|
 |
"Serbo-Croatian" and its descendants | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages |  | |
| !LH@N Triglot Senior Member Germany Joined 6632 days ago 487 posts - 531 votes  Speaks: German, Turkish*, English Studies: Serbo-Croatian, Spanish | Message 9 of 28 10 September 2009 at 5:18pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
I agree with you on this Chung, me too I would say that people from the region will be glad to hear anyone speak "their" language.
Regards, Ilhan 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| kerateo Triglot Senior Member Mexico Joined 5457 days ago 112 posts - 180 votes Speaks: Spanish*, English, French Studies: Italian | Message 10 of 28 10 September 2009 at 10:05pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
Well... I kind of like the idea, I´m gonna start saying that I speak Mexican instead of Spanish because it´s a totally different language, I mean, different accent, lots of indigenous words, and different grammar (what "vosotros" mean?, jeje).
1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Kiki svuda Diglot Newbie Croatia Joined 5352 days ago 1 posts - 2 votes Speaks: Croatian*, English Studies: German | Message 11 of 28 23 September 2009 at 2:38pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
Serbo-croatian linguistic relations in 19th and the beggining of 20th century were developing in accordance
with Karadžić's idea of svesrpstvu ("Serbs are everyone and everywhere") according to which there is no Croatian language or on the line of "linguistic togetherness" promoted by vukovci according to which Croatian and Serbian are a single language which, sadly, has two forms: ekavica and iekavica. In 1935 Beograd's linguistic journal "Naš jezik" (Our language) published an article by serbian linguist Radoslav Boskovic titled "On linguistic differences between Serbian and Croatian". In it, author, with great difficulty ("hteli mi to ili ne hteli" wheather we like it or not) points out that, in his opinion, dictionary of differences between serbian and croatian "would have up to four thousand words". After listing about two hundred such words he mentions: "Today's differences have relative value however. Time, fortunately, is shattering that which was created by historical, cultural and political isolation of serbian and croatian part of out nation." Keep his last sentence in mind when reading blogs like that one. Serbo-croatian has been used for a hundred years to stamp out Croatian language as well as ethnic identity of Croatian people. Those "nationalist" linguists who many deride are simply rehabilitating Croatian language and bringing back words that were snuffed out by political ideology. In conclusion, if the reason for learning is to be understood in the whole region then learning serbo-croatian is a good strategy. If you want to learn a language because you like the culture, literature, music, history of its people then avoid this political aberration and go for the real thing :) Kiki 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| trance0 Pentaglot Groupie Slovenia Joined 5561 days ago 52 posts - 78 votes Speaks: Slovenian*, English, German, Croatian, Serbian | Message 12 of 28 23 September 2009 at 7:53pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
I consider both languages pretty much identical, differences between 'Serbian' and 'Croatian' are marginal at best, mostly vocabulary, very little difference in grammar. Most Slovene dialects differ more from standard Slovene than both standard versions of Serbian and Croatian differ from each other. Politics aside, we are talking about one language here(linguistically). Edited by trance0 on 24 September 2009 at 5:10pm 4 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Chung Diglot Senior Member Joined 6967 days ago 4228 posts - 8259 votes 20 sounds Speaks: English*, French Studies: Polish, Slovak, Uzbek, Turkish, Korean, Finnish | Message 13 of 28 15 January 2013 at 9:11pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
As I've started reviewing my long-dormant knowledge of BCMS/SC and checking out old posts on the language, I came upon this chestnut for a thread.
This commentary while full of facts is not aligned coherently. Karadžić's idea of svesrpstvu was his (mis)interpretation of the dubious but common equation in the 18th and 19th centuries of ethnicity and language. In this mindset, if two people spoke in the same way, then those two people could only be of the same ethnic group. From Karadžić's point of view, this meant that anyone who spoke like him had to be a Serb just as he identified himself. He actually didn't seem to realize that his native dialect was already being used natively by other ethnic groups until he met Croatian and Slovenian intellectuals. The codification of SC was indeed done by Croatian and Serbian linguists (i.e. Vukovci) but hardly under the guise of a Greater Serbian pet project as Kiki svuda insinuates. The reinterpretation of the codification as a malevolent Serbian project gained ground after the Croats started to feel that they were unduly marginalized politically and socially in Yugoslavia. By then, everything bad about their lot could only be the fault of the Serbs and the government in Belgrade. The invoking of svesrpstvu as a Croatian bogeyman became relevant when nationalist Serbs basically walked into Croatian fears of Serbian domination when enough Serbs became more open about supporting Serbs in Croatia (i.e. feared precursor of irredentism) and started to follow Karadžić's simplistic logic that if non-Serbs are native speakers of Shtokavian just like they are, then those non-Serbs are Serbs but just don't know it. It's puerile to me but air-tight logic to the nationalist thug, I guess. It's a small point but it's ijekavica. Iekavica is a convention proposed by the Croatian linguist Dalibor Brozović in a fit of nationalist reinterpetation. He reanalyzed the long diphthong spelled ije as ie to try to add another increment of divergence between standard Croatian spelling and standard Ijekavian Serbian spelling. Even my proudly Croatian friend who helped me during my Croatian studies corrected me when I once spelled *cviet instead of proper cvijet.
