User talk:AWN2/sandbox

Italic Script

It seems when Macedonian is written in italics it is different to both the printed script and the handwritten script. It's also different from the "Serb/Mac" examples in Cyrillic alphabet#Letter-forms and typography. I'm looking at a book in Macedonian right now and the distinct (lowercase italic) letters are:

Б (Be) - looks like б. It is standard Cyrillic as opposed to Serb/Mac (which looks a bit like a delta)

Д (De) - looks like д. It is standard Cyrillic as opposed to Macedonian handwritten (which looks like a "g")

Т (Te) - looks like Macedonian handwritten as opposed to standard Cyrillic (which looks like "m")

П (Pe) - looks like Macedonian handwritten as opposed to standard Cyrillic (which looks like "n")

Г (Ge) - looks like a mix between standard Cyrillic and "Serb/Mac" (like a backwards "s" with a line above)

I've seen this in most Macedonian books. However I've seen another book with completely different letters when in italics. Does anyone know if there is a (predominantly) consistent way to write Macedonian characters in italics? I'm guessing three different versions of the same alphabet will cause confusion to a non-native speaker. Alex 202.10.89.28 (talk) 10:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Updates to article

User Laveol (talk · contribs) has raised some issues in the article, and I have attempted to address them below:

• Who in Bulgaria claims that "Macedonian is a dialect of Bulgarian"?

I think the current wording is OK, given that linguists who claim that "Macedonian is a dialect of Bulgarian" are likely to be a subset of Bulgarian nationalists, rather than vice-versa or a separate group. (That is, Bulgarian nationalists who claim that "Macedonian is a dialect of Bulgarian" are not a subset of Bulgarian linguists, and the Bulgarians who claim that "Macedonian is a dialect of Bulgarian" are not two separate groups of nationalists and linguists. Those Bulgarians who claim that "Macedonian is a dialect of Bulgarian" are likely to be nationalists, and some may also be linguists!) I say this because the linguistic/scientific concensus seems to be variously that

• literary Macedonian and literary Bulgarian are two dialects of the same South Slavic language system/dialectal continuum (which includes Slovenian, Serbo-Croatian, Macedonian and Bulgarian); or

• literary Macedonian and literary Bulgarian are two languages of the same East South Slavic diasystem.

Other than nationalistic writings, I have seen no evidence to support the notion that "Macedonian is a dialect of Bulgarian", so I think the wording that "some Bulgarian nationalists (claim)... that the Macedonian language is a dialect of Bulgarian" is the most appropriate.

As an aside, the best quote I can find on the whole Macedonian/Bulgarian debate is: "The decision as to whether a given transitional South Slavic dialect belongs to one or another language is not a linguistic one but a sociopolitical one." ("The Sociolinguistics of Literary Macedonian", International Journal of the Sociology of Language, Victor A Friedman, p36, 1985))

• Do most linguists claim that Macedonian and Bulgarian are part of the same diasystem?

It is difficult to find non-Macedonian, non-Bulgarian sources on whether Macedonian is a language or a dialect or part of a diasystem. From my readings, the best I can deduce is that "literary Macedonian" (i.e. the Slavic dialects of the Veles-Prilep region) and "literary Bulgarian" (i.e. the Slavic Thraco-Moesian dialect^{"Macedonian: Codification and Lexicon", Victor A Friedman, in "Language Reform History and Future", Vol 4, edited by István Fodor and Claude Hagège, 1989, p302.} of north-eastern Bulgaria) are two dialects along the South Slavic dialectal continuum. Both Friedman (who writes from a Macedonian view) and Henniger (who writes from a Bulgarian view) seem to agree on this. Henniger’s view is that Macedonian "can be called a Bulgarian dialect, as structurally it is most similar to Bulgarian", but "but since it now has the status of a literary language most other scholars accept its independent existence" ("Macedonian and Bulgarian", J Henniger, in the Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (1994), vol.1, p.429, edited by R.E.Asher and J.M.Y.Simpson (Oxford, New York, Seoul and Tokyo: Pergamon Press) [1]). Macedonian therefore seems to be widely considered a language (see Macedonian language) separate to (although closely related to) Bulgarian.

Another good independent opinion on Macedonian/Bulgarian comes from UCLA (my underlines are added): "Macedonian is a Slavic language belonging to a group of South Slavic languages that includes Old Church Slavonic (a liturgical language), Slovene, Serbian/Croatian, and Bulgarian. The modern South Slavic languages form a continuum of a series of mutually intelligible dialects. The two end points, Slovene and Bulgarian, are not mutually intelligible, but the transition between Serbian/Croatian and Macedonian, and Bulgarian and Macedonian is gradual and mutual intelligibility is high. It is most closely related to Bulgarian. Some consider Macedonian a dialect of Bulgarian, but this is a highly charged issue hotly disputed by others. For example, Henniger (1992) discusses the matter from a Bulgarian point of view; Friedman (1987) from a Macedonian perspective." UCLA International Institute, Centre for World Languages, Macedonian

The wording should perhaps therefore be that "most linguists consider Macedonian a separate language".

