Dear Slavsk Beseda censors,
please leave this text untouched. I write it at the bidding of Mark Hucko who ecouraged all reformers to sum up their proposals.
-------------
ALPHABET AND PRONUNCIATION
GS-Slovianski can be written both in Latin and in Cyrilic alphabet:
a, b, c, cj, d, e, f, g, h, i, k, l, m, n, o, p, r, s, sj, t, u, v, z, zj
а, б, ц, ч, д, е, ф, г, х, и, к, л, м, н, о, п, р, с, ш, т, у, в, з, ж
The letter "j"/"й" is abolished. The letter "i"/"и" can be pronounced either [i] or [j], depending on surrounding consonants/vowels and the speaker's comfort.
ROOTS
There are two kinds of roots:
- Nominal roots end usually in a consonant: "lud", "zjen", "pes", "dom", "knig", "vec", "noc", "per", "pism", "velik", "dobr", "malink", "nov", "spokoin", "dolg". Only a few roots end in a vowel: "kano", "iglu", "histori".
- Verbal roots end in any vowel except "o": "pisa", "vide", "govori", "mogu".
NOUNS
- Singular nouns derived from nominal roots take the "-a" ending: "luda", "pesa", "doma", "kniga", "veca", "noca", "pera", "pisma", "velika", "dobra", "malinka", "nova", "spokoina", "dolga", "kanoa", "iglua", "historia".
- The "-a" ending can be almost always elised. It isn't recommended to elise it:
* when the root ends in more than one consonant ("pism", "dobr", "malink", "dolg")
* when the root ends in a voiced consonant which has got an unvoiced counterpart ("knig", "nov")
* when the root ends in a vowel ("kano", "iglu", "histori")
* when the root expresses a clearly female person ("zjen")
With a maximal use of elision, the example nouns would look like this: "luda", "pes", "dom", "kniga", "vec", "noc", "per", "pisma", "velik", "dobra", "malinka", "nova", "spokoin", "dolga", "kanoa", "iglua", "historia".
- Plural nouns are formed by replacing of the "-a" (no matter if it is elised or not) with "-i": "ludi", "pesi", "domi", "knigi", "veci", "noci", "peri", "pismi", "veliki", "dobri", "malinki", "novi", "spokoini", "dolgi", "kanoi", "iglui", "historii".
- Nouns derived from verbal roots take the "-nia" ending: "pisania", "videnia", "govorinia", "mogunia". These nouns express the name of the action of the verb. These nouns are treated as any other nouns with the "-a" ending. For example, the plural is: "pisanii", "videnii", "govorinii", "mogunii".
ACCUSATIVE
- Accusative marks a direct object. It has to be used in sentences where object isn't placed after subject. Depending on the speaker's will, it may (but doesn't have to) be used also in sentences where object is placed after subject.
- Accusative ending of singular nouns is "-u": "ludu", "pesu", "domu", "knigu", "vecu", "nocu", "peru", "pismu", "veliku", "dobru", "malinku", "novu", "spokoinu", "dolgu", "kanou", "igluu", "historiu", "pisaniu", "videniu", "govoriniu", "moguniu".
- Accusative ending of plural nouns is "-ov": "ludov", "pesov", "domov", "knigov", "vecov", "nocov", "perov", "pismov", "velikov", "dobrov", "malinkov", "novov", "spokoinov", "dolgov", "kanoov", "igluov", "historiov", "pisaniov", "videniov", "govoriniov", "moguniov".
NEUTRAL NUMBER
- When the speaker isn't familiar with the concept of grammatical number (e.g. when he/she is Japanese), when we speak about things whose quantity is irrelevant (water, food, coal) or when we speak generally with no importance of the number of described things, one can use neutral number. This number says absolutely nothing about the quantity of things we speak about.
- Neutral number ending of nouns is "-e": "lude", "pese", "dome", "knige", "vece", "noce", "pere", "pisme", "velike", "dobre", "malinke", "nove", "spokoine", "dolge", "kanoe", "iglue", "historie", "pisanie", "videnie", "govorinie", "mogunie".
