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 (3,706 Views)
iopq
Administrator
Jarvi
Sep 9 2010, 06:22 PM
Quote:
 

So we keep prośba and ľgati.

Sorry, what is ľgati?
I'd venture a connection with l'gota, nel'ze
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
 
wannabeme
Member Avatar

iopq
Sep 8 2010, 11:11 PM
well I want to distinguish between k acute and t acute because they give different reflexes in different daughter languages
like Bg. вече vs. дъщеря
Srb. веће vs. ћерка

the difference is that the proposed cyrillic for nauczni slovianski in that thread is a transliteration of your nauczni slovianski
my nauczni slovianski looks like this:

Medjuslovjěnĭský językŭ moge bytĭ veliká pomogĭ dlę pǫtujǫtjihŭ i tŭgĭ dobró orǫdĭje dlę tyhŭ, kŭtoré hŭtjętŭ naukiti sę jednŭgo ili vętje slovjěnĭskyhŭ językovŭ.
Serbian has вече(р), кћер(ка).
See the shape of ћ, simply Tь or tь.

We have
хтети
хоћу, not хочу
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
wannabeme
Member Avatar

Considering дьнь, тьма, льжь,
Southslavic ь - only frontal halfvocal, something like e in ehmmm.
Other slavs are softening after front vowels e and i automaticly and so after front halfvowel. But southslavs kept the real quality of the halfvowels. Later the long halfvowels (both) have been vocalized to a (BCS), and o (retral long), e (frontal long) in Bulgarian and Macedonian and the short werent hearable any more.

So we have дан, тама, лаж, and polish has dzenj, ćma, lž or similar.
But its not so that Southslavs hardened, but they only keep the primarly quality of vowels without hardening after и, е, ь.
Edited by wannabeme, Sep 10 2010, 12:29 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
wannabeme
Sep 10 2010, 12:10 AM
Serbian has вече(р), кћер(ка).
See the shape of ћ, simply Tь or tь.

We have
хтети
хоћу, not хочу
веће as in more, not evening
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
 
pedza
Member Avatar

Veće means bigger, V(ij)eće means council.

Ć in BCMS comes from palatalised T, hence Vuk's letter in Cyrillic, while Macedonian has Ḱ which is softer than the BCMS Ć.
»V velikomu narodam geniju se gnezdo tkaje« -- Vladika Petar II Petrovič Njegoš
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
wannabeme
Member Avatar

iopq
Sep 10 2010, 10:31 AM
wannabeme
Sep 10 2010, 12:10 AM
Serbian has вече(р), кћер(ка).
See the shape of ћ, simply Tь or tь.

We have
хтети
хоћу, not хочу
веће as in more, not evening
True, but ć is soft t. It almost regular. veliko, veće is irregular.
But the fact is that č is used for palatalization of k and ć for soft t. (The difference is that BCS is not softening automaticaly after e or i.
In nonslandard Serbian automaticly after short "jat" is possible).
But I agree that slovianski naučni should keep distinguishing Č and Ć.
In old cirilic ć was щ, right?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
no, you misunderstand
щ corresponds to шт in serbian
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
 
wannabeme
Member Avatar

iopq
Sep 10 2010, 04:44 PM
no, you misunderstand
щ corresponds to шт in serbian
LoL, no, you misunderstood...

Serbian has št only in few (and really few) borriwings from OCS or Bulgarian... like obšte (while Cro uses obće), sveštenik (while Cro has svećenik)

In all other cases Serbian has ć.
нощ - ноћ
свеща - свећа
дщерь - кћер
хощу, хощеши - хоћу, хоћеш :)

Надем се же ти схватил овчас :)

Serbian št comes only frome st
опростити опраштати

Edited by wannabeme, Sep 10 2010, 05:48 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
Ah, but those are just things that never sounded the same in OCS and Serbian in the first place
штитити, вешт, блештати, штука etc. are spelled with щ in Bulgarian

щ is a letter that is a combination of ш and a small т hanging from the bottom of it
they even use it in words like щат
Edited by iopq, Sep 10 2010, 06:40 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

@Dražen:

Quote:
 
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


By definition, a majority of Slavs use a natural system. Natural is what is actually used now, not what was used 1000 years ago. 1000-year-old deviations from this system are no more deviations now, they are a part of the standard. Or, are you going to say that Proto-Slavic was a crippled unnatural form of Proto-Indo-European created by people who misunderstood their own language? And current Slavic languages are crippled unnatural versions of Proto-Slavic?

