang stuff, and much as I love creating languages that mimic natlangs, it has no place in an auxlang.

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

Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански
[čćч]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
Quote:
 
If we allow free variation between soft i/e shouldn't we specify which words are soft for the people who use the hard variant? Example:
jego, do n'ego


I agree, in some cases it can be useful. The rule is: e and i can be palatalising or not. That does not mean that it is forbidden to specify when it should be mandatory. Only, I think we should avoid overusing that freedom. Let's avoid things like knjiga, because we'd soon end up with bjit' for "to hit" (until someone says: instead of having bit'/bjit', wouldn't it be easier to write byt'/bit'? And there you go...)

In the case of (n)jego, we can explain it very simply: the basic form is jego, but after a preposition, n- is inserted. So jego becomes do njego, and Bob's your uncle.

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

Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански
[čćч]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
Should we write Ĺľeravl'em or Ĺľeravlem? It seems counter-intuitive to write an original vj as "hard"
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:
 
I agree, in some cases it can be useful.


Who the hell will decide when it's useful and when it's not? Remeber, if we allow this, iopq will soon say 'e and 'i are useful nearly everywhere. And I don't really want e/'e and i/'i to be randomly distributed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gabriel Svoboda

Quote:
 
That the sequence -jo- looks odd to a Russian doesn't matter at all, because Slovianski is not Russian.


If we consequently eliminate all the similar stuff that says nothing to a considerable number of Slavs (e.g. e/'e, i/'i, dva kon'a or oni kriczat, as I have just written elsewhere), then OK, let's do away with o'>e, too, and choose the option C.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
I like my option the best:
I) Use -em instead of -om, -ego instead of -ogo, etc., -uvat' instead of -ovat', use only -e- to link two words, and only leave words like sveĹľost' which just simply HAPPEN to have soft + o combination in them
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
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fonologija i pravopis · Next Topic »
Add Reply