- Neutral number ending of accusative nouns is "-eg": "ludeg", "peseg", "domeg", "knigeg", "veceg", "noceg", "pereg", "pismeg", "velikeg", "dobreg", "malinkeg", "noveg", "spokoineg", "dolgeg", "kanoeg", "iglueg", "historieg", "pisanieg", "videnieg", "govorinieg", "mogunieg".
OTHER CASES
- Genitive and dative are replaced by prepositions.
genitive - "oz" (of)
dative - "da" (to)
ADJECTIVES
- Adjectives end in "-ih": "ludih", "pesih", "domih", "knigih", "vecih", "nocih", "perih", "pismih", "velikih", "dobrih", "malinkih", "novih", "spokoinih", "dolgih", "kanoih", "igluih", "historiih".
ADVERBS
- Adverbs are derived from nominal roots by "-o" ending: "ludo", "peso", "domo", "knigo", "veco", "noco", "pero", "pismo", "veliko", "dobro", "malinko", "novo", "spokoino", "dolgo", "kanoo", "igluo", "historio".
COMPARING OF ADJECTIVES AND ADVERBS
- The comparative is formed by means of the prefix "visje": "visje-dolgih", "visje-noco", "visje-peso", "visje-novih", "visje-ludo", "visje-nocih".
- The superlative is formed by means of the prefix "nai": "nai-dolgih", "nai-noco", "nai-peso", "nai-novih", "nai-ludo", "nai-nocih".
A MIDWAY BETWEEN ADJECTIVES AND ADVERBS
- The same as Slovio, GS-Slovianski also has got the form that helps those who have problems with grammar. It ends in "-oh": "dolgoh", "nocoh", "pesoh", "novoh", "ludoh".
PERSONAL AND POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS
First person (I/we):
SINGULAR NEUTRAL PLURAL
NOMINATIV ia ma mi
GENITIV moi moii nasj
DATIV mne nama nam
AKUSATIV menia na nas
Second person (you):
SINGULAR NEUTRAL PLURAL
NOMINATIV vu ve vi
GENITIV voi vaiu vasj
DATIV vebe vama vam
AKUSATIV vebia va vas
Third person singular masculine (he):
SINGULAR
NOMINATIV on
GENITIV iago
DATIV imu
AKUSATIV ego
Third person singular feminine (she):
SINGULAR
NOMINATIV ona
GENITIV iae
DATIV ei
AKUSATIV iu
Third person singular neuter (it):
SINGULAR
NOMINATIV ono
GENITIV ogo
DATIV omu
AKUSATIV ho
Third person neutral and plural (they):
NEUTRAL PLURAL
NOMINATIV one oni
GENITIV onu ohni
DATIV oma om
AKUSATIV oie oh
self:
NEUTRAL
NOMINATIV sebe
GENITIV svoi
DATIV sebu
AKUSATIV seba
(Iz cjazjektori svoi brati iest Anton nai-razumih.
Ona lubovit ego visje cjem seba.
Ona kupala seba vo svoi komnat.)
one:
NEUTRAL
NOMINATIV se
GENITIV si
DATIV su
AKUSATIV sa
(Oni bili taskolko ne-priatih, zje se ne-mogule domovot so oni. They were so unpleasant that one couldn't live with them.
Grazih vozduh nemocot sa.
Zlocjiniconiki moguiu kradit si odeveg.
Ne-kritikiite sa, ibo se bi mogul tozjo va kritikit.)
- The basic second person pronouns show neither politeness (vykat'-ing) nor intimacy (tykat'-ing). To express politeness, one can replace the inital "v" with "pan": "panu", "pane", "pani" etc. To express intimacy, one can replace the initial "v" with "t": "tu", "te", "ti" etc.
- To express the sex of the speaker/addresse in the first or second person, one can add the prefix "i-" for male sex or "e-" for female sex: "iia, ima, imi, ivu, ive, ivi, eia, ema, emi, evu, eve, evi".
