Talk:Slavic Languages
Reading the IB main page in Russian and knowing smth about the IB history of Russia, methinks, would the orthography be now similar *there* to *here*?
Читая главную страницу ИБ на русском и зная что-то об истории России в ИБ, думаю, орфография русского была бы теперь такая же *там* и *здесь*?
or
Читая главную страницу ИБ на русскомъ и зная что-то объ исторiи Россiи в ИБ, думаю, орѳографія русскаго была бы тѣпѣрь такая-же *тамъ* и *здѣсь*?
Jan II. 13:52, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- Gosh, that looks weird! Like Ukrainian crossed with Tuvin or something. I don't know enough about the history of Russian Cyrillic to answer beyond that, though, I'm afraid. You've got me curious, though... - Geoff 22:59, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- there was a ortho-reform conducted by bolsheviks in 1917-1918, which hardly would happen in IB world, so methinks, russian *there* should have had the old, traditional orthography. i bet, white council would preserve it. too links are related:
- Реформа русской орфографии 1918 года
- Jan II. 07:47, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- You're probably right. But if we change over the Russian orthography to the traditional version, I will need to rework the Qazaq and InterTurkic Cyrillic alphablets, which are based on the modern version. And what happens to Alyaska? Could be worse, but I've got too much on my plate right now to faff with it. - Geoff 11:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- then, we need a good story, why the ortho-reform was done :) Jan II. 17:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not saying we can't use the traditional form in IB. In fact, it does seem more reasonable to do so in the IB context. But I don't think I have time right now to do the necessary follow-through with the other Cyrillic-alphabet stuff that falls under my hegemony. :) But you're right. If we keep the modern and decree that a change was made (this is beginning to sound a bit like a temporal paradox) we do need a viable back-story. - Geoff 11:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- if you agree, i may help you, at least to summarise the differencies between *here* and *there* russian ortho (creating the IB russian language page) and to correct e.g. the main page russian text. Jan II. 07:33, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- I think your comment that "I bet the White Council would preserve it (the trad. orthography)" was exactly right; they almost certainly would. If you'll do the IB.Russian stuff and summarise the changes as you say, that will give me a good starting point for altering the Turkestani and Uygur Cyrillic transcriptions when I 'do' have time. Alyaska and Oregon are on their own, not that there's much detail on either. - Geoff 11:29, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Oregon Cyrillic
Moved this part of the discussion to Talk:English.
Peter's Changes
The question arises, though - would Peter's changes have happened? I admittedly haven't looked into the history of Russia in IB - but I did glance at the Russian orthography changes, and it seems that most of them were brought in by Peter - so, did that happen there? Did the White Council revert them if they did? Or did they just not allow the post-Revolution changes to occur? BoArthur
- honestly, current agreement (QSS) on russia goes this way: what has happened before 1914 was not that much different *here* from *there*. and peter I. and his reforms high probably would happen *there* as *here*. white council was strongly conservative, so i do not believe they will allow change the old ortho, especially if it was advocated by bolsheviks. moreover, bolsheviks *there* do not have enough time to press the reforms to come through. they have lost sooner. and even they would succeed in official implementation, white council would abolish these changes quickly. hypothetically, after 1991, something may happen to turn russian language from SNORistic "visage". i have contacted jan I. to contribute, so maybe he will. Jan II. 07:35, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
