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
Naučni Slovianski [čćч]
Topic Started: Jul 2 2010, 12:53 PM (4,751 Views)
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
tellur
Jun 13 2012, 02:47 PM
What the hell is soft and hard syllabic r (and l)? Why do you differ this softness of a liquid?
In my opinion, noone should really attempt at marking the length in any intermediate Slavic language. It really depends on a nationality of a speaker, i.e. his language.
But it would be interesting to see some comparsion! :)

In some languages TьrC and TъrC have merged, namely in Czecho-Slovak and South Slavic. However, in other languages this is not the case, and that's why we have мёртвый, первый vs. корчма, торг. In a more Northern-flavoured form of Slovianski, there is no point in keeping syllabic R, that's why distinguishing between Ṙ and Ŕ makes sense.

The sequences TьlC and ТъrC merge in a lot more languages, although in Polish the difference still matters, hence wilk vs. Russian волк.
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno tož bude trudno s vsim inim.

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

IJzeren Jan
Jun 13 2012, 06:40 PM
In some languages TьrC and TъrC have merged, namely in Czecho-Slovak and South Slavic. However, in other languages this is not the case, and that's why we have мёртвый, первый vs. корчма, торг. In a more Northern-flavoured form of Slovianski, there is no point in keeping syllabic R, that's why distinguishing between
The sequences TьlC and ТъrC merge in a lot more languages, although in Polish the difference still matters, hence wilk vs. Russian волк.
so it's actually a different treatment of hard and soft yer before liquids. And I have always wondered why Russian has got первый but on the other hand торг. :)
My Interslavic shortly - no i/y disinction and o/e rule enforced (byti>biti x biti>biti, svežego x dobrogo), soft consonants ń, ĺ, ď, ť, ŕ, ě/e merged, ę->ja, no syllabic r/l (torg, deržava, volk, dolgi), tl/dl clusters preserved (midlo, metla), CroC, CloC, CreC, CleC (grod, glova, breg, mleko), 1st sg. ending -u, 3rd pl. ending ut/jat (delaju, čuju, molvju x delajut, čujut, molvjat). Basically, a heavy Western flavour with some Eastern elements.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
Okay, since there have been no further comments, here is a proposal for Naučny Medžuslovjanski. In addition to the normal alphabet (Latin without Q W X and with Č Š Ž) and the soft consonants (Ň Ľ Ř Ť Ď Ś Ź), it will have the following characters:

Consonants
Ć for PSl. -tj- (svěća, povraćati) → Slovianski sveča, povračati
Đ for PSl. -dj- (međa, ćuđi) → Slovianski medža, čudži
Ķ for PSl. 2nd palatalisation (ķvět) → Slovianski cvet
Ģ for PSl. 2nd palatalisation (ģvězda) → Slovianski zvězda
in PSl. -tl- (meṱlo) → Slovianski melo
in PSl. -dl- (moḓliti) → Slovianski moliti
Ù in loanwords (aùto, Eùropa) → Slovianski avto, Evropa

Vowels
Å in PSl. TorT/TolT (gråd, glåva) → Slovianski grad, glava
Ė in PSl. TerT/TelT (brėg, mlėko) → Slovianski breg, mleko
Ě for PSl. ě (město, htěti) → Slovianski mesto, hteti
Ę for PSl. ę (pęť, počęti) → Slovianski peť, početi
È for PSl. strong ь (pès, otèc) → Slovianski pes, otec
Ò for PSl. strong ъ (bòčka, pěsòk) → Slovianski bočka, pesok
Ų for PSl. ǫ (zvųk, bųdų) → Slovianski zvuk, budu

Syllabic liquids
in PSl. TъrT (tṙg, gṙdy) → Slovianski trg, grdy
Ŕ in PSl. TьrT (smŕť, pŕvy) → Slovianski smrť, prvy
Ŀŀ in PSl. TъlT (pŀny) → Slovianski polny
Ĺĺ in PSl. TьlT (vĺk) → Slovianski volk

(What's better? Ṙṙ Ŀŀ? Ŗŗ Ļļ? Ṛṛ Ḷḷ?)

