February 23 2007 at 10:33 PM No score for this post
I.
-
I WOULD SUGGEST THE WORD FOR "SCIENCE" - VEDA.
HERE WE HAVE SOME SUBSTANTIATION FOR THIS :
Etymology
The word "veda" means "knowledge", and is derived from the root "vid-", Sanskrit for "know", reconstructed as being derived from the Proto-Indo-European root "*weid-", meaning "see" or "know"[2]. "*Weid-" is also the source of the English word "wit", as well as "vision" through Latin. The Czech and Slovak words for "science" are "věda" resp. "veda", derived from western Slavic "vědet" resp. "vedie" for "know". Veda may also be derived from "vedana," Even the -uid in Celtic Druid seems to compliment "*Weid-" (Druid meaning knowledge of the oak).
Polish eiedza = nauka -=knowledge - they are synomimous
No score for this post
April 5 2007, 10:09 PM
In Polish word wiedza or "veda", or vieda or videnje in some other slavic languages, mean knowledge, seeing the meaning of, etc. Wiedziec, vedet, viedet, viedat means to have knowledge in English, to know, to be aducated, to have a scientific knowlege amongst it all, too... Only someone of very bad will can not see the equal synonimous significance and easyness of understanding of it for all Slavs.
If Slavic languages hugely disagree about some word, then yes, we may ask also logic for some help. But this is not the case: all east Slavic languages, Polish, Serbian, Bulgarian and Macedonian use almost exclusively nauka. Czechs and Slovaks primarily use "veda", but they perfectly understand nauka, it is just a synonym for the same concept. Croatian and Slovenian have "znanost", but I really doubt they would have problems with understanding nauka. So there is no need to invent some logical alternative for so common word; don't try to Czecho-Slovakise the inter-Slavic langauge, please.
I AM NOT SAYING THAT I DO NOT LIKE THAT.
YOU STILL DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS ALL ABOUT.
LOOK AT THE OTHER NATIONS - WHY ENGLISH DO NOT WRITE AND SPEAK IN OLD ENGLISH ?
WHY SPANISH AND FRENCH AND ITALIANS DO NOT USE LATIN LANG ?
WHY EVEN GERMANS DO NOT USE LANGUAGE THAT THEIR ANCESTORS SPOKE THOUSANDS
YEARS AGO ?
TOWARDS OUR FUTURE - LANGUAGES ARE GOING TO BE MORE SIMPLE IN THEIR GRAMMARS
AND EVEN BY SHORTENING WORDS.
IT'S THE TREND THAT HAS BEEN LASTING FOR SEVERAL HUNDREDS YEARS.
AND I ASK YOU : " WHY NOT DO THAT WITH SLAVIC LANGS OR JUST ONE ALL - SLAVIC ONE ?
I WOULD ACCEPT CYRILIC ALPHABET IF IT IS IN GENERAL USE IN AT LEAST SEVERAL COUNTRIES SPREAD ROUND THE WORLD.
BUT AS YOU CAN SEE IT IS VERY UNPRACTICAL AND USING THE ALPHABET THAT SLOVIO
OR SLOVANO HAVE IS THE MOST SPREAD ONE IN COUNTRIES THAT USE LATIN SCRIPTURES.
[I do not have to change my keyboard when using Slovano / Slovio alphabet
on German, English, French, Italian, Spanish, Svedish, Norvegian, Islandian,
Croatian, Romanian, etc, etc, keyboards.
Using azbuka or cyrilic PCs [laptops] with their alphabets on their keyboards it would be big problem.
This is some kind of joke? At first "I." states that we should use veda because it's 3000 years old, then he declares that Englishmen do not write in Old English and we should go towards our future.
Of course I quite agree with the last statement, we should use the simple 26-letter Latin alphabet and speak simple and universal English language.
You may call me an old fart, but I'm complaining about this all-capitals style again. Ioannes, when you talk aloud you always shout?
You do not still understand me.
I just wanted to say that GRAMMAR should be simplified and they could be any even thousand years old e.g. GROD for fortified settlement or town as it was used by old Slavs.
Hellerick, be sure that when you use a language with such difficult grammar as the natural slavic langs have - nobody will accept it and nobody will learn it at all. And it doesn't matter what you or me think about it.
