Slav Macedonians

[Risto the Great]

ZAS, I have no idea what you are suggesting.
It is not necessarily clever to make vague statements like the one above.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Hey SOM defend this!

ZAS, explain yourself bre coek, so tuku brboris, what exactly are you attacking for me to defend?

[ZAS]

ZAS, explain yourself bre coek, so tuku brboris, what exactly are you attacking for me to defend?

you asked me about Slavs on this forum, Pelister is a good Slav.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Ok, thank you for being forthcoming. To be fair, I think the person you have just accused should be afforded the courtesy of responding to this allegation himself, first and foremost. I will be happy to give you my opinion too on how you have just manipulated the intent of somebody's words and have totally misrepresented what they are trying to say.

Pelister, would you care to answer ZAS, I'll just go get the pop corn.

[indigen]

If the language is Macedonian, its dialects can only be Macedonian!

I believe it would be a simple sign of respect and a professional acknowledgement of Macedonians as equals, for journalists to use “ethnic Macedonian language speakers living in _______”. Using an archaic political term as a linguistic classification blurs reality for most people, empowering the Greek pseudo-argument. The Victorian mind is preconditioned to thoughtlessly determine ethnicity according to language.

“Slavic speaking Romans defeated the Slavs, who called for surrender in their Getic language, etc…” is an academic absurdity, an anachronistic aneurism, in my opinion. It works the same way in a newspaper, as well.

Our language is Macedonian and any dialects that relate to it should simply be called MACEDONIAN. And, naturally, ALL speakers of the Macedonian language (literary or dialect variety) should also be referred to as Macedonian speakers, IMHO.

Then there is also Old Macedonian/Old Church Macedonian and Macedonic dialects/Macedonic linguistic group.

English is a Germanic language but one will NEVER hear of speakers of this language being referred to as Germans or German/Germanic speakers.

Cheers

[ZAS]

Our language is Macedonian and any dialects that relate to it should simply be called MACEDONIAN. And, naturally, ALL speakers of the Macedonian language (literary or dialect variety) should also be referred to as Macedonian speakers, IMHO.

Then there is also Old Macedonian/Old Church Macedonian and Macedonic dialects/Macedonic linguistic group.

English is a Germanic language but one will NEVER hear of speakers of this language being referred to as Germans or German/Germanic speakers.

Cheers

BRAVOS Right-on, This is what I mean.
Thank you.

[Soldier of Macedon]

I agree, however, when speaking in the broader sense of all related languages, there are times where Slavic is an accurate descriptor.

That various tribes invaded the Balkans during the 6th century cannot be disputed, nor can the fact that many of these tribes were called 'Sclaveni' (Slavs) by the Roman writers. While the others such as Avars, Bulgars, etc were Asiatic, the Slavs mentioned by the Romans were European and lived north along the Danube. There is evidence to suggest that the language of the Slavs was related to the various native dialects in Macedonia, Thrace and Illyria, although how close they were specifically is difficult to demonstrate due to the lack of texts (It can, for example, be demonstrated that the Balto-Slavic group is related to Thracian). Subsequently, Macedonia and other parts of the Balkans would be controlled by Slav warriors in enclaves called Sclavinae, in which the language of the locals amalgamated with the Slav leaders, a blending of two related groups from the same linguistic family.

The language of Cyril and Methodius can rightfully be called Old Macedonian because it is essentially a native dialect that derives from Macedonia, there is no doubt there. It can also be called (Church) Slavonic, because that was the name used by Clement in his biography of Methodius and because the Macedonian dialect that was standardised for the mission was aimed at a broader audience. The very fact that it was called "sloven'ski" by writers such as Clement confirms the connection to the word "slovo", which indicates a commonality among speakers of a similar tongue. This common identification began to take place centuries earlier and was indirectly completed by works of Cyril, Methodius and their followers thereafter, and is the most logical explanation as to how the term spread so rapidly and mantained its presence for so long. If the language of the Slavs was not related to the Balkan languages in some way, the term "sloven'ski" would not have spread the way it did.



ZAS & Indigen, can you see my point? Give us your thoughts.

