| 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: |
| One more thought about orthography | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Sep 1 2010, 09:44 AM (3,711 Views) | |
| Moraczewski | Sep 2 2010, 11:29 AM Post #16 |
|
Is it really? Why is it not predictable? jednost' is predictable because it is feminine, pisatel' is predictable because Southern Slavs write it as pisatelj. The problem remains may be for BG/MK... Anyway, I hope we shall not change anything: we shall never apply Y for ordinary Slovianski and will not get rid of soft consonants... |
|
"I nenít pochyby, že kdokoli chce a umí, může sobě stworiti jazyk krásný, bohatý, libozwučný a wšemožně dokonalý: ale jazyk takowý nebudě wíce národnim, alebrž osobním jazykem toho kdo jej sobě udělal". František Palacký. Posudek o českém jazyku spisovném, 1831. [čćч] | |
![]() |
|
| IJzeren Jan | Sep 2 2010, 12:00 PM Post #17 |
|
Jan van Steenbergen
|
Yeah, but there is a difference. There were a lot more apostrophes those days (l'ubit', t'agnut') so that almost every sentence had several of them. We were constantly fighting about what's better for an official orthography, and about what the differences are between l' and lj. What I'm trying to say now is that all those options are possible representations of the same thing, and that it's really up to people how they choose to represent it. As long as it's clear, no problem. Just like for ž we suggest zs, but if people choose to use zx or whatever it won't be "less Slovianski" or something. I guess I just had to grow into such way of thinking. The term "official" and Slovianski being a "set of recommendations" don't go together well. That why instead of thinking in terms of official orthographies and rules and all that, I'm thinking more and more in terms of source forms and their possible representations. Unlike Slovio and other auxlangs, there is no unitary Slovianski. Every user has his own way of representing the same thing and there is always a lot of "couleur local" in it.
Out of curiosity, I just counted the words that would belong to the remaining, say, 5%. It's something between 110 and 120 unique words, including numerous compounds (11 -kryv/kryt-, 6 -plyv/plyn-, 6 vysoky/vyš- etc.) and borrowings from Greek (symbol, etymologija etc.). All in all, if you scratch those as well, there won't be much more than some 50-60 words containg -y-, which is really not much in a dictionary with well over 4000 words. It's only slightly more than the number of unique words with t', for example. |
|
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno tož bude trudno s vsim inim. Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански [čćч] | |
![]() |
|
| Gabriel Svoboda | Sep 2 2010, 08:40 PM Post #18 |
|
It's all very fine that Slovianski is a flexible language, but you will just confuse the learner by giving too many options and lengthy speeches about flexibility and non-unitarity, without saying which option is the highest style - for those who happen to be fine with more than one option. I completely understand that as per the proposed system, čerešn'a, čerešnja, čerešńa or even čerešna would be all fine, but I still sincerely don't understand whether the proposed system would give also ďevčinka and ťeľefon besides the completely recognized options devčinka and telefon.
Nice an euphemism. Czech/Slovak children learn these cca 100 unique words for nine or thirteen years, yet some of them never completely manage it:http://sk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vybran%C3%A9_slov%C3%A1 Slovianski introduced soft consonant just not to have учитела where even Bulgarian has учителя. And then we gradually "logically extended" the presence of soft consonant to achieve the current state. |
![]() |
|
| Moraczewski | Sep 2 2010, 10:05 PM Post #19 |
|
I believe the highest style will be presented in the dictionary. And the dictionary will surely never contain ďevčinka and ťeľefon, if Slovianski will still be ekavian. Of course ďevčinka or even děvčinka will not be prohibited, but this will be not the recommended option. While čerešńa or čerešnja will be recommended; and čerešna allowed. |
|
"I nenít pochyby, že kdokoli chce a umí, může sobě stworiti jazyk krásný, bohatý, libozwučný a wšemožně dokonalý: ale jazyk takowý nebudě wíce národnim, alebrž osobním jazykem toho kdo jej sobě udělal". František Palacký. Posudek o českém jazyku spisovném, 1831. [čćч] | |
![]() |
|
| IJzeren Jan | Sep 2 2010, 11:24 PM Post #20 |
|
Jan van Steenbergen
|
Well, it's obvious which option is highest style: that would be ŕ, ľ etc. But whether a person will actually want to take the effort to write them, using ALT codes, transliteration engines and the like, will pretty much depend on the kind of text he's writing. In an internet chat or an sms it won't be worth the effort. In a blog entry it might be. In a brochure of a company it definitely will. But if he decides not to use these difficult characters, does it really matter that much what he uses instead? As rj and r' are equally understandable, you can't really say one option is better than the other; the differerence is in the aesthetics, but that's subjective. If it creates confusion, then all I can say is that the confusion is already there. If you look at texts written by different Slovianskiists, you'll notice that there aren't two people who write in exactly the same way. Who am I to say that my Slovianski is better than Dražen's, or Igor's Slovianski is better than Andrej's, etc.? We have made the first step already with the Ž problem: after years of discussion, we finally decided that it is up to the user how to asciify ž. Sure, we recommend ZS, but if a person decides to write for example ZX or ZZ, there little or nothing wrong with that, as long as he is aware of the consequences. Same goes for SZ/SX etc. So why not for Ŕ/RJ/R' then?
