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
One more thought about orthography
Topic Started: Sep 1 2010, 09:44 AM (3,709 Views)
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
My Slovak dictionary has it: koňak as well. Well, cognac may be a bad example. While Slovak does have ie where Czech has ě, I notice both Czech and Slovak have: kariéra. Slovene and Bulgarian also have kariera, while BCMS has karijera. In other words, you can't really generalise here. It's as simple as this: each language has its own methods for borrowing international vocabulary. In most cases they simply adopt the original spelling and adapt their pronunciation to the result, eliminating only orthographical and phonological impossibilities (like in Polish Vatican > Watykan). Only if the original spelling is really problematic, like in the case of cognac or feuilleton, they'll represent it the way they hear it. And how they hear it, is dependent on their own pronunciation. Cyrillic of course doesn't have option 1, so they will always write down what they hear. Just look how different languages handle the French word feuilleton: BE feljeton, PL felieton, CZ fejeton, SK fejtón, BG fejleton.

Voting won't really help here for the above reason. You might end up with kariera vs. barjera, just because one language doesn't have one of the two. What we need is one simple and consistent rule for this kind of borrowings. IMO Slovianski deserves better than to look like transliterated Russian. What I am proposing here is a fairly simple and good-looking solution: to use -nie- instead of -ńje-. It's not even an innovation, because we already have it in cases like funcionovati, oficialni, milion, diabol, etc.

EDIT:
Quote:
 
what I dislike about the latin solution is that suddenly words radio and diakritika lose one syllable

Well, that's actually the point I'm trying to make here. Some languages have a syllable here, others don't. Some languages have o-fi-ci-al-ni, others have o-fi-cjal-ni. Same with other words of this type, including radio and dialog (Polish: dia-log). Polish quite consistently does NOT have the syllable, other langues differ. Look, we've been bickering a lot about these things. Especially also about delanje (= delańe) vs. delanije. This solution I'm suggesting here could take care of these problems once and for all: those who want to read it as a syllable can do so, those who don't can read it as j or '. It's the perfect compromise, if you ask me.

To push this even a little bit further, we might use the character ě in Naučni Slovianski. Right now, it is used only for infinitives, but the grave is sort of consistent with č and ň, used for strong jers. It could be used in karěera, dělaněe (instead of dělańje) as well. Asciification could be either i or j, dependent on one's preferences. As a matter of fact, this would even (re)open the possibility for people to use for infinitives!

[čćч]
Edited by IJzeren Jan, Sep 4 2010, 03:56 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
 
Moraczewski
Member Avatar

IJzeren Jan
Sep 4 2010, 11:58 AM
And there is always the possiblity of transliterating nie as нье into Russian Cyrillic (by building in the rule иэ > ье), if so desired.
There is no such possibility because it will not be 1 <-> 1.
ie -> ье -> je

Foreign words are not so common to make new "phonemes" in Slovianski or make orthographical reforms. I would even propose koniak and кониак. This will produce официални, функционовати, милион, диабол and what's wrong?
"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]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
wannabeme
Member Avatar

Jarvi
Sep 4 2010, 07:51 PM
IJzeren Jan
Sep 4 2010, 11:58 AM
And there is always the possiblity of transliterating nie as нье into Russian Cyrillic (by building in the rule иэ > ье), if so desired.
There is no such possibility because it will not be 1 <-> 1.
ie -> ье -> je

Foreign words are not so common to make new "phonemes" in Slovianski or make orthographical reforms. I would even propose koniak and кониак. This will produce официални, функционовати, милион, диабол and what's wrong?
It looks nice IMO.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
I agree as well. People will always have the freedom to pronounce it as they prefer anyway.
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno tož bude trudno s vsim inim.

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

Does any other language ausser BCS says diaVol instead of diaBol?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moraczewski
Member Avatar

Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Bulgarian, Macedonian, apparently Slovene.
"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]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
It is diavol in the dictionary and I was mistaken. But now that you mention it, are you sure, Andrej? My Belarusian dictionary says д'ябал, I can't find it in Slovene. No matter what, it's 3 votes for -v- and 2,5 for -b- with Slovene abstaining it will be -v- anyway.

[čć]
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno tož bude trudno s vsim inim.

