Lower Sorbian to Slovenian: two dual systems still need a participant check
A shared dual does not settle who belongs to the pair
Lower Sorbian and standard Slovenian both distinguish a grammatical dual from singular and plural. This is useful when translating messages about two people: the source’s pair need not disappear into an undifferentiated target group. But shared number categories do not mean that every phrase containing a dual pronoun identifies its members in exactly the same way.
Stone’s Lower Sorbian discussion illustrates this with mej z nanom. Depending on context, the expression can describe father and the speaker, or a pair including the speaker plus father as an additional participant. The difference is between two and three people, despite the dual form at the beginning. An arrangement that looks transparent can therefore conceal an important headcount decision.
With someone can identify one member of we
Greenberg gives Slovenian Midva z Miranom with a dual verb in a sentence meaning that Miran and the speaker are going to Lendava. The person introduced with z belongs to the acting pair in this example. The construction helps identify who is included rather than necessarily adding a third traveler to an already complete two-person group.
For a Lower Sorbian travel message, do not assume the named companion is always extra. Establish whether the source means the speaker and that companion, or the speaker with another person and then the companion as a third. The Slovenian predicate must express the actual group chosen. Preserving the source pronoun’s category without resolving membership can produce the wrong number of travelers.
The pronouns themselves contain different distinctions
Stone’s Lower Sorbian first- and second-person dual subject forms are mej and wej. Greenberg’s standard Slovenian table distinguishes masculine or mixed forms midva and vidva from feminine medve and vedve. Identifying two participants is consequently only part of choosing the target pronoun: the gender composition expressed by the standard Slovenian form also matters.
This does not justify guessing who the pair consists of from a Lower Sorbian dual pronoun alone. If a conversation already names both people, that information supports the target choice; if the source leaves their identities unstated, the translation problem remains underdetermined. A shared dual meaning cannot supply a gender distinction that the particular source form did not encode.
Two body parts do not always require a dual form
Greenberg further notes that normally paired items such as hands and eyes generally appear in Slovenian plural forms with plural agreement. The dual can be used when the fact of both members is specifically emphasized. Thus an ordinary reference to someone’s hands and an instruction stressing both hands need not be grammatically interchangeable.
This qualification prevents another mechanical transfer from a Lower Sorbian phrase whose number is visibly marked. Ask whether the message simply identifies a familiar paired body part or insists on exactly both members. That distinction can matter in an instruction about holding or carrying something, where changing emphasis changes what the reader is being asked to do. Across this direction, the useful common ground is the ability to express pairs; the remaining work is to determine their members, their target pronoun form and whether the pairing itself is the point of the sentence.
Language references