Talk:Ser-Drama-Lagadin-Nevrokop dialect

Extremely biased article showing only one viewpoint.

The article is dedicated to the so called Macedonian language which hadn`t existed till the late 40`s.Fact.Furthermore, the content is extremely biased and represents only a certain viewpoint.More than half of what are supposed to be specifics of the local dialects is in fact literary Bulgarian language.And the almost everything from the rest is much closer to Veliko Turnovo`s dialect(literary Bulgarian) than to literary Macedonian which was codified on the bases of several dialects from the central parts of Vardar Macedonia.--BulgarianPatriot (talk) 07:32, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

The dialect is transitional between the (other) dialects of the Macedonian language and the (other) dialects of the Bulgarian language. BalkanFever 08:01, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I made it clear in the article. --Laveol ^T 16:33, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Severe problems with the article

The article is not just biased, it is simply wrong, including the examples where half of them seem to be taken from Dojran or Maleshevo:

• the presence of mutation ja/e (typical only for Eastern Bulgarian) misrepresented as a/e
• use of consonant group -šč- - incorrect, it is sht (Friedman also has it), even there is example (again incorrect but this time the vowel) in the article - Кушта/Kušta which proves it is sht
• use ov vocalic r and l - completely incorrect, even Friedman (who is strongly pro-Macedonian) lists ръ (rə)/лъ (lə) here
• Retention of Proto-Slavic nasal vowels - again incorrect, this is a feature typical for several villages (even not all!!) in the Lagadina region (which should be taken out as a separate article as it is completely different from the Serres-Nevrokop dialect) and it is not a nasal vowel but combination (ən)
• Кушта/Kušta or "со рака" - completely incorrect, Friedman unequivocally says the reflex of yus and ъ is only ъ (ə), so it is къшта, с ръка

and so on and so on, and so on

Furthermore - the examples are practically identical to the ones quoted in Maleševo-Pirin dialect (they are actually correct for Maleshevo and partly correct for Pirin) so I suspect copy-paste from that article.

The "traditional" song also shows significant deviations from the actual vowels that exist in the dialect (Првиот instead of Първийъ, vocalic r {врвеја, Кршисер) - which does not exist the dialect, напијам instead of напија, etc. etc.)

• 1) I am putting the song on the talk page
• 2) I have added a table comparing the dialect with Standard Bulgarian and Standard Macedonian which also includes the previous salvageable examples
• 3) I am putting the map on the talk page (relationship to Macedonian unproven and dubious)

The Serres-Nevrokop dialect can be a dialect of Macedonian (or a transitional dialect) if:

• 1) It is close phonologically to or at least contains a couple of features common to Macedonian and different from Bulgarian - it does not
• 2) It is spoken by people who identify as Macedonians - where are they? The ones living in Pirin Macedonia identify themselves as Bulgarians and the sources I've provided explicitly prove wide-scale migration of the ones living in Greece to Bulgaria - where they again identify themselves as Bulgarians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VMORO (talk • contribs) 23:25, 14 July 2008

The location of the Ser-Drama-Lagadin-Nevrokop dialect among the others Macedonian dialects

Examples of the dialect

• Traditional song:

Четворица кумити

низ Кршисер врвеја.

Низ Кршисер врвеја,

право Гари влегоја.

Првиот беше, врвеше,

Стојанчо Паун кумита.

Други ми беше, врвеше,

Стефанов Мицо кумита.

Трети ми беше, врвеше,

Алексо Кирко кумита.

Четврти беше, врвеше,

Пејданчо Блажо, кумита.

Чукат, чукат на врата:

- Отвори млада невесто.

Отвори млада невесто,

невесто млада Стојанице.

Она си слезе од чардак

и си вратата отвори.

- Добро вечер, невесто!

- Дал бог добро, кумити!

Стојан си вели, говори:

- Невесто млада, Стојанице,

качи се горе в' одаја,

отвори долап мусандра.

Извади шише ракија,

тајфата да ја напијам!

