Talk:Slavonic languages

message: This page claims that Quark is from Slavic languages through German, but I've found multiple sources which say that the physicist who invented the word was quoting a nonsense word from an English novel (James Joyce's "Finnegans Wake") 
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=quark&searchmode=none
http://www.takeourword.com/TOW111/page2.html
I think the tvorog claim, while interesting, is suspicious and should probably be removed until solid evidence controverting the two sources I just posted can be found.  If no one responds within the next several days, I'll just remove that sentence. BryanC 05:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Quark is a type of spread dairy product long popular in Central Europe. It is this which is said to come from Slavonic, not the name of the recently discovered subatomic particle. I take it you've never been to Germany. CRCulver 14:32, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually, I have been to Germany, and I'm not disputing that the German word Quark comes from a Slavonic root.  Here's the relevant sentence from the article: "English derives quark from the German Quark, which in turn is derived from the Slavic tvarog, which means "curd"".  I believe this claim to be incorrect, since English does not derive the word quark from the German Quark.BryanC 21:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Look at the OED. There are English authors who have used the word "quark" in English-language texts for the dairy spread. CRCulver 21:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:   You're right, I didn't know of that secondary meaning for the word "quark".  Perhaps we should make the text clearer, so as not to lead people into the misapprehension that the subatomic particle is named after curds. BryanC 22:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:   I changed the wording to make it clear that the subatomic particle was not named after the cheese.  BryanC 03:07, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology of Quark 

message: :The Slavic group of languages is completely different from the neighboring Baltic group
They're not "completely different", as they're both IE, and probably in closer genetic relation to each other than to any other group of IO languages. --Taw
What does "completely different" mean?  Difference in languages is often only a question of degrees. Eclecticology
There are two ways to explain the similarities between Slavic and Baltic languages:
# the common ancestor, Proto-Balto-Slavic;
# coexistence of ancient Slavic and Baltic tribes in the same land (the geographic closeness made some common processes possible).
Some linguists claim that there was no Proto-Balto-Slavic language. They explain all the similarities in the second way. They point at some structural differences between Baltic and Slavic languages. On the other hand, numerous similarities between these two groups support the Proto-Balto-Slavic theory.
Boraczek 11:36, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Who are those "some linguists"? -- Naive cynic 21:48, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Frankly, I can't remember who the most prominent supporters of that theory are. But I'll check it and let you know in a few days, OK? Boraczek 14:52, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you. It will hopefully help to deweaselize the wording of the article somewhat. -- Naive cynic 02:31, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, the one who questioned the Proto-Balto-Slavic theory was Antoine Meillet. Since then, there is no consensus among linguists whether Proto-Balto-Slavic existed. Boraczek 09:09, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: difference from Baltic

message: I don't think that Kashbian and Polish is closer then Polish and Czech! --212.144.61.43, 03:56, 11 Dec 2003
Great! Now that you've commented, how about you follow that up? Because that does not follow. If you even look at written Kashubian, it is very clear that Polish and Kashubian are more mutually intelligable than Polish and Czech, to the point where Polish linguists consider it a dialect. --Vegalabs 19:02, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is just like Russian and Ukrainian, I believe. Nobody would have thought these were different languages, if they were not spoken in different states. --Ghirla -трёп- 14:43, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Kashubian and Polish

message: The map contains numerous mistakes. Click the map for more info. Boraczek 10:23, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  newest map 

message: I am writing this as a casual reader (knowing almost nothing about language except for my traditional Latin & Spanish courses in high school) who wants to point out to whom ever has the knowledge that this article fails to explain (where needed) the origin and history of Slavic languages. I know that it's a harsh criticism but I can't help to just see "nerd speak" in the article and as a casual reader I'm turned off. Thanks/Sorry, JoeHenzi 09:14, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you tried reading... the history section? Maybe someone should update the simple Wikipedia article.-Iopq 14:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of Slavic Languages, Origins 

message: In recent times the scholarly synthesis of linguistic, archaeological, genetic and anthropological data under the name of Paleolithic Continuity Theory treats the Southern Slavonic languages as autohtonous Balkan languages.
I find this information dubious. Could you please indicate the source of this information? Any reference? Boraczek 23:12, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I received no answer, so I'm removing the quoted paragraph until some substantiation is presented. Boraczek 23:31, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  autochtonous Balkan languages 

message: The Podlasie Voivodship in Poland (capital - Białystok) is heavily populated by ethnic Belarusians. They are natural residents, not immigrants from Belarus. In some powiats, especially in Hajnówka, Belarusian is a predominant language. This should definitely be reflected on the map.
Also, the rural population in Eastern Belarus and Russian territories, adjacent to Belarus, speaks neither Russian, nor Belarusian, but rather a mix of two languages called "trasianka". I think this should be shown too.
Natural residents (especially rural) of Smolenk and Briansk regions of Russia are very close to Belarusians in terms of culture and dialects. These regions were incorporated into Russia in the early 1920-s, and many consider them to be Belarusian ethnic lands. On the official level, however, people from those regions are considered Russian. Juras14 3:11, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correction to the map needed - Belarusian language 

message: This article doesn't tell us anything about what Slavic languages are like, what are their common traits, etc. Zocky | picture popups 16:36, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description? 

