Slavic Latin alphabets based on Polish

[Jan Olbracht]

In OTL almost all alphabets of Slavic nations using latin script were based on Czech alphabet. What POD is needed to change it, so at least some of these Slavic nations use alphabet based on Polish, so w instead v, no háčeks and more diphtongs (perhaps Croats and Slovenes, bonus if Slovaks are included and respect if Czechs too)? My thoughts are:
-erode Czech alphabet from use if possible (forbidden as"heretic" and replaced by new one based more on German, during national revival Czechs adopted more "Slavic" script from Poles)
-preventing partitions also would be helpful. As result Polish culture fare better and is more influental. If 19th century Poland is succesful state Croats and Slovenes may see Polish as example how alphabet of Catholic Slavs should look like.

 

[garabik]

Easy, make the Polish rationalize their alphabet similarly to the Czech orthography, and then the others could be said to be based on the Polish one


Seriously, though, it is archaic, inefficient and inconsistent - (ż instead of expected zz, -cja for Latin loanwords because -ci- is already taken for ć, the horrid combination -szcz etc.).

There are not so many Slavic languages using Latin script anyway - Slovak would follow Czech barring some serious deviations, (Latin) Rusyn is a joke, Kashubian and Sorbian(s) are irrelevant, Slovene would follow Croatian. So it comes really to Croats and Slovenes deciding otherwise.

Anyway. the contemporary Czech (upon which other Slavic alphabets are based - and also Lithuanian, being designed by a Czech linguist) is already heavily reformed, before the so called "skladná oprava" in mid-19th century it featured some rather unusual features ("g" for /j/, "ǧ" for /g/, "j" for /i:/). So, the POD can be that Šafařík is indifferent and Czechs continue to use the archaic orthography (maybe with "analogic" features, i.e. using more morphematic features introduced by Dobrovský&co.). Slovaks follow, but Croats and Slovenes do not and look towards the Polish language, as well as Sorbians and Lithuanians.

 

[Jan Olbracht]

Ok. So Czech alphabet remained archaic. 19th century came, Croats and Slovenes are codifing their alphabets. Poland is still independent and is local power, so Polish culture is richer and more influental in region. Croatian reformers look at Poland as an example of succesfull Catholic Slavs and to strenght cultural ties with Poles modify Croatian alphabet to resemble Polish.

 

[abc123]

Ok. So Czech alphabet remained archaic. 19th century came, Croats and Slovenes are codifing their alphabets. Poland is still independent and is local power, so Polish culture is richer and more influental in region. Croatian reformers look at Poland as an example of succesfull Catholic Slavs and to strenght cultural ties with Poles modify Croatian alphabet to resemble Polish.

IMO, the reason why Ljudevit Gaj took Czech forms for Croatian language is because Czechs were in Habsburg Monarchy and Poland was not independent. If Poland was independent country, maybe they would look more at Poland...

 

[Jan Olbracht]

My thoughts about how would Croatian alphabet more based on Polish one would look like-changes from OTL ortography: cz instead of č, dż instead of dž, dj for đ, like in original Gaj's alphabet (dź would make no sense because there is no ź in Croatian) ń instead nj, sz and ż for š and ž and finally w instead of v. Now there are no letters in Croatian alphabet which are absent in Polish (althought some digraphs are). Also before syllabic liquid r letter y is written. (Optionally ni is written instead of ń before a vowel like in Polish.)

Example text:

Hyrwatska abeceda nazwana josz i hyrwatska latinica (posebno prilagodjeno latiniczno pismo namjeńeno za pisańe hyrwatskog jezika

 

[Dan1988]

^ Well, like all Shtokavian in general (and also in Chakavian and Kajkavian), Croatian also distinguishes between short vowels and long vowels, an underspecification in Gajica. In that case, <á, é, í, ó, ú> could be introduced as the long forms of <a, e, i, o, u>.

On the other hand, with the right POD, "Croatian" could be taken to mean Chakavian. Here's a look at a typical consonant inventory for Chakavian. The vowel inventory varies greatly depending on which dialect of Chakavian you take as standard, whether it be Buzet or a more central one that follows Jakubinskij's law or something else within the Chakavian spectrum.

 

[Jan Olbracht]

^ Well, like all Shtokavian in general (and also in Chakavian and Kajkavian), Croatian also distinguishes between short vowels and long vowels, an underspecification in Gajica. In that case, <á, é, í, ó, ú> could be introduced as the long forms of <a, e, i, o, u>.

Althought distinction between short and long vowels disappeared from Polish language before 16th century, they changed into so called "głoski pochylone" (inclined sounds?) written as á, é, ó. In early 19th century they were still in use occasionally until á and é finally merged with normal a and e and ó changed into the same sound like that represented by u. So diacritic ' over vowel could be taken from Polish.

 

[Dan1988]

True.

As for something similar, there was also the Belarusian Latin alphabet. Earlier forms of it were similar to Polish, orthographically, particularly in the early version of Branisłaŭ Taraškievič's grammar.