@Jarvi:

Quote:
 
Well, but at least for information, we have to be aware, that some words are not understandable to BCS speakers - just for this it is not good to keep your mouth shut! You say, we see and if there is really nothing to do, we shall nothing to do, but if there is?


I agree with Dražen here. Of course, no-one should remain silent about serious misunderstandings, when an identical word means something completely unrelated or even directly opposite: a Russian should say aloud that "život" means "abdomen" and not "life" for him, a Czech should say aloud that "užasni" means "great" and not "awful" for him. But in less serious cases, even though there would be nothing wrong with saying it aloud, there is also nothing wrong with remaining silent, because either way Slovianski will hardly change its choice. E. g. for Czech/Slovaks, "dľa" means not "for" but "according to", "grod" means not "town" but "castle", "pogoda" means not "weather" but "comfort" etc. - but I don't propose to use Czech-Slovak-only words instead, because the Slovianski words are well chosen already: they have a large majority, and the outvoted minority doesn't provide a word that would be understandable to the majority.

@Jan:

Quote:
 
The problem of those two exceptions COULD be solved by using ô instead of ĺ (which would match the ę in bręg), but we'd lose the funny a/o effect of ĺ)


I agree it's funny, but I'd rather be serious in this case. It is easy to explain to people that "Slovianski = Naučni Slovianski minus diacritics, with the exception of y since many languages already have this character and in none of them it is i with diacritics". But in the case of ĺ/ô, all languages have just either a or o, so there is no reason not to use the majority character (o) with diacritics, as Naučni Slovianski does in all other cases.

We could use ḍl/ṭl, ḑl/ţl, ḓl/ṱl or ḏl/ṯl.

Quote:
 
Likewise, there's no current solution for third palatalisation either. Or for palatalising vs. non-palatalising e. However, the more additional diacritics there are, the more the final result will look messy and unfriendly. There must be some point where the gains from giving additional information don't justify the loss of clarity anymore, and ten different diacritics over e will only make things confusing.


I agree, Naučni Slovianski should be some compromise between ordinary Slovianski and hyper-scientific Slovianski manifesting any single distinction of any single language (even such as vowel length, stress, tone). Luckily there is a technical limit - for example for "e", Wikipedia offers "only" 26 diacritics.

Quote:
 
But for the moment Naučni Slovianski is far from final yet.


Okay. Naučni Slovianski is great already now, but take your time to make it perfect.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moraczewski
Member Avatar

Quote:
 

But in less serious cases, even though there would be nothing wrong with saying it aloud, there is also nothing wrong with remaining silent, because either way Slovianski will hardly change its choice.

Yes, in most cases the choice will remain, but there CAN be cases where the choice was wrong or we weren't aware of something important!
"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

Quote:
 
By definition, a majority of Slavs use a natural system. Natural is what is actually used now, not what was used 1000 years ago. 1000-year-old deviations from this system are no more deviations now, they are a part of the standard. Or, are you going to say that Proto-Slavic was a crippled unnatural form of Proto-Indo-European created by people who misunderstood their own language? And current Slavic languages are crippled unnatural versions of Proto-Slavic?



What I wanted to say is that today many Slavic languages use an non analogical writing system system. Why do some Slavs soften automaticly after e and i, but not after a, o, u. And wenn they need to soften after a, o, u they write ja, jo, ju.
Westslavs do that because they orientated on Russian phonology and only changed cirilic signs with latin.
But they didnt realize that и is actualy ji and not i.
Original slavic system was:
normal vowel vs softening vowel

a vs ia
e vs ѥ
i vs н (today written и, but as you can notice it was only little i infron of other i, the same principle like e - ѥ)
оу vs ю
o vs ѥ (o was always softened to ѥ)
ѧ vs ѩ
ѫ vs ѭ́

Dont you see a perfect system here? COmpletely regular! All softening vowels get provided with an little i infront.
But what some reformators did ? Changed н into и and started to use it everywhere instead of i. And than also Westslavs orientated after this system by introducing и cirilic = i latin.
And said : Yeah we soften automaticly after i. What you think is i, is actualy ii.
So Russians got rid of such system with writting softening vowels with i infront of it and replaced it with some other system where they soften after e and и automaticly. Only remembrance of the old system are я which is actually ia and ѧ and ѩ together. ю is also there. So the system has been quite corrupted and thats why today we have such misunderstanding of reading e like e or je. Reading i like i or ji.

And such "corruption" you see today as normal and natural but indeed that makes us now quite big problem with orthography.

