Ahoj Gabriel,

pozrel som si tvoju gramatiku. Musim konstatovat, ze jej struktura niekolkonasobne tazsia ako napr. struktura gramaticky Slovano, alebo Slovio.

Prosim ta, to ako mozes robit take nepravidelnosti ako napr. kniga > knižni
ved to mas skoro take tazke ako samotna cestina, alebo slovencina.
Naco potom vymyslal nieco umele [skonstruovany umely jazyk] ked tam mas spustu
nepravidelnosti. Kdo sa ti to, prosim ta, bude ucit.
Nehnevaj sa, ale to by som chel videt tych ludi, ktori budu ochotni to pouzivat.

To sa len tak "hras s jazykom", alebo to fakt myslis vazne, ze sa tie nepravidelnosti bude aj niekto ucit naspamat ?

I.

Yes, Slovio and Slovano have relatively simple grammars, but they are non-Slavic either on the first sight (Slovio) or on the second sight (Slovano). When the users later ask the creators of Slovio/Slovano "why was this feature solved this way an not in another way?", you will give them many logical arguments, but everybody can have its individual way of logical thinking. On the contrary, I will reply to my users "it is this way because it is in all Slavic languages". In fact, I don't invent a new language, I just uncover what all Slavic languages have in common.

Yes, all three languages in question (Slovio, Slovano, Slovianski) are somewhat understandable, but Slovio and Slovano have many features I don't feel like wanting to be represented by - because these features were invented by a few logicians, while other logicians might have different opinion. But no logicians can quarrel about what is or isn't present in Slavic languages, so I believe that Slovianski would look basically the same if invented by others, providing they would be guided by the same design principles.

As I have already said, it would be great to have a Slavic Esperanto, but neither Slovio nor Slovano have achieved it. Both languages retained some difficult features (Slovio's many suffixes for one meaning, Slovano's formation of singular from plural). So all three languages share two basic properites - they are more or less difficult and they are more or less understandable - but Slovianski has got one more feature: it is Slavic.

I am not going to invent ridiculous theories why exactly my language and no-one else's will ever be learned and used, but let me point one fact out: Many people learn English, German, Spanish, Chinese or French in their natural form; the native speakers of the respective languages have neither simplified nor crippled their languages in order to be more accessible to others. Yet millions of people learn these languages. So why would they not learn Slovianski?

I am planning on developing a real Slavic Esperanto

first I'll learn Esperanto, though

AHOJ GABRIEL,

MOHLI BY SME ASPON HLADAT NEJAKU SPOLOCNU [PRINAJMENSOM PRIBLIZNE SPOLOCNU CESTU] A TO TYM, ZE BY SME SI UJEDNOTILI SPOLOCNE CRTY TYCHTO JAZYKOV.

PRED CASOM SI NAVRHOVAL NAPR. GENIVIV TVORIT POMOCOU PREDLOZKY "od".
TO JE CELKOM DOBRY NAPAD. ROZMYSLAL SOM NAD TYM A CELKOM SA MI TO POZDAVA.

DALEJ SME SA ZHODLI PRI PLURALY SUBSTANTIV [koncovka -i].TO JE DALSI KROK
K NIECOMU SPOLOCNEMU.

MOZME TO ROBIT TAK, ZE SPOLOCNE CRTY SI HNED DAME DO SVOJICH GRAMATIK.

[hned teraz zmeni genitiv tym, ze sa pred substantivum bude davat tzv. predlozka "od". Ak s tym suhlasis, zmen si tak isto genitiv tymto sposobom].

MOZNO ZE SA AJ TVORCA SLOVIA DA PREHOVORIT A BUDEME MAT ASPON JEDNU CRTU SPOLOCNU. TAKTO MOZME CASOM POKRACOVAT.


S pozdravom,

I.

I agree.

I think here it might not be as difficult to persuade Slovio-ists as in other cases. After I had told them that it's absolutely illogical to use accusative for the genitival meaning, they added the following paragraph to their grammar:

Genitive: The above described endings -(u)f, -(i)fs have been also used by Slovio speakers to express genitive. As far as we know this does not create any problems and ads clarity to the language. As far as we know similar usage exists also in Ido and Esperanto and it also does not create any problems. Your commnents and suggestions are welcome.

AHOJ GABRIEL,

I WOULD SUGGEST THIS DECLINATION OF NOUNS :

DEKLINACIA SUBSTANTIVIOV - Declination of Nouns

Nominativ To es dom - It is a house
Genitiv - ov/od To es otecov auto - It is father´s car
To es auto od otec - It is the car of father
Dativ - om/do Ti em dat to libro detiom - You will give children the book
Ti em dat to libro do deti - You will give the book to children

Akuzativ Tie ubudoval vez'a - They built up a tower

Lokal : preposition o ( o mama-about mum, o otec-about dad, o nam-about us, o me-about me, o te-about you(sg.),
o tenu-about him, o tau-about her, o tim-about them )
Ins'trumental : preposition s ( s mama - by mum, s otec - by dad, s nam - by us, s me - by me, s te - by you,
s tenu - by him, s tau - by her, s tim - by them)
* peronal pronouns are in dative

For dative, I'd suggest k.

For instrumental, I have:

od stroni = "by", shows an agent in a passive sentence
od = shorter and a little bit more confusing alternative for "by"

posredstvom = "by means of", shows a tool
s = shorter and confusing alternative for "by means of"

OF COURSE WE CAN CREATE SOMEHOW ACCUSATIVE [either by adding some suffix or
by some preposition. But the second proposal is not very acceptable]


OR LEAVE IT AS IT IS. BUT IT WOULD REQUIRE SOME WORD ORDER THEN [that is not
of slavic origin very much]

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT IT ?