As for the adjective markers Ý, Í, Á, Ó, É and the infinive marker Ì, I feel these should be deprecated. They may be of use for automatic transcriptions into orthographies mean to resemble natlangs (é > RU -ые), but I think there use in texts should really be discouraged.

As for Ě, I'm wondering whether we shouldn't restrict its use to hard consonants, so that instead of šě, čě, jě etc will just write še, če, je.
Edited by IJzeren Jan, Jun 16 2012, 02:18 PM.
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno tož bude trudno s vsim inim.

Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански
[čćч]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bandziol20
Member Avatar

IJzeren Jan
Jun 16 2012, 01:41 PM
Ć for PSl. -tj- (svěća, povraćati) → Slovianski sveča, povračati


what's for 'third' in Slovianski ?
Quote:
 
instead of šě, čě, jě etc will just write še, če, je.

Are there any such connections indeed ? I mean jěsti could be with j- as prothese, but šě čě ? Nothing such comes to my mind.
Glasovanje je čista gluposť. Voting is a pure nonsense.
Pišem slovjansky. I write Slovianski.

http://www.conlangs.fora.pl/index.php
http://steen.free.fr/interslavic/dynamic_dictionary.html
http://dict.interslavic.com/index.jsp
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
bandziol20
Jun 16 2012, 02:23 PM
IJzeren Jan
Jun 16 2012, 01:41 PM
Ć for PSl. -tj- (svěća, povraćati) → Slovianski sveča, povračati
what's for 'third' in Slovianski ?
Treťji, I'd venture.

Quote:
 
Quote:
 
instead of šě, čě, jě etc will just write še, če, je.

Are there any such connections indeed ? I mean jěsti could be with j- as prothese, but šě čě ? Nothing such comes to my mind.

Yes, in cases like jěsti and jěhati.

šě and čě... Well, I think mostly in cases before -ěj(ši), like bližěj, legčěj etc.

EDIT: And I'm not sure about c either (cěna, cěľ, cělovati)
Edited by IJzeren Jan, Jun 16 2012, 02:51 PM.
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno tož bude trudno s vsim inim.

Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански
[čćч]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bandziol20
Member Avatar

cěna - hr cijena - pl cena (old pl. cana) ~ Greek kaina
cělъ - hr cijel (cio) - pl cały (Lechitic umlaut : ě > a before hard consonants) ~ Greek kailos, English hail

I don't really know if there were ě in adjective comparative.
BTW : skorej for 'almost' imo is not good and misleading, it has been loaned from Slovene skoraj, but -j in this language isn't for comparatives. On the other hand Russian has skorieje in a different meaning. It would be better to use skoro as in Croatian instead.
Edited by bandziol20, Jun 16 2012, 03:21 PM.
Glasovanje je čista gluposť. Voting is a pure nonsense.
Pišem slovjansky. I write Slovianski.

http://www.conlangs.fora.pl/index.php
http://steen.free.fr/interslavic/dynamic_dictionary.html
http://dict.interslavic.com/index.jsp
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gabriel Svoboda

Quote:
 
Ķ for PSl. 2nd palatalisation (ķvět) → Slovianski cvet
Ģ for PSl. 2nd palatalisation (ģvězda) → Slovianski zvězda
Ṱ in PSl. -tl- (meṱlo) → Slovianski melo
Ḓ in PSl. -dl- (moḓliti) → Slovianski moliti


Where is the idea that Naučni Slovianski minus some diacritics = non-scientific Slovianski? Okay, there will always be some exceptions:

- y is justified by the fact that natlangs actually employing this scientific element always use y for it, some people even use it in non-scientific Slovianski
- ŀ, ĺ is justified by symmetry with , ŕ in Novoslovienski

But I see no such justification in the case of ķ, ģ, ṱl, ḓl. I'd prefer ċ/ç/ȼ, ż/ẓ/ƶ, ļ/ḷ/ḽ/ḻ/ƚ/ɫ/ɬ/ɭ (it would not be strictly necessary to distinguish dl/tl, "add d or t" should be sufficient advice for west Slavs).

