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
i/y distinction
Topic Started: Mar 21 2007, 07:33 AM (2,333 Views)
wannabeme
Member Avatar

Ona něst jedyně dobra, ona jest jedyna ktoru imamo :)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
steeven
Nov 8 2010, 07:00 AM
Since when are "y" and "Ы" used in Slovjanski?
Od kogdi bukvi "y" i "Ы" upotrebjani po Slovjansku?
They have always been. I think we should get rid of the notion that Slovianski was created in 2006 by O. Rečnik, G. Svoboda and J. van Steenbergen once and for all. The truth is that this project was started already in the 16th century, and that there have been many projects for creating the same language ever since. Look here. Thanks to Google books and the Wayback Machine, we now have the unique opportunity to see some of those other projects at work and learn from them. Of course, there are differences: some of them are more biased towards West Slavic, others take Old Church Slavonic as their base; some have a stronger tendency towards simplification than others; some, to put it bluntly, are better than others; and some are more sketchy than others. Every author makes his own individual choices regarding phonology and orthography. But the basic idea is always the same, and it is complete nonsense to call them separate languages or something. Especially one project (Slovo, 2001, by Štefan Pilat) is remarkably similar to Slovianski, I've noticed. In other words, Slovianski has been there for a long time, albeit under different names. And most of these versions use y.

I'm glad to see that some people are actually using elements from Naučný Slovjanský. This is precisely what I envisioned when I developed it: not to replace Slovianski in any way, but to serve as a toolbox of additional/optional characters that can help in making things more clear and understandable. All these characters are basically a matter of adding a diacritic, except one: y. Naučný Slovjanský also has at least one additional asset: it can serve as an "umbrella orthography" for practically all other Interslavic projects. For that reason I actually plan to rename it "Naučný Medźuslovjanský".

So, about y. Like it or not, it is part of the phonemic "core inventory" of Slavic. Sure, in South Slavic and Ukrainian it merges with i, but there are so many other phonemes that merge in South Slavic as well. That goes for ř/r, but also for e/ě/ę. If you want to write quickly, or if you don't know when to use which phoneme, you can always write r or e. But if you want to make yourself maximally understandable, it's better to be as precise as you can. The same goes mutatis mutandis for i/y, too. If you are Czech and writing for an audience of mostly Russians and Poles, there isn't a single reason why you shouldn't use y. I'm pretty sure even those Slavs who don't have y in their own alphabets won't have much trouble reading y as their own i. Besides, Slovianski has chosen to have a richer phonology with no less than five (or seven) soft consonants. It's kind of weird to do exactly the opposite with vowels. What kind of trouble you get yourself into by having those soft consonants and not having y becomes sufficiently clear if you look at some of the previous discussions.

To summarise: "novi" is a simplification of "novy" in the same way as "delati" is a simplification of "dělati". Which one is better really depends on who is writing, to whom he or she is writing, and also on the type of communication. If for example you decide to use Slovianski for your user page on several Slavic wikipedia editions, it would deserve recommendation to customise it: just like you'd probably use Cyrillic on wp.uk or wp.bg and Latin on wp.hr and wp.sk, you might also want to distinguish between raz- and roz-, or y and i.
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
again, I'd like to point out that in Bulgarian r'/r is still phonemic before a consonant
car/car'at (king, the king)

what I'm going to point out that the richest consonantal languages are the simplest with vowels
czech has long and short vowels and very few soft consonants
Russian has the most soft consonants and only 5/6 vowels (it's really 5 grammatically, 6 phonemically)
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
iopq
Nov 9 2010, 05:54 AM
again, I'd like to point out that in Bulgarian r'/r is still phonemic before a consonant
From Wikipedia:

