Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Montenegrin 5
 | A new discussion (open to autoconfirmed users only) is now open. See #Second discussion below.
Approved as an ISO 639–3 code effective 21 December 2017, and published at SIL as of 5 January 2018. Project still under discussion at LangCom. Remember, also: The current decision is whether to make the project eligible. Content must still be created on Incubator, and a test wiki community must still be established there, before the project will be finally approved. For more information, see this page on Incubator. For LangCom: StevenJ81 (talk) 17:55, 5 January 2018 (UTC) |
| submitted | verification | final decision |
|
|
Discuss the creation of this language project on this page. Votes will be ignored when judging the proposal. Please provide arguments or reasons and be prepared to defend them (see the Language proposal policy).
The language committee needs to verify the language is eligible to be approved.
|
- The community needs to develop an active test project; it must remain active until approval (automated statistics, recent changes). It is generally considered active if the analysis lists at least three active, not-grayed-out editors listed in the sections for the previous few months.
- The community needs to complete required MediaWiki interface translations in that language (about localization, translatewiki, check completion).
- The community needs to discuss and complete the settings table below:
| What | Value | Example / Explanation |
|---|
| Proposal | ||
|---|---|---|
| Language code | cnr (SIL, Glottolog) | A valid ISO 639-1 or 639-3 language code, like "fr", "de", "nso", ... |
| Language name | Montenegrin | Language name in English |
| Language name | Crnogorski | Language name in your language. This will appear in the language list on Special:Preferences, in the interwiki sidebar on other wikis, ... |
| Language Wikidata item | Q8821 - item has currently the following values:
|
Item about the language at Wikidata. It would normally include the Wikimedia language code, name of the language, etc. Please complete at Wikidata if needed. |
| Directionality | LTR | Is the language written from left to right (LTR) or from right to left (RTL)? |
| Site URL | cnr.wikipedia.org | langcode.wikiproject.org |
| Settings | ||
|---|---|---|
| Project name | Vikipedija | "Wikipedia" in your language |
| Project namespace | usually the same as the project name | |
| Project talk namespace | "Wikipedia talk" (the discussion namespace of the project namespace) | |
| Enable uploads | no | Default is "no". Preferably, files should be uploaded to Commons. If you want, you can enable local file uploading, either by any user ("yes") or by administrators only ("admin").
Notes: (1) This setting can be changed afterwards. The setting can only be "yes" or "admin" at approval if the test creates an Exemption Doctrine Policy (EDP) first. (2) Files on Commons can be used on all Wikis. (3) Uploading fair-use images is not allowed on Commons (more info). (4) Localisation to your language may be insufficient on Commons. |
| Optional settings | ||
| Project logo | This needs to be an SVG image (instructions for logo creation). | |
| Default project timezone | Europe/Podgorica | "Continent/City", e.g. "Europe/Brussels" or "America/Mexico City" (see list of valid timezones) |
| Additional namespaces | For example, a Wikisource would need "Page", "Page talk", "Index", "Index talk", "Author", "Author talk". | |
| Additional settings | Anything else that should be set | |
Proposal
[edit]The Montenegrin language is the official language of the independent nation of Montenegro. Yugoslavia has been dissolved and thus with the Serbo-Croatian language gone, all languages are now separate - Croatian for Croatia, Bosnian for Bosnia&Herzegovina, Serbian for Serbia. All of them have Wikipedias, and now so should Montenegrin as - Montenegrin = MONTENEGRO! Serbia and Montenegro are no longer a common state and Serbian domination has been removed from Crna Gora. Liberation has begun and in 2007 Montenegrin has been declared official language. In 2009 the first Montenegrin PRAVOPIS was adopted as a proposal. The people of Montenegro should get Wikipedia on your Montenegrin language, speaking and who is in official use since 2006 and Montenegrin language spoken by over 220,000 people
| First discussion is closed, and hidden for convenience. Please see #Second discussion below. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:31, 28 December 2017 (UTC) |
|---|
Discussion[edit]Arguments in favour[edit]Even if it's rejected I think that people of Montenegro deserve their own Wikipedia and not Wikipedias in other languages. I contacted ISO 639 organisation by email and this was the response: Dear Luka, Thank you for your interest in creating a code for Montenegrin. Because of the relationships between the languages of the former Yugoslavia, the decisions about creating a code for Montenegrin falls to part 2 of the ISO 639 standard. The Registrar for part 2 has been approached by the National Library of Montenegro about creating such a code, so I know it is under study. If you would like to contact his office, you can email to: iso639-2@loc.gov Melinda Lyons ISO 639-3 RA SIL International 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd. Dallas, TX 75236 Don't you think it's unfair that over 200,000 people that declared to speak Montenegrin can't have their own Wikipedia. We're talking about language with certain differences from Serbian, Bosnian and Croatian languages. Montenegrin is official language in Montenegro, and Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian and Albanian are other languages in use. First, two letters are added that are only seen in Polish orthography, not found in any written form in any of other South Slavic languages. Ś, Ź (С́, З́) are those letters, respectively. They can be heard from most of Montenegrin speakers, especially of the Zeta-South Sandžak dialect. Not having Montenegrin Wikipedia disables the speakers of this language from freely using these letters as they simply do not exist in other languages, and upon editing Serbian or any other (Bosnian, Croatian, Serbo-Croatian) Wikis, these changes are deleted after a day or so, depending on the article. It is also officially used in Montenegrin Parliament, media and TV shows, and online on various sites including Google, and (fairly) recognized as a separate language option on many keyboards on various devices, including Google's (Gboard). The current lack of ISO code hasn't stopped them, nor many other services from including Montenegrin as an option for it's speakers, so why would this be the case with Wikipedia? And we know that Croatian, Bosnian and Serbian all have separate Wikipedias, even though main argument that is used by opponents of Montenegrin version is that these are all the same (Serbo-Croatian) language, then why do all these others exist if it is possible to have just this one that they claim everyone can understand? Isn't it then hypocritical to say these things when talking about Montenegrin, and then just continue reading on Wiki pages on whatever their language is, most of them never opening Serbo-Croatian version, which they claim is perfectly understandable to them, and telling Montenegrin speakers to use that? Do they (opponents) use it? No.They all have their language specific pages. Bosnian, Serbian and Croatian. Why is Montenegrin the only variety of what they claim is a "common language" that cannot have it's own Wikipedia when all others already do? Why make an exception with Montenegrin, and discriminate over 200.000 people in the process? And even if we change from those Wikipedias to be more understandable to native Montenegrin speakers, all of those changes are revoked. Not to mention the inability to use Montenegrin-specific letters there. Even more than 200.000 according to the most recent conducted poll by Matica Crnogorska. From 1.001 people in the poll, 41.1% declared their native language as Montenegrin. From approx. 622,781 (2016) citizens of Montenegro we come to a figure of 255.963 native speakers. I'm not saying you should immediately add Montenegrin Wikipedia until it's fully coded if it's against the rules. But it would be unfair that people of Montenegro can't have Wikipedia in their own language. cgr, sr-ME or even me-ME ISO codes are currently unofficially used when referring to Montenegrin and can be used for creating Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is necessary at least as a temporary solution. Perhaps the best solution to the codification problem right now if we were to create an official Montenegrin Wikipedia is to temporarily use me-ME code for it, and upon the completion of it's standardization use the newly given code (which would probably be exactly me-ME) since there is absolutely no other obstacle in creating a Wikipedia in Montenegrin as all other conditions are met: -It is a language, spoken by at least 200.000 people (closer to 250.000) - All other varieties of the Serbo-Croatian macrolanguage already have their Wikipedias, leaving Montenegrin speakers the only ones left out. Phonology, morphology, and syntax are not the only dimensions of a language: other fields (semantics, pragmatics, stylistics, lexicology, etc.) also differ between these languages, once again leaving Montenegrin speakers the only ones that cannot have their own. -It will be very easy to provide required active members to translate to Montenegrin After so many requests, it is really about time to stop the discrimination of native Montenegrin speakers and allow the creation of Montenegrin Wikipedia, especially considering that all other standards of the ˝Serbo-Croatian˝ already exist!--Lujki 01:31, 28 june 2014 (UTC)
Maybe you can use the sr-ME code? --145.130.0.142 14:32, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
All the information I got here: https://www.quora.com/How-different-is-the-Montenegrin-language-dialect-from-Serbian-Croatian-and-Bosnian However, there can be more differences which have appeared but are not presented yet. And while this language is in the process of fast developing and reestablishing completing this list will be quite hard. But Montenegrin Wikipedia will be very important in trying to save the language.--RMN120501 18:51, 28 june 2017 (UTC)
GORSKI VIJENAC
Ozrinići, naši graničari,
Ozrići, naši krajičnici?
Navyworth (talk) 20:11, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
@НиколаБ...Editors will be Montenegrins. Did you hear the great news? Montenegrin language - finally and officially recognized. Look: ISO 639-2 Language Code List - Codes for the representation ... Library of Congress >> Standards cnr Montenegrin monténégrin Montenegrinisch https://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php --Markus cg1 (talk) 20:42, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
--Femic Vesna (talk) 20:39, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
Arguments against[edit]
Other discussion[edit]I just want to give everyone a heads-up in case there's a sudden influx of opposition. An editor is trying to canvass people from the Serbian Wikipedia to vote against this proposal in order to "protect the Serbian language", as they say in their message. – Srdjan m (talk) 11:09, 15 December 2017 (UTC) Looks like there was a canvassing attempt on the Croatian Wikipedia, where a user asked whether the community would be willing to support this proposal for the "Montenegrins to finally get their own Wikipedia". – Srdjan m (talk) 15:23, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
Only 3 speakers of the Montenegrin language, this is a big joke. --Kolega2357 (talk) 06:36, 26 December 2017 (UTC) --87.116.178.1 19:25, 26 December 2017 (UTC) Only 3 speakers? Incorrect!Montenegrin language - Native speakers 232,600. --Markus cg1 (talk) 20:04, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
|
Second discussion
[edit]Introduction and rules for the discussion
[edit]I will carefully open a second discussion here. As things stand now, even assuming an ISO 639–3 code is approved, LangCom is leaning towards rejecting this request on the following grounds:
LangCom therefore feels that the Montenegrin community should be able to contribute to, and participate in, the community of the Serbian Wikipedia, the Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia, or both. It should not need a separate project.
This second discussion, therefore, is limited to a discussion of reasons the Montenegrin community does not feel that LangCom is correct about this. I am creating the following rules for the discussion:
Discussion
[edit]The book of Adnan Čirgić Crnogorski jezik u prošlosti i sadašnjosti (Montenegrin language in the past and the present), interesting are pages 7-11, a lot about "different from Ijekavian Serbian" and Montenegrin dialectal basis and specific features. On pages 15-17 is the description of the work of the Commission for the standardization of the Montenegrin language, with the ortography and grammar listed. The Commission had two fundamental tasks, that Wikimedia's Language Committee required:
- to prove the the existence of the Montenegrin language
- to describe it as such and
- to make ortography (made, Pravopis crnogorskoga jezika, 2.rev.ed., 2010. ISBN 9789940905293)
- to make ortographical dictionary (made [1], Pravopis crnogorskoga jezika i rječnik crnogorskoga jezika, 2009.)
- to make grammar (made, Čirgić/Silić/Pranjković: Gramatika crnogorskoga jezika, 2010., ISBN 9940905270, 9789940905279)
The Commission started from the neostructuralistic philosophic and linguistic model of the interpretation of the language. There is a lot of very useful explanation in the intro. Maybe someone can ask Montenegrin Ministry of Education or mr Čirgić to make a translation in English and publish it online?
Here [2] is also a comparatistic work Orthography in context – context in orthography: On the examples in the orthography books of Croatian and Montenegrin (in Croatian). Kubura (talk) 04:30, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- Lets discuss on evidences, with reliable sources, of ways that standard Montenegrin is meaningfully different from Ijekavian Serbian. Here are few websites from Montenegro: http://www.vijesti.me/ , http://portalanalitika.me/, https://www.cdm.me/, http://www.rtcg.me/ (national broadcast service). and here is a website from Banja Luka, capital of Serbian part of Bosnia. I dare you to find me as many as you can different words. -- Bojan Talk 04:41, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Montenegrin alphabet is distinct from Serbian: 'The most notable distinction, say Montenegrin linguists, is in two letters, "s" and "z" ["Ś" and "Ź", actually], each bearing what resembles a French acute accent, neither of which exist in Serbian. They were always present in the spoken language in Montenegro, but were only formally added to the Montenegrin alphabet last July [i.e. July 2010].'[3] While the inclusion and importance of these two letters are somewhat debatable (and describing them as the "most notable distinction" might be a self-refuting argument), it follows that Montenegrins can't use letters from their own official alphabet (alphabets, actually - that's both Latin and Cyrillic) while contributing to any of the South Slavic Wikipedias. GregorB (talk) 14:51, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- I don't see any special reason or thing that would disallow and/or prevent Montenegrins in contributing to e.g. Serbocroatian wikis. But I may be wrong of course. --Biblbroks (talk) 15:20, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- A similar situation exists on the German language Wikipedia, where the three standard varieties of German (de-AT, de-CH and de-DE) share a single Wikipedia. The de-CH variety does not have the letter ß, which exists in both de-AT and de-DE. The solution was to i) implement a script converter gadget and ii) write all articles related to Austria/Tyrol in de-AT, all related to Switzerland/Liechtenstein in de-CH and all related to Germany in de-DE. --Vogone (talk) 15:04, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
As @StevenJ81 requested, here I am, confirming my points 3. and 4. I made in another discussion down below regarding this issue. As for the 3rd point, I've randomly chosen actors, artists, architects, writers and poets section of a list of pages every Wikipedia should have, as there are 1000 articles in total, of which 53 are in this artist section. Here are my findings: Ijekavian: Michelangelo Buonarotti * right here you have the proof of my 1. point as well, there are sentences is ijekavian Serbian not corresponding to the Montenegrin standard which would, if I were to write that way in Serbian either ekavian or ijekavian, be incorrect "...већи број његових скулптура нису завршене.” (Most of his sculptures are not finished). This, written in Montenegrin would be using ниjeсу as opposed to нису (нису being correct both in ekavian and ijekavian Serbian, not at all in Montenegrin). Francisco Goya Mixed (switching between ekavian and ijekavian against wiki guidelines): Henri Matisse intro in ijekavian, rest in ekavian Naguib Mahfouz same Ekavian: 49 other pages found within this section. Using this to make a conlcusion we see that by using a random collection of pages that every Wikipedia should have, the Serbian one uses Ekavian in approximately 92% of the case in the given sample, 4% ijekavian, and 4% randomly switching. 4th point conclusions I'll be writing soon. There is so much more proof for that one so gathering it takes some time. --Lujki (talk) 17:35, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- Both dialects are equal in Serbian and nobody have a right to change it in favour one of them. All articles (or at last huge majority) about Montenegrin topics are written on ijekavian dialect. Some of the contributors here write about ekavian version of Njegoš's "Gorski vijenac" (The Mountain Wreath) what is one notorious foolishness cause there is only one and original Gorski vijenac. Than first translation of The Bible on Serbian is wrote on ijekavian dialect. Serbian speakers from Bosnia & Herzegovina (including Reublika Srpska), Croatia, southwestern and western Serbia use ijekavian speech (not only in Montenegro). So what was the point of this? --НиколаБ (talk) 18:18, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- The point is this: the argument that "Montenegrin is just like ijekavian Serbian" may be valid in theory, but in practice it is of no importance if the ekavian variant of the standard is the one which is vastly dominant both in official use in Serbia and in sr wiki. GregorB (talk) 21:04, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- Majority articles on Portuguese Wikipedia are written on Brazilian variant of Portuguese, is that mean (according to your words) that Brazilian are vastly dominant over users from Portugal, so let's made new variants of Portuguese Wikipedia (one for Portugal, one for Brazil, one for Mozambique etc)? Huge majority of articles on Serbocroatian Wikipedia are written on standard Croatian and less than 5% articles is in the Cyrillic script. I still can't get a point? --ΝικόλαςΜπ (talk) 22:49, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- The point is this: the argument that "Montenegrin is just like ijekavian Serbian" may be valid in theory, but in practice it is of no importance if the ekavian variant of the standard is the one which is vastly dominant both in official use in Serbia and in sr wiki. GregorB (talk) 21:04, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
I see you haven't read the very first sentence that I have written. It was in response to a previous request in another discussion page, that's link is down below. I was asked to show approximately how many articles are in Ekavian standard vs Ijekavian. And you conveniently skipped the part where I mentioned examples of Montenegrin specific hyperiotated forms that have no alternative spelling, which are not a part of standardized ijekavian version of Serbian, which was also one of the requests.Lujki (talk) 18:29, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- Gregor, Lujki, please, show me letters "Ś" and "Ź", show me hyperiotated forms in most visited web pages from Montenegro. I don't see any. -- Bojan Talk 20:45, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- My remark about the letters "Ś" and "Ź" is a purely normative argument, so it was not my intention to provide examples or attempt to prove these letters are somehow vital to the language; I clearly stated their practical importance is debatable. GregorB (talk) 21:10, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- Gregor, Lujki, please, show me letters "Ś" and "Ź", show me hyperiotated forms in most visited web pages from Montenegro. I don't see any. -- Bojan Talk 20:45, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
I'm not surprised you don't as (allow me to guess and correct me if I am wrong) you are neither from Montenegro, nor a native speaker of Montenegrin language. You do not open these sites on a daily basis. I do. And I'd gladly do the thing you asked me to, but as I am busy with the request from Steven, and holidays in general, I think it would be much easier if you opened any one of the sites you mentioned in a comment up in the thread yourself, and scroll down to the comment section, and from ordinary people, like you and me, you can find all of the mentioned forms. Also, you will find that your point, and Nikola's, about people in Montenegro not using these letters to be false. A friendly suggestion is to also check Caffe del Montenegro, Kolektiv.me, Portal Analitika etc. on your quest. Good luck and I'm sure you won't be searching for long.--Lujki (talk) 21:20, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- I already mentioned sites Cafe del Montenegrom (cdm.me) and Portal Analitika (portalanalitika.me). And I've just visited Kolektiv.me. Still, I don't see letters "Ś" and "Ź" in articles, I don't see any hyperiotated forms in articles, but I see there are 99,99999% words that I use too, though I'm not from Montenegro. If you want to point that comments are in Montenegrin, does it mean that articles on that web pages are in Serbian ijekavian? Note that some Serbs (both those who live in Montenegro and those who do not) also use hyperiotated forms (đe, đevojka, đed, đeca, neđelja, poćerati, međed) in colloquial speech. In fact, in past many more Serbs spoke like that (I would quote Serbian-German-Latin dictionary by w:Vuk Karadžić and w:Jernej Kopitar from 1818: [4] Ranilo, na Cvijeti (a đešto i na Blagovijest) urane đevojke prije sunca na ranilo na vodu, pa onđe uvaše kolo, te igraju i pjevaju različne pjesme...-- Bojan Talk 22:14, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
As I originally understood, you were searching for anything written in the mentioned form. Now that you most likely have found it, there's that new request of it being in an article. You can see for yourself that Montenegrins use these letters, a point disputed by certain users here (I guess you as well, since you insisted so much on finding them), and isn't that the most important thing and the best proof on it's own? As far as đe, đed and so on goes, people in Montenegro who speak the language identical to Montenegrin but call it Serbian, they do not speak standard Serbian, as these words are not a part of the Serbian language, ekavian or ijekavian alike. That is also the reason why Montenegrin speakers can't use them if they were to write in Serbian Wikipedia, as these hyperiotated words are not a part of Serbian language, ekavian nor ijekavian. If the solution is to use noniotated forms like gdje, djed and so on, thus limiting the use of our language by packing it with another, that would be an unfair solution, but a solution indeed. Until we come to another point. You wanted to know, and @StevenJ81 should as well, how to recognize ijekavian Serbian from Montenegrin. There are certain hyperijekavizations used in Montenegrin language and that do not have alternative nonijekavized forms corresponding to ijekavian Serbian. Take nijesam for example. This is written and pronounced this way exclusively in standard Montenegrin, while Serbian (ekavian and ijekavian, Croatian and Bosnian all use nisam instead). This word (meaning I am not), especially in other forms (nijesu - they are not etc.) is almost ubiquitous in Wikipedia pages, meaning even if we were to write on Serbian Wikipedia in ijekavian (in which, as I've shown so little is written to begin with), we are on almost every step faced with a challenge. If in the concrete example we use nisam, it is not correct in Montenegrin; while if we use nijesam instead, it is not correct in official standard Serbian in neither ekavian nor ijekavian. As you see from the given example, Montenegrin and Serbian ijekavian are not only different in certain situations, but can also be mutually exclusive. --Lujki (talk) 23:52, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- Did you ever read Petar Kočić or Branko Ćopić? Words like nijesam, đed, đevojka, međed, neđelja etc. are not Montenegrin uniqueness, they are widely used in Bosnia, Dalmatia, Herzegovina. --ΝικόλαςΜπ (talk) 11:35, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
Did you read my comment? I never said that they do not use it, I said it is not a part of standardized Serbian language, it's non official, if you were to write in a formal manner you would not be allowed to use there words, while in Montenegrin you have no alternative but to use them.--Lujki (talk) 12:43, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
- Nikolas, I made that request myself, here. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:35, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- There is around 12M Serbian speaking people and about 8M use ekavian, so it's logical majority of articles on .sr wiki are on that dialect. But why everyone bypassing the fact that both dialects are equal in Serbian and every contributor on Serbian Wikipedia has a freedom to choose dialect whatever he wants. Same for latin or cyrillic script (we even have program for transliteration from one to another script). --НиколаБ (talk) 19:00, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Bojan, I found some ś in use:
- pośetio, śedočanstvo, Śever, śeverni, śutra, śeveroistočnim, Predśednik, pośeti, śutra, śednici, śutrašnji
- Pośedak
- Śednik, śeme, śevernim, podśećati
- here they used predsjednik and predśednik, śutra--Rovoobob Talk 12:46, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Rovoobob:. I gues you had hard time to find those letters cause, aside from not finding any articles with "Ź", 'cause Your google hits are from years 2014-2016. (in case of PortalAnalitika.me) I shall demonstrate in case of website PortalAnalitika.me. I didn't find any "ś" in articles from past two days (December 30 and December 31 2017).
- My point: for every article that use "ś" I bet I can find 100x more articles that don't use it. A man would expect that those letter are more common, cause they are artificial and the most noticeably (and practically only) thing what makes "Montenegrin" standard different from Serbian Ijekavian standard. -- Bojan Talk 05:24, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- Bojan, they use them both, ś and sj, its their choice, guess depends on the newsman and editor in chief. Ź, I couldn't find it on those portals. Thats probably because there are less words with letter Ź in them to choose from, than with Ś. Some other random sites through google search:
- pośeti, pośetu, predśednik 10/09/2017, podśetilo, predśedavajućeg, Śetimo, śutradan, ośećanje, ośećaj 09/12/2017, Predśednik 24/12/2017
- Pośeta
- predśednika, zaśenio, pośete potpreśednika, naśedaju, Śećate 04.08.2017
- predśednik 18 sep 2017
- śutra, Śećanja
- Also found this book Some of the random found: Śedi, p. 14; śetivaju, p. 21; Śutradan p. 25; śutraveče p. 46; iźeli p. 44; iźedeno p. 61; iźedovi p. 72.