I see no justification for ù instead of ṽ/ṿ/ʋ as well.

Quote:
 
As for the adjective markers Ý, Í, Á, Ó, É and the infinive marker Ì, I feel these should be deprecated. They may be of use for automatic transcriptions into orthographies mean to resemble natlangs (é > RU -ые), but I think there use in texts should really be discouraged.


I think such transcriptions are still a valid aim of Naučni Slovianski, so I'd keep the adjective markers. Even if Novoslovienskij is Novosloviensky now, east Slavic languages have not yet made a corresponding change. (But we may once convince their inventors as well. :) )

Also, ì is necessary for flavourisation (or have you deprecated it as well?). -ti infinitive is a minority solution, so an easy flavourisation to should be possible. A conversion of every word-final -ti to would not work.

Quote:
 
they make a text look like Vietnames[e]


They make a text look like Czech/Slovak (with its mandatory length markers), or Russian with stress markers, or Serbo-Croatian with tone markers. The hell of Vietnamese is more than one diacritic mark over one letter.

Quote:
 
Gabriel asked about the endings -ògo, -òm etc. Thing is, ò is not really suitable for these, because these endings do not derive from strong jer at all. The situation is similar in so far that West Slavic has e and East Slavic has o in these positions, but in reality this is a matter of different approaches to contraction. Therefore dobrògo cannot be correct. If anything, I'd use a separate character here, like œ. But then, I really doubt if there is any use in this, and dobrœgo doesn't look that cool either.


Word-final -ògo, -òm, -òj, even though not scientifically correct, are easily transcriptible for flavourisation. Use -œgo, -œm, -œj if you like, but not just -ogo, -om, -oj.

For me Naučni Slovianski is like a Pandora's box - if you have let out some characters, I won't stop use them. :)

Quote:
 
As for Ě, I'm wondering whether we shouldn't restrict its use to hard consonants, so that instead of šě, čě, jě etc will just write še, če, je.


That's what I like about Naučni Slovianski - use a character even if it won't affect pronunciation. BTW, does f. ex. Ijekavian reflex čě, šě, žě, jě in a way different from č(i)je, š(i)je, ž(i)je, j(i)je?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tellur
Member Avatar

Ja byh raděje iměl v medžuslovjanskom povodnu psl. skųpinų*dl *tl, ktora jest dnes sohraněna v zapadnyh językah. Da, znam, že "moliti sę" jest množstevne rěšenije, no čelověk iz zapadnyh krajin ne ima na p'rvy poględ šancų razuměti slovam jako "sělo", "moliti sę", "melo" itd. Potom, čo sę dany jedinec nauči, že jego "modliti sę" bųde v medžuslovjanskom "moliti sę" to ne jest nijedin problem...No na drugų stranų si mysljų, že ľudi iz vozhoda i juga ne budųt iměti problemy se skupinojų dl tl vo slovah jako "modliti sę" itd.
Za mene jest lěpše, kogda si obyčajny čelověk može otbaciti bukvų/glaskų, než si ovų glaskų dop'lniti. Razuměte?:)

