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
Flavourisation; Northern vs. Southern Slovianski
Topic Started: Dec 6 2010, 12:16 PM (5,250 Views)
wannabeme
Member Avatar

gIf you want to hear how Southslavs pronouns sylabic -r- you can here it here.

Ni zadnji ni prvi - Aleksandra Radović

On 0:51 and 1:25 prvi
1:28 mrvi
1:39 she says pravi and prava so you can see the hear the difference between prvi and pravi.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqtuAKbgals

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gabriel Svoboda

Quote:
 
Are those words pronounced with schwas? I thought they were syllabic continuants?


Yes, but syllabic r and l in fact are syllabic [r@] and [l@], they would be impossible to pronounce otherwise.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moraczewski
Member Avatar

Gabriel Svoboda
Dec 10 2010, 12:14 PM
Yes, but syllabic r and l in fact are syllabic [r@] and [l@], they would be impossible to pronounce otherwise.
:o :o :o
I must be a genius then...
"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

:o :o :o

Are you able to pronounce, for example, [d] or [l] separately? Don't you actually pronounce [d@], [l@]? One of my old English textbooks actually defined schwa just as "the sound you unwillingly pronouce when you try to pronounce a consonant separately".
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pne
Member Avatar

Gabriel Svoboda
Dec 10 2010, 12:40 PM
Are you able to pronounce, for example, [d] or [l] separately? Don't you actually pronounce [d@], [l@]? One of my old English textbooks actually defined schwa just as "the sound you unwillingly pronouce when you try to pronounce a consonant separately".
[d] is a plosive, not a continuant - you can't sustain it.

[l] can be pronounced by itself, for as long as you want, just like (for example) [s] or [f] or [r]. Also nasals such as [n] and [m].

So something like the famous "k" for dative has to be [k@] or [@k] if there's no vowel nearby - but "s" for instrumental can be simply [s], which sounds different from [s@] or [@s].

I think for the "pronounce a consonant separately" you have to distinguish between continuants and plosives.

In English, in words such as "button" or "middle" I have two pronunciations: one with shwa, and one with just (nasal/lateral release and) the syllabic consonant at the end.

Perhaps I should record what I think I say in such cases.
Edited by pne, Dec 10 2010, 12:55 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
Gabriel Svoboda
Dec 10 2010, 12:14 PM
Quote:
 
Are those words pronounced with schwas? I thought they were syllabic continuants?


Yes, but syllabic r and l in fact are syllabic [r@] and [l@], they would be impossible to pronounce otherwise.
Ru. мысль has two syllables, but no schwa as far as I can tell
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
 
Aquarius

Moraczewski
 
I must admit that trg and brzy are much more understandable for Russian than terg and berzy
Da!
Gabriel
 
Well, standard Slovianski has just i, hasn't it? Of course, we talked about y a lot, but it was always in a clear connection with Naučni Slovianski or Slovianski Plus; proposals to have y in Standard Slovianski were rare and none of them has ever been accepted, unless I severely misunderstood something. Besides that, having northern y would be very strange in the light of the proposed drastical southernization.
To je dobra ideja.
Edited by Aquarius, Dec 10 2010, 03:26 PM.
Slov dobryh obranje čini se črez glasovanje!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pne
Member Avatar

wannabeme
Dec 10 2010, 12:10 PM
gIf you want to hear how Southslavs pronouns sylabic -r- you can here it here.

Ni zadnji ni prvi - Aleksandra Radović

On 0:51 and 1:25 prvi
1:28 mrvi
1:39 she says pravi and prava so you can see the hear the difference between prvi and pravi.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqtuAKbgals

Those sound like "p@rvi, m@rvi" or (as someone said before) "pörvi, mörvi" to me.

