Talk:Ukrainian hryvnia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of the WikiProject Numismatics, which is an attempt to facilitate the categorization and creation of accurate and formal Numismatism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join and see a list of open tasks to help with.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

The girivna sign looks like the US dollar sign. Probably this is why grivna got a nickname hohlobucks (хохлобакс) . (Khokhol is a nickname of Ukrainian in Russian language.).

There is an an alternative explanation. Hryvnia is often abbreviated as grn, similar to "greens" or griny, the nickname for dollar. The name hohlobaks is older than the new symbol. --Gene s

1 Symbol usage
2 Etymology
3 Misspelling
4 Images on Hryvnia banknotes
5 Plural forms
6 Kazakhstan??
7 500 hryven

[edit] Symbol usage

Is the Hryvnia symbol used before or after numbers? Is there a symbol for kopiyka? —Michael Z.

Michael, I've never seen a usage of that symbol in my life. I guess Mr. Tigipko, that-time Head of National Bank, invented the symbol, as well as the new bank notes design, purely to promote himself as a politician. Although, I'm not sure about the exact rules of usage which they could have invented.

No symbol for kopiyka as far as I know.

BTW people! As I recently found out, the money design and state symbols of Ukraine are free of any copyrights according to Ukraine's Civil Code Art.434 (sec2). So I guess those WEb-qualified may upload respective images on this page freely. Just watch the ethical&political aspects of usage (they're regulated by a different act) Pryvit, AlexPU

What about colour separations, and paper and ink specs? On an unrelated topic, I'm looking for investors in a money-making scheme.... —Michael Z.

Interesting aspect you revealed... I start to think about what does really that article mean : )) I cite exactly: грошові знаки ... не є обєктом авторського права. Legal casus? AlexPU

That just means they won't sue your ass for copyright infringement after they slap you in irons for counterfeiting. I wonder how many countries have copyright-free money. There may be other laws which simply make it illegal to publish facsimiles of money, anyway. I believe Canada has such a law—I've seen many ads with partially-obscured banknotes in them, but never the whole note.

More relevant: it's probably fine for me, in Canada, to scan some Hryvni and put them onto Wikipedia, which is only governed by US copyright laws, I think. But maybe you'd better not do so. —Michael Z. 02:21, 2005 Jan 16 (UTC))

[edit] Etymology

This part is interesting

The other lesser currency units were nogata — a fur of a large animal such as a bear or a wolf, kuna — a fur of smaller animals, like mink or sable (compare Croatian kuna), and the cheapest was veksha — a fur of a squirrel.

Hryvnia from Hryva.
Does "nogata" mean ногата (nohata), the pelt of a legged beast, or one big enough to have usable fur on the legs?

Sounds quite plausible, but I can't find a reliable source to confirm it.

I haven't heard kuna before, but it's obviously a variation of куниця (kunytsia).

Yes. Actually kunitsa is a variation on kuna - "lesser kuna" (cmp. ryba - rybitsa, reka - rechitsa, deva - devitsa etc.)

Haven't heard veksha either; is it the same word as білка (bilka), or вивірка (vyvirka)?

Yes, it is. Here is "veksha" entry in 19th century dictionary of Russian: http://encycl.yandex.ru/cgi-bin/art.pl?art=dal/dal/03020/29900.htm&encpage=dal (in Russian)

The word must be present in other slavic languages as well.

--Gene s 08:03, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Перепрошою за стару галичанську мову. —Michael Z. 02:41, 2005 Jan 16 (UTC)

[edit] Misspelling

Guys, it is a misspelling. I mean Ukrainian is not Chinese; millions of native English speakers also speak Ukrainian fluently. So If I tell you correctly: гривня - you just can't transliterate it gryvna (unless you're a little deaf : )). However, I'm comfortable with the current text. AlexPU

Grivna appears to be a valid transliteration: google count for it [1] is 38,800 (hryvna 77,700 [2], hryvnia 804,000 [3]). The same test gives just 486 pages with gryvna [4], so it does look like a typo/mistake. --Gene s 08:04, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Well, perhaps it's popular, but it's certainly not the proper one. Ukrainian г is, unlike in Russian, an equivalent of h ([ɦ] in IPA, a tad similar to Spanish g, but certainly not to the Russian or English g). Check Romanization of Ukrainian for details. Halibu tt 09:07, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)

On the second thought: does any of our Ukrainian-speaking colleagues have a microphone at home, so that he could record an .ogg sample for all of us to hear? Halibu tt 09:40, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)

I don't think there is any dispute over pronounciation. The question was raised regarding the statement "Hryvnia is often transliterated as grivna or gryvna". I believe the statement regarding "grivna" is correct (see google stats above), while gryvna is wrong. Th phrase should be corrected to include "hryvna" instead of "gryvna". --Gene s 11:03, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

