 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Languages Forum » Google Translator treatment of Bulgarian and... |
|
Page 9 of 9 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Nikolaj... |
 Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 12:15 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Christian Weisgerber pravi:
[quote]Nikolaj <nikolaj.korbar at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
There is a dialect continuum from most north-western Slovenian dialects
is spoken down to the most eastern Bulgarian.
I wonder what the intermediate forms look like between Bulgarian's
very reduced noun/adjective inflection and the typical Slavic one
of the more westerly languages. And isn't the Bulgarian verbal
system more complex?
[/quote]
First info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torlak
http://www.matica.hr/Kolo/kolo0401.nsf/AllWebDocs/torl
Both articles also have more literature, also in English, in the
Literrature section. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Nikolaj... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 4:22 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
António Marques pravi:
[quote]On 6 Nov, 17:15, Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
Christian Weisgerber pravi:
Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
There is a dialect continuum from most north-western Slovenian dialects
is spoken down to the most eastern Bulgarian.
I wonder what the intermediate forms look like between Bulgarian's
very reduced noun/adjective inflection and the typical Slavic one
of the more westerly languages. And isn't the Bulgarian verbal
system more complex?
First info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torlak
Well then. So it turns out that (Southern) Kosovo's serbs are actually
bulgarians!
[/quote]
People are, what they say they are. Nothing else matters. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Dušan Vukotić... |
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 6:55 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 6, 10:22 pm, Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
[quote]António Marques pravi:
On 6 Nov, 17:15, Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
Christian Weisgerber pravi:
Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
There is a dialect continuum from most north-western Slovenian dialects
is spoken down to the most eastern Bulgarian.
I wonder what the intermediate forms look like between Bulgarian's
very reduced noun/adjective inflection and the typical Slavic one
of the more westerly languages. And isn't the Bulgarian verbal
system more complex?
First info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torlak
Well then. So it turns out that (Southern) Kosovo's serbs are actually
bulgarians!
People are, what they say they are. Nothing else matters.
[/quote]
Yes, I agree.
But we are talking about the historical development of nations and
ethnicities. For instance, no one knows what was the real name of the
Bulgars before they were subjugated to the rule of Avars/Huns.
Probably, they were either Serbs or Croats (modern Slovenes). As I
repeated many times, South-Slavic languages are much closer to each
other than some dialects in Germany. If there were the political will
we could now have the standard language of the Balkan Slavs - Hoch-
Slavic  - or something similar. Simply, the South Slavs, unlike
Germans, were unable to rich an agreement about the name of the future
"common" language and nation.
DV |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Du¹an Vukotiæ... |
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:20 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 2, 12:42Â pm, John Atkinson <johna... at (no spam) bigpond.com> wrote:
[quote]Peter T. Daniels wrote:
On Oct 30, 8:23 pm, Du¹an Vukotiæ <dusan.vuko... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 3:21 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
The problem is that there never was any "dialect of Muslim" in Bosnia.
Before the last Bosnian war (1992-95) the Bosnian population was
hardly mixed and they all spoke the same Serbo-Croatian (Ijekavian)
language (there were no dialects at all, neither Muslim nor Serbian
nor Croatian).
Of course there were dialects. They were, however, geographically
based, not politically based.
Isoglosses paid no attention to boundaries.
You know nothing about Bosnia and stop pretending to be a smart ass
about things you don't know.
It has nothing to do with Bosnia specifically.
But I happen to have been told by Slavicists that there are (of
course) dialects within Serbo-Croatian, and they do not coincide with
political boundaries.
What about Herzegovina?
There were, and are, three main dialects of Serbo-Croat spoken in
Bosnia-Hercesovina, viz Eastern Hercegovian (which forms the basis for
standard Serbo-Croat, and is of course ijekavian), Eastern Bosnian
(jekavian and shkyakavian), and Younger Ikavian (mostly in Hercegovina
and eastern Dalmatia).
Dushan, have you ever been there?
John.
[/quote]
There is not any "shkyakavian" (you probably thought "kaykavian") in
Eastern Bosnia (I was born in that region). Every one in every corner
of Bosnia and Hercegovina is saying 'Å¡to" (what; shtokavian-ijekavian
dialect of Serbo-Croatian) and no one says 'kaj" (what). Ikavian and
Ekavian are just the variants of the same Shtokavian speech, although
the Ikavian is present only in a few villages on the border to
Dalmatia.
DV |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Du¹an Vukotiæ... |
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:43 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 6, 10:19 pm, António Marques <ento... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On 6 Nov, 17:15, Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
Christian Weisgerber pravi:
Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
There is a dialect continuum from most north-western Slovenian dialects
is spoken down to the most eastern Bulgarian.
I wonder what the intermediate forms look like between Bulgarian's
very reduced noun/adjective inflection and the typical Slavic one
of the more westerly languages. Â And isn't the Bulgarian verbal
system more complex?