Not what I had expected to hear!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
wannabeme
Member Avatar

Yes, I said pörvi and mörvi.
So the actual pronounciation of BCS први is пьрви.
But when you speak fast you can also hear prrrrvi but never pr@vi.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pne
Member Avatar

Here's my attempt at talking about syllabic consonants: http://conlang.mizinamo.org/slovianski/slovianski-syllabic-consonants.ogg (0:38, Ogg Vorbis)

I pronounce syllabic m, l, r, and try to say "vznesl, klesl; prvi, mrvi; krk; vlk". I also say "middle" and "button" two different ways.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gabriel Svoboda

Sustainability is a different concept - yes, I can sustain [l], [r] or [ s ] for as long as I want, but at the end I'll still pronounce a schwa, since this is the sound produced when you have just relaxed the tongue yet the vocal folds are still active. In Dražen's video I hear [pr@vi] or maybe [prrrrr@vi], but never [prvi] or [prrrrrvi].

Anyway, whoever of us is right, this discussion itself shows how tricky it is to assign some official meaning to syllabic liquids and/or schwa.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gabriel Svoboda

Quote:
 
I pronounce syllabic m, l, r, and try to say "vznesl, klesl; prvi, mrvi; krk; vlk". I also say "middle" and "button" two different ways.


I hear: [mmmmmmmmmm@], [llllllll@], [rrrrrrr@], [vznesl@], [klesl@], [prrr@vi], [mrrrr@vi], [krrrr@k], [vllll@k], [midl@], [bat@n], [midllll@], [bat:@n]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iopq
Administrator
he did not say [m:@] he just said [m:] because he didn't open his mouth when he ended the sound
what kind of a vowel is said with a closed mouth?!
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
Quote:
 
Well, standard Slovianski has just i, hasn't it? Of course, we talked about y a lot, but it was always in a clear connection with Naučni Slovianski or Slovianski Plus; proposals to have y in Standard Slovianski were rare and none of them has ever been accepted, unless I severely misunderstood something.

See http://s8.zetaboards.com/Slovianski/topic/8249337/.

Quote:
 
Besides that, having northern y would be very strange in the light of the proposed drastical southernization. Just like it is strange you insist on 5 northern soft consonants in Slovianski, even though only two of them are really necessary (ň, ľ) and only one more is quite easy for South Slavs too (ť at the end of feminine nouns). Nothing more is really necessary, and this is the direction the southernization should take - use features that are objectively simplier (i instead of y, 2-3 soft consonants instead of 5-7), not subjective biases (since TraT is no simplier than TroT).

The basic principle in the case of y is quite simple: write it if you know when to use it, otherwise don't. The same goes also for the soft consonants. As a rule, I think the orthography of Standard Slovianski should be as inclusive as possible - it's easier to turn kosť into kost than the other way round. Likewise, you can turn all y's in a document into i, and you get a valid document. The opposite won't work. If a South Slav reads puť or byti, he'll know what is meant. If a North Slav reads put and dimiti, he'll have to think first.

So Standard Slovianski should be as precise as possible, and basically include everything that can be represented in Cyrillic without resorting to ҍ, ѧ and the like (which is regrettable, because the difference between ě and e is quite crucial). The only exceptions are ś and ź, mostly because they rare and not supported by a majority anyway. Y is supported by 3.5 votes (and a vast majority of the speakers). Also, it's weird to have lots of soft consonants and no y; that's another example of a "package deal".

In the case of TraT/TroT it's different: you cannot treat one as a simplification of the other. And ĺ can't be represented in Cyrillic, therefore we must make a choice, either a Northern-biased or a Southern-biased one. Because practically all other solutions are already Northern-based, I thought in this particular case we might settle the score a bit.

Besides, I noticed that most Russians here on the forum prefer TraT as well. Which doesn't even surprise me, since Russian is full with -oro-/-ra- doublets. So they know already that there is a relationship between those two. So if they see "krava" and don't recognise it immediately, they don't have to dig deep.

Quote:
 
Quote:
 
Polish, Belarussian and Ukrainian are three mutually quite understandable languages, with together 2 votes. Add Russian (which in most cases will work), and you have 3 votes and a majority of the population - no further discussion.

Indeed, and why there should be any further discussion, if something is common to some 84 % of Slavic languages, including three most widely spoken of them? Please understand that even if the words "northern" and "southern" look similar, they are not at all equal, just like China and Vatican are not. Ergo Slovianski should actually be closer to the northern branch, not a half-way between northern and southern.