As I can't stand the misspellings of Ukrainian (and of Byelorussian, too), and I tried my best to correct those inconsistencies. But there are still some I cannot correct (e.g. hetman instead of het'man for гетьман and quite a bunch of other cases like this). What's the reason for transcribing ня' by nia (or else you'd have to try to give us a ni instead of n for нь)? ня is just the soft counterpart of на, that's to say that you'd never be able to hear a kind of ni-ah or evene ni-yah (why not?). So, the less inconsistent way would be to keep transcribing the Slavic soft letters with an inserted -y-. And that gives me a painful headache to think that we'd have to check through thousands of articles! Uuuuh… Does someone know how to correct the title? Korenyuk 17:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

most of the 38,800 results seem to be personal names.

Let me repeat the original that could potentially be on coins and banknote

nom sing	гривня	копійка
nom pl (2-4)	гривні	копійки
gen pl (5+)	гривень	копійок

Now, let's look at the problematic letters one by one

г: according to Romanization of Ukrainian, all but ISO 9:1995 translates г to h. But the description of ISO 9:1995 says "Each Cyrillic character is represented by exactly one unique Latin character, so the transliteration is reliably reversible." So my interpretation is that ISO 9 is really a Cyrillic transliteration system not specific to a particular language. ISO 9 itself had an older version where г for Rusyn and Ukrainian is represented by h. So г should be h.
ня: This is a little tricky. It appears to be nia or nya are the most sensible. The English home page of the National Bank of Ukraine use hryvnia.
і: i by all standards
ь: ' by all standards
й: i or y. NBU uses kopiyka or kopiika for копійка. See [5] and [6]. I have no conclusion on й. However, Korenyuk did not change the existing spelling with y.
и: y by all standards

So the only thing remains in question is ня. nia or nya. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 11:27, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Korenyuk edit is invalid one. According to Ukrainian law - Ya must be only at beginning of work, ia at others places Order 380-2004-п (Ukranian) (2004-03-24). It's Ukrainian currency - so everybody have to respect Ukrainian law (as this at least something that country wish others to do). If no objections in 4 days - I'm going to revert it. P.S> Can somebody add International Phonetic Alphabet transcription to article ? I have no experience with it. --TAG 14:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

TAG, what about the other part of Korenyuk's edit? Such as ь -> ' ?

I've no definite stance on '. I known nothing that can prevent usage of ' in name as is. But I've feeling that hriven' is non-english word and hryvnias (according to rules for making plural in English) can be used instead. For possible references take a look at Answers.com dictionaries collection. and WordNet. Princeton University.. Unless somebody will find a references that it's common mistake to use hryvnias - looks like this can be changed too. --TAG 17:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Guys! You seem to be somewhat confused — I mean, what laws are you talking about? With such reasoning, you may fall into deep holes on many topics. Try to think twice… One of the problems of the official transcriptions is that they are made by bankers, public service employees, etc. — not by linguists or phonologists (it reminds me of a lot of sighs colleagues of all of the former USSR countries often have, 15 years after independance still, regarding such questions). For my part, I am a linguist, and what's more, Ukrainian is my mother-tongue. I tried to find an acceptable midway between what ANYONE can read: a) without knowledge of the IPA, b) without too bad pronunciation (and, for anyone who doesn't speak a Slavic language, ня / nia is pronounced nee-ah, not nya, nja or n'a — I made a quick test today around me with 23 persons). Yes, there's still the problem of the final ль / љ / l' / lj, нь / њ / ň / ń / nj and so on. Try to explain to a neophyte in ten seconds (he wouldn't give you more, unless he really wants to learn properly this language) that кохання, or worse, любов (sorry for this obsession), if transcribed kokhannia and liubow, only give caricatural (and, in other instances, ununderstandable) pronunciations. It is already difficult enough, when using the standard (for about twelve decades now!) non-IPA Slavic transcriptions, to explain that there is a real difference between lubow, with a soft l and *Lubow with a "hard" l — give them a chance not to say a ridiculous Llee-oobow…

As for every language, it is difficult to find an efficient way to render unknown sounds, using only signs that the reader knows. Just take a look at some books, so-called quick-learning guides or these "X Language in 100 (or even 10) lessons", and cross-check how publishers who sell so many language and conversation books (like those Berlitz, some of the Hodder & Stoughton Teach Yourself Books (e.g. about Cantonese) and Assimil, among others) transcribe the same words of the same languages in English, German, French and Spanish. You may laugh — I do not. See how their rendition of the Arabic ق makes a lot of their readers believe that this is a simple k, after two to three unsuccessful trials, and imagine how they would do with the Chechen къ, the Georgian ჭ, the Armenian տ or the Welsh ll.

