Quote:
Originally posted by cniaju
I think you pinpointed it exactly - it's the result of a difference
in perspective. My observations are based on vocabulary and
syntax that I picked up from studying several Slavic languages
and the linguistic family itself - yours come from the approach
of a native speaker on the homefront.
We should combine the details of what we've noticed into
a comprehensive hybrid perspective that could be understood
by almost everybody, а la slovio-style. :P
|
Hehe...several slavic languages eh? Now I understand why you know dual. Well I don't look at it from completely slovene perspective at least. I know serbo-croatian as well as long as understand at least some basics from other langugages, so my perspective is a bit wider as well, but not much more then an average slavic persons.
Quote:
Originally posted by coolasfcuk
..
freddie, I just noticed you called us 'Bulgars' there is no such thing we are called 'Bulgarians' .. or are you trying to get me back cause i said 'slovenian' in the begining
|
Ops! Sorry
Coolz! *blushes* My bad. I think there were "Bulgars" but they were a tribe that came to bulgaria from Asia and weren't slavic at all, but just mixed with the slavic population. Or maybe I'm completely wrong here again. *hides*
Quote:
Originally posted by zebu
i don't understand why you put this serbo-croatian languange all the time as it doesn't exist and on that page it also says Serbian and Croatian as different languages
|
Quote:
Originally posted by coolasfcuk
..and yeah, I see zebu's point - there is no such nation as 'serbo-Croatians' .... Serbs and Croatians ja?
|
Even Slovene is SO sililar to Serbo-Croatian it's ridilculous. Yet it's still not as similar as Serian and Croatian are to eachother. All those South Slavic languages were once just one basic dialect. Serbian and Croatian simply differentiate to little to be called seperate language. We don't know an Austrian, Australian or American language do we? Of course there are differences, but those differences have to be QUITE significant to label the language as a seperate entity. We don't have such nation as Austro-Germans neither yet we still don't have seperate languages for those two countries.
FURTHERMORE... In the internetional codification of languages (every language in the world has it's own code), there was NO such thing as a Croatian or a Serbian language. They were both taged under the same code "Serbo-Croatian". But after the break up of Yugoslavia they became seperate under political pressures.
Lemme show you what I mean:
(this is taken straight from the tree of slavic languages from
http://www.ethnologue.com)
In the western part of South Slavic languages (East Part it Bulgarian and Macedonian) there is a following codification:
South Slavic Languages:
Western Section
Slovene - (SIL Code, SLV; ISO 639-1 code, sl; ISO 639-2 code, slv)
Serbo-Croatian - (SIL Code, SRC; ISO 639-1 codes, bs (also hr and sr; ISO 639-2 codes, bel; ISO 639-2(B) codes, scr and scc; ISO 639-2(T) codes, hrv and srp)
After the break-up of Yugoslavia they became officially considered as three languages, Serbian, Croatian, and Bosnian, though the differences (apart from the choice of script) are more political than dialectal.
Romano-Serbian - (SIL Code, RSB; ISO 639-2 code, sla)
There you go.