message: that you have to insult me twice?
Twice!
--VKokielov 07:10, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What in hell's name is that, fringe theories, huh?  Does your battle creed entail the removal of large portions of text written by others without any explanation or criticism?  That's just rude.  --VKokielov 14:58, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What have I done to you, precisely 

message: Please take a look at Polish literature. Holy Cross Sermons and Mikołaj Rej may be worth mentioning, both predate Kochanowski.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:15, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish literature 

message: Modern mass media, however, has helped to minimize variation in all the Slavic languages.
This generalisation is unsourced and out of touch of reality. Therer are virtually no Russian films or productions in Poland's mass media for example. Furthermore I don't see Poles using cyrillic.
--Molobo 16:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That claim is inaccurate. Mass media are intentionally used to increase the differences between Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian, and between Bulgarian and Macedonian. It's all politics... --Telex 16:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That isn't really POV, it's just an unfounded statement.  Just remove it until it is sourced. - Kuzain 16:26, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What was meant, I think, is that modern mass media have increased standardisation of Slavic languages. That is, modern Slavian languages are not becoming more similar to each other but each of them is becoming more standardised.--Unoffensive text or character 16:22, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV statement

message: I've removed a bit saying that similarities between Baltic and Slavonic can be explained by the Slavs living alongside the Baltic-speaking peoples after AD 600. That makes no sense, for if that were the case, only the East Slavonic languages would be similar to the Baltic languages, since the South Slavonic languages had already moved south around AD 500. Since all Slavonic languages, however, show similarities, one must assume that Proto-Slavic itself, the language spoken before the spread of the Slavs, had some kind of relationship with the Baltic languages. CRCulver 11:30, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Balto-Slavonic 

message: The map conveys the impression that Slavic languages are spoken over large parts of East Germany. The problem is that historical information (the long-extinct Polabian language) is mixed with information on the contemporary status of Slavic languages.
Polabian should be removed entirely from the map (or maybe just printed across northeast Germany in brackets) and the speech-area of the Sorbian languages are a lot smaller than shown on the map.--Unoffensive text or character 16:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Map

message: A guideline on whether or not to italicize Cyrillics (and all scripts other than Latin) is being debated at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (text formatting)#Italics in Cyrillic and Greek characters. - - Evv 16:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cyrillics in Wikipedia 

message: === Evolution of literary languages ===
 
The imposition of Church Slavonic and Latin on Slavs was often at the expense of the vernacular.  Says W.B. Lockwood, a prominent Indo-European linguist: "It [O.C.S] remained in use to modern times, but was more and more influenced by the living, evolving languages, so that one distinguishes Bulgarian, Serbian, and Russian varieties.  The use of such media hampered the development of the local languages for literary purposes and when they do appear the first attempts are usually in an artificially mixed style."  (148)  Lockwood also notes that these languages have enriched themselves by drawing on Church Slavonic for the vocabulary of abstract concepts. Unlike Latin loans, Church Slavonic borrowings did not sound foreign to the Russian ear and were organically incorporated into everyday speech, since both Slavic languages were easily intelligible. As a result, Russian language acquired the stratum of high speech, which made other Slavic languages appear one-dimensional in comparison, Nikolai Trubetzkoy has observed.
Some of the earliest texts in Slavonic vernaculars include the Russkaya Pravda, an 11th-century legal code of Kievan Rus, and the 12th-century Tale of Igor's Campaign, the only surviving Slavonic epic. The Russian tsar Ivan the Terrible, his adversary Andrey Kurbsky, Polish Renaissance poet Jan Kochanowski and the Croatian Baroque writers of sixteenth century all wrote in their respective vernaculars (though Polish itself had drawn amply on Latin in the same way Russian would draw on Church Slavonic).  
Although the Church Slavonic language hampered vernacular literatures, it nonetheless fostered Slavonic literary activity and abetted linguistic independence from external influences.  The languages of the Catholic Slavs tottered precariously near extinction on many occasions.  The earliest Polish is attested in the fourteenth century; before then, the language of administration was Latin.  Czech was always in danger of giving way to German, and Czech's relatives Upper and Lower Sorbian, spoken only in Germany, have nearly succumbed just recently. Under German and Italian influence for many centuries, the Slovene language was a regional language spoken by peasants, and was brought to written standards only by the followers of the Reformation in the 16th century. The Serbo-Croatian vernacular literary tradition began with the Vinodol Codex in 1288 and continued through the Renaissance until the codifications of Serbo-Croatian in 1850, though much of the literature between 1300 and 1500 was written in much the same mixture of the vernacular and Church Slavonic as prevailed in Russia and elsewhere.  The independence of Ragusa facilitated the continuity of the tradition.
More recent foreign influences follow the same general pattern in Slavic languages as elsewhere, and are governed by the political relationships of the Slavs.  In the seventeenth century, bourgeois Russian (delovoi iazyk) absorbed German words through Polish.  In the Petrovian era, close contacts with France invited countless loans and calques from French, a significant fraction of which not only survived, but replaced older Slavonic loans.  Russian, in turn, influenced most literary Slavic languages by one means or another in the nineteenth century.  Croatian writers borrowed Czech words liberally, whereas Czech writers, scrambling to revive their dying language, had in turn borrowed many words (cf. vzduch, air) from Russian.  A more direct role for Russian came vis-a-vis Bulgarian, where Russian words were imported en-masse to replace Turkish and Greek loans, so that many Bulgarian words now carry a Russian phonetic footnote (i.e., have a phonetic structure unusual for the Bulgarian language or, indeed, the South Slavic languages in general).
I give up.  I give up!  --VKokielov 01:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  section cut 