The confusion might arise from Czech. I may be wrong, but I believe the haček sometimes switches place as a matter of orthography. Thus, instead of "rěka", you write "řeka". It's never the E that causes RJE, TJE sequences, it's always the consonant. The consonant is not R, but Ŕ (RJ, R'), and it never changes. "Moŕ-e" has the genitive "moŕ-a" (now written "morje" and "morja"), while "žen-ě" is the locative of "žen-a" (written "žene" and "žena"). Slovianski is ekavian, so we simply assume that ě merges with e. That's how we get žene, reka, svet; had Slovianski been jekavian, it would have been ženje, rjeka and svjet, and the RJ in rjeka might be reanalysed as Ŕ, which is precisely what happens in Czech and Polish. But real Ŕ is not affected by the merger at all. I should note that, because Ę > E now, soft consonants won't appear often in the middle of a word. Only in cases like ľubiti and dľa; boŕba; ńego; govoŕeni; moŕe, poľe and buŕa. There's no such thing in děvčinka and telefon, so djevczinka is not an option here, and neither is tjeljefon.
Hehe, cool! I understand almost all of them! Well, but this only proves that there's really not that many of those words at all. Sure, South Slavic users would sometimes make mistakes with them, but so what? There are several of words here that a normal person wouldn't use more often than, say, twice a year. And if a South Slav would take the effort of learning a list of words of this type, he'd acquire some very useful knowledge for the future learning of another Slavic languages like Russian. Of course, Polish has similar issues. Very frequent are mistakes between u and ó, as well as mistakes between rz and ż. [я] |
|
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno tož bude trudno s vsim inim. Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански [čćч] | |
![]() |
|
| IJzeren Jan | Sep 3 2010, 12:07 AM Post #21 |
|
Jan van Steenbergen
|
Okay, let's assume all LJ and L' become Ľ, and we'll leave it to the writer how he elects to write it: ľubiteľ, ljubitelj, l'ubitel', ljubitel' or even lubitel. The same goes of course for Ž and the like. So we effectly rid ourselves of any official Polish version, as well as of any official asciifications. We'll give recommendations, but not more than that. So here comes the inevitable second question: what to do with Cyrillic? Here things will be a bit harder, because there's no such thing as Cyrillic ASCII. Ľ and Ń have nice Cyrillic equivalents, Љ and Њ. But for the remaining soft consonants there's nothing like that; Ћ and Ђ are too problematic, and even if we'd adopt those too, we'd still be stuck with Ś, Ź and Ŕ. We'll need Сь, Зь, Рь for that, and for reasons of consistency, also Ть, Дь, Ль, Нь. So far so good. But what happens when they are followed by a consonant? Would our "official" Cyrillic orthography say "морьа", while we only "allow" "моря"? What should we suggest to a Serbian, who can't write either of them? морја? If so, the problem remains that nobody would ever write "петј", and I have a feeling that apostrophes wouldn't work in Cyrillic either. And the next question would of course be: what happens to J? Serbian Ј has of course the advantage of 1:1 transliteration with Latin J, so it will probably be the winner, but what would be the suggested alternative? ЙА looks way to awkward, so we'd say Я. And instead of ЈЕ we wouldn't suggest ЙЕ, but rather Є; if a person can't write that either, we'd suggest Е (with the additional suggestion to write Estonija with Э). He might also choose not do distinguish between initial E and JE at all, which would be a thing similar to writing pisatel instead of pisateľ. The above is practically identical to the current solution, except that the "official alphabet" would include only the letters that exist in all Cyrillic alphabets + Ј + Ь. The result would be a 1:1 transliteration scheme that works in all cases:
The question is only: are льубити and дльа good enough for an official Cyrillic representation? |
|
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno tož bude trudno s vsim inim. Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански [čćч] | |
![]() |
|
| wannabeme | Sep 3 2010, 02:29 AM Post #22 |
|