"The Bulgarian consonants б /b/, в /v/, г /ɡ/, д /d/, з /z/, к /k/, л /l//ɫ/, м /m/, н /n/, п /p/, р /r/, с /s/, т /t/, ф /f/, ц /t͡s/ can denote both a normal, "hard" pronunciation, as well as a "soft", palatalized one. The hard and the palatalized consonants are considered separate phonemes in Bulgarian. [...] The softness of the palatalized consonants is always indicated in writing in Bulgarian. A consonant is palatalized if: it is followed by я / ʲa/, ю / ʲu/, or ьо / ʲɔ/. (Note: ь occurs only before о in Bulgarian) [...]
Even though palatalized consonants are phonemes in Bulgarian, they may in some cases be positionally conditioned, hence redundant. In Eastern Bulgarian dialects, consonants are always allophonically palatalized before the vowels /i/ and /ɛ/. This is not the case in Standard Bulgarian, but that form of the language does have similar allophonic alternations. Thus, к /k/, г /ɡ/ and х /x/ tend to be palatalized before /i/ and /ɛ/, and the realization of the phoneme л /l/ varies along the same principles: one of its allophones, involving a raising of the back of the tongue and a lowering of its middle part (thus similar or, according to some scholars, identical to a velarized lateral), occurs in all positions, except before the vowels /i/ and /ɛ/, where a more "clear" version with a slight raising of the middle part of the tongue occurs. The latter pre-front realization is traditionally (and incorrectly) called "soft l", even though it is not palatalized (and thus isn’t identical to the /lʲ/ signalled by the letters ьо, я and ю). In some Western Bulgarian dialects, this allophonic variation does not exist. [...]
It is important to point out that even though it is traditionally accepted that palatal and non-palatal consonants are different phonemes, some researchers claim that only the non-palatal consonants can be considered phonemes (with hard and palatalized allophones). The reason for this is that words with a palatal consonant can be considered as having an "underlying" /j/ after the consonant (which is also reflected in the spelling). This palatal approximant makes the consonant palatal through regressive assimilation. This theory is supported by the fact that these palatal allophones do not normally appear in syllable-final position as in other Slavic languages, such as Russian."


What follows from the above? That in Bulgarian practically every consonant can have a phonemic distinction between hard and soft (which is practically the same situation as in Polish). Either that, or the distinction isn't made at all, and the softener is treated like a phoneme on its own. Both approaches are acceptable. But one thing is clear: IF there is a phonemic distinction between ŕ and r, then there is also a phonemic distinction between p' and p, between k' and k, etc.

And this makes the whole discussion about phonemes vs. non-phonemes pretty moot. Your original argument in favour of phonemic r/ŕ distinction and against phonemic p/p' distinction was that the former can appear finally and the second cannot, which is not a commonly accepted criterium, but at least creates a nice workaround. However, following this line of thinking, you'll also have to accept that the ŕ phoneme as such as absent in Bulgarian, Ukrainian, Slovak etc. Or equally absent as the p' phoneme, at least.
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
not true, because p/k/c in Bulgarian are only softened before e or yat or i
but the following phonemes exist in the Bulgarian grammar:

n/n' - kon/kon'a
l/l' - dvigatel/dvigatel'a
r/r' - lekar/lekar'a
t/t' - zet/zet'a

the underlying forms for these words is more like kon', dvigatel', lekar', zet' because the brojna forma, the vocative, all reinforce this (lekar - lekar'u!) not to mention the articles as well (lekar - lekar'at)

compare this to желъд - два желъда and you can see d' is not a phoneme in Bulgarian
Edited by iopq, Nov 11 2010, 05:39 AM.
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
 
Tarkhan

Novoslověnsky jest troshku lepshij od Slovjanskogo, mimo że bazujet na jużnoslovjanskich jazykach, eto u njego jest bolsha gracija.

Distinkcija y od i jest potrebnaja, kazhdoj mozhe obje glasnice tshitat' kak umiejet ili chotshet.

Proshu menja wybatshit, alje pishu iz nje svojogo komputera i nje imaju layouta z kirilicu
Nie jest nam potrzebny żaden międzysłowiański język w kontaktach pomiędzy Słowianami. Od tego powinien być Rosyjski.

Żyje, żyje spam słowiański i żyć będzie wiecznie.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pedza
Member Avatar

Distinkcija i/y može egzistovati, ALI moramo odlično rozgraničiti kogda se upotrebja Y, a kogda I. Takože, mora biti dozvoljeno da se upotrebja samo I, ali konsistento (ne može nekto pisati byti, ali dobri istovremeno).
»V velikomu narodam geniju se gnezdo tkaje« -- Vladika Petar II Petrovič Njegoš
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
Agreed. I'll implement Y on the grammar/dictionary pages, and make sure there will be a short explanation about its usage.
Človeku, ktoromu je trudno s soboju samim, verojetno tož bude trudno s vsim inim.