To jest za mene ta ista kauza jako s glagolami v infinitivě. Imamo koncovkų -ti, no večinstvo językov ima toliko -ť/-t jako koncovkų infinitiva. Začo togdy moliti sę, no ne modliť sę?
Da, znam, vsegda mogų užiti flavorizacijų i pisati modliť sę...No moje pytanije ostavaje tym istym.
My Interslavic shortly - no i/y disinction and o/e rule enforced (byti>biti x biti>biti, svežego x dobrogo), soft consonants ń, ĺ, ď, ť, ŕ, ě/e merged, ę->ja, no syllabic r/l (torg, deržava, volk, dolgi), tl/dl clusters preserved (midlo, metla), CroC, CloC, CreC, CleC (grod, glova, breg, mleko), 1st sg. ending -u, 3rd pl. ending ut/jat (delaju, čuju, molvju x delajut, čujut, molvjat). Basically, a heavy Western flavour with some Eastern elements.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kozica
Member Avatar

no ja "molit' se" bez konteksta nerazumem. ale "molim se za hvoroj mame" bez problema
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bandziol20
Member Avatar

tellur
Jun 17 2012, 06:33 PM
Za mene jest lěpše, kogda si obyčajny čelověk može otbaciti bukvų/glaskų, než si ovų glaskų dop'lniti. Razuměte?:)
well, it's a sensitive question on understandability (besides we're talking about naucsni Slovianski where I prefer to preserve forms with -dl- and -tl-). I agree that the simpler word the better : one condition - it should be understandable for people. For example, I use naj for let..., while IJzeren prefers full etymological form nehaj. Now the question is whether naj is understandable in the context.
On the other hand some "simplifications" are too general and made rather automatically (with no brainstorm). Take for example -tl- where even in Croatian it is svjetlo 'light', metla 'broom' etc. not : svjelo, mela. :)
Glasovanje je čista gluposť. Voting is a pure nonsense.
Pišem slovjansky. I write Slovianski.

http://www.conlangs.fora.pl/index.php
http://steen.free.fr/interslavic/dynamic_dictionary.html
http://dict.interslavic.com/index.jsp
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nonik

bandziol20
Jun 18 2012, 09:01 AM
tellur
Jun 17 2012, 06:33 PM
Za mene jest lěpše, kogda si obyčajny čelověk može otbaciti bukvų/glaskų, než si ovų glaskų dop'lniti. Razuměte?:)
well, it's a sensitive question on understandability (besides we're talking about naucsni Slovianski where I prefer to preserve forms with -dl- and -tl-). I agree that the simpler word the better : one condition - it should be understandable for people. For example, I use naj for let..., while IJzeren prefers full etymological form nehaj. Now the question is whether naj is understandable in the context.
On the other hand some "simplifications" are too general and made rather automatically (with no brainstorm). Take for example -tl- where even in Croatian it is svjetlo 'light', metla 'broom' etc. not : svjelo, mela. :)
MELA ( kumbha mela ) je crkveny prazdnik v Indiji :))
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
Gabriel Svoboda
Jun 17 2012, 05:51 PM
Where is the idea that Naučni Slovianski minus some diacritics = non-scientific Slovianski?
Basically abandoned on the moment I decided to rename it Naučny Medžuslovjanski, and shortly after I had come to the conclusion that NMS could serve a much more useful purpose, namely serve as a unifying factor between Slovianski and other Interslavic projects (including Novoslovienskij, but not only).

Quote:
 
- ŀ, ĺ is justified by symmetry with , ŕ in Novoslovienski

Yep. My only problem is that doesn't show well in most fonts, while ŀ looks kind of too similar to ľ IMO.

As a matter of fact, I have also been thinking about simply throwing in Cyrillic ъ and ь, giving ъr/ьr/ъl/ьl. I'm not a fan of using Cyrillic characters in the Latin alphabet, but in this case it is a tradition in Slavistics that we might as well follow.

Yet another solution could be what NS does: 'r/'ŕ/'l/'ĺ.
Quote:
 
But I see no such justification in the case of ķ, ģ, ṱl, ḓl. I'd prefer ċ/ç/ȼ, ż/ẓ/ƶ, ļ/ḷ/ḽ/ḻ/ƚ/ɫ/ɬ/ɭ (it would not be strictly necessary

Interesting ideas! My own preference for ķ/ģ stems from the fact that they are the "original", while c/z are the innovation.
I actually did consider ç, but the problem is that there's no z-cedilla.
IMO ż and ƶ are a bad idea, since both are read as ž by Poles. OTOH comes from Latin Extended Additional as well, giving the same disadvantage as in the case of .

