Talk:законъ

@Atitarev: Is this an obsolete spelling in Russian? --Barytonesis (talk) 14:03, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@Barytonesis This is the pre-Bolshevik spelling. You should learn about the “pre-1918” spelling if you deal with Russian. I don’t know how much you deal with Russian as you do not show enough in your Babelbox, but there are these main things:

1. instead of consonantal endings there is written ъ in addition
2. inherited ѣ (and some artificial ones) are used
3. before vowel signs, we do not write и but і.
4. the genitive singular endings exhibit аго/яго instead of ого/его when unstressed.
5. nom./inan. acc. pl. ые is ыя for feminine and neuter words.

I also write this way. It hurts to write reformed spelling. Palaestrator verborum (loquier) 14:34, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@Barytonesis: Long explanation but yes. Category:Russian pre-1918 spellings has links to Wikipedia. I've made a Russian entry but I'm not a fan of this spelling. Most of them were made by User:Wikitiki89, maybe some by User:Benwing2.

@Palaestrator verborum: Hmm, it's weird that you use the century-old spelling. The reform was made by Bolsheviks but it makes perfect sense and nobody, AFAIK, uses pre-1918 spelling, including emigrants and there is no movement to return to it but it's sometimes used for some effect, e.g. on signs. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:56, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

@Atitarev Sure, if they killed everyone who used the spelling and wasn’t too prominent abroad, and books in the old spelling have become increasingly hard to reach. There can’t be a movement for return as long as there aren’t enough works printed in the old style. I still want to know where reprints of classical works in the pre-1918 orthography can be found, say the Complete Works of 19th century authors.

I also prefer Fraktur and Kurrentschrift. If it is more complicated there are more differences with which the script can be read. This is what the reformers always forget when they want to make learning to write easier. Palaestrator verborum (loquier) 14:43, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

@Fay Freak: Hi. I've been looking for a copy of the Повѣсти Бѣлкина written in pre-1918 spelling, and I've managed to find this. I'm somewhat of a book collector, though, and I'd like something more authentic than a modern reprint. Would you have some tips on how to find authentic pre-1918 copies/books/editions? An address in Moscow to recommend?

I've also found this editor, but again, only reprints.

Also, to go back to your point 2. above, do you yourself use only etymological ѣ, or artificial ones as well? Canonicalization (talk) 14:33, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

@Canonicalization https://www.alib.ru/ for used books – Artificial ѣ spellings I don’t know, there can’t be many that were around. Theoretically one can also find old books at the addresses one buys used books from in Germany, France etc., but not many are also entered in the original or at least Cyrillic script. And you begin to understand why I repudiate those bibliographies or book templates with transcriptions and no original script. Fay Freak (talk) 15:37, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

@Fay Freak: Thank you! I've found a copy dating from 1912 thanks to that site.

Indeed. abebooks, for example, doesn't even support Cyrillic... Canonicalization (talk) 22:20, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Actually, -аго/-яго are used even when stressed. It is only in certain pronouns that they are not used, regardless of stress. --WikiTiki89 17:34, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Actually, this is in even more archaic usage. From 1710 to 1918 there have not been the same rules. Palaestrator verborum (loquier) 18:22, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

@Palaestrator verborum: I've added Babelboxes. I'm using the CEFRL scheme. --Barytonesis (talk) 14:44, 14 December 2017 (UTC)