This idea and conclusion only work when enough people cling to the equation of ethnicity with native language (and the related idea that for every distinct nation, there must be a distinct native language, assuming that language is what expresses the "soul" of a "nation"). Croats are not less "Croatian" if they learn a variant of a language that's used by Serbs in a different variant. If everyone in the former Yugoslavia could invalidate this equation by considering BCMS/SC as a vibrant pluricentric language then there'd be one fewer excuse for nationalists and opportunists to stir up trouble.
Except for the insinuation of SC being an especially striking political aberration (dividing a pluricentric language into 4 to match nation states is arguably a greater political aberration itself), I can't disagree. However, my having already studied some "Croatian" has made decidedly un-Croatian tidbits such as Sevdahlinka, Turbofolk and the film Srđo among other things, accessible and even helpful in refining my understanding of the language. 3 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Merv Bilingual Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5084 days ago 414 posts - 749 votes Speaks: English*, Serbo-Croatian* Studies: Spanish, French | Message 14 of 28 15 January 2013 at 11:14pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
Honestly, this just seems to come out of no-where and to be stirring the pot. The central problem for Westerners in understanding Yugoslav history is that ethnicity is not defined on a racial or linguistic basis, but on a religious one. In the West, religion came after polity and language. In the ex-Ottoman and ex-Austrian territories, religion came first, then polity and language. And before this becomes one of those "oh those Balkanians" or "oh those Turks" arguments, I would remind you that Western Vienna was the one that decided to discriminate against all non-Catholics in it's territories: to force Hussites back to Catholicism through brutal tactics, to crush Protestantism in Slovenia and Austria during the counterreformation, to abuse Romanian and Serbian and Ukrainian Orthodox Christians, to purge and expel Jews, to put down Romance and Slavic language speakers under the German boot. So the centuries of intolerance were institutionalized from a Western capital. (Parenthetically, it's hardly surprising that fascism found such a comfortable home in Vienna, centuries later). I also don't think it's a nationalistic thing for Serbs or Croats to question claims of Bosnian Muslims and Montenegrins to be bona fide ethnic groups (or Bulgarians to question Macedonians in the same regard). Yes, ethnicity is partly self-defined. But it also depends on recognition from others. I can learn to speak perfect Chinese, write Chinese, convert to Taoism, live in China, and yet many Chinese would have quite some justification in questioning my Chinese-ness. After all, my ancestors had nothing to do with China. Not to mention that as recently as 20 years ago Montenegrins were browbeating Serbs as not being Serb enough (or trash-talking to the tune of: Serbs are fake because they bred with Turks and Hungarians and others whereas Montenegrins are the "true" and "pure" Serbs who stayed in the mountains and remained genetically pure, etc.) And Muslims were calling themselves Croats one day, Serbs another, Turks the third, Yugoslavs the fourth, muslims the fifth, Muslims the sixth, and Bosniaks today. Did Serbs and Croats change their autonyms 7 times in one century? I think not. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Chung Diglot Senior Member Joined 6967 days ago 4228 posts - 8259 votes 20 sounds Speaks: English*, French Studies: Polish, Slovak, Uzbek, Turkish, Korean, Finnish | Message 15 of 28 15 January 2013 at 11:23pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
Who? Kiki svuda or I? I thought that I poked enough holes in Kiki svuda's post. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Марк Senior Member Russian Federation Joined 4867 days ago 2096 posts - 2972 votes Speaks: Russian* | Message 16 of 28 16 January 2013 at 8:44am | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
The real difference between dialects spoken in the former Yugoslavia has nothing to do
with its ethnic division. Some dialects of Croatian are farther from standard Croatian than standard Serbian is from standard Croatian. Serbs, Bosnjaks and Croats in BIH speak the same language, while Serbs in Southern Serbia speak a different one. Serbian is practically the same as Serbo-Croatian, but Bosnian and Croatian were artificially made different from the former standard. Foreigners can speak any understable language, this language is usually farther from any standard than these standards from each other because of multiple mistakes. Many people are not good at English there. 1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
