Talk:Bosnian language/Archive 1

message: How is Bosnian different from Serbo-Croatian?  Which alphabet is it written in?  This article needs work.  -- Zoe
: That's what I would like to ask these experts on new languages, I just instantly added two more languages under my belt all thanks to their efforts in proving the existence of separate "Croat" and "Bosnian" languages. -- Igor 1:20, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Lack of info

message: Maknuti ovu smijesnu sliku "Povelje Kulina bana", koja je stripovska preslika izvornika na kaligrafsku latinicu puckoskolskoga tipa. Nevjerojatno kakvi debilizmi ovdje prolaze.Mir Harven 12:44, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Nevjerojatno

message: However, the present post-war political climate in both Croatia and Serbia and Montenegro has been very anti-Bosnian, and the faliure to recognize the existence of Bosnian language is not surprising. Both Croatian and Serbian nationalists are very unlikely to give any practical recognition to the existence of the Bosnian language, although they officially do recognize it.
This paragraph is removed because: --millosh (talk (sr:)) 23:26, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Serbian government protects Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic, a war criminals responsible for genocide in Srebrenica, as Carla del Ponte said. Vladan Batic a former minister in Serbian government also said similar thing when he pointed out that Serbian army had been protected Ratko Mladic until 2002.Emir Arven 20:32, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont see, how anything is relevant regarding Serb comments about Bosnian language!Emir Arven 20:32, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You (said that you) are a fascist. I am sure that I know better dialectoloty of dialects which are spoken by Bosniaks, as well as phonology of Bosnian language then Bosniak Dado (he is an architect, I am a linguist). --millosh (talk (sr:)) 23:19, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Your insult is the best proof of Serbian involvement in anything regarding Bosnia (like Genocide in Srebrenica, for instance) or maybe just lack of good manners.Emir Arven 02:25, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert 

message: I removed this sentece, temporary:
"However, the present post-war political climate in both Croatia and Serbia and Montenegro has been very anti-Bosnian, and the faliure to recognize the existence of Bosnian language is not surprising."
I will try to get you some proofs and to quote Natasha Kandic or others Serbian intelectuals which will confirm, that above sentence is correct. And I will quote war criminals like Radovan Karadic, Vojislav Seselj, Radoslav Brdjanin, Milorad Dodik, Biljana Plavsic etc which will support that Serbian and Croatian nationalist dont recognize Bosnian language. This information is as relevant as the information about Serbian and Croatian linguists, because most of them are nationalists and they sholdnt talk about Bosnian language at all, because Bosnian linguists dont talk abot Serbian language.Emir Arven 20:16, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The second of all is that Millosh's intention as a Serb, is to destroy this article as many Serbs before him tried.Emir Arven 20:24, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

text: First of all, I am not a Serb by nationality. This is your fiction. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 23:13, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A never said that you are a Serb by nationality. I said you are a Serb.Emir Arven 02:29, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems that you know a lot about me. No, I am not a Serb. And it is clear that you are a fascist... --millosh (talk (sr:)) 17:58, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, fascism is what happened in Srebrenica. And you are the one who should be ashamed!Emir Arven 18:47, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, fascism was happened in Srebrenica; I agree with you. But, it is not excuse for you fascistic behaviour. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 19:03, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: My behaviour is OK, but you manners are bad! I never insulted you, but you insulted me. As I sad I colleceted you insults and I will send it to the right place.Emir Arven 19:13, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: So, you are saying that your fascistic behaviour is OK? --millosh (talk (sr:)) 20:08, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Second, sorry, I read has been as is. Yes, in the first years after the war climate was anti-Bosniak. It is not now. (Also, you are mixing citizens of Serbia and Montenegro with Serbs. 80% of persons which you wrote about are Bosnians.) --millosh (talk (sr:)) 23:13, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 80% of persons which I wrote are war criminals, and are protected by Serbian government.Emir Arven 02:29, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Radovan Karadic (in Bosnia or in Montenegro), Vojislav Seselj (in Hague), Radoslav Brdjanin (who is he?), Milorad Dodik (a leader of the second largest political party of Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina), Biljana Plavsic (in prison in Sweden). You are 100% lier. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 17:58, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You are rude, but not surprising. Second, Radovan Karadzic (Serb born in Serbia and Montenegro), Ratko Mladic (a Serb, protected by the govornmet of Serbia, as your minister said), Vojislav Seselj (former vice president of Serbian governmet, we all saw what he said in th ICTY abot Bosniaks), Slobodan Milosevic (a Serb from Hague and former president of Serbia:)...ok but this is for you irrelevant, now I will get you the list od war criminals (Serbs who get financial and jurisdical help from governmet of Serbia). Here we go: General Perisic (attacked Mostar, town in Bosnia), Drago Nikolic, Mejakic, Banovic (Serbian concentration camps in Bosnia), Blagojevic, Jokic, Obrenivic and Momir Nikolic (genocide in Srebrenica) and other more than 140 Serb war criminals. Do you want me to put all their names here or you would like their sayings?Emir Arven 19:07, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Third, the first sentence which I rewrote (this is not controversal) is better then present sentence. (I left your edit on Serbian language.) Central South-Slavic diasystem includes Chakavian for sure and maybe Torlakian and Kaykavian. All standard languages are Shtokavian based. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 23:13, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so.Emir Arven 02:29, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose you are well educated liguist... --millosh (talk (sr:)) 17:58, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Better than you.Emir Arven 18:47, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversy

