1549 messages over 194 pages: << Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 36 ... 193 194 Next >>
Chung Diglot Senior Member Joined 7156 days ago 4228 posts - 8259 votes 20 sounds Speaks: English*, French Studies: Polish, Slovak, Uzbek, Turkish, Korean, Finnish
| Message 281 of 1549 16 March 2011 at 3:32pm | IP Logged |
hribecek wrote:
Chung wrote:
Thank you. I hope that it answers some of your questions about Finno-Ugric languages. It was a pain but ultimately rewarding for me to dig out that comparative material since those languages are not well-served by literature in English.
I would like to add a few bits to Maxval's comments about Bulgarian and Macedonian. Indeed the question about what distinguishes a language from a dialect is highly charged in the Balkans. A comparable parallel between Bulgarian and Macedonian would be something like Czech and Slovak. Like Czech and Slovak, Bulgarian and Macedonian were standardized on different dialects (Bulgarian was standardized primarily on dialects typical of eastern Bulgaria while Macedonian was standardized primarily on dialects typical of central Macedonia). A hypothetical "Bulgaronian" or "Bulgaro-Macedonian" language would probably have come to life if language planners had chosen some sub-dialect that is currently classified as "eastern Macedonian" or "southwestern Bulgarian". The analogy to a hypothetical "Czechoslovak" language would probably involve language planners having chosen to standardize using a subdialect spoken near Hodonín in southeastern Moravia which is pretty much indistinguishable from what passes off as dialect in Skalica in Slovakia. |
|
|
Köszönöm a információt. Látom, hogy beszélsz szlovákul. Engem érdekel, mennyibe értesz a cseh nyelvet? Én beszélek csehül és azt hiszem, hogy értem 75% szlovákul, talán többet, ez attól függ honnan szlovákiában vannak az emberek, például az embereket Bratiszlávától értem talán 85%, de az embereket a kereti résztől értem kévésebben, talán csak 40% vagy kévésebb. Természetesen, a cseh emberek értik 99.9% a szlovák nyelvet Bratiszlávától (a nyugati nyelvjárást). |
|
|
I'm not sure if I'm the best person to ask because I have studied Czech in addition to Slovak, so I'm not totally reliant on Slovak when processing Czech. In general I understand about 80% of what's presented to me in Standard Czech. The percentage is lower when I deal with Colloquial Czech.
1 person has voted this message useful
| maxval Pentaglot Senior Member Bulgaria maxval.co.nr Joined 5073 days ago 852 posts - 1577 votes Speaks: Hungarian*, Bulgarian, English, Spanish, Russian Studies: Latin, Modern Hebrew
| Message 282 of 1549 16 March 2011 at 3:41pm | IP Logged |
maxval wrote:
hribecek wrote:
maxval wrote:
About the name of Bratislava.
In Hungarian all former Hungarian cities are used with their original Hungarian names. So Bratislava is Pozsony in Hungarian.
Maybe you dont know this fact: Bratislava was the capital of Hungary since 1526 until 1848.
Hungary had 5 different capitals in its history. |
|
|
I knew that Bratislava was the capital at some time in the past but I didn't know that it was for more than 300 years! That's very surprising for me. I also didn't know that it's known as Pozsony in Hungarian. What were the other 3 former capitals?
Mit szerint (mi szerinte?) egy átlag magyar? Azt akarja, hogy a előző magyar részek Szlovákiában, Ausztriában, az előző Jugoszláviában és Romaniában vannak (probably should be the imperative mood here but I still haven't learned the forms of it) ismét magyarországon? |
|
|
The first capital was Székesfehérvár at the very beginning of the Hungarian Kingdom, then Esztergom, and since the 15th century was Buda. When Buda was occupied by the Turks, the capital was moved to Bratislava. After then Buda (Budapest) again.
Debrecen was the capital for a few months in 1849 and alsp for a few months in 1944-1945.
You know in 1944-1945 there were TWO Hungarian governments - like now in Libya... :-) |
|
|
Something important to add.
In reality between 1526 and 1918 there was no Hungary in the strict sense of the word "country". It was part of a larger entity. So Bratislava and later Buda(pest) were capitals not of an independent country, but of a "province". The real capital was Vienna. This was changed only in 1867, when both Buda(pest) and Vienna became capitals of the whole Habsburg Empire.