- Bojan, they use them both, ś and sj, its their choice, guess depends on the newsman and editor in chief. Ź, I couldn't find it on those portals. Thats probably because there are less words with letter Ź in them to choose from, than with Ś. Some other random sites through google search:
- They use them in Montenegrin language and others in countries created by the dissolution of Yugoslavia don't use them in their languages.--Rovoobob Talk 10:04, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- No, You can't say that they use them. As I said, there is 100x, 1000x, 10000x more pages with "sj" and without "ś". -- Bojan Talk 12:07, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
It seems that each and every time someone finds what you thought they won't you change your request. What is the problem here? It is obvious that Montenegrins use these letters. They wouldn't have been there if they didn't. In spoken form 10x more and you'd know it if you had ever spoken to a Montenegrin. But I bet you had and that you do know all of this. As for your comment that there is practically no difference between ijekavian Serbian and standard Montenegrin, I've shown that they are mutually exclusive. Words like nijesam, osjeka, kisjelina and so on are not a part of official, standardized ijekavian Serbian, nor were they a part of Serbo-Croatian language while it was still a thing in Yugoslavia. Let's even forget all the talk about iotation and all. Certain words in Montenegrin simply aren't the same like in any version of Serbian. Take the name of the European currency for example. In Montenegrin it's Euro, while in Serbian it's Evro (ekavian and ijekavian). All of the words derived from this word are different too (Eurozone etc.) You can either write them in Serbian or in Montenegrin, not in both, they are not the same nor is the other variant of the word allowed in each language. Again, they are mutually exclusive. You cannot write standard Montenegrin in Serbian Wikipedia if you want to fully adhere to Montenegrin standard. So the argument that Montenegrin could fully exist on Serbian Wikipedia falls in the water. I'll bring more arguments after the New Year. Happy holidays.--Lujki (talk) 13:57, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- According to this (page 133) currency is euro, but European Union is Evropska Unija, continent is Evropa, than Evropljanin, evropski. --ΝικόλαςΜπ (talk) 15:22, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- I said all the words derived from the name of the currency not continent. The name of the continent has Greek roots Ευρώπη so we, just like you took the V in those words. But as the currency in original has U in it we chose that while in Serbian language it is still a V to match the others. This was just an example to show that not all differences are just in iotation between these languages and that a single page cannot be written both in Montenegrin and Serbian simultaneously, therefore one Wikipedia can't be enough.--Lujki (talk) 16:28, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
@StevenJ81: regarding the comment that Montenegrin language is not authentic, but a jekavian variant of Serbian language, I am hereby sending you the arguments which prove it is not correct. After the decay of SFRY the agreed artificial so called Serbo-Croatian or Croatian-Serbian language officially ceased to exist, so the logical consequence was for the following separate socio-linguistic languages of Shtokavian origin to evolve as independent: Bosnian, Montenegrin, Croatian and Serbian. Naturally, within these languages certain structural specificities developed. Such specificities are not negligible and cannot be annihilated by a thesis that if there are no communication obstacles, we cannot speak about different languages. Montenegrins created their language in the process of their own development in the capacity of an authentic and self-grown nation in specific natural and historical conditions. As such, it has three layers: 1. first part are general Shtokavian language features (common in Bosnian, Montenegrin, Croatian and Serbian languages); 2. second part are the features from general Montenegrin language layer (macro-structure); and 3. third layer comprises features of local speech patterns pertaining to Montenegrin dialects (micro-structures). Basic structural difference between these languages, among others, is their phonemic composition. “Surplus” Montenegrin phonemes are ś and ź. In Montenegro, they are commonly acknowledged, which is why they have been included in the Montenegrin standards. Confirmation of their phonemic nature are numerous: Śoga : šoga, śenka : Senka, Źagore : zagore, Źagora : Zagora, 3avala : zavala, śetni : ćetni, śenica : šenica, śutra : jutra, śenka : ženka; źenica : ženica, źato : zato, Źale : Zale. Numerous authors have pointed out to the general presence of voices ś and ź in Montenegrin dialects, as well as to the custom of the voice з in these speeches (even though the last one often alternated with z under the influence of Serbian language which is still officially in use in Montenegro, and because it was impossible to write it). Based on the Montenegrin onomastic substance, the omnipresence of voices ś and ź in Montenegrin language is irrefutably evident. Contrary to the mentioned phonological system of Montenegrin language, Serbian standard language has 30 phonemes. Montenegrin specific phonemes mentioned above appear very rarely in Serbian speeches, and thus pertain to the dialectical layer of that language. Serbian standard language does not know voices ś and ź as products of jekavian iotation. There, it is always: sjekira, sjesti, sjetiti, brezje, klasje, osje, kozji, pasji, zjenica, izjesti etc. Instead of these forms, in Montenegrin language the following forms are standard and omnipresent: śekira, śenica, śesti, śetiti, śutra, klaśe, ośe, paśi, iźesti, iźelica, koźi, źenica, źenični etc. As such, these forms have a dialectical, or mostly local status. In Serbian language, they are very solitary part of the dialect, thus not being part of its standard. These forms entered Serbian language mostly from the territory of Montenegro by mass migrations starting from the 15th century. In Montenegrin language, these voices are its unavoidable and distinguished part. In view of the creation and development of consonants ś and ź, they cannot always be replaced with sj and zj, because they did not appear only as a product of jekavian iotation. The following examples can prove it: Śoga, Śota, Daśko, pośljednji, źatiti, groźđe (in Montenegrin speeches), iźđeljati etc. Voices ś and ź did not appear in Montenegrin language only as a product of jekavian iotation, but its appearance is widely confirmed in hypocoristics: hypocoristicity is certainly the grounds on which (…) voices ś and ź developed. And subsequently, as it is the case with other hypocoristics, it was possible for the generalization process to appear and for the hypocoristics to grow into non-hypocoristics, which is what actually did happen. Due to the lack of adequate graphemes in the standard alphabet and Cyrillic script, Montenegrin writers have noted these voices in different (inadequate) manners. Along with the most frequent use of groups sj and zj instead of typical ś and ź, they often used šj and žj, or even š and ž as substitutes. Once it was formed, one way or the other, as a formant, the consonant ś could act and spread completely independently, without any connection with the voice j. Phonemes ś and ź were formed by the so-called new or jekavian iotation and alignment to the place of creation: śever, śutra, śen, śenopadina, uśečenije, Śekloća (surname), in nouns expressing dearnes (hypocoristics): Śata, Paśo, Śaka and in toponyms and hydronyms: Paśeglav, Śenica, Śerava, Preśeka, Śenokos(i), Koźe pogledalo, Koźevići, Glavica koźa, Koźi brijeg, Koźa, iźelica, iźesti, źđeljati, Źaga, Źajo. The importance of these phonemes as substantially recognizable features of Montenegrin language, a renown Croatian professor of general linguistics and sociolinguistics Dubravko Škiljan indicates as follows: The closest to the option of detaching as a separate language is not Croatian, but Montenegrin language – the moment they introduce in their standard language soft forms of š and ž as special phonemes (…), they will make a more resolute move than any other alterations made here for the purpose of the language separation. For, that is something that firmly defines the language structure, number or phonemes system. Apart from the said differences, as an outstanding feature of Montenegrin standard language and its recognizable difference in comparison with Serbian language, there are voices ć and đ, which appeared by jekavian iotation. In Serbian standard language, the only ones acknowledged as normative are the results of jekavian iotation of consonants lj and nj (ljeto, ljepota, voljeti, njegovati, snježan etc), whereas all other are qualified as dialectical. In Serbian literary speech of jekavian pronunciation only sonants l and n are aligned: ljeto (for ekavian leto), ljepota (for ekavian lepota), njegovati (for ekavian negovati), nježan (for ekavian nežan), while consonants (s, z, d, t) remail unaltered: djevojka, vidjeti, tjerati, sjekira, izjesti etc. Such forms without iotation are absolutely unknown in all the Montenegrin language territory. All the linguistic research of Montenegrin speeches so far has shown that voices ć and đ as products of jekavian iotation of consonants t, d and c are omnipresent in all the terrain. It is a common thing t, d, c + je (đe was an old grapheme of jat) > će, đe: ćerati, lećeti, ćešiti (but also tješiti), vrćeti; đe, đed, neđelja, đegođ and in onomatics: Ćetko, Ćetna, Ćetković, ćetalj, Ćetanski pod, Ćedilo, Ćeklići, Šćepan, Šćepo, Šćepanović, Šćepan polje, Šćepandan, Neđeljko, Međeđe, Međedović. Consonants d and t in Montenegrin standard language are not subject to iotation only in rare cases: a) in complex verbs, when their prefix ends in d and the other part starts with j: nadjačati, odjuriti, odjeziditi, podjarmiti, odjednom, odjedanput, podjariti etc; b) in foreign complex words: adjektiv, adjunkt; d) in lexemes: tjeme, tjelesni, tjelesina. Considering such a use of phonemes đ and ć in Montenegrin language, they had to become part of its standard (exactly as the voices ś, ź mentioned earlier), since they represent imposing characteristics of that language. The analysis of phonetic-phonological features of Montenegrin and Serbian languages lead to a conclusion that the basic differences among them are as follows: the rank and status of phonemes ś, ź, ć i đ, namely the presence/absence of phonemes ś, ź in their standards and phonemes ć and đ created as the result of jekavian iotation. These features can be associated with jekavian script, because ekavian script is a recognizable Serbian language feature, and it can be assumed that the status of jekavian script in that language will be rather marginal in the near future. And so forth. The truth is that during the times of Yugoslavia, the education was mostly carried out in Serbo-Croatian language, because the Montenegrins were attached to the idea of the common state. Yugoslavia fell apart not due to Montenegrins and all the nations returned to their languages, which they used before. I would like to note that the state of Serbia officially introduced Montenegrin language as official language of the Montenegrin minority in Serbia, and that it is financing publications, school education and manifestations in Montenegrin language from the state budget, which is prescribed by the laws of the state of Serbia. Freemanmne (talk) 13:52 30. December 2017 (UTC)
- Only and only reason why alphabet that Serbs (and Croats and Bosniaks) use has 30 phonemes is language reform from beginning of 19th century by Vuk Karadžić and Đuro Daničić and their Croatian and Slovenian associates. Prior to this date those rare literate Serbs use alphabet that looks like pre-October-Revolution Russian with phonemes like ё, щ, ы, ю, я and famous ѣ (yat) and hard (Ъ) and soft sign (Ь). Serbs dropped unnecessary Cyrillic phonemes, Russians dropped unnecessary Cyrillic phonemes and probably Bulgarians, Ukrainians and Belorussians, too. They concluded that 30 phonemes are enough and that there is no need for dropped phonemes. -- Bojan Talk 06:06, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
While differences do not seem to be crucial and exist only in very small number of marginal cases (where editor choose to use a different version instead of the same one by using two 2009 standard letters which Assembly of Montenegro removed from any type of governmental documentation in February 2017), is there any evidence that users of Montenegrin standard were prevented in using Montenegrin standard at the Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia? In 2010 article "Digitalizirano prosvjetiteljstvo" Croatian ophthalmologist Karmen Lončarek writes "Srpskohrvatska wikipedija je i najležernija u pogledu jezika i pisma, pa dozvoljava da se piše bilo kojim od tri jezika (sr, hr, bs) i dva pisma, iako preferira latinicu." ("The Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia is also the most relaxed in terms of language and script, allowing its users to writte in any of the three languages (sr, hr, bs) and two alphabets although it prefers the latin one") (Montenegrin Grammar was adopted on 21 June 2010). Is there any evidence that out of 4 standardized varieties editors can not use only the Montenegrin one? If yes, was there ever any proposal to include new Montenegrin standard and what was the reaction from Wikipedia community?--MirkoS18 (talk) 16:41, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
- @MirkoS18: "very small number of marginal cases...", "letters which Assembly of Montenegro removed from any type of governmental documentation in February 2017"--Before answering your question I'd like to point out that in the very first sentence there is some bias visible towards this project. It is true that the differences are small indeed between all standard variants of the Serbo-Croatian macrolanguage, however I find this to be underestimation of them. They do exist. And I don't see how is the decision of Montenegrin Assembly relevant to this discussion if the reasons are not linguistic but rather technical. Same why they opted for latin script rather than cyrillic.
- Now regarding your request, sadly I am not able to do such a thing because after an extensive search I was not able to find a single article on Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia written in the Montenegrin standard to begin with. Perhaps this is the best evidence on it's own. I also couldn't find a sizable Montenegrin community participating in this Wikipedia, and even those sporadic cases where they edited articles (mostly regarding Montenegro) it was in either Serbian or Croatian standard in which the articles were written. Perhaps the reason for such small contribution of Montenegrin editors is because they are the only ones without their own native Wikipedia, which are forced to conform to other languages' standards such as Serbian, Croatian, or in this only case where I could find a Montenegrin editor on SC Wiki, Croatian standard. Are we even free to use our words such as those listed above a thousand times, or our own letters? In my hands I'm holding orthography and wordbook of the Serbo-Croatian language, written by orthographic commission of 11 people of which 7 have a PhD. My edition was printed by "Beogradski grafički zavod" in 1960., so from Yugoslav times where SC lived as a single language. Here it does not mention the famous 2 Montenegrin letters, nor any of the word forms that Montenegrins use in their standard language, meaning they were never a part of it. Writing like this would not be correct in "Serbo-Croatian" language (used mostly as an unitaristic tool during the Yugoslav times, and never used at all after YU fell). Even in Novi Sad agreement where SC as a language was created, Montenegrin way of speaking was disregarded. If we were to write on Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia using Montenegrin (and not Serbo-Croatian) letters who can guarantee that it will be saved if we are then writing outside of Serbo-Croatian standard? Presuming we are talking about SC as a single language. Even ISO defines it as a macrolanguage, not a single one, and in that case if we presume it includes all of Montenegrin, then I, as I said cannot answer your question as I was not able to find a single page written in Montenegrin to begin with. To conclude, I'd like to add the fact that many people in Serbian community resent SC Wiki and view it as a copypasta of their work. Croats refuse to even say the words "Serbo-Croatian (macro)language", calling it "Srednjojužnoslavenski dijasustav" instead. I don't want to repeat the fact that Montenegrin is the only standard language that's a part of this macrolanguage without it's individual Wiki, even tough it has a fully valid language code. Langcom usually denied it as a political problem, but aren't they getting more political (and in a hand discriminatory) by denying us our right to write in our own language and packing Montenegrin alongside other languages and/or failed communist political projects?--Lujki (talk) 21:39, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
- Dear @Lujki: thank you for your time and effort to answer. You are right, I do have opinion and I do not think the new project is good idea. I was thinking that my "bias" towards the existence of only one Serbo-Croatian project is visible to everyone already from my previous contribution. I am sorry if it was not transparent and there was any need to clarify it. I do not deny certain differences in modern day Montenegrin standard (I think none need to do this), I just think that they can easily be embraced within already existing Serbo-Croatian project. There are already examples on other Wikipedias how it can be done, and I really don't think you may have big issues with such ideas on Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia. For example, there is practice on English language Wikipedia where certain number of articles are clearly marked as being written in British English on talk page while this should not be changed without broad consensus. Was something like this ever proposed on Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia in relation to the new Montenegrin standard and if yes was there any negative reaction from Wikipedia community? The fact that there is not many editors writing in Montenegrin does not mean that it is not possible to try to do this on Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia. Hypothesis that lack of separate project is discouraging editors from Montenegro shall be founded on strong arguments. On the other side, I guess (also without any strong evidence) that joint project may encourage editors since it is already common practice in Montenegro that all standardized varieties of Serbo-Croatian are in daily and in official use in the country. I am also concerned that users of less diverse version of Montenegrin standard will actually be the ones who are discouraged from using the new project. Montenegrin standard itself is flexible and often offer more than one option how to write. With all this big talk about differences administrators on this new project may be biased towards the usage of the form that is different from the other Serbo-Croatian varieties instead of those that are the same. This may be just a natural way to justify separate project and it is something already seen on Croatian and probably other project that pushed some local users back to more flexible Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia. As for the perception of Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia within some nationalist groups, well I think we can only bear it as a badge of honor but this is not the point here :) . In short, I just don't see how Montenegrin variety is the only one out of 4 that can not be used on Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia. Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia do not use only the old standards from Yugoslavia or Austria-Hungary since it is also open for Bosnian standard that is formalized after the 1990s. As for your statement that Serbo-Croatian is nothing more than a "failed communist political projects" (ignoring its developments since the XIX century and fact that standardized language is by its nature always a creation/project) I will leave it to others to evaluate how users from Serbo-Croatian project will be welcomed to the new Montenegrin one (if you are successful I hope you will welcome speakers of failed communist language to contribute :D ). I completely understand some dissatisfaction with the fact that there are already other projects, but this is not the point in this discussion as well. I highly appreciate your commitment and energy and wish you all the best.--MirkoS18 (talk) 23:59, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
There is absolutely no difference between standard Serbian and "standard" Montenegrin except in orthography. Root of standards for all 5 inceptions of these so-called langauges (Serbo-Croatian, Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian/k, Montenegrin) is based in work of Vuk Karadžić, who being from that region defined standard Serbian as Ijekavian Eastern-Herzegovinian, which he regarded as most proper form of South-Slavic dialectical continuum. Additional standard for Serbian in its ekavian form is Šumadija-Vojvodina dialect, which had very major amount of its specific characteristics made obsolete by Eastern-Herzegovinian, and due to this most Serbs now speak language which is mixture of these two dialects in either ijekavian or ekavian form, with EH. having primate over the other. Reason why existance of Bosnian and Croatian wikipedia is partially justified even though both languages use Serbian dialect as standard is because they both have other dialects with their own characteristics, even though Croatian Wikipedia is based on Shtokavian narečje, Kajkavian and Chakavian exist. Bosnian, as well as Croatian uses grammatical forms that are rarely met in Serbian (such as [5]).
- @RMN120501: Pardon, Chakavian got its own iso639-3:ckm. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:09, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
In case of Montenegrin language almost all mentioned linguists that defended its status are using non-standard Zeta-Raška dialect and are even reaching out for Raška variaties (which is spoken in territory of Republic of Serbia) of the said dialect to find as many characteristics that diverge from standard Eastern Herzegovinian as possible. In they comparison they use Ekavian Serbian with universally accepted ortography while in same time using forms of so-called Montenegrin that are phonetically exactly the same or with minor variations to further their political agenda. Example: standard Eastern Herzegovinian Ijekavian Serbian - гдје (gdje), possible future standard of Montenegrin - ђе (đe). To non-native speaker of Serbo-Croatian this might seem as a difference, but in reality almost all speakers of Eastern Herzegovinian, especially in Herzegovina itself (which also covers part of Montenegro called Old Herzegovina) use exactly the same word - đe (where?). Karadžićists tried to model SC. after phonetic ortography, and this is the logic Montenegrin nationalists are trying to push, however in multiple spheres of our language some forms are etymological. That is how gdje remains proper form, čovek remains proper form (while Montenegrin langauge would standardize čo'ek by accepting Zeta-Raška dialect, even though that form is used by EH. speakers as well). Those "hundreds of differences" between standard variants are simply found by nationalist tricks and are fueled by politics.
Also, to add - two separate letters added in supposed standard Montenegrin are made by fusion of letters "s" and "j" and "z" and "j" in ijekavian. Concept of those two letters was made by people having no knowledge of original Slavic letter ѣ (jat) which has its own reflexes in SC. to sort out differences between ijekavian, ekavian and ikavian forms while in same time making language remain phonetic linguists have in past 2 centuries allowed for letter jat to have triple form (je, e, i) (with additional я in Bulgarian), not even government of Montenegro takes this attempt seriously. ([6] - Assembly of Montenegro using standard Serbian, [7] - Government of Montenegro using standard Serbian, [8] website of President of Montenegro using standard Serbian) --ApcehCraft (talk) 11:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Montegrians have the right to have their own Wikipedia. And I am big supporter of it. But now standards of the language are only developing. And until the complete agreement about using certain grammatical features (like ś/sj and ź/zj) will be made within linguistical community in the country there are not much chances that Montegrin Wikipedia will be working well. As I know from my native language Wikipedia (Ukrainian) lack of standartization makes it very hard to work with it. However, appearance of Montenegrin Wikipedia is inevitable. It will just take time. 5-10 years will be enough if everything goes right. Firstly, there is a need for standarization (the best example is again ź and ś. When they will be broadly used in this form (in my opininon they are the only correct forms for such language) as well as other features which dsttinguish the language there will be big possibilities for Montenegrin to be a strong language language). Then this standartized variant must be taught in all schools, used by government officials and on TV and Internet. And the important thing is making dictionaries and grammar books for ordinary people (not for students, not for linguists) as well as rising national identity so that Montenegrin people would know that they are Montenegrin, speak the language of Montenegro and support traditions of Montenegrian cultural identity. The one important thing is carefully mapping all the dialects and working on classification of different grammar mistakes in everyday talks (for example, using some words of non-Montenegrin origin). And a serious piece of literature in the language is also very important. The more books published in Montenegrin, the more chances for it to become a strong language. After all these criteria are met at least at 60% each, Montenegrin Wikipedia will be a serious project which will grow rapidly. And to ensure that enough people are interested in developing this Wikipedia I suggest you to work on SC for now and to talk with all the main contributors of it about recognising Montenegrin variant. If it works, you will be able to work there and make an impact on language developing (and just to ensure there are enough contributors. Because it is a really serious issue. Ukrainian Wikipedia really suffers because there are only a few people who develop regularly. And I personally would not like if this thing happens with another Wikipedia). If they will not allow you, then it is an additional argument about starting your own Wikipedia. RMN120501 (talk) 20:34, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
- As far as ApcehCraft's comments go I won't be wasting much of my time responding to a comment of which 90% are utter lies such as official Montenegrin sites being in Serbian when they are clearly offered in Montenegrin, as can be seen when selecting languages (English is offered too), how in the world could they be written in a language other than the official language of the country? Does this person know that Zeta-South Sanjak dialect is the most widely spoken one in Montenegro, no wonder it would affect the language, and how come Eastern Herzegovinian a Serbian dialect when it is a common ground for all of these languages, what specific elements did he find to conclude it's exclusively Serbian? And it's obvious he's not a native Montenegrin speaker since he does not seem to know that Montenegrin standard already exists and it is absolutely correct saying Đe and everything else that is a result of jekavian iotation. It's not provincialism, nor the work of Montenegrin "nationalists" but the way of speaking of Montenegrins. Nor does he seem to have read previous examples of how standard Montenegrin (which he writes under "" for some reason) and Ijekavian Serbian are mutually exclusive. It's obvious that these comments are here just to cast a bad shadow on our project and the big effort we all put in.
- Dear RMN120501, thanks for your support and kind words. While you are most probably absolutely correct about the things you said, I disagree with you on the SC project. Montenegrin community (the largest part of) is obviously not interested in working on SC Wikipedia, there are 0 articles in total (that I could find, and trust me I spent a lot of time searching) written in the Montenegrin standard. We want to write our articles completely independent of other Wikis, not to create a copypasta. It can be seen from our Incubator project, which is the most active one in there. Of course we'd like to later on help and work on SC Wiki, why wouldn't we, but only after we finish working on our own. Hey, we aren't asking for anything all the others don't already have, right?--Lujki (talk) 23:09, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
- "Montenegrin community (the largest part of) is obviously not interested in working on SC Wikipedia, there are 0 articles in total (that I could find, and trust me I spent a lot of time searching) written in the Montenegrin standard." This is perhaps the crux of the matter. Let me rephrase here what I've already said in the talk page: while in theory a) "not being able to work on" and b) "not being interested in working on" are two different things, and the framework for this discussion recognizes only a) as a valid argument in favor of creating the mne wiki, in practice a) and b) have exactly the same outcome (i.e. virtually no editors and no articles). Ironically, a) would still be fixable (if true), while b) isn't fixable, realistically speaking. I believe the language committee should also consider the outcome of their decision, rather than merely its theoretical validity. GregorB (talk) 12:58, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
- I am not expert on Wikipedia policies but this logic seem to me to be open for two interpretations. One is that users unconsciously avoid to participate in Serbo-Croatian project due to the lack of awareness of this eventual option. The second one is that users consciously and actively refuse to participate in Serbo-Croatian project where it may look like political decision. In the first case interested users should be encouraged to explore that possibility. In the second case it looks a bit like a blackmail similar to "user [who] may make an impotent threat to leave the project in the hope of blackmailing the threatening people into caving into his demands". This is "not one of Wikipedia policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community" but there is idea that it is not appropriate behavior in community and may not be appropriate behavior towards the language committee.--MirkoS18 (talk) 16:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
- I don't agree. It's not like we've ever been a part of the SH project for reasons as explained above, there is no conditioning from our side at all, I was merely stating the fact that most Montenegrin editors are not interested in participating in this project. We have nothing to leave here nor anything to blackmail with. There is no inappropriate behavior from our side towards LangCom because as we see it we are the only ones here being conditioned by being forced to participate in other projects if we even want to do anything on Wikipedia instead of letting us have our own which all the others already do.--Lujki (talk) 17:25, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
- I am not expert on Wikipedia policies but this logic seem to me to be open for two interpretations. One is that users unconsciously avoid to participate in Serbo-Croatian project due to the lack of awareness of this eventual option. The second one is that users consciously and actively refuse to participate in Serbo-Croatian project where it may look like political decision. In the first case interested users should be encouraged to explore that possibility. In the second case it looks a bit like a blackmail similar to "user [who] may make an impotent threat to leave the project in the hope of blackmailing the threatening people into caving into his demands". This is "not one of Wikipedia policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community" but there is idea that it is not appropriate behavior in community and may not be appropriate behavior towards the language committee.--MirkoS18 (talk) 16:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
- "Montenegrin community (the largest part of) is obviously not interested in working on SC Wikipedia, there are 0 articles in total (that I could find, and trust me I spent a lot of time searching) written in the Montenegrin standard." This is perhaps the crux of the matter. Let me rephrase here what I've already said in the talk page: while in theory a) "not being able to work on" and b) "not being interested in working on" are two different things, and the framework for this discussion recognizes only a) as a valid argument in favor of creating the mne wiki, in practice a) and b) have exactly the same outcome (i.e. virtually no editors and no articles). Ironically, a) would still be fixable (if true), while b) isn't fixable, realistically speaking. I believe the language committee should also consider the outcome of their decision, rather than merely its theoretical validity. GregorB (talk) 12:58, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
- Dear RMN120501, thanks for your support and kind words. While you are most probably absolutely correct about the things you said, I disagree with you on the SC project. Montenegrin community (the largest part of) is obviously not interested in working on SC Wikipedia, there are 0 articles in total (that I could find, and trust me I spent a lot of time searching) written in the Montenegrin standard. We want to write our articles completely independent of other Wikis, not to create a copypasta. It can be seen from our Incubator project, which is the most active one in there. Of course we'd like to later on help and work on SC Wiki, why wouldn't we, but only after we finish working on our own. Hey, we aren't asking for anything all the others don't already have, right?--Lujki (talk) 23:09, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
- Please, would you translate this short announcement from website of President of Montenegro from "Montenegrin" to "Serbian Ijekavian".