- To express the sex in the second person neutral and plural, one can replace the inital "o-" with "i-" for male sex or "e-" for female sex: "ine", "ini", "ene", "eni" etc.
- The pronoun "ono" expresses not only inanimate things, but also animate people, animals etc. whose sex is unknown or unimportant.
NUMERALS
0 - nul
1 - edin
2 - dve
3 - tri
4 - cjetiri
5 - pat
6 - sjest
7 - sedem
8 - osem
9 - devet
10 - desat
100 - sto
1 000 - tisic
Numerals from 11 to 19 are formed by adding "-nast" to the numeral from 1 to 9:
11 - edinnast
12 - dvanast
13 - trinast
14 - cjetirinast
15 - patnast
16 - sjestnast
17 - sedemnast
18 - osemnast
19 - devetnast
Other numerals are formed simply:
50 - patdesat
51 - patdesat edin
68 - sjestdesat osem
70 - sedemdesat
111 - sto edinnast
200 - dvesto
300 - tristo
597 - patsto devetdesat sedem
etc.
Ordinal numerals are formed by adding of the adjectival ending:
9th - devetih
13th - trinastih
60th - sjestdesatih
300th - tristoih
Ordinal numerals from 0 to 4 are formed irregularly:
0th - nultih
1st - pervih
2nd - drugih
3rd - tretih
4th - cjetiretih
Fractions are formed by the suffix "-in-" and are treated like all other nouns:
1/9 - devetin(a)
1/13 - trinastin(a)
1/60 - sjestdesatin(a)
1/300 - tristoin(a)
3/9 - tri devetini
3/13 - tri trinastini
38/60 - tridesat osem sjestdesatini
146/300 - sto tridesat sjest tristoini
Fractions from 2 to 4 are formed irregularly:
1/2 - polovin(a)
1/3 - tretin(a)
1/4 - cjetirin(a)
VERBS
- Verb stem derived from verbal root is identical with the verbal root: "pisa", "vide", "govori", "mogu".
- Verb stem derived from nominal root is formed by adding "o" to the nominal root: "pero", "belo".
- Infinitives are formed by adding "-t" to the verb stem: "pisat", "videt", "govorit", "mogut", "perot" (to write with a pen), "belot" (to whiten).
- In present tense, following endings are added to the verb stem:
first person singular - "-m": ia pisam, ia videm, ia govorim, ia mogum, ia perom, ia belom
second person singular, intimate form - "-sj": tu pisasj, tu videsj, tu govorisj, tu mogusj, tu perosj, tu belosj
third person singular: "-t": on pisat, ona videt, ono govorit, on mogut, ona perot, ono belot
first person neutral and plural - "-mo": mi pisamo, mi videmo, mi govorimo, mi mogumo, mi peromo, mi belomo
second person (except singular intimate form) - "-te": vi pisate, vi videte, vi govorite, vi mogute, vi perote, vi belote
third person neutral and plural - "-iu": oni pisaiu, oni videiu, oni govoriiu, oni moguiu, oni peroiu, oni beloiu
Those who are unfamiliar with conjugation according to person and number can always use "-t" in present tense.
- In past tense, there are five endings:
singular - "-lo": ia pisalo, tu pisalo, ono pisalo
neutral - "-le": ma pisale, ve pisale, one pisale
plural - "-li": mi pisali, vi pisali, oni pisali
singular masculine - "-l": ia pisal, tu pisal, on pisal
singular feminine - "-la": ia pisala, tu pisala, ona pisala
Those who are unfamiliar with sex distinction can forget the "-l" and "-la" endings and use always "-lo" in singular. Those, who are unfamiliar with conjugation according to number, can always use "-le".
- The future tense is formed by the future form of the verb "to be" + infinitive:
ia budem pisat
tu budesj pisat
ono budet pisat
mi budemo pisat
vi budete pisat
oni budu pisat
Those, who are unfamiliar with conjugation of the verb "to be" according to person and number, can always use "budu".
