The Rosetta Stone

[indigen]

Lavce & what have you been doing that makes you so tired???

He is studying for his Uni exams.

[indigen]

@Indigen I know how to post, I was tired.

I am sure you know how to post but you have not been giving much attention to quoting effectively and I am sure we will not have such problems in future.

[indigen]

Ibdigen i remember in the early 1990's when professor peter hill was doing some research into macedonian pecalbari in sydney australia & he was interviewing me & my family of how we came to be etc.
I said to him afterwards that do you have time to get into a long discussion about something on our identity.He said why not.He was saying he was professor of slavonic studies at hamburg university??Anyway i said you specialise in slavonic studies.I said you take a macedonian who thinks he is macedonian,I said there is so much diservice & destruction that referring to one as slav or slav macedonian.I said look at the people in that are meant to reopresent us are letting us down by the refrence to slavs.We went on discussing the slav history etc even to wards prehistoric references,Finally he caved in & said i was right.I explained to him that the so called illiterate slavic hordes went through greece,bulgaria,turkey,albania,Why do we don't classify them as slavic.He realised that we were letting ourselves down by adopting a whole view of slavianism.Also i mentioned over the years all our enemies have been working on overdrive using smear tactics to destroy us & tell us we are nothing but slavs which is false.After this discussion Peter Hill i'm sure was very well informed on the issue.He just said he never thought about it before like that.I said you just remember to tell the real truth about slavianism & where it stands in relation to macedonians.Also since then over the years i have informed other members in the macedonian community what the effects of the slavianism has really done is to destroy our identity.I did remind people that each side of the occupied territory tried to outdo each other with heavy duty propaganda trying to tell macedonians that they are not related to the ancient macedonians & they should take glory out of being slavs & related to the slavs.Nothing could be further from the truth.

George, that is good to hear and know. Though I have also heard some negative comments about the original draft of P. Hill's book (where he had wanted to give a pro MPO version of our history in it) and that there had been a lot of political lobbying by the community to get it changed to what was in the final print.

[indigen]

Oh I'm so not touching this. Yes I'm a coward and I'll hide under my big straw hat.

Good idea because it will get us nowhere and waste a lot of our time!

[indigen]

But just out of curiosity, Indigen, what is your theory on how "Macedonic" languages spread from Macedonia all over Eastern and Central Europe and are now spoken by more than 300 million people? And when did they spread?

There are a lot of theories/beliefs going around that can cater to the concept of Macedonic spreading out from the Macedonian Peninsula (Balkans), some of them very old and predominant for a long time.

[lavce pelagonski]

Delodephius I wasnt drinking I was going to bed.

[George S.]

lavce i know you got exams indigen was saying good luck all the best.

[George S.]

indigen peter hill has got a mind of his own he writes what he wan'ts to write.One minute he'll write this or that only to be surprised he has written the opposite.I fully agree with your comments.

[Soldier of Macedon]

I'm here to help.

You're here to agitate, the rest of what you wrote is irrelevant, and if you're going to be irrelevant, stay out of the discussion(s). This is your last warning on all counts, your smug presence here is becoming a stench.

The criticism aimed at Macedonians such as Tentov, IMO, is much more venomous than is warranted and appears to be of a self-hating Macedonian type when none of it is ranged in similar passion against those that insist we are "Slavs" and can't be connected to the ancient Macedonians.

People like Tentov and Iljov should first get their works accepted by the linguistic community before the Macedonian community, until then they should be subject to criticism - irrespective if it makes ignorant Macedonians content to believe in unsubstantiated theories.

You are not that important to most of us (except maybe SOM)......

Indigen, you're hardly the common voice of the collective MTO membership where it concerns Slovak. And as a person who shares an interest in genuine linguistic research, I value his input here. He is miles ahead of you in this field, you could learn something from him if you learned to re-adjust that tunnel vision of yours.

It is rude to tell people (another nationality) what they should learn at school, IMO! You might have had a better reception if you designated a different (and more appropriate) label for the Macedonian language in question!