ZAS, am I a Slavist too for taking an objective stance on this historical point?

[Risto the Great]

Athanasios, read the rules before you post here. A simple request.

[indigen]

ZAS (or Bradley Pappas, as you used on Maknews forums),
I don't think that it is very ethical (for obvious reasons) of you to use another persons real name as your login! I even think it should be part of forum rules not to do so.

BRAVOS Right-on, This is what I mean.
Thank you.

If that is what you meant, why didn't you say it?

Cheers

[Soldier of Macedon]

If that is what you meant, why didn't you say it?

Because it would appear that ZAS likes to ride on the wave of comments from others, while cunningly keeping his own hands out of the 'dirt'.

ZAS, you're not going to go missing again are you? Answer the questions put forth to you by myself, Indigen and others.


INDIGEN, what are your thought regarding what I wrote above about Slavs?

[indigen]

The Anomaly on 28 Jun 2009:
How many of you have grown tired of people using the word "Slavic language"? There is no such thing as the Slavic language. There are Slavic languages and they are mostly unintelligible one to another. They all have their own rightful names, even those unwritten dialects. So instead of putting both the nuts and the berries into one basket, one should try to call a language or a dialect the speakers of that language or dialect call it.

I agree, however, when speaking in the broader sense of all related languages, there are times where Slavic is an accurate descriptor.

SOM, since you agree with the basic Macedonian patriotic tenet, there is no real need, IMO, to dissipate any more energy on this.

I will just reaffirm the following points:

1). There has not been a common Macedonic ("Slavic") language for centuries (or longer, if ever) and any reference to language (or dialect) spoken by Macedonians should be designated as MACEDONIAN.

2). Macedonians and Macedonia (as a nation state) are ancient/biblical designations and I do not support or appreciate the backwards projection of a latter political designations ("Slav", "Slavic") for Macedonian ethnicity or ethnogenesis.


Eden izvadok za doobjasnuvanje:

Dnevnik: Број 1887 (сабота, 29 јуни 2002)

Илија Чашуле – Покрстување

Кумовите повторно и бараат име на Македонија

Што се однесува до самите термини Славомакедонци, Македонски Словени, Македонски Славјани и сл., тие се наметнуваат поизразито, и тоа главно со извори надвор од Македонија, како одраз на пансловенското движење во 19 век (сосема како и терминот славјаносерпски во Србија или славјанобугарски во Бугарија) и настапувањето на Русија на Балканот, т.е. потребата лојалноста на локалното население да се сврти кон моќната православна спасоносна словенска сила на североисток. Употребата на терминот Словен во овој контекст, освен како спротивставување кон етниконот Грк-Елин, имала цел, меѓу другото, повикувајќи се на средновековното наследство, да создаде една општа безоблична, неединствена и неосвестена маса, која би можела да се обликува според политичките потреби на денот. Современите наложувања да се воведе именувањето Славомакедонци, Македонски Словени и сл., пак произлегуваат од зад границите на Република Македонија и повторно се изведуваат од истата политичка рамка. (Во таа насока е и упорното настојување на некои западни - американски и други - извори дека во Албанија и во Грција има "словенско" население - на тој начин тие луѓе повторно стануваат аморфно количество, наспроти нивното сопствено изјаснување главно како Македонци.

Дури и на лингвистички план, иако е неоспорно дека македонскиот јазик спаѓа по својот пред се материјален, а помалку граматички облик, во југоисточната подгрупа на јужнословенската група на јазици, факт е дека тој е најмалку словенски од сите словенски јазици (вклучувајќи го тука и бугарскиот), поради низа граматички процеси од балкански и од романски тип, кои радикално ја видоизмениле неговата структура и го ставиле во жариштето на процесите на Балканскиот јазичен сојуз. Употребата на определбата "славо-" во врска со јазик чија структура е само делумно словенска би била и теориски на слаба основа, особено што нема друг македонски јазик или народ со кој треба да се изврши разграничување. Впрочем, статусот на македонскиот стандарден јазик веќе подолго време е цврсто втемелен. Во крајна линија, нема ниту некаков лингвистички (деривациски, зборообразувачки), логички или смисловен начин од именката Македонија и синтагмата македонски јазик да се изведе именување Славомакедонец и сл.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Thanks for your response Idigen, I truly feel that we as Macedonians need to come to a consensus regarding this matter and determine when it is appropriate to use Slavic as opposed to Macedonian in some instances.