Reversions

I would suggest to BalkanFever not to revert without discussing first - otherwise the next thing I will do is turn to an administrator. 12:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest you tone down the POV-pushing. Feel free to add the stuff calling it a Bulgarian dialect, but you completely raped the previous intro, which described it as a transitional dialect anyway. BalkanFever 12:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Falsified sources

According to the articles quoted in Slavic language (Greece), Trudgill explicitly subsumes all forms of Slavic in Greece except those of the Pomaks under Macedonian on his sociolinguistic criteria. This clearly includes the Serres-Drama dialects (although he would of course count the speakers accross the border as Bulgarian). Schmieger constructs an actual linguistic boundary on dialect grounds, a bit further west than Trudgill, but apparently not at Yat boundary to the west of this dialect; he includes only "the far east of Greek Macedonia [...] the region around Kavala and in the Rhodope Mountains, as well as the eastern part of Drama nomos" as Bulgarian. It seems clear that this does not cover Serres and Drama itself but means a different dialect area to the east of it. Quoting these two authors as saying that this dialect as a whole is solidly part of Bulgarian as opposed to Macedonian is blatant falsification.

Behaviour like this from disruptive tendentious editors like VMORO (talk · contribs) will not be tolerated. VMORO, you may not have noticed it, but we are no longer in 2005 here. Please have a look at WP:ARBMAC and consider yourself warned. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I changed it to cite them for Macedonian dialectogy, not Bulgarian, as you have explained the linguist's quotes. BalkanFever 00:53, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Trudgill and Schmieger clearly classify the dialects on the Bulgarian side of the border (which are included in this dialect) as Bulgarian (you admit that yourself) => Since the Nevrokop dialect (which is Bulgarian) is treated as part of the larger Serres-Nevrokop dialect, then the larger Serres-Nevrokop dialect is automatically treated as part both of the Macedonian and the Bulgarian language. Clear enough? And this notwithstanding the "far east of Greek Macedonia" as quoted by Schmieger which you claimed in the previous version of the article to be included in the Serres-Nevrokop dialect and which is portrayed to be included in the dialect on your map. So, please do not try to manipulate statements and claim territories when it suits you and disclaim them when it doesn't. Also, I would suggest that you read WP:CIV and WP:AGF and tone down the language a bit. Last, throwing threats around is really not a good idea. VMORO 00:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Who, me or Fut. Perf. ? BalkanFever 08:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I was referring to Fut. Perf.:-)) A degree of civility is necessary even if you don't like someone;-) VMORO 12:30, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I stand by my warning. If you want a more polite version of the same warning, let me know. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:38, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The Slavs in Greece

Die soeben angeführten Merkmale ... beweisen die enge Verwandtschaft der Slaven Griechenlands mit den Bulgaren und ihre nahe Beziehung zur Sprache der Slavenapostel.Kap. VI: Allgemeines und sprachliche Stellung der Slaven Griechenlands, pg.324.

Die Slaven in Griechenland von Max Vasmer Mit eine Karte ( Verlag der Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin 1941 ) ( Zentral Antiquariat der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik, Leipzig 1970 ) Jingby (talk) 08:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

In English: So brought special features ... prove the narrow connection of the Slavs from Greece with the Bulgarians and the language of the Saint Apostels! Jingby (talk) 08:51, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

"Comparison of the Serres-Nevrokop dialect with Standard Bulgarian and Standard Macedonian"

