# Czech/Slovak: without cable



## dihydrogen monoxide

This thread concerns both Czech and Slovak morphology and I wonder why do Czech say without cabel 'bez kabelu' and Slovak 'bez kábla'? And why does Slovak have a length marker on letter a and Czech doesn't after all it's the same word related and from the same source? 
This word cabel is intriguing because in my mother tongue and perhaps in other Slavic languages it would be like the Slovak say. I would expect from Czech at least *kablu or *kabla.


----------



## slavic_one

You can't "expect" sth from a language, lol
I'd say it's simply how it is in Czech and Slovak, as in any other language. Same I could ask why in Croatian is "i" and in Slovene is "in".
Why in Slovak it's "á" and in Czech not? Well.. why in Polish it's "słońce" and in Croatian "sunce", I really don't understand your question obviously.
And btw, with my knowledge of Czech language, I'd say "bez kabelu" sounds "more Czech" than "bez kablu", but just my opinion. Only think I would ask myself is is it "kabelů" or "kabelu".


----------



## Jana337

I am equally perplexed.  Languages do not arise out of someone's conscious effort so we can hardly ask questions as if someone were responsible for a particular phenomenon.

Regarding "kabel", I am afraid we are simply not consistent in Czech. Some words in -el lose the -e- (Pavel, kotel), others don't (kabel, velitel, hotel, jetel, učitel).


----------



## TriglavNationalPark

I'll let dihydrogen speak for himself, but I suspect his curiosity was sparked by the fact that Czech and Slovak tend to be similar, yet they handle this word very differently (I could see a similar question being asked about specific differences between Macedonian and Bulgarian, for instance). In this case, it would be interesting to know if, say, one form is more recent than the other, or if "kabla" is used in any Czech dialects.



Jana337 said:


> I am equally perplexed.  Languages do not arise out of someone's conscious effort so we can hardly ask questions as if someone were responsible for a particular phenomenon.
> 
> Regarding "kabel", I am afraid we are simply not consistent in Czech. Some words in -el lose the -e- (Pavel, kotel), others don't (kabel, velitel, hotel, jetel, učitel).


 
It's similar in Slovene, but the forms that retain the "e" usually end with *-elj* (učitelj, učitelja), while those that lose it end with *-el* (kabel, kabla). But there are always exceptions: Hotel is one of them, since it ends with *-el *but still retains the "e".


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

That is what I meant they are similar but handle the word differently. Yes there are exceptions maybe this is one of them. Regarding expecting something from a language, I'd say you would think, or you could see it as or something similar. I am just wondering why do they treat it differently.


----------



## Jana337

While superficially very similar, the two languages can be quite different in terms of morphology and orthography if you look closer. The declensions do not always match and nor does the orthography. For example, Slovaks have a rule about the number of long vowels in a word (e.g. you can't have long vowels in two consecutive syllables). Not that it applies for the word "cable", of course, but it probably means that you should not assume similarity as a rule.

Here's a Wiki article (in Czech): http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rozdíl_mezi_češtinou_a_slovenštinou


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

Jana337 said:


> I am equally perplexed.  Languages do not arise out of someone's conscious effort so we can hardly ask questions as if someone were responsible for a particular phenomenon.
> 
> Regarding "kabel", I am afraid we are simply not consistent in Czech. Some words in -el lose the -e- (Pavel, kotel), others don't (kabel, velitel, hotel, jetel, učitel).


 
Of course no one is responsible for a particular phenomenon regardless the speaker some long long time ago.
Why are you not consistent in Czech could be a nice study and I'm sure an answer could/can be found like they were in other linguistics' issues. We can certainly find an answer (linguists) or maybe the answer is known. Maybe someone studied inconsistency in Czech's morphology.


----------



## slavic_one

dihydrogen monoxide said:


> That is what I meant they are similar but handle the word differently. Yes there are exceptions maybe this is one of them. Regarding expecting something from a language, I'd say you would think, or you could see it as or something similar. I am just wondering why do they treat it differently.



