S'ef od Rusia spoloc'nost posobiac vo oblast od raketa a kozmos teh'nologiai dostal denes 11 roki od vezenie za s'pionaz' vo prospeh' od C'ina.

Moskva sud uznal z'e riaditel od firma TsNIIMASH-Export, Igor Res'etin es vinin zo to, z'e ne zakono odovzdal tom C'ina cit skutoc'nosti. Dla hovorkina od sud idel o informaciai viuz'iten pri viroba od raketi sh'open niest atom hlavicai.

Res'etin vse obvineniei odmieta a tvrdi, z'e materiali, so kor tenoe firma oboznamil c'ína strana, ne obsahoval neki utajen skutoc'nosti. Spoloc'nost TsNIIMASH-Export es viznam obh'od partner od Rusia Federal Kosmos agentura a vikonava teh'nika dohlad vo mnog kosmos projekti.

Res'etin bol zatknun vo november 2005. Vo posled roki bol vo Rusia vo suvislost so zneuz'ivanie od citliv informaciai obvinen vic vedari a novinari. Pripad poukazova na obavanie od Moskva zo rastenie od moc od sused C'ina. Hoc mezo tie dve krajinai se rozvija intenziv spolupraca, na priklad aj vo vojenie oblast, vic Rusia predstaviteli a odborniki vs'ak vnima C'ina vzostup so nevola.

Err... This text does rather look like one written by Slavo, not Ioannes. Or "S." and "I." are two alter egos of the same person?

do you say that because you can understand it?

On the contrary, when Ioannes writes a text I understand at least something. But here... What citliv means? It sounds like Hebrew to me.

This text is the outcome of the both languages (Slavo's and Ioannes')

We are friends and made an agreement to publish texts just in one "unified" language.

P.S.
I would recommend this "unifying" to Slovianski languages as well.
How many are these Slovianskis at the moment ?

BTW. citliv is sensitive.

It comes from the word " citlivy, citlivi, citliva, citlive, citlivemu, citliveho, citlivej, citlivym, citlivych, citlivymi, ...


Now, you can see how many endings have just this ONE word. But everywhere is
CITLIV that can be considered the word root.
We just use most of the slovak words and some of Ioannes's vocabulary that was done before.

If you use just the roots in "your own langs" and give translation to every word then your languages would be easier for everybody, providing that the grammar would be clear and without exceptions.

We did unite our languages, they use the same orthography now. If we were to unite it any further, we'd have Slovianski DC-on. Which Hellerick already discussed.

The same orthography is just "a drop in the sea" as for real unification of languages.

this is why Slovak is a bad language, čutlivi is more understandable to most Slavs
plus, citliv sounds like a Czech word, is it a loan

Ah, but we also have the same etymology, dictionary, and we only have a few differences in the grammar

OK iopq, I would accept c'utliv but not c'utlivi cause ending -i is not stable.
It varies : c'utlivi, c'utlive, c'utlivemu, c'utlivim, c'utliva .......

The problem of the Slovianskis languages is that nobody would like to learn them, because they are too difficult and too theoretical; but I have to admit: I do understand them.

And the problem of S+I is that it is so simple that I do not understand it.

So the best would be an understand of the "father" of Slovianski ( Ondrey Recxnik)and Slovio.

But Gabriel killed his ideas and Igor finally buried him!

Ja to bil

If you like the original ideas of Ondrej Recnik, you can use Slovianski not only without declension, but also without conjugation.

You cannot use Slovianski by Ondrej Rec'nik cause the grammar without declination, gender and conjugation with words would be different from e.g. Gabriel's and that is different language then. Other than other versions of Slovianski.

BTW. I would like to compare two or three versions of slovianski in the same text. Is it possible for you to write some text (the same) with all of your Slovianskis ? Then we could compare the words how "far" they are each other.

Hey anonimnik, do you really think that all the declination, gender and conjugation endings in all the slavic langauges are THE SAME ?
Don't be silly.

Have a look at any declination e.g. in russian, or macedonian and polish or czech or slovak, slovenian and you'll see the differences.

So, what are you talking about ? Let's talk not just about vocabulary but different aspects of grammar ?

Of course, I understand "almost" all the vocabulary from your langs but if I wanted to create some sentence it wouldn't be possible cause I know the best just my mother tongue grammar. I understand the words' endings when you use them but if I should make some sentence I would use logically other endings -
that match my mother tongue grammar. And that's the problem for the all slavs to use "your" languages. Basically, they wouldn't know what suffixes and prefixes they should use and they would use just their own ones.

That's the reason I got rid of all the enginds in my language and left just word roots that are very easy to use after learning them.

It's much easier to learn just word roots than learn all the declination suffixes with all the nouns and the same gender endings.

Once again, these endings are not the same in all slavic languages.

Of course, the endings are not always identical in all Slavic languages, just as word roots are not. The solution: to choose the most common and therefore the most understandable ones, not those that just the author likes.

How can you unify an inter-Slavic language with an inter-Slovak one? What's the target group of the resulting language?

