Homogenity between languages in a language group (was: Romance languages)
Hans Kamp
STAN MULAIK <psc...@prism.gatech.edu> schreef in berichtnieuws
7shqfq$b...@catapult.gatech.edu...
> "Hans Kamp" <hans...@introweb.nl> writes:
>
>
>
> >Folkspraak and Mezhdja could give a Germanic and Slavic Interlingua.
>
> >Hans Kamp.
>
> I don't know what the situation is with the Slavic languages, i.e. how
> homogeneous are they?
They are very homogeneous, at least as homogeneous as the languages,
Interlingua is based on. I did some research at
http://members.tripod.lycos.nl/Hans200866/mezhdja/. It is a language
designed by myself and it has Cyrillic letters, because many Slavic
langauges have Cyrillic letters. The word "jazik" for language is found in
very many languages, about 6 or 7!
> But it seems to me that the Germanic languages
> are much more diverse than English and the Romance languages. (English
> is so heavily Latinized that it provides an excellent base along with
> the Romance languages to construct a homogeneous language based on
> prototype forms--which makes the process much more objective.
That is true. The relationship between Germanic languages is very hard to
see. You could compare Frisian, German, Afrikaans and Dutch with each other,
but English (except from its Germanic words) is a sort of odd-man-out. For
example, where Dutch has a t, the German has a z [ts]: twee - zwei (two),
tijd - Zeit (time), vertwijfeld - verzweifelt (doubtful), twintig - zwanzig
(twenty), tussen - zwischen (between) (as you can see, English follows the
Dutch pattern), etc. Where we have a p, the German has pf of f: paard -
Pferd (horse), dorp - Dorf (village), lepel - Loeffel (spoon), wapen - Waffe
(weapon). Where Dutch has a d, English as a th [T]: drie - three, dorp -
thorpe (archaistic), moeder - mother, vader - father, etc. As I said, it is
very hard to see!
> The Germanic languages also have heavy influences from Latin, going way
> back to the early encounters of the Germanic peoples with the Romans.
> Martin Luther's translation of the Bible required coining many German
> terms from the Latin, which he did by mere calque translations.
> And the Scandinavian languages seem to have borrowed calque translations
> of these calque translations. In the 19th century I believe most of
> the German middle class spoke French, even at home. Voltaire reports
> that in the 17th century Polish nobles spoke Latin routinely at home,
> and all of their household help spoke it too. If you look words up
> in a Russian dictionary you will be amazed at how many romance-Latin
> words exist in that language. So, the Latin/Grec/Romance sphere
> of influence is very extensive and forms the basis for a homogeneous
> standardization of the international vocabulary in the Western
> European Languages.
Except of English I still think that the influance of Romance is not so big
as you describe. There are lots of words in Russian ending with -irovat',
that has a root coming from Roman, I think funkcionirovat' is that kind of
verb.
> I understand that Latin had a heavy influence in
> Hungary, being used as the administrative language in the 19th Century,
> and still influential because of the Catholic presence there. In fact,
> Catholicism and Protestantism mark regions where the Roman, Latin,
> Romance influence has been extensive, even among the Slavs.
>
> Now, I will not dissuade you and others from trying to construct
> pan-German and pan-Slavic "interlinguas". If they can serve a purpose,
> then more power to them.
Well, I don't know enough about Folkspraak, but with Mezhdja I try to find
an average between the Slavic languages. I would say that many words are
pure Slavic (not having a foreign or strange etymology).
Hans Kamp.
Peter T. Daniels
> > But it seems to me that the Germanic languages
> > are much more diverse than English and the Romance languages. (English
> > is so heavily Latinized that it provides an excellent base along with
> > the Romance languages to construct a homogeneous language based on
> > prototype forms--which makes the process much more objective.
>
> That is true. The relationship between Germanic languages is very hard to
> see. You could compare Frisian, German, Afrikaans and Dutch with each other,
> but English (except from its Germanic words) is a sort of odd-man-out. For
> example, where Dutch has a t, the German has a z [ts]: twee - zwei (two),
> tijd - Zeit (time), vertwijfeld - verzweifelt (doubtful), twintig - zwanzig
> (twenty), tussen - zwischen (between) (as you can see, English follows the
> Dutch pattern), etc. Where we have a p, the German has pf of f: paard -
> Pferd (horse), dorp - Dorf (village), lepel - Loeffel (spoon), wapen - Waffe
> (weapon). Where Dutch has a d, English as a th [T]: drie - three, dorp -
> thorpe (archaistic), moeder - mother, vader - father, etc. As I said, it is
> very hard to see!
So hard to see that it's the very first (or close to it) Lautgesetz ever
discovered! "Grimm's Law."
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@worldnet.att.net
PJS
>
>STAN MULAIK <psc...@prism.gatech.edu> schreef in berichtnieuws
>7shqfq$b...@catapult.gatech.edu...
>> "Hans Kamp" <hans...@introweb.nl> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>> >Folkspraak and Mezhdja could give a Germanic and Slavic Interlingua.
>>
>> >Hans Kamp.
>>
>> I don't know what the situation is with the Slavic languages, i.e. how
>> homogeneous are they?
>
>They are very homogeneous, at least as homogeneous as the languages,
>Interlingua is based on. I did some research at
>http://members.tripod.lycos.nl/Hans200866/mezhdja/. It is a language
>designed by myself and it has Cyrillic letters, because many Slavic
>langauges have Cyrillic letters. The word "jazik" for language is found in
>very many languages, about 6 or 7!
But isn't using Cyrillic a possible political minefield, because that means
identifying with Eastern Orthodoxy - Russia/Serbia/Bulgaria and rejecting
the Czechs, Poles and so on? I suppose someone's upset no matter what you
do.
---
Puritanism - the haunting fear that someone, somewhere
may be happy.
- H.L. Mencken
Hans Kamp
938284411.6306.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
But there are more languages with Cyrillic letters: Macedonia, Ukraine,
Belarus. And Bulgaria was a friend of the NATO during the war against
Serbia. I think that the countries that use Cyrillic letters have different
political attitudes.
I might be influenced by the fact that Cyrillic letters are popular in the
Netherlands. BTW, when I was in Bulgarija, there was a trend to give the
Cyrillic a Latin look. The Bulgarian k looks exactly the same as Latin (c.q.
our) k. The Bulgarian t (lower case) looks like an m. "Restaurant" looks
like: pecmopaH (of course the H-similar letter is much smaller!)
Also for Syldavian a language used in "The Adventures of Tintin", Cyrillic
is used, and it is a non-existent Germanic language!
Hans Kamp.