| "Montenegrin" | "Serbian Ijekavian"/Serbocroatian |
|---|---|
| Predsjednik Crne Gore Filip Vujanović uputio je čestitku povodom božićnih praznika svim pripadnicima pravoslavne vjeroispovijesti. „Povodom Božića, svim pravoslavnim vjernicima i vjernicama u Crnoj Gori upućujem najsrdačnije čestitke i želje da u miru, dobrom zdravlju i sreći njeguju bliskost i slogu, u duhu vječnih poruka koje sadrži najradosniji hrišćanski praznik. Istrajmo u poštovanju univerzalnih vrijednosti dijaloga, razumijevanja i iskrenog zajedništva koji su uslov opšteg napretka. Slijedimo taj put kao trajnu vrijednost Crne Gore i siguran smjer u srećnu budućnost svih njenih građana. U to ime još jednom čestitam Božić, veliki hrišćanski praznik.“" | awaiting "translation" |
-- Bojan Talk 05:02, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, so here we have a random bit of text from the President's website where we don't have words that are written and spoken differently in Ijekavian Serbian and Montenegrin such as previous examples. If we were to rewrite it in any Serbo-Croatian Ijekavian variants it would still be the same except for Croatian using Kršćanstvo, Sretno and Opće instead of Hrišćanstvo, Srećno and Opšte. Serbian Wikipedia uses Ekavian standard in basically 90% of the case, so this is not applicable. Also, Bosnian variant would also prefer these Croatian words, while allowing the alternatives used in the text as well, just like Montenegrin prefers using Predśednik instead of Predsjednik but allows it as well. The difference is, we cannot use that in Serbian Wikipedia in which Ijekavian is almost not present to begin with. Do you want the text to be translated to the Serbian Ekavian variant which your government uses and which is vastly dominant on your Wikipedia as well? Better yet, can you give official Serbian government's text to be translated to Montenegrin, since we are showing the differences here? Again, this is not my main point we know that all the variants are intelligible (I cannot prove otherwise besides a couple of hundred of Montenegrin words I am sure you've never heard about), but so is SC and Macedonian, Macedonian and Bulgarian and yet, they all have Wikipedias. On the other hand Montenegrin editors which can significantly contribute to Wikipedia should not be forced to comply to others' standards and be unable to use their own way of speaking. Nobody else is forced to do this. Nor are they forced to use SC variant as said above a few times now. Most MN editors are simply not interested in contributing while not being allowed these things. Someone from LangCom said that this is like having American, Australian and British English, now wanting Irish as well. No, this is like having all of them, every single one, including variants spoken in Africa, Latin America and all those islands over there, while saying the Irish, hey you can't have your own, use British one instead. ISO code has been approved, this is playing politics right now... There are enough linguistic differences and orthographic ones for us to be granted our own project even if we disregard the plans for writing original articles, not merely copying them. And the last thing, saying that Ś and Ź can always be replaced with SJ and ZJ is not true. There are cases when they aren't there because of iotation. Such as in names/nicknames. How am I supposed to write a name Śoka in Serbo-Croatian or Serbian? Or anything not a product of iotation where Ś,Ź are used?--Lujki (talk) 15:27, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
- I didn't ask You for variants spoken by Croats or Bosniaks. I follow StevenJ81's guideline. Evidence, with reliable sources, of ways that standard Montenegrin is meaningfully different from Ijekavian Serbian would also be welcome. Clearly, something convinced the Library of Congress to make the first change to ISO 639–2 in over five years. If anyone has access to that evidence, please share it here. You may choose any text from website with domain .me. I chose site owned by Presidency of Montenegro. Those localisms, and loanwords Serbs from Montenegro use too, so what is you point? Articles on Monenegro, Croatia or Bosnia and Herzegovina are/should be in Ijekavian variant. Majority, almost all articles on cities in Germany are in ijekavian variant. Only reason why we have this here are politics. -- Bojan Talk 04:24, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Dear Mr Amir, regarding your comment on LangCom mailing list, there aren't half a million people of Montenegrin in total (nor Montenegrins for that matter) so I just wanted to clear up that first, you can see the number of speakers in the table at the beginning of the page. Ś,Ź are taught in schools, this way of spelling is totally accepted there, teachers themselves nowadays speak this way while giving lectures, no matter the subject. I personally can confirm this as I attend them myself. We especially use them in colloquial, everyday speach as they are an integral part of our language. Older people did have a tendency to avoid them in official communication because they (in times of Yugoslavia, while there was no standardized Montenegrin) were taught that this way of speaking was not correct by the Serbo-Croatian standard. Exactly this is the reason why we cannot use them on any other Wikipedia. They are not a part of Serbian language, nor Serbo-Croatian language while it was considered to be a single language, writing that way would be no more correct in these languages than it would be in English. Again, they are much more used in spoken language, especially by younger people who are taught that this way of speaking is correct. So yes, they are used in search engines such as Google, and no, you cannot get results from Wikipedia except in Polish where they are also present. They are especially used in communication by younger people for the mentioned reason especially in Viber, WhatsApp as you asked. So I don't think it's possible to "convince" people on srwiki to let us use all of this since it is not a part of their language, it's not fair to them either, why would they? And as displayed in previous examples you can see that lots of them are not inclined to accept the idea of Montenegrins themselves (just check the article about Montenegrins in Serbian Wiki) let alone the language (check that article as well). To conclude, you wanted to know if the "new" way of spelling is used by general Montenegrin public. Not only it is used (again, especially in spoken form), it has managed to survive almost a century of suppression and marginalization (hence I said "new") it has now managed to be allowed to be used in standard language. I think this is the best proof about it's usage, a point many here try to refute, and unsuccessfully so. And finally, no, not in any case are we just a few dozens of people, this is all used by basically most of Montenegrins, I can't find you a reliable source for this as no specific survey has been done yet, but I live here and speak with other people, so the best proof that I am able to provide is a random Montenegrin-it's basically guaranteed that he speaks this way, don't take my word for it, if you know anyone of them, ask them yourself. Best regards!--Lujki (talk) 21:33, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Lujki: who is Amir? I mean whom was meant this message to be delivered? I think it would be better to ping that person. I personally don't understand what's this disscussion's connection to your message if it was intended for some other person to read it. Best regards, --Biblbroks (talk) 10:13, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Biblbroks: "Amir" is a member of the Language Committee, and Lujki was responding to a comment he made on the Language Committee's email listserv. I have informed Amir of this comment already. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:10, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Lujki: Some notes and questions.
- Which keyboard layouts on Android, iOS, Mac, or Windows can be used to type the characters С́ З́ or Ś Ź?
- The question is not how do people in Montenegro speak. A Wikipedia is mostly a written medium, so the question is how do they write.
- Reliable sources would be really helpful here. If they are provided elsewhere on the page, please tell me where; I'm sorry, but this page is very long and it's quite possible that I missed it. It's OK if it's not in English.
- Can you give some examples of search terms that are written in Montenegrin, and that don't produce useful results on common search engines like Google, DuckDuckGo, or Bing?
- Can you give examples of school textbooks that teach literacy including С́ З́ or Ś Ź? A scan of a page would be really useful (they are probably restricted by copyright, so it's OK if you upload it to imgur or something). --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 13:04, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Amire80: Thanks for reading my response! I’m gladly answering your questions right here and I apologize in advance for not being able to hyperlink everything as I’m typing on my phone.
- On Android Gboard (Google Keyboard) is offered in both Montenegrin Latin and Cyrrilic variant, Samsung’s Keyboard supports them on English, iOS as well on English, on Windows there are special Montenegrin keyboards supported all of which can be confirmed with a quick Google search.
- I agree, however they write this way as well. There are many examples given from various Montenegrin sites here in this discussion with links to those articles. I’d like to quote a part of Montenegrin orthography (with a whole section, namely paragraph 217. on Montenegrin Iotation talking about special Montenegrin language features, link here: http://www.gov.me/files/1248442673.pdf#page56 ). The part I’m going to quote is from the introduction on page 6: “Even though too much flexibility in orthography may be unwanted since it often leads to orthographic anarchy, current social situation in Montenegro has brought the need to standardize a certain number of alternative forms which, on their own, also function in Montenegrin written and oral language. (These “alternatives” are non-iotated forms forced upon Montenegrins when Serbo-Croatian was official, the orthography mentions this as well). When talking about these double forms which function in modern language, primacy must be given to those (forms) which are autochthonous and represent our recognizable linguistic heritage in order for them to be kept as such.” These autochthonous forms are those iotated forms specific only to Montenegrin language, not allowed in neither Serbian nor any other Serbo-Croatian variant, many examples of which have been provided in the discussion. This brings up a logical question. Why would LangCom want to disable us from writing in our own way, and force us to adhere to standards of other languages instead of our own?
- Sure. Let’s suppose you’ve been learning about eyes in biology class. If you were to google pupil (źenica) you’d end up with a bunch of results showing you Bosnian city of Zenica instead. Or if I were to search for a Croatian place which in Montenegrin is called Koźi Vrh (in other SC variants Kozji Vrh). Not a single relevant result. This is an exclusive form, Kozji Vrh not being listed in our orthography. This is specifically mentioned in word list at the end of the orthography (you can search for Koźi Vrh under letter K, specifically listed as a toponym, Kozji Vrh not being listed as an alternative form so it’s not correct in Montenegrin). Many similar examples are there. Also, if I were to Google Interpol Arrest Warrant to see what it was in Montenegrin I’d be searching for “Interpolova poćernica” and nothing useful on Wikipedia comes up, even if I type Wikipedia next to it, no relevant results are available, even though an article on this topic is available in Serbian Wikipedia “Interpol poternica”. I’ve just listed things on top of my head, there are many similar examples.
- I don’t have them in my possession, but there are plenty of images available under Google images, I’ll provide links to Montenegrin language books teaching children these letters:
- http://www.kurir.rs/data/images/2016/12/10/15/1055351_bukvar-crna-gora_po-s.jpg ::http://www.kurir.rs/data/images/2016/12/10/15/1055353_bukvar-crna-gora_po-s.jpg
- https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSe_KUKJcfMd4xb0Ap9CtMZNchV3JSmofDhFvn6b0T0ifhQBtSY
- https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSJwAcSLgz412OJEq0wBFwKViVHfwjvTZSJ9HiOUQCDZuxR4zp_
- https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSVuMAlOqL1otSGqr2kbL_-9u8yX82EKigSmiDxubUvIgVRahS0
- P.S. I’d like to ask you for a favor. I’m not able to directly communicate with other LangCom members, and I’d really appreciate if you could forward them my question- Why would we be disabled to write in our own way, and be forced to adhere to other languages’ standards instead?
- Also, regarding the latest message in mailing list written by Gerard M. directed at you, where he says Montenegrin is a part of Serbian, can he prove this? Not a single institution considers this to be true. SIL lists Montenegrin as a language part of Serbo-Croatian macro-language, but not a part of Serbian in any case. Even Serbian government acknowledges Montenegrin as a minority language. Why does he ignore everything (especially Montenegrin iotation; letters Ś, Ź; hyper-ijekavizations all explained in this discussion) and keeps saying this with no evidence (as no such exists) to prove it?
- Horrible NPOV violations directed against Montenegrins are not even considered as a point in favor of MNWiki (examples listed in this discussion). Nor the (understandable) lack of interest of Montenegrin users to contribute to that (and even then, not in their specific way of speaking/writing).
- Hope you’ll be able to forward my question and mention some of these points I made. Regards!—Lujki (talk) 23:35, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
- I tried Gboard, and: 1. It calls Montenegrin "SR" :) But OK, maybe it's because the new code is very recent. 2. It does include the letters Ś and Ź in long-press on S and Z. It's possible that people use this feature, although my experience with observing people using touch-screen keyboards in other languages tells me that most people don't bother with diacritics on long-press and rely much more on autocompletion, which brings us to the next point. 3. It doesn't seem to include the typical Montenegrin words with Ś and Ź, which you suggested, in its autocompletion dictionary: predśednik (although it does include predsjednik), koźi (although it has Kozji), źenica (but no zjenica). So I'm not totally convinced that people actually use it much on their phones yet. I'd love to see other examples, though, as well as examples from desktop operating systems.
- Because standards is one thing and actual usage is another. There are other languages in which standard and actual usage differ considerably. If I understand correctly, the document by the government of Montenegro, which you are quoting, is a prescriptive standard and not a documentation of actual usage. It may happen that it will commonly used some day, and it is also possible that it is in common usage now, but if this is the case I'd love to see reliable sources. (Also, I couldn't find Ś and Ź anywhere in the text of the document, but only in the examples in italic typeface. It says "predśednik" in examples, but "predsjednik" in its own text. But maybe I misunderstand something.)
- If I google for "źenica", I find a wiktionary page created in 2013, which links to zenica and zjenica. If I google for zjenica, I find the article with this name in Serbo-Croatian, Croatian, and Bosnian Wikipedias. The Serbian Wikipedia doesn't appear to have an article about this topic. This may not be a perfect situation, but is this really something that must be improved by creating a whole new Wikipedia? Can't this be resolved by mentioning the alternate spelling in the articles and by creating redirects, as it is done in English and Portuguese Wikipedias, which also have spelling variations? Google is quite smart about Wikipedia redirects.
- Thanks for the examples, this is very interesting. However, this brings me back to the previous point about search engines: isn't this something that can be resolved by creating redirects and mentioning alternate spellings? Does it really justify a whole new Wikipedia? --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 09:27, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Amire80: As for Gboard, I’m communicating with Google on this matter, Montenegrin has only recently been added, but before ISO gave it a code, so there’s still work to be done, but they are committed to it (as they are for Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian as well). Now that Montenegrin has a language code, more and more services are to be expected to be available in Montenegrin.
- With all due respect I do not understand why these two letters cause such problems, they haven’t been invented by anyone out of the blue, they have been in oral Montenegrin tradition for hunderds of years, surviving huge repression in 20th century, they just couldn’t be written at that time. First use of Ś in example is almost a thousand years ago, when first Slavic tribes came to these areas, as explained by a user at the very bottom of this page in the name Śćepan.
- More importantly, it’s not merely about these two letters, so many other words are differently spelled. I’ve sent you the link to Montenegrin orthography, the part about Montenegrin Jekavian iotation, not present in any other SC variant. This way of spelling is not allowed in any other language. Yet, using non-iotated forms is unnatural to most Montenegrin speakers. Why would we be disabled from writing in our own way, which is also a part of our cultural heritage as well as modern use? LangCom allows made up languages such as Esperanto, but not a living human language, especially when all other variants of the specific macro-language are all already in existence. It has no problems with allowing near dead languages with a few speakers left, denying them for only nobody writing in them on Incubator but telling them when they are able to build a community, they are welcome, and then when it comes to Montenegrin community, which is very enthusiastic about this, building the most active project on Incubator right now, disable them from contributing in their language, forcing them to write in Serbian, Bosnian...
- Again, LangCom may allow a language with 5.000 or less speakers in total, but not Montenegrin where even if we presume that 10.000 people out of 200.000 speakers use iotated forms (and the real number is far greater), again why would this be a problem if languages with less total speakers are allowed? Our community thinks that this is very unfair to say the least.
- As for redirects, I think it’s complicated, and a bigger question arises: Why would I have to learn how źenica is called in Serbian or in Croatian if I want to read an article on it, and why would I be forced to read it in a different language other than my own, especially if nobody else is?
- Merely mentioning alternate spellings is not a solution for two reasons:
- 1. It’s not an alternate spelling in any language other than Montenegrin, none of these forms are a part of other languages. And these non-iotated forms are alternatives in Montenegrin, not those iotated ones.
- 2. The rest of the article is still written in a language other than Montenegrin, which in case of let’s say Croatian is sometimes completely unintelligible to me such as when I was reading a page on parallelograms in Croatian Wikipedia, so nothing has been accomplished by redirecting me to it.
- Why’d I have to go trough all of that, read in another language, and be forced to follow rules of other languages instead of my own just to read and write on Wikipedia? It’s much more hassle to us, the users and potential contributors, than for LangCom to simply allow the project, which I strongly believe it should do for all the reasons listed above. And finally yes, I do believe all these reasons justify a new Wikipedia, I think a justification is not even necessary, it’s a standardized language, with it’s code, with native speakers, an enthusiastic community, so a justification would actually be necessary for denying the project, not allowing it, especially when Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian Wikipedia, artificial and almost dead language Wikipedias all do exist.—Lujki (talk) 16:43, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- There's an article called Autumn in the English Wikipedia. In North America everybody says "Fall" and not "Autumn", but this is not a reason to create an "American English" Wikipedia. The rest of the article is readable for American English speakers, and there are no serious complaints about having to learn how is this season called in British English.
- So the question is how different is the Zjenica article in the Serbocroatian Wikipedia from how it would be written in Montenegrin. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 15:28, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
- Why’d I have to go trough all of that, read in another language, and be forced to follow rules of other languages instead of my own just to read and write on Wikipedia? It’s much more hassle to us, the users and potential contributors, than for LangCom to simply allow the project, which I strongly believe it should do for all the reasons listed above. And finally yes, I do believe all these reasons justify a new Wikipedia, I think a justification is not even necessary, it’s a standardized language, with it’s code, with native speakers, an enthusiastic community, so a justification would actually be necessary for denying the project, not allowing it, especially when Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian Wikipedia, artificial and almost dead language Wikipedias all do exist.—Lujki (talk) 16:43, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Amire80: Here’s the thing, differences between American and British English are not remotely as big as these here. If there are a couple of words different there, and others only pronounced differently but written the same, it doesn’t affect the written article as those differences don’t get pronounced at all. This isn’t merely fall vs autumn (by the way, most English speakers are familiar with both terms, just as soccer vs football, kids vs children and so on). In Serbian Wikipedia we cannot use any iotated forms as they aren’t a part of that language. Serbocroatian Wikipedia on the other hand is mostly written in either Serbian Ekavian or in Croatian language, so differences are much more significant and pronounced compared to Montenegrin, especially Croatian (which a majority of articles in SCWiki are written to begin with). Due to Croatian linguistic situation, they tend to coin neologisms (literally make up new words to replace the “Eastern” ones). A vast majority of them is not only merely differently spelled, but completely unknown to an average speaker of Montenegrin. Since you asked how would Montenegrin article on źenica be different from Serbocroatian one, here’s a table to show it, with translation and minor styllistic correction where necessary to adapt it to standardized Montenegrin way of speaking. Let me just remind you differences between Croatian (on which a majority of articles on SCWiki are written in) and Montenegrin are much more significant, differences being not only in spelling, completely different words in lots of cases, but grammar rules as well. Here’s the table (I’ve just taken a few sentences under the first photo, I can translate the whole article, any article on SC wiki to show what you requested if you wish so, it is really not a problem to me, so please, be free to ask):
| Serbocroatian | Montenegrin |
|---|---|
| “Zjenica je crne boje, no zapravo je prozirna, jer je ona otvor u središtu šarenice. Crna zjenica okruđena je plavkastim kolutom, šarenicom, a šarenica je pak okružena bjeloočnicom koja je bijele boje. Ispred šarenice i zjenice je rožnica, no ona se ne vidi jer je prozirna” | “Źenica je crne boje, ali je zapravo providna, jer je ona otvor na sredini dužice. Crna źenica je okružena plavičastim krugom, dužicom, a dužica je pak okružena beonjačom koja je bijele boje. Ispred dužice i źenice nalazi se rožnjača, ali se ona ne vidi jer je providna” |
—Lujki (talk) 22:53, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
- Is there a dictionary of this language?
- Which newspapers are published in it? --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 15:19, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Amire80: As for the dictionary, there’s an orthographic dictionary on pages 86-296 of the ortography PDF file I linked before, it’s a list of I presume commonly misspelled words. Regarding the actual dictionary which I believe you meant to ask about, the first part of it was written and published back in 2016, at over 12.000 words, 500 pages and only including first three letters of Cyrillic alphabet (A, B, V). Second part is yet to be released. (Here’s a link to a page to confirm that what I’m saying is true: https://mnemagazin.me/2016/04/08/rjecnik-crnogorskog-narodnog-i-knjizevnog-jezika-predstavljen-u-canu-nova-era-nacionalne-kulture/ ). A quick Google search can confirm this as well.
- And as for newspapers there are Vijesti, Pobjeda, Dan, Dnevne Novine, Informer (Montenegrin edition, not to be confused with the Serbian one issued in Serbia)... Magazines such as Ljepota i Zdravlje, Glorija...
- Interestingly enough, even Apple includes separate instruction manuals written in Croatian, Serbian, Montenegrin and Slovenian for South East European markets. I have my phone box with me and can take a photo if necessary to confirm that as well. So even they recognize the need to separate these languages and avoid creating a confusion. Can’t see a good reason why LangCom wouldn’t do this as well.—Lujki (talk) 23:08, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
- Interesting questions. I use English layout for time being with my Samsung. Here is how that looks like. Rest I will leave Lujki as he is also asked. --Ego and his own (talk) 21:15, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Here is today article that contributes to this discussion: https://www.b92.net/info/intervju/index.php?yyyy=2018&nav_id=1349745 In this article Montenegrin and Serbian linguist exchanged arguments regarding this same topics.
- “U meri u kojoj su posebni i nezavisni bosanski, hrvatski i srpski jezik poseban je i crnogorski. Kad se govori o posebnosti i nezavisnosti tih jezika, mora se poštovati sociolingvistička stvarnost i osnovna razlika između jezika kao sistema i jezika kao standarda. Sistem je lingvistička, a standard sociolingvistička kategorija. Ti su jezici nezavisni jedni od drugih onoliko koliko su na njihov razvoj i njihovu standardizaciju uticali nezavisni sociolingvistički razlozi, a posebni su onoliko koliko su posebni organski govori koji su poslužili za osnovu pri njihovoj standardizaciji. Zbog toga je npr. srpski jezik (izvorno) ekavski, a crnogorski ijekavski. Crnogorska se ijekavica iz istih razloga npr. razlikuje od bosanske i hrvatske, a jekavska jotacija kao opšta pojava u crnogorskim govorima dovela je do realizacije fonema ś i ź koji su danas deo crnogorskoga standardnog jezika. Šira elaboracija zahtevala bi mnogo više prostora“, kaže Čirgić.
- (my translation) "In same way as much as are different and independent Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian language in a same way is Montenegrian language. When we talk about this languages there must be respected socio-linguistic reality basic differences of languages as system and language as standard. System is linguistic and standard is socio-linguistic category. This languages are independent from each other as much as their development and for their standardization where influenced by socio-linguistic reasons, and unique as much as unique is organic speech that was used for basic of their standardization. Because of that for example Serbian (in roots) ekavian, and Montenegrin ijekavian. Montenegrin ijekavian for same reasons differs from bosnian and croatian ijekavian, and jekavian jotation that can be found in all Montenegrin speeches lead to realization of phonema ś i ź which today are part of Montenegrin standard language. Wider elaboration would require much more space(for discusion), said Čirgić"
He continues:
- Za postojanje sva četiri jezika važe isti uslovi i isti kriterijumi, te nijedan od njih ne može imati manjka ili viška uslova i razloga za postojanje. Sva četiri jezika imaju posebne države u kojima su u upotrebi, posebnu naciju koja ih koristi, posebne govore koji su im u osnovi standardizacije, posebnu književnost nastalu na tim jezicima, posebne istorijske i kulturološke uslove u kojima su se razvijali i tako dalje. Ako bi se prihvatio stav kolege Tanasića da struka crnogorski jezik tretira kao varijantu srpskog, kao idiom odnosno kao srpski jezik s posebnostima, onda bismo morali poverovati da kompletna slavistička struka misli isto što i grupa desničarski nastrojenih srpskih lingvista. No takav stav danas je ipak usamljen i izvan pomenute grupe niko ga ne zastupa", kaže Čirgić.
- Kako navodi, o tome "piše recentna literaturu evropskih i svetskih lingvista o crnogorskom jeziku, među kojima će naći i svetski poznata imena poput Dejvida Kristala ili Marka Grinberga", a ističe i da su "na slavističkim katedrama u Evropi odbranjene i neke doktorske disertacije koje crnogorski jezik tretiraju kao zaseban štokavski jezik".
- "Ko ne veruje takvoj literaturi ili kome je muka čitati, neka se prošeta Crnom Gorom i uveri je li crnogorski jezik jezik ili srpski idiom. Na kraju, neka pročita Njegoša. Već prvi stih Gorskoga vijenca („Viđi vraga su sedam binjišah“) razrešiće dilemu“, ocenjuje Čirgić.