- Conditional is formed by "bi" + past tense form of the verb:
ia bi pisalo
tu bi pisalo
on bi pisal
ona bi pisala
ono bi pisalo
ma bi pisale
ve bi pisale
one bi pisale
mi bi pisali
vi bi pisali
oni bi pisali
- Past conditional is formed by the past tense form of the verb "to be" + conditional form:
ia bilo bi pisalo
tu bilo bi pisalo
on bil bi pisal
ona bila bi pisala
ono bilo bi pisalo
ma bile bi pisale
ve bile bi pisale
one bile bi pisale
mi bili bi pisali
vi bili bi pisali
oni bili bi pisali
- Imperative is formed by adding endings to the verb stem:
first person - "-ime": mi pisaime, mi videime, mi govoriime, mi moguime, mi peroime, mi beloime
second person singular, intimate form - "-i": tu pisai, tu videi, tu govorii, tu mogui, tu peroi, tu beloi
second person (except singular intimate form) - "-ite": vi pisaite, vi videite, vi govoriite, vi moguite, vi peroite, vi beloite
third person (rarely used) - zero ending: on pisa, ona vide, ono govori, one mogu, one pero, oni belo
NEUTRAL TENSE
- Some people (e.g. the Chinese) are unfamiliar with the concept of verb tense. For the Chinese, it's simply irrelevant when the action happened / happens / will happen. But even we Slavs sometimes speak generally with no importance of the tense. So besides the three classical tenses, I would introduce the fourth tense (as an option; it wouldn't be mandatory at all). It's ending could be e.g. non-Slavic "-s":
ia pisas
tu pisas
ono pisas
mi pisas
vi pisas
oni pisas
VERB "TO BE"
- The verb "to be" is the only irregular verb.
- The infinitive is "bit".
- Present tense:
first person singular - ia iesam
second person singular, intimate form - tu iesi
third person singular - on iest, ona iest, ono iest
first person neutral and plural - mi iesmo
second person (except singular intimate form) - vi ieste
third person neutral and plural - oni iesu
Those who are unfamiliar with conjugation according to person and number can always use "iesi" in present tense.
- In the past tense, there are five forms:
singular - ia bilo, tu bilo, ono bilo
neutral - ma bile, ve bile, one bile
plural - mi bili, vi bili, oni bili
singular masculine - ia bil, tu bil, on bil
singular feminine - ia bila, tu bila, ona bila
Those who are unfamiliar with sex distinction can forget the "bil" and "bila" and use always "bilo" in singular. Those, who are unfamiliar with conjugation according to number, can always use "bile".
- The future tense has got these forms:
first person singular - ia budem
second person singular, intimate form - tu budesj
third person singular - on budet, ona budet, ono budet
first person neutral and plural - mi budemo
second person (except singular intimate form) - vi budete
third person neutral and plural - oni budu
Those, who are unfamiliar with conjugation of the verb "to be" according to person and number, can always use "budu".
- Conditional is formed by "bi" + past tense form:
ia bi bilo
tu bi bilo
on bi bil
ona bi bila
ono bi bilo
ma bi bile
ve bi bile
one bi bile
mi bi bili
vi bi bili
oni bi bili
- Past conditional is formed by the past tense form of the verb "to be" + conditional form:
ia bilo bi bilo
tu bilo bi bilo
on bil bi bil
ona bila bi bila
ono bilo bi bilo
ma bile bi bile
ve bile bi bile
one bile bi bile
mi bili bi bili
vi bili bi bili
oni bili bi bili
- Imperative is formed this way:
first person - mi budimo
second person singular, intimate form - tu budi
second person (except singular intimate form) - vi budite
third person (rarely used) - on budo, ona budo, ono budo, one budo, oni budo
- The neutral tense has got these forms:
ia es
tu es
ono es
mi es
vi es
oni es
SOME BASIC SUFFIXES
- Suffixes are added either to verbal stem (nominal root + "o") or to verbal root.
