2007-01-23 V Cxehju glavn-grod Prag vstretil Slovakju perv-ministr Robert Fico s bilju Germanju kancler Gerhard Sxroder i s bilju Cxehju perv ministr Jiri Paroubek. Fico oglosil zxe bi protistanil mestovenie USA-ju radar-stanciaf v Slovakia. USA planijt mestovit proti-raketju radar-stancia v Cxehia i raketis proti-raketju obronaf v Polakia. Kritiknikis podozrejut zxe realuo USA hcejt mestovit atom-raketis v Polakia cielitju proti Rosia. Ocx-viduo tut celoju sistem ne es planitju obronat Europ proti teroristju raketis no visxit USA-ju voina-vigod proti Rosia i tut plan cielijt razrusxit voiskoju rovnvazxie vo Vset.
Hey Gabriel, as usual, you pick on insignificant detail. For the trees you don't see the forest. We will not try to explain you any reasons, your mind is just too closed to understand them anyway. You always pick on insignificant detail, but fail to see how it fits in with the whole pattern of language, how it fits in with 40 thousand other words, how it makes it possible to make from the same root adjectives, adverbs, verbs, nouns - without having consonant and other changes.... Good night Gabriel, sleep well.
INAC, PRECO BY SA MALA PRAHA VOLAT PRAG, KED NA UZEMI CIECH JU VSETCI VOLAJU PRAHA. PRECO BY SA MALO NEJAKE CESKE MESTO PRISPOSOBOVAT GERMANSKYM JAZYKOM.
NEW YORK - CANIA TIEZ NEVOLAJU SVOJE MESTO NOVY YORK, ANI LONDON SA NEVOLA LONDINIUM [CO JE ORIGINALNE MENO TOHTO SIDLA].
V TOM S GABRIELOM SUHLASIM.
TAK ISTO NEVIEM PRECO BY SA MALI RAKETY VOLAT RAKETIS. KED UZ TAK RAKETAS.
PRETOZE RAKETA JE RAKETA V SLOVANSKYCH JAZYKOCH A NIE ZIADNA RAKET.
TO NIE JE PODLA VAS "AMPUTACIA SLOV" AKO STE TO NEDAVNO PROKLAMOVALI VOCI INYM PAN - SLOVANSKYM JAZYKOM ?!
how it makes it possible to make from the same root adjectives, adverbs, verbs, nouns - without having consonant and other changes
Do you think that it is more practical to have pragju, praguo, pragit than pragaju, pragauo, pragat? Both trios sound the same weird, so I don't know why to prefer Prag to Praga because of derivation. Moreover, many people will tend to pronounce Prag as [prak] because of final devoicing, while Praga would be OK.
In the same way:
zxenju, zxenuo, zxenit is no way better than zxenat, zxenauo, zxenat
republikju, republikuo, republikit is no way better than republikaju, republikauo, republikat
pricxinju, pricxinuo, pricxinit is no way better than pricxinaju, pricxinauo, pricxinat
formulju, formuluo, formulit is no way better than formulaju, formulauo, formulat
We will not try to explain you any reasons, your mind is just too closed to understand them anyway.
We want the good for you, but you must trust us, we are not going to give any rational reasons. I should warn you that Slavs lived in regimes with this sentence as the official ideology for tens of years. They will hardly believe it again.
Slovio:
2007-02-19 - Rosju ministrie obronaf oglosil zxe esli USA bu postroit voina-bazis proti-raketju obronaf v Cxehia i v Polakia zxe Rosia bu prinudilju cielit svoi raketis proti tot voina-bazis.
Slovianski-P:
19i februar 2007 - Rusko ministerstvo od obrona davalo znat, czo jesli Sjedinene Sztati od Amerika budut budovat vojnne bazi dlja protiv-raketna obrona v Czehija i Poljska, Rosija bude prinudz'ana celit svoje raketi protiv tamte vojnne bazi.
departament -3-> organ -> govern -> Russia | +-> defence | +=> declare -2-> USA => build -> s -> base -3-> for -> war | | | +-> defence -> against -> rocket | | | +-> in -> and -2-> Czechia | | | +-> Poland | +-> Russia => must -> target -2-> s -> base -> that | +-> with -> rocket -> Russia
Departamentajta organa uprava Rosiju obronu lije oglosujva USA’a stava sa bazajta dla vojnu obrona prota roketu va ijva Èehiju Poliju Rosija toje musa cjelajva sa baza tu odza roketa Rosija
I adore this language. It’s completely regular, unambiguous, and unusable.