message: As I said before, I will put some statemens here that will confirm the above sentence.
Serbian minister Vladan Batic's statement 
DHSS vice president Zivojin Stepic said that according to information that DHSS had Ratko Mladic was in Belgrade.
'He is moving from military objects to flat in Cerak or to flat in New Belgrade.
DHSS president Vladan Batic also said that Mladic was in Belgrade. 'Authorities in Belgrade know that', Batic said.
This is very anti-Bosnian policy, because Ratko Mladic is the one responsible for Genocide in Srebrenica (Bosnian and Herzegovina).Emir Arven 20:41, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This can be anti-Bosnian policy, but this is not anti-Bosnia(k|n) climate. As I said, both Bosniak national parties are in Serbian government (which are included anti-Bosniak policy?) as well as Serbia has very good economic relations with Bosnia and Herzegovina. Ratko Mladic is only one person as well as structures which support him are not majority in Serbia. As well as it is not clear where is he now. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 23:42, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: How many ministers are Bosniak in Serbian government, and how many ministers are in Serbian government?Emir Arven 02:33, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: One minister of Serbia and Montenegro is Bosniak/Muslim. I think that three (two, three or four) deputy ministers in Serbian government are Bosniaks. Bosniaks and Muslims has around four (of 250) members of Serbian assembly. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 18:14, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, there is one minister in Serbian governmet, but I also asked you: How many ministers are there in Serbian governmet in general.Emir Arven 19:17, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In SCG govermnet there are a few ministers (I don't know, between 5 and 7) and this number is partitioned between Serbia and Montenegro. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 17:05, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You didn't answer. I have asked you for Serbian Government, not for Serbia-Montenegro  Government (which is just a formal as Montenegrins say). I will repeat my question, be honest and answer:How many ministers are Bosniak in Serbian government, and how many ministers are in Serbian government?Emir Arven 18:49, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Bosniak is responsible for human and minority rights, relation between SCG and ICTY and relation with Albanian minority in Southern Serbia. Or it is not important? I don't know what is the number of ministers in Serbian government (10-15?, I don't know). 4/126 (needed for majority in assembly) is much less then 1/3 (Serbian chairs in State Union government) and at the same relevancy with 3 deputies/15 ministers. But I don't think that I can give to you any reason which would be enough for your xenophobia against Serbs. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 15:44, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You could just simply say, that there is not even one Bosniak minister in Serbian Government, and thera are around 20 ministers in Serbian Government. Than you for being honest.Emir Arven 17:18, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