This seems little bit strange for Russians and for Serbians but only little bit and it must be little bit strange. I wanted to propose this some months ago but I forgot because we were changing topics too fast ![]() One alphabet and everybody happy. We have Serbian and Macedonian ј and Russian and Bulgarian ь. Other letters are the same. I wouldnt use Serbian ћ, ђ nor Russian я,ю but instead ть, дь - ја, ју . And even more I we can introduse ть, дь, ль, рь, нь as one letter or sound only. And instead of RU тя тю and SRB ћа, ћу write тьа, тьу. Its strange for Russians but they will recognize this for shure because the pronounciation will still be the same. Strange for Serians too but they will learn it (Only they will pronounce ть, дь like polish ć, dz :)) полье, польа, морье, морьа, конь, коньа This is why we should see those two combined symbols as one letter only. After all is ы something else? а б в г д дь е ж з и ј к л ль м н нь о п р рь с т ть у ф х ц ч дж ш a b c č d dž d' e f g h i j k l l' m n n' o p r r' s š t u v z ž Only permitted exception , you can write č as cz, š as sz and ž as ż! So we will have 31 letters, the same as Macedonian ![]() Edited by wannabeme, Sep 3 2010, 02:51 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| iopq | Sep 3 2010, 04:10 AM Post #23 |
|
Administrator
|
if you pull up my cyrillic from some time ago, that's exactly the way I wrote although, it felt a little wrong because it doesn't exist anywhere but Drahomanivka |
|
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" | |
![]() |
|
| Moraczewski | Sep 3 2010, 06:54 AM Post #24 |
|
Well, the suggestions I dislike are the suggestions not attested in any Slavic language. That's why I will never write польа / морьа If "the highest" or "official"* style of latin Slovianski is ščž ŕńľť... i.e. only what is possible to type using CZ/SK layout only, I suggest make the same for Cyrillic. The official one will be either Serbian-based or Ukrainian-based, with lots of means to replace specific letters. What is bad in a simple rule? if we use Serbian-based Cyrillics, then why can't Russians replace ja - я etc? Or if we choose Ukrainian, then for user of Serbian layout я becomes ja etc, and the soft sign is just omitted like the apostrophe everywhere except ль нь Edited by Moraczewski, Sep 3 2010, 06:55 AM.
|
|
"I nenít pochyby, že kdokoli chce a umí, může sobě stworiti jazyk krásný, bohatý, libozwučný a wšemožně dokonalý: ale jazyk takowý nebudě wíce národnim, alebrž osobním jazykem toho kdo jej sobě udělal". František Palacký. Posudek o českém jazyku spisovném, 1831. [čćч] | |
![]() |
|
| Gabriel Svoboda | Sep 3 2010, 08:15 AM Post #25 |
|
OK, thanks for the explanations for Latin. But what has suddenly become wrong with Cyrillic? You want to have only one official Cyrillic orthography, or what? Are you sure the proposed cure is not worse than the disease? Currently we have the best Cyrillic orthography ever, we have never had it both natural and easily transliterable at the same time - and now you want to return to the bad old times? |
![]() |
|
| iopq | Sep 3 2010, 08:33 AM Post #26 |
|
Administrator
|
well I dislike морье a lot in cyrillic because it looks like взморье, лукоморье |
|
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" | |
![]() |
|
| Moraczewski | Sep 3 2010, 10:01 AM Post #27 |
|
Let's do nothing with current Cyrillic. We, the engineers, say often: "Работает - не трогай", if something works well - better not to touch it. |
|
"I nenít pochyby, že kdokoli chce a umí, může sobě stworiti jazyk krásný, bohatý, libozwučný a wšemožně dokonalý: ale jazyk takowý nebudě wíce národnim, alebrž osobním jazykem toho kdo jej sobě udělal". František Palacký. Posudek o českém jazyku spisovném, 1831. [čćч] | |
![]() |
|
| iopq | Sep 3 2010, 11:24 AM Post #28 |
|
Administrator
|
yeah that's what I said when people told me I should start spelling more as morje |
|
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" | |
![]() |
|
| IJzeren Jan | Sep 3 2010, 12:16 PM Post #29 |
|
Jan van Steenbergen
|
I'd say that's debatable, because љ and њ are quite obviously contractions (ligatures) of ль and нь. But for the remaining five soft consonants, Serbian has nothing to offer, simply because it doesn't have those itself. I'm pretty sure that if Serbian had had ŕ, it would have done exactly the same: рьа (since ligature would be unlikely in this case). OTOH, Russian рьа does not exist because it has я, but Russian doesn't seem to have a problem with рьо, for instance. That's why the Serbian orthography isn't fit for Slovianski, simply because it is not equipped for most soft consonants. Yet it has a good solution for J. Russian is inconsistent in the same way Polish is: the phoneme is ль, but what is actually льа is written ля. Just like Polish writes się instead of śę. Besides, я is another ligature that replaces not only ьа, but also йа. What we have here is a situation where the representation of a phoneme depends on what precedes and/or follows. Й is quite a difficult character, you know? He loves to be preceded by a vowel and followed by a consonant or nothing at all. He feels uneasy when followed by an о, but somehow tolerates it. However, he hates to be followed by а or у. If one of those pays him an unsollicited visit, there's always a heavy fight, and the result is always the same: й gets packing and the vowel stays behind, heaviliy mutilated, as я or ю. Against е he is even more defenseless, so he simply