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

Quote:
 
Agreed. I'll implement Y on the grammar/dictionary pages

Cool!
Višla matka kuročka,
S nej mali kuriati:
"Ko-ko-ko, Ko-ko-ko,
Nesimati hoditi daleko!"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
Actually, I have one issue. Does y become i after k/g? Russian, Belarussian, Polish and Sorbian have that feature, Czech and Slovak don't. In Ukrainian and South Slavic i and y merge, so for them it's not much of an issue.

It doesn't really matter in so far that there are no minimal pairs between ki/gi and ky/gy. It's mostly a matter of spelling convention.

In my opinion, "slovjanski" looks slightly better than "slovjansky". Besides, it's a bit late for a name change.

On the other hand, "slovjanski" has the disadvantage that grammar becomes a little more complicated:
dobry > dobrogo
legki > legkogo
sveži > svežego

Your preferences?
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

BCS prefferences are that we have gy ky hy and čy, žy, šy

BCS can learn to put y instead of e in nom-declension in G sg, nom and Acc pl f and Acc pl m and instead of i in adj-declension. N sg m. in -yvati sequences and some verbal and nominal roots.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gabriel Svoboda

As for ki/gi vs. ky/gy, I agree ky/gy looks easier since the declension of legký/legkí is obviously closer to dobrý than to svěží, so it's spelling should be closer to dobrý too - especially if legký is never going to be pronounced differently than legkí. But I am biased here and I don't want to reject a majority solution ex cathedra.

By the way, what about the subject-predicate agreement when it comes to past tense in plural? It applies in west Slavic (in official Slovak it was deleted by an orthographic reform, but dialects where y is pronounced /e/ instead of /i/ show it is acually a Slovak feature too). The rule is: the basic past tense form is pisaly, unless:

1. at least one of the subjects is masculine animate (no mater if singular or plural), then it is pisali
2. all subjects are neuter plurals, then it is pisala

Examples:
muži pisali
kompjutery pisaly
ženy pisaly
teletka pisala
muži i ženy pisali
muž i ženy pisali
proteko i teletko pisaly

I know, there is probably no rational argument for this, except for "if we already have y, we should use it up whenever possible".
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
You're probably right. Polish has a similar system, except for the neuter plural ending, which is -ły as well.

If the subjects are masculine (not animate, just human persons) or mixed, then the ending is -li.
if the subjects are feminine, non-human, neuter or whatever, then the ending is -ły.

mężowie pisali
ludzie pisali
komputery pisały
żony pisały
cielątka pisały (did they, really? ;))
mężowie i żony pisali
etc.

Sure, we might adopt something like that in Slovianski, too. What only frightens me a little is what's going to be next: normal adjectives are also going to have -i for masculine animate?

Another thing I'm not sure about is the pronoun oni "they". Should it be oni, ony or both?

[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
 
IJzeren Jan
Member Avatar
Jan van Steenbergen
wannabeme
Nov 14 2010, 04:30 PM
BCS prefferences are that we have gy ky hy and čy, žy, šy
Really? That's sort of weird. In terms of etymology, "i" always follows a soft consonant and "y" always a hard consonant.

IMO we shouldn't make this harder then necessary. The rule soft consonant + y = i is easy to apply for everybody. The additional rule k/g/h + y = i (supported by a majority of the Y languages) can be handled as well. But why should part of the soft vowels be treated as if they were hard?

[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
 
Moraczewski
Member Avatar

IJzeren Jan
Nov 14 2010, 08:34 PM
You're probably right. Polish has a similar system, except for the neuter plural ending, which is -ły as well.

If the subjects are masculine (not animate, just human persons) or mixed, then the ending is -li.
if the subjects are feminine, non-human, neuter or whatever, then the ending is -ły.

mężowie pisali
ludzie pisali
komputery pisały
żony pisały
cielątka pisały (did they, really? ;))
mężowie i żony pisali
etc.

Sure, we might adopt something like that in Slovianski, too. What only frightens me a little is what's going to be next: normal adjectives are also going to have -i for masculine animate?


[čćч]
Oh no don't do it. It will be very hard for Russian speakers to guess where to write i, where y.
And oni is oni.
We should not complicate it too much. We should use "y" in as less cases as possible - so it will be easier for all.
"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