Welcome to the Gulf of Finland

Fabulist

Banned
American English
I would like to post a sign,

"Welcome to the Gulf of Finland, June 22, 1790."

Is

"Привет на финскый залива, 22 июни 1790"

the correct Russian?

In 1790, would there have been any spelling differences, such as "Приветъ" or "фінскый"?

Спасибо.
 
  • ahvalj

    Senior Member
    Добро пожаловать на Финскій заливъ, 22 іюня 1790 — in the orthography of that time
    Добро пожаловать на Финский залив, 22 июня 1790 — contemporary
     

    Maroseika

    Moderator
    Russian
    Very intersting question, because any word here is quite questionnable.

    1. In the end of the 18th century adjectives on -ъй after the velars could be -кой: финской. According to par. 38 of Grot's Grammar (end of 19th cent.) in musc. sing. adjectives spelling -скiй instead of spoken -ской was fixed with a view to bringing it to the uniformity with the adjectives on unstressed -ый.
    I don't know when exactly it was fixed like that, but this might well happen after 1790, if even in Grot's time it was still spoken as -ской.

    2. Финский залив: it is not for sure that the Gulf of Finland was called as such at that time. For example, as far back as in the 16th century it was called in Russian Московский залив or Ливонский залив.

    3. Construction "на залив" sounds rather contemporary. I'm far not sure it was like that in 1790.

    4. The same doubt refers to the very construction Добро пожаловать на залив. Sounds like an invitation to the boyscout camp or a resort.

    5. What exactly place is meant? In 1790 this invitation would rather mean some exact part of the Gulf of Finland: Невская губа, Каперская губа, Нарвская губа, etc., etc.

    In brief, what is the background of your question?
     
    Last edited:

    Maroseika

    Moderator
    Russian
    So, the revised phrase in the old orthography:
    Добро пожаловать на Финской заливъ, 22 іюня 1790
    Well, in respect of orthography, yes, I think it is like that. But as for all the rest, it looks very strange and anachronistic. Especially I'm daunted by "на залив".
    And I'd like to add clause 6:

    6. Spelling the date should be checked. I'm not sure it was spelled like that in the end of the 18th cent.

    Is it a science fiction novel?
     

    morzh

    Banned
    USA
    Russian
    Actually, at least in today's language (and I suspect, might be the case with the older version of it) "на залив / в залив" may be used depending on who and on what kind of transport is coming to the gulf.

    If you are coming in a flotation vessel, it is probably "в залив"; if you are coming on the shore (on foot, in a horse carriage, or any dry land transport) - then it is "на залив".
     

    Fabulist

    Banned
    American English
    I didn't expect it to be so controversial. It is a sign to welcome people to a simulation of naval battle that could have occurred off the island of Hogland (Гогланд) on June 22 ("old style" or Julian Calendar) or July 3 ("new style" or Gregorian Calendar), 1790. The Swedish fleet had broken the Russian blockade at the western exit of Vyborg Bay and was retreating to Sveaborg. They had to go around Hogland. Russians ships caught up with the last Swedish ships near Hogland and fought them there. I have asked about a similar sign in Swedish, with the July 3 date (Sweden had switched to the Gregorian calendar in 1752), in the Swedish forum.

    I had no idea that the Russian name for the eastward extension of the Baltic south of Finland, west of Ingria, and north of Estonia had had numerous names or that the name had changed. I am speaking of the waters directly south of the island of Hogland.
     

    ahvalj

    Senior Member
    I didn't expect it to be so controversial. It is a sign to welcome people to a simulation of naval battle that could have occurred off the island of Hogland (Гогланд) on June 22 ("old style" or Julian Calendar) or July 3 ("new style" or Gregorian Calendar), 1790. The Swedish fleet had broken the Russian blockade at the western exit of Vyborg Bay and was retreating to Sveaborg. They had to go around Hogland. Russians ships caught up with the last Swedish ships near Hogland and fought them there. I have asked about a similar sign in Swedish, with the July 3 date (Sweden had switched to the Gregorian calendar in 1752), in the Swedish forum.