vanishes in its company. But much as he hates being followed by those vowels, he even more hates being preceded by a consonant. It never works out, probably because he is afraid of them. So afraid that in their presence, he becomes very very tiny, until nothing of him remains but ь, and as we all know well, ь is quite a weakling. Without his preceding consonant, he is simply nowhere. And just like his alter ego й, he has a troublesome relationship with а and у. Yes, й is quite a difficult character, I woud even call him asocial and slightly schizophrenic. Yet, he is the true king of the Russian alphabet. That would also explain why he is wearing a crown. Unfortunately for him, not everybody likes having a king, so it should come as no surprise that some of his subjects proclaimed a republic, electing the more modern and pro-Western ј as their president. But seriously now, we'll have to face the fact that what feels like silk for one feels like barbed wire for the other. Look at it like this: for a Russian польа may look bad, but for a Serbian it would have been the normal way of writing if there hadn't been a ligature. This is a thing VERY similar to dńa, for example. Even though Ń was taken from Polish, dńa looks very wrong to a Pole, because ń can never occur in front of a vowel. Not a reason to stop us though, because it's not Polish we are writing, it's Slovianski. There's an odd kind of justice in a Latin system with words like čeresńa. Everybody can write some characters some others cannot: Poles have ń, ś and ź, but they don't have š, ľ or ŕ. Croats can write č, š and ž, but not the other soft consonants. Slovak manages best, but can't handle ń, ś and ź. The same thing goes for a Cyrillic orthography with ј and ь: it isn't optimal for anybody, but it is at least equally bad for everybody. Slovianski is a generic Slavic language, and so it needs a generic Slavic alphabet. It can't be entirely based on one of the national systems, because both Cyrillic and Latin have two mutually exclusive groups of national systems. The best we can do is use the best (= most practical) elements from each of them. But of course, the design principle still stands that every Slav must be able to write it on his own keyboard in a way that makes him feel comfortable, so everybody is free to manipulate the "standard" orthography into something that feels best. Thus, ľubiteľ can be written as ljubitel', ljubitelj, l'ubitel', ljubitel and (why not?) liubitel' as well. The same goes for Cyrillic: льубитель can be written as любитель, любител, љубитељ, любитељ, льубител... Whatever suits you best.
You know, I think we should get rid of all those notions like "official", "correct", "wrong", "non-standard", "substandard" and whathaveyou. I'd much rather think in categories of prototype or sourcecode or whatever you want to name it, and recommended/possible representations. All this talk about what's better and what's worse is unproductive. Over the years, we've been switching between liubiti, ljubiti, l'ubiti at several occasions, and each time we had to tell people: "Forget what you've been using, from now on it will be solution x. We apologise for the inconvenience." With an approach like this, all previous solutions will be equally valid. Maybe it will create confusion. I don't know. But I'm afraid the confusion is already there anyway, with four official orthographies and people using all kinds of variations on them. Besides, we also gain something: a clear orthography where both in Latin and in Cyrillic every phoneme is represented by one character (ль is treated as one character), so that there will be a 100% match between them.
That's actually the point of what I'm saying: they can. Морьа and польа are just prototypes. A Serbian would probably write мор(ь)а and поља, a Russian моря and поля. And both will be equally correct as they are now. |
|
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno tož bude trudno s vsim inim. Slovianski - Словянски - Словјански [čćч] | |
![]() |
|
| iopq | Sep 3 2010, 12:29 PM Post #30 |
|
Administrator
|
well, of course, I've been using pol'a and польа in my latin/cyrillic for a long time because it is the most logical and straightforward way of tranlisterating things but there's also an argument for using only polja and поля as "official" solutions there is no real difference between the two for most cases but now my question is, if we're going to use pol'a, are we going to distinguish feljeton in other words, are we distinguishing sequences of CjV from C'V? |
|
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" | |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Fonologija i pravopis · Next Topic » |






Czech/Slovak children learn these cca 100 unique words for nine or thirteen years, yet some of them never completely manage it:
2:14 PM Jul 11