Talk:Bogoslav Šulek

Comments

Untitled

Excellent. Mir Harven 21:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Great piece for propaganda. Lie lie and lie some more. Interesting to think that Dalmatian writers called themselves Catholic Serbs but somehow spoke (then non-existent) Croatian. Curious. Are you sure he wasnt doing a bit of selective reading when looking for books in the recently created (post-Illyrian movement [which until the movement the name 'Illyrian' was exclusively used for Serbs!! and Dalmatian Catholic Serbs]) Croatian language. Or to think that Ljudevit Gaj himself stated that Croatian is Serbian with a name change to suit the political situation and newly-found national patriotism. And also Bosnian Cyrillic? I know you guys are trying to invent some Croatian/Bosnian Cyrillic script to cover up your tracks which lead to the conclusion that Serbian language and script was used in the respective countries - with Bosnian king Tvrtko (an etnic Serb) and Croatian monarchical line longer than that of Ancient Persia and India put together. And last but not least that Serbs speak Croatian - statement of the century - too bad Old Church Slavonic was just that - CHURCH slavonic and wasnt spoken by the general population. If you want to say something about Slavoserbian which was spoke by the wealthy and learned and the diaspora for about 200yrs in Vojvodina is pathetic. Apart from that I mean you are right on track. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.27.250.90 (talk) 01:00, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

No, Illyrian exclusively meant Croatian before (and even during!) the Illyrian movement, and was as such defined in plethora of dictionaries of the period. The term Illyrian has been over the course of history abundantly "abused" and loosely-applied, but as far as the Croatian writers are concerned - it has been used by Čakavian, Kajkavian and Štokavian Croatian writers, for very good historically-justified reasons. It never meant "Serb" dude, please don't spread inaccuracies and lies.

It's a fact that lots of Croatian writers used "Bosnian Cyrillic". "Western Cyrillic" or "Croatian Cyrillic" would be much better terms, as there is no evidence whatsoever that it originated in Bosnia, as the oldest extant writings of it are in fact from Herzegovina or Dalmatia [Moreover the term "Bosnian" might be confused by ignorants with this "Bosnian language" the Muslims codified in the 1990s). 19th century Slavists like Jagić equated all Cyrillic writings with some "Serbdom", but that view has been deprecated for a long time. There are no known Serbian Orthodox writings written in Western Cyrillic AFAIK, and the writings of Divković and other Franciscan monks operating under Bosna Argentina, as well as Dubrovnik prayer books and miscellanies, are hardly instances of some "Serb" literary heritage.

Serbs don't "speak Croatian", but hundreds of words coined by Šulek have entered the Serbian language whether you like it or not. Slavoserbian (as well as OCS, though I do not see connections here now that you mention it) was not spoken language of the vulgus - but it was the literary language up until 1868 when Karadžić's "reform" was officially accepted. How many Serbian vernacular books older then 200 years have you read? I don't think too many. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 03:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)