text: However, this is about present. It is a trouth that post-war climate was anti-Bosniak (as well as post-war climate in Bosniak part of Bosnia and Herzegovian was anti-Serb), but it would be better to say it better (for example: "in the second part of 1990s, after the war" or something like that). This is just better explanation, but I don't think that it should stay here, anyway. It should stay inside of some article about politics. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 23:42, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I think that Serb linguist comments regarding Bosnian language should stay inside of some article about politics.Emir Arven 02:33, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, you are giving proofs that you are a fascist. And, please, tell me who is "Serb linguist" here? --millosh (talk (sr:)) 18:14, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I am aware of Serb nationalism as many others in the world, so your inslut is not surprising. You came here to remove parts from article called Bosnian language. Fascism is what happened in Srebrenica, maybe you should remove that POV tag in Serbian wikipedia in the Srebrenica genocide article because that is the only POV tag about Srebrenica genocide article from all Wikipedias, which you put there. Be ashamed! I collected your insults and I will send it to the right place. I saw, you are trying to represent wikimedia in Serbia, so the people from Wikimedia will see what kind of person is going to be their contact.Emir Arven 18:44, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Some statements - 1

message: I will just quote Louise Branson an editorial writer for USA TODAY. 
Serb nationalism
Serb nationalism
Before the wars, in the 1980s, the Serb capital Belgrade was the cosmopolitan Paris of Eastern Europe. It is now a dreary backwater, left behind as neighbors sprout modern shopping malls, McDonald's and skyscrapers and join Western clubs from NATO to the European Union. The Serb mafiosos and gangsters remain a nationalistic, intimidating force. Despite the efforts of some human rights campaigners and hard-hitting media outlets, nationalist sentiment still runs high. In a Serb opinion poll in May, more than half denied the Srebrenica massacre even took place.
Last month, however, Serbs got a chance to break out of the denial. Serb TV broadcast a video of part of the massacre. In it, Serb paramilitaries — the "Scorpions" — pull six battered, emaciated men from a truck, hands tied behind their backs. At least three are shot at close range. A Serb Orthodox priest blesses their actions against the "infidels." It was the Serbs' first incontrovertible evidence that they, not just rogue Bosnian Serb "cousins," were complicit: The Scorpions, as other paramilitary groups, were under the direct command of the Serb police.
The fact that it took a full 10 years for the video to emerge is already testimony to the resistance. The film was first played at The Hague tribunal, where it was sent by Serb human rights campaigner Natasha Kandic, who has long been subject to death threats. The Hague has, until now, largely enabled Serbs' denial. Milosevic's trial is being carried out far away, by foreigners, encouraging many to feel they, too, are being victimized. But the videotaped evidence cannot be so easily dismissed.
There are signs it might provide the needed psychological jolt out of the surreal world that Milosevic — much as Hitler — constructed. His nationalist propaganda denied inconvenient realities — though the truth was known.
Serbian men, as the Scorpions, were drafted to fight in the wars, often going with gusto. They knew what was happening, bringing information back to families and friends. When I visited Serb homes near Srebrenica months after the massacre, people shrugged about what might have happened to the "disappeared." But their exchanged glances told a different story. Police cars pulled up at the houses after I left, suggesting an official effort to suppress any breaking of the collective coverup.
:::So it is very important to know what nationalists think, because this will give a full picture as you just mentioned Serb linguists. If the Serb linguists are relevant to talk about Bosnian language then it is relevant to see the whole picture and to see the context.Emir Arven 21:01, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Some statements - 2

message: Biljana Plavšić a Serb intellectual and professor, the highest-ranking Serbian politician from the former Yugoslavia pleaded guilty to a single charge of crimes against humanity. Plavšić's statement repeated her admission of guilt. It said she had refused to believe stories of atrocities against Bosniaks and Croatians and accepted without question the claims that Serbs were fighting for survival: 
"I have now ... accepted that many thousands of innocent people were the victims of organized, systematic efforts from the territory claimed by Serbs...The knowledge that I'm responsible for such human suffering and for soiling the character of my people will always be with me."
Statements by Jovan Rašković a Serb intellectual, founder of the Serbian Democratic Party of Croatia:
"I feel responsible because I made the preparations for this war, even if not the military preparations. If I hadn’t created this emotional strain in the Serbian people, nothing would have happened... My party and I lit the fuse of Serbian nationalism not only in Croatia but everywhere else in Bosnia-Herzegovina. It’s impossible to imagine an SDP (Serbian Democratic Party) in Bosnia-Herzegovina or a Mr. Karadzic in power without our influence. We have driven this people and we have given it an identity. I have repeated again and again to this people that it comes from heaven, not earth." 
Statement by Radovan Karadžić an intellectual, co-founder of Republika Srpska and its first president, alluded to the origins of this ideology on March 4, 1992 to the Bosnian Parliament:
"...the road to which you want to take Bosnia and Herzegovina is the same highway of hell which Slovenia and Croatia took. Don't think you won't take Bosnia and Herzegovina to hell and the Muslims into annihilation... Muslims can't defend themselves if there is war here"... 
:::These statements are the best proof for Serb policy toward Bosniaks and their heritage including language.Emir Arven 21:16, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not trying anything, I am just quoting.Emir Arven 02:34, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Serbian intellectulas