- (translation) "For existence of all four languages there are same conditions and criteria, none of them can have lass or more conditions and reasons for existence. All four languages have separate states where they are in use, separate nation that use them, separate speech which is base for its standardization, unique literature on those languages, unique historical and cultural conditions in which they developed and so on. If it would be accepted remark of colleague Tanasic(Serbian linguist) that profession treats Montenegrin as variation of Serbian, then we would need to believe that complete Slavistic profession thinks same as group of right-wing oriented Serbian linguists. Such position today is lonely and outside mentioned group no one mentions it. As he cites, about that "written resent literature of European and world linguists about Montenegrin language, among who can be found also world famous names as David Kristal or Mark Grimberg", and he points out also that "on Slavic studies in Europe there where defended doctor dissertations which treats Montenegrin language as separate štokavian language". Who does not believe such literature and who does not wish to read it because of laziness, let him go to Montenegro and convince him self is Montenegrin an language or Serbian idiom. At end, let him read Njegoš. The first words in his work "Gorski Vijenac" ("Viđi vraga su sedam binjiša") will resolve any dilemma." said Čirgić
I have tried to translate quickly few parts for those who dont know our language--Ego and his own (talk) 13:46, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
History of south Slavic languages
[edit]Just for the sake clarifying some things that where mentioned many times but seems confuses many is how come this languages are so similar but still different I wanted to write short history of area in past few centuries so hopefully you can understand better. First you need to know that south Slavic nations developed separately for many centuries.
- Croatia - Croatia and Austria were part of the same union for almost 400 years; Habsburg Monarchy (1527-1804), Austrian Empire (1804-1867) and Austro-Hungarian Empire (1867-1918); with Croatian regions Istria and Dalmatia being under the Austrian rule since 1867 Compromise until 1918 collapse. en:Austria–Croatia relations
- Serbia - The Turks continued their conquest until they finally seized all of northern Serbian territory in 1459 when Smederevo fell into their hands. ... After the fall of the Bosnian kingdom in 1496, Serbia was ruled by the Ottoman Empire for almost three centuries. en:Ottoman Serbia
- Bosnia - Conversely, during the couple of centuries Croatia was under Austro-Hungarian rule and Bosnia under Ottoman rule en:Ottoman Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Montenegro - While large portions of Montenegro fell under Ottoman rule Montenegro was never conquered completely and was only nation of all south Slavs that where free (but under constant wars) most of the time. Montenegro exists for over 1000 years as independent state. There was few moments in history where it lost independence but more about that later. en:History of Montenegro
If you can understand that south Slavs lived for centuries separated you will have less of a problem to understand why such differences in language exist. Austrian Monarchy in 1850 organized a meeting for Slavic linguists that where citizens of monarchy (only) to establish a language system - agreement for their Slavic language that was used in the Austrian Empire. sh:Bečki književni dogovor 3 years before that bishop and ruler of Montenegro Petar II Petrovic Njegoš wrote "Gorski Vijenac"[1] which contains so many proofs of Montenegrin language uniqueness that should be sufficient proof to anyone unbiased that Montenegrin language as unique language among south Slavic languages does exist and its very old. At those times there was a idea of Yugoslavian future for all slavic nations. Njegoš and his contemporary rulers of Serbia, Bosnia and hercegovina and Croatia where all working toward forming Yugoslavia. It took more then century for such idea to come to be and language that was called "Serbo-Croatian" and "Croato-Serbian" where means of unification of Yugoslavian people to understand each other. But right-wing groups that where dominant in past century abused it and used language as means of assimilation. So I when was a kid, I have studied "Serbo-Croatian" for 8 years then because of war in Yugoslavia[2] and separation of Croatia suddenly started studying "Serbian" in 1992 or so. Nothing changed with language except name. Montenegrin language was suppressed to degree of utter discrimination and called "villager" talk, "street" talk etc. Motives for such suppression was to assimilate Montenegrins to be Serbs. There is huge amount of information about this right-wing Serbian hegemony on Balkans, I cant really believe that can someone miss it when studies about this. I was discriminated in my own country by Serbian nationalists for many years until Montenegro became independent country and separated from Serbia. I was discriminated in school, army, even University... just because I was persistent to call my self Montenegrin. This aspect is important to understand motives here. As there is no single proof that Montenegrin language (beside historically being dominated by Serbia in few periods of which one is very resent) is subset of Serbian language. That is simply not true. The roots of south Slavs languages does not belong to any south Slav nation alone like Serbian nationalists are trying to present here. Just a single proof that Njegoš wrote his work(1847.) before Vienna agreement(1850.)[3] should be sufficient proof of historical and significant uniqueness of Montenegrin language. If Njegoš wrote his work, before such event took place and which is taken as foundation of Serbian and Croatian language, in such a unique way that no one can doubt that is Montenegrin and is distinctly different to the Serbian and all other Slavic languages. What arguments are there then left? That is a sure proof that Montenegrin uniqueness existed before Serbian language was linguistically systematized in any way and that talk about being subset of Serbian has only roots in "right-wing" politically motivated views. --Ego and his own (talk) 15:39, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Why language was called Serbo-Croatian and Croato-Serbian?
[edit]As you can find out on the link en:Serbo-Croatian Yugoslavia didnt just happen, but after First World War Serbian dynasty annexed Montenegro and Bosnia did not exist but where part of Serbia. Kingdom of serbs, croats and slovenians was formed under Serbian dynasty [1]. I will not comment all this articles on English Wikipedia as they are infected by Serbian "right-wing" POV but some thing can be clear regardless. King of Montenegro was forbidden to return to Montenegro and was held as captive by France and Serbia organized (against law) public congress and declared that Montenegro territory is since then part of Serbia.
from:en:Nikola_I_Petrović-Njegoš
After the end of the First World War, a Serb-dominated meeting in Podgorica voted to depose Nikola and annex Montenegro to Serbia. A few months later, Serbia (including Montenegro) merged with the former South Slav territories of Austria-Hungary to form the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, which was renamed Yugoslavia in 1929. Nikola went into exile in France in 1918, but continued to claim the throne until his death in Antibes three years later.
So it may be clear that "Serbo-Croatian" and "Croato-Serbian" came from political reasons at that time as Kingdom was Constitutionally made from Serbs, Croats and Slovenians of which only Serbs and Croats talk sufficiently similar and had interests in such unification of Language. Montenegro disappeared to exists as state and as nation[2], until Montenegro was again liberated after WWII from Serbia and became restored into equal-right state among other Slavic republics in Yugoslav federation[3]. All this can show that turbulent history of Balkans is not something to be taken lightly, but to understand that Yugoslavia fell apart because of internal struggle for dominance some of their constituents, namely Serbia over others. Montenegro suffered greatly and that can be seen by wikipedians by just analyzing articles on English Wikipedia about Montenegro. Sources are most interesting like: "Serbian land Montenegro" etc. I think anyone could see, who knew anything about it, that most of Montenegrin history is converted into Serbian history and that should be one of the main reasons why should this project be accepted. It will allow aggregation of content that would certainly improve quality of articles about Montenegro in English as more sources and information about Montenegro gets collected. I am convinced that lot of current articles would have trouble to stand as is and would need to be corrected. But as Serbian is being very strong group at Wikipedia with many in very important positions can not be tackled by individual contributors. Mine personal changes where deleted and reverted on English Wikipedia many times by Serbian Ops, that caused that I just ceased to contribute. Making this project a reality would certainly help to prevent such abuse of power in my personal opinion. And proving all this what I have said, cant be done without organized community, which Wikipedia is. I am afraid that Serbian community knows this, and that is why they are doing everything here to prevent Wikipedia in Montenegrin Language. I think its obvious that they do that. I recognize same opponents from 13 years ago when this project was declined like Bojan and few others. --Ego and his own (talk) 21:13, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
- What language was taught schools in Kingdom of Montenegro? -- Bojan Talk 18:40, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
- @BokicaK: You seem to be strongly opposed to this proposal. Can you explain in 2–3 sentences why you are so strongly opposed? StevenJ81 (talk) 22:49, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
- @StevenJ81:. I think that Montenegrin language is modern invention. Actually, not a invention at all, but simply a renamed actual language. Sole purpose of Montenegrin Wikipedia wouldn't be free knowledge, but promotion of certain point of view. I would be same if 13 colonies called their language American after they fought against English/British crown. -- Bojan Talk 03:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
I want to point out a very important thing Ego seems to have missed in the interview with Mr Čirgić who is in a hand the establisher or the modern Montenegrin standard (https://www.b92.net/info/intervju/index.php?yyyy=2018&nav_id=1349745 this is the link to the interview). He also says that the reason why giving an ISO code to Montenegrin lasted for almost 10 years is not that people at ISO think it’s the same as Serbian. It was never even mentioned (rather falsely spinned by some right-wing Serbian media last summer, such as “Blic” if I recall correctly). The reason is that Montenegrins themselves who contacted ISO, namely Montenegrin national library “Djurdje Crnojevic” had made some technical errors in their original request which took a lot of time to correct. So that “extra evidence provided to convince them otherwise” that StevenJ81 mentioned in the rules for discussion does not exist since this was never the problem at all (logically concluding since they never even thought that, as said by Mr Čirgić himself). I want to answer to Bojan that language used in Kingdom of Montenegro was declared as Serbian, but it was significantly different from the language spoken in Serbia. It was an ideological declaration, not a linguistic one. We’ve seen the same thing in Yugoslavia, where at a point in time the language was “Serbo-Croato-Slovene” which linguistically speaking has never existed at all. Montenegrins themselves called their language “Montenegrin” or even “Christian” as reported by Ante Mažuranić in an argument with Vuk Karadžić who never disputed this. Source: https://hr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crnogorski_jezik In the same page you can see Serbian scientist Ljubomir Nenadović claiming that Montenegrin and Serbian language are significantly different as well as Encyclopedia Britannica listing Montenegrin as a language (similar to SC) back in 1911. I never wanted to bring any of this up but since you guys have steered the discussion to history, well... here it is. I’m still much more open to discussing the present situation since that is what matters right now. But you see that all of this has a lot to do with politics and is a sensitive subject requiring lots of time and knowledge of history to truly understand. In the present moment we have the world benchmark for languages SIL/ISO which recognized Montenegrin as a language. LangCom tends to avoid politics in their decisions (and rightfully so). The only way not to get political here is to accept this decision, allow the project to continue (let me remind you that all other members of SC macrolanguage do have Wikis) and finally finish with the Balkan region and move on. It’s the only correct thing to do.—Lujki (talk) 23:29, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Montenegrin speakers you have no arguments for creating Montenegrin Wikipedia. You want to show one point of view. Your thinking is the following that every state of the former Yugoslavia has its own Wikipedia only Montenegro does not own. Such thinking is wrong and will be. --Kolega2357 (talk) 07:27, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- We have a lot of arguments. First and easiest to show is that main(and only?!) opposition to this project comes from Serbs. I have received support some of members from Croatian Wikipedia community and was offered help dealing with some mediawiki specifics how to translate interface and similar(how nice of them!), and I am sure based on articles on all other wikis on south Slavic languages about Montenegrin language(except Serbian) that they all do support this project, or at least don't object. Second argument that is explained above that literal work from 1847. "Gorski Vijenac" is clear proof that Montenegrin language has been spoken for centuries and it has been written before Serbian language got any standard. What you guys need to explain here is how you can claim that Montenegrin language is subset of Serbian when historical evidence clearly proves otherwise. Mare fact that Montenegro didn't standardize its own language for so long was political reason(being so long into wars against Ottoman occupation and Serbian occupation of Montenegro from 1918-1941) not because spoken language didn't exist and its made up suddenly that Montenegrin alphabet has 2 more phonemes and new standard. Njegoš work is sufficient proof that Montenegrin language did exist way before any formal south Slavic official language standard and that Serbian arguments shown here are misleading, constructed and based on historical details that Montenegrin did use and study in elementary schools from Serbian books. Montenegro did not have University until 1974.[4] Montenegrin's with higher education studied in Belgrade, Zagreb and other European countries. So please don't mislead people here that Montenegrin language did not exist and it was not spoken for centuries as there are plenty of evidence for that. It just happen that Montenegro regained independence from Serbia and started working on standardizing their own language. All this can be proven easily. Montenegrin's could not express them self's completely in written Serbian language and that is why linguists in Montenegro worked to bring new standard so Montenegrin's can write as they speak(like Serbians can in their language - meaning express them self's fully), which they could never do in Serbian where even minor attempt would lead to braking rules of Serbian language. --Ego and his own (talk) 13:46, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
Gorski Vijenac is written in Serbian, not in Montenegrin. 1847th Montenegrin language did not exist when the Gorski Vijenac was published in Vienna. You can not be an opposition to project who comes from Serbs because the opposition in Wikipedia project does not exist. You received support from Croatian Wikipedia but you and other forgot 2013 year in Croatian Wikipedia. Serbia did not occupy Montenegro that is biggest lie, stop the falsification of history here. Montenegrin alphabet has 2 more phonemes is archaic letter who use for differentiation of Serbian Language, so what other cities did not have universities. Njegoš said that the Serb never said in his works that he was a Montenegrin. --Kolega2357 (talk) 15:12, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- If you think that because English speaking users here cant read it and because of that will take your and other (interestingly again) Serbs word for granted, it is easy to show to them that "Gorski Vijenac" is not written in Serbian but Montenegrin language[5]. At the beginning of the work can be obvious (what linguist Čirgić mentions in interview above) :
Serbian Montenegrin Vidi vraga sa sedam binjiša, sa dva mača i sa dve krune, Viđi vraga su sedam binjišah, su dva mača a su dvije krune,
- Whole work is rich with such examples but I will only bring them up if someone still doubts. Like word "io" that has no meaning in Serbian but means "eat" in Montenegrin language. I can provide more examples but you seem deny many facts about occupation of Montenegro[6] even when I have provided references from world media at that time. That tells me that you are right wing Serb and will deny everything regardless. So I will do that only if someone other doubts this.--Ego and his own (talk) 15:46, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- Are You serious? You showed differences between modern Ekavian and archaic Ijekavian variants. And differences are according to you are in exactly in seven letters. And You dare to say that we don't understand Gorski vijenac. Can you find word "Io" somewhere on websites with domain .me that is not related to a Jovian moon? I'll show you examples of another poems Početak bune na dahije and Boj na Mišaru, that are about First Serbian Uprising.
Original archaic ijekavian variant "Translation" to modern ekavian variant Bože mili! Čuda velikoga! Kad se ćaše po zemlji Srbiji, po Srbiji zemlji da prevrne i da druga postane sudija, tu knezovi nisu radi kavzi, nit' su radi Turci izjelice, al' je rada sirotinja raja, koja globa davati ne može, ni trpiti Turskoga zuluma; Bože mili! Čuda velikoga! Kad se ćaše po zemlji Srbiji, Po Srbiji zemlji da (se) prevrne i da drugi postane sudija, tu knezovi nisu radi kavzi,; nit' su radi Turci izjelice, Al' je rada sirotinja raja, koja globa davati ne može, ni trpiti turski zulum
- I had no problems to understand Gorski vijenac more than Početak bune na dahije. I don't know meaning of word ćaše, i guess it means dogodi(ti).
Original archaic ijekavian variant "Translation" to modern ekavian variant Polećela dva vrana gavrana sa Mišara‚ polja širokoga‚ a od Šapca‚ grada bijeloga‚ krvavijeh kljuna do očiju i krvavih nogu do koljena‚ Poletela dva vrana gavrana sa Mišara, polja širokog, a od Šapca, grada beloga, krvavih kljuna do očiju i krvavih nogu do kolena
And you didn't answer me what language was tought in Montenegro 100 years ago. So I would cite Zakon o narodnijem školama u Kraljevini Crnoj Gori
Original English translation III. Nastava.
Član 26.
U osnovnoj školi uče se ovi predmeti:
1., nauka hrišćanska;
2., srpska istorija;
3., srpski jezik;
4., crkveno-slovensko čitanje;
5., crtanje i lijepo pisanje;
6., pjevanje (svjetovno i crkveno);
7., gimnastika i dječije igre;
8., zemljopis,
9., poznavanje prirode;
10., poljska i domaća privreda;
11., osnovi higijene;
12., računica i geometrijski oblici;
13., ručni rad sa domaćim gazdinstvom (po mogućstvu).
III. Curriculum.
Article 26.
Following subjects are tought in elementary school:
1., catechesis;
2., Serbian history;
3., Serbian language;
4., reading of church-Slavonic (?)
5., drawing and caligraphy;
6., singing (secular and religious);
7., gymnastic and children games;
8., geography,
9., nature;
10., agriculture and household;
11., basics of hygiene ;
12., aritmetics and geometry;
13., handwork (if posible).
-- Bojan Talk 17:34, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- Bojane you did not read my comment as I explained there that in Montenegro was studied in elementary school from Serbian books. So your citation is just bloating this page and makes it less readable. There is no reason for that unless it is a goal. Second this difference that linguist Čirgić mentions is for sure not archaic but it is specific to Montenegrin language even today. I am no linguistic expert (and may be very far from understanding its terminology) but I use it all the time and its so common in Montenegro to hear:
English Montenegrin Serbian With what(depends of context) did you come? Su čim dođe? Sa čime si došao?
- So don't say such things, as they are simply not true. There is no one who will deny that word "io" also (used as well in "Gorski Vijenac") is regularly in use today in Montenegro. The rest I already explained. You should give your self more time to read otherwise this can not be called discussion. .--Ego and his own (talk) 18:06, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- Your comments are original research. Tell me why Serbian language studied in in Montenegro a century ago, and not Montenegrin? Why Serbian orthography and alphabet was used? Perhaps Montenegrin king and Montenegrin legislature and people of the age better knew what was their native language than New York Times? -- Bojan Talk 20:03, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- I answered you why myself in my comment above. Let’s not clutter this thread just because someone isn’t careful enough.—Lujki (talk) 20:19, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- I agree. This is suppose to be a discussion about "Gorski Vijenac" as a centuries old uniqueness of Montenegrin spoken language. --Ego and his own (talk) 20:40, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- I answered you why myself in my comment above. Let’s not clutter this thread just because someone isn’t careful enough.—Lujki (talk) 20:19, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- I didn't have problem to understand Gorski vijenac in school. -- Bojan Talk 20:57, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- Where? -- Bojan Talk 20:25, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- Less than 10 posts up, however here you go, I’m copying the part of my comment which is a response to your question: “I want to answer to Bojan that language used in Kingdom of Montenegro was declared as Serbian, but it was significantly different from the language spoken in Serbia. It was an ideological declaration, not a linguistic one. We’ve seen the same thing in Yugoslavia, where at a point in time the language was “Serbo-Croato-Slovene” which linguistically speaking has never existed at all. Montenegrins themselves called their language “Montenegrin” or even “Christian” as reported by Ante Mažuranić in an argument with Vuk Karadžić who never disputed this. Source: https://hr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crnogorski_jezik In the same page you can see Serbian scientist Ljubomir Nenadović claiming that Montenegrin and Serbian language are significantly different as well as Encyclopedia Britannica listing Montenegrin as a language (similar to SC) back in 1911. I never wanted to bring any of this up but since you guys have steered the discussion to history, well... here it is.“—Lujki (talk) 20:38, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- No, it wasn't. It was same language, but ijekavian variant in Montenegro and neighboring Bosnia and Heryegovina, and Ekavian variant in Serbia. (btw I cited two folk epic song from Serbia, on ijekavian variant) Naming language after religion? Lol. So, proud Montenegrins, who knew that they always spoke Montenegrin, did nothing to stand up against this "ideological decision"? It does make sense... not. -- Bojan Talk 20:52, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- OK, it’s your word against Encyclopedia Britannica’s... You are also (intentionally or not) omitting the fact that Montenegro in this time was extremely poor, people had more important things to do (such as survive) than to worry about the name of the language. You are now mocking them for calling it after their religion; mocking them for the understandable lack of education in undeveloped Montenegro of the time. The bare survival was the main reason for desire of unification, alongside ambitious King Nichola’s desire to rule a big Serbo-Montenegrin state (you know his attitude after the plan failed, and promotion of Montenegrin nationalism, which by the way Serbian Wikipedia also lies again about not being Anti-Serbian, but rather Pro-Serbian. They say in article about History of Montneegro: “Crnogorstvo ne negira srpstvo kao sastavni deo.” “Montenegrism doesn’t deny Serbdom as it’s integral part”. Read “Božićne poslanice Crnogorcima” dating from 1919. and see how false this is. SrWiki tries to portray him as the biggest Serb, and make no mentions of post-1918. period which is crucial in Montenegrin history). This is also when Montenegrins after finally seeing the intentions of Serbia have made an uprising (“Christmas uprising”). Montenegrin national identity was clearly beginning to crystallize. In YU times all forms of nationalism were repressed, so what we have today is a direct continuation of the process that began back then. So not true, Montenegrins have rebelled against this ideology after seeing what it almost brought to them.
- @StevenJ81: I hope you can find the time to read this as well. Even though it seems off-topic, it’s necessary in order to understand what is happening today, and if not for that reason, then for the abundance of examples I have provided regarding violations of NPOV on SrWiki.—Lujki (talk) 21
- 14, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- No, it is You against reason. I do not mock anyone aside you logic. I know that Montenegro was poor, but they did have laws/schools/newspapers at the end of 19th/beginning of the 20th century. I'm the author of text on King Nicholas and I didn't try to portray him as the greatest Serb, but as a autocratic megalomaniac Serb who was sometimes in alliance, sometimes in latent conflict with princes/kings/regents of Serbia (and last two were his son-in-law and grandson). I used (pro)Montenegrin author Srđa Pavlović and his book Balkan Anschluss: The Annexation of Montenegro and the Creation of the Common South Slavic State. Take a glimpse at article on king Nicolas and see how many times his work is cited) Only opposition to king Nicholas was people who even more were pro-Serbian than him. I can't otherwise explain chain of events, such as his joining Serbia in World War One. Would you be kind to translate his proclamation/declaration of war to Austria-Hungary to English so @StevenJ81: or someone else could judge who is lying here? P.S. Link to his Božićna poslanica Crnogorcima from 1919. on Serbian Wikisource is shown at the bottom of the article, and it was I who copied it to Serbian Wikisoruce.-- Bojan Talk 02:52, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- Me against reason.. At least I have Britannica and your own scientists as well as Ante Mažuranić on my side. “Proud Montenegrins...” “Lol, calling language by religion..” What is this other than making fun of Montenegrins?