Where are the the examples taken from? I'm neither a philologist, nor a linguist but as a person who spends his winter holidays in the respective region, I'm pretty well aware of the local dialects.Some words correspond to what is written in the article but other don't.That's why I'd like to ask for the source of information for the words in the table.--BulgarianPatriot (talk) 21:28, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Can you quote a specific example and to which dialect do you refer exactly? The table regards phonological and (to a lesser extent) grammatical features and it is based mainly on Friedman and Stojkov (see the reference list) so I can vouchsafe 100% for the reflexes. The specific words are, however, only for reference. VMORO 00:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm referring to the presumable lack of "ъ" in Samokov's and Dupnitza's dialects and whether "ъ" is occasionally replaced by "о".We all know that "ъ" was a sound which existed in all the Moesian, Thracian and Macedonian dialects from Silistra to Ohrid and was irreplaceable part of the Cyrillic alphabet for approximately 1000 years.However, in the late 40's when was conducted the language reform in what is now Republic of Macedonia "ъ" was removed due to political reasons despite being an indivisible part of the pronunciation.Since then it's not being written but because the speech is impossible without it, the sound was replaced by "o" in some cases and in other it's still being pronounced without being written.But this changes didn't occur in Bulgaria and the sound was preserved in the literary language and in all dialects as well.Furthermore, I've been many times in this region and heard with my own ears that the locals pronounce it just like me(a person living 400km from Pirin, Rila and the Rhodopes.
It's neither "сон", not "сан", but "сън"."Сон" exists only outside the border with Macedonia whereas "сан" is completely different word and means rank, level.Sometimes it might be between "ъ" and "a" but the difference is extremely small and this isn't local specific but national.
As for the vocalic r, it's result of the language reform in Republic of Macedonia from the 40's and had never been inherent to the local dialects till then when was borrowed from Serbo-Croatian due to the lack of "ъ".Otherwise "r" can't be pronounced properly.But such a thing never happened in the territories which remained part from Bulgaria because the hard pronunciation of "r" was preserved and there was no need for introduction of "vocalic r".Everywhere from Silistra to Blagoevgrad it's "крЪв/ф, врЪх --BulgarianPatriot (talk) 10:01, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, if the schwa (what you call hard sign or er golyam) waswere used in the Macedonian alphabet, the words would be spelt кърв and върв, since that's the closest pronunciation to the vocalic r BalkanFever 10:09, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi again, thanks for your comment. For Dupnitsa and Samokov, I am basing myself solely on Stojkov - but he is not the only one mentioning the vocalic r there. When you talk about dialects and presence of features in them, you need to take into account the influence of the formal language and you need to differentiate between historical and present dialect. Most Bulgarian dialectology is based on research carried out in the late 19th century and the first half of the 20th century - i.e. before television, mass media, etc. etc. I have friends from Dupnitsa, too and they don't speak any different from me - because they speak more or less formal Bulgarian:-). However, their grandparents and great grandparents speak/spoke quite differently:-) There has been gradual process of coalescence of dialects towards the formal language in the past 50 to 100 years in all European languages whereby dialectal features are gradually replaced by features typical for the formal language. So if you hear someone say кръф in Dupnitsa or Samokov, this is not because it is typical for their dialect but because they watch Bulgarian television, read newspapers and books and have received formal Bulgarian education where кръф is pronounced and read with a schwa and not with a vocalic r. As for the Macedonian dialects, I also tend to disagree: in the central Macedonian dialects, on which Standard Macedonian is based, the schwa is practically missing. And emphatic NO to the allegation made by BalkanFever, the hard sign was NEVER used in the Macedonian alphabet since 1945 when it was created. And before that, most "Macedonians" wrote in Formal Bulgarian, with the Bulgarian alphabet where ъ does and has always existed. VMORO 12:28, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Not to be arrogant, but I would bet that I know more about the Macedonian alphabet than you think you do. What "allegation" did I make? Maybe you got confused; it's a hypothetical situation. How about I rephrase it: If the schwa were used in the Macedonian alphabet, the words would have been written.... You don't need to scream at me just because you don't understand English. BalkanFever 12:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

@VMORO I've never denied the influence of Veliko Turnovo's dialect on the Thracian and the Macedonian dialects.Since it's the only official dialect obviously it gradually changes the local dialects as well BUT the old people still speak as they used to when were young.Taking into consideration that they pronounce everything in the way it's described in the article except of "ъ" and "vocalic r", I think that they some of the listed specifics were never fact.You can hear the locals saying "них" or "тех" which are close but aren't part neither from literary Macedonian, nor from literary Bulgarian.And I give this just as an example.If you go to Bansko and stay in a private house instead of in a hotel you'll notice that there are many archaic words(including a lot of Turcisms) and they sometimes put the stress(ударението-I'm not sure about the word in English) differently in comparison with the Northerners, usually pronounce "е" instead of "я" but no one uses vocalic r and "ъ" can be clearly heard.It's not necessary to be a professor to realize that most of these old people were poor and couldn't afford attending school, that's why they weren't influenced by the educating system and they speak like their grandparents at the end of of 19th century.There is no logic Turnovo's dialect to change only the pronunciation of "r" from soft to hard, to "introduce ъ" and to preserve all other specifics. --BulgarianPatriot (talk) 13:44, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

References

The ref. list looks bloated, so someone needs to group the same citations by adding a "ref name" tag. It sure as hell isn't going to be me, though. Köbra | Könverse 09:03, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

MAP and other POV irredentist pushing

This is indeed the last time I ask you politely to remove and correct the map (not only from this page but from all pages) and to stop pushing disguised POV by "viewed from Macedonian perspective" and the like. Let me remind you because you seem to forget:

1) Before WW2, all Slavic dialects in Macedonia were generally classified as Bulgarian.