message: Please, write something better about Bosancica... --millosh (talk (sr:)) 15:15, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bosancica 

message: I removed this part, I have already explained why (script is not language, it is heritage)Emir Arven 16:32, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed part

message: The line 
:The vast majority of linguists do not consider Bosnian, Serbian, and Croatian as separate languages, since they are fully mutually intelligible
is transparently bogus. A significant percentage of linguists have no opinion on the matter, not knowing the first thing about Bosnian, and two different idiolects are likely not to be fully mutally intelligible. Moreover, it's simply not true; according to the ausbausprache page, "Two language forms that allow easy mutual communication are regarded as two different languages by sociolinguists if they are each an Ausbausprache according to this definition." I don't know if using a term such as ausbausprache is appropriate here, but that's the best I could do.--Prosfilaes 18:41, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that three *sprache definitions fit the situation perfectly (and maybe B,C,S & SC could be back-linked from that article, as I suppose many readers are at least basically familiar with the current situation in ex-Yu). Only, the German nomenclature is quite ugly unexpected (sigh)... Duja 08:01, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy: Mutually intelligiblity 

message: See: Glasovanje_o_zatvaranju_srpskohrvatske_Wikipedije
Hope, many of you will contribute! :)  --Neoneo13 13:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Voting on closing down the serbocroatian Wikipedia 

message: An anonymous user added this note to the introduction:
: However it is considered by ISO-639 individual language member of a macro language; [Serbo-Croatian]]
It's true, except that ISO-639-3 is still a draft not really included in ISO-639 yet. But all that means is that the Bosnian is sometimes considered part of the Serbo-Croatian language, just like many unrelated languages are sometimes considered Chinese (zh). It's too pendantic to include in the intro, and needs too much explanation for me to write it up for elsewhere, if the article even needs a note.--Prosfilaes 19:50, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISO-639-3 Macrolanguages 

message: Which alphabet is the main in the Bosnian language? --HolyRomanEmperor 23:05, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I get it, it is self-declared to use both; I doubt that more than few native speakers use Cyrillic actively though. I'd say it's declared as active chiefly for political reasons, but I wouldn't comment further. I ammended the intro to reflect that. Duja 01:33, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It didn't come out of thin air though. Remember that Bosniaks used cyrillic before they used latin. Live Forever 02:02, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And Croats did use Glagolitic and Cyrillic before the Roman script. Gone with the wind. Mir Harven 18:28, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latin or Cyrillic? 