- This list intends to be only a brief example about what the suffixes will look like, not a complete list of them.
-cj- - male (ucjitel > ucjitelocj, priatel > priatelocj)
-dl- - tool (rezit > rezidla)
-lk- - thing (novih > novolka, rezultit > rezultilka)
-ln- - room (cjaa > cjaolna, zabavat > zabavalna)
-n- - female (komunonista > komunonistona, ucjitel > ucjitelona)
-nan- - member (senat > senatonan)
-nek- - container (dengi > dengonek)
-nik- - person somehow related to the basic word (mlodih > mlodonik, robit > robinik)
-nist- - follower, adherent (komun > komunonista)
-sjti- - place, area (pesok > pesokosjtia, ucjit > ucjisjtia)
-tel - person professionaly related to the basic word (zuba > zubotel, ucjit > ucjitel)
-teln- - possible (vidit > viditelnih)
-v- - material, substance (dreva > drevova)
-va- - emphasising of the imperfective aspect, repeated or continual action (begit > begivania, molvit > molvivat)
-vost- - quality (priatel > priatelovosta, dobrih > dobrovosta)
VERBAL PARTICIPLES
- Verbal participles are derived from verbs but they don't work like verbs any more. Their basic form is an adjective.
- Passive participles are formed by verb stem + "n" + adjectival ending:
Ona iest lubovinih ot cjazjektori.
Kado otec molotil sinu, sin bil molotinih.
Avgusta budet moi mesiac nai-lubovinih.
Denge imanih bi bile visje-vazjnih cjem denge utratinih.
Vrobec ulovinih bilo bi bilo visje-dobrih cjem orel na krisja.
- Present active participles are formed by verb stem + "c" + adjectival ending:
Voda tecjicih iest visje-cjistih cjem voda ne-peremisticih.
Vremu pridicih nikta esjto znat.
Ozeru pokrivaiu listi plavacih.
On padal pod ehacih poezdu.
Cjazjekado, kado ona bila vernucih, ona bistro begila vo domu.
- Present active participles are formed by verb stem + "vsj" + adjectival ending:
Bozja prosto izvinit da luda grehivsjih ne-znaco.
Padavsjih luda ne-mogul stanit horo.
On bil skazavsjih mne pravdu.
- The participles can take the adverbial "-o" ending, then they express an act done by the same subject:
On pridil ko ia celo ne-ocjekano.
Docja idila, no sjepotico.
Naidivsjo iabloku ia edal ho.
- The participles can take the suffix "-nik-" to indicate a person:
Kado brat molotit sestru, brat iest moloticonik i sestra iest molotinonik.
On iest tolko edino-vremih lgavsjonik, no tu iesi cjazjekadih lgaconik.
- The participles can take the suffix "-lk-" to indicate a thing:
Ia ne-berim mnogo balinolkeg.
Toi rasticolka ne-budet produktot muku.
Ia darim ho tebe kako garanticolku oz moi vernunie.
(The suffix "-lk-" has got more passive than active meaning - thus the second and the third sentences should always look like this, while the first sentence could be simplified: "Ia ne-berim mnogo balilkeg.")
- The basic forms of the participles of the irregular verb "to be" are:
present active participle - buducjih (with regular derivations - buducjo, buducjonik, buducjolka)
past active participle - bivsjih (with regular derivations - bivsjo, bivsjonik, bivsjolka)
passive participle would have no sence
PREPOSITIONS
- Some basic prepositions look like this:
without - bez
with - so
above - nad
under - pod
near - pri
in - vo
out, from - iz
by - ot
by means of - posred
because of - pre
for - dla
universal preposition - ie
- Every preposition is always followed by the nominative. The same as in Slovio, the only exception serves to indicate a direction by means of the accusative:
Trebit egzistit zapadih doroga vo Indiu. Posle ogo naidinia mi moguli bit vo India.