Ahem, that's something I don't agree about at all. If you just look at speakers, we might as well use Russian only. Interslavic should be there for all Slavs, not only for part of them. So yes, half-way between East, South and West, that's exactly where Slovianski should be IMO.

Quote:
 
Yes, Simplified Russian is a good name for Slovianski in its current state. The current voting system ensures Russian is deprived of its most exotic features, yet without introducing another exotic features from the other side of the Slavic world.

Ouch! If that is really the case, then we have done something very wrong! At least, that's my feeling. I wouldn't call a solution with 3 vote "exotic", though.

Quote:
 
Then, why not just use flavourisations for subjective tastes, and keep Slovianski objective? Flavourisations are indeed an excellent idea of yours, only they are overshadowed by the fact that you propose to modify Standard Slovianski according to one of these flavourisations. If you hadn't proposed to touch Standard Slovianski, there would have been no five-page controversy now and we all would have been setting fireworks instead!

Hm, here you got a point! :)

But let's move on to syllabic liquids...

Quote:
 
I keep thinking about the -er-/-or-/-r- problem. Let me sum it up, we have three options, none of them without disadvantages:

1) torg, smerť
+ consonant clusters are broken with natural and etymological vowels
- west and south Slavs don't know when to fill in e and when o

2) terg, smerť (or alternatively: torg, smorť)
+ consonant clusters are still broken, and west and south Slavs know which vowel to fill in
- east Slavs have problems with this, vowel deletion is better understood than vowel replacement

3) trg, smrť
+ easy to understand
- difficult to pronounce

Yeah, that's a good way of putting it. Although you didn't mention the biggest disadvantage of 2: zero votes. And indeed, terg etc. look VERY strange to everybody. So as far as I'm concerned, we'll have to choose between 1 and 3.

Three is the solution with most votes. But one is the more inclusive solution, because "mertvy" and "torg" can be flavoured into "mrtvy" and "trg" without a problem, but flavouring back isn't possible. This is actually quite a good argument in f(l)avour of the old solution.

Quote:
 
You know, I can live with the option 3), but I don't like it, because it means we are introducing schwa as an official vowel in Slovianski.

Until now, people could be encouraged to pronounce Slovianski always with clear, full vowels, with no reductions into schwa. As soon as we introduce schwa, Russians might start to think "if schwa is allowed, it is also allowed to reduce any vowel into schwa, just like we do it in our native language". Ergo, a Pandora's box will be opened and the most difficult Russian feature for other Slavs to learn and understand, namely stress-dependent vowel reduction, will become permissible in Slovianski.

Hmmmm, I'm not really afraid of that. However, you have a point regarding the location of the schwa. [sm@rt] still means "death" to me, but [smr@t] is more like "stink".

Quote:
 
Schwas are really not good for clarity at all.

Well, the truth is, if we'd REALLY go for simplicity, then we'd need schwa in all positions where we have č or ň. As Dražen pointed out, they merge in all the Western languages (BCMS a, other languages e). Had we followed that model, then we have had mǝrtvy, pǝlny, pǝs, dostatǝk, dobrǝgo, hlĺpǝc, obǝjdti, sǝglĺsno etc.

Quote:
 
This problem will become our daily bread if we introduce trg, smrť.

Yeah. Well, all in all, it's not THAT big an issue to me. It would have some advantages to treat syllabic R and L the same way, even though most natlangs treat them differently. I don't really buy the argument that it's ugly. If I write: THE REACTOR'S MLTING DOWN... EVRYTHING BRNS! you'll understand me, right? No WTF-syndrom. But if it really makes things harder for Northerners without actually making it easier for Southerners, then we might as well stick to ER/OR/OL.

[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
not quite the same advantages since ьl and ъl have the same reflexes so it's always ol no matter the source
ьr becomes er, ъr becomes or so simplifying to r might have an advantage

I have become fully convinced Gabriel is having hallucinations about schwas being everywhere, though
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
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fonologija i pravopis · Next Topic »
Add Reply