I.

There are Slavic langauges - Bulgarian and Macedonian - with a more fixed word order and no accusative. So why not do it the same?

NEVIEM, DATIV BY BOL DOBRY S -K, PRETOZE POTOM BY TO BOLO DOST PROBLEMATIKCE
KEBY SI CHCEL POVEDAT NIECO, CO ZACINA NA PISMENO "K".

napr. Dam to k korab. alebo : Pridam to k kralovi. a pod.

[preco sa ti nepozdava predlozka : do ?

I.

MOHOL BY BYT AKUZATIV S KONCOVKOU : - u , PRI PODSTATNYCH MENACH ?

I.

No, it couldn't. Let's not have more complicated grammar than some Slavic langauges do.

AKO CHCES TEDA RIESIT AKUZATIV ? NEVIEM, CI METODA "WORD ORDER " JE TA NAJSPRAVNEJSIA. VED TY SAM HOVORIS, ZE SA MAME DRZAT "SLOVANSKYCH ASPEKTOV GRAMATICKY A SLOVNEJ ZASOBY ". PREDSA WORD ORDER NIE JE SLOVANSKY PRVOK.
TAM SU SLOVA VO VETACH VIAC-MENEJ NEZAVAZNE A KDEKOLVEK TO SLOVO VO VETE DAS, TAK TO NEZMENI ZMYSEL VETY. KDEZTO V ANGLICTINE UZ TO ZMYSEL MNOHOKRAT NEDAVA.

I.

If we take a vote most Slavic languages can change word order. Then again, most Slavic languages have cases.

PREDSA WORD ORDER NIE JE SLOVANSKY PRVOK.

It is Slavic, look at Bulgarian and Macedonian grammars!

Because you give the book to (k) the children, not inwards (do) the children.

Ukrainian: Поверни цю книгу до библиотеці.

Here the do means "into" and not datival "to", doesn't it?

Gabriel pisal:
...On the contrary, I will reply to my users "it is this way because it is in all Slavic languages". In fact, I don't invent a new language, I just uncover what all Slavic languages have in common...
===
Ti ne masx pravda, Gabriel:

Slovianski-P is using one verb form for all persons: ja pisat, ti pisat,... vi pisat.
This does not exist in a Slavic language, but is typical for Afrikaans:

Ek sktryf, jy skryf, hy skryf sy skryf, dit skryf; pl: ons skryf, julle skryf, hulle skryf.

Eugeniusx

izvinijm:
ek SKRYF natuurlik. Gabriel, eerste lees dan dink en in die einde skryf!

Slovianski-P is abandoning this.

---

The following endings are added to the root:

1st person singular -ju | 1st person plural -mo

2nd person singular -Å¡  | 2nd person plural -te

3rd person singular -0  | 3rd person plural -jut

Some verbs have a special present-tense root:

- all verbs ending in -ovat and all frequentatives on -ivat have a present-tense root in -uj-, e.g. sportova- > sportuj-
- all verbs ending in -nut have a present-tense root in -n-: kradnu- > kradn-
- verbs of one syllable have a present-tense root on -j-: z^zi- > z^zij-
- a closed group of very few verbs have an irregular present-tense root: pisa- > pis^z-

To these present tense roots, the following endings are added:

1st person singular -u  | 1st person plural -emo

2nd person singular -eš | 2nd person plural -ete

3rd person singular -e  | 3rd person plural -ut

---

I promise that I will update this and that I will give the list of irregular verbs on http://www.langmaker.com/db/User:Gabriel_Svoboda/Slovianski-P in a week.

Gabriel pisali:
but Slovianski has got one more feature: it is Slavic.
===
on pisali, ona pisali is everything but not SLAVIC.

on pisali, ona pisali is everything but not SLAVIC.

I agree with you. That's why Slovianski has on pisal, ona pisala, ono pisalo, oni pisali.

ona pisal, ono pisal is everything but Slavic.

Gabriel pital:
Many people learn English, German, Spanish, Chinese or French in their natural form; the native speakers of the respective languages have neither simplified nor crippled their languages in order to be more accessible to others. Yet millions of people learn these languages. So why would they not learn Slovianski?
===
Because nobody needs to learn Slovianski!!!
What for, Gabriel? just to "talk" with you?

If I could choose to learn English or Folkspraak (a Germanic language project) I would choose English of course.
NOBODY needs Slovianski. It is just a coffee klatsch for brain masturbation

Because nobody needs to learn Slovianski!!!

And why do you think somebody needs to learn Slovio?

If I could choose to learn English or Folkspraak (a Germanic language project) I would choose English of course.

So why do you think that somebody will learn rather Slovio than for example Russian?

There are many people who have reported that they have learned Russian for several years, but the first time they have seen Slovio and read Slovio-texts, they could understand them better than Russian, even though they had never learned Slovio before!!!! Think about that! Slovio is simpler and more logical than any other Slavic language, and for that matter than English, German, French or Chinese! At the same time Slovio is understood without learning by some 400 million people! No other language can match that!

HA! Slovio is actually harder to understand than ANY Slavic language.

"To es plus bezdragju dla sxefis imat mnoguo mlodju ucxnikis ktor polucxijut tolk maluo sxilingis."

To me I would guess this means:

"There is less to be afraid of for chefs to have many young students who earn very few shilllings."

bezdragju sounds like you're not shivering (drognut' in Russian)
sxef means chef and not chief

In Russian:

"To meneje dorogo dl'a glavnih imet' mnogo molodih ucxenikov kotoryje polucxajut malo sxilingov."
I know this is what is meant because I looked at the English translation.