Radovan Garabik
: PJS <P...@winwaed.demon.co.uk> schreef in berichtnieuws
: 938284411.6306.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
:> Hans Kamp wrote in message <93824719...@tbird.introweb.nl>...
:> >
:> >STAN MULAIK <psc...@prism.gatech.edu> schreef in berichtnieuws
:> >7shqfq$b...@catapult.gatech.edu...
:> >> "Hans Kamp" <hans...@introweb.nl> writes:
:> >
:> >They are very homogeneous, at least as homogeneous as the languages,
:> >Interlingua is based on. I did some research at
:> >http://members.tripod.lycos.nl/Hans200866/mezhdja/. It is a language
:> >designed by myself and it has Cyrillic letters, because many Slavic
:> >langauges have Cyrillic letters. The word "jazik" for language is found
: in
:> >very many languages, about 6 or 7!
I would not be surprised if this word is present in all the slavic languages
(heritage of proto-slavic)
:> -----------------
:> But isn't using Cyrillic a possible political minefield, because that
: means
:> identifying with Eastern Orthodoxy - Russia/Serbia/Bulgaria and rejecting
:> the Czechs, Poles and so on? I suppose someone's upset no matter what you
:> do.
: But there are more languages with Cyrillic letters: Macedonia, Ukraine,
: Belarus. And Bulgaria was a friend of the NATO during the war against
then we have these:
cyrillic: russian, ukrainian, belarussian, serbian, bulgarian, macedonian
= total 6 languages
latin alphabet: polish, czech, slovak, upper serbian, lower serbian,
slovenian, croatian, bosnian = total 8 languages
(ok, I am not counting russyth into first group and I am countin
serbian/croatian/bosnian to be different languages here... but still it is
at least equal, as for number of languages, though not as for numbers of
speakers)
: Serbia. I think that the countries that use Cyrillic letters have different
: political attitudes.
: I might be influenced by the fact that Cyrillic letters are popular in the
: Netherlands. BTW, when I was in Bulgarija, there was a trend to give the
: Cyrillic a Latin look. The Bulgarian k looks exactly the same as Latin (c.q
: our) k. The Bulgarian t (lower case) looks like an m. "Restaurant" looks
: like: pecmopaH (of course the H-similar letter is much smaller!)
: Also for Syldavian a language used in "The Adventures of Tintin", Cyrillic
: is used, and it is a non-existent Germanic language!
you can go for an old serbo-croatian approach: make two variants of the
ortography, one with cyrillic letters and one with latin, and make the
transformation bijective (or almost... you do not have enough latin letters
for this)
so you have following letters (in latin variant)
a b v g d e zh z i j k l m n o p r s t u f h c ch sh ju ja
or
a b v g d e z" z i j k l m n o p r s t u f h c c" s" ju ja
where " stands for breve
(the first version has the advantage to fit into ascii)
and make the cyrillic and latin versions equal, and everybody is happy :-)
(I was contemplating with creating my own pan-slavic language and making
a double ortography, but my linguistic knowledge is way too weak for it...)
P.S. it is je,zyk in Polish, not jazyk
P.P.S. are d t n l palatalized(?) before e and i?
P.P.P.S. I find it rather disturbing to have no declinations in mezhdja, but
I am biased as I do not speak Bulgarian...
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
| Radovan Garabik http://melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk/~garabik/ |
| __..--^^^--..__ garabik @ fmph.uniba.sk |
-----------------------------------------------------------
Hans Kamp
Radovan Garabik <gar...@fmph.uniba.sk.invalid> schreef in berichtnieuws
93845091...@cdwork.cvt.stuba.sk...
> In alt.language.artificial Hans Kamp <hans...@introweb.nl> wrote:
> : PJS <P...@winwaed.demon.co.uk> schreef in berichtnieuws
> : 938284411.6306.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
> :> But isn't using Cyrillic a possible political minefield, because that
> : means
> :> identifying with Eastern Orthodoxy - Russia/Serbia/Bulgaria and
rejecting
> :> the Czechs, Poles and so on? I suppose someone's upset no matter what
you
> :> do.
>
> : But there are more languages with Cyrillic letters: Macedonia, Ukraine,
> : Belarus. And Bulgaria was a friend of the NATO during the war against
>
> then we have these:
> cyrillic: russian, ukrainian, belarussian, serbian, bulgarian, macedonian
> = total 6 languages
> latin alphabet: polish, czech, slovak, upper serbian, lower serbian,
What do you mean with Upper Serbian and Lower Serbian? The language spoken
in the neighborhood of Cottbus in former East-Germany?
> slovenian, croatian, bosnian = total 8 languages
And if you consider the number of people that write Cyrillic?
Maybe... I could introduce hacheks (so replacing the " with it), or - as the
Croatian call it - krachicas.
> and make the cyrillic and latin versions equal, and everybody is happy :-)
> (I was contemplating with creating my own pan-slavic language and making
> a double ortography, but my linguistic knowledge is way too weak for
it...)
Maybe I will. But it is a test language... I would know how an average
Slavic would look like.
--
Hans Kamp
Radovan Garabik
:> cyrillic: russian, ukrainian, belarussian, serbian, bulgarian, macedonian
:> = total 6 languages
:> latin alphabet: polish, czech, slovak, upper serbian, lower serbian,
: What do you mean with Upper Serbian and Lower Serbian? The language spoken
: in the neighborhood of Cottbus in former East-Germany?
yes.. sorry, it should have been sorbian (I was half asleep :-))
:> slovenian, croatian, bosnian = total 8 languages
: And if you consider the number of people that write Cyrillic?
of course, cyrillic wins in that case.
:>
:> you can go for an old serbo-croatian approach: make two variants of the
:> ortography, one with cyrillic letters and one with latin, and make the
:> transformation bijective (or almost... you do not have enough latin
: letters
:> for this)
:> so you have following letters (in latin variant)
:> a b v g d e zh z i j k l m n o p r s t u f h c ch sh ju ja
:> or
:> a b v g d e z" z i j k l m n o p r s t u f h c c" s" ju ja
:> where " stands for breve
:> (the first version has the advantage to fit into ascii)
: Maybe... I could introduce hacheks (so replacing the " with it), or - as the
: Croatian call it - krachicas.
hachek is what I call breve (in english text :-))
(ha'c"ek is a Czech word for it)
if you use sh zh ch, it will introduce ambiguity with h, so maybe using x
for /x/... (this is what I use to transcribe Russian into ascii)
the Polish way is not bad either (sz cz (zz or zs is not polish, but was
used in old Czech)) but used only in polish and sorbian.
:> and make the cyrillic and latin versions equal, and everybody is happy :-)
:> (I was contemplating with creating my own pan-slavic language and making
:> a double ortography, but my linguistic knowledge is way too weak for
: it...)