2 persons have voted this message useful
| hribecek Triglot Senior Member Czech Republic Joined 5349 days ago 1243 posts - 1458 votes Speaks: English*, Czech, Spanish Studies: Italian, Polish, Slovak, Hungarian, Toki Pona, Russian
| Message 283 of 1549 19 March 2011 at 6:35pm | IP Logged |
Maxval, tudsz magyarazni nekem, milyen a különbség 'ön' és 'maga' között. Mikor használnom a egyiket és mikor a másiket? A könyvemben azt leírték, de még nekem nem egyértelmű.
Előre köszönöm
ps. holnap fogok írni új levelet
Edited by hribecek on 19 March 2011 at 6:36pm
1 person has voted this message useful
| maxval Pentaglot Senior Member Bulgaria maxval.co.nr Joined 5073 days ago 852 posts - 1577 votes Speaks: Hungarian*, Bulgarian, English, Spanish, Russian Studies: Latin, Modern Hebrew
| Message 284 of 1549 19 March 2011 at 7:23pm | IP Logged |
hribecek wrote:
Maxval, tudsz magyarazni nekem, milyen a különbség 'ön' és 'maga' között. Mikor használnom a egyiket és mikor a másiket? A könyvemben azt leírték, de még nekem nem egyértelmű.
Előre köszönöm
ps. holnap fogok írni új levelet |
|
|
Gyakorlatilag semmi különbség nincs, az "ön" kicsit udvariasabb, hivatalosabb forma, mint a "maga". Írásban viszont, hivatalos levélben sosem írnám azt, hogy "maga", mindig csak azt, hogy "ön".
2 persons have voted this message useful
| hribecek Triglot Senior Member Czech Republic Joined 5349 days ago 1243 posts - 1458 votes Speaks: English*, Czech, Spanish Studies: Italian, Polish, Slovak, Hungarian, Toki Pona, Russian
| Message 285 of 1549 20 March 2011 at 10:28am | IP Logged |
A quick couple of questions.
1) Do Hungarians ever make mistakes distinguishing between the letters 'a' and 'o'? I know there is a very small difference in the sound but I can't hear it?
2) What are typical mistakes that perhaps a less educated Hungarian makes in their language?
Előre köszönöm
1 person has voted this message useful
| hribecek Triglot Senior Member Czech Republic Joined 5349 days ago 1243 posts - 1458 votes Speaks: English*, Czech, Spanish Studies: Italian, Polish, Slovak, Hungarian, Toki Pona, Russian
| Message 286 of 1549 20 March 2011 at 12:54pm | IP Logged |
A új levelem. Azt hiszem, hogy azt írtam nagyon rosszul.
A ÓCSÉM - A FÉRFI AKI SZERETI A MEDVÉKET
Én is szeretem a állatokat és többszer ökkel dolgoztam, például a erdőben Costa Ricában és a nagy macskákkal Belizeben, de végül találtam a szenvedélyemet - a világ, a kúltura és a nyelvek, hogy a utolsó levelemetben leírtam. Most akarok valamit a ócsémről írni, mert a életje elég érdekes. Hasonló nekem, sokáig nem tudta, mit fog csinálni sem milyen munkát szeretné. Azért utazott sokat is és kereste a szenvedélyét. Egy önkéntes munka alatt Amerikában, végre azt találta - a medvéket!
Minden nyár Amerikában a ócsém vigyaz sok medvékre, a erdőben ételeket a medvéknek letesz, mert a medvéknek az az erdő bistonságos, a vadászat tilos és ő és a többiek ott akarnak, hogy a medvék ez a rész erdőben maradnak, mert itt a közelben a más erdőkben a vadászat nem tilos és nekik veszélyes (vadászati idény alatt). Ott tölt három hónap minden év és aztán visszamegy Angliába néhány hónapra, ahol gyárokban pénzt keres. Aztán, amikor elég pénzje van, megint valahol megy a medvékhez! Szokott menni Horvátországba, de volt is Indiában, Ecuadorban és más országokban. A minden országokbanmedvék miatt volt. A családunknak ez vicces, mert amikor a ócsém fiatalobb, neki hívtük "bear"nek, mert tűnött úgy medvékne - a nagy kéze, lábja, feje vannak és elég magas.
Nem tudom, milyen pontos okja van, miért a medvéket szereti - tudom, hogy neki tetsznek a medvék megjelenésjük és személyiségjük, de azt hiszem, hogy főleg szeret lenni és lakni minden nap a természetben és a medvékkel kell lennie a természetben. Ez a életfajtát én is szeretném, de ezek a idők (a medvékkel) között nem szeretnék dolgozni sok hónap a gyárokban.