- And since we are judging who is lying, let’s help them determine by translating “Božićne Poslanice” instead, where he makes a clear mention of Montenegrins, Montenegrin nation and betrayal of a brotherly nation, occupation of Montengro,unconstitutional annexation. In the article itself all of these things you put under quotation marks or not mentioned them at all, giving the reader impression that this is untrue. That is misleading to say the least. You tried to present himself as a “megalomaniac Serb”, congrats, that’s how you keep NPOV! What about page of Montenegrin History and Montenegrin nationalism, which was labeled as “pro-Serbian” as well (it was not). I do not mean to argue about history and historical events right now, I was just giving examples of how misleading and biased articles about Montenegro are written, nothing else. That’s in accordance with Steven’s request to show how NPOV is frequently violated (of course at expense of Montenegrins). I just listed this as one example. Name any page about Montenegro and I bet I’ll find it.—Lujki (talk) 19:13, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- No, it is You against reason. I do not mock anyone aside you logic. I know that Montenegro was poor, but they did have laws/schools/newspapers at the end of 19th/beginning of the 20th century. I'm the author of text on King Nicholas and I didn't try to portray him as the greatest Serb, but as a autocratic megalomaniac Serb who was sometimes in alliance, sometimes in latent conflict with princes/kings/regents of Serbia (and last two were his son-in-law and grandson). I used (pro)Montenegrin author Srđa Pavlović and his book Balkan Anschluss: The Annexation of Montenegro and the Creation of the Common South Slavic State. Take a glimpse at article on king Nicolas and see how many times his work is cited) Only opposition to king Nicholas was people who even more were pro-Serbian than him. I can't otherwise explain chain of events, such as his joining Serbia in World War One. Would you be kind to translate his proclamation/declaration of war to Austria-Hungary to English so @StevenJ81: or someone else could judge who is lying here? P.S. Link to his Božićna poslanica Crnogorcima from 1919. on Serbian Wikisource is shown at the bottom of the article, and it was I who copied it to Serbian Wikisoruce.-- Bojan Talk 02:52, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- Which my own scientists? And Ante Mažuranić's opinion (i don't know whether you lie just lie like Ego) is not significant as opinions of princes/kings/citizens of Montenegro from 19th and early 20th century. I do not make fun of Montenegrins, I make fun of Your narrow knowledge and logic. Go ahead translate Božićna poslanica that I copied on Serbian Wikisource some four years ago. And please translate proclamation of war to Austria-Hungary, too, if you are in mood. -- Bojan Talk 03:41, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- Listen, there’s no need to insult me. I haven’t insulted you about your inability to read posts that I’ve previously posted, have I? It is not an opinion of Mažuranić, it’s his finding after going to Montenegro himself and asking people what is their language. I have no reason to lie, I’ve posted a link to the page in my post, but I guess you have not seen that either.. And you’ve said it yourself, you tried to display king Nicholas as a “megalomaniac Serb”. There you go, I wanted to show violation of NPOV and there it is. You are not the one to judge what kind of person who is, you are there to give objective information not personal opinions. I am not going to argue with you anymore on this topic anymore as I’ve wasted enough time already, and have proven my point.—Lujki (talk) 11:53, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- You think You have Mažuranić on Your side. I have king of Montenegro, his laws, proclamations as argument. You wish to convince us that he one day woke up and said: from now on, I'm a Serb, and language taught in schools would be Serbian, newspapers and books would be printed in Serbian Cyrillic 30-letters alphabet. And that his sane subjects 50+ years did nothing to bring him to reason? That is the story you wish to sell us. -- Bojan Talk 04:36, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- I don’t think I have, I know it. He said that himself, not me, he talked to people of Montenegro of the time, so I have the people as well. Well good for you if your main person is someone you portray as a “megalomaniac”... (you haven’t said a word about that NPOV violation I see). Convenient how you ignore everything you can’t answer to and want to drag me into a discussion about history. I am not going to get into history here. I wanted to show NPOV violation with writing personal opinions rather than stating the facts and letting the person decide for himself, and everything even a little pro-Montenegrin about him post-1918. is either under quotation marks, word allegedly or simply not written. I’m done talking about this.—Lujki (talk) 11:35, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- No, he didn't say something like that. Ask Google. Megalomaniac Serb and king of Montenegro Nikola Petrović wrote w:Onamo, 'namo!. Perhaps he knew better than Mažuranić... -- Bojan Talk 20:15, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- That was what he was referring to. He can keep his opinion about me as long as he wants but he certainly didn't prove any of it here. We answered all their questions, and argued all their arguments. Playing on ticket that English speaking people don't know the language is a tin straw. We proved here that Montenegrin language is not ijekavian Serbian dialect but to extent similar. We proved that Montenegrin language is not 21. century invention but was written before then Serbian language or any other south Slavic language was linguistically considered, with literal work of Njegoš.. We proved that fundamental construction of sentences, words, letters and expressions in Montenegrin language are distinct from any Serbian variation . I think we are in good path Lujki os don't get discouraged with their mean words. As I believe they managed to persuade people from LangComm in some of this things. Lets see if anyone else doubts any of this and try to explain to them best we can. Bojan obviously does not want to accept any of our arguments which I think where plain examples for linguistic perspective. If they are knowledgeable in that field they will have no issues to recognize all provided examples and comparisons and see for them self's differences. They certainty should know what are ekavian and ijekavian variations of Serbian. What constructs them and obvious distinction of Montenegrin language from those characteristics. --Ego and his own (talk) 16:38, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- You haven't proved anything. You constantly try to show differences, but guess what, you cant show any. We are going in circle. Bellow You insist that śutra and predśednik are Montenegrin words, and sjutra and predsjednik are Serbian Ijekavian. OK, then, lets discus on this short announcements of from official website of Montenegrin president. Predsjednik Republike Bugarske Rumen Radev obavijestio je Predsjednika Crne Gore Filipa Vujanovića o spremnosti Bugarske, kao NATO saveznice i priatelja, da odmah uputi specijalizovani helikopter za gašenje požara koji bi u toku sjutrašnjeg dana intervenisao na najkritičnijim mjestima požara u Crnoj Gori kao i spremnost Republike Bugarske na svaku drugu pomoć u gašenju požara. -- Bojan Talk 04:36, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- Also, Kolega, This is absolutely untrue. First it’s obvious you have not read the discussion since you say such things, the very first post contains books written on this topic in favor of Montenegrin. Half of the posts explain linguistic differences between Montenegrin and Ijekavian Serbian and the other half lists the arguments of non-linguistic nature why this project should be allowed. And again, not true that we want to show our own point of view. NPOV is non-existent on Serbian Wikipedia. We are not able to change that since any and every change in that direction is being reverted (example “Njegoš” article, reverted change where it was stated he was Montenegrin writer as well, not exclusively Serbian). Literally check any page about Montenegro, especially the discussion pages. The toxic atmosphere in there is unbearable. We do not want to be a part of that. I’ve clearly stated that Montenegrin community wants to write original articles, not copypastas, especially having in mind the NPOV which does not exist neither on Serbian, nor other SC Wikis for that matter (ex. “Srpsko-Hrvatski jezik” page on CroWiki is literally an essay of how it doesn’t exist and was forced to them. In the article you even have questions asked to the reader in that direction. Talk about objectivity..) So please, re-read the discussion, check the mentioned examples and then let’s talk about this. Regarding the argument of Njegoš’s nationality it is written in his passport, so Google it. Clearly says it right there. And as for “falsification of history” you are the ones doing this! Check the article about Dubrovnik siege in the ‘90s. You have not written the song of apology to Croatia “Sa Lovćena Vila kliče, oprosti nam Dubrovniče” (From Lovćen “vila” hails, forgive us Dubrovnik”) but only “Sa Lovćena Vila kliče, dje si srpski Dubrovniče” (From Lovćen the Vila hails, where are you, Serb Dubrovnik). This kind of fascism is unseen in Wikipedia.—Lujki (talk) 17:00, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- Pardon, you said many times "SC Wiki", I wonder which Wikipedia are you referring to? Is it still the Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia which is sh.wikipedia.org? For me you're really sometimes pointing to an ultra-unrelated, Sardinian Wikipedia which is pointing to Sardinian, a language that is speaking and writing by Sardinia, an Italian island. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:17, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Can someone write here at last one difference between Serbian, spoken in Eastern Herzegovina region, and language spoken in Montenegro today? Thank you ΝικόλαςΜπ (talk) 23:18, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- Can you please re-read the discussion. If you have already forgotten, you and I have already talked on this topic right here, and on this page’s talk page as well. So have I and Bojan, Ego, Freemanmne and others. It’s all right here. While we’re at it, can you please tell me how many articles are written in this variant of Serbian language on Serbian Wikipedia? (Hint, less than 10%)—Lujki (talk) 19:13, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- Difference is in such degree that no one who knows both speeches would ever be confused if person is Montenegrin speaker or Serbian speaker from Herzegovina. Montenegrin language is unique in significant degree that such person would not need to hear much of the conversation to know difference and to recognize which speaker talks in Montenegrin language.
- Different construction of sentences, vocabulary and accent are very distinct even if we both use ijekavin elements in language. Montenegrin dictionary contains great numbers of words that person who talks Serbian dialect that is used in Herzegovina does not use at all. They dont have any words in their vocabulary that contain phonemes ś and ź and they don't shorten or construct sentences in same way.
- Some examples of obvious differences that would be common in conversation:
- Can you please re-read the discussion. If you have already forgotten, you and I have already talked on this topic right here, and on this page’s talk page as well. So have I and Bojan, Ego, Freemanmne and others. It’s all right here. While we’re at it, can you please tell me how many articles are written in this variant of Serbian language on Serbian Wikipedia? (Hint, less than 10%)—Lujki (talk) 19:13, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
English Montenegrin Serbian Did you got upset? Jesi se naśekira'? Dali si se iznervirao?
- Or about meals, as people would often say when they are very hungry
English Montenegrin Serbian I am so hungry, I could eat a Bull! Tako sam gladan, iźjeo bi vola! Baš sam gladan, pojeo bih vola!
- Someone mentioned, differences are obvious when personal names are used like "Pero".
English Montenegrin Serbian Give to Pero Daj Peru Daj Peri Take from Pero Uzmi od Pera Uzmi od Pere
And there are plenty of others examples, that could be shown. But I was hoping going back to topic of this section and as well to get some answers here how anyone can claim that Montenegrin language is subset of Serbian when Njegoš work (numerous work not just "Gorski Vijenac" but even earlier work "Luča Microcozma"[7]) clearly proves otherwise. That Montenegrin spoken language was written way before Serbian language standard existed. And that such claims historically are inaccurate. If anyone doubts this I am willing to cite his work, translate it in English and Serbian respectively to remove any doubt. Njegoš spoke Montenegrin language, wrote those literal books in unique to Montenegro ways of speak. No one talked like that among Serbs in Serbia or Herzegovina. Some people imply that studies of Serbian language in elementary schools are proof that Montenegrin people spoke Serbian and Montenegrin language didn't exist. But I did not learn to speak in school but I have learn it from my parents, family and friends. Then I went to school and studied Serbian(formerly Serbo-croatian). That can not be an argument that spoken Montenegrin language did not exist but it was transferred from generation to generation verbally. People explained that Montenegro for centuries was in constant war and was financially exhausted. Under such conditions Montenegro could not for objective reasons(constant presence of Ottoman troops and being place of constant conflict) produce its own but used instead Serbian books. But not any more. Montenegro today is part of United Nations and is recognized as independent nation based on millennium old proofs of independence and existence. Montenegro did not became as nation by separating from Serbia (nor did languages became that way) but developed independently. I would recommend to Serbs here to take advice from Vice President of Serbia Ivica Dacic[8] and stop with this objection to this project. We lost so many years to develop this project because of your objection and influences on people here. No remorse and no regret? I guess not. --Ego and his own (talk) 20:53, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Tako sam gladan, izjeo bi vola .... hahah this is really one big joke. People here for bread say hleb, hljeb, kruh, kru, lebac, leb etc. We call it synonyms and dialects. --ΝικόλαςΜπ (talk) 23:25, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- That is a people saying not a joke. Many languages have sayings like that for occasions. It just crossed my mind as I was hungry at the moment and had some beef pršuta on my mind :) But point of that example was not Vo(Bull) but word iźjeo as Montenegrin expression in contrast to word pojeo from Serbian language. This goes even deeper as I have mention before word "io"(eat) that does not exist in any Serbian dialect. I could not trick anyone in Serbia(I was living there for a year) that I am not Montenegrin. It was in seconds of introduction clear that I was Montenegrin, because of my language. There are popular groups[9] that gained popularity in Serbia exactly because of specific difference of Montenegrin language. You can continue to pretend that is not true, but I wanted to clarify. --Ego and his own (talk) 02:11, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
If someone thinks that what I said about spoken Montenegrin language being transmitted verbally is something to doubt about I am showing testimony from famous Serbian actor Lazar Ristovski from interview with him in Serbian media where he was asked how he knows to speak Montenegrin[10]. He said that even he was born in Vojvodina (Serbia) his mother was Montenegrin and he learned as a child from her and other Montenegrins. He was asked about new phonemes ś and ź and he answered that he knew them and used them since his childhood(obviously he meant vocally as new letters and Montenegrin language standard didn't exist when he was child) This should assure you more that what I have said is true. --Ego and his own (talk) 02:48, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Ego, Bart Simpson's famous catchphrase Eat my shorts is translated by Pink Television some 15 years ago as Izedeš mi gaće. Ijekavain variant would be Izjedeš mi gaće. -- Bojan Talk 03:46, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- But even if that is true (I heard no one that says "izede" for eating something but you should know better Serbian then I do) regardless it proves that Montenegrin is not a ijekavian dialect but it uses singular phoneme ź instead of dual zj for same word. In same way "io" word has same root as "jeo" and has no ijekavian characteristics. Same is with phoneme ś. Montenegrin is only to certain degree ijekavian. --Ego and his own (talk) 04:22, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- As I said, You have very narrow knowledge and views, so you write bollocks. You certainly heard for Izem ti (something). Word io is synonym for jeo (to eat) (there is phrase iće i piće (food and drink). We speak same language, letters ź and ś are here just to make difference from standard spoken in neighboring Bosnia and Herzegovina. -- Bojan Talk 04:58, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- You said many things here, i missed those attempts of downplaying me, but those Serbian words you are mentioning has nothing to do with Montenegrin language or ijekavijan dialect. Lazar Ristovski, whos interview I have posted, certainly disproves your insinuation that this letters are now made up so they look different. He had no reason to lie. ś and ź are in verbal use since Montenegrin's know for them self's. You have no proof for any of your claims. You dont even know Montenegrin language. Otherwise you all would not have so many questions.--Ego and his own (talk) 05:35, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- As I said, You have very narrow knowledge and views, so you write bollocks. You certainly heard for Izem ti (something). Word io is synonym for jeo (to eat) (there is phrase iće i piće (food and drink). We speak same language, letters ź and ś are here just to make difference from standard spoken in neighboring Bosnia and Herzegovina. -- Bojan Talk 04:58, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Montenegrin Serbian ekavian Serbian ijekavian English śekira sekira sjekira Axe śedi sedi sjedi sit down śutra sutra sjutra tomorrow śeme seme sjeme seed
- Here are few examples of differences. So you cant say that Montenegrin language is Serbian ijekavian dialect. Its simmilar to extent but it is not the same. --Ego and his own (talk) 05:44, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
This is a same case as football vs soccer on English ΝικόλαςΜπ (talk) 16:19, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- No it is not. I asked many Serbian friends and no one heard ever "izede". If that word existed in Serbian then it would need to change by the rules of ekavian and ijekavian Serbian respectivly:
Montenegrin Serbian ekavian Serbian ijekavian English iźede izede izjede is eating iźeo izeo izjeo was eaten iźeli izeli izjeli we(or they) ate iźela izela izjela she ate
- This words in ekavian are sounding like nonsense I never heard anyone talks like that. So this is not true at all. Its more likely that Montenegrin's wrote before like ijekavian examples(I did) because Serbian has no such phonemes so they could not have wrote ź but instead used zj as substitute which phonetically is a bit closer but not the same. That is evidence as well that Montenegrin's can't and could't express them self's completely on Serbian. --Ego and his own (talk) 17:44, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
There’s no point even trying to get into a discussion here, Ego. No matter what you say they’ll ignore it and ask again.
We’ve clearly listed plenty of differences including: Montenegrin jekavian iotation (causing Ś, Ź), hyperiotations where ijekavian Serbian and Montenegrin mutually exclude each other (nijesam vs nisam, kisjelo vs kiselo in Montenegrin opposed to ekavian, ijekavian Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian), cases where the words are simply different not having to do anything with iotation (euro vs evro), same words mean different things (kaša, kačamak), different word forms in grammatical cases (Perova vs Perina meaning Pera’s)...
All this time nobody has answered me how to write Montenegrin words without “non-iotated alternatives” in ijekavian Serbian, or to transcribe words using Ś, Ź, names, nicknames, where they are not present because of iotation?
How are we going to solve NPOV violations directed against Montenegrins, and understandable lack of interest of Montenegrin editors to contribute to that?
Why are they so determined to disable Montenegrins from using their own way of speaking by packing it with other languages? If I am a speaker of Montenegrin, why am I forced to adhere to others’ standards?
And most importantly, why are these fierce opponents of this project so determined not to make this happen and later on still write far-right propaganda of articles directed against Montenegrins but call them to contribute to that, not letting them correct these things? It’s merely hypocritical and nothing else. The only right solution here is to allow this project, the most active on Incubator, already having over 1.200 articles in 2 months or less, to continue and allow cnr.wikipedia.org to be created.—Lujki (talk) 19:20, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- And I clearly demonstrated that hyperiotation is not unique for Montenegro, that it exist in wider area (Bosnia and Herzegovina and historically western Serbia). Hyperiotation is not present at web pages of Montenegrin president, parliament and leading newspapers. Examples of articles with letters Ś, Ź are rare on leading Montenegrin web-portal portalanalitika.me and nonexistent on second most visited vijesti.me or website of Montenegrin state institutions. Write as Montenegrins did in past 150 years and majority even now without any problems. -- Bojan Talk 05:07, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- The only clear thing is that you do not know Montenegrin grammar. What you are talking about is so called jekavian iotation resulting in merging of certain letters with J to give other voices (C+J=Ć and so on). Even though it is in a certain amount present in areas other than Montenegro, it does not make them correct in those other languages which it’s not a standard part of. In Montenegrin it is.
- What I called hyper-iotated forms are words where there was no jat sound to be replaced with -(i)je
- but there is still that infix nevertheless. Take nijesam for example. Now tell me that there is no hyperiotation on these sites. This word especially in other forms is ubiquitous and has no alternative (nisam being absolutely incorrect in Montenegrin language, and that’s the only form used in Serbian). You haven’t answered transcription question, nor this where we are supposed to choose between Serbian and Montenegrin. Nor why would we be forced to adhere to Serbian standard instead of Montenegrin. Nor NPOV violations problem. It’s clear you can’t answer that, nor can anybody, so you don’t have to even try, as the only solution is cnr.wikipedia.org
By the way, if we were to write as people did 150 years ago, you would not understand a lot of it. It’s clear you have no intention for a discussion but rather to bash Montenegrin for political reasons as it’s clear you have a problem with Montenegrin ethnicity, not Wikipedia.—Lujki (talk) 11:24, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- T+J gives Ć. I dont't know any example of C+J=Ć., do You? There are exactly two words (and few derivated from them) according to your definition of hyperzotated form: sjutra and kisjelo. Nijesam is does not with your definition because there was yat. And nijesam is unique for Montenegro. For example Branko Ćopić used nijesam is books on Bosnian krajina[9] Go ahead, find word đe instead of gdje, viđeti instead of vidjeti on those websites. Good luck, because there is no this kind of iotation at all. Can you find me word on website with vijesti.me that you won't find for examle on https://www.nezavisne.com/ ?-- Bojan Talk 19:52, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- P.S. Find me some text written some 200 years ago, we will see who can and who can not to understand it. P.S. #2 I don't have problem with your ethnicity. You have right to self-determination, but you can not rename language. Montenegrin has same sense as Austrian language.-- Bojan Talk 20:03, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- Nijesam is only standardized in Montenegrin, using it in Serbian of both Ekavian and Ijekavian standard is plain wrong. True that -ije was caused by replacement of yat but everywhere else (including Serbia) an Ikavian (not neither Ekavian nor Ijekavian) “nisam” came out as dominant for reasons unknown (I didn’t mention it not to confuse other readers with an Ikavian variant but nevermind now, Ekavian would be “nesam” which is not correct anywhere). Kisjelo, sjutra were just words that came on my mind first, there are many more, just check the orthography.
- I know you do not know any examples of C+J=Ć because there is no such example anywhere in Serbian language. It is an exclusive Montenegrin feature which proves you wrong, Montenegrin is not Ijekavian Serbian (ćenovnik is a good example, ćevanica as well, ćepanica too...). Plenty more evidence elsewhere in this discussion is provided. As for Vijesti.me I presume you are forcing it this much since their editorial policy is not to use Ś and Ź but rather avoid them since most of their readers are Serbs who are offended and mock Montenegrins for their way of speaking just like I presume you as well. On the other hand, websites not having to deal with such “problems” use them freely, for which examples were already provided to you. And just like Montenegrin orthography says, it is not of importance in how many words these letters are present since that is not why they listed them, it’s rather because that is one of the most remarkable features of Montenegrin language especially in it’s spoken form. They are present in media and TV (anchors frequently saying Śutra, dje and so on..) TV shows exclusively using these forms such as many History and Art programs on National TV of Montenegro, TV commercials (Such as for Voli, Naš Diskont and a caffé in Tivat if you really want to be sure I’m not lying, I’m just listing some I can remember right now, there are plenty more). They are especially used by young Montenegrins in everyday communication (I personally can attest that since I’m one of them and literally all of my friends do as well, just as their parents and grandparents did, even in times of repression of Yugoslav Serbo-Croatian).
- P.S. Find me some text written some 200 years ago, we will see who can and who can not to understand it. P.S. #2 I don't have problem with your ethnicity. You have right to self-determination, but you can not rename language. Montenegrin has same sense as Austrian language.-- Bojan Talk 20:03, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- To get to my point, your main argument is that these letters are not used frequently (and we’ve shown that they are). Well, guess what, neither is Ijekavian on Serbian Wikipedia (much less frequently than Ś and Ź by Montenegrins). And even that Ijekavian Serbian is not how Montenegrins speak (I’ve personally never heard a single Montenegrin say “djed” (ijek.Serb.) instead of đed (Mont.) If Montenegrin standard allows it (and Ś, Ź) it must be allowed on Montenegrin Wikipedia. Nobody in Serbia uses Ijekavian and almost nobody on SrWiki, but yet it is allowed, and so? So should be Montenegrin Ś and Ź on our own Wikipedia.—Lujki (talk) 12:43, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Even Croats who live in bordering area of Dubrovnik speak similar to us in Montenegro. That is quite normal. I was just thinking about my ancestry and found proof. My last name is Bulatović meaning we all are from Bulat(from Slavic Steel) that no one else used among south Slavs its a unique name here but can be found in Russia and among other eastern Slavs. His father had name Gojak( pure Slavic not found also nowhere among south Slavs) who had numerous sons beside Bulat. His other son was called Śćepo, this is well known in Montenegro and could be easily confirmed. And we talk here about time-span of one millennium when my ancestors came to inhabit Montenegro and they used phoneme Ś in the name Śćepo i Śćepan. No one can deny this as there is respectable amount of people who are called by him[11] as I am called by Bulat. So this phonemes where certainly in use for ever in Montenegro. But his name was not so unique but can be found among Serbs in form Stepan[12] and Croats in form of Stjepan[13] --Ego and his own (talk) 15:33, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- Reference of Serbian solder Stepa Stepanović is great example for showing this as well like example with name Pero I have mentioned before. Montenegrin variant would be Śćepo Śćepanović where Stepa i Śćepo produce significant grammatical difference when used in conversation.
English Montenegrin Serbian Give to Pero Daj Peru Daj Peri Take from Pero Uzmi od Pera Uzmi od Pere Give to Stevo Daj Stevu Daj Stevi Take from Stevo Uzmi od Steva Uzmi od Steve Give to Śćepo/Stepa Daj Śćepu Daj Stepi Take from Śćepo/Stepa Uzmi od Śćepa Uzmi od Stepe
- Montenegrin would think Stepa is female name and only under that condition would treat it the same. Here are some examples of differences between male and female names.
Male name Female name Dušan Dušanka Duško Duška Darko Darka Miro Mira Momir Momirka
- And here is how grammatically changes are affecting male and female names in constructed sentences that refer to those names:
--Ego and his own (talk) 16:42, 27 January 2018 (UTC)English Montenegrin Give to Duško (male) Daj Dušku Give to Duška (female) Daj Duški Take from Darko (male) Uzmi od Darka Take from Darka (female) Uzmi od Darke
For your infoamation, Bulat is not a Slavic word (wikipedia says it is Turkish/Kazak/Persian word). Slavic variant woud be Stal (hence w:Stalin, made of steel). Name Šćepan comes from word St(j)epan/Stefan/Stevan. Apply ioatioan and results would be Stjepan -> Sćepan -> Šćepan. Just another variant of same name. Both Pero/Pera, Savo/Sava, Stevo/Steva, Bora/Boro are Serbian masculine name. Pera/Sava/Steva are used in Serbia, Pero/Savo/Stevo in Bosnia and Montenegro. In Bosnia and Montenegro Sava is feminine name. Quick lists of people who had name Pero/Stevo/Savo and aren't related to Montenegro: w:Pero Bukejlović, Savo Derikonja, Stevo Opačić... For Pera/Steva/Sava give to Pera/Steva/Sava would be daj Peri/Stevi/Savi, but for Pero/Stevo/Savo/Marko/Veljko it should be daj Peru/Stevu/Savu/Marku/Veljku. -- Bojan Talk 19:52, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- Bulat was not the point of the story but Śćepo-Śćepan and usage of Montenegrin phoneme in his name. For the rest: Just because Serbian Dinasty annexed Montenegro from 1918-1941 and deleted state and nation of Montenegro from the existence and then developed their own map of different dialects and called them by the names of regions of Serbia like Zetski Dialect, Hercegovački dialect and so on has no merit here today. Indeed similarities between eastern Croats and Serbs from eastern Herzegovina is significantly more similar because of strong ijekavian characteristics like Montenegrin. But we are talking here about differences and there are differences of which some are exclusive. There are other words: "Śćesmo, Śćedosmo, Śćeh, Śćedoh, Śćela" this are all words that where used in Montenegro and contain those phonemes. Ekavian Serbian version would be: Htesmo, Htedosmo, Hteh, Htedoh , Htela. And ijekavian: "Htjesmo, Htjedosmo, Htjeh, Htjedoh , Htjela" . I will try to find more examples. Even in words like "where?" where Serbian use "Gdje/Gde?" we in Montenegrin use "Đe?". --Ego and his own (talk) 21:00, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- 1) Do You wish to tell as Š and Ć are Montenegrin phonemes and not used in others Serbo-Croatian languages?
- 2) Please, verify that translated correctly few sentences from geography textbook published in Royal M(ontenegrin?) State Printing Office (КР. Ц. ДРЖАВНА ШТАМПАРИЈА) in Cetinje (ЦЕТИЊЕ), capital of Kingdom of Montenegro, in 1911, reviewed and approved by Royal M(ontenegrin?) School Commity (КР. Ц. Школска Комисија), during reign of megalomaniac king of Montenegro Nikola/Nicolas : У Црној Гори живе све чисти и прави Срби који говоре српскијем језиком, а има их око 300 000 становника. Већина су је православне вјере, а има нешто мало римокатоличке и мухамеданске вјере, али треба знати да смо сви српског поријекла и српске народности... Осим Црне Горе има још српских земаља у којима живе наша браћа Срби. Неки су као ми слободни, а неки нијесу, него су под туђином. Сваки Србин у Црној Гори дужан је познати и љубити своју цјелокупну домовину - све српске земље, у којој живе наша ослобођена и неослобођена браћа Срби... English translation: In Montenegro live pure and true Serbs who speak Serbian language, and there are 300 000 inhabitants. Majority are of Orthodox faith, and there are some of Roman-Catholic and Muhammadan faith, but it should be known that we all are of Serbian origin and Serbian faith... Aside from Montenegro, there are more Serbian lands in which live our brothers Serbs. Some of them are free as we, some are not, but under foreigners. Every Serb in Montenegro is obligated to know and love his whole fatherland - all Serbian lands, in which live our liberated and non-liberated brothers Serbs. -- Bojan Talk 08:51, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- 1. Yes, as a result of jekavian iotation, these phonemes occur in certain places only in Montenegrin language. Other than that they are used by all other SC variants, but not in words listed by Ego. You wanted differences, now you ask questions like this to confuse and mislead.