As for dl/tl solution that unify both, I have considered that as well, but such a character would be practically useless, as it won't specify which option to use for West Slavic flavourisation, and the character itself won't be of any help to West Slavs either.

Quote:
 
I see no justification for ù instead of ṽ/ṿ/ʋ as well.

You mean adding Greek characters instead of ù?

Quote:
 
Quote:
 
As for the adjective markers Ý, Í, Á, Ó, É and the infinive marker Ì, I feel these should be deprecated. They may be of use for automatic transcriptions into orthographies mean to resemble natlangs (é > RU -ые), but I think there use in texts should really be discouraged.

I think such transcriptions are still a valid aim of Naučni Slovianski, so I'd keep the adjective markers. Even if Novoslovienskij is Novosloviensky now, east Slavic languages have not yet made a corresponding change. (But we may once convince their inventors as well. :) )

Hehe. See below.

Quote:
 
Also, ì is necessary for flavourisation (or have you deprecated it as well?). -ti infinitive is a minority solution, so an easy flavourisation to should be possible. A conversion of every word-final -ti to would not work.

I haven't deprecated anything yet, I'm merely sharing thoughts and hoping for some input, because since its inception there has been very little feedback about N(M)S. I specifically asked you for comments, because you are the only person who uses it even for texts (myself, I'm more a fan of Slovianski Plus or some other dumbed-down version of NMS).

Quote:
 
Quote:
 
they make a text look like Vietnames[e]

They make a text look like Czech/Slovak (with its mandatory length markers), or Russian with stress markers, or Serbo-Croatian with tone markers. The hell of Vietnamese is more than one diacritic mark over one letter.

That's true, I used it rather as a manner of speech. There's also an aesthetical aspect to it. Shortly speaking: too many different diacritics doesn't look good either. We use hačeks, ogoneks, graves, dots, grade signs... Maybe it's just my personal feeling, but when every second word containts two or three or four diacritics, it makes this final result look kind of messy in my opinion.

Quote:
 
Word-final -ògo, -òm, -òj, even though not scientifically correct, are easily transcriptible for flavourisation. Use -œgo, -œm, -œj if you like, but not just -ogo, -om, -oj.

In that case -œgo, -œm, -œj would definitely be better. Although I need to swallow first before writing Žaložeňja Međuslovıanskœgo Języka. :)

You know, for me the main feature of NMS should remain: readability. Therefore characters must be self-explaining and ideally rooted in some Slavic tradition. I am not in favour of importing characters from non-Latin alphabets like Cyrillic, Greek or IPA either, and I am very hesitant when it comes to using characters from little-used character sets.

My problem with -ó etc. is that they can be misleading:
- for a Pole, ó = [ u ]
- for a Czech, ó is a lengh marker
- for a Russian (and many others) it is a stress marker.
And the thing is that -ý, -ó etc. in NMS are neither. Because more than anything else, it is an adjective marker. Sure, you might postulate that they are long like in Czech, but be honest: it would be silly to introduce vowel length only for adjective endings. To be consistent, we should apply it everywhere.

Furthermore, the genitive -ògo is plain wrong, even though it works for West and East Slavic. But let's face it, -ogo does not come from *-ъgo, but from a contraction. So -œgo isn't such a bad solution.

But then, if we write dobrœgo, then why not write dělæš? It's a similar case of contraction after all!

And last but not least: if we write dobrœgo in the genitive, what should the nominative neuter be? dobrœ? Or dobró?



Quote:
 
For me Naučni Slovianski is like a Pandora's box - if you have let out some characters, I won't stop use them. :)

Ha!

Quote:
 
Quote:
 
As for Ě, I'm wondering whether we shouldn't restrict its use to hard consonants, so that instead of šě, čě, jě etc will just write še, če, je.