Pes begilo vo domu. Posleo ono bilo vo dom.
Ia polozjil ho na vaiu stolu. Tepero ono iest na vaiu stol.
Ia hotem idit vo nebesih kroloniu. Posleo ia bi bil vo nebesih krolonia.
CORRELATIVES
ktora---- nektora---- liboktora---- niktora---- cjazjektora---- inoktora---- taktora-- ETA-tut-------- ETA-------- edvaktora---- samoktora----
kta------ nekta------ libokta------ nikta------ cjazjekta------ inokta------ takta---- TUTE-tut------- TUTE------- edvakta------ samokta------
cjte----- necjte----- libocjte----- nicjte----- cjazjecjte----- inocjte----- tacjte--- TOTA-tut------- TOTA------- edvacjte----- samocjte-----
kakih---- nekakih---- libokakih---- nikakih---- cjazjekakih---- inokakih---- takakih-- tamokakih-tut-- tamokakih-- edvakakih---- samokakih----
kado----- nekado----- libokado----- nikado----- cjazjekado----- inokado----- takado--- TEPERO--------- tamokado--- edvakado----- samokado-----
kako----- nekako----- libokako----- nikako----- cjazjekako----- inokako----- TAK------ tamokako-tut--- tamokako--- edvakako----- samokako-----
pre-cjte- pre-necjte- pre-libocjte- pre-nicjte- pre-cjazjecjte- pre-inocjte- BO------- pre-TOTA-tut--- pre-TOTA--- pre-edvacjte- pre-samocjte-
gdo------ negdo------ libogdo------ nigdo------ cjazjegdo------ inogdo------ tagdo---- TUTO----------- TAMO------- edvagdo------ samogdo------
skolko--- neskolko--- liboskolko--- niskolko--- cjazjeskolko--- inoskolko--- taskolko- tamoskolko-tut- tamoskolko- edvaskolko--- samoskolko---
cjoi----- necjoi----- libocjoi----- nicjoi----- cjazjecjoi----- inocjoi----- tacjoi--- tamocjoi-tut--- tamocjoi--- edvacjoi----- samocjoi-----
(The minus signs only format the table in this text file, spaces should be instead of them.)
- The correlatives in this table are ordered in the same way as in the corresponding Slovio table (
http://www.slovio.com/1/0.slovio/osnov.html ) so their meanings should be clear.
- The correlatives beginning in "samo-" mean "the same".
- Correlatives ending in "-a" (ktora, kta, ...) can be pluralised (ktori, kti), accusatived (ktoru, ktu) etc. the same as regular nouns.
- Correlatives ending in "-e" (cjte, ...) are in the neutral number. They can be accusatived. Thoretically, they can also be put into singular (cjta) or plural (cjti) but these forms are not likely to have some sence.
- Irregular forms are written in capital letters.
NAMES OF COUNTRIES AND PEOPLE
These names have got special roots, for example:
rus
brit
saudarab
uson
cjin
afgan
kub
palestin
latv
ind
irak
gruzin
ispan
sjveicar
Names of countries are formed by "-ia" ending and the result word is treated like any other noun (so it is "-iu" in accusative, "-ii" in plural etc.):
Rusia
Britia
Saudarabia
Usonia (USA)
Cjinia
Afgania
Kubia ("Kubia" is the state, "Kuba" is the island)
Palestinia
Latvia
India
Irakia
Gruzinia
Ispania
Sjveicaria
Common names of people related to the countries are formed by the suffix "-an" (and again, the result word is treated like any other noun, so the accusative is "-anu", plural "-ani" etc.):
rusan
britan
saudaraban
usonan
cjinan
afganan
kuban
palestinan
latvan
indan
irakan
gruzinan
ispanan
sjveicaran
These names will probably be used the most often, they are the most general. But there are two possible distinctions:
If one wants to express that the person belongs exactly to the ethnicity and nationality of the basic root (no matter where the person lives now), one can use the suffix "-onik":
rusonik
britonik
saudarabonik
usononik
cjinonik
afganonik
kubonik
palestinonik
latvonik
indonik
irakonik
gruzinonik
ispanonik
sjveicaronik
If one wants to express that the person lives in the particular country (whatever nationality and ethnicity the person may have), one can use the "-ian" suffix:
rusian
britian
saudarabian
usonian
cjinian
afganian
kubian
palestinian
latvian
indian
irakian
gruzinian
ispanian
sjveicarian
So for example a Chinese living in Russia can be called both "cjinonik" (but not "cjinian") and "rusian" (but not "rusonik"). But this person can be reffered to as either "cjinan" or "rusan".
