• This topic has 6 voices and 9 replies.
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #346419

    Anonymous

    As some of you might know, in all West Slavic languages, there's a very specific symbol in the orthography – ó in Polish, both Sorbians* and Kashubian, ô in Slovak and ů in Czech and Silesian. They all might represent a different sound but they all share the same etymology – apparently, it stems from long o. In Czech, this long o got diphthongised into uo and then changed into long u. In other West Slavic, the development of the long o was similar but the results are a bit different (Slovak preserved the diphthong uo, Polish shortened long u into a short u etc). Often, the symbol ô/ů/ó alternates with ordinary o (Czech:bŮh but bOže, Polish:grÓd but w grOdzie).

    My question is:why long o? Why not some other long vowel? And why is the symbol so universal across West Slavic languages even if some West Slavic languages lost the difference between long and short vowels? Why they "decided" to keep the symbol for long o?

    *According to omniglot.com/writing/sorbian.htm, "ó [o] appears in some Lower Sorbian dictionaries, though some linguists claim it is not used in Lower Sorbian."

    #430361

    Anonymous

    You are wrong.

    "Ó" is not long, described as "u:" in phonetic symbols. It is the same as "u". The only thing which makes them different is ortography. When there is a word "koza" (goat) in singular, in plural (genitive) it will be "kóz". When there is "o" in plural will be "ó". It pronunciation it is the same. You can nowhere see the difference between "kutwa" and "krótki" – it is the same. The only thing is ortography. Maybe in the past there was a difference in photenics, but nowadays, no.

    But I've heard once, that in Polish language is more exceptions than rules :) It might be true.

    #430362

    Anonymous

    I know, Gaius. That's why I said "Polish shortened long u into a short u". I know Polish lacks the distinction between long and short vowels which is still present in Kashubian, Slovak and Czech but was lost in other Slavic languages (at least those codified ones).

    #430363

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    I know, Gaius. That's why I said "Polish shortened long u into a short u". I know Polish lacks the distinction between long and short vowels which is still present in Kashubian, Slovak and Czech but was lost in other Slavic languages (at least those codified ones).

    Jesus, I meant "but was lost in other West Slavic languages. I can't see the edit button.

    #430364

    Anonymous

    Tbh to me West Slavic orthography sometimes dosen't make sense at all. Like i was lisening to Polish song that Gajus gave me where there was word Bóg on screen, cuz lyrics were added, but when hearing it, it sounded more like Buh to me. Srrsly wth u west ppl. :D

    #430365

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    Tbh to me West Slavic orthography sometimes dosen't make sense at all. Like i was lisening to Polish song that Gajus gave me where there was word Bóg on screen, cuz lyrics were added, but when hearing it, it sounded more like Buh to me. Srrsly wth u west ppl. :D

    Don't mix West Slaves all together. It's not a fault of other West Slaves, that Poles are stuck on old-fashioned orthography:-) And if I'm not wrong, that Slovenes also use some elements of Czech orthography, so be careful with such comments or we may want our hačeks back ;D

    About polish ó
    Originally it was long o, then some sound between o and u, then it changed to u, but orthography stayed. ( http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%93 )

    #430366

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    Don't mix West Slaves all together. It's not a fault of other West Slaves, that Poles are stuck on old-fashioned orthography:-) And if I'm not wrong, that Slovenes also use some elements of Czech orthography, so be careful with such comments or we may want our hačeks back ;D

    About polish ó
    Originally it was long o, then some sound between o and u, then it changed to u, but orthography stayed. ( http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%93 )

    Yes i know i know. I am messing a bit but yeah some cases like that Polish one are really unusual. It makes it interesting, like English wrriting. :D Well anyways i am not pro on West Slavic linguistics so i cant say much but yeah actually Slovene orhography isn't correct, "literate" enough either. So Polh, Polha, Polhi is actually pronounced more like Pouh, Pouha, Pouhi.

    Since we are at this topic an interesting information. Primož Trubar, our protestant who made first book in Slovene was very well informed with Czech & Polish orthography and alphabet. Funnly he denounced them on the grounds of being not pretty (haček's and such). On the same account he swaped from gothic wrriting to italic. Had he not such an opinion we would possibly have Czechic influenced wrriting already in that era. Instead he used German orthography and alphabet. Which made it less transparent on č,š,ž and such. For example sh could mean š or ž or s could be z or s thow in minuscle š & s were usually wrriten with ſ in minuscule but there was nothing absolute in practice.

    #430367

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    Since we are at this topic an interesting information. Primož Trubar, our protestant who made first book in Slovene was very well informed with Czech & Polish orthography and alphabet. Funnly he denounced them on the grounds of being not pretty (haček's and such). On the same account he swaped from gothic wrriting to italic. Had he not such an opinion we would possibly have Czechic influenced wrriting already in that era. Instead he used German orthography and alphabet. Which made it less transparent on č,š,ž and such. For example sh could mean š or ž or s could be z or s thow in minuscle š & s were usually wrriten with ſ in minuscule but there was nothing absolute in practice.

    That's very interesting, because in 16th Century was Czech orthography still full of digraphs, although some forms of diacritical marks were introduced already at the beginning of 15th Century, and then some Czech text could look e. g. like this: "Pane Geziissi Kryste Synu Boha zywego Studnicze a pocžatek wšiie dobroty kteryžto s przebytku otcze wžywost …", which should be pronounce circa like "Pane Ježíši Kriste, synu Boha živého, studnice a počátek vší dobroty, kterýžto z přebytku otce v živost …". So it was still a long way to fully recognition of háčeks and stuff, which (contrary to Primož) Czech protestants loved a lot:D

    I can understand that he didn't like it, I am myself also not sure, if I like it or not:D (but ofr sure it's easier to read than digraphs) And I also heard that Ljudevit Gaj was also criticized by someone for introducing "Czech flyshit" in Croatian alphabet:D

    #430368

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    I can understand that he didn't like it, I am myself also not sure, if I like it or not:D (but ofr sure it's easier to read than digraphs) And I also heard that Ljudevit Gaj was also criticized by someone for introducing "Czech fly****" in Croatian alphabet:D

    There actually was a dispute between Slovene intelectuals about which writing system we should use in the first half of the 19th century called črkarska pravda. Prešeren and his buddies defended the old script (bohoričica), while some like Dajnko or Metelko tried to introduce their own systems (dajnčica, metelčica). It was mostly about the sounds for č, š, ž, s, z, c, o and e. Dajnko and Metelko simply took some cyrillic letters or made up their own for these sounds. They got "defeated" and bohoričica remained though it got slowly replaced by gajica only shortly after. At fist people didn't like gajica as it took them too long to stop and make the kljukica (or is it called strešica? I always confuse these two … "haček" as you know it), while in bohoričica they could simply write whole words in one move. But in a few years gajica (slovene version of gajica has 25 letters while Croatian has 30 letters and digraphs) completely took over, that can be seen very good in the publications of the newspaper Kmetijske in rokodelske novice, where they published the articles in the script in which theyy receaved it, at least at first. But even today our version of gajica is considered to not be alright as we have to write down 29 or our language's sounds with 25 letters.

    #430369

    Anonymous

    Correction: Slovak language contains ô (uo) as well as ó (read as ooo).

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Slavorum

4 User(s) Online Join Server
  • Fia
  • kony97
  • Tujev
  • jorgos