: Maybe I will. But it is a test language... I would know how an average
: Slavic would look like.
so far it seems to me it is a bit south-slavic biased...
but I do not speak any south-slavic language, so I am biased too :-)
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
| Radovan Garabik http://melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk/~garabik/ |
| __..--^^^--..__ garabik @ fmph.uniba.sk |
-----------------------------------------------------------
Antivirus alert: file .signature infected by signature virus.
Hi! I'm a signature virus! Copy me into your signature file to help me spread!
Hans Kamp
berichtnieuws 93852630...@cdwork.cvt.stuba.sk...
> In alt.language.artificial Hans Kamp <hans...@introweb.nl> wrote:
> :> you can go for an old serbo-croatian approach: make two variants of
the
> :> ortography, one with cyrillic letters and one with latin, and make the
> :> transformation bijective (or almost... you do not have enough latin
> : letters
> :> for this)
> :> so you have following letters (in latin variant)
> :> a b v g d e zh z i j k l m n o p r s t u f h c ch sh ju ja
> :> or
> :> a b v g d e z" z i j k l m n o p r s t u f h c c" s" ju ja
> :> where " stands for breve
> :> (the first version has the advantage to fit into ascii)
>
> : Maybe... I could introduce hacheks (so replacing the " with it), or -
as the
> : Croatian call it - krachicas.
>
> hachek is what I call breve (in english text :-))
> (ha'c"ek is a Czech word for it)
But hacheks are most often used: Czech, Slovakian, latinized Russian,
latinized Belarus, Sorbian, latinized Serbian, Croatian, Slovenian,
latinized Bulgarian.
> :> and make the cyrillic and latin versions equal, and everybody is happy
:-)
> :> (I was contemplating with creating my own pan-slavic language and
making
> :> a double ortography, but my linguistic knowledge is way too weak for
> : it...)
>
> : Maybe I will. But it is a test language... I would know how an average
> : Slavic would look like.
>
> so far it seems to me it is a bit south-slavic biased...
> but I do not speak any south-slavic language, so I am biased too :-)
Maybe because many Slavic languages is in the west and south of the area.
--
Hans Kamp
N.Aliic' ~{3I9zJ@=gSoU_!!~}
>if you use sh zh ch, it will introduce ambiguity with h, so maybe using x
>for /x/... (this is what I use to transcribe Russian into ascii)
that's what's used by esperantler - so maybe Hansi will take this
for the romanization , because he is one
although in esperanto zx would be jx
>the Polish way is not bad either (sz cz (zz or zs is not polish, but was
>used in old Czech)) but used only in polish and sorbian.
zs is used for jx in Hungarian
-isnčmásígnadů-
sogň$u'inbâçdrinatkâmanítsá'ônewáwa
untfüü'éndatsi'anetbisma'untdat'étkimt
Hans Kamp
N.Aliic' ~{3I9zJ@=gSoU_!!~} <nenad....@gmx.li> schreef in berichtnieuws
7sta0s$45mi$7...@www.univie.ac.at...
> fon gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk.invalid (Radovan Garabik) :
>
> >if you use sh zh ch, it will introduce ambiguity with h, so maybe using x
> >for /x/... (this is what I use to transcribe Russian into ascii)
>
> that's what's used by esperantler - so maybe Hansi will take this
> for the romanization , because he is one
> although in esperanto zx would be jx
I think I will use hacheks because they are used in many Slavic languages
with latin letters. If you look at other languages (with Cyrillic letters)
the hachek is used in latin transscriptions.
--
Hans Kamp
Radovan Garabik
: fon gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk.invalid (Radovan Garabik) :
:>if you use sh zh ch, it will introduce ambiguity with h, so maybe using x
:>for /x/... (this is what I use to transcribe Russian into ascii)
: that's what's used by esperantler - so maybe Hansi will take this
: for the romanization , because he is one
but this is completely unnatural for an average slavic language
: although in esperanto zx would be jx
:>the Polish way is not bad either (sz cz (zz or zs is not polish, but was
:>used in old Czech)) but used only in polish and sorbian.
: zs is used for jx in Hungarian
yes, but that is irrelevant (e.g. in hungarian cs is used for cx and s for
sx and sz for s :-)).
hachecks are good, maybe some sort of (additional, unofficial) transliteration
into 7-bit ascii would be nice (ch sh zh is so nice, but conflicts with h,
maybe cx sx zx... but this does not look emotionally appealing :-))
OTOH, esperanto has such a standard, and yet people are using cx jx sx hx ux...
Radovan Garabik
: I think I will use hacheks because they are used in many Slavic languages
: with latin letters. If you look at other languages (with Cyrillic letters)
: the hachek is used in latin transscriptions.
you face one crucial problems: how to call hachecks in mezhdja :-)
(ha'c"ek in Czech, ma:kc"en" in Slovak, does not exist in Polish or Russian,
something else in Croatian...)
Hans Kamp
Radovan Garabik <gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk.invalid> schreef in
> In alt.language.artificial N.Aliic' ~{3I9zJ@=gSoU_!!~}
<nenad....@gmx.li> wrote:
> : fon gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk.invalid (Radovan Garabik) :
>
> :>if you use sh zh ch, it will introduce ambiguity with h, so maybe using
x
> :>for /x/... (this is what I use to transcribe Russian into ascii)
>
> : that's what's used by esperantler - so maybe Hansi will take this
> : for the romanization , because he is one
>
> but this is completely unnatural for an average slavic language
Yes, I will use hacheks. But the limitation of the netiquette forces me to
use an h, just as in Esperanto. If it is up toe me, I would send HTML
postings with Unicode, and than hacheked letters won't be a problem.
--
Hans Kamp
Hans Kamp
Radovan Garabik <gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk.invalid> schreef in
> In alt.language.artificial Hans Kamp <hans...@introweb.nl> wrote:
>
>
> : I think I will use hacheks because they are used in many Slavic
languages
> : with latin letters. If you look at other languages (with Cyrillic
letters)
> : the hachek is used in latin transscriptions.
>
> you face one crucial problems: how to call hachecks in mezhdja :-)
> (ha'c"ek in Czech, ma:kc"en" in Slovak, does not exist in Polish or
Russian,
> something else in Croatian...)
"Krachica" in Croatian. A Bosnian talked with me about "kvachica"s.
--
Hans Kamp
Radovan Garabik
: Radovan Garabik <gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk.invalid> schreef in
: berichtnieuws 93863325...@cdwork.cvt.stuba.sk...
please, do not post HTML...