message: Why shouldn't it be mentioned that "Bosnian" is 100% mutually intelligible to speakers of "Croatian" and "Serbian"? I would have thought that such a fact would be of interest to a reader disinterested in petty politics. I don't dispute that "Bosnian" has been recognised as a language, but it should be made clear that any speaker of "Serbian" or "Croatian" can understand "Bosnian" as well as their "mother tongue". It's totally kafakesque that you could have three friends in some town in Bosnia speaking three different official languages to each other, and this utter absurdity should be noted on WP. --estavisti 17:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't written "Bosnian" also identical to Croatian?  Are there any differences between Bosnian and Croatian? john k 03:09, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there are some (orthography, word-formation, syntax,..)-for instance, Croatian word for "chemistry" is "kemija", Bosnian "hemija"; to undervalue is "podcijeniti" in Croatian and "potcijeniti" in Bosnian; also, syntactically, Bosnian is more prone to "infinitive-amnesia" & "dakanje" (the Balkan use of present tense instead of the infinitive")- "I have to go", Croatian "Moram ići", Bosnian "Moram da idem". Mir Harven 08:19, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are these differences as significant linguistically as those between, say, British English and American English?  Or Quebecois French and France French? john k 11:49, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As regards standard languages, they are more significant. It seems to me that most native English language speakers, considering the Croatian and Bosnian languages (I'll omit Serbian), think along the lines of pronunciation, phonetics and mutual intelligibility of colloquial speech. In these areas, colloquial Croatian and Bosnian languages are, with a very limited word-stock,  roughly similar to the British and American English situation. However, difference is very visible in all other areas: for instance, I've read university textbooks on various fields of physics and mathematics (topology, classical chaos, mechanics of fluids, quantum thoery...) authored by a few writers, both British and American. Of course, there have not been "American" chapters, nor the  "British" ones in these books. They were written in one language, since there is no significant difference between American and British syntax, lexicon and scientific terminology. In case of Croatian and Bosnian, a textbook (university, high school, elementary school) cannot be written by "mixed" authors because it would be immediately recognized as "either-or". Take high school textbooks on, say, chemistry, law, sociology, psychology, mathematics, biology,...and you will know, immediately, in which language it has been written. The same with newspapers, TV programmes etc. Mir Harven 17:08, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are considerable orthographic differences between American English and British English, which render it relatively easy to tell whether a book is written in one or the other.  "color" vs. "colour," "theater" vs. "theatre," and so forth.  There are also definite differences in the lexicon itself.  "Lorries" and "flats" are rarely used in American English; the word "pants" means something different in the two.  That there may be British and American writers of a single textbook presumably only means that an editor has standardized things one way or the other.  It will generally take me not very long to determine if a written text has been written by a Brit or an American. john k 11:14, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a bit belated, I know. Whatever....Of course, anyone knows about-ise/-ize (realise/realize) & -our/-or (colour/color), plus a list of different terms (lorry/truck). But- ordinary books, specialis/zed ones as well as, say, novels, do not have much different forms (word-formation, orthography, syntax, lexicon). In Croatian and Serbian case (here, Bosnian is somewhere in the middle), you got: ca. 100 different accentuation rules; ca. 400 different rules in morphology and word-formation; ca. 20-30 different rules in syntax; too many subtle differences in semantics & stylistics, and ca. 40.000 different words in a dictionary of 120.000 words. Bosnian-Croatian differences cannot be split meachanically, but, this is a picture. Also-British scientific books tend to be Americanized. I've seen -ise and -our falling into disuse by British authors of British-American textbooks in physics. Also, my fave example: solving a problem in electrodynamics (from a Serbian textbook), I've found 11 different words and some different syntax in just one sentence (elektromagnetni, naelektrisanje, pravougaoni, harmonijski, talas, jonizujući, ravan, oscilovati,..). And-one simply cannot "translate" an American novel (say, Hemingway's "The Sun Also Rises") into British English, or British novel (say, Woolf's "Mrs. Dalloway") into American English-you'd end up in a few colours and trucks. But, if you get a Serbian novel like Crnjanski's "Seobe", and Croatian novel like Krleža's "Na rubu pameti"- the effort is perfectly possible. You'll get different stuff on virtually every page-orthographically, morphologically, syntactically, lexically, semantically...Mir Harven 21:18, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

text: These differences are almost totally insignificant. For example, the example that Mir Haven gives as being indicative of differences between languages is absurd. Sometimes I say "Moram ići" and sometimes I say "Moram da idem" - and I'm from Serbia. Which "language" am I speaking - "Croatian", "Serbian" or "Bosnian"? I can talk to a speaker of Croatian in the same way I can talk to someone from "up north" - a few slang words might be different, but that's pretty much it. No one would dispute that the same language is used in London and Liverpool. The problem here is caused by two things. Firstly, the language is written phonetically, so regional differences in accent appear in the spellings of words. Secondly, spelling conventions, grammer etc have all been messed around with since the early 1990s in a deliberate (and unsuccessful) attempt to make "Bosnian" and "Croatian" as different as different as possible from "Serbian". It's simply ridiculous that 3 or 4 "different" languages belong to the same dialect (See: Shtokavian)... As a Londoner, I have more trouble understanding Welsh people speaking English than I do as a Serb talking to Croatian speakers. --estavisti 12:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dispute 

message: Some sections read pretty awkwardly as English. AnonMoos 10:13, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs copyediting