- 2. What is the point of this? Yes the translation is correct. That does not change the fact that after 1918. (and your text is from 1911.) he twists this story completely upside down, and as I’ve clearly shown, you violated NPOV in that article about King Nicholas. And again, it’s clear you do not have a problem with Montenegrin Wikipedia but with Montenegrin ethnicity.
- If there’s anyone from LangCom reading this discussion I’d be more than glad to answer any of your questions, otherwise I’m done arguing with nationalists.—Lujki (talk) 11:11, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- 1) Ego said usage of Montenegrin phoneme in his name (Šćepan), so it sounded that some of them (Š, ć, e, p, a or n) are exclusive Montenegrin. They are archaic form used in unofficial conversation. Again they are not exclusive for Montenegro. Example from epic poem Početak bune na dahije: Još Aleksa govoriti šćaše, Ali dželat govorit’ ne dade.
- 2) What is point of Ego's lies and bringing politics into causing shitstorm of comments? How Serbia could delete Montenegrin nation after 1918 when according to textbook from 1911 (there are earlier editions who says same) in Montenegro live only true and pure Serbs? -- Bojan Talk 12:46, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- 1.) I said the truth. In Montenegro was always used phoneme Ś but they could not write it down so they used Š. Only since new standard of Montenegrin language we got a means to write phonemes "Ś" and "Ź". History also knows, and Njegoš wrote about tzar of Montenegro Śćepan mali (1767-1773). Everyone knows also that he was called Śćepan and not Šćepan There are old movies who had as topic him, where that is phonetically sound and clear. Where this phoneme "Ś" was used to represent authentic Montenegrin spoken language of old days. So again phoneme Ś is not modern day invention as you claimed but exist in spoken Montenegrin for so long (my ancestry traces it since more then millennium) that it became their distinguishable characteristics. No one talked like that or used that phoneme but Montenegins among south Slavs. This is all clear evidence that you dont speak the truth.
- 2.) I will not comment. Your statements you can keep but I have shown historical proofs. and there are plenty more of those from independent sources but I want to focus here on differences of Serbian ijekavian variant and Montenegrin language. --Ego and his own (talk) 17:42, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
There are many more examples of differences. Ijekavian words prijelaz, prijenos, prijevoz, prijedlog, rješenje are all a part of Ijekavian Montenegrin standard. In Serbian using these words and many more alike are incorrect and are perceived as archaic in Ijekavian Serbian unlike Montenegrin (and Croatian and probably Bosnian as well). Toponyms such as Koźi Brijeg have no alternative spelling (meaning you can’t write Koz(i)ji Brijeg), so if I were to write an article about that place (and many similar cases) on Serbian Wikipedia I couldn’t unless I somehow transcribe it which I honestly don’t know how to as I’m not a native Serbian speaker and do not know the rules in these cases. All of this is listed in Montenegrin orthography which can easily be found by merely googling it. In there all of you can find much more examples of differences between Montenegrin and Ijekavian Serbian standard as I’m most certainly not going to translate the whole book, if there’s someone willing to translate these parts of orthography he is most certainly welcome to do so. I just wanted to point out differences, with reliable sources. There are many more to be found in there.—Lujki (talk) 21:24, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- Says WHO that following words are incorect: wikt:prijelaz#Serbo-Croatian, wikt:prijenos#Serbo-Croatian, wikt:prijevoz#Serbo-Croatian, wikt:prijedlog#Serbo-Croatian, wikt:rješenje#Serbo-Croatian in Serbian/Serbo-Croatian Ijeakvian, and correct in Montenegrin? Can You give some reliable sources examples of text from Sarajevo, Banja Luka, Zvornik, Bijeljina areas without these words to point out diferences? Why can't you write Kozji Brijeg. It got name after Koze (goats) so it literally means Goat Hill. -- Bojan Talk 08:51, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- To the well established tradition, let me point out the part of my post which you haven’t read. Nobody said it’s not a SC word (Croats, Bosniaks and Montenegrins use it as a part of their languages). It’s frowned upon when using these words in Ijekavian Serbian because it’s perceived as archaic and unnecessary, in Ijekavian Serbian standard these are replaced with corresponding Ekavian ones (such as prelaz, prevoz and so on). Even in orthographies of these languages you can find that what I am speaking is true. It was always the part of “Western” (Croatian) variant of SC while that existed. Even some users from Serbian Wikipedia community argued against using these forms in articles (since they aren’t used in Serbia, and that user completely has a point there, no reason why on Serbian Wikipedia should there be Montenegrin, Croatian words).
- And you can’t change it to Kozji since the name given is Koźi, the same way you can’t change the female name Asja to Aśa in Montenegrin. Or write name of city Bijelo Polje (lit.transl. White field) as Belo Polje in Serbian. And still, nobody told me why would they want to limit us and forbid us to use own our language and it’s most remarkable feature of jekavian iotation, as well as no-alternative hyperiotations but rather conform to others’ standards which may not even be known by everyone?—Lujki (talk) 11:11, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- WHO perceives word rječnik, prijevoz, prijenos, etc when they are in everyday use? Regarding Kozji brijeg, was it named after goats? And wtf did you mean with Bijelo Polje? Who did mention it? I said, that Montenegrin language never existed, wasn't taught in school, it was one-man initiative that got momentum after Montenegrin leadership reversed their politics and begun to seek independence, first ever "dictionary" and "grammar" got after Montenegro seceded. You disregard what your own bishops, princes, kings did if that doesn't suit your needs. Pure politics. -- Bojan Talk 12:46, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- Who? Your orthography to begin with. Why did I mention Bijelo Polje? Because I want to explain to you on a different example how you can’t “translate” a toponym. You are either acting crazy or something else.. Therefore you cannot write Kozji Brijeg instead of Koźi just like you can’t say Belo Polje instead of Bijelo. But I know you know this already.
- As far as politics go, read your own comment and see who’s s***storming. There is a paragraph written on YOUR OWN Wikipedia that Serbs have forced Montenegrins into uaing “Eastern” (Ekavian) dialect in place of “Southern” (Montenegrin). Just they (on srwiki) took even that to point out “it were dialects therefore that was one language”. Again, where’s your NPOV? It’s not a one man initiative, it’s how Montenegrins have spoken for centuries. Montenegrin identity was opressed in pre-1918. times, but as I pointed out, people clearly knew that they had spoken Montenegrin and that foreign scientists (even Serbian) confirmed this fact. Encyclopedia Britannica (1910/11. Edition) as well. Ego explained school situation and I explained the official name already.
- And no, you are the one who disregards all of this, and only use opinions of someone you called a megalomaniac when it suits you. You know that he was speaking everything completely differently post-1918 and that is what bothers you and that is why you violated NPOV and portrayed him as a “megalomaniac” to discredit him and his pro-Montenegrin POV post-1918. I said I won’t get into discussion with nationalists anymore. This whole discussion you ignored everything we’ve said, all the questions we’ve asked and kept asking same things over and over again and ignoring the answers when having no argument to counter them, politics was brought in and that has nothing to do with this project. Again, if anyone serious, or from LangCom wants to ask anything or has non-political goals here, such as MirkoS18 had, and he opposed to this project yet we had a nice discussion, I’m open for a discussion anytime. Otherwise I’m done. Best regards!—Lujki (talk) 13:30, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- WHO perceives word rječnik, prijevoz, prijenos, etc when they are in everyday use? Regarding Kozji brijeg, was it named after goats? And wtf did you mean with Bijelo Polje? Who did mention it? I said, that Montenegrin language never existed, wasn't taught in school, it was one-man initiative that got momentum after Montenegrin leadership reversed their politics and begun to seek independence, first ever "dictionary" and "grammar" got after Montenegro seceded. You disregard what your own bishops, princes, kings did if that doesn't suit your needs. Pure politics. -- Bojan Talk 12:46, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- Again, WHO perceives Ijekavian as obsolete? I see it very alive and kicking. Would You quote that paragraph? Or did You mean да књижевно наречје буде јужно наречје, односно штокавско нарјечје и ијекавског изговора. It doesn't say anything like you have just said. Nevertheless, I don't know how Serbs could force Montenegrin to accept anything from Serbia if they didn't want to. Serbia and Montenegro didn't have common border until 1912/1913, and I gave textbook from 1911 (fourth edition, original came in 1895, I think) that says what in Montenegro live only pure and true Serbs who speak Serbian language.
- OK, may I copy/paste here lyrics of his anthem? Lets other judge was threatening to Ottoman Empire by small Montenegro (at that time as big as modern Luxembourg) was serious. When I said he was megalomaniac you are offended, but when I say during his reign official language was Serbian, that only Serbs of three faiths lived in Montenegro according to textbooks approved by himself/his ministers/commissars, you have nothing to say.
- Did Kozji brijeg get its named after goats? Yes or no? BTW, where is that hill? Google gives only 6 hits (two of them is Meta-Wiki) Do you know differences between transliteration (zj <-> ź) and renaming a toponym? -- Bojan Talk 14:23, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- P.S. Would you give us link to Britanica from 1911. Wasn't little strange that Americans know better than King and Ministers of Montenegro? -- Bojan Talk 14:30, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- Here you go (answers): I do not know after what Koźi Brijeg got it’s name to be honest, really.
- How have I not anything to say? I keep saying over and over again same things which you ignore then ask the same thing... I’ve explained why they called it Serbian in a previous post, we had a discussion on this. I’ve shown you that people of Montenegro called it Montenegrin. You just keep saying Montenegrins are Serbs.
- Even if Nicholas was megalomaniac (which is your personal opinion and nothing else), tou are not allowed to write that, especially not write a whole section explaining why you think this is true.
- If I am correct you proposed to write Koźi as Kozji, I do not know if that is correct, in Montenegrin it most certainly is not. And if I’m not mistaken, “translating” names from SC variants is not allowed (take Rijeka for example, Bijelo Polje and so on). So I do not know your Grammar and Ortography, nor should I. I am a speaker of Montenegrin and there’s no reason for me to have to learn other rules and standards other than those of my language to contribute to my language and meanwhile, you want to disable me from writing in my own way. Would you be comfortable with having to write in let’s say Ikavian variant instead of Ekavian I presume is your native? Of course not. Same way it’s unnatural to me (and every Montenegrin) to say Gdje, Djed... instead of Đe, Đed...
- Here’s the source to Britannica (I’m typing on my phone, can’t hyperlink it, sorry) http://www.montenegrina.net/pages/pages1/religija/crnog_pravosl_crkva_i_crnog_jezik_u_enciklopediji_britanica.htm
- And I didn’t say all Ijekavian words (but I would not be much wrong, Ijekavian is not spoken in Serbia, in Republic of Srpska in Bosnia they started to speak Ekavian as well to differ from Croats and Bosniaks but I don’t think that remained for long, but I know some TV ahows there are still in Ekavian) are seen as archaic, but forms in nouns that start with a prefix pre- which Ijekavians tend to replace with prije- (nouns only, not verbs!) and this kind of replacement is rare almost nonexistent in Serbian of Ijekavian standard who use pre- as well.
- „Ijekavski oblici su prijedlog, prijelom, prijelaz, prijepis, prijevoz itd, ali su Srbima ijekavcima mnogo običniji (dakle, i jedino pravilni) ekavski likovi: predlog, prelom, prelaz, prepis, prevoz, prenos, premor...” —Milorad Telebak, renowned Serbian linguist saying exactly this, to Serb Ijekavians these forms are unknown.
- Finally, no it’s not strange. They had no politics to interfere into. They didn’t care about Serbs nor Montenegrins. They (just as Ante Mažuranić as I’ve shown) have simply stated the fact that Montenegrins had spoken what they themselves called Montenegrin language even back then.—Lujki (talk) 18:05, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- P.S. Would you give us link to Britanica from 1911. Wasn't little strange that Americans know better than King and Ministers of Montenegro? -- Bojan Talk 14:30, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Just as contribution to discussion to provide support for what I was saying about Montenegro being occupied by Serbia. As evidence for such claims of mine, here is document from June 04, 1922 from NYTimes[14] about Plea made by Montenegrin people in Genoa(Italy). So our POV is not empty talk but our knowledge of real events that occurred during Serbian annexation of Montenegro . And only reason why we cant share more of such knowledge on English Wikipedia is because of strong Serbian control over Montenegrin related articles which are modeled in such a way that we or anything related to us Montenegrins appears as Serbian[15]. Every article I have read is like that "Serbian-ized". And I cant resist feeling that some people here still live in (1918-1941). Well, Serbs (I would call you brothers but not when you oppose my identity and my language so I need to speak in English here for other to judge among us...embarrassing!) its 2018. Montenegro is independent state, it has its own language. It has been studied in elementary schools (See how suddenly that is not important that is official) and have ISO code. And I think we proved here differences from Serbian language sufficiently for someone to see even with basic knowledge of language. What else? --Ego and his own (talk) 23:03, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Yes, Serbian leadership wasn't faithful toward his ally, megalomaniac-Serb-Montenegrin-king Nikola (what do you say about his anthem Onamo, 'namo! I asked you and have't get your reply. Would you sing it?). But what it has with language? -- Bojan Talk 08:51, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- They where not faithful to no one but their pockets. if they where not like that, king would not be assassinated by collaboration of Croats and Macedonians (imagine that people who talk 20% similar where united "by love" for that Serbian dynasty). And would not exist songs about Serbian king who runs away in 1941 and left country but took people gold with him in airplanes. And the same person Marko Daković who orchestrated "Podgorička Skupština" (Serbian organized Assembly for annexation of Montenegro) died trying to run away with king. He was too greedy and overloaded plane and plane broke and thise crates full of gold fell on him and killed him. So it seems they betrayed everyone(including Serbs at end) not just king Nikola and Montenegrin people. --Ego and his own (talk) 16:36, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
But I would like to mention also days of the week or some names of relatives and common words where we don't conform to ijekavian at all but use Đ in Montenegrin:
| English | Montenegrin | Serbian ijekavian | Serbian ekavian |
|---|---|---|---|
| whole Week or Sunday | neđelja | nedjelja | nedelja |
| Monday | poneđeljak | ponedjeljak | ponedeljak |
| Brother in law | đever | djever | dever |
| Girl | đevojka | djevojka | devojka |
| Grandpa | đed | djed | deda |
Interestingly there is no ekavian variant of "đed" but instead "deda" is used. And then again đed is male "rod" in language and it can transmute normally in Montenegrin "đedu, đede, đedovo, đeda" Example: (From where did you learn to speak like that? From grandpa.) "Okle ti takav govor? Od đeda." Serbian varian would be "Odakle ti takav govor? Od dede." --Ego and his own (talk) 16:36, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
And one thing that you said is not truth about word "bread". And that can be shown not in Latin because all south Slavic languages in Latin have one problem with letters when we use single phoneme "lj" i "nj" but need to use two characters to describe single phoneme which is not the case in hand writhing in our language but we use sub-scripted J in a single character "Nj" and "Lj" to make distinction from normal use of such characters. So when Montenegrin use word:
| English | Montenegrin | Serbian ijekavian | Serbian ekavian |
|---|---|---|---|
| bread | ljeb | hljeb | (h)leb |
We use single phoneme "lj" and its not ijekavijan configuration as it would appear in Latin Alphabet . In cyrillics this can be seen easily that its singular phoneme:
| English | Montenegrin in cyrillics | Serbian in cyrillics |
|---|---|---|
| bread | љeб | (х)лeб |
--Ego and his own (talk) 18:38, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
"Okle ti takav govor? Od đeda." Serbian varian would be "Odakle ti takav govor? Od dede." !!!!! Аhahaha. I am literally dying ahahaha. Pleas what are you by profession @Ego Car mechanic? Cause with those kind of examples I strongly doubt any of south Slavs languages are your mother tongue. Hahaha LJEB TI LJUBIM. Čoveče ne blamiraj se više, nije sramota ne znati, ali ove jezičke egzibicije su stvarno teški mazohizam ΝικόλαςΜπ (talk) 21:28, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
- But I dont talk nonsense. What you do is pretend that Montenegrin speech is nothing more then Serbian ijekavian and ignore differences that we showed here. And you come here to trow few unrelated to discussion personal remarks. Who cares what you think about me? I don't?! So for who do you write them for? I will certainly ignore you next time if I see any more disrespectful remarks from you. if you have them keep them for your self. --Ego and his own (talk) 22:59, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
Here is a en:Ded Moroz as a simple proof. Many Slavs seems share same root of word for grandfather.
| English | Russian | Ukrainian | Serbian | Montenegrin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| synonym for "Santa Claus" but literally Grandpa frost | ded Moroz | did Moroz | deda Mraz | đed Mraz |
I also heard some Croats from Split to say "dida" so I see similar change like between Russian and Ukrainian variations. But Montenegrin is certainly unique and its even mentioned there. And this brings up the point that it is in interest for Wikipedia to have a edition in Montenegrin language so researchers and students who study Slavistics or anything related to Slavic could have access to it. Its not of use just for us from Montenegro. Many other projects would be affected as well like Wiktionary. Wikiquote. Wikibooks, Wikisource. Wikispecies. I know for example that Montenegro has many unique endemic species. But you need to enable community to be build around Wikipedia for any of that to have chance to happen. --Ego and his own (talk) 13:54, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Yes you write nonsense. Or Petar Kočić wrote on Montenegrin, (šjutra dobri moj Lujo, šjutra). But look, Branko Ćopić have a đed haha. I am from Banja Luka region and we use word đed ΝικόλαςΜπ (talk) 19:21, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- You should comment about that where I have mentioned it in discussion, and here about what I mentioned here. Šjutra is not Śutra. Š and J are two phonemes while Ś is single phoneme. There is no singular phoneme "Šj" in Serbian but are two characters each having its own phoneme. Nj and Lj are only exceptions where that it is a case as I have shown above. --Ego and his own (talk) 20:58, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Yes you write nonsense. Or Petar Kočić wrote on Montenegrin, (šjutra dobri moj Lujo, šjutra). But look, Branko Ćopić have a đed haha. I am from Banja Luka region and we use word đed ΝικόλαςΜπ (talk) 19:21, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
There might be people here who dont know specifics of our languages. So to help them understand what we talk about here, they need at least to know:
- 1.) Every single character in our alphabet represents single phoneme. So 32 letters of Montenegrin language "A B C Č Ć D Dž Đ E F G H I J K L Lj M N Nj O P R S Š Ś T U V Z Ž Ź" are 32 phonemes. Serbian language has only 30 phonemes.
- 2.) Readers need to know that all this words we have mention are not (only) Serbian words but Slavic words shared among many Slavs. Any word that is affected by ekavian/ijekavian/ikavian characteristics is Slavic word Let me demonstrate:
Montenegrin Serbian ekavian Serbian ijekavian Czech Ukainian English śekira (cyr. с́eкира) sekira (cyr. сeкира) sjekira sekera сокира Axe śedi (cyr. с́eді) sedi (cyr. сeді) sjedi (cyr. сjeді) sedni si сідай sit down
You can use google translate and pick any word we mentioned and try to translate in any of following languages to assure your self (that this are Slavic words not just Serbian): Croatian, Bulgarian, Bosnian, Belorussian, Macedonian, Czech, Slovak, Polish, Russian, Ukrainian. I find astonishing similarity for many words between Russian, Ukrainian, Serbian,Macedonian and Montenegrin written Cyrillic. And they all have Wikipedia on their own languages. Differences found in Montenegrin spoken (and now written) language certainly didn't develop from Serbian but from its Slavic roots that all Slavic people share. --Ego and his own (talk) 17:19, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Google Translate is not true. --Kolega2357 (talk) 22:28, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Well, I have to write it... "The language must be sufficiently unique" - what a joke considering the fact that there's Bosnian Wikipedia. It's like a clear signal to people who speak Montenegrin: "you are the WORSE ones, your speech is a WORSE one". And excuses like "we don't want to create a new phenomenon". Well, so, if users of Wikipedia had reliable audio-video recordings that some of important politicians want to destroy the whole world, then you would also say that "we don't want to create a dangerous phenomenon"? Ok, for me the fact of the existence of four former Serbo-Croatian standards is a pure nonsense, but if there's such absurd, the law for it should exist for every standard, not only for 3 of 4 of them! Because it's called a pure discrimination. By your stupid decision children will have to read Wikipedia in Serbian or Croatian (rarely in Bosnian) and they won't be able to read in their own, as you say, "dialect", thus causing another obstacle while speaking Montenegrin (they will be automatically influenced by another post-Serbo-Croatian standards). And the fact that one stupid organisation thinks otherwise? Who knows who are they? Maybe they do it for political reasons or some other ones? We'll never know. But that shouldn't be a reason to treat them like gods, because they aren't ones. But, of course, nobody will care about my opinion, because YOU KNOW BETTER. (talk) 13:15, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
- The only reason Serbian, Croatian, and Bosnian Wikipedias exist is because they were created before the current language proposal policy came into effect and were grandfathered in. If someone would have tried to create these under the current policy, they would have been rejected and only Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia would have existed. Differences between the 4 standards of Serbo-Croatian are minimal, so theoretically Montenegrin should be allowed on Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia. There is no "discrimination" or malicious intent of any kind involved; if you had read the header of this discussion, you would know this. DraconicDark (talk) 01:06, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
One thing from the header that hasn't been brought up much in this discussion that should be: "Evidence that the existing communities have prevented Montenegrins from having "free, unbiased access to the sum of all human knowledge" on the current projects would be welcome and appropriate. However, to be convincing, such evidence must include a diff showing specific examples, with an English-language summary of the example." The discussion on the second point from the header has gone on for long enough; I think it's time the first point is discussed. Does any such evidence exist? DraconicDark (talk) 01:06, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- @DraconicDark: I guess what @Evertype and Amire80: wanna see is a linguistic that has well-knownly researched the languages of Yugoslavia area, so that questions like "what's the differents between Montenegrin and any sort of other Yugoslavia languages"... can be damnly clear, if yes, then I tried to search via Slovenia version of Google and I got one called Vesna Požgaj Hadži from the University of Ljubljana, he is a very trust researcher of Yugoslavia languages and their cultures. It's broken-hearted that however, he veto any requests to contact him via email, so if you want to contact him and get responses, you have to visit Ljubljana, Slovenia, you have to visit UoL, and ask their safeguards to let him know that you need documents from him. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:36, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Well... First of all this "grandfather clause" is causing a discrimination. I really can't understand that Bosnian standard has its own Wiki and Montenegrin doesn't. Secondly - I guess a compromise would be creating common Serbian/Montenegrin Wiki with possibility of 2 articles existing - one in Serbian standard and second in Montenegrin one. That would sort of solve the problem. Because, even if I know that Wikipedia isn't (usually) a reliable source for citing, it's not fair that Montenegrins can't use the Wiki material in their own standard. --prz_rulez (talk) 21:58, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
I am supporter of the Montenegrin Wikipedia because the Croatian, Serbian and Bosnian standards have already their languages. The Serbo-Croatian language also has got its Wikipedia. So, it is very unfair that Montenegrin standard does not have its Wikipedia. Montenegrin standard got its ISO code. So why Montenegrins can get the knowledge on their own language, as the Croats, Serbs and Bosniaks can. --Space2006 (talk), 17:06, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
- Well. Montenegrin is a real autonomous language since the independence from Serbia. The community seems to be despised and probably would work more if this project would be recognized. Цареник Костович (talk) 15:57, 3 June 2020 (UTC). Edited. Цареник Костович (talk) 15:45, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Цареник Костович: Hello, in the current form of discussions, no vote-like comments are allowed, so please remove your {{Support}}, thx. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:05, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi members of LangCom. I will situate this discussion into a broader overview of the language situation in former Yugoslav countries after the fall of Yugoslavia. First, all the languages that emerged out of Serbo-Croatian are mutually perfectly intelligible (this includes Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, and Serbian language standards). If you look for linguistic arguments on how the Montenegrin language linguistically differs from the Serbian language - you will not find them. However, you will not find linguistic arguments that would support creation of separate Bosnian, Croatian, and Serbian Wikis either. This is neither one and the same nor four separate languages. This is one polycentric language with four official language standards. There are differing views on the topic, but the fact of perfect mutual intelligibility among the four language standards is not denied by even the staunchest nationalists. Yet, the fact is that there are, indeed, four official language standards and that the speakers of these standards are often very sensitive to the differences between them. [Though not always, see the details about the Declaration on the Common Language: https://balkaninsight.com/2017/03/30/post-yugoslav-common-language-declaration-challenges-nationalism-03-29-2017/ ]
Second, the Montenegrin language got its ISO code because one of the criteria is the following: “Where there is enough intelligibility between varieties to enable communication, they can nevertheless be treated as different languages when they have long-standing distinctly named ethnolinguistic identities coupled with established standardization and literatures that are distinct.” https://www.ethnologue.com/about/problem-language-identification This criterion applies to the differences between all the language standards that emerged out of Serbo-Croatian.