One more point: Are the Wikipedias ruled by government laws, Google findings, or by the necessity of giving the most precise information? I do choose the third solution, which — by experience of a multilingual proselyte of polyglottalism and of a part-time Ukrainian, Qazaq, Arabic and French (for foreigners) teacher — always gives the best results.

The best would sure be to give exclusively IPA transcriptions, inviting each time the reader to take a couple of minutes to learn this alphabet. It's not that difficult: For my part, I learned French and Swedish, when I was 10 and 12 respectively, in an experimental school, which didn't give us real texts during the first year — we didn't know then that [wa'zo] was to be written oiseau (what a nightmare!) and ['ʂʉː ˴ ta] could be skjuta. Otherwise, I guess I wouldn't have been able to express myself with about 600 words in two years, and become "accent-stealthy" in about four years with Swedish and six with French (I learned with Canadians but had to go to France…).

If IPA is not to be the sole mean used here, so, if you please, follow the rules of the language specialists (their imperfections are certainly not that imperfect, because after one or two courses (depending on the language taught) their system is easily understood, and this can't be said of ALL the other systems*), not those of the Googlists and their likes... Why not ask the teachers, instead of dubious gurus? Besides being a volunteer for teaching languages, I am a reporter: that makes me try to always look for the best source. After 23 years of exercise, I never found that on Answers.com...

NB*: My son and a friend have been trying to learn bokmål Norwegian with Assimil, without external help (e.g. audio cassettes, because they had been told by natives that those readings were a) quite artificial and b) different dialects were used from one lesson to the other without signalling it), and, after a daily effort of about 160 days (!), neither I nor people in Oslo or Tromsø managed to understand them instantly — they now know that istedenfor å sitte på sofaen og late oss, etc. does not equal Assimil's “Istédënfor ô `si̠të pô so̠u̠faë’n ô `latë os...” (in Le norvégien sans peine, p 51). I've chosen one of the "least worst" examples, and I don't even speak of tone misunderstandings, semantical approximations and grammatical inconsistencies. Then they were dangerously happy to be systematically invited to use English or German after two attempts to ask for a loaf of bread, etc. Korenyuk 02:22, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Citing_sources. We can not trust your words - even if you are well-known professor in linguistics and those are truth. We need references others that you. If you are reporter - you probably should know how important is to validate information from your sources. Probably one reliable source can be Інститут української мови НАН України (Київ, МСН, вул. Грушевського, 4) - as they has originally designed transliteration table [7] - but I've no resources to contact them for official stance on this problem. --TAG 03:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

For plural, I suggest using what гривень corresponds to per Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style. The same reason you never heard 1000 Japanese yens. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 19:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Google test agree with me - not you. One of links from it's results lead to Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Ukraine. that is more then sufficient. As well - in rule you have cited - there are exceptions. --TAG 22:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the spelling hryvnia should be used and hryvnya should not. -- Evertype·✆ 20:48, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

First I would like to say I'm glad that we're discussing this matter with sources and supporting links, not name callings or unnecessary sarcasm. I would have to disagree on validity of google test on this one. If you seach "PIN number" or "ATM machine" (with the quotation marks, to enforce a search on the string inside the quote together), you will get a 2 miilion results combined! But strictly speaking, those terms are not correct (Personal identification number number and automated teller machine machine). Wikipedia is a place to correct that, such as at Personal identification number and Automated teller machine. I also place some doubt on the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Ukraine web page. Some foreign central banks mistakenly capitalize currency unit, where it shouldn't (it's a unit). The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Ukraine web page say "with the correspondent use of monies". Last time I checked, money is an uncountable noun, as in "how much money". So "monies" is incorrect. Any one want to comment on why plural of yuan, won, and yen are still yuan, won, and yen? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 02:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Are we talking about the same thing? I find it puzzing that hryvnya is "recommended" and used throughout the article. The plural should certainly be hryvnias in English. -- Evertype·✆ 11:17, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Images on Hryvnia banknotes

Names of the likenesses on the banknotes added.

[edit] Plural forms

What are the plural forms that should be used here? I am assuming that that "hryvnas" is probably wrong. Chris talk back 18:50, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Checking the official site of National Bank of Ukraine, the plural form hryvnias was approved in the article. I believe the foreign declension was not suited to another language in this case. NBoU has made a wise decision. -- Sameboat 21:40, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kazakhstan??

Wtf is Kazakhstani tenge doing in Europe currencies list at the bottom of the article?

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.154.206.201 (talk • contribs) 17:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Some people believe that part of Kazakhstan is in Europe. Take a look at the green part of Image:Europe political map.png. That is why Armenian dram, Azerbaijani manat, Georgian lari, Turkish new lira, and Russian ruble are cross-listed in both the navigational boxes of European and Asian currencies. And watch your language. --Chochopk 03:13, 10 July 2006 (UTC)