I agree with his suggestion of having our schools teach the old language. Although I prefer the use of Old Macedonian (because that is exactly what it is) and that is how I would expect it to be taught in schools, contextual references to the language of that period as Slavonic and/or Church Slavonic cannot be excluded because it would be historically incorrect. That is why they are acceptable alternatives. Our people called it Slavonic during an extended period of time and that is how it came to be known as a liturgical language in the Christian world. The very name 'Slavonic' is evidence of the fact that it represents a pan-linguistic identity and not an ethnic one, even though the Slavonic language of Cyril and Methodius was Old Macedonian . Our enemies have made some us think that the word itself is completely negative because they use it in an inappropriate manner, and those who are ignorant among us contribute to this misinformation by rejecting anything associated with it. Both the terms 'Macedonian' and 'Slavonic' can exist in our historical perspectives if there is logical interpretation and relevant context applied, with neither one being suggestive against the other.

Are you are certain that it was "brought to Macedonia"?

The language known as Common Slavic that was formed during the rule of the Goths was brought into Macedonia and was related to the Paleo-Balkan languages, including ancient Macedonian. With it also came a different socio-political system and the establishment of rebel enclaves independent from direct Roman rule. None of this could have happened without the participation of local populations, who remained the majority. Old Macedonian was formed as a hybrid between Common Slavic and its substratum, the anc. Macedonian and other Paleo-Balkan languages - as related languages, that simply meant taking Common Slavic forms of words that were common to both groups in many cases.

There are a lot of theories/beliefs going around that can cater to the concept of Macedonic spreading out from the Macedonian Peninsula (Balkans), some of them very old and predominant for a long time.

How many of those theories are credible? Which languages are included in this Macedonic group? When did it split from PIE? How did it it spread?

[Delodephius]

Here is a chapter from my OCS grammar book that explains what the name of the language should be:

The Name of the Old Slavonic Language

§19. In the oldest written documents of the 9th and 10th century – Slavonic, Greek and Latin – Old Slavonic language is simply called: SLAVONIC.

From the Slavonic sources – in the biographies we find only the general designation словѣньскъ: ѩзыкъ словѣньскъіи, кънигъі словѣньскъіѩ, ростиславъ кънѧзь словѣньскъ and the like.

In the Greek biography of St. Clement we find: ΤΑ ΣΘΛΟΩΕΝΙΚΑ ΓΡΑΜΜΑΤΑ.

In the Latin sources: LINGUA SCLAVINICA, SCLAVINISCA, SCLAVINA.

In science this term has not been accepted from the very beginning – for two reasons:
a) because it is completely unspecific: it can represent any Slavic language or all of them;
b) because this name is already used by two of the Slavic language: slovenski jezik = Slovenian and slovenský jazyk = Slovak.

§20. Consequently with different understanding about the origin and territory of the Old Slavonic language the name also changed.

With the name the intent was:
1) either to point to the tribal and territorial qualification of the Old Slavonic language;
2) or to point to the character and function of the Old Slavonic language.

On the basis of the former – the term ALTBULGARISCHE SPRACHE (= Old Bulgarian language) was created by German linguists Schleicher and Leskin which today is still used ONLY by Bulgarian linguists.

The weak points of this term are: - Old Bulgarian can be mistaken for the language of the old Turanian or Turkic Bulgars who still haven't melted with the Slavic speakers in the 9th century; - it doesn't explain the Macedonian character of the Old Slavonic language, thus it doesn't give an accurate idea about the tribal qualification of the Old Slavonic language; - it imposes the wrong idea that the Modern Bulgarian language is a further development of the Old Bulgarian language; - it cannot be used to designate all Old Slavonic texts; - it does not give the idea about the Old Slavonic as a written language and Old Slavonic as a sacral language.

§21. On the basis of the same intent another term was created: ALTSLOVENISCHE SPRACHE = Old Slovenian language; lingua paleoslovenica.

That term was used by Miklošič till the end of his life.
Today it is completely abandoned because it gives a wrong idea about the origin of the Old Slavonic language.