I have a usable language that's completely regular. It's my version of Slovianski-S:
Obrona ministerstvo Rosija davaj znat devetnacat februar, cxo kak Amerika Mnogi Sjedini Sxtat budut budovat mnogi protiv raketna obrona vojni baza v Cxehija i Polska, celit mnogi svoji raketa protiv te mnogi vojni baza budet nuzxdeni Rosija.
Not a single plural or case used.
Endings:
-(i)j for verbs
-(i)t for verb infinitives
-i for adjectives/adverbs (no distinction)
-o, -a, -0, -e for nouns
Regular suffixes and prefixes
Making a verb into an adjective that means "the result of the action" -ni
Making a noun into another noun that means "the generalisation of the object" -stvo
Passive adjective -eni
1) What is the relation between "obrona", "ministerstvo" and "Rosija"? It is not possible to get rid of any genitive marker without affecting the meaning. The same applies to "Amerika Mnogi Sjedini Sxtat".
2) How does "kak" mean "if"?
3) Whitherward did the "a" from "raketa" disapper in "raketni"? The same applies to "vojna" > "vojni".
4) The word order in "celit mnogi svoji raketa protiv te mnogi vojni baza budet nuzxdeni Rosija" is quite unusual, but as you like.
5) I have already enjoyed my portion of uneasiness when I introduced plural articles, now it seems to be your turn.
Sorry, I messed my example up. I didn't get enough sleep :D
Should be:
Department of defense of Russia
Ministerstvo obrona ot Rosija OR Obroni Ministerstvo Rosija (obroni being the adjective)
I confused adjectival form with the noun form
the best and most unambiguous would be Rosijski ministerstvo obrona
"Kak" can't be used for 'if'? In Russian you can say "kak tol'ko ty eto zdelajesx, ja zdelaju cxto-to drugoe"
can "kak tolko" mean "if and when" in other languages?
raketa vs. raketni:
the rule is that the last vowel is dropped when you add a suffix
pretty simple rule
gromada = a huge mass, a whole bunch
gromadni = huge
gromadnost = hugeness
here we eliminated both -a and -i
I don't have plural articles, I just say mnogi when it's required and don't say the number when the information is not important, and in fact I could do without it in Sedini Sxtati Amerika
"te" was a demonstrative pronoun, but I could probably do without those (maybe, I still haven't decided)
the word order is unusual because I confused participles and adjectives
so the correct order will be:
"Rosija budet nuzxdeni celit mnogi svoji raketa protiv vojni baza"
then again, I'm still coming up with the language, so until I can write down a grammar I'm going to change my opinion a lot on things
the best and most unambiguous would be Rosijski ministerstvo obrona
OK, but still, what is the relation between "ministerstvo" and "obrona"?
can "kak tolko" mean "if and when" in other languages?
In Czech, I don't think so.
raketa vs. raketni:
the rule is that the last vowel is dropped when you add a suffix
pretty simple rule
If something is dropped without compensation, then it isn't a schematic language.
I don't have plural articles, I just say mnogi when it's required and don't say the number when the information is not important, and in fact I could do without it in Sedini Sxtati Amerika
Ruske ministerstvo di obrono did dava zna, czo jesli Jedinane Sztati di Amerika bu budova vojne bazi dlja protiv-rakete obrono v Czehija i Poljska, Rosija bu prinudz'ane cela se raketi protiv tamte vojne bazi.
What is not schematic by having a vowel elision rule? Novial uses ' to represent an elided i at the end of the word that might be pronounced occasionally. I dare you to claim that Novial is not a schematic language.
Novial is not a schematic language -- it's a compromise language. And your language looks like Slavic Novial to me.
What about words like dinamit and kraj -- are they verbs? Schematic languages usually don't tolerate this.
About your "plural article": By the way, if I got it right USA intend to build just two bases -- one in Poland, and one in Czech Republic. Are just two bases enough to be mnogi?
Why word for "that" is te? Is it plural? I think it rather should be ti.
Making a verb into an adjective that means "the result of the action" -ni -- Why you told us this? You never use this feature. I hope you don't mean word sjedini -- but it's part of stem here.
Are you sure you need to distinguish "verb infinitives" and "verbs"?
What forms are words budet and budut in?
Looking from my Jazikujva's point of view I can say that -i is reverse link marker; -o/-a/-e/-0are direct link markers (or stop markers), and -ij is narrative marker. Ergo: obroni ministerstvo = ministerstvo obrona; mnogi baza = baza mnogo etc.