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

Sorry for Belarusian. I was not sure in Slovene, but it is often similar to BCS.
"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]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gabriel Svoboda

I wanted to write a more comprehensive reaction a few days later when I'll have more time, but if I had delayed it further, not a single stone of the good old Slovianski would have remained intact. So sorry for writing it in a bit unsorted way:

Quote:
 
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")


So why should ordinary Slovianski users learn whether the softening "sits" on the consonant or on the vowel, if this kind of etymology is not obvious from the current orthography of a lot of languages? BTW, wasn't it the case in Common Slavic that any softening was caused by a vowel, and if we now have vowelless soft consonants, it is only because the soft vowel (such as yer) disappeared and left only the softening behind?

Quote:
 
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.


So, it is better to have one unnatural Cyrillic alphabet, instead of two natural ones, right?

Quote:
 
You know, I think we should get rid of all those notions like "official", "correct", "wrong", "non-standard", "substandard" and whathaveyou.


And get rid of the notions "clear" and "non-confusing", then. Sorry, I can't really follow your way of thought here. "Official", "correct" doesn't mean "the only possible", and "wrong", "non-standard", "sub-standard" doesn't mean "forbidden under death penalty". So there is nothing wrong with these terms, they just add more clarity for those people who are fine with more than one option.

Quote:
 
If you think its a bad idea to mix alphabets of different languages, well, then why we mixed our latin alphabets?


If we mixed our Latin alphabets in a fashion similar to the proposed cripplement of Cyrillic, we would have something like cz, š, zh, dja, t'a, ňa, ľa, rza, sia, zya at the same time. No-one obviously proposes this. On the contrary, all Cyrillic languages have either й, я, ю and ь, or ј and ligatures with soft sign. Nothing in between. Just you want to create a hybrid zxrakula alphabet, taking elements of both.

Quote:
 
I'd like to know how Polish and Czech read "relief" or "batalion"


In Czech [re-li-je:f], [ba-ta-li-jo:n].

Quote:
 
Indeed, й could never be used in "йужни" or "земйа", with ј there is no such problem.


With южни and земя there is no such problem, too.

Quote:
 
The J shouldn't really be problematic for the Eastern Slavs because languages using the Latin script have already 'infiltrated' those parts.


Yes, but only languages using Latin script in the way that "j" means "dž", "ž" or "h" there.

Quote:
 
We have stucked with the orthography for years.


But the discussions were worth of it, and until this fucked thread we had finally had a natural and easily transliterable orthography.

Quote:
 
And now everybody writes its own thing.


Which is nothing the currently proposed orthography would be gonna to change.

Quote:
 
But in which orthography are we gonna write dictionaries.


The one with which nothing is wrong: the current one.

Quote:
 
We have to have an so called official orthography which would be our proposal for universal Slavic orthography. It is logic and regular because every slavic language is based on it but with the time different slavic languages made some irregularities like introducing я, ю, ћ,ђ or similar.


Slovianski is based on what Slavic languages are, not on what the should have logically been if they played nicely by the rules. No original research please, we don't invent a new Slavic language, we just uncover what already is here. No alphabet with ь and ј at the same time has appeared yet, so who are we to invent it?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moraczewski
Member Avatar

While Latin reform initially seemed a bit improvement - yes, it fixes what is the current solution, where, for example, Poles tend to write lubiti and not ljubiti and Russians tend to write na kone and not na konje.
But I don't understand why to rip Cyrillic all of sudden?
"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]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
Not so fast, Gabriel. Please have a look at my proposal first: http://steen.free.fr/slovianski/slovianski_orth.html

Quote:
 
So, it is better to have one unnatural Cyrillic alphabet, instead of two natural ones, right?

As Dražen pointed out, there's nothing unnatural about it. Serbian simply contracted the soft sign with their preceding consonants, that's all. The Serbian alphabet would be perfect for Slovianski, the only problem with it is that it doesn't have a solution for t', r' etc. I've heard to complaint that ђ isn't recognisable for Russians. So why wouldn't the same thing apply with ю? Let's face it, Serbian Cyrillic for Slovianski is flawed as hell, and neither петј nor пет' look natural to anybody.

Quote:
 
If we mixed our Latin alphabets in a fashion similar to the proposed cripplement of Cyrillic, we would have something like cz, š, zh, dja, t'a, ňa, ľa, rza, sia, zya at the same time. No-one obviously proposes this. On the contrary, all Cyrillic languages have either й, я, ю and ь, or ј and ligatures with soft sign. Nothing in between. Just you want to create a hybrid zxrakula alphabet, taking elements of both.


Quote:
 
With южни and земя there is no such problem, too.

Neither is there with јужни and земја. So which one is "better"?

Quote:
 
But the discussions were worth of it, and until this fucked thread we had finally had a natural and easily transliterable orthography.