§22. On the basis of the second intent: the term OLD CHURCH SLAVONIC was introduced by Vondrak and use it to mark the language of the 9th and 10th century Old Slavonic monuments, the language of the monuments that form the so-called Old Slavonic canon.

This term became fairly domesticated in science (in Germany, Poland, etc.).

§23. The term OLD SLAVONIC was introduced by Fortunatov and the Russian linguistic school.
This is a linguistical term: to embrace the oldest state of the Slavic languages. It embraces all Old Slavonic texts, of all types and dialects and has a wide application.

Russian: старословянский язык.
Polish: język staroslowiánski.
The Czechs have coined a term derived from the original name: jazyk staroslověnský.

[George S.]

Guys guess what's come over on the email::
The Rosetta Stone Center Text Translation - Controversy



By Risto Stefov

[email protected]

June 19, 2011



Ever since the Rosetta stone center text translation presentation took place at the University of Toronto on May 15, 2011, I have been inundated with a barrage of questions ranging from wanting to know if I believed the text was genuinely translated, or if this was some sort of hoax, to asking me to give some details of the translation.



My advice to all of you is to go to the website and have a look at the information first hand and then judge for yourselves. Here is a link; http://rosetta-stone.etf.ukim.edu.mk/



I will summarize however, what I know and will give you my opinion as to why the translation has created so much controversy leading to much discussion in the various forums and blogs.



Let me begin by dividing the translation into two separate aspects; the alphabet and the language of the text.



The alphabet itself can be subdivided into “written letters” and “sounds” with each letter having its own sound. The ancient “written” center text on the Rosetta stone consists of letters and symbols similar to say the Latin alphabet which also contains letters (a to z) and symbols like ?, !, @, #, $,% &, *, (, ), [, ], {, <, and so on.



In my opinion the Macedonian team working on the Rosetta stone center text translation has figured out and identified all the unique letters and symbols found in the text, and in the case of the letters, they have identified what they sound like. They have also discovered that the text is syllabic written from right to left, opposite from what we are used to.



Given that they recognize what each letter looks like and sounds like, they can now read the Rosetta stone center text. Many of you, if you have the time, can spend a couple of hours or days studying the alphabet and symbols and you too can then read what the text says; but can you understand it?



I don’t speak Italian but I too can fluently read Italian because Italian text is written in the Latin alphabet which I am familiar with. I may be able to fluently read Italian but I cannot understand what it says because I don’t know the Italian language.



So, to summarize; the Macedonian team can now read the Rosetta stone center text; but can they understand the language that it is written in?



Yes they can, but, so far, only a small part of it.



Is it related to modern Macedonian? In my opinion, yes, it is!



Because the Macedonian language on the stone is very old and the modern Macedonian language has greatly evolved over the centuries, most of the old language is now unrecognizable to ordinary readers. That however does not mean it is not Macedonian. It only means that we cannot understand all of it. We can however, understand parts of it, especially the names of rulers, gods, titles, cities, etc., and some connecting words such as “of”, “in” “at”, “and” and so on, which are similar to modern Macedonian. In fact more than 400 such names and connecting words have been identified on the text and translated to English and Russian.



Will the entire text be, someday, translated?



In my opinion, yes, but it will require the effort of many paleo-linguists, who, so far, have shown no interest.



And why is that?



Before I answer that question, let me say that the center text is not the same as the bottom text; the names are not the same and the bottom text was written for the “ruled” while the center text was written for the “rulers”. So comparing the center text to the other texts does not help figure out what it says.



Why have paleo-linguists and other scientists not shown any interest in the work of the Macedonians?



It is difficult for anyone in the current establishment to accept anything out of the common belief. History is built on a foundation of building blocks and if any of the foundation building blocks are “jostled” then the entire historic structure will be in danger of collapse.



Imagine how difficult it was for people to accept that the earth was “round” when for generations “everyone” believed that the earth was “flat”. The entire foundation of science and religion was built on the concept that the earth was flat and the stars and sun revolved around the earth. In fact people who spoke differently lost their lives.