Third, something you are not aware of, but that is noticeable in the previous discussion on this issue: the reluctance of the LangCom and Wikimedia/Wikipedia decision-makers to create a Montenegrin Wiki – when all the other languages that emerged from the Serbo-Croatian got their own Wikis (including Serbo-Croatian itself) – feeds into the pro-Serbian nationalism in Montenegro. From this perspective, all the Montenegrins are actually Serbs, but they refuse to acknowledge it. By claiming that the speakers of the Montenegrin language standards should contribute to the Serbian Wiki, you unwittingly support this nationalist idea.
To conclude, it is rather unfair to the speakers of the Montenegrin language to deny them an opportunity to work on a separate Wiki - if all the other speakers of the language standards to emerge from Serbo-Croatian got their own Wikis. In my view, if LangCom wants to be fair, there are two things you could do. First, you could decide that “long-standing distinctly named ethnolinguistic identities coupled with established standardization and literatures that are distinct” allow for the creation of the Montenegrin Wiki. Second, you could refuse this socio-political criterion and reorganize the Croatian, Serbian, and Bosnian Wikis so that they are all parts of the Serbo-Croat (SH) Wiki. The latter option would be an antinationalist one (and I would personally actually support it). NaucnicaCG 21 October 2020, 22:49 (CET)
- @NaucnicaCG: I wonder if which folklore in the Yugoslavia countries results you leaved this message to the top of this section, but as a wiki discussion page, you should add messages to the bottom, best regards. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- @NaucnicaCG: I did tend to agree with u on the topic, but the more i explored the arguments i very much found them flawed and not up to date. Basically what u are saying to the LangCom is for them to ditch linguistics and turn into ethnic justice dealers, or to put it in a more positive manner, become political philosophers/or ethnologists instead. I'll explain why.
- U basically explained it yourself. During Yugoslavia the name of the language was one - serbocroatian. During Yugoslavia the (ethnic) Montenegrins and Bosnian Muslims haven't felt any ethnic injustice done to them because the name of the common language didn't contain their ethnic names. So it was common for Montenegrins and Bosniaks 50 years ago to say they speak serbocroatian, or even serbian (because, practically, people tend to shorten long words when using them over a period of time) and not have any experience of ethnic injustice. It all came to an end during the 90's and after (it started in the 70's) and all of the 4 nations gradually (and not always starting at the same time) started to experience the name of the language as a part of their national identity/myth-symbol complex is the scientific term (the link explains the current situation in Bosnia for example). So the programme is the following: since ethnic justice was served to the Serbs in creating their Wiki and to all the others, and these wikis continue to exist and are not planned to be closed, then justice should be served to the Montenegrins as well. Fair. And i did agree with that. But...
- Why is this exposition above so important. Because it tells u (and LangC) two things. 1: the name of the language in the countries where serbocroatian is spoken is always a marriage between politics and the speakers. So its basically dependent on a political regime/social paradigm. And 2) it is temporal. That is what the case of serbocroatian shows. In Yugoslavia the language name wasn't an issue, in and after the 90's it was, and nowdays it is possible that it still is, or we may as well witness an other paradigm shift, like in the 90's (you pointed out the Declaration from a few years ago). So CHANGE comes through RE-VALUATION of the current conditions of society. So it is quite possible that a socio-political regime in the Balkans has emerged or will emerge, where the language name is no longer an issue of national identity (justice). A regime where, for example, Montenegrins wouldn't feel depraved if calling the language they speak Serbian, or Serbs who wouldn't feel depraved for calling their spoken language Croatian, or all four (B,C,M,S) all together for calling their spoken language (once again) Serbo-croatian...That's why i sad that the LangC should act as a group of political philosophers, because that's what political philosophy is all about: analyzing the current assumptions on which the current society is built upon and aticipating a possible change of those assumptions in the future.
- Which brings us to my last point: the case of the Serbian wikipedia, or accurately the Wikipedia on the serbian language. My experience as an sr.wiki editor for the last 10 years is that sr.wiki ceased to regard itself as an exclustivist (serbian) national project. It did in the beginning, the time it was created. But it is not anymore. And that is what you assume, when now days saying: Third, something you are not aware of, but that is noticeable in the previous discussion on this issue: the reluctance of the LangCom and Wikimedia/Wikipedia decision-makers to create a Montenegrin Wiki – when all the other languages that emerged from the Serbo-Croatian got their own Wikis (including Serbo-Croatian itself) – feeds into the pro-Serbian nationalism in Montenegro. From this perspective, all the Montenegrins are actually Serbs, but they refuse to acknowledge it. By claiming that the speakers of the Montenegrin language standards should contribute to the Serbian Wiki, you unwittingly support this nationalist idea.
- There are quite a few editors at sr.wiki who come from Montenegro, and who are quite possibly ethnic Montenegrins, who contribute to the project and have never faced any discrimination. The revaluation of the serbian wiki over the last 10 years is that, that it puts the encyclopedia/the written content first, meaning, that the content doesn't serve any cause (nationalist or otherwise) but exists for it's own sake. For me, as an sr.wiki editor, is quite clear that a process of revaluation on sr.wiki takes place where the link: Serbs → serbian language and vice versa, is being broken. That is, for example, why this rule is being applied with more vigor than ever. So, to me it is clear that, on sr.wiki, a similar process takes place, just as it did, historically, in Yugoslavia during the 50's and 60's, when the name of the language wasn't anchored in national identity. Serbian nationalists in Montenegro may put that argument u claim they do forward, but they don't know what the current sr.wiki is about --Ivan VA (talk) 22:16, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Ivan VA:, I am not going to discuss the language politics in the SFR Yugoslavia, because it is not relevant to this question. The reason the language was called Serbo-Croatian, or Croato-Serbian, has to do with the population numbers and divergent histories in different parts of this region.
- What you are basically saying when you suggest this issue is "temporal" is that the official name of the language spoken in Montenegro might stop being "Montenegrin" at some indeterminate future point. I don't see how that is possible. The languages in official use in Montenegro today are Montenegrin, Serbian, Bosnian, Croatian, and Albanian. Whatever government comes into power, Montenegrin will still be the language of some of the people living in that country and it will still be identified as a separate language by the Ethnologue.
- I have not researched Serbian Wikipedia, so I cannot make any claims about its work. However, I do not see why people who speak the Montenegrin language should be expected to contribute to it, rather than to the Montenegrin one, or to the Croatian, Serbo-Croatian, or Bosnian wikis. There are many people from Montenegro who speak the Serbian language and contribute to the Serbian wiki and that is great. However, the link between languages and ethno-nationalities is built into the organization of Wikipedia in the ex-Yugoslav region. We cannot pretend it is not there. If it is already there, it is unfair towards the speakers of the Montenegrin language to tell them Wikipedia knows better what language they (should) edit and contribute to.
- The LangCom should ideally dismantle the ethno-nationalist assumptions built into the current organization of Wikipedias in the ex-Yu region and push us to work *with* one another to create a robust and strong Wikipedia in the BCMS (Bosnian-Croatian-Montenegrin-Serbian) language.
- I wonder what motivates you personally to comment on this issue since the creation of Wikipedia in the Montenegrin language would presumably not affect your Wikipedia work in any way?
--NaucnicaCG (talk) 05:59, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
- @NaucnicaCG:I am not going to discuss the language politics in the SFR Yugoslavia, because it is not relevant to this question. The reason the language was called Serbo-Croatian, or Croato-Serbian, has to do with the population numbers and divergent histories in different parts of this region. It is very much relevant to the question, because, as it's well known, in social sciences historical accuracy when describing an evolution of a phenomenon is very, some argue, the most important thing. By claiming that The reason the language was called Serbo-Croatian, or Croato-Serbian, has to do with the population numbers and divergent histories... u exactly make my point in the previous comment on the evolution on the relation between the name of the language and national identity, coz it implies that back then the name of the language wasn't related to nat. identity, or somewhat not related ( u say that it was just a numbers thing etc.) Which just underlines the temporality and it's relation to the whole social order of the current society.
- What you are basically saying when you suggest this issue is "temporal" is that the official name of the language spoken in Montenegro might stop being "Montenegrin" at some indeterminate future point. I don't see how that is possible. The languages in official use in Montenegro today are Montenegrin, Serbian, Bosnian, Croatian, and Albanian. Whatever government comes into power, Montenegrin will still be the language of some of the people living in that country and it will still be identified as a separate language by the Ethnologue. Yes i very much do suggest that. The problem of the Montenegrin and Serbian language, this whole issue, arises of the current ethnic (political) spat between the Serbs and Montenegrins in present day Montenegro. So it's reserved to current Montenegro only. If u change the social context, by, let's say going to Serbia or Germany, u will leave the spat behind (that is why, for example for migrant communities of Serbs/Montenegrins, or broadly s-h. speakers in general in Germany, there is no language issue at all. They call the language by other names like našinski or smth. else.). 2ndly, as for the nature of the problem, the root of the problem (reserved to current Montenegro) is that a bunch of present day Montenegrins define themselves in their national identity as non-Serbs, and vice versa. So when asking for a Montenegrin wikipedia, ure not looking for some other wikipedia content, or encyclopedia content at all (the argument that LangC makes), the otherness is inscribed in the name of the Wikipedia. It's about who owns it. That is why sr.wiki is alien to them. But to underline the issue, it's their perception of sr.wiki, given the social context they live in. It has nothing to do with the empirical reality of sr.wiki at all. Because sr.wiki recruits it's member and readership base from places where there is no ethnic spat, like Serbia or the United States, not just the Serbs from Montenegro (engaged in the spat). That's why i said that among members of sr.wiki there is a weakened link between national identity and language name, just like on english or german wikipedia for example. Because they, unlike the Serbs of Montenegro, live in a different kind of social and political regime.
- So, ok, what's next, what are the options. The problem stands as i described it above. If Montenegrins (living in present day Montenegro) experience sr. and sh.wiki as alien to them, feel discriminated, then that should be the final argument for the creation of a Montenegrin wiki. Regardless of the empirical realities of these projects themselves. If the discriminated feel as they feel, then their point of view should be the privileged one. Just like it's not up to straight people to tell gay people if they are discriminated or not, it's the actual experience of the discriminated identity which bears the privileged point of view. So the only thing left for LangC (and all of us liberals) is to acknowledge that reality and create a Montenegrin wiki! (redeem the discrimination)...But now comes the twist the LangC (and You) should know about...
- The argument of temporality: When i said that this whole issue arises out of the current political problem (and politics is always constrained by a now and here) in the society of Montenegro (the problem addressed is called in polit. philosophy a national question with all the academic tradition which goes with it, from Balibar, back to Derrida etc.), that also means that in the moment that political problem is resolved a new reality WILL! emerge, which the LangC, will have to acknowledge, given the previous criterion it used to create the Montenegrin Wiki. For example, if in 20 years time, the Montenegrins and Serbs in Montenegro resolve their spat in a spirit of coexistence and brotherhood, and decide that the name of the language they speak is no more Montenegrin and Serbian (reflecting the newly achieved context), but „Serbo-Montenegrin“ or „Montenegro-Serbian” or „our Mother tongue”, than that LangC will! have to acknowledge that reality and create a 6th wikipedia on the s-h. standard. And abolish the previously created Montenegrin and Serbian wikis (ofc. probably at that time the Bosnian Serbs wouldn't want to abolish sr.wiki so it will stay open). That's the logical conclusion. U don't believe me? Well let's look at history and contemporary societies. That's why the Yugoslavia case is so important.
- The historical examples: obviously the Yugoslavia example. Immediately after WWII and the joint war struggle, the political regime that followed, leaning on the legitimacy created during the war, had the symbolic capital to call the language in an non-ethnic fashion. So such a moment described above is historically possible, given the circumstances. It can happen again, in a slightly different way, but yes. An other historical example are the migrant s-h. speaking communities in Western countries mentioned above. Their social reality greatly differs from that of the people in present day Montenegro. They call their language spoken našinski (our tongue). If LangC applies the same criterion given to the Montenegrin wiki, than it should give them also their own wiki. An other example is present day Serbia. The smartest of the smart of the political observers of the current society in Serbia say that, since 2010 or so (the moment the National question, nowdays plaguing Montenegro and Bosnia, got resolved) the serbian society is experiencing a process of 'deterritorialisation'. Meaning the elements composing the national identity of the Serbs in Serbia are beginning to loosen (including the name of the language). The Serbs in Serbia are more and more reluctant to establish a direct link between their national identity and the language name, unlike in the 90's and 00's. The more sensitive people on this issue don't call it anymore the 'serbian language', but 'this language' ('ovaj jezik') or 'our language' ('naš jezik'). So it is quite possible that in 30 years time the minority which signed the Declaration u quoted in the comment above, will turn into the countries majority. It's no surprise i mentioned that on the contemporary sr.wiki most of the editors and readers don't relate to the (serbian) language name as part of national identity. It's very possible that in 30 years time most of the citizens of Serbia will call their language spoken Serbo-croatian. Reflecting that reality, at that moment, LangC will have to abolish the Serbian wiki, coz the name of that wiki is no more reflected among the speakers population. And i could go on and on, giving u examples form world history and the current times. If tomorrow LangC decides to give the Jamaicans their own Wiki reflecting the peculiarity of their spoken english, does that mean that automatically the Americans will ask for their own 'American Wikipedia'? Not likely! Why? Because they don't live in a socio-political context where this kind of decision would provoke a sense of ethnic injustice in them. That also answers your claim: However, the link between languages and ethno-nationalities is built into the organization of Wikipedia in the ex-Yugoslav region. We cannot pretend it is not there. Not completely true. It's true from the point of view of the current Montenegrin society and the spat, but not outside of it.
- So, to sum it up. If LangC is to use the criterion of the existent social reality as legitimate to create or abolish wikipedias, it will turn into a caterer of the thoughts and experiences of the current society, which changes it's mind on things every 30 years (most of the time), including the language name.
- If u ask me for the resolution of the conflict i would very much support a single sh.wikipedia. Although, if we are honest, the name of that wiki would also be a debate point. The current name (serbocroatian) is very much controversial, reflected also in your answer by pointing out the (B-C-M-S) name as an alternative. But, the shutdown of sr., hr. and bs. wiki will never happen. This whole project, Wikimedia/Wikipedia, is heavily built upon the concept of subsidiarity. The Organisation is very, very reluctant to engage itself into the activities of the local wiki branches and their communities. If u're not very familiar with the way things are run around here, the latest example is the global ban on a right-wing hr.wiki administrator. Meta-Wikimedia took 10 years to ban ONE guy who terrorized the whole hr.wiki community and who is responsible for the famous 2013 controversy and all the negative right-wing publicity of the croatian wikipedia the news outlets in the region reported. And after numerous cries and pleas to the Meta people, from all the s-h language wiki communities, they didn't block him for that, but for a thing called sockpupeting (and that happened quite by chance). So not for being a mobster but for tax evasion. That's how non-engaging the Meta people are. Just 1 guy was the problem, and it took 10 years. So the idea that LangC or Meta will close down an entire encyclopedia like sr.wiki (or the rest), with 600+k articles and an active community numbering hundreds of people isn't even an utopia. The only way it can happen is if the editors themselves decide to merge into 1 s-h-language wiki. As for the LangC, it's very unlikely they will approve a Montenegrin wiki. For the reasons i explained above in length. They have no desire to turn into a caterer of contemporary Balkan societies, not to mention, more importantly, that they run who-knows-how-many wiki-language projects with the implication that a situation like this one could appear, in other contexts, all over the world. They would, pretty much, turn themselves into the laughing stock of the whole world. They already started chasing the rabbit down the whole when they created sr. and hr.wiki in the early 00's, they have no intention turning this into a wonderland. So, unsatisfactory, the speakers calling their language Montenegrin won't get their satisfaction. The only think left for you guys is either to join some of the 4 projects (which, really are, much more cosmopolitan and u won't experience discrimination), or wait until the the ethnic spat in current Montenegro is to be overcome in 15+ years or so (my guess), and by then, u will stop signifying the language name in ethnic terms, it will basically become pretty much insignificant to you the name u call the language spoken. Yes, it is a bad situation.
- I wonder what motivates you personally to comment on this issue since the creation of Wikipedia in the Montenegrin language would presumably not affect your Wikipedia work in any way?..As u might have noticed, i like debating these things, but, sadly and more importantly, it's COVID time, and after 5 pm. when everything closes in Serbia, i really have no better things to do than sitting in front of a computer :( --Ivan VA (talk) 23:04, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Ivan VA and NaucnicaCG: If you both want to know why there's still no judgements from langcom, well, something from Talk:Language_committee/2020#Again,_can_Montenegrin_be_eligible?:
- I wonder what motivates you personally to comment on this issue since the creation of Wikipedia in the Montenegrin language would presumably not affect your Wikipedia work in any way?..As u might have noticed, i like debating these things, but, sadly and more importantly, it's COVID time, and after 5 pm. when everything closes in Serbia, i really have no better things to do than sitting in front of a computer :( --Ivan VA (talk) 23:04, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
| “ | The four standard languages that together constitute Serbo-Croatian (or BCMS, if you prefer) are all derived from the very same Štokavian dialect (Eastern Hercegovinian). Differences between them are minimal and mutual intelligibility is nearly 100%. Montenegrin is essentially Ijekavian Serbian with a few minor orthographical quirks similar to labour vs. labor in English. It's constantly the same few words (śutra, đevojka, nijesu etc.) that are being quoted to show the difference, but their number is limited and many articles won't contain any of them. For the rest, is of course possible to construct sentences that demonstrate how different Montenegrin is from Serbian, but the same can be done for American/British/Australian English as well ("That bloke parked his lorry on the left shoulder of the motorway").
When I was in Montenegro recently, it was pretty hard to find any traces of this separate Montenegrin orthography; all I found was a poster in a school. Even the websites of major state institutions don't seem to use it. My impression is that at present, this language/orthography as a separate entity is marginal even in Montenegro itself. Another thing is the Montenegrin test wiki itself, which is almost exclusively about Montenegrin subjects; You'll hardly find articles about planets, mathematics, animals, American politics, psychology, linguistics, films, Pokémons and whathaveyou. In other words, it's a Montenegropedia rather than a typical Wikipedia. Now, I'm not saying that's a bad thing, quite the opposite, because the entire content of this test project could very easily be merged into either the Serbian or the Serbo-Croatian edition. I'm sure it should be possible to establish as a rule that articles about Montenegrin subjects should be preferably follow Montegrin standards, and, if desired, it's always possible to add a template saying "This article is written in Montenegrin" (several languages with multiple standards already do that, f.ex. Rhaetoromance, Norman, Sardinian, Limburgish). At last, since the difference between various forms of Serbo-Croatian is of a political rather than a linguistic nature, the only remaining argument for a separate Montenegrin project seems to be POV differences. Apart from the fact that Wikipedia ought to be neutral, the number of articles where this POV difference could really matter is extremely limited. It's most unlikely that there will be nationality-based POV differences about other topics than former Yugoslavia. |
” |
--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:01, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226: We have past these arguments a long time ago. No (strict)linguist (socio-linguistics differs here) in the Balkans or elsewhere will tell u, that from the viewpoint the language system is built in itself, there is a difference between Montenegrin and the other 3 standards. If there is one, he's gotta his diploma taken away from him. This discussion (the serious arguments) has taken off into the realm of political philosophy/ethnology/psychoanalysis. And is entirely based on analysing the relationship between the language name (and nothing other than that) and national identity and the (contemporary, Montenegrin) political context this relationship arises out of. That's it. And since we're at it, ill ping @IJzeren Jan: so he can tell us why the discussion is still open, and perhaps read through the last comments. I'm really interested hearing the current opinion of the LangC members. --Ivan VA (talk) 13:22, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Ivan VA: Hi again Ivan VA, thanks for a thoughtful discussion.
Part of the problem here is that the development and history of Wikipedia intersects in complex ways with the language situation in former Yugoslavia. There was not LangCom when Serbian and Croat Wikipedias were established as separate, and I am pretty sure the same goes for the Serbo-Croat and Bosnian Wikis. Thus, this is not just a discussion about the Montenegrin language and Wikipedia, but about the Montenegrin language and Wikipedia *within a particular space* that has its own history, rules, and regulations. In other words, this discussion would have looked very different if there was LangCom back in the early 2000s.
- I am well aware of the problems in the Croat Wiki and I have learned a lot about the WMF over the last year. I would also be very surprised if the LangCom decides to intervene into the current structure of the WIki communities in the BCMS language space and merge the Serbian, Croat, Bosnian, and Serbo-Croatian Wikis into one. This is another illustration of what I said above - this discussion about the creation of the Montenegrin Wiki is shaped by the histories, rules, and regulations of the Wiki world. People with decision-making powers, i.e. LangCom need to acknowledge this. In my view, it is unfair to refuse to permit the creation of the Montenegrin Wiki *and* to refuse to change the current ethno-national divisions of the Wiki world in former Yugoslavia.
- This is not just a matter of principle - contributing to a Wikipedia was never on my horizon of possibilities as I was growing up, because there were both too many of those I could perhaps contribute to (Serbo-Croat, Bosnian, Serbian, Croatian) and not one that would make direct and straightforward sense for me to contribute to. I think this is part of the reason of why the current Incubator CNR Wiki focuses mostly on the entries that have to do with Montenegro - there are comparatively few of those in the Serbo-Croat, Bosnian, Serbian, Croatian Wikis. To many people from Montenegro, it simply did not occur to contribute to a Wiki because there are four Wikipedias that emerged from the Serbo-Croatian language but not the Montenegrin one.
- Regarding the questions of "temporality" you raise - you mean refer more to "temporariness". That is, you keep suggesting that the Montenegrin language will disappear in 50 years. Language is a living thing and it is possible all the successors of the Serbo-Croatian would be called something else in 50 years' time. Yet, I think it would take a genocidal government to make the Montenegrin language disappear. It is there now, in any case. Maybe ask yourself if you make the same assumption about the Serbian, Croat, or Bosnian languages and, if not, why not. There is a strong paternalism among the people from Serbia towards Montenegro (my mom is Serbian and I lived in Belgrade the first seven years of my life, so this is said with love). I asked why you participate in this discussion because Montenegro has a significant Croat minority - yet no one from the Croat Wikipedia comes here and claims MNE Wikipedia is not needed, despite all the revisionism and nationalism of the Croat Wiki. This has to do with the expansive character of Serbian nationalism and exclusionary character of the Croat nationalism - which apparently shape our interests and viewpoints even if we are liberal.
- "If Montenegrins (living in present day Montenegro) experience sr. and sh.wiki as alien to them, feel discriminated, then that should be the final argument for the creation of a Montenegrin wiki." Agreed. And if not, these four Wikis (Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian, Serbo-Croatian) should be merged into one! Anything else is unfair towards the speakers of the Montenegrin language.
Take care. --NaucnicaCG (talk) 20:21, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- @NaucnicaCG: One point: shwiki will not be closed even a cnrwiki can be established per two 2014 PCP discussions: Proposals for closing projects/Deletion of Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia (where Ivan VA also said Oppose) and Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia, but I just no longer oppose creation of a cnrwiki. See also: User_talk:Evertype#Wikipedia_Montenegrin. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:55, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226: As a private editor i would also grant a crn.wiki. But i would also grant a British english wiki or a Brasilian wiki, or any other proposal which clearly shows that the current speakers community isn't comfortable with the way they previously used to call their language, from now on until this project ends, in the future. Ocean to ocean, the whole world. But if i were a LangC member i would be very reluctant to make that call. Because it would transform the LangC into Amnesty international if u want. This whole project would experience an explosion of ethnic justice project grants. The number of wikipedias would quadruple at best. In that situation, in order to save the project from falling apart, LangC would ditch their policy of transparency and publicly explaining their decisions and turn to decision arbitrariness. At that moment they are pretty much dead. U cannot run a global project of this size if u try to cater the needs of (almost)ever changing societies and their political preferences.