Well, I'd dispute the latter. The transcription rules between Latin, Russian Cyrillic and Serbian Cyrillic are not that transparant at all. There's a lot of IF ~ ELSE ~ where J is involved. Besides, don't over-idealise the current solutions. If they had really been so great, there wouldn't have been the constant complaining about morje and the like. The reason hardly anybody complains about Cyrillic is mostly that hardly anybody ever uses it.

Quote:
 
Quote:
 
And now everybody writes its own thing.

Which is nothing the currently proposed orthography would be gonna to change.

With one difference: nobody will say liubiti or l'ubiti is wrong anymore, it's just different ways of representing the same thing.

Quote:
 
Quote:
 
But in which orthography are we gonna write dictionaries.

The one with which nothing is wrong: the current one.

You mean, the current four?

Quote:
 
Slovianski is based on what Slavic languages are, not on what the should have logically been if they played nicely by the rules. No original research please, we don't invent a new Slavic language, we just uncover what already is here. No alphabet with ь and ј at the same time has appeared yet, so who are we to invent it?

It's not an invention at all, see Dražen's post. Besides, you might as well say: no language has the word "vojovati" in that form, so who are we to invent it? But that's the entire point of Slovianski: to "invent" the most generic forms of the most generic words. Why wouldn't we do the same with the alphabet instead of using national forms? Is "vaš" more generic or more Slavic than "wasz"?

[čćч]
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
I write in Latin, but I use your website to transliterate things into cyrillic (for me to read from this very forum!) because it's a pain to read Latin when the words are Slavic
Edited by iopq, Sep 5 2010, 01:55 PM.
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:
 
Not so fast, Gabriel. Please have a look at my proposal first: http://steen.free.fr/slovianski/slovianski_orth.html


Thanks, now I can no more accuse your proposal of being confusing at least. :)

Quote:
 
As Dražen pointed out, there's nothing unnatural about it.


The fact is has once (or twice, see Drahomanivka) proposed doesn't make it natural. Neither proposal catched on.

Quote:
 
Let's face it, Serbian Cyrillic for Slovianski is flawed as hell, and neither петј nor пет' look natural to anybody.


So let's just abolish Serbian Cyrillic as one of the official scripts of Slovianski. Till now we thought we had to have two cars, so we had a red Fiat Punto and a green one, even though we realised the latter is a bit broken from our point of view. If we need only one car now, let's just scrap the one which is less suitable for us, let's not try to repair it by painting red dots on it. (The green Fiat Punto is excellent in its own field, but our requirements are different - seven soft letters instead of just four.)

Quote:
 
Neither is there with јужни and земја. So which one is "better"?


The one which

1. is able to spell also /moŕa/ while maitaining internal cosistency, without imported letters
2. has two times more votes and lots of times more population

Quote:
 
Besides, don't over-idealise the current solutions. If they had really been so great, there wouldn't have been the constant complaining about morje and the like.


Morje is a non-issue in terms of orthography, I'd complain about moŕe, moře, morie, morye or morze as well. The only uncontroversial spelling is more for me.

Quote:
 
Well, I'd dispute the latter. The transcription rules between Latin, Russian Cyrillic and Serbian Cyrillic are not that transparant at all. There's a lot of IF ~ ELSE ~ where J is involved.


Well, for Russian Cyrillic ja always equals to я, я always equals to ja, ju always equals to ю and ю always equals to ju, ь always equals to ' and ' always equals to ь. Similar equations would apply to other vowels as well, if we accepted certain Ukrainian letters - which would be no problem now since ease of typing for as much people as possible no more matters.

Quote:
 
The reason hardly anybody complains about Cyrillic is mostly that hardly anybody ever uses it.


Would the modified Serbian Cyrillic improve the situation?

Quote:
 
With one difference: nobody will say liubiti or l'ubiti is wrong anymore, it's just different ways of representing the same thing.


It's true, and it's great indeed, we should just consider what is going to be the highest style.

Quote:
 
You mean, the current four?


Two of them: the east Slavic one, and the Czech-Croatian one (it would not matter if we chose the Polish one instead, we might interpret 1 vote vs. 1,5 votes as a close call where population decides).

Quote:
 
Besides, you might as well say: no language has the word "vojovati" in that form, so who are we to invent it?