Most Angliában van, de Áprilisban újra megy Horvátországba egy hónapra és akkor egy hónapra Bulgáriába megy. Mindkét kirándulás a medvékhez megy.
Hogy mondtam, én is a éllatokat és a természetet szeretem és ha gazdag lennék, ezeket dologokfajtát csinálném.
Maxval, tudsz valamit a medvékről Bulgáriában? Vannak sokan ott?
Mindennyian, szeretnétek is dolgozni és lakni a természetben vagy inkább szeretnétek a városban lakni?
1 person has voted this message useful
| maxval Pentaglot Senior Member Bulgaria maxval.co.nr Joined 5073 days ago 852 posts - 1577 votes Speaks: Hungarian*, Bulgarian, English, Spanish, Russian Studies: Latin, Modern Hebrew
| Message 287 of 1549 20 March 2011 at 1:12pm | IP Logged |
hribecek wrote:
Do Hungarians ever make mistakes distinguishing between the letters 'a' and 'o'? I know there is a very small difference in the sound but I can't hear it?
|
|
|
Never. For a Hungarian "a" and "o" are completely different! Let me give an example with English so you can understand.
For an English native speaker the vowels in the words "bad" and "bed" are completely different, no English will ever say "bad" instead of "bed". These vowels for an English native speaker are two different phonemas - yes, they are close phonemas, but are clearly different. (I know there are English regional differences, I know about the specific New Zealand English, where they pronounce "bad" not as in American or British English, but now lets speak only about the general British English and American English.)
A Hungarian will identify the vowels in the English words "bad" and "bed" as the SAME phonema, a Hungarian thinks they are either the same sound or "versions" of the same sound. Many Hungarians even wont be able to identify the difference between them.
For an English person it is strange that a Hungarian cant make clear difference between "bad" and "bed". The same way for a Hungarian it is extremely strange that an Englishman thinks the vowels in Hungarian words "kar" and "kor" are similar or the same! So a Hungarian will never make a mistake in this, "a" and "o" are simply clearly different.
2 persons have voted this message useful
| maxval Pentaglot Senior Member Bulgaria maxval.co.nr Joined 5073 days ago 852 posts - 1577 votes Speaks: Hungarian*, Bulgarian, English, Spanish, Russian Studies: Latin, Modern Hebrew
| Message 288 of 1549 20 March 2011 at 1:40pm | IP Logged |
hribecek wrote:
What are typical mistakes that perhaps a less educated Hungarian makes in their language?
|
|
|
This is a complex linguistic-philosophic question. It depends on the definition of the word "mistake".
I think that a native speaker NEVER makes a mistake in his own native language, its simply impossible!
What you call "mistakes" are in reality characteristic properties of dialects and sociolects, not real mistakes.
As in every living language, in Hungarian there are also dialects (the difference between Hungarian dialects is considerably less, than between English dialects, with the only exception of the Csángó dialect that is almost unintelligable for most Hungarians), and there are dialects that use constructions absent in the literary language. And also there are sociolects, higher and lower styles.
A few examples.
In higher style it is considered a "mistake" to use iktelen conjugation for most of the ikes verbs, in 1st person singular present tense indicative mood. Saying "iszok", "eszek", "lakok" instead of "iszom", "eszem", "lakom" is considered uneducated.
In spoken language many times many people say -ba/-be instead of -ban/-ben: "a szobába vagyok". In writing this is considerated as very uneducated, also this is considerated as very uneducated in higher style speaking.
Other example. In 1st person plural definite conjugation of most verbs ending in -t the "official" grammar demands making difference between indicative and imperative mood by assimilating the ending in imperative mood and by not assimilating it in imperative! For example we say "látjuk" in indicative, but "lássuk" in imperative. In other verbs it is not so, there is usually no difference in 1st person plural definite conjugation between indicative and imperative mood, for example "nézzük" means both indicative and imperative. Uneducated persons simply follow the normal logic of the language and they make no distinction between indicative and imperative even in the case of verbs with -t, when the "official" grammar demands it, so they say "lássuk" for both indicative and imperative.
Edited by maxval on 20 March 2011 at 1:40pm
2 persons have voted this message useful
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.4531 seconds.
DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
|