Slovio's grammar is all right so far but what you have produced out all about Slovianski - it hasn't got any meaning and aim to our future.
Just ask people all round you ... who is willing to learn such irregular grammar structure and use it in every day life. I say NOBODY.
No future for a language with a difficult grammar.
No future for English.
No future for German.
No future for Spanish.
No future for Chinese.
No future for French.
Yes, if all these premises were true, then Slovianski would certainly have absolutely no future, too.
No future for a language with a difficult grammar.
No future for English.
No future for German.
No future for Spanish.
No future for Chinese.
No future for French.
Gabriel, you still DO NOT understand what I wrote about. You should better read more carefully what I am writing.
I wrote about artificial languages that have got grammars as difficult as natural languages - and Slovianski has such that grammar because you yourself allege that Slovianski has to aswer all the criteria for accepting the natural slavic languages with all the aspects that are assignet to that.
What you have written above are natural national languages that have of course
difficult grammars. (which doesn't ?) I don't know any natural lang in Europe that hasn't got difficult grammar.
But the problem with Slovianski is that its grammar is as difficult as natural Slavic ones (regardless what is its wordstock).
Comparing to Slovio or S - lingva, Slovianski's grammar is several times more difficult, maily for its irregularities.
Esperanto is quite popular because it was the first in the eyes of some people, and it was lucky. There are many constructed langauges that are undoubtedly easier to learn than Esperanto is, yet nobody learns them.
However, Interlingua is quite popular, too. The fact that "quite popular" means "several thousand speakers" here just shows that constructed languages are generally unpopular, this is no speciality of Slovianski.
Let me challenge you: so simplify the grammar of S-lingva so that it would be as easy as Esperanto (or at least as Slovio) and we'll see what succes your language will have. I bet it won't have any, but I would be a fan of such Slavic Esperanto at least.
Ay Gabriel!
If had the chance to choose between (natural and constructed)Germanic languages I would choose Afrikaans, the newest Germanic language. It has a very simple grammar and is very easy to learn for all who know a Germanic tongue.
A constructed language is not necessarily an easy to learn language, please compare here: Interlingua, Slovianski and German. But NO person with a common sense would learn those mentioned languages if he had the chance to chosse!!!
Another very difficult thing is that you do declension separately for masculine, feminine and for neuter substantives that is enormous difficult to speak and write fluently. It has big problems even for some native Slavs sometimes.
Why do you have inflectional genitive and dative when these cases could by made by prepositions? (I mean, by prepositions ONLY, as in Bulgarian, Macedonian, or Slovianski-P.)
Slovianski-N is simpler than any natural language.
Iopq is right. Of course, this statement doesn't imply that this language has less than 6 cases, or less than 3 genders, or invariable adjectives. Let's read what Jan wrote about it:
Saying that, for example, the locative singular ending of masculine words is -e is not the problem. It becomes a problem when you start adding info like: ... but, when the root ends in k/g/ch/c/dz/etc., then the ending will be -u, except if that k/g/ch/c/etc. is preceded by an <insert characters>, with the following 63 exceptions to rule A and 240 exception to rule B: ....
It is that kind of stuff that is characteristic for natural languages, and that kind of stuff I want to eliminate in Slovianski-N. Throwing away the entire locative is unnecessary for that. So, declensions yes, irregular declensions and spellings, no.
But, on the other hand, we don't want endless tables with nominal and verbal paradigms, and therefore we try to achieve a great deal of simplification anyway. Most important is that the forms chosen will be instantly recognisable, even if the given forms would look differently in someone's own language. We try avoid irregularity, but only as far as easy recognisability is not jeopardised. A lot of simplification will come by itself. For example, most Slavic languages can have various endings for the masculine genitive singular, but there is one ending they all have in common: -a, which is what we pick for all occurrences of this form.
Igor:
Slovianski-N is simpler than any natural language.
===
NE:
1. Bulgarian is easier than, not yet existing Slovianski-N
2. Afrikaans is by far easier than the framework called Slovianski-N. Sl-N has 6 cases and 3 gender. Afrikaans has neither nor!!!
3. It is a very big error to believe that one HUMAN language is easier than another. Think over it!
There are only some easier to start to learn. One of them is Afrikaans, Slovio and Esperanto. But NOT Slovianski-N
A constructed language is not necessarily an easy to learn language, please compare here: Interlingua, Slovianski and German.