I am using proper news reader, not web browser
You can post UTF 8 though... (but it would be better to post in ISO latin 2,
as that is the norm for slavic languages and most news readers support this)
Radovan Garabik
: Radovan Garabik <gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk.invalid> schreef in
: berichtnieuws 93863350...@cdwork.cvt.stuba.sk...
:> In alt.language.artificial Hans Kamp <hans...@introweb.nl> wrote:
:>
:>
:> : I think I will use hacheks because they are used in many Slavic
: languages
:> : with latin letters. If you look at other languages (with Cyrillic
: letters)
:> : the hachek is used in latin transscriptions.
:>
:> you face one crucial problems: how to call hachecks in mezhdja :-)
:> (ha'c"ek in Czech, ma:kc"en" in Slovak, does not exist in Polish or
: Russian,
:> something else in Croatian...)
: "Krachica" in Croatian. A Bosnian talked with me about "kvachica"s.
hmm... kvac"ka in slang Slovak (Czech) means that type of hook made on
paper you confirm something with (looking indeed like a hook)
so perhaps this word is more widespread than it seems :-)
Antonio
> hachecks are good, maybe some sort of (additional, unofficial)
> transliteration into 7-bit ascii would be nice (ch sh zh is so nice, but
> conflicts with h
Cz, sz, rz would look very slavic. Is there any problem with r+z?
--
@NtOnju mArkS
Plant Systematics & Life History
Radovan Garabik
: Radovan Garabik wrote:
:> hachecks are good, maybe some sort of (additional, unofficial)
:> transliteration into 7-bit ascii would be nice (ch sh zh is so nice, but
:> conflicts with h
: Cz, sz, rz would look very slavic. Is there any problem with r+z?
No, they would not. Only Polish and Sorbian(s) are using them (and Old Czech
once did). All other slavic languages use breves (hacheks or whatever you
call them) or cyrillic.
r" is not in Mezhdja.
But I agree cz sz zz (or zs) are less ambiguous than ch sh zh (when there
is already h in the language)
btw what about this transliteration? (I am using it for russian):
a b v g d e zh z i j k l m n o p r s t u f x c ch sh ju ja
(notice the x for /x/)
This is completely unambiguous.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
| Radovan Garabik http://melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk/~garabik/ |
| __..--^^^--..__ garabik @ fmph.uniba.sk |
-----------------------------------------------------------
N.Aliic' ~{3I9zJ@=gSoU_!!~}
>please, do not post HTML...
>I am using proper news reader, not web browser
>You can post UTF 8 though... (but it would be better to post in ISO latin 2,
>as that is the norm for slavic languages and most news readers support this)
it's really stupid that esperantler are not using this standard .
what's wrong to write the esperantajn sonojn with their croatian
equivalents .
latin2 : è ð x ž š ú
latin3 : æ ø ¶ ¼ þ ý
ikse : cx gx hx jx sx ux
-isnèmásígnadù-
sogò$u'inbâçdrinatkâmanítsá'ônewáwa
Radovan Garabik
:>please, do not post HTML...
:>I am using proper news reader, not web browser
:>You can post UTF 8 though... (but it would be better to post in ISO latin 2,
:>as that is the norm for slavic languages and most news readers support this)
: it's really stupid that esperantler are not using this standard .
: what's wrong to write the esperantajn sonojn with their croatian
: equivalents .
what's wrong with writing esperanto sounds with slovak equivalents?
slovak variant: (v over a letter is hachek, since we seem to have different
ISO latin2 norms :-))
v v v v
c dz ch z s
cx gx hx jx sx
u' is something other
or for that matter, what's wrong writing croatian with slovak standard?
or with esperanto standard?
: latin2 : č đ x ú
uhm.. that's not ISO latin 2
latin 2 is this:
latin2 : č đ x ž š ú
: latin3 : ć ř ś ź ţ ý
: ikse : cx gx hx jx sx ux
and anyway, ú is _not_ meant to be pronounced like ux
Dik T. Winter
> : Maybe... I could introduce hacheks (so replacing the " with it), or - as the
> : Croatian call it - krachicas.
>
> hachek is what I call breve (in english text :-))
Strange, as there is a difference between the hachek and the breve. It
makes a difference when on top of one of the letters a, e, i, o, u or g
(where the both can occur). The hachek is called "caron" in Unicode.
--
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/
Radovan Garabik
: In article <93852630...@cdwork.cvt.stuba.sk> gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk.invalid (Radovan Garabik) writes:
: > : Maybe... I could introduce hacheks (so replacing the " with it), or - as the
: > : Croatian call it - krachicas.
: >
: > hachek is what I call breve (in english text :-))
: Strange, as there is a difference between the hachek and the breve. It
: makes a difference when on top of one of the letters a, e, i, o, u or g
: (where the both can occur). The hachek is called "caron" in Unicode.
ok, breve (or hacheck :-)) cannot occur in Slovak over these letter, so it
does not matter much.
However, in Czech there can be a hacheck over e, so I'll switch to calling
it caron.
btw how do caron and breve look over d t l? There is a difference in
appearance in Czech and Slovak for these letters (it looks like d' t' l'),
though ordinary looking caron can be used (but looks ugly)
Dik T. Winter
> In alt.language.artificial Dik T. Winter <d...@cwi.nl> wrote:
> : Strange, as there is a difference between the hachek and the breve. It
> : makes a difference when on top of one of the letters a, e, i, o, u or g
> : (where the both can occur). The hachek is called "caron" in Unicode.
>
> ok, breve (or hacheck :-)) cannot occur in Slovak over these letter, so it
> does not matter much.
But there is certainly a difference in appearance. A breve is round, a
caron is an upside-down circumflex, at least in normal script.
> btw how do caron and breve look over d t l? There is a difference in
> appearance in Czech and Slovak for these letters (it looks like d' t' l'),
> though ordinary looking caron can be used (but looks ugly)
The caron as an appended apostrophe or comma on d, t and l is quite common
as another rendering of the same symbol. It can also be used for h and k
(both occur with caron in Lappish scripts I think). I also do think it is
more pleasing.
Hans Kamp
Antonio <ip20...@ip.pt> schreef in berichtnieuws 37F2B092...@ip.pt...
> Radovan Garabik wrote:
>
> > hachecks are good, maybe some sort of (additional, unofficial)
> > transliteration into 7-bit ascii would be nice (ch sh zh is so nice, but
> > conflicts with h
>
> Cz, sz, rz would look very slavic. Is there any problem with r+z?
For me it look Polish. That spelling I never see in other Slavic languages.
I must say that Sorbian and latinized Belarussian (Lacinka) also look
Polish.