message: The imposition of Church Slavonic and Latin on Slavs was often at the expense of the vernacular.  Says W.B. Lockwood, a prominent Indo-European linguist: "It [O.C.S] remained in use to modern times, but was more and more influenced by the living, evolving languages, so that one distinguishes Bulgarian, Serbian, and Russian varieties.  The use of such media hampered the development of the local languages for literary purposes and when they do appear the first attempts are usually in an artificially mixed style."  (148)  Lockwood also notes that these languages have enriched themselves by drawing on Church Slavonic for the vocabulary of abstract concepts. Unlike Latin loans, Church Slavonic borrowings did not sound foreign to the Russian ear and were organically incorporated into everyday speech, since both Slavic languages were easily intelligible. As a result, Russian language acquired the stratum of high speech, which made other Slavic languages appear one-dimensional in comparison, Nikolai Trubetzkoy has observed.
Some of the earliest texts in Slavonic vernaculars include the Russkaya Pravda, an 11th-century legal code of Kievan Rus, and the 12th-century Tale of Igor's Campaign, the only surviving Slavonic epic. The Russian tsar Ivan the Terrible, his adversary Andrey Kurbsky, Polish Renaissance poet Jan Kochanowski and the Croatian Baroque writers of sixteenth century all wrote in their respective vernaculars (though Polish itself had drawn amply on Latin in the same way Russian would draw on Church Slavonic).  
Although the Church Slavonic language hampered vernacular literatures, it nonetheless fostered Slavonic literary activity and abetted linguistic independence from external influences.  The languages of the Catholic Slavs tottered precariously near extinction on many occasions.  The earliest Polish is attested in the fourteenth century; before then, the language of administration was Latin.  Czech was always in danger of giving way to German, and Czech's relatives Upper and Lower Sorbian, spoken only in Germany, have nearly succumbed just recently. Under German and Italian influence for many centuries, the Slovene language was a regional language spoken by peasants, and was brought to written standards only by the followers of the Reformation in the 16th century. The Serbo-Croatian vernacular literary tradition began with the Vinodol Codex in 1288 and continued through the Renaissance until the codifications of Serbo-Croatian in 1850, though much of the literature between 1300 and 1500 was written in much the same mixture of the vernacular and Church Slavonic as prevailed in Russia and elsewhere.  The independence of Ragusa facilitated the continuity of the tradition.
More recent foreign influences follow the same general pattern in Slavic languages as elsewhere, and are governed by the political relationships of the Slavs.  In the seventeenth century, bourgeois Russian (delovoi iazyk) absorbed German words through Polish.  In the Petrovian era, close contacts with France invited countless loans and calques from French, a significant fraction of which not only survived, but replaced older Slavonic loans.  Russian, in turn, influenced most literary Slavic languages by one means or another in the nineteenth century.  Croatian writers borrowed Czech words liberally, whereas Czech writers, scrambling to revive their dying language, had in turn borrowed many words (cf. vzduch, air) from Russian.  A more direct role for Russian came vis-a-vis Bulgarian, where Russian words were imported en-masse to replace Turkish and Greek loans, so that many Bulgarian words now carry a Russian phonetic footnote (i.e., have a phonetic structure unusual for the Bulgarian language or, indeed, the South Slavic languages in general).
I give up.  I give up!  --VKokielov 01:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evolution of literary languages 

message: Search for упырь *ǫруrь would become vampir only in Polish or Polabian since most other Slavic languages lost nasal vowels. -iopq 16:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology of Vampire