Your 2 points however, don't really answer my question.

What do we call the language of the invaders from the 6th century?

[indigen]

Thanks for your response Idigen, I truly feel that we as Macedonians need to come to a consensus regarding this matter and determine when it is appropriate to use Slavic as opposed to Macedonian in some instances.

Your 2 points however, don't really answer my question.

What do we call the language of the invaders from the 6th century?

SOM, I don't think it is up to me to answer all these issues, I can only make some suggestions. We Macedonians have a bigger problem from the "enemy within" (the whole state structure in RM is rotten to the core) than the external enemy.

As for language classification, the following is a good option, IMO:

Originally posted by naemnik

Webster Dictionary 1967-69

GROUP: MACEDONIC

ANCIENT: MACEDONIAN

MEDEVIAL: MACEDONIAN

MODERN:

SOUT: BULGARIAN, SERB-CROATIAN, SLOVENIAN, MACEDONIAN

WEST: CZECH, SLOVAK, POLISH, WENDISH etc.

EAST: RUSSIAN, UKRAINIAN, BELORUSSIAN

http://forum.idividi.com.mk/forum_po...?TID=9449&PN=3

If my memory serves me right, the same (or similar table) can be found in the following book:
Etnogenezata na makedonskiot narod: kontinuitet i tradicija : nekoi aspekt
# Paperback: 234 pages
# Publisher: Matica makedonska (1992)
# Language Macedonian
# ASIN: B001P4MO86

So pochit

[Soldier of Macedon]

I see what you are saying Indigen, but I cannot agree with calling the language of the Slavs from the Danube that penetrated the Balkans as Macedonian. I agree that it was related to the local Macedonian language which must have assisted in the process of amalgamation, but it cannot be rightfully called anything but Slavic at that point in time. Even the terms 'Croatian' and 'Serbian' are relatively recent where it concerns the names of the languages, given the alleged time of their arrival in the Balkans (7th century).

[Sovius]

To Slav or not to Slav? That is the question. You can fit a round peg into a square hole by simply reclassifying square pegs as being round.

During the period in history in which Marcus Justinus lived, the Macedonian language was likely generally classified as Pelasgic, given the vast expanse over which the indigenous populations of Southeastern Europe lived and what colonial historians had written of these various peoples. Sklabenoi was a Roman slang word for Gothic populations who spoke a Northern Thracian language, as recorded by both Procopius and Simocatta. Thracian, then, is a language that came to be referred to as the language of the “Sklabenoi”. To adhere to grammatical convention, ‘Slav’ represents a variation of ‘Sklabenoi’, not ‘slovenskii’, as slovenskii is not a proper noun. Thracian formally represents an accurate equivalent of what ‘Slav’ actually meant and continues to mean within the context of the historical record. Would it not be safe to say that Historical Linguistics is an empty pursuit without historical accuracy? Was the Odrysian Kingdom a Slavic speaking kingdom, a political entity that existed well before the term came into use? If we apply this Victorian convention to Germans, would they not be speaking a Hunnic language, as this is what the Allied forces informally referred to speakers of this “proto-Nazi” (?) language as during World War I? Very disrespectful to modern Germans to say the least. The self-loathing Albanian pseudo-argument is based on faulty presuppositions. I don’t believe the Macedonian thesis should give the unwary the benefit of the doubt. Those who have taken the time to properly educate themselves regarding the reality of this term understand it quite differently than those who were simply indoctrinated with fragmented academic swill. It’s too easy to misconstrue an honest argument (or news report) using this term. It creates a cognitive effect similar to the Jacob’s Ladder concept.

Perhaps, Slovenian (Slow-ven-ian, not veen-ian) better represents slovenski than Slavic when used for discourse in the English language?