2) In the cold-war period (mostly through Friedman's work), all Slavic dialects in Macedonia were generally classified as Macedonian - although this did not apply to the Soviet Union, for example.

3) Now, as profusely referenced, the Slavic dialects in Pirin Macedonia are generally classified as Bulgarian whereas the Slavic dialects in RoM and most of Greek Macedonia are classified as Macedonian. Do not try to push Friedman as an opposite example because he has been working on the topic since the late sixties, however, his cold war theses have fallen into disregard these days - as seen in the references. And I can quote you French Larousse which called Macedonian a dialect of Bulgarian in 2005.

4) Bulgaria continues to claim all Slavic dialects in Macedonia as Bulgarian. Stop misrepresenting the Bulgarian position as you did in the intro of this article.

5) RoM continues to claim all Slavic dialects in Macedonia as Macedonian

Considering the above, we will either follow NPOV and will regard the dialects in Pirin Macedonia as Bulgarian and in RoM and most of Greek Macedonia as Macedonian, which means:

1) The map will be corrected to exclude Pirin Macedonia

2) The Serres-Nevrokop and Maleshevo-Pirin articles will be split into the respective Bulgarian and Macedonian dialects.

3) There will be information about the respective countries' claims but without POV pushing.

OR We can continue pushing POV but this time it will not be only who will be pushing it, it will also be me. If you, based on Macedonian claims and Friedman's cold-war theses can publish maps and call internationally recognized Bulgarian dialects disputed, then I, based on Bulgarian claims, pre-WW2 conceptions and other information like Larousse's for example, can do the same. This will mean:

1) A corresponding map of Bulgarian dialects will be created to include all dialects in RoM and Greek Macedonia.

2) This map will be placed in all articles regarding Slavic dialects in Macedonia.

3) All these articles will be re-worked to reflect Bulgarian claims.

4) The template Bulgarian dialects will be added under all of these articles.

I prefer compromise (because it means less work for me) but I can live with the other option, as well. Irredentism may seem like a fun game to play but it is actually very dangerous and the rocks you throw at others most often hit your own head. Contact me on my talk page if you need more info. I am travelling until Thursday so I probably won't reply until then but I will start re-working all articles on Friday. VMORO 20:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Table is original research?

I see no grounds for removing the table or the text above it. The only statement that is remotely original research is the claim that the dialect has all the main features of Bulgarian, which perhaps should be removed, but how is a referenced comparison between different dialects original research or synthesis? Kostja (talk) 15:01, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Would you care to explain why a comparison with the Dupnitsa/Samokov dialect is necessary? Lunch for Two (talk) 15:04, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

This thing needs to be reworked. What we of course want to have in the article is a treatment of these structural features. Of course it makes sense to have a selection of features roughly like this one, because as far as I can see, most of them do have some significance in the dialect geography of the two languages. Each feature could be treated in terms like: "this dialect is situated south-east of the isogloss of feature so-and-so, which runs from A to B", or "it is separated from the neighbouring dialect area XYZ by feature so-and-so, which it also shares with C", and so on. If at the end of the day such a section will contain more statements where this dialect coincides with standard Bulgarian than with Standard Macedonian, so be it (I recognise this is most likely the case); the section just mustn't be structured as if it were designed for pushing that comparison to prominence, because that's not what good dialectology is about. The data itself seems to be reliable enough. By the way, where is Dupnitsa/Samokov? The outside reader will have no idea. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:21, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

I said that the intro might be original research, but you still haven't explained how this is a synthesis. A table is the easiest way to compare the isogloses and of course a comparison should be made with the two standard languages, as the dialect is claimed by both. I don't think it's correct to claim that the table was designed to push the view that the dialect is closer to standard Bulgarian; I think it was adapted from a similar table in the Maleševo-Pirin dialect article which is somewhere between the two standard languages, so it's not the fault of the table that in this dialect it shows a different result.

The Samokov and Dupnitsa dialects occur in western Bulgaria and are indisputably Bulgarian. I would say their presence is justified as exactly the kind of orientation you suggested was needed in the article. Kostja (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ser-Drama-Lagadin-Nevrokop dialect. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110612005854/http://www.kroraina.com/knigi/dj/dj_3a.htm to http://www.kroraina.com/knigi/dj/dj_3a.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:48, 1 March 2016 (UTC)