PROPER NAMES
Proper names should always be written in their native alphabet and a pronunciation should be added in brackets. In a Latin-alphabet text, one should also add a Latin transliteration (or transcription) of the name if the original alphabet of the name isn't Latin. In a Cyrilic-alphabet text, one should also add a Cyrilic transliteration (or transcription) of the name if the original alphabet of the name isn't Cyrilic.
So every name should be written in two or three ways so that it could be always recognisable and further useable by the reader. One doesn't have to use all three parts:
* if technical limitations don't allow the writer to combine two alphabets in one text,
* if the writer doesn't know the original spelling, the correct prunciation or the required transliteration and if the writer isn't able to find the required information about the name,
* if the name already occured in the text previously (so it wouldn't be practical to always repeat all two/three ways of writing the name; one can offer all required ways only at the first occurence of the name and to use only one of the two/three ways then).
General words which originated as national specialities but which are internationally known now are adopted as regular GS-Slovianski words, they are written in GS-Slovianski orthography, pronounced in a GS-Slovianski way and they accept GS-Slovianski grammatical endings:
Posle koncerta mi idili vo picolnu, ktora imalo picov iz mnogo zemi.
Ia edam velmo dobro-vkusih knedlikov so gulasj podla starih predpis iz Bohemia, gdo svadzjena oz moi nai-mlodih brat bila rodinih.
Subotako ia ucjastil kursu karateih.
Vigvam iest podobih da tipia.
THE LORD'S PRAYER
Nasj otec, ktora iesi vo nebes,
sviatonih budo toi imen,
pridi krolonia toi,
budo hotenia toi kako vo nebes tak na Zemla,
hlebu nasj cjazje-denih darii nam dneso,
i izvinii nam nasj grehov, tak kako mi izvinimo nasj grehoconikov,
i ne vestii nas vo pokusiniu,
no nas spasii proti zla.
Amen.
EXPLANATORY REPORT
The idea of a language for mutual communication both of Slavs and of those interested in Slavic affairs is really good. Slovio could certainly work as this language but there is no reason for accepting such language when we can have a better one. That's why I give my proposal of a better pan-Slavic language. A lot of my proposal's features are only my personal ideas and nothing bad will happen if they are accepted in a modified way or if current Slovio version is found better. But there are two basic Slovio's features that are really non-Slavic, look odd and could be done much better:
1) NOUN ENDINGS
The Slovio's endings "-(i)s", "-(u)f" and "-(i)fs" are non-Slavic. Yes, it isn't possible for everything to be 100%ly Slavic, but these endings influence the final appearence and sound of the language so badly that they are unacceptable. It's quite clear that Slavic plurals don't naturally end in a consonant but in a vowel - most often "-i". Many current Slavic conlangers try to introduce a system in which one cannot recognise the singular form when one knows only the plural form ending in "-i" - this is also unacceptable. That's why I introduce a system whose kernel is taken from Esperanto, only endings are different. It means that basis of the language isn't formed by words ending either in a consonant or in a vowel, but by roots which end mostly in a consonant.
What looks more Slavic - "lud - ludis" or "luda - ludi"? What looks more Slavic - "zxen > zxenis" or "zjena - zjeni", "pes > pesis" or "pes > pesi"? What looks more Slavic - "dom - domis" or "dom - domi", "knig - knigis" or "kniga - knigi", "nocx > nocxis" or "noc - noci"? What looks more Slavic - "pero - peros" or "per - peri", "kanoe - kanoes" or "kanoa - kanoi", "iglu - iglus" or "iglua - iglui", "historia - historias" or "historia - historii"?