How similar do you think they are?  Why in Slovene is sth threathen different than in Slovak? They're also similar, like any other Slavic language 
Obviously you think they're similar more than they are. I'd say that Slovak is the most similar to Czech, but still, not that much. They have so much words that are similar to Polish, or even to Croatian. Maybe you don't know, but Slovak has different alphabet than Czech. And Slovak has some different grammer ending, some more similar to Croatian than to Czech. To sum it up, Slovak and Czech are not that similar that one can ask a question like that and get some "smart" answer.


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

slavic_one said:


> How similar do you think they are?  Why in Slovene is sth threathen different than in Slovak? They're also similar, like any other Slavic language
> Obviously you think they're similar more than they are. I'd say that Slovak is the most similar to Czech, but still, not that much. They have so much words that are similar to Polish, or even to Croatian. Maybe you don't know, but Slovak has different alphabet than Czech. And Slovak has some different grammer ending, some more similar to Croatian than to Czech. To sum it up, Slovak and Czech are not that similar that one can ask a question like that and get some "smart" answer.


 
Enough similar so that Czech and Slovak are mutually intelligible. I know Slovak has different alphabet than Czech and I know that for a Slovene/Croate Slovak is easier to understand than Czech. Which language doesn't have different endings, of course they have similarities to Croatian than to Czech. Slovak and Czech are similar otherwise they wouldn't be in the same Slavic group. If the word is from the same source than it doesn't matter if languages are similar or not. Take word *pHter. Sanskrit and German are not that similar but they belong to an Indoeuropean group of languages. But they are not in the same subgroup. One is Indic and the other Germanic. But we can answer why the one says pita and the other Vater. We can also answer many things about it. But Czech and Slovak are more similar than Sanskrit and German. Questions like mine or similar or were already asked otherwise Slavic languages wouldn't be in the group of their own ie wouldn't have a subgroup. We wouldn't have made the rules for Proto-Slavic let alone its existence. If you have Slavic languages (group), Slovak and Czech language (subgroup), the same one, then I can ask this question because I ask a question specific to the subgroup. 
All languages differ from one another and so do Czech and Slovak. But not much linguistically. What is different in Slovak alphabet from Czech 3 letters. Slovak ä that corresponds to Czech e with haček that goes back to Proto-Slavic yat. Of course í to does go back to yat but not in all cases, correct me here. Polish and Slovene are not that similar. I would dare to say that most Slovene speakers would have most difficulties understanding Polish rather than Czech or Slovak. 
The word is the same goes back to Latin, languages are in the same group, same subgroup of Slavic languages, similar morphology, almost the same ortography, but they are similar but there are some words that Czech wouldn't understand from Slovak or certain phrases or certain endings and so on.
I think an answer could be answered. Like if I said why does English has t in water and German has s. You would be able to answer that (meaning linguist) yet German and English are related but not mutually intelligible. But when concerning Czech and Slovak which are more similar you say they aren't and there is no satisfying answer yet I think this could be even simpler answer than German and English.
There are unanswered things in linguistics but some of them can be. I am just saying that they are similar, we can't measure similarity in percentage, but the question is appropriate and I think Czech and Slovak can be compared and aren't so different that they could not be compared.


----------



## TriglavNationalPark

slavic_one said:


> How similar do you think they are?


 
Jana explained it well, but I would say that they're similar enough for the common differences, which can easily be remembered, to provide interesting morphological insight.

Via user *szarkafarka* on another forum, here is the same sample text in both languages:

SLOVAK:



> *Keď sa Budhu pýtali, či Boh jestvuje, obyčajne odpovedal hlbokým mlčaním. Raz však povedal túto bájku: *
> 
> *Istý človek bol ranený jedovatým šípom. Lekár ho prišiel ošetriť. Pacient chytil lekárovu ruku a povedal: *
> *"Pán doktor, počkajte! Predtým, čo mi ten šíp z rany vytiahnete, povedzte mi, kto to bol, že na mňa ten šíp vystrelil. Bol vysoký, alebo krátky? Bol mladý, alebo starý? Bol tmavý, alebo plavý? Bol to muž, alebo žena? Bol vznešeného pôvodu, alebo poddaný? Bol vojak, alebo civil?" *
> 
> *Jeho otázky nemali konca. *
> *Lekár nestrácal čas na odpovede, ale bez meškania šíp z rany vytiahol. Veď, keby mal všetky otázky zodpovedať, pacient by mu zomrel od otravy. *