By admitting that the earth was round and not flat as claimed by the authorities, the “all knowing” had to admit that they were either “ignorant” (not all knowing) or were “lying” to the people! And who would have wanted to be the first to do that?



Who, of the modern “all knowing” wants to be first to say “yes the text is Macedonian, and yes the modern Macedonians speak the same Macedonian language the ancient Macedonians spoke” and yes we lied when we led the entire world to believe that “Macedonians did not exist” and that “the modern Macedonians were Slavs” who came to Macedonia from somewhere north of Romania, in the 6th century AD. Who wants to be the first to say this?



The implications of the Rosetta “find” are horrendous and will have an epic impact on our current foundation of history.



If we now admit that the ancient text is indeed Macedonian, the same Macedonian as spoken today, what will happen to the beliefs that the Slavs came to the Balkans in the 6th century AD and brought this language with them? What will happen to the belief that the ancient Macedonians spoke “Greek” and a “different”, yet to be identified language, different from modern Macedonian? What will happen to Bulgarian claims that the modern Macedonian language is a dialect of the Bulgarian language?



What will happen to all these claims, particularly to the Bulgarian language claims, if we accept that the ancient Macedonians spoke the same language as the modern Macedonians? Where will Bulgaria be if all this is accepted? Where does the Bulgarian language fit in all this? Where do all the Bulgarian claims fit in all this?



It is difficult to even imagine the implications that would arise from this if the Rosetta stone center text is actually accepted to be Macedonian, the ancestor of the modern Macedonian language!



Now I hope you can understand why so may people hesitate to be involved and why there is such a controversy surrounding this topic.



Many of you also asked for my opinion if I believe this language to be Macedonian, the ancestor of modern Macedonian? The simplest answer I can give is a resounding YES!



Why do I believe that?



The clincher for me was when Aristotel Tentov, whom I met in Macedonia and know him to be a very serious, intelligent and dedicated person, told me that his team translated similar inscriptions found on ancient Macedonian coins (the kind that Greeks claim do not exist), on an artifact from the Vincha Culture, modern day Serbia and an on an artifact found in Russia. There inscriptions were written in the same syllabic alphabet found on the Rosetta stone center text and the language sounded similar to the familiar Aegean dialects, some words which even I could understand.



So, if this is truly Macedonian, and I have no reason to believe it not to be, then why is there such a big controversy surrounding it especially in the Macedonian community?



This is because the Macedonian community is still divided and does not know who or what to believe. Foreign propaganda particularly that of Greece and Bulgaria, the parties that have the most to lose from this, is hard at work “negating” everything Macedonian. I ought to know I am in the middle of it. Everything I say is continuously “negated” by Greeks and Bulgarians. I often publish the negations and insults I receive in the monthly Macedonian Digest.



Those Macedonians who tend to pay attention to foreign propaganda tend to question everything Macedonian, and tend to surround issues with confusion and mistrust, especially controversial issues such as the center text of the famous Rosetta stone.



But, despite the opposition, balking and foot dragging, the truth will surface and will be eventually accepted for what it is!



My wish for Macedonians is to be a bit more patient, understanding and supportive of those who stick their necks out and who are prepared to uncover the truth.



In my opinion if it were not for people like Boshevski and Tentov, today we all would be walking around happily believing the earth was flat, that there is no such thing as a Macedonian and that today the people in Macedonia speak a dialect of the Bulgarian language!

[Delodephius]

Why do they insist the Demotic text was not deciphered? This I can't understand.

[George S.]

Delod have you checked out their link about ancient macedonian???

[Delodephius]

Yes, but it makes no sense. They just ignore all the scholarly research that has been done on the Demotic language.

I know I wrote of all this before and there was some discussion elsewhere too, but it just keeps boggling me.

[rosetta]

In the Greek biography of St. Clement we find: ΤΑ ΣΘΛΟΩΕΝΙΚΑ ΓΡΑΜΜΑΤΑ.

Actually that is ΣΘΛΟΒΕΝΙΚΑ ΓΡΑΜΜΑΤΑ, (Sthlovenika Grammata), i.e. Sthlovenic Letters/Script.