- If u wan't to explore this issue more broadly it also points towards the question why this project, Wikipedia, was successfully created in the political/social context of the United States in the early 00' reaching our time, and not in present day Bosnia or Montenegro. Don't kid ureself, the same way this Montenegrin language issue is arising out of a particular political context, the same way Wikipedia did aswell. --Ivan VA (talk) 04:07, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Ivan VA I think currently the most negative thing to get a possible eligiblity for this RFL is Croatian Wikipedia Disinformation Assessment-2021, to which it mentions
- If u wan't to explore this issue more broadly it also points towards the question why this project, Wikipedia, was successfully created in the political/social context of the United States in the early 00' reaching our time, and not in present day Bosnia or Montenegro. Don't kid ureself, the same way this Montenegrin language issue is arising out of a particular political context, the same way Wikipedia did aswell. --Ivan VA (talk) 04:07, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
| “ | 3. Encouraging the affected communities to discuss the possibility of re-merging Bosnian, Serbian and Croatian language projects into the original Serbo-Croatian language projects to re-align with the practices of other pluricentric languages with unified Wikipedia projects; including but not limited to Chinese, English, German, Spanish, Tamil, Korean, and French language Wikipedias.
|
” |
- So for a possible separation of Montenegrin from Serbo-Croatian wiki projects you have to answer that why that assessment page says wrong, especially the reason why Montenegrin contents can't just be provided by sh:. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:49, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- @NaucnicaCG: "If Montenegrins (living in present day Montenegro) experience sr. and sh.wiki as alien to them, feel discriminated, then that should be the final argument for the creation of a Montenegrin wiki." Agreed. And if not, these four Wikis (Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian, Serbo-Croatian) should be merged into one! Anything else is unfair towards the speakers of the Montenegrin language. This just underlines that the core of this issue is not linguistics but the unresolved Montenegrin and Serbian national questions in PRESENT/TEMPORAL climate of Montenegro, meaning politics. This sentence: And if not, these four Wikis (Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian, Serbo-Croatian) should be merged into one! Anything else is unfair towards the speakers of the Montenegrin language. makes only sense if u are familiar with the political context of present Montenegro. If u would change the words in this sentence by let's say putting it this way: If there is a Jamaican wikipedia than there must be an American one as well, or everything else is screaming injustice towards the Americans. Given the context this sentence makes no sense. If u know anything about contemporary America u know that Americans don't call their language in a non-ethnic fashion (english) because, let's say Jamaicans, do (for arguments sake). Which brings us to the core of this whole issue. A sh. only wikipedia is acceptable to u because, in that case, every ethnic group/nation (and let's stop kidding ourselves this is a Montenegrins/Serbs issue only), would be denied their ethnic justice. So it is somewhat fair. Not completely. What makes such a solution workable is not the fact that our/Montenegrin ethnic justice is being denied to us (coz nobody sane is willing, willingly, to put himself in a place of injustice), what makes this solution workable is that ethnic justice is being denied to them. To the Serbs, the ones we (the Montenegrins) identify as non with. So the whole enterprise is somewhat workable because the ones we identify as non with, are being denied justice. So it's a power struggle between the Montenegrins and the Serbs (and it expands to the whole contemporary society in Montenegro. Everything is eaten up by it. It's everywhere. The language issue is just 1 aspect of it we discuss here; the CORE of the political issue is, of course, the about the character of the Montenegrin state (is it a montenegrin nation state or not. Ethnopolitics is always about the nature of state, everything else, including the language question is just a side kick; the ethnic identity is the main political identity)).
Turning back to the issue present on this forum, of course this (the M-S power struggle on the language issue) immediately has repercussions in the Symbolic order. That is why the name -serbocroatian- fits so well. If it would be just serbian, the mere prefix in the name, then it wouldn't function. Because the Serbs would successfully appropriate that prefix (then name), and that is unacceptable to the Montenegrin side. So, in order to avoid a successful appropriation of the language name by the Serbs, the suffix croatian is being cobbled together with the prefix -serbian-. This suffix successfully prevents the exclusive appropriation of the language name by the Serbs. Because the Serbs are unable to identify with an ethnic name other than theirs (croatian. That is because, they (the Serbs) are situated in an intensity of alienness towards the other nations in MNE (very good lecture here about alienness) ..it's no coincidence that, after the dissolution of the sh. name in the 90's, all the standards emerging from it, choose an ethnic name to denote their language).
Now the most important part. The point of view of the -croatian- suffix in the name. The suffix (-croatian-) in the language name (serbocroatian) reveals the true nature of the issue. From the point of view of the croatian suffix in the name, which no one wants (nor the Montenegrans nor the Serbs), becomes clear that being the mere name doesn't bear any significance. Signifying a language. Being a mere name for a language (like english or swahili or w/e). What makes this name so significant is the signifier. This is the most important moment. The moment the signifier becomes detached from the signified. This only becomes apparent when looking from the position which the signifier(s) refuses to signify (the croatian suffix). What lies in front are two signifiers in a clinch of mutual non-recognition. The Montenegrin signifier happy, because it sees the Serbian signifier unable to appropriate the language name exclusively for himself, and the Serbian signifier happy because it sees the Montenegrin not present in the language name (at all) (which feeds into his own identity where he identifies as a non-Montenegrin). So u basically can put any name u like for this language, as long as the signifieing formula is to be respected. No exclusivity. U can call the language „Jibber-jabber” if u like and create a Jibber-jabber wikipedia, it will work. As long as the rule of signifieing is to be respected. The moment u create an exclusive wikipedia alongside Jibber-jabber wikipedia, or Serbo-croatian wikipedia, ethnic justice demands will start screaming back at u. They will not satisfy just with the Jibber-jabber wikipedia. The moment it sees the others exclusive possession, and it itself has no exclusive possession, ethnic injustice kicks in. The moment u create a wiki alongside the one with the name who no one wants the formula breaks down. The significance arises not out of the thing one has, but what is denied to the other side.
And it would be vice versa if there was no Serbian wiki, at least when the Serbs in Montenegro (and Bosnia for that matter) are concerned. The Serbs in Serbia have a whole different thing going on, i stressed that out in my previous commentary (they don't live in a ethnonationalist regime anymore, regardles of the projection towards Serbia in the commentary Naucnica wrote above). That is also why the sentence with the American and the Jamaican doesn't work in this context. The American, if was told the Jamaican got his own wikipedia separating from the common english one, will say: „good for them”, or, „who cares”. Here this sentence can't operate. The Montenegrin Serb or Montenegrin from Montenegro (and not from Germany for example) will scream injustice right back at u.
Until the national question in Montenegro is solved. That's the temporal nature of this whole issue. The moment the political regime changes, the language name issue goes with it. That is why this Montenegran/Serbian language issue wasn't present 20 years ago. It's actually quite young. I've been born b4 it became an issue.
- Regarding the said above, Naucnica, i'm sad to see in this discussion, that u hand picked the arguments from my previous comment u wanted to answer to. U didn't really go into the temporality argument at all. The historical record is pretty clear about that it is temporal. U should perhaps ask your Serbian mother if she felt discriminated against as a Serb in the 60's or 70's when the language name in the country wasn't called 'serbian'? Yet, I think it would take a genocidal government to make the Montenegrin language disappear. It is there now, in any case. This just underlines that this whole issue is tied to present-day politics, and is temporal in nature. Maybe ask yourself if you make the same assumption about the Serbian, Croat, or Bosnian languages and, if not, why not. There is a strong paternalism among the people from Serbia towards Montenegro... It would be nice if u could point toward such an argument in my comments. I'm really interested where u found this paternalism and nationalism. --Ivan VA (talk) 04:07, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226: Thanks for letting me know! I am glad to hear that.
- @Ivan VA: Hi Ivan VA, just briefly: the name of the language is firmly related to the process of its standardization. Many European languages were standardized in the 18th and the 19th century, but not all. For us today it is really difficult to imagine what social reality was like back in the 18th and 19th centuries. Cultural differences between aristocratic elites and the peasants in what would become the same nation-states were so huge that they sometimes did not even speak the same language. European aristocrats and religious leaders had culturally more in common with one another than with the peasants working their lands. These sorts of differences are invisible from our contemporary perspective, since we tend to impose the nationalist lens when looking at the 18th and 19th-century sources and to assume that nations were bound to emerge. Even the Eastern Herzegovinian dialect, that is, the language variety that Vuk Karadzic used for the standard of the Serbian language was "almost a foreign tongue" for "the Serbian clergy with a base in the area around modern Novi Sad." And Vuk Karadzic chose the Eastern Herzegovinian as the standard of the Serbian language because this was the dialect he spoke. From that moment, all the other language varieties in this region became "non-standard" ways to speak. It's all politics, when you look close enough into history.
- In what is today known as Montenegro, in the 19th century, there was also a lot of cultural and linguistic variety. Arguably, the coastal region under the Austro-Hungarian rule was culturally profoundly different from the montainous parts of Montenegro that were under the Ottoman rule. And the mountainous parts of Montenegro, Herzegovina, Kosovo, and Albania had culturally more in common with one another than with other parts of what would become Montenegro, BiH, Kosovo, or Albania. All of these differences are also invisible when we think only from the perspective of the nation-states.
- There are records that some people called the language Montenegrin back in the 19th century. For instance, French author Vialla de Sommieres in his 1813 travelogue "Voyage historique et politique au Montenegro", published in 1820, used this term. Ljubo Nenadovic in his text "On the Montenegrins" from 1856 writes that the language taught in the Montenegrin schools is Montenegrin, that it is different from the Serbian language, and that Montenegrin schools should start teaching the same language that is being taught in Belgrade and Novi Sad. Ante Mažuranić claimed that people in Montenegro called the language Christian or Montenegrin. I personally have not looked up these historical sources in the original, just the secondary literature. Still, I think this clearly illustrates that the question of how to call the language, and how to standardize it, was a matter for a major political discussion in the 19th century as well.
- I am not going to engage in this discussion anymore, since I explained all of my arguments. I will clarify things I have written above, if and when necessary.
--NaucnicaCG (talk) 12:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- @NaucnicaCG: The history of the standardisation process is quite familiar, there are a lot of books written about it. The most recent ones:
- Kordić, Snježana (2010). Jezik i nacionalizam (PDF). Zagreb: Durieux.
- Das Serbokroatische zwischen Linguistik und Politik: mit einer Bibliographie zum postjugoslavischen Sprachenstreit. Studies in Slavic Linguistics, Bd. 34. München: Lincom Europa. 2009. p. 451. ISBN 978-3-929075-79-3. OCLC 428012015. OL 15295665W. Template:COBISS-Sr. Template:COBISS. Inhaltsverzeichnis. from Bernhard Gröschel.
The main critique from the ethnologists point of view is that these books, or the story of how serbocroatian (and that name for the language prevailed in the 19 c. long b4 Yugoslavia was created) got standardised, is the moment the language name started being signified in ethnic terms. The moment the speakers, themselves being part of different nations, started to see the language name as part of their national identity, which also became an ethnic one (the alieness part linked in the previous comment). The moment the signifier became an ethnic signifier. And there are books about that too. The name Ugo Vlaisavljević resonates here quite heavily. So when u say: Still, I think this clearly illustrates that the question of how to call the language, and how to standardize it, was a matter for a major political discussion in the 19th century as well... nobody disputes that, i certainly didn't. That is my argument the whole time. That the name of the language was and is tied to changing political regimes (in 19 century as it is today). But what You imply in this sentence is that the signifier was an ethnonationalist one in the 19 century, as he is one today. That people looked at the name of the language through the lens of ethnopolitics (ethnic national identity) the whole time. For two centuries. And that is blatantly false. It's historically very easy to dispute that. As i said the Montenegrin/Serbian language issue kicked off some 20 years ago, perhaps some time later than that. That is the argument of temporality of this whole issue i talked in length about. To put it blatantly, the political/societal regime in 19 century Montenegro, unlike the one today, wasn't an ethnonationalist one. That's why they didn't bother about the name of the language back then, didn't feel any ethnic injustice tied to it. If u want, they were like todays Americans. --Ivan VA (talk) 16:26, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
I have a back-up idea. If this time you Montenegrin failed, you could apply for an Ijekavian Serbian (if this dialect were not in ISO 639, you could just apply) wikipedia (and here you would only need to prove that Ijekavian Serbian is different from standard Serbian and standard Serbo-Croatian). --John Smith Ri (talk) 03:54, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
The Montenegrin language and Montenegrin Wikipedia it should be. There is the Montenegrin web corpus. It has 321573 texts, 3654071 sentences, 90871077 tokens in the Montenegrin language. Or there these studies.--Arxivist (talk) 23:58, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Arxivist The problem is that currently the test project seems frozen, trying to create any new articles only result an error message says "You are trying to create a page without a valid ISO 639-1 or -3 code." Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Creating a separate project for Montenegrin would only cause more problems and another battleground for ultranationalistic editors prone to historical revisiosnism. Editors from Montenengro are free to choose to participate ob sr.wiki, sh. or even Bosnian or Croatian projects. Language spoken in Montenegro is 99,99% similar to Serbian spoken in Herzegovina, for example. Examples of "vast difference" between 2 variants of the same language given here, honestly sound like an episode from the Monty Python. Besides a couple of records given by foreign travelers unfamiliar with the region calling the native language from MNE Montenegrin, all documents in Montenegro (middle ages, Principality and Kingdom) were written in Serbian. And that is not a claim, it's a hard fact which can be easily documented. Modern-day borders and political disputes can not change that. As I have said before, this request would only create additional problems in the long run. Sadko (talk) 19:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- If this was really a criteria for creating or not creating a wiki, separate serbian, croatian and bosnian wikis would not exist. Until they do, and until they have not merged into one, a montenegrin wiki has no reasons to not exist. FStupnikov (talk) 17:56, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- @FStupnikov Someone asked at Incubator's Administrator noticeboard to request continue contributing the test project, but not successful. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:43, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: Didnt understand your comment. As for the quoted report i dont think much of it. U can read the whole discussion on the discussion page and on the Signpost article disc. page. Its quite clear u have to pick between two realities which are irreconcilable. Since then i have come to change my position, i would grant a mne.wiki and also any other language-name disupute related request which would arise from past and future. --Ivan VA (talk) 09:53, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
- Pardon, which "Signpost"? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:42, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
I don't understand why Montenegrin Wiki could not be created. It's an official language of a Balkan country. Пан Хаунд (talk) 13:16, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Пан Хаунд: I guess you may want to ask this matter via this talk page? Thoughts, I was asked some years ago but nothing from their memberships happened. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:54, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Montenegrin speakers are very welcome to write in the Montenegrin standard on the Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia. :) It is not hostile towards any of the standards. It might not seem there are many of them (due to small proportion of contributors from Montenegro) but there are articles written using characteristics of Montenegrin. That said, I fear this will end up being yet another bot/import/POVFORK project between SH, SR, HR, BS and CNR to fill up basic articles, because why waste effort when you can import whole pages with minimal or no changes? Serbo-Croatian is a pluricentric language no different to English, German, Spanish or Portuguese, and while it's written in both scripts, Latin-Cyrillic transliterator is a bit problematic to implement due to different standards of writing foreign names, but it's on a track to being done. -Vipz (talk) 12:33, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Vipz Then? What we are discussing is the language eligibility of Montenegrin, not proposal to merge them, as said above, any comment that says no more than "This is ridiculous. Montenegrin is the same as Serbian (etc.)." will also be deleted. LangCom knows how you feel, too. This RFL is currently on hold, not rejected, means that the users from Montenegro are still having choices to challenge your suggestions that "Hey Montenegrin users are welcome to the shwiki or others" which they take their evidences that this claim isn't true. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:52, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226 I didn't want to clog this page with lengthy half-off-topic argumentation, so I've replied to this on your talk page. -Vipz (talk) 04:16, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Vipz Then how about CLDR-10769 on CLDR issue tracker? Where Luka said sth. against your replies on my talk page? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:57, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226 adding
cnras a localization option sounds pretty reasonable to me, just like we haveen,en-CA,en-GBfor English,de,de-AT,de-CHfor German and so forth, yet we don't have separate American, Canadian and British English Wikipedias, or Standard German, Austrian German and Swiss German Wikipedias - and the latter three have many more linguistic differences than varieties of Serbo-Croatian (or known by its longer name, Bosnian-Croatian-Montenegrin-Serbian). If that's what you're asking about. -Vipz (talk) 02:25, 30 November 2022 (UTC)- cnr has already been available for localization for years. Localization in a different standard spelling is legitimate, like it is for en-gb, de-at, etc. A whole new Wikipedia—not so much. I haven't seen anything convincing in this discussion that shows that Montenegrin is distinct from Serbian. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 12:21, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Amire80 Montenegrin is a separate language standard that has also extra letters and state has ongoing war-like tension to Serbian nationalists, so both linguistically there is a need and culturally there is a need
- as it is not possible to just assume good faith or ambivalence among Serbian and Montenegrin.
- IMHO having a Wikipedia has long been a thing of more then just language distinction but also a matter of social and cultural distinction. Wikipedia is now even used to emancipate and empower preservation of cultures *(often minority, close to extinct historic) ... let alone here. Since local language is not supported with Wikipedia in Montenegrin the content gap is just increasing rapidly when compared with Serbian, which is fastest growing and for 15 years the only well resourced language of HBS spectrum with two distinct affiliates *(others have none!). In the time when WMF PRing that we are inclusive, diverse and equitable Movement for all world's knowledge...and failing miserably in this region.
- Keeping Montenegrin Wikipedia growing a community in incubator does not cost WMF anything and requires no extra action.
- Blocking it will render a full state and language standard unwelcome while providing even more support to those who are against it.
- Mind you I am working on HBS macro-language project of Wikivoyage with all folks, exactly because we have to have more diverse strategies and multiple options to accommodate diversity, rather then pushing for rigid rules of single language
- standard per project, but then also failing some for their weak representation.
- If you do block it please be aware that this will become a public matter that will waist more energy and create more frustration for sure, then to just ... let it be?!. --Zblace (talk) 20:01, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- I agree with the call of letting people contribute new articles to the Incubator, I didn't even know it was disabled. This should be done regardless of different interpretations of Montenegrin as a language. –Vipz (talk) 12:17, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
- Can you enable the test wiki? I want to write articles but it wrongly states that [cnr] is not a 639-3 code. Blu145 (talk) 07:08, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- @StevenJ81: please see requests above. ^^ –Vipz (talk) 00:05, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
- That user is inactive for 4 years, I doubt they would be back. Probably this matter is discussing at Incubator's AN? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:25, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
- @StevenJ81: please see requests above. ^^ –Vipz (talk) 00:05, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
- Can you enable the test wiki? I want to write articles but it wrongly states that [cnr] is not a 639-3 code. Blu145 (talk) 07:08, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- I agree with the call of letting people contribute new articles to the Incubator, I didn't even know it was disabled. This should be done regardless of different interpretations of Montenegrin as a language. –Vipz (talk) 12:17, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @Amire80. While I disagree with your statement, I am interested in understanding why specifically do you associate Montenegrin with Serbian (as opposed say to Bosnian or Croatian, which are more similar since they all follow the ijekavian standard)?
- As for the reasons I disagree with your statement, firstly, it carries an implied bias and political implications, whether you are aware of it or not. The first issue with such a position is that it implies and goes in hand with the deniers of the existence of Montenegrins as a nation, stemming from a nationalist narrative that caused civil wars in 3 nations and is seeking to assimilate another nation, an active political process that is nearing its culmination as of last week. The other critical reason is that by insisting on trying to “prove” distinctions from Serbian only, it is being implied not only of Montenegrin in an inferior position to Serbian when the whole linguistic community regards it as an equal member of the Serbo-Croatian macrolanguage, but also it raises the question of motives or a potential lack of understanding of the language itself, since, as I said, the language is more closely related to standard Bosnian than to Serbian.
- Finally, if the international linguistic community has recognised Montenegrin as a distinct language, if we have proven the very fact that there are many cases where if one is following the Montenegrin standard, grammatically, the text will simply be incorrect in all Serbian language standards, and that in these cases it is impossible to follow both Montenegrin and Serbian and still be correct, and if you are aware of the hostility to the Montenegrin community on thr Serbian wikipedia, and if you are aware of the culturocide and political imperialist assimilation project that the Montenegrins are exposed to, why is none of this enough for you? By taking the stance that you have taken, whether intentionally or not, you are firmly positioning yourself on one side of this issue and bringing your impartiality into question. Please be aware that whether you are aware of it or not, you are making a political stance, on the side pushing a forceful assimilation agenda. Looking forward to reading your response. Luka. 31.11.52.147 18:51, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
- 31.11.52.147, I'm not sure if you were @Lujki: or not, if you were, then please try logging in with that account, anonymous commenting while you do or did have an account isn't a good behavior. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:26, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226 I do not think it is fair to ask people to out themselves if they already decided to post anonymously over the sensitive matter. Wikimedia has enough (micro and macro) hostility that is not being processed that your call here sounds like asking someone to become a moving target! (especially as CoC is not well implemented yet across projects) Zblace (talk) 08:50, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Also, @31.11.52.147 please can you provide sources for your if the international linguistic community has recognised Montenegrin as a distinct language? if we have proven the very fact that there are many cases where if one is following the Montenegrin standard? the text will simply be incorrect in all Serbian language standards? and that in these cases it is impossible to follow both Montenegrin and Serbian and still be correct? and if you are aware of the hostility to the Montenegrin community on thr Serbian wikipedia? and and if you are aware of the culturocide and political imperialist assimilation project that the Montenegrins are exposed to? Without notable and reliable sources to indicate them, I'm afraid that many peoples of Wikimedia movements will only consider lots of your such "opinions" as just your own original researches. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- 31.11.52.147, I'm not sure if you were @Lujki: or not, if you were, then please try logging in with that account, anonymous commenting while you do or did have an account isn't a good behavior. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:26, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- cnr has already been available for localization for years. Localization in a different standard spelling is legitimate, like it is for en-gb, de-at, etc. A whole new Wikipedia—not so much. I haven't seen anything convincing in this discussion that shows that Montenegrin is distinct from Serbian. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 12:21, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226 adding
- @Vipz Then how about CLDR-10769 on CLDR issue tracker? Where Luka said sth. against your replies on my talk page? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:57, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226 I didn't want to clog this page with lengthy half-off-topic argumentation, so I've replied to this on your talk page. -Vipz (talk) 04:16, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Now, who can make a summary of the above discussion bulletins? As suggested, there should have a summary of a previous discussion, which is however and sadly I couldn't find it easier by just Ctrl+F. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:50, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Montenegrin was established as Montenegro's main official language in the country's constitution. Montenegro was worldwidly recognized as an independent state. Many language versions of WP were created for lesser reasons. WP cannot ignore these proven facts. Best regards, Agathenon (talk) 19:45, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Agathenon indeed +1 Zblace (talk) 08:54, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
I'd just like to add a few cents. I've skimmed through the discussion and wanted to note something regarding claims that have been raised about the use of 3 new characters.
Whoever claims that these characters are in us has never ever been to Montenegro. No one uses those characters. They cannot be found in popular papers, nor in the official paper of the country, on country websites...nowhere. They are not even used by the Old Capital of the country, which traditionally includes the most sovereignists: http://www.cetinje.me/cetinje/site_mne/public/index.php/index/artikli?id=4
The thing with the three characters was just an excess, largely of political motivation. The vast majority of all people who consider they speak Montenegrin never use it under any circumstance and even professional Montenegrin linguists openly oppose them. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by MinorCents (talk) 12:43, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- This article can confirm what was written by MinorCents above. –Vipz (talk) 02:33, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- I have a question: what requirements does the test wiki still need to meet before it could be approved? 81.172.236.100 17:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- @81.172.236.100 A request must be first eligible for any further approval process, if it's not an eligible request, then I'm afraid that it won't be approved, it may be rejected, or be ignored. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:34, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- I have a question: what requirements does the test wiki still need to meet before it could be approved? 81.172.236.100 17:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
I support, As far as I am concerned, there is a majority oppose votes/critical comments that are mostly just Serbian nationalists getting political or complaining about wars and history, which should not be used as a argument for something that is not supposed to be political. The others have good points, but no matter how similar Montenegrin is to other languages, it still is a language. The argument "Montenegrin is to similar to the other Yugoslav languages" is contradictory because all Yugoslav languages are very closely related with each other anyway. That means Macedonian Wikipedia should be deleted/moved to Incubator because the majority of words are related/the same to Bulgarian words. It's contradictory, and I support the creation of a Montenegrin Wikipedia, it's been years, we need to finalize our decision. I mean, I get it, but it isn't Wikipedia's fault that Serbia and Montenegro dissolved. Stop being so salty about it and let us discuss with good arguments involving linguistic truths, not some nationalist nonsense. Wheatley2 (talk) 02:33, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Wheatley2 Given that assessment page said, Montenegrin isn't really "a language", but rather a member orthography of the pluricentric language Serbo-Croatian, that's afaik the majority argument of langcom members which suggested rejection of this 5th request. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:47, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, okay. I did read more into it and as far as I am concerned, Montenegrin is practically Serbian. There was still no need for all the nationalist stuff from some editors in this discussion. After researching further, I would support the creation of Wikipedia in "Montenegrin", but that would just simply be making a second Serbian Wikipedia. Wheatley2 (talk) 17:38, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
References
- ↑ https://www.britannica.com/place/Kingdom-of-Serbs-Croats-and-Slovenes
- ↑ http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9F06E4DE1339E133A25755C1A9629C946395D6CF&legacy=true
- ↑ en:Socialist_Federal_Republic_of_Yugoslavia
- ↑ en:University of Montenegro
- ↑ https://www.rastko.rs/knjizevnost/umetnicka/gorski_vijenac.html
- ↑ en:Christmas Uprising
- ↑ en:The Ray of the Microcosm
- ↑ http://rs.n1info.com/a357573/Vesti/Vesti/Dacic-Srbi-u-Crnoj-Gori-da-ne-preispituju-njenu-drzavnost.html
- ↑ en:Monteniggers
- ↑ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huXNHKAMCT0
- ↑ en:Vlado Šćepanović
- ↑ en:Stepa Stepanović
- ↑ en:Stephen Držislav of Croatia
- ↑ http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9F02E2DA1439EF3ABC4C53DFB0668389639EDE&legacy=true
- ↑ en:Montenegrins