 
CZECH:



> *Když se Budhy ptali, zda Bůh existuje, obyčejně odpovídal hlubokým mlčením. Jednou však vyprávěl tuto bajku: *
> 
> *Jistý člověk byl raněný jedovatým šípem. Lékař ho prišel ošetřit. Pacient chytil lékařovu ruku a povídal: *
> *"Pane doktore, počkejte! Před tím, než mi ten šíp z rány vytáhnete, povězte mi, kdo to byl, že na mne ten šíp vystřelil. Byl vysoký, anebo krátký? Byl mladý, anebo starý? Byl tmavý, anebo plavý? Byl to muž, anebo žena? Byl vznešeného původu, anebo poddaný? Byl voják, anebo civil?" *
> 
> *Jeho otázky neměly konce. *
> *Lékař nestrácel čas na odpovědi, ale bez meškání šíp z rány vytáhl. Vždyť, kdyby měl všechny otázky zodpovědět, pacient by mu zemřel na otravu. *


----------



## slavic_one

dihydrogen monoxide said:


> Enough similar so that Czech and Slovak are mutually intelligible. I know Slovak has different alphabet than Czech and I know that for a Slovene/Croate Slovak is easier to understand than Czech. Which language doesn't have different endings, of course they have similarities to Croatian than to Czech. Slovak and Czech are similar otherwise they wouldn't be in the same Slavic group. If the word is from the same source than it doesn't matter if languages are similar or not. Take word *pHter. Sanskrit and German are not that similar but they belong to an Indoeuropean group of languages. But they are not in the same subgroup. One is Indic and the other Germanic. But we can answer why the one says pita and the other Vater. We can also answer many things about it. But Czech and Slovak are more similar than Sanskrit and German. Questions like mine or similar or were already asked otherwise Slavic languages wouldn't be in the group of their own ie wouldn't have a subgroup. We wouldn't have made the rules for Proto-Slavic let alone its existence. If you have Slavic languages (group), Slovak and Czech language (subgroup), the same one, then I can ask this question because I ask a question specific to the subgroup.
> All languages differ from one another and so do Czech and Slovak. But not much linguistically. What is different in Slovak alphabet from Czech 3 letters. Slovak ä that corresponds to Czech e with haček that goes back to Proto-Slavic yat. Of course í to does go back to yat but not in all cases, correct me here. Polish and Slovene are not that similar. I would dare to say that most Slovene speakers would have most difficulties understanding Polish rather than Czech or Slovak.
> The word is the same goes back to Latin, languages are in the same group, same subgroup of Slavic languages, similar morphology, almost the same ortography, but they are similar but there are some words that Czech wouldn't understand from Slovak or certain phrases or certain endings and so on.
> I think an answer could be answered. Like if I said why does English has t in water and German has s. You would be able to answer that (meaning linguist) yet German and English are related but not mutually intelligible. But when concerning Czech and Slovak which are more similar you say they aren't and there is no satisfying answer yet I think this could be even simpler answer than German and English.
> There are unanswered things in linguistics but some of them can be. I am just saying that they are similar, we can't measure similarity in percentage, but the question is appropriate and I think Czech and Slovak can be compared and aren't so different that they could not be compared.



I didn't say Czech and Slovak are not similar. I said that Slovak is the most similar to Czech than to any other language, and same goes for Czech to Slovak. But I still think they have so many different words that it can't be explained why it's "kábla", and not "kabelú". And because as you said they all came from Old-slavic, you could then ask same question for let's say, Czech and Slovene. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's my opinion.
And I think that German/English/Sanskrit story, as well as equivalents between two languages are not important for this topic, it's something different. We all say mama, 1, 2, 3... very similar (no matter Slavic, Roman, German...) because majority of European languages is in Indo-European group of languages. And as for those equivalents, we all have them. I'll just put some Polish / Croatian: c / c, ć; ć, ci- / t, ti, te; dz / z, đ; dź, dzi- / di, de; 'e, 'a (soft) / e, je, ije; ę, ą / u, om, e; l / l, lj; 'o / e; wy / iz; wą, wę / u; ...