First info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torlak
Well then. So it turns out that (Southern) Kosovo's serbs are actually
bulgarians!
[/quote]
Are you illiterate? Torlakian is a Shtokavian dialect of Serbo-
Croatian. Most of the Bulgarian linguists have the same opinion as
their Serbian and Croatian colleagues.
__________________________
* The two Proto-Slavic semivowels (ъ, ь) gave only one phoneme in
Serbian and Slovenian
* Ç« gave labials u and o in S.-C. and Slovenian, it gave
unlabialized ÑŠ in literary Bulgarian, a in Macedonian)
* vь- gave u in West, v- in East
* Proto-Slavic *tj gave Ä/ć in west, Å¡t in East
* *Är gave cr in West, but was preserved in East
* Epenthetic l is preserved only in west (S.-C. zemlja, Bulgarian
zemja)
* Distinction between Proto-Slavic /ɲ/ and /n/ is lost in East (S.-
C. njega, Bulgarian nego).
* Consonants in final position preserve their leniency (S.-C./
Macedonian grad, Bulgariangrat)
* *vs stays preserved without metathesis in East (S.-C. sve,
Bulgarian vse)
* Genitive njega in West, and old genitive on O in East (nego)
* Nominative plural of nomina on -a is on -e in West, -i in East
* Ja 'I, ego' in West, jas in East
* Mi 'we' in West, nie in East
* Distinction between the plural of masculine, feminine and
neutrum adjectives is preserved only in West (S.C. beli, bele, bela),
not in East (beli for masc., fem. and neutr.)
* First person singular of verbs is in West -m, and old reflex of
*Ç« in East
* suffixes *-itjÑŒ (-ić) and *-atja (-aÄa) are common in West, not
known in East |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Yusuf B Gursey... |
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:16 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 7, 11:55 am, Du¹an Vukotiæ <dusan.vuko... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 6, 10:22 pm, Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
António Marques pravi:
On 6 Nov, 17:15, Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
Christian Weisgerber pravi:
Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
There is a dialect continuum from most north-western Slovenian dialects
is spoken down to the most eastern Bulgarian.
I wonder what the intermediate forms look like between Bulgarian's
very reduced noun/adjective inflection and the typical Slavic one
of the more westerly languages. And isn't the Bulgarian verbal
system more complex?
First info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torlak
Well then. So it turns out that (Southern) Kosovo's serbs are actually
bulgarians!
People are, what they say they are. Nothing else matters.
Yes, I agree.
But we are talking about the historical development of nations and
ethnicities. For instance, no one knows what was the real name of the
Bulgars before they were subjugated to the rule of Avars/Huns.
[/quote]
you mean Bulgarians (slavic), rather than Bulghars (turkic).
they were never subjugated to the rule of the Avars (though it appears
that they spoke a similar language. the name "Bulghar" appears after
the dissolution of the Huns (with which they probably shared a similar
language as well). the Danube Bulghar royal house seems to have
claiemd descent from Attila the Hun.
[quote]Probably, they were either Serbs or Croats (modern Slovenes). As I
repeated many times, South-Slavic languages are much closer to each
other than some dialects in Germany. If there were the political will
we could now have the standard language of the Balkan Slavs - Hoch-
Slavic - or something similar. Simply, the South Slavs, unlike
Germans, were unable to rich an agreement about the name of the future
"common" language and nation.
DV[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Yusuf B Gursey... |
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:31 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 7, 1:16 pm, Yusuf B Gursey <y... at (no spam) theworld.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 7, 11:55 am, Du¹an Vukotiæ <dusan.vuko... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 6, 10:22 pm, Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
António Marques pravi:
On 6 Nov, 17:15, Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
Christian Weisgerber pravi:
Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
There is a dialect continuum from most north-western Slovenian dialects
is spoken down to the most eastern Bulgarian.
I wonder what the intermediate forms look like between Bulgarian's
very reduced noun/adjective inflection and the typical Slavic one
of the more westerly languages. And isn't the Bulgarian verbal
system more complex?
First info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torlak
Well then. So it turns out that (Southern) Kosovo's serbs are actually
bulgarians!
People are, what they say they are. Nothing else matters.
Yes, I agree.
But we are talking about the historical development of nations and
ethnicities. For instance, no one knows what was the real name of the
Bulgars before they were subjugated to the rule of Avars/Huns.
you mean Bulgarians (slavic), rather than Bulghars (turkic).
they were never subjugated to the rule of the Avars (though it appears
that they spoke a similar language. the name "Bulghar" appears after
[/quote]
IIRC the Danube Bulghars, in alliance with the Byantines scored a
major victory over the Avars.
[quote]the dissolution of the Huns (with which they probably shared a similar
language as well). the Danube Bulghar royal house seems to have
claiemd descent from Attila the Hun.