--
Hans Kamp
Hans Kamp
Radovan Garabik <gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk.invalid> schreef in
> In alt.language.artificial Hans Kamp <hans...@introweb.nl> wrote:
>
> : Radovan Garabik <gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk.invalid> schreef in
> :> In alt.language.artificial N.Aliic' ~{3I9zJ@=gSoU_!!~}
> : <nenad....@gmx.li> wrote:
> :> : fon gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk.invalid (Radovan Garabik) :
> :>
using
> : x
> :> :>for /x/... (this is what I use to transcribe Russian into ascii)
> :>
> :> : that's what's used by esperantler - so maybe Hansi will take this
> :> : for the romanization , because he is one
> :>
> :> but this is completely unnatural for an average slavic language
>
> : Yes, I will use hacheks. But the limitation of the netiquette forces me
to
> : use an h, just as in Esperanto. If it is up toe me, I would send HTML
> : postings with Unicode, and than hacheked letters won't be a problem.
>
> I am using proper news reader, not web browser
> You can post UTF 8 though... (but it would be better to post in ISO latin
2,
> as that is the norm for slavic languages and most news readers support
this)
I seem not to be able to post UTF8 withouth using HTML. So for the time
being I will post in ASCII.
--
Hans Kamp
Hans Kamp
Radovan Garabik <gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk.invalid> schreef in
>
> :> hachecks are good, maybe some sort of (additional, unofficial)
> :> transliteration into 7-bit ascii would be nice (ch sh zh is so nice,
but
> :> conflicts with h
>
> : Cz, sz, rz would look very slavic. Is there any problem with r+z?
>
Czech
> once did). All other slavic languages use breves (hacheks or whatever you
> call them) or cyrillic.
Indeed. I will use haches (or - as you call it - breves).
> r" is not in Mezhdja.
No, r" is only found in Czechian, AFAIK. Many other Slavic languages has
just an r, for example: Czechian tr"i, Polish trzy, Russian tri, and so are
many other Slavic languages.
> But I agree cz sz zz (or zs) are less ambiguous than ch sh zh (when there
> is already h in the language)
>
> btw what about this transliteration? (I am using it for russian):
> a b v g d e zh z i j k l m n o p r s t u f x c ch sh ju ja
> (notice the x for /x/)
> This is completely unambiguous.
Indeed, but by replacinig the h by hacheks.
--
Hans Kamp
Antonio
> : Cz, sz, rz would look very slavic. Is there any problem with r+z?
>
> No, they would not. Only Polish and Sorbian(s) are using them (and Old
> Czech once did). All other slavic languages use breves (hacheks or
> whatever you call them) or cyrillic.
Well... yes. But we were discussing a way round hacVeks in the latin
alphabet, I think.
> r" is not in Mezhdja.
I meant rz to sound 'zh'; if r+z doesn't occur, then it's unambiguous.
A hacek isn't a breve, though they look similar. A breve you can find in
Romanian.
Are you Slovak? Can a monolingual Slovak make out something of Polish
(say, spoken slowly)?
--
@NtOnju mArkS
Plant Systematics & Life History
Hans Kamp
> A hacek isn't a breve, though they look similar. A breve you can find in
> Romanian.
>
> Are you Slovak? Can a monolingual Slovak make out something of Polish
> (say, spoken slowly)?
A Polish Esperantist told me that he could understand some words from some
Croatian people, that didn't speak Esperanto. Not quite strange for me,
while I know that Polish and Croatian are Slavic languages.
--
Hans Kamp
Paul J Kriha
>
>Radovan Garabik <gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk.invalid> schreef in
>berichtnieuws 93876550...@cdwork.cvt.stuba.sk...
>> In alt.language.artificial Antonio <ip20...@ip.pt> wrote:
>> : Radovan Garabik wrote:
>>
>> :> hachecks are good, maybe some sort of (additional, unofficial)
>> :> transliteration into 7-bit ascii would be nice (ch sh zh is so nice,
>but
>> :> conflicts with h
>>
>>
>> No, they would not. Only Polish and Sorbian(s) are using them (and Old
>Czech
>> once did). All other slavic languages use breves (hacheks or whatever you
>> call them) or cyrillic.
>
Why *would* you call hacheks breves? They are different
in all respects. Look different and signify completely
different concepts.
>> r" is not in Mezhdja.
>
>No, r" is only found in Czechian, AFAIK. Many other Slavic languages has
>just an r, for example: Czechian tr"i, Polish trzy, Russian tri, and so are
>many other Slavic languages.
The name of the language is Czech. The palatalized r is also found in
Polish. The Polish rz is almost the same as Czech r + hachek.
>> But I agree cz sz zz (or zs) are less ambiguous than ch sh zh (when there
>> is already h in the language)
So, what's your orthography for other palatalized consonants and vowels,
d n r and t, e? :-)
Paul JK
>> btw what about this transliteration? (I am using it for russian):
>> a b v g d e zh z i j k l m n o p r s t u f x c ch sh ju ja
>> (notice the x for /x/)
>> This is completely unambiguous.
>
>Indeed, but by replacinig the h by hacheks.
>
--
Know what's weird? Day by day nothing seems to
change, but pretty soon everything is different.
Radovan Garabik
: Why *would* you call hacheks breves? They are different
: in all respects. Look different and signify completely
: different concepts.
ok, I am calling them carrons now :-)
Because hacheck is a Czech word. When speaking english, I want to use the
english equivalent (otherwise I can speak about "makchens" and no-one knows
it is the same as hacheck)
:>> r" is not in Mezhdja.
:>
:>No, r" is only found in Czechian, AFAIK. Many other Slavic languages has
:>just an r, for example: Czechian tr"i, Polish trzy, Russian tri, and so are
:>many other Slavic languages.
: The name of the language is Czech. The palatalized r is also found in
: Polish. The Polish rz is almost the same as Czech r + hachek.
however, in Polish it is pronounced (nowadays) as zh
:>> But I agree cz sz zz (or zs) are less ambiguous than ch sh zh (when there
:>> is already h in the language)
: So, what's your orthography for other palatalized consonants and vowels,
: d n r and t, e? :-)
we are speaking about mezhdja, it does not have (probably) palatalized
consonants other than before ja, ju.
e" is not palatalized e, it is just a clever way of palatalizing previous
consonant.
Radovan Garabik
: Radovan Garabik wrote:
:> : Cz, sz, rz would look very slavic. Is there any problem with r+z?
:>
:> No, they would not. Only Polish and Sorbian(s) are using them (and Old
:> Czech once did). All other slavic languages use breves (hacheks or
:> whatever you call them) or cyrillic.
: Well... yes. But we were discussing a way round hacVeks in the latin
: alphabet, I think.