And when I and Jan propose an orthography which would be analogic, thus what is valid for one vowel should be applied to all other too. And lots of you are telling, no its not understandable what we propose or you dont like it or what I know.
I really dont understand how an perfect orthography with only one principle can be more difficult than an orthography with ten principles.
Thus I say it is better to have a, ja, i , ji, e ,je etc but you say is better to have a, ja, u, ju, but e and i separately like sometimes so and sometimes so.



Edited by wannabeme, Sep 12 2010, 04:33 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moraczewski
Member Avatar

wannabeme
Sep 12 2010, 04:24 PM
Quote:
 
By definition, a majority of Slavs use a natural system. Natural is what is actually used now, not what was used 1000 years ago. 1000-year-old deviations from this system are no more deviations now, they are a part of the standard. Or, are you going to say that Proto-Slavic was a crippled unnatural form of Proto-Indo-European created by people who misunderstood their own language? And current Slavic languages are crippled unnatural versions of Proto-Slavic?



What I wanted to say is that today many Slavic languages use an non analogical writing system system. Why do some Slavs soften automaticly after e and i, but not after a, o, u. And wenn they need to soften after a, o, u they write ja, jo, ju.
Westslavs do that because they orientated on Russian phonology and only changed cirilic signs with latin.
But they didnt realize that и is actualy ji and not i.
Not so fast!
How can West Slavs orientate on Russian phonology! Every West Slav will beat you for saying this. Russian language was standartised in beginning of XIX century, while Polish was used since Middle Ages! How could Polish change cyrillic with latin if they never used cyrillic?
Czechs and Slovaks AFAIK never write i after vowel, they always write ji

Yes, you are right that и is ji, that's why Belarussian doesn't use и and write i instead.

Well, I am now agree to write jаблонь - if someone finally tells me what is the Alt-code for j.
But to write jiх and jiмено? or jих and jимено? what would be correct from your point of view?
"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 12 2010, 04:47 PM
wannabeme
Sep 12 2010, 04:24 PM
Quote:
 
By definition, a majority of Slavs use a natural system. Natural is what is actually used now, not what was used 1000 years ago. 1000-year-old deviations from this system are no more deviations now, they are a part of the standard. Or, are you going to say that Proto-Slavic was a crippled unnatural form of Proto-Indo-European created by people who misunderstood their own language? And current Slavic languages are crippled unnatural versions of Proto-Slavic?



What I wanted to say is that today many Slavic languages use an non analogical writing system system. Why do some Slavs soften automaticly after e and i, but not after a, o, u. And wenn they need to soften after a, o, u they write ja, jo, ju.
Westslavs do that because they orientated on Russian phonology and only changed cirilic signs with latin.
But they didnt realize that и is actualy ji and not i.
Not so fast!
How can West Slavs orientate on Russian phonology! Every West Slav will beat you for saying this. Russian language was standartised in beginning of XIX century, while Polish was used since Middle Ages! How could Polish change cyrillic with latin if they never used cyrillic?
Czechs and Slovaks AFAIK never write i after vowel, they always write ji

Yes, you are right that и is ji, that's why Belarussian doesn't use и and write i instead.

Well, I am now agree to write jаблонь - if someone finally tells me what is the Alt-code for j.
But to write jiх and jiмено? or jих and jимено? what would be correct from your point of view?
Jarvi, I am not speaking about standardization. First Slavs who were written were Southslavs, Bulgarians, Serbians, Croatians glagolitic and Slovenians latin.
After a while Bulgarians and Serbians swiched to cirilic. But even glagolitsa was given to Russians. They were writing even in XI ct. but Poles not.
Moravians had cirilic orthography first and then only swiched to latin (what I was saying). Polish orthography has developed from Czech. Notice that Czech first had cz, sz and not č, š.

And what about Southslavs. Well Serbians has pretty much old orthography until XVII ct, than Turks forbidd Serbian Church and culture. After a century of non education Serbians seeked help from Russians and got Russian influenced orthography. But it didnt was useful for Serbian language. So Vuk Stefanović did some mix of old Serbian and new Russian priciples.
He took Russian softening sign ь and old Serbian j and ђ.

Middleage Serbian wrote će, ći, ća, ću like кѥ, кн, кia, кю for example instead of тѥ, тн, тiа, тю
So община, obćina was обкнNa

Edited by wannabeme, Sep 12 2010, 05:11 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moraczewski
Member Avatar

Russians were writing in Old Slavic (Southern Slavic language actuall), and Russian phonology wasn't applied in orthography those times.

But that's all offtop.
What do you say about to write jiх and jiмено? or jих and jимено? what would be correct from your point of view?
"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
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fonologija i pravopis · Next Topic »
Add Reply