I don't like your word order.
Sedini Sxtati Amerika -- why sxati has ending -i?
NOT RUSSIAN BUT PROBABLY KIEVAN RUSSIA THAT WAS ON PRESENT UKRAINE TERRITORY.
The Kievan Russia was located on the territory of all the three contemporary East Slavic states. It had two principal cities: Novgorod (where it was founded in AD 862, now in Russia), Kiev/Kyiv (was captured in AD 882 and made a capital).
Sure, it's not 100% schematic. IT IS Slavic novial.
You are not supposed to learn the original word from a derivative because it is likely to be a concept somewhat removed from the original word. In Esperanto, there are some words that are related to a root word, but you can't predict what they mean 100% because adding a special suffix doesn't change every word equally. The creator of Novial explained this "ambiguity" in derivation in Esperanto.
There is no way to unabmiguously derive words. But you can guess from the context if they are derived somewhat regularly. At least the form would be regular.
And you know that an -i has been elided because the form has been an adjective (-ni) but the only ambiguity is when a noun root has an elided vowel.'
Volapuyk didn't tolerate PREFIXES like it- in the word ITALIA so it had to change the name of the country! In retrospect, that's ridiculous. Dinamit and kraj are fine. I don't want to change half of the vocabulary because some words end in the same endings as some other verbs. It is already several times more regular than Russian, and I'm sure it will be easier to learn once I decide all the features.
Te is a demonstrative pronoun. Regardless of gender, number or animity.
I couldn't decide between budut and budet. I'll probably use budut. It is gender-neutral in Slavic languages. I might also use all third-person plural forms for infinitives. So instead of est (eat) I'll have edat. I will make an except for e (is) because it is so common for every form in East Slavic languages.
I wrote Sedini Sxtati Amerika in my response, but the text is correct. Sedini Sxtat Amerika. Mnogo is not quite that necessary here.
Note that Russian is a term for both the Rus' language and the Rossija language. I could have said Ruthenian, but that's used for the Rusyn language.
I probably should have said Rus'kij.
My word order is slightly messed up from some edits I've done while translating the passage. It is SVO, adjective noun, adjective verb. I don't think there's a need for proverbs, American slang eliminated them as in "I did good on my test" instead of "I did well on my test".
Of course such ways exist. But when I mentioned dinamit I didn't mean to criticise you. I just used it as yet one argument of why your language can't be classified as schematic.
Volapuyk didn't tolerate PREFIXES like it-
Volapük didn't tolerate any vowel in stem-initial position. Russia is Lusän in it, and Ukraine would be Klainän I guess. I use this language to give names for some my "private files" in it -- it's very useful, nobody but me understands what it means.
Note that Russian is a term for both the Rus' language and the Rossija language. I could have said Ruthenian, but that's used for the Rusyn language.
You could just say "Old Russian" or "of Rus". For contemporary Russian you could use terms "New Russian", "Great Russian", or "Muscovite Russian". In fact I think that "Ukrainian Russian" (ukrajins'ka rus'ka) would be a correct term too.
Personally I think that a verb for budut/budet is a finite form and should end in -j like all the reast finite verbs. You should try something like buj.
I guess you meant "adverbs". When I said that I didn't like word order, I meant that I don't think that it was a good idea to put Russia in the very end of the sentence -- it's subject for criminy's sake. I would write it somewhat like this:
Rosijski ministerstvo obrona davaj znat devetnacat februar, cxo jesli Sjedineni Sxtat Amerika buj stanovat baza protiv-raketni obrona v Cxehija i Polska, Rosija buj nuzxdeni celit svoji raketa protiv ti baza.
But Classical Volapu'k didn't have "r", so it probably had Lusa'n, Sa'lba'n, Kloata'n, Montenegla'n, Bulgala'n. Moreover, it tended to truncate initial vowels rather than add some consonant before them, so Ukraine would probably really be Klaya'n.
The classical Volapük did have /r/, but Schleyer didn't like this sound. (E.g. he used it in niver -- "university", or ragason -- "prince".)
As for word for "Ukraine"... It doen't sound a good idea to exclude consonant /n/ from it, since it's part of the stem; though Volapukists don't bother about such things too much. But taking into consideration worgs like Nelijän ("England"), I can guess that it tended to convert initial VC1C2 into C1VC2. Ergo, it's likely that "Ukraine" would be Kurainän, Kulainän, or Kulanän.
