Reconstruction talk:Proto-Slavic/maťexa
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Thadh in topic Ukrainian and Belarusian
Ukrainian and Belarusian
[edit]@ZomBear: Hi! Do the Ukrainian and Belarusian languages go back to Old Ruthenian? This is primitive, and not true. Gnosandes ❀ (talk) 20:08, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- If the Old Ruthenian forms are not fictitious, then why did you remove them? :v Gnosandes ❀ (talk) 04:06, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Thadh, what do you say about these objections? --ZomBear (talk) 10:04, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- @ZomBear: I think Gnosandes is referring to the wave theory? If so, we can't really use that in our descendants trees. Thadh (talk) 10:24, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Thadh, ZomBear: Yes, you are right, that is why etymologies can be written more accurately, cf. шэры. Gnosandes ❀ (talk) 10:57, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- @ZomBear: I saw that you again returned the Old Ruthenian language as an ancestor, but is it really necessary to repeat that this bookish language only influenced the literary Ukrainian and Belarusian languages, but is not their direct ancestor. Just like the language of commercial monuments of Moscow Rus' influenced the Russian literary language :v Gnosandes ❀ (talk) 10:57, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Gnosandes вы делаете меня одного виноватым... Не знаю, устраивайте обсуждение с вовлечением множества других участников (в частности Thadh, организовавшим добавление "Old Ruthenian") и пусть пересматривается всё древо славянских языков. Если быть совсем критичным, то и "Old East Slavic" нельзя будет указывать как предка украинского, белорусского и русского языков, а все их надо выводить напрямую от праславянского. -- ZomBear (talk) 12:02, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- We use the literary language as a hub for all the dialects spoken in the region where that literary language was used. In this case, Old Ruthenian is used as a label for any East Slavic dialect that later developed into a form which is currently written in Ukrainian, Belarusian or Rusyn. We can't accomodate the wave theory in descendant trees, so please stop wasting everyone's time with trying to reinvent the wheel: If you don't like it, bring it up on WT:BP, since it is a site-wide issue, but don't go around policeing edits that put forms as descendants of not-so-perfect terms of other languages. Thadh (talk) 12:43, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- @ZomBear: I saw that you again returned the Old Ruthenian language as an ancestor, but is it really necessary to repeat that this bookish language only influenced the literary Ukrainian and Belarusian languages, but is not their direct ancestor. Just like the language of commercial monuments of Moscow Rus' influenced the Russian literary language :v Gnosandes ❀ (talk) 10:57, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Thadh, ZomBear: Yes, you are right, that is why etymologies can be written more accurately, cf. шэры. Gnosandes ❀ (talk) 10:57, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- @ZomBear: I think Gnosandes is referring to the wave theory? If so, we can't really use that in our descendants trees. Thadh (talk) 10:24, 15 May 2022 (UTC)