:
:> r" is not in Mezhdja.
: I meant rz to sound 'zh'; if r+z doesn't occur, then it's unambiguous.
: A hacek isn't a breve, though they look similar. A breve you can find in
: Romanian.
: Are you Slovak? Can a monolingual Slovak make out something of Polish
: (say, spoken slowly)?
Yes, I am Slovak, but as I speak a bit Polish, I can't reliably answer you
this :-)
(I started by reading a Polish book _without_ dictionary or any other
help... after a few pages I could follow the text, after two books I
did understand almost everything from "not so fast" spoken polish in movies
etc...)
Polish would not be so different from Slovak (or Czech), but it has really
mangled orthography and pronunciation.. once you get used to it, you
understand a lot.
Radovan Garabik
:>
:>Indeed, but by replacinig the h by hacheks.
:>
I was talking about the case when you have only 7 bit ascii available.
(the original article has already disappeared from my news server...)
Peter T. Daniels
> : Are you Slovak? Can a monolingual Slovak make out something of Polish
> : (say, spoken slowly)?
>
> Yes, I am Slovak, but as I speak a bit Polish, I can't reliably answer you
> this :-)
> (I started by reading a Polish book _without_ dictionary or any other
> help... after a few pages I could follow the text, after two books I
> did understand almost everything from "not so fast" spoken polish in movies
> etc...)
>
> Polish would not be so different from Slovak (or Czech), but it has really
> mangled orthography and pronunciation.. once you get used to it, you
> understand a lot.
It's usually said that all the Slavic languages are mutually
intelligible, with about that much effort (i.e., not much). But one
lexicostatistical study suggests Slovenian is quite distinctive -- how
do you feel about Slovenian?
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@worldnet.att.net
Peter T. Daniels
>
> In alt.language.artificial Paul J Kriha <re-move...@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
>
> : in all respects. Look different and signify completely
> : different concepts.
>
> ok, I am calling them carrons now :-)
> Because hacheck is a Czech word. When speaking english, I want to use the
> english equivalent (otherwise I can speak about "makchens" and no-one knows
> it is the same as hacheck)
The English word is hachek. It's often spelled hacek, but I think that's
silly.
The most common name for breve is "short mark" (and for macron is "long
mark"), left over from high school Latin.
N.Aliic' ~{3I9zJ@=gSoU_!!~}
>what's wrong with writing esperanto sounds with slovak equivalents?
nothing ; I just don't know how to write slovak .
>uhm.. that's not ISO latin 2
>latin 2 is this:
> latin2 : è ð x ¾ ¹ ú
i had no latin2 font installed on my free agent
for testing it .
Radovan Garabik
: Radovan Garabik wrote:
:>
:> Polish would not be so different from Slovak (or Czech), but it has really
:> mangled orthography and pronunciation.. once you get used to it, you
:> understand a lot.
: It's usually said that all the Slavic languages are mutually
: intelligible, with about that much effort (i.e., not much). But one
: lexicostatistical study suggests Slovenian is quite distinctive -- how
: do you feel about Slovenian?
Slovenian I understand a bit better than e.g. Serbocroatian[1], maybe it is
because of the vocabulary.
I am able to follow the TV news in Serbocroatian, but not to watch movies,
bulgarian is a bit more difficult to follow because of lack of inflections,
but I still can make something out of radio broadcast (again, news)
I can't comment on ukrainian and belorussian - I understand a lot of them,
but I already speak some Russian (ukrainian seems to me like russian with
a lot of polish and slovak words, which makes it easy to understand)
There are a lot of young people leaving to Russia for 3 month from this
university. Routinely they leave with almost none knowleadge of russian (it
is some time since russian was compulsory in elementary schools) and return
with good working knowleadge of russian (and russian slang :-))
[1] I know there are officialy 3 languages now...
Radovan Garabik
: Radovan Garabik wrote:
:>
:>
:> : Why *would* you call hacheks breves? They are different
:> : in all respects. Look different and signify completely
:> : different concepts.
:>
:> ok, I am calling them carrons now :-)
:> Because hacheck is a Czech word. When speaking english, I want to use the
:> english equivalent (otherwise I can speak about "makchens" and no-one knows
:> it is the same as hacheck)
: The English word is hachek. It's often spelled hacek, but I think that's
: silly.
that's the original czech spelling (with hachek over c and accute accent
over a). What's the origin of English word hachek? Is it really from Czech?
And is it valid when talking about other languages then?
And what is carron?
(sorry for a lot of questions.. I would like to know answers...)
For example during high school lessons of slovak language and literature, we
were taught that it is incorrect to use the word ma:kc"en" (the slovak for
hachek) to describe hacheks in czech words... they are not ma:kc"en"s, but
ha'c"eks...
: The most common name for breve is "short mark" (and for macron is "long
: mark"), left over from high school Latin.
--
Radovan Garabik
: Radovan Garabik wrote in message <93904186...@cdwork.cvt.stuba.sk>... :> : The name of the language is Czech. The palatalized r is also found in
:> : Polish. The Polish rz is almost the same as Czech r + hachek.
:>
:>however, in Polish it is pronounced (nowadays) as zh
: Polish speakers I've known have pronounced it more like the Czech sound you
: mention.
When I watch polish TV, is sounds to me more like zh than r".
And I think officialy it is considered the same sound as z. (z with dot
above)
PJS
>In alt.language.artificial Paul J Kriha <re-move...@actrix.gen.nz>
wrote:
>
> : in all respects. Look different and signify completely
> : different concepts.
>
>ok, I am calling them carrons now :-)
>Because hacheck is a Czech word. When speaking english, I want to use the
>english equivalent (otherwise I can speak about "makchens" and no-one knows
>it is the same as hacheck)
>
> :>
> :>just an r, for example: Czechian tr"i, Polish trzy, Russian tri, and so
are
> :>many other Slavic languages.
>
> : Polish. The Polish rz is almost the same as Czech r + hachek.
>
>however, in Polish it is pronounced (nowadays) as zh
------------
Polish speakers I've known have pronounced it more like the Czech sound you
mention.
---
Puritanism - the haunting fear that someone, somewhere
may be happy.
- H.L. Mencken
Peter T. Daniels
> :> ok, I am calling them carrons now :-)
> :> Because hacheck is a Czech word. When speaking english, I want to use the
> :> english equivalent (otherwise I can speak about "makchens" and no-one knows
> :> it is the same as hacheck)
>
> : The English word is hachek. It's often spelled hacek, but I think that's
> : silly.
>
> that's the original czech spelling (with hachek over c and accute accent
> over a). What's the origin of English word hachek? Is it really from Czech?
> And is it valid when talking about other languages then?