You may have plenties of prejudices or even rational arguments against Esperanto, but you can't deny that the Esperanto-based system produces a greater number of more natural words than Slovio's system. You call the Slovio's system "natural" because it has no "artificially truncated" roots. However, the "artificial truncation" isn't the only criterion of naturality. In Esperanto, singular nouns end in "-o" and plural nouns in "-oj"; in Ido, singular nouns end in "-o" and plural nouns in "-i". In the same way, GS-Slovianski uses "-a" for singular nouns and "-i" for plural nouns. In both Esperanto and Ido, one can elise the ending of singular noun. In commonly used Esperanto and Ido, this doesn't occur very often, but in GS-Slovianski this feature is intended to be used much more frequently. This ensures the fact that even in singualar nominative, GS-Slovianski renders most Slavic words in their natural form. Yes, Slovio's "pero" is more natural than GS-Slovianski's "per", Slovio's "kanoe" is more natural than GS-Slovianski's "kanoa", Slovio's "iglu" is more natural than GS-Slovianski's "iglua". But is also Slovio's "peros" more Slavic than GS-Slovianski's "peri", is Slovio's "kanoes" more Slavic than GS-Slovianski's "kanoi", is Slovio's "iglus" is more Slavic than GS-Slovianski's "iglui"? I don't think so. Singular nominative noun and plural nominative noun are very common grammatical forms, they occur in almost every sentence. That's why their naturality should be well balanced. Unlike Slovio, whose singular nominative nouns are 100%ly Slavic, but plural nominative nouns are completely non-Slavic.
This Esperanto-based system also enables us to use more natural accusative endings - "-u" and "-ov" instead of "-(u)f" and "-(i)fs".
2) LATIN ORTHOGRAPHY
Slovio doesn't make a mistake about the opinon that our language should be writeable on all computers without difficulties. But even with this premise, we mustn't give up the basic need for Slavicity. The "cx", "sx" and "zx" look really very odd and non-Slavic. Maybe the Slavs can understand them but this doesn't imply that a language who intends to represent all Slavs should use so non-Slavic orthography. You might argue that the Slovio's system creates no confusions with foreign words. However, if Slovio used e.g. "cz", "sz" or "zz", it would create a confusion in one of about thousand sentences - while the system of "cx", "sx" and "zx" creates a non-Slavicity in almost every sentence. Moreover, there is no need for the fear of such confusions - general words should be written phonetically (shouldn't they?) and proper names are always capitalised, so the reader can always recognise them.
In this proposal, I use "cj", "sj" and "zj", but the previous variant "cz", "sz" and "zz" is still in consideration. As you might have read on the Slavsk Beseda, some Slavs didn't like especially "zz". That's why I got an idea that "j" is already abolished and it is generally known to many Slavs as a softener.
The "j" has been abolished much earlier than I introduced "cj", "sj" and "zj". The reasons were following:
- Sound difference between "i" and "j" is often very small, so it would be confusing to have two letters for these two almost identical sounds.
- As far as Cyrilic-writing Slavs are concerned, e.g. Serbs use different "j" than Russians, so it wouldn't be practical to use only Russian "j" because Serbs have no simple possibility to write the Russian "j" (they have another "j" on their Cyrilic keyboards).
So "j" had been abolished, but "cz", "sz" and "zz" were still in use. After some time, I realised the possibility to use the "j" for the puropose of "softening" of "c", "s" and "z" and I publish this idea for the first time in this proposal. There are also other possibilities to write the sounds of Slovio's "cx", "sx" and "zx" - they should also be discussed. Six years ago, Slavic appearence wasn't considered vary much while creating the Latin orthography of the pan-Slavic language, so this mistake should be corrected now.