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

slavic_one said:


> I didn't say Czech and Slovak are not similar. I said that Slovak is the most similar to Czech than to any other language, and same goes for Czech to Slovak. But I still think they have so many different words that it can't be explained why it's "kábla", and not "kabelú". And because as you said they all came from Old-slavic, you could then ask same question for let's say, Czech and Slovene. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's my opinion.
> And I think that German/English/Sanskrit story, as well as equivalents between two languages are not important for this topic, it's something different. We all say mama, 1, 2, 3... very similar (no matter Slavic, Roman, German...) because majority of European languages is in Indo-European group of languages. And as for those equivalents, we all have them. I'll just put some Polish / Croatian: c / c, ć; ć, ci- / t, ti, te; dz / z, đ; dź, dzi- / di, de; 'e, 'a (soft) / e, je, ije; ę, ą / u, om, e; l / l, lj; 'o / e; wy / iz; wą, wę / u; ...


 
They are not (German/English/Sanskirt), but I just wanted to point out the relation. Equivalents are everywhere. I just wanted to show the relation. They are related, but perhaps it cannot be explained.


----------



## slavic_one

dihydrogen monoxide said:


> They are not (German/English/Sanskirt), but I just wanted to point out the relation. Equivalents are everywhere. I just wanted to show the relation. They are related, but perhaps it cannot be explained.



I know what you wanted to say but who knows how languages were "born" and why they are the way they are, and from when. So something like that should be accepted as the form of language. Some words can be explained with equivalents, but e.g. "kábla" is not root, but genitive of a noun.


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

slavic_one said:


> I know what you wanted to say but who knows how languages were "born" and why they are the way they are, and from when. So something like that should be accepted as the form of language. Some words can be explained with equivalents, but e.g. "kábla" is not root, but genitive of a noun.


 
Kábl- would be the root but -a marks the genitive. Hope you know what I mean?


----------



## werrr

dihydrogen monoxide said:


> This thread concerns both Czech and Slovak morphology and I wonder why do Czech say without cabel 'bez kabelu' and Slovak 'bez kábla'?


It’s a loanword and loanwords are always exceptional. In addition, the Czech and Slovak aproaches to foreign words are dramatically different, and even the obvious cognates could come via different languages.



> And why does Slovak have a length marker on letter a and Czech doesn't after all it's the same word related and from the same source?


Because Czech “kabel” originated in German “das Kabel”, while Slovak “kábel” is derived from Hungarian “kábel”.



> I would expect from Czech at least *kablu or *kabla.


We don’t ommit the “e”, we insert it to break the consonant clusters.

The insertion could occur even in the nominative form of words of Czech origin or words of foreign origin which are integrated into Czech for a long time, but it never occurs in recent loanwords. Their nominative form reflects the foreign form we addopted. “Kabel” is derived from German “das Kabel”, hence we use the “e” in the nominative and all other forms.


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

Werrr thanks for clarifying, that's the answer I've been waiting for.


----------



## slavic_one

dihydrogen monoxide said:


> Kábl- would be the root but -a marks the genitive. Hope you know what I mean?



I think it's "kábel". In Slovak, Czech and Polish they have that "e" which sometimes "hides", same as Croatian "nepostojano a".


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

slavic_one said:


> I think it's "kábel". In Slovak, Czech and Polish they have that "e" which sometimes "hides", same as Croatian "nepostojano a".


 
It is but I've taken the form without the e.


----------



## slavic_one

dihydrogen monoxide said:


> It is but I've taken the form without the e.



Oh I see now you put "-" after like some case sufix, my appologise.
And I see werrr explained why "á"  but still no explenation for why that form of genitive, and why in Czech other one, right?


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

slavic_one said:


> Oh I see now you put "-" after like some case sufix, my appologise.
> And I see werrr explained why "á"  but still no explenation for why that form of genitive, and why in Czech other one, right?


 
No need to, as long as you've noticed. He did, but you're right about there being no explanation.


----------