Of course it is. Are only French people allowed to lounge on American
chaise longues?
> And what is carron?
I've never seen it outside lists of character names like Unicode. It's
not in the Merriam-Webster 10th Collegiate.
> (sorry for a lot of questions.. I would like to know answers...)
If you don't ask, how will you learn?
> For example during high school lessons of slovak language and literature, we
> were taught that it is incorrect to use the word ma:kc"en" (the slovak for
> hachek) to describe hacheks in czech words... they are not ma:kc"en"s, but
> ha'c"eks...
Maybe it's one of the few differences between Czech and Slovak ...
PJS
<93904186...@cdwork.cvt.stuba.sk>...
> :>In alt.language.artificial Paul J Kriha <re-move...@actrix.gen.nz>
> : wrote:
> :>
> :> : Polish. The Polish rz is almost the same as Czech r + hachek.
> :>
> :>however, in Polish it is pronounced (nowadays) as zh
> : ------------
> : Polish speakers I've known have pronounced it more like the Czech sound
you
> : mention.
>
>And I think officialy it is considered the same sound as z. (z with dot
>above)
--------------
Radovan Garabik
: Radovan Garabik wrote:
:> For example during high school lessons of slovak language and literature, we
:> were taught that it is incorrect to use the word ma:kc"en" (the slovak for
:> hachek) to describe hacheks in czech words... they are not ma:kc"en"s, but
:> ha'c"eks...
: Maybe it's one of the few differences between Czech and Slovak ...
yes.. the slovak term is ma:kc"en", the czech one ha'c"ek.
Thew point is, when in Slovak it is incorrect to address the czech ha'c"ek
as ma:kc"en" (even if they are the same diacritic sign), then when applied
to English the term hachek is valid only when speaking about the Czech
language...
: --
: Peter T. Daniels gram...@worldnet.att.net
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
| Radovan Garabik http://melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk/~garabik |
| __..--^^^--..__ garabik @ fmph . uniba . sk |
-----------------------------------------------------------
Hans Kamp
> : Radovan Garabik wrote:
>
>
> :> For example during high school lessons of slovak language and literature, we
> :> were taught that it is incorrect to use the word ma:kc"en" (the slovak for
> :> hachek) to describe hacheks in czech words... they are not ma:kc"en"s, but
> :> ha'c"eks...
>
> : Maybe it's one of the few differences between Czech and Slovak ...
>
> yes.. the slovak term is ma:kc"en", the czech one ha'c"ek.
> Thew point is, when in Slovak it is incorrect to address the czech ha'c"ek
> as ma:kc"en" (even if they are the same diacritic sign), then when applied
> to English the term hachek is valid only when speaking about the Czech
> language...
--
Kresimir Blazina
: Antonio <ip20...@ip.pt> schreef in berichtnieuws 37F5536C...@ip.pt...
:> A hacek isn't a breve, though they look similar. A breve you can find in
:> Romanian.
:>
:> Are you Slovak? Can a monolingual Slovak make out something of Polish
:> (say, spoken slowly)?
: A Polish Esperantist told me that he could understand some words from some
: Croatian people, that didn't speak Esperanto. Not quite strange for me,
: while I know that Polish and Croatian are Slavic languages.
Not just some. Vast majority of vocabularies are connected quite closely
in all slavonic languages.
Radovan Garabik
:> yes.. the slovak term is ma:kc"en", the czech one ha'c"ek.
:> Thew point is, when in Slovak it is incorrect to address the czech ha'c"ek
:> as ma:kc"en" (even if they are the same diacritic sign), then when applied
:> to English the term hachek is valid only when speaking about the Czech
:> language...
: And what about the umlaut-like dots above (in this posting after) the a in mäkcen?
that's called prehla'ska in Slovak, and does not occur in Czech.
IIRC, during lessons of german we never used the term prehla'ska for german
umlauted letters... we were talking about umlauts.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Paul J Kriha
>In alt.language.artificial Hans Kamp <hans...@introweb.nl> wrote:
> : Radovan Garabik <gar...@center.fmph.uniba.sk.spam> schreef in berichtnieuws
7tim1o$kp1$1...@sunnews.cern.ch...
>
> :> yes.. the slovak term is ma:kc"en", the czech one ha'c"ek.
> :> Thew point is, when in Slovak it is incorrect to address the czech ha'c"ek
> :> as ma:kc"en" (even if they are the same diacritic sign), then when applied
> :> to English the term hachek is valid only when speaking about the Czech
> :> language...
It is incorrect to refer to the Czech hachek as ma:kc"en" because its
function is *not* *quite* the same, regardless of what is looks like.
The English word hachek (gosh, my EOD spells it 'hacek' with all the
Czech diacriticals, that's a bit going too far, isn't it?)
is used to describe an orthographic feature that exist in several
West and South Slavic languages.
(btw, the adjectives Czech and Slovak are spelled with capital C and S
respectively).
> : And what about the umlaut-like dots above (in this posting after) the a in mäkcen?
>
>that's called prehla'ska in Slovak, and does not occur in Czech.
>IIRC, during lessons of german we never used the term prehla'ska for german
>umlauted letters... we were talking about umlauts.
Here is another difference between the Cech and Slovak.
The Czechs freely use the term pr^ehla'ska for German umlauted letters. :-)
Paul JK.
Paul J Kriha
>Radovan Garabik wrote:
>
>
>> : (say, spoken slowly)?
>>
>> this :-)
>> (I started by reading a Polish book _without_ dictionary or any other
>> help... after a few pages I could follow the text, after two books I
>> did understand almost everything from "not so fast" spoken polish in movies
>> etc...)
>>
>> mangled orthography and pronunciation.. once you get used to it, you
>> understand a lot.
>
>It's usually said that all the Slavic languages are mutually
>intelligible, with about that much effort (i.e., not much). But one
>lexicostatistical study suggests Slovenian is quite distinctive -- how
>do you feel about Slovenian?
No, that is not so. Some Czech speakers find Slovenian and Croatian
slightly easier to understand than Polish even though Polish is
supposed to be in the same sub-family as Czech.
My Polish friends tell me that they find the Polish-Slovak
or Polish-MoravianSlovak conversation much easier than Polish-Czech.
Slovenian dual/plural can be tricky for a person who never formally learned
Slovenian. I find it easier to listen to spoken Slovenian poetry than
reading it. Some love poems are quite beautiful, but when a third
person steps in it all suddenly turns into complete double-dutch. :-)
Radovan Garabik
: It is incorrect to refer to the Czech hachek as ma:kc"en" because its
: function is *not* *quite* the same, regardless of what is looks like.