Of course.
But NO person with a common sense would learn those mentioned languages if he had the chance to chosse!!!
Yes, but people don't have such a choice very often: if you are born in a Slavic country, you will just natively learn the Slavic langauge spoken around you, no matter if you have chosen it or not. And for those people, who already know one Slavic langauge, Slovianski is easy to learn.
Bulgarian, unlike Slovio, is Slavic, but in the description of Bulgarian I found many complications that definitely don't make it easier to learn than Slovianski-P:
- the sht, yu and ya letters
- a defined stress
- an article
- superfluous past tenses
- no infinitive
etc.
1. For me your way of arguing and your Gabrielogic is very ugly, not Slovio.
2. Your saying that Bulgarian, unlike Slovio, is Slavic, is just everything but wrong!!!
Bulgarian adopted some of vocabulary and grammar (!) from its non-Slavic neighbours. Again here I see your unfair argumentation, just pure enviousness or and I hope not, paranoia.
Your saying that Bulgarian, unlike Slovio, is Slavic, is just everything but wrong!!!
Bulgarian adopted some of vocabulary and grammar (!) from its non-Slavic neighbours.
I don't mind that some simple feature is of non-Slavic origin, providing it is commonly used in at least one modern Slavic language.
For questions "how to simplify the language?", I seek answers in modern natural Slavic languages only:
- For the question "how to omit declension?", I found a perfect answer in Bulgarian and Macedonian, so I adopted the Bulgarian and Macedonian solution.
- For the question "how to omit genders?", I found an answer in no Slavic language. How would such a langauge form plural, for example? Constructors of easy languages just have this question answered by their phantasy, not caring about how much Slavic the final language will look like.
- For the question "how to freeze adjectives?", I found an answer in no Slavic language. Where would the only used adjectival from come from - from masculine singular, from feminine singular, from neuter singular, from plural, ...? Constructors of easy languages just have this question answered by their phantasy, not caring about how much Slavic the final language will look like.
- For the question "how to omit present tense conjugation?", I found an answer in no Slavic language. Where would the only used present tense verb form come from - an infinitive, a third person singular form, ...? Constructors of easy languages just have this question answered by their phantasy, not caring about how much Slavic the final language will look like.
But the language that will be (maybe one day) proclaimed the universal pan-slavic one, will be not just for the all Slavs but for foreigners as well.
It depends how successfully we are (or will be) spread out this language round the world. It would be funny speak English, German, French, Spanish etc. on the slavic territories. And I ask - Why we should speak those langs on the slavic territories. The Germans, French, English and others do not ( and never will) speak some of Slavic languages on their territories. So, let's not be fools to speak their languages on our territory.
So, if somebody from the world will come to slavic lands he/she will be supposed to speak in this pan-slavic lang. And it will be normal and nobody will wonder why. And for those who will come this language will be the best way how to address to the Slavs. Some people in the past asked me what is the best slavic language to learn so that they could make understanding on slavic territory. And that question wasn't satisfied at that time because none of them fulfilled this requirement.
Offering the foreigners some difficult lang (even if it is all-slavic) I don't think it is the best way doing it.
But the language that will be (maybe one day) proclaimed the universal pan-slavic one, will be not just for the all Slavs but for foreigners as well.
Yes, but the English, the Germans, the French, the Spanish haven't crippled their langauges in order to be easier to learn for foreigners. So why we Slavs should?
Offering the foreigners some difficult lang (even if it is all-slavic) I don't think it is the best way doing it.
The English have already done it. People learn a language because it is economically interesting, not because it is easy.
If you offered me chinese if it would be economically advantageous, believe me, I wouldn't learn it (and other millions as well).
Of course, English is much easier than any slavic langauge. And even German and Spanish langs have simple grammar than any slavic lang.
So they do not have to cripple their langs so much as we should do with ours if we want to simplify our grammars.
Don't worry, your grand-grandchildren will have no other economically reasonable choice than to learn Chinese.
German and Spanish have genders, so does Slovianski-P.
German and Spanish have at least two plural endings, so does Slovianski-P.
German and Spanish have variable adjectives, do does Slovianski-P.
German and Spanish have conjugation, so does Slovianski-P.
German and Spanish have root changes, so does Slovianski-P.
