Talk:Ukrainian hryvnia/Archives/2012

Untitled
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

Symbol usage
Is the Hryvnia symbol used before or after numbers? Is there a symbol for kopiyka? &mdash;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.... &mdash;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&mdash;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.  &mdash;Michael Z. 02:21, 2005 Jan 16 (UTC))''

Etymology
The word гриф means vulture or griffon in Russian. It is a borrowed word, related to the English griffon, and not a slavic root. It has nothing to do with the Ukrainian currency. I reccomend entirely removing the reference to this word on this page. 71.36.35.86 (talk) 02:09, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The word гриф has several meanings in modern Russian, among them "finger-board (or neck) of stringed instrument" (see The Oxford Russian-English Dictionary). This may be the origin of the etymology in the main article. Whether the etymology is valid or not, I do not know, but please do not change "neck" to "vulture", because "vulture" is totally meaningless in this context -- and moreover this is not the only possible meaning of гриф. The option of removing the reference to "neck" from the etymology section should be considered by qualified linguists. --Zlerman (talk) 02:19, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

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. &mdash;Michael Z. 02:41, 2005 Jan 16 (UTC)

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 is 38,800 (hryvna 77,700, hryvnia 804,000 ). The same test gives just 486 pages with gryvna , 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 &#1075; is, unlike in Russian, an equivalent of h ([&#614;] in IPA, a tad similar to Spanish g, but certainly not to the Russian or English g). Check Romanization of Ukrainian for details. Halibutt 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? Halibutt 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

Now, let's look at the problematic letters one by one So the only thing remains in question is ня. nia or nya. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 11:27, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 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 and . I have no conclusion on й. However, Korenyuk did not change the existing spelling with y.
 * и: y by all standards


 * Korenyuk edit is invalid one. According to Ukrainian law - Ya must be only at beginning of work, ia at others places  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 and . 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 Verifiability and 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 - 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 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 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)

Images on Hryvnia banknotes
Names of the likenesses on the banknotes added.

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)

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)

500 hryven
info available at --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 04:14, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Exchange rate needed for homework assignment
HOW MUCH UKRAINIAN MONEY GOES INTO A DOLAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Rebecca N K 04:48, 12 February 2007 (UTC)REBECCA

Sssshhhhhhhh! Mycroft7 04:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * What do you mean "goes into a dollar". If you mean how many Ukrainian hryven' can be exchanged with 1 USD, then the answer is at.
 * There are many volunteers at Wikipedia. I'm sure they are very willing to help. Reference desk is a good place. However, using all caps and excessive exclamation marks is not nice. That is not the way of getting attention. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 07:17, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hear, hear. -- Evertype·✆


 * Wikipedia is not here to do your homework for you. If we can help, fine, otherwise it's not our problem. www.oanda.com has the exchange rates AndrewRT(Talk) 14:00, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Speak for yourself please, Andrew. Mallerd (talk) 17:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think we have said enough. If you're still reading this, Rebecca N K, I hope you still ultimately come back to Wikipedia for information, engage in a healthy dialog with others, and perhaps contributes back to the community. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 14:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * There are already many possible exchange rate sources listed in article - official, Financial Times, some markets. --TAG 15:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

New hryvnia design
I noticed that the new 500 hryvnia banknote has a new design. I know I'm not supposed to speculate, but I believe this is the new design for all other banknotes. The question is, when will the other banknotes incorporate the new design? Anything about this on the internet? — Alex (T 04:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Hryvnia?
Offtopic, but Russian-speakers can (incorrectly) read "hryvnia" as "хрювния". No offense! :) —lim 13:20, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


 * "khryuvhiya"? Weird... -- Sameboat - 同舟 14:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Why is the Ukrainian kopeck referred to as "kopiyok"? See Russian ruble for example, the kopeck is kopeck, not "kopejka". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.223.167.149 (talk • contribs) 19:09, 1 June 2007

500 hryvnia note
The 500 hryvnia note apparently includes a representation of the Eye of Providence (or All-seeing eye) inside a triangle and circle. If anyone knows why that symbol was chosen to appear on the note, it would be helpful if the explanation could be added to the description in the current uses section of Eye of Providence. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Solipsist (talk • contribs) 09:56, 12 May 2007 (UTC).


 * National bank of Ukraine provides the following explanation:
 * Зліва від будівлі розміщено графічне зображення авторського малюнку Григорія Сковороди до його творів (“Піфагоровий трикутник” у який Г.Сковорода вкладав глибокий символіко-філософський зміст).

New design of 200 hrn. banknote
National Bank of Ukraine introduced new design of 200 hrn. banknote on May 28, 2007. More information about it you can see on official NBU site: http://bank.gov.ua/Bank_mn/Banknoty/G200_07.htm (there you can find obverse and reverse images, banknote size). Please update article with information on new banknote.

Third/fourth series
Wouldn't the 200 and 500 UAH banknotes be considered fourth series? There's a visible difference, and different security features. — Alex(U 12:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * There exist some visible differences if these banknotes are compared with banknotes of smaller face value. But such differences may be attributed to commonly observed differences between banknotes of smaller and larger face values. I think, at this point, It's sufficient to split the banknotes into three series, rather than four, but it could certainly be changed following future releases, if these releases would indicate so.
 * It should be noted that the classification by series in this article is an original research, and the classification is uses solely for clarity of the visual presentation of the banknotes, nothing more --Novelbank 20:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

hryven', kopiyok vs. hryvnias, kopiykas
Why the forms of Ukrainian are used to English? It's not correct at all! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.0.182.201 (talk) 23:39, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Do you meam the Ukrainian is incorrect? If so, please correct. If you mean we should use English, no, we use local forms for the currency units, as per WikiProject Numismatics/Style. Dove1950 21:19, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

гриф
This must be a translator's error, because this Russian word means this kind of neck only an is a German loanword (meaning "grip"). As such it has nothing to do with the anatomical neck (although there are some necks out there, that... uhh, nevermind). --Illythr (talk) 02:06, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Inflation
The inflation article states that in 2008, inflation in Ukraine was 25%. Mallerd (talk) 17:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Drawback in infobox
hryvni (гривні, nom. pl., from 2 to 4), and hryven’ (гривень, gen. pl. above 5) - it's not completely correct, because after, for example, 22 there goes hryvni, but not hryven' (22 гривні). I guess it must be fixed, but giving the absolutely right condition will take quite much place in the box (actually, hryvni is in use after ...2, ...3, ...4, but not ...12,13,14). --Microcell (talk) 13:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)