: The English word hachek (gosh, my EOD spells it 'hacek' with all the
: Czech diacriticals, that's a bit going too far, isn't it?)
when there are words like ro^le and nai:ve...
English is a big mess.
: is used to describe an orthographic feature that exist in several
: West and South Slavic languages.
well, but Czech ha'c"ek has a different function than Slovak
ma:kc"en", not speaking about Croatian krac"ica... it is incorrect to
refer to the Slovak ma:kc"en" as hachek (your own words :-))
: (btw, the adjectives Czech and Slovak are spelled with capital C and S
: respectively).
I know, I am just too lazy to type it properly...
:> : And what about the umlaut-like dots above (in this posting after) the a in mäkcen?
:>
:>that's called prehla'ska in Slovak, and does not occur in Czech.
:>IIRC, during lessons of german we never used the term prehla'ska for german
:>umlauted letters... we were talking about umlauts.
: Here is another difference between the Cech and Slovak.
: The Czechs freely use the term pr^ehla'ska for German umlauted letters. :-)
I asked a few Hugarians around... it seems that during lessons of Slovak
language (in Hungarian schools, and in Hungarian language), they used the
Slovak terms for ma:kc"en" and dl'z"en" (dl'z"en" looks like accute accent
and does exist in Hungarian, of course it is called differently)
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
| Radovan Garabik http://melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk/~garabik/ |
| __..--^^^--..__ gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba. |
--------------------------------------------------------------
Philip 'Yes, that's my address' Newton
(Radovan Garabik) wrote:
>In alt.language.artificial Hans Kamp <hans...@introweb.nl> wrote:
> : And what about the umlaut-like dots above (in this posting after) the a in mäkcen?
>
>that's called prehla'ska in Slovak, and does not occur in Czech.
_The World's Writing Systems_, in the article "Languages of Eastern
and Southern Europe" by Bernard Comrie, calls the Slovak letter ä "[a
z dvoma botkami] 'a with two dots'". Is that what you call it? Or do
you say something like "a z prehla'skem"?
(And is the sound 'ny' spelled n-with-tilde or n-with-hacek? The same
article writes the letter n-with-tilde (Ñ ñ), but calls the letter Ô ô
"[o z voka:Nom] o with vokán" with the last letter being n-with-hacek,
and [N] being n-with-hooked-left-leg (voiced palatal nasal).)
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <nospam...@gmx.net>
Brian M. Scott
[...]
> when there are words like ro^le and nai:ve...
> English is a big mess.
Nowadays they're usually written in English without the diacritical
marks.
[...]
Brian M. Scott
Radovan Garabik
: _The World's Writing Systems_, in the article "Languages of Eastern
: and Southern Europe" by Bernard Comrie, calls the Slovak letter ä "[a
: z dvoma botkami] 'a with two dots'". Is that what you call it? Or do
is there pronounciation in []? anyway, it sounds better with dvomi instead
of dvoma
: you say something like "a z prehla'skem"?
it is possible to call <a s dvomi bodkami> it just sounds... hmm...
uneducated :-) (but commonly used)
The correct way is <prehla'skovane' a>,
<a s prehla'skou> is what you have in mind, but it is not used.
: (And is the sound 'ny' spelled n-with-tilde or n-with-hacek? The same
n-with-hacek (if you call it hacek)
: article writes the letter n-with-tilde (Ń ń), but calls the letter Ô ô
: "[o z voka:Nom] o with vokán" with the last letter being n-with-hacek,
: and [N] being n-with-hooked-left-leg (voiced palatal nasal).)
n-with-tilde does not exist, o^ is indeed <o s voka'n"om>
(n" stands for n-with-hacek)
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
| Radovan Garabik http://melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk/~garabik/ |
Philip 'Yes, that's my address' Newton
(Radovan Garabik) wrote:
>In sci.lang Philip 'Yes, that's my address' Newton <nospam...@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> : _The World's Writing Systems_, in the article "Languages of Eastern
> : and Southern Europe" by Bernard Comrie, calls the Slovak letter ä "[a
> : z dvoma botkami] 'a with two dots'". Is that what you call it? Or do
>
>is there pronounciation in []? anyway, it sounds better with dvomi instead
>of dvoma
Yes. There's a short table of the alphabet, giving the letter's shape,
phonetic value (in []), and name (in []).
> : you say something like "a z prehla'skem"?
>
>it is possible to call <a s dvomi bodkami> it just sounds... hmm...
>uneducated :-) (but commonly used)
>The correct way is <prehla'skovane' a>,
><a s prehla'skou> is what you have in mind, but it is not used.
I was guessing :)
> : (And is the sound 'ny' spelled n-with-tilde or n-with-hacek? The same
>
>n-with-hacek (if you call it hacek)
Sorry. I had forgotten the Slovak term. [looks] ma:kc"en", right?
> : article writes the letter n-with-tilde (Ń ń), but calls the letter Ô ô
> : "[o z voka:Nom] o with vokán" with the last letter being n-with-hacek,
> : and [N] being n-with-hooked-left-leg (voiced palatal nasal).)
>
>n-with-tilde does not exist, o^ is indeed <o s voka'n"om>
>(n" stands for n-with-hacek)
So they got that letter wrong. Woops!
Thanks for your answers!
Sergei Pokrovsky
...
> yes.. the slovak term is ma:kc"en", the czech one ha'c"ek.
On the ground of its form I'd expect "m:ak>ce>n" to be any kind of
soft mark, e.g. also the diacritical in [l'] should be a "softener",
but it is not a "h'a>cek". Do you call such a softening apostrophe
"m:ak>ce>n" as well?
--
Sergei Pokrovsky
Radovan Garabik
: gar...@center.fmph.uniba.sk.spam (Radovan Garabik) writes:
: ...
of course... over l,d,t,n it is indeed "softener" (equivalent to russian
mjagkij znak), it does not matter if it looks like apostrophe or hook
(in handwritting it is always hook), after s,z,c its function is different,
but it's always called ma:kc"en", and in czech it's always called ha'c"ek,
even over r and e, where it has yet another function
---
--------------------------------------------------------------
| Radovan Garabik http://melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk/~garabik/ |
| __..--^^^--..__ gar...@melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba. |
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ilya Talev
Antonio wrote:
> I meant rz to sound 'zh'; if r+z doesn't occur, then it's unambiguous.
"r+z" does occur in Russian, for instance, as in /merzost'/ (=abomination),
/merzavec/ (=scoundrel), /merzlota/ (=frozen ground), etc.
IT
m76
Excuse me, what was it about? (I can't see other postings in this thread.)
--===[ marcin76 ]================[ phi9...@studserv.uni-leipzig.de ]===--