Gabriel, you haven't got the idea of the language.
It's absolutely not " an interslovak langauge ".
And that's always the problem with you. You simply think out some term for anything that does'nt match the reality.
This language is just a guide how it should look like.

* BTW. You haven't answered to my previous texts above.

The only difference between Sl-N and Sl-P would be that where I write raketu, Gabriel would write raketa
So the case endings are different, since Gabriel doesn't use any cases

So what was the language of S., if not an inter-Slovak one?

Once again and again and again. It wasn't an "interslovak" language. It was just simplified slovak. And it's difference, isn't it ?

E.g. there are some attempts in Slovakia for getting rid of "ypsilon" from the slovak language and some small grammar changes as well. And we do not call it
"interslovak". Interslovak or however you may call it is not needed and never existed.

IT'S JUST SIMPLIFICATION OF THE LANGUAGE.

Do not mislead the terms.

I just wanted to say that the language of S. was for Slovaks and foreigners interested in Slovak. The language of I. was for Slavs and foreigners interested in Slavic. If you merge these two languages, what will be the target group of the resulting language? Won't it be too Slavic for Slovaks and Slovak-interested, and too Slovak for Slavs and Slavic-interested?

Here is one example how the Russians shotened their words :

Spoločenstvo nezávislých štátov (SNŠ, angl. skratka CIS; rus. Содружество Независимых Государств - Sodružestvo nezavisimych gosudarstv)

Here we can see that word GOSUDARSTVO was shortened to GOSUDARSTV.

(gosudarstv-ennych, gosudarstv-ennaja, gosudarstv-ennoe, gosudarstv-ennomu,
gosudarstv-ennym, gosudarstv-a, gosudarstv-ennyj, .......etc.)

You can object that it is genitive plural of this word but if it works with
shorten version with some of cases, then why not use it enywhere.

This is just small example that even in really existed natural and national
russian language we can see "naturally shortened" word.

So, why not use it in all-slavic one ?

Must everything its "target group" ?

Lots of languages have got their "target groups" and aims and efforts and, and, and...... and what are their results ? Nothing. Nothing happened with them for several dozens of years. Nothing fulfilled and caried out for what they were "designed" (Esperanto, Ido, Interlingua, Latine Sine Flexione, Novial, Globish, Atlango, even not Simplified basic English.

So, why do you think it's slick your language that will be that "right" for
what it was proposed ?

I just wonder very much how many readers or internet bloggers or chatters or anybody else that surfs on internet, have read your articles published ?
Or how many of them are regular readers.

It conserns all of us (Slovio, Slovianskis, S-lingva, Nov-slovenc'ina)

I do it just for my pleasure and I suppose you all do it as well.

I doubt very much that these articles that we all published are of deep interest of anybody (except us).

I was thinking about it all (our work). If we (each of us) changed our natural languages in just something small in grammar, it would have bigger interest among the readers. Of course, the articles would have to be about something interesting. For example, if I wrote some interesting article e.g. in slovak
without diacritics (that I usually do on internet), or used just -i instead of -y or like, I surely got more debate counterparts as if I publish the same articles in any of our languages.

What do you think, how many people are interested in what we write in our "own languages" ? Could we count them on the fingers of one hand ?

So what's the point of doing that further on ?

I just wonder very much how many readers or internet bloggers or chatters or anybody else that surfs on internet, have read your articles published ?
Or how many of them are regular readers.

It conserns all of us (Slovio, Slovianskis, S-lingva, Nov-slovenc'ina)

I do it just for my pleasure and I suppose you all do it as well.

I doubt very much that these articles that we all published are of deep interest of anybody (except us).

I was thinking about it all (our work). If we (each of us) changed our natural languages in just something small in grammar, it would have bigger interest among the readers. Of course, the articles would have to be about something interesting. For example, if I wrote some interesting article e.g. in slovak
without diacritics (that I usually do on internet), or used just -i instead of -y or like, I surely got more debate counterparts as if I publish the same articles in any of our languages.

What do you think, how many people are interested in what we write in our "own languages" ? Could we count them on the fingers of one hand ?

So what's the point of doing that further on ?

I think the best way will be if each of us will concentrate just on those readers that belong to his language category, i.e. Gabriel to the Czechs, SI to the Slovaks, Eugeniusx to the Germans (or other langs he is familiar),
Hellerick to ....., iopq to ...... etc.

You can do more progresive work in your own mother tongues than creating or make corrections in something that is just some kind of illusion or dull idea published on internet with no readers' interest in a large scale.

We have been writing our texts for more than 2 years with no effect.
It's just our illusion that e.g. 150 million Russians or 38 million Poles
will respond to our texts. No, it woun't happen. At least while we are alive in this world. Even not 100 russians and 100 poles will respond to our langs.

It might happen probably after accepting some international all-mankind language but then it will be for nothing then.

If the mankind probably have one common communication language then I don't think the Slavs will want some for themselves.

Russian +1
I do like the idea of a common language based on natural and related languages and I found Slovio quite understandable. Just keep on!
Udacxi!