Talk:Interslavic

Cyrillic name

In the sample words table the name Slovianski is transliterated as "Словянски". Is it correct? Shouldn't it be "Словиански"? Hellerick (talk) 15:34, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Not really. 'я' corresponds both to 'ia' or 'ja' in Cyrillic. 'иа' and 'ия' correspond to 'ija'.

--Jidu Boite (talk) 10:19, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Then, shouldn't it be shown in the table in the alphabet section? Hellerick (talk) 11:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Hiya Hellerick! Well, the thing is that back in 2006 when Slovianski was conceived, we used i as a j/palataliser after a consonant and before a vowel. Later we changed that to j: ljubiti instead of liubiti. Thing is only, by that time the language had already acquired some notability under the name "Slovianski", and so we decided not to leave it. I think the Cyrillic form "Словиански" may have been the result of that. But it simply means "Slavic", and therefore "Словянски" is correct. It's probably due to Slovianski's flexible nature that it is known in various name variants: Словиански, Словянски, Словјански, Словијански. Cheers, —IJzeren Jan _Uszkiełtu? 00:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Formatting

In the "Users" section on the main template, there are two spaces between "hundreds" and "2012". Does anyone know how to fix this?--Frglz (talk) 23:53, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Text to Speech Voice

There is need for Text to Speech Voice link in the article, or project who wants to create one. Just as purpose of wikipedia is to facilitate and promote expansion of knowledge and science and literature.

Family: Linguistic and Utilitaristic

Please note Talk:Latino_sine_flexione#Family:_Linguistic_and_Utilitaristic. Also note the paragraph about whether Interslavic really is a "Zonal language" or a "full" International Auxiliary language. --217.224.132.211 (talk) 12:50, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Interslavic language. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100219051417/http://www.ahistoria.pl/index.php/2010/02/jezyk-ktory-maja-zrozumiec-wszyscy-slowianie/ to http://www.ahistoria.pl/index.php/2010/02/jezyk-ktory-maja-zrozumiec-wszyscy-slowianie/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100301014403/http://www.zdruhejstrany.sk/%E2%80%9Ekvik-kvik%E2%80%9C-alebo-zvieracia-farma-po-slovensky/ to http://www.zdruhejstrany.sk/%E2%80%9Ekvik-kvik%E2%80%9C-alebo-zvieracia-farma-po-slovensky/
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120530192828/http://www.melano.hu/news.php?extend.185 to http://www.melano.hu/news.php?extend.185
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141213181511/http://www.vsekiden.com/?p=65542 to http://www.vsekiden.com/?p=65542
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120303161508/http://www.marica.bg/show.php?id=21583 to http://www.marica.bg/show.php?id=21583

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:29, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Intelligibility

It would be good to add the percentage of intelligibility of Interslavic by native speakers of various Slavic languages. On YouTube videos in Interslavic, I've seen comments from people from places like Bosnia, Russia, and Poland saying that they could understand between 95% and 99% of what was spoken (but could make sense of the spoken version of the language better than the written one). 173.88.246.138 (talk) 06:16, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

CHAOS

THIS PAGE REDIRECTS TO ITSELF Muonium777 (talk) 15:28, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Schematic vs naturalistic

"Its main focus lies on instant understandability rather than easy learning, a balance typical for naturalistic (as opposed to schematic) languages."

The problem is that the web page cited as a source for this generalisation cites, in turn, another Wikipedia article for the definitions of schematic vs natualistic. In the meantime, however, Wikipedia no longer defines "schematic languages" in the way the web page uses. The current definitions in International auxiliary language claim that schematic languages are mixtures between a posterior and a priori languages in that they "have some a priori qualities" in that some of their morphemes or derivational devices are invented. A priori languages are said to be regular and simple, but it is not asserted that a posteriori ones aren't. These definitions aren't sourced to anything, I don't know whether the earlier ones were either. Personally, I would object to the suggestion that naturalistic languages aren't regular and simplified (Interlingua is supposed to be a typical naturalistic Romance auxlang, and yet it eliminates gender and verb agreement), or that ease of learning precludes ease of understanding. This is an excuse by the creators of Interslavic to create a language that retains all the complexities of most Slavic languages in order to make it sound more familiar - the claim that it wouldn't even be understandable otherwise is highly dubious. --178.249.169.67 (talk) 09:30, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Typo report ľ => ĺ

I think that ľ is a typo for ĺ in this line > The consonants ľ, ń, ŕ, ť, ď, ś and ź are... in the extended alphabet section — Preceding unsigned comment added by Medzhu88 (talk • contribs) 23:47, 11 November 2023 (UTC)