Probably, they were either Serbs or Croats (modern Slovenes). As I
repeated many times, South-Slavic languages are much closer to each
other than some dialects in Germany. If there were the political will
we could now have the standard language of the Balkan Slavs - Hoch-
Slavic - or something similar. Simply, the South Slavs, unlike
Germans, were unable to rich an agreement about the name of the future
"common" language and nation.
DV[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Nikolaj... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 6:00 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dušan Vukotić pravi:
[quote]But we are talking about the historical development of nations and
ethnicities. For instance, no one knows what was the real name of the
Bulgars before they were subjugated to the rule of Avars/Huns.
Probably, they were either Serbs or Croats (modern Slovenes).
[/quote]
There were no ethnicities called Serbs or Croats back then.
[quote]As I
repeated many times, South-Slavic languages are much closer to each
other than some dialects in Germany.
[/quote]
I don't think so.
[quote]If there were the political will
we could now have the standard language of the Balkan Slavs - Hoch-
Slavic - or something similar. Simply, the South Slavs, unlike
Germans, were unable to rich an agreement about the name of the future
"common" language and nation.
[/quote]
And why would that be good? I think it would be worse, not better. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Dušan Vukotić... |
| Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 5:29 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 9, 12:00Â am, Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
[quote]Dušan Vukotić pravi:
But we are talking about the historical development of nations and
ethnicities. For instance, no one knows what was the real name of the
Bulgars before they were subjugated to the rule of Avars/Huns.
Probably, they were either Serbs or Croats (modern Slovenes).
There were no ethnicities called Serbs or Croats back then.
[/quote]
Have you ever read anything in your life? We are talking about the
7Ith century of the New Era! Maybe you do not understand what the word
"ethnicity" means?
[quote]As I
repeated many times, South-Slavic languages are much closer to each
other than some dialects in Germany.
I don't think so.
[/quote]
Do you know anything about German dialects?
DV |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Dušan Vukotić... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 3:11 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 14, 12:25Â am, Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
[quote]Dušan Vukotić pravi:
On Nov 9, 12:00 am, Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
Dušan Vukotić pravi:
But we are talking about the historical development of nations and
ethnicities. For instance, no one knows what was the real name of the
Bulgars before they were subjugated to the rule of Avars/Huns.
Probably, they were either Serbs or Croats (modern Slovenes).
There were no ethnicities called Serbs or Croats back then.
Have you ever read anything in your life? We are talking about the
7Ith century of the New Era! Maybe you do not understand what the word
"ethnicity" means?
Or maybe you don't. Ethnicity is a modern 19th century appearance. There
was no ethnicities before nation states, and before unification of
pre-modern, feudal kingdoms and states into national(ist) states, with
corresponding nationalistic imagniery.
Where is Italian ethnicity in that:
[/quote]
You are right about the Italian ethnicity; it was constituted rather
lately as a some sort of "super-ethnicity". Following that example (or
example of Germans), the Yugoslavs could have been an ethnicity too.
However, you cannot deny that Serbs and Croats (the modern Slovenes)
were two different ethnic groups even in the beginning of the new era.
As a matter of fact, Serbs and Croats are mentioned in many of the old
chronicles. The other thing is why the Slovenes forgot their original
Croatian name (Chorutani, Carantania, Korotan, Koruška) and changed it
with the common Slavic name; and why and how the Western Serbs
embraced that "abandoned" name.
DV |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Nikolaj... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 6:25 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dušan Vukotić pravi:
[quote]On Nov 9, 12:00 am, Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor... at (no spam) bla.si> wrote:
Dušan Vukotić pravi:
But we are talking about the historical development of nations and
ethnicities. For instance, no one knows what was the real name of the
Bulgars before they were subjugated to the rule of Avars/Huns.
Probably, they were either Serbs or Croats (modern Slovenes).
There were no ethnicities called Serbs or Croats back then.
Have you ever read anything in your life? We are talking about the
7Ith century of the New Era! Maybe you do not understand what the word
"ethnicity" means?
[/quote]
Or maybe you don't. Ethnicity is a modern 19th century appearance. There
was no ethnicities before nation states, and before unification of
pre-modern, feudal kingdoms and states into national(ist) states, with
corresponding nationalistic imagniery.
Where is Italian ethnicity in that:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_unification#Maps_of_Italian_unification
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Italian_unification
It doesn't exist, it emerges in the process of unification.
Similar for other ethnicities.
What you do is mixing up modern ethnicities and pre-modern quasi-ethnic
regional identities (and tribal identities before that), but they are
not the same.
[quote]As I
repeated many times, South-Slavic languages are much closer to each
other than some dialects in Germany.
I don't think so.
Do you know anything about German dialects?
[/quote]
Not much, but I have heard some Austrian and Swiss dialects. Slovene
dialects by itself are as diverse are those in correspondence with
Hochdeutsch. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat Nov 28, 2009 5:14 pm
|
|