Well, vojovati is based on the assumption that lots of languages would have it if they had the root voj-. But to assume how a certain word would be spelled if certain language had borrowed certain letter is a hundred times higher assumption: languages have thousands of words, but just dozens of letters. I don't think we should go that far, otherwise we could as well borrow the presence of nominative, genitive and dative from Russian, and absence of accusative, locative and instrumental from Bulgarian. We can speculate about words, but not about letters or grammatical features. Remember Russian and Serbian Cyrillic alphabets were invented intentionally as two mutually exclusive and uncompatible systems, the former using ligatures of vowels to indicate softening, the latter using ligatures of consonants for the same purpose.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
wannabeme
Member Avatar

Quote:
 
So, it is better to have one unnatural Cyrillic alphabet, instead of two natural ones, right?

Dear Gabriel, I am sick of the fact that almost every of so called Slovianski makers never say some proposals how we can make it better but only comment how stupid are some ideas of those who give efforts (and such will recognize themselves ) to make Slovianski to be a language and not a mixed crap of all nothing.
What do you mean by natural for gods sake? Natural is only natur. Writing cannot be natural, human invented it and not some nature.
Please you are an educated man, not a shepard from bosnians mountains with no education at all like me. You should know much more about all slavic languages than I. But if you dont know then study them, you have internet. Then you will see that such system Jan and me proposed is so very what you call "natural" and existing. And for shure was alive in Serbia, Bosnia and Macedonia 100 years ago. And today its only simplified by malting l, n, t with "jer". And let me tell you that this system is broght to Serbia from Russia. Serbian generals from serbian Husaria (or what we call gusari after their wings with feathers of geese, SRB-gus) which fought Turks in Slavjanoserbija, todays Ukraine ( Kirovohrad oblast and Luhanska Oblast). Uf, back to thema!
But please if you recall some common slavic features ( softening after a vocal only) and thats only natural thing than fine, we can start using jer like in old times, naimly jer wasnt used as any softening vowel but as a halfvowel. Softening vowels was only "jota".

So we had
а, ѧ, е, i, оу, о, ѫ
ia ѩ, ѥ, н, ю, _, ѭ (old и was written as н and you should see its like the first part of ю plus i, or dubble i, thats why you think that и is always softening, and the same way it was taken over into latan slavic later, so Westslavs soften after i, and indeed it should be written as ii in Polish and ji in Cz and Svk, but who am I to judge something like that ). Everything was a mistake, that's the naturality of slavic, jota softening and not "jers" which were actualy hardening like in ы. подькрепыти /pod´krep´itji/.
So our dear Methodius was very smart when he was making Kirlic script but it was somehow misunderstood and changed with time by Russians and then bloody Serbians take Russian thing over because they believed Russian always have had right and now you tell me it is not natural. Well you are right but unfortunately the majority of Slavs use this unnatural system with only some slight remembrances of "old proper naturality like ю and и" and when Slovianski will completely take this unnaturality, like Serbians did, and make it regular so it is easier to use this, you tell its not natural and it is better to use good old cocktail of misunderstood genial Methodius' idea and only two vowels of well understood genial Methodius idea. When I would say lets have it like Methodius was thinking, which is genial, you'd say that nobody uses that. When I say ok than let us use completely other thing which most of slavs use, but then we through out Methodius' thing completely so we have one nice regular system that every but for real everybody can write, you say no, because you are so lazy to get used to that ji and ju are now written like expected by any human beeing who has little bit brain. Believe me that every new user and learner of Slovianski will be happy that we can offer him or her one unique alphabet instead of 1001 options which with he or her will be only confused and asking himself, so what the hell these guys done for 6 years. Everybody can write anything like he wants and everybody's gonna understand that. Totaly untrue!!! If that were so than people could write its own language. Serbians write Serbian and Russians must understand it, right! People who need Slovianski, and want to learn Slovianski seek a unique language which would be interlingua. An interlingua not 7 intelinguas. All we wanted is that everybody IS ABLE to write it on his or her own keyboard. That's true. But my proposal can be written on every keyboard! But you dont like that you must change what you are used to. Well, ofcourse, you have to sacrifice something to get some proffit and everybody has to do that. Not only Russians or only Poles, or even Southslavs which are somehow too oldfeshioned for northern Slavs. So what are your-all REAL arguments against my proposal?

PS: Sorry that you had to read all those stuff. Perhaps little bit too much for one post but that's my old habit. Hard to get rid of it sometimes :)



Edited by wannabeme, Sep 5 2010, 08:25 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moraczewski
Member Avatar

As I recall, Dražen, your proposal was коньа, морьа?
"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]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums with no limits on posts or members.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fonologija i pravopis · Next Topic »
Add Reply