Sorry, I don't see any need to cripple Slavic more than German or Spanish.
I see, razumja!
Slovianski is based on German-Spanish!
Who is you to Espaniogermanize Slavic language?
Why not Afrikaanize it the most modern Germanic Language:
Afrikaans has no genders
Afrikaans has no only two plural endings
Afrikaans has no variable adjectives
Afrikaans has no conjugation
Afrikaans has no root changes
I wanted to show that German and Spanish, although not as easy as English or Afrikaans, are learned by millions.
And Slovianski is approximately the same easy/difficult as German or Spanish.
So if Slavic countries are once economically the same interesting as German or Spanish ones, people will certainly learn the language accepted by Slavic countries as the inter-Slavic one (if there is ever such one), for example Slovianski, even if it is not easier than German or Spanish.
German has also once been an artificial language with a grammar that was sometimes even more difficult than grammars of some German dialects. Yet it is a widely accepted natural language now.
Everybody in Germany and in other German-speaking countries has to learn German. But the majority of Germans esp. those in the South SPEAK a very simplified German! Grammatically more similar to Afrikaans than to Hochdeutsch (standard German). This is reality!
the majority of Germans esp. those in the South SPEAK a very simplified German! Grammatically more similar to Afrikaans than to Hochdeutsch (standard German).
Into Slovianski-P, I have already included Slavs that speak very simplified Slavic, namely Bulgarians and Macedonians. But this simplification only concerns the absence of declension.
- If you know Slavs who naturally speak a genderless language, let me know.
- If you know Slavs who naturally speak a langauge with invariable adjectives, let me know.
- If you know Slavs who naturally speak a language without present tense conjugation, let me know.
- If you know Slavs who naturally speak a language without root changes, let me know.
etc.
But of course, I mean Slavs that are linguistically well documented, not Slavs who exist in someone's imagination only.
So Gabriel, if you allege this, you cannot go further on with simple all-slavic language. You just stay with your own one that, believe me, nobody would willing to learn. Ask somebody about this - if he is willing to learn something that is as difficult as any of natural Slavic langs. I am sure just maybe one out of thousand would like to. And it will be just for that reason he is just interested in constructed languages and for the purpose of using it every day.
It doesn't matter, though
because even if Gabriel is the only person who knows Slovianski-P he can come to any Slavic language forum and start speaking to them immediately.
So, iopq, you know very few internationally adopted terminology that is used in many fields of our lives then and it's not good then.
Sorry, I didn't know that words like "an", "en", "ko" or "tenoi" belonged to international vocabulary.
We (in Slovakia) say, the people who do not understand some basic international terminology are of lower intelligence and some kind of "primitiv".
I have recently been accused of dividing Slavs into diaspornikis, west Slavs, east Slavs, south Slavs etc., but I have to admit that you have invented a far more advanced division: Latino-Slavs and primitives.
So Gabriel, if you allege this, you cannot go further on with simple all-slavic language.
I don't want to create a simple (crippled) Slavic langauge. I will stay with mine that will be intersting for everybody who wants a real inter-Slavic communication and not in a parody of it.
GAbriel:
I don't want to create a simple (crippled) Slavic langauge. I will stay with mine that will be intersting for everybody who wants a real inter-Slavic communication and not in a parody of it.
===
Ay Gabriel you are so an ignorant a person! Fact is that Slovio is a spoken constructed language whereas yours is not even spoken PROPERLY by yourself!
Never mind. With Slovianski, I can come to any Slavic country and start to communicate with local Slavs instantly. With Slovio, I may be able to do the same, but I have to explain at least a few strange endings in advance in order to be understood.
But speaking and understanding is one thing and acceptance of such language is the other one.
I can come to more than half of the all slavic countries and speak e.g.Slovak and the people in these countries will more or less understand me. In some countries 50% in other 70% and in some 90% and it probably would be with Slovianski as well.
I can stay with my Slovak language and the final effect will be the same as with Slovianski, so why we need Slovianski then.
Not every Slovianski's word is understood in the all Slavic countries and the same it is with Slovak, Polish, Czech, Ukrinian, Russian, Croatian etc. languages. So the level of understandability of these natural languages is the same as for Slovianski. So there is no reason using this language at all.
I suppose the main point for creation of artificial lang is somewhere else.