That's what I like about Naučni Slovianski - use a character even if it won't affect pronunciation. BTW, does f. ex. Ijekavian reflex čě, šě, žě, jě in a way different from č(i)je, š(i)je, ž(i)je, j(i)je?

AFAIK čě, šě and žě are practically non-existent. I've only found them in cases like bliž-ěj.

If we assume that the locative singular has always -ě, then we'll get o mųžě etc.
Edited by IJzeren Jan, Jun 18 2012, 11:21 AM.
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno tož bude trudno s vsim inim.

Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански
[čćч]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bandziol20
Member Avatar

I don't know much about Naučni, but I prefer :-u in masculine locative singular.
Glasovanje je čista gluposť. Voting is a pure nonsense.
Pišem slovjansky. I write Slovianski.

http://www.conlangs.fora.pl/index.php
http://steen.free.fr/interslavic/dynamic_dictionary.html
http://dict.interslavic.com/index.jsp
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gabriel Svoboda

What follows is not a definite proposal at all, just a chain of thougts and questions.

Quote:
 
As a matter of fact, I have also been thinking about simply throwing in Cyrillic ъ and ь, giving ъr/ьr/ъl/ьl. I'm not a fan of using Cyrillic characters in the Latin alphabet, but in this case it is a tradition in Slavistics that we might as well follow.


I wouldn't be against.

Quote:
 
My own preference for ķ/ģ stems from the fact that they are the "original", while c/z are the innovation.


How far are you going to go with that? Shall we have tь/dь instead of ć/đ, ǫ instead of ų, -ôr- instead of -rå-, -ėr- instead of -rė-? I would not be strictly against, but we should be consistent.

But if we are going to continue preferring majority solutions: I understand some violations of the majority principle (ъl/ьl for symmetry instead of òl, å more or less for south Slavs instead of ô, -tì for south Slavs and a better-looking orthography instead of -ť). But I see no good motivation behind kv/gv instead of cv/zv. (BTW, haven't you overlooked kv/gv is anti-south-Slavic?)

In my opinion, if a majority of languages undergo an innovation, is is no more standard vs. innovation, it's conservative (archaic) vs. standard. Let's consider ĉvet/ẑvězda, cv̈et/zv̈ězda, c̄vet/ẕvězda, ƈvet/ȥvězda, cwet/zwězda, c·vet/z·vězda.

As for tl/dl, what about something like me‘lo and mo'liti? ‘ = former t, ' = former d.

Quote:
 
You mean adding Greek characters instead of ù?


Oh, I didn't notice they were Greek. But still we have , w or ·v.

Quote:
 
But let's face it, -ogo does not come from *-ъgo, but from a contraction.


Thanks for the explanation. Then, if we are going to have a more conservative NMS as described above, what about having plain uncontracted adjectival endings? We'd just have to solve conflicts with word final j's like in words olej or dělaj. We'd either write olej, dělaj, dobroĵe/dobroɉe/dobroǰe, or inversely oleĵ/oleɉ/oleǰ, dělaĵ/dělaɉ/dělaǰ, dobroje.

But if we introduced this system to avoid "ugly" -á, -é, -í, -ó, -ý, wouldn't the cure be worse than the disease?

Also, if we kept -á, -é, -í, -ó, -ý, do I understand it right that dobrógo, dobróm, dobrój would be correct (<-- dobrojego, dobrojem, dobrojej)?

If dobró is misleading, would f. ex. dobrö, dobrȯ or dobrō be better?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bandziol20
Member Avatar

I've got no problem with cvet (or kvet) and zvezda (or gvezda), but I think we should keep -tl- and -dl-, it has a big role in clarity of declence and derivation. :P
Glasovanje je čista gluposť. Voting is a pure nonsense.
Pišem slovjansky. I write Slovianski.

http://www.conlangs.fora.pl/index.php
http://steen.free.fr/interslavic/dynamic_dictionary.html
http://dict.interslavic.com/index.jsp
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fonologija i pravopis · Next Topic »
Add Reply