 

[garabik]

Example text:

Hyrwatska abeceda nazwana josz i hyrwatska latinica (posebno prilagodjeno latiniczno pismo namjeńeno za pisańe hyrwatskog jezika

And also use the ie digraph for the reflex of Slavic yat' - this has in fact been used OTL in some orthographies, but also for diphthongs:

Chrwatska pisana jeziczna basztina swoje poczetke bilieżi već krajem XI. stolieća. Najstarii su chrwatski tekstowi pisani svojewrsnom mieszawinom chrwatske inaczice crkwenoslawenskog jezika i archaiczne czakawsztine te iskliucziwo glagolicom.


Note the ch. And also the ambiguity of li and ni - but introducing ł would be too much.

Anyway, the other subtle difference is that Polish is rather more etymological and morphematic - if Croatian follows (and write teżko, srbski instead of teszko, srpski), then the Vienna literary agreement might not be that easy and Serbian and Croatian will grew more separated (much like Czech and Slovak OTL). Where would this lead is anyone's guess.

 

[Valena]

True.

As for something similar, there was also the Belarusian Latin alphabet. Earlier forms of it were similar to Polish, orthographically, particularly in the early version of Branisłaŭ Taraškievič's grammar.

Considering the region he lived in, this is entirely reasonable.
Though the only place the Latin alphabet of my language is seen by me on daily basis is Minsk subway (it is used to write proper names of stations in "English" signs), but this is like 90% Polish derived.

 

[abc123]

Chrwatska pisana jeziczna basztina swoje poczetke bilieżi već krajem XI. stolieća. Najstarii su chrwatski tekstowi pisani svojewrsnom mieszawinom chrwatske inaczice crkwenoslawenskog jezika i archaiczne czakawsztine te iskliucziwo glagolicom.


.

Intresting. Such way of spelling presents to me allmost no problem for reading. Writing would of course be more difficult...

 

[Dan1988]

Considering the region he lived in, this is entirely reasonable.
Though the only place the Latin alphabet of my language is seen by me on daily basis is Minsk subway (it is used to write proper names of stations in "English" signs), but this is like 90% Polish derived.

Definitely. My joy with that, albeit with some minor modifications, would be using it as an alternative for the Esperanto alphabet. Seriously - Lacinka now and Esperanto look very similar, although it wasn't the case when Zamenhof presented the Unuo Libro. The only downside is that Esperanto lacks any form of palatalization except <tj> in the interjection <tju!> and the very marginal <nj> and <ĉj> (though early forms of Proto-Esperanto did contain palatalization), so one would have to be creative in adapting the Belarusian Latin alphabet. So it's possible.

 

[Jan Olbracht]

And also use the ie digraph for the reflex of Slavic yat' - this has in fact been used OTL in some orthographies, but also for diphthongs:

Chrwatska pisana jeziczna basztina swoje poczetke bilieżi već krajem XI. stolieća. Najstarii su chrwatski tekstowi pisani svojewrsnom mieszawinom chrwatske inaczice crkwenoslawenskog jezika i archaiczne czakawsztine te iskliucziwo glagolicom.


Note the ch. And also the ambiguity of li and ni - but introducing ł would be too much.

Anyway, the other subtle difference is that Polish is rather more etymological and morphematic - if Croatian follows (and write teżko, srbski instead of teszko, srpski), then the Vienna literary agreement might not be that easy and Serbian and Croatian will grew more separated (much like Czech and Slovak OTL). Where would this lead is anyone's guess.

Changing ortography without touching the language itself can make it much more understandable for user of another kin language. Croatian text written that way is easier to me for understand that those written in Gajica. I think it's something comparable to Spanish/Portuguese situation-due to phonetic changes spoken Portuguese significantly differs from Spanish, but written form of both languages is much more simillar. On the contrary Kashubian language, which is very clouse to Polish use such strange ortography that it's really hard for Pole to understand Kashubian text. Polish ortography is very phonemic, altought maybe not to the degree of Gajica or Vukovica , but is quite etymological at the same time. The prize is extensive use of digraphs and two letters for the same phoneme. Polish u and ó represent exactly the same phoneme, but the later interchange with o while the former do not, similar situation with ż and rz (the later came from historical soft r), but because of it a Pole would see resemblance of words rzeka and rijeka, if the former were written żeka instead it would not be so obvious.

 

[kasumigenx]

What about there is no Hussite revolt and Poland unites with Bohemia in the 14th century, the old Czech orthography which is similar to Polish will be the base of the Orthography of other Slavic countries.

This what I am doing in my TL Great Lithuania.

 

[Cahaya Purnama]

can anyone create Full Alfabet of it?

 

[garabik]

can anyone create Full Alfabet of it?

Sure.

a b cz chz d e é f g h ch i/y/ g/i/y k/c l m n o p q r rs zz ſſ t u/v w y zz s

This is 14th century Czech alphabet, when the orthography stabilized a bit, but there are still variants. As per OTL, ſ would be replaced by s sometime in the 18th century...