    I had no idea that the Russian name for the eastward extension of the Baltic south of Finland, west of Ingria, and north of Estonia had had numerous names or that the name had changed. I am speaking of the waters directly south of the island of Hogland.
    Well, I think in your case the two variants we all agreed upon will be appropriate. There are indeed some nuances, but as I can understand they have little to do with your situation. So, to repeat:

    Добро пожаловать на Финский залив, 22 июня 1790 (modern orthography)
    Добро пожаловать на Финской заливъ, 22 іюня 1790 (old orthography)
     

    Maroseika

    Moderator
    Russian
    It is a sign to welcome people to a simulation of naval battle that could have occurred off the island of Hogland (Гогланд) on June 22 ("old style" or Julian Calendar) or July 3 ("new style" or Gregorian Calendar), 1790.
    Well, it's more clear now. However what I still can't understand is whether you want it to look like a text of the 18th century addressed to our conetmporaries, or like a text addressed ot the peopel of the 18th century?
    Anyway, добро пожаловать is rather ambigous in respect of the people invited to the place where their ancestors died.
    I'm afraid, so far Russian variant looks just funny.


    I had no idea that the Russian name for the eastward extension of the Baltic south of Finland, west of Ingria, and north of Estonia had had numerous names or that the name had changed. I am speaking of the waters directly south of the island of Hogland.
    Gogland's vicinity is called Финский залив nowadays. As for its name in 1790, this is a subject of historical investigation.


    As for на залив and в залив: I think на залив is mostly refers to its coast while в залив - to the gulf itself. If events are to occur in the gulf, nearby Hogland, it is в залив.
     

    Fabulist

    Banned
    American English
    Well, it's more clear now. However what I still can't understand is whether you want it to look like a text of the 18th century addressed to our conetmporaries, or like a text addressed ot the peopel of the 18th century?
    Anyway, добро пожаловать is rather ambigous in respect of the people invited to the place where their ancestors died.
    I'm afraid, so far Russian variant looks just funny.

    Gogland's vicinity is called Финский залив nowadays. As for its name in 1790, this is a subject of historical investigation.

    As for на залив and в залив: I think на залив is mostly refers to its coast while в залив - to the gulf itself. If events are to occur in the gulf, nearby Hogland, it is в залив.
    There must be a greater difference between 18th and 21st century Russian than between 18th and 21st century English. When I simulate naval battles involving the British and French, I use "Welcome to <place name>" in modern English, but as far as I know the phrase could have been used in 1741 or 1790. I do use an 18th-century type font including the "long s" that the Roman alphabet does not have anymore, and whatever the English called the place at the time (even if it is different from what it is called in the local language). I don't think 18th-century Englishmen would have used different words if they knew they were talking to 21st-century people.

    From the discussion above, which I very much appreciate, it seems that I should use
    Добро пожаловать в Финской заливъ, 22 іюня 1790

    I will wait for any further comment. Thanks to all who have contributed so far.
     

    Sobakus

    Senior Member
    Honestly, if you aren't writing a scientific work here, this thread overcomplicates things by an oceanic margin. The sentence in your last post is as all right as it gets.
     

    Maroseika

    Moderator
    Russian
    Excuse me my dullness, but how this kind invitation combines with the date? If you mean "Welcome to the reconstruction of 1790", than in Russian text at least comma is superfluous, becuase with a comma it looks like an invitation to the participants of the events of 1790, which is rather strange for having nothing "well" in that "coming" for at least part of them.

    Добро пожаловать в Финской заливъ 22 іюня 1790 (i.e. Добро пожаловать в Финской заливъ двадцать второго іюня 1790).

    Or, since it is also is not very clear and can be understood as an unimplicit joke), maybe even something like that:

    Добро пожаловать в 22 іюня 1790 в Финской заливъ.
    I.e "Welcome in the 22th day of June 1790 in the Gulf of Finland".
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top