Commentary only: With regard to Henniger's comment that "Macedonian can be called a Bulgarian dialect", it seems to be in the context of a larger Bulgarian linguistic territory, where Velesian, Skopjan, Sofian, etc are all dialects in the Bulgarian linguistic system. It is my opinion that Henniger uses the term "Bulgarian" to denote both the Bulgarian literary language and in place of "Bulgarian linguist territory" (sic, his term, i.e. the linguistic grouping which includes both Standard Macedonian and Standard Bulgarian). "Bulgarian linguistic territory" would include all the Slavic dialects from western Republic of Macedonia to eastern Bulgaria (Henniger states that "Bulgarian linguist (sic) territory is divided into the East Bulgarian and the West Bulgarian dialects", which I assume means Bulgarian and Macedonian). A better term for "Bulgarian linguistic territory" may be "East South Slavic" (my invention -- which differentiates Macedonian and Bulgarian from the western South Slavic dialects (Serbian dialects, Croatian dialects) and from Slovenian).

• When did Macedonians begin to see their dialects as a language?

It seems that Macedonians began to see their dialects as separate to Bulgarian in the mid- to late-nineteenth century (^{"The Modern Macedonian Language and its Relation to Modern Macedonian Identity", Victor A Friedman, in "The Macedonian Question", East European Monographs, Victor Roudometof (ed.) (2000), p182-184}). A number of works were published in the dialects of what is now the Republic of Macedonia, although the writers called their language Bulgarian (^{"The Modern Macedonian Language and its Relation to Modern Macedonian Identity", Victor A Friedman, in "The Macedonian Question", East European Monographs, Victor Roudometof (ed.) (2000), p177}). Friedman (^{"Macedonian: Codification and Lexicon", Victor A Friedman, in "Language Reform History and Future", Vol 4, edited by István Fodor and Claude Hagège, 1989, p303.}) considers the first definitive statement of Macedonian linguistic (and nationalistic) separatism to be Gjorgi Pulkevski's Slavo-Macedonian/Albanian/Turkish Dictionary of 1875. Macedonian sentiments were re-affirmed in Krste Misirkov's 1903 book "On Macedonian Matters", where Misirkov argued for an independent Macedonian state, and the development of a Macedonian literary language based on the Prilep-Bitola dialect group.

However, this does not translate to a development of a Macedonian alphabet, so I think the paragraph in question should be reworded as follows:

Old Version

New Version

The decline of the Ottoman Empire from the mid-19th century coincided with Slavic resistance to the use of Greek in Orthodox churches and schools"The first philological conference of the Macedonian alphabet and Macedonian literary language: Its precedents and consequences", Victor A. Friedman (1993), pages 162, and a resistance amongst some Macedonians to the introduction of standard Bulgarian in Vardar Macedonia"The first philological conference of the Macedonian alphabet and Macedonian literary language: Its precedents and consequences", Victor A. Friedman (1993), pages 162-3. As vernacular Macedonian was written more often, and increasingly began to be viewed by many Macedonians as a language rather than a dialect, the need for a standard Macedonian alphabet increased, especially with regard to phonemes which could not be represented by using the Serbian or Bulgarian alphabets. At the time, transcriptions of Macedonian used the Cyrillic alphabet, with adaptations drawing from Old Church Slavonic, Serbian and Bulgarian, depending on the preference of the writer.

The decline of the Ottoman Empire from the mid-19th century coincided with Slavic resistance to the use of Greek in Orthodox churches and schools"The first philological conference of the Macedonian alphabet and Macedonian literary language: Its precedents and consequences", Victor A. Friedman (1993), pages 162, and a resistance amongst many Macedonians to the introduction of standard Bulgarian in Vardar Macedonia"The first philological conference of the Macedonian alphabet and Macedonian literary language: Its precedents and consequences", Victor A. Friedman (1993), pages 162-3. The latter half of the 19th century saw increasing literacy and political activity amongst speakers of Macedonian dialects, and an increasing number of documents were written in the dialects. At the time, transcriptions of Macedonian used the Cyrillic alphabet, with adaptations drawing from Old Church Slavonic, Serbian and Bulgarian, depending on the preference of the writer.

• Did Serbian and/or Bulgarian authorities "ban" the use of Macedonian?

Macedonian was not banned per se, but was a "proscribed language", and could only be used in the context of being a dialect of Serbian/Bulgarian. References have been added in the article.

Very nice AWN. Some of this info could also go in Macedonian language naming dispute. BalkanFever 07:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd really like to comment on this one, but I really don't have the time now as I'm in a big discussion (a rough one I have to say) and I can do only simple annon reverts on other articles for the moment. When I get this figured out, I'll look into the article. Cheers. --Laveol ^T 08:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I read it and have only one comment which is on the controversy section. I'm not sure how to re-word it right now. The fact is that not only Bulgarian nationalists, but the government and the people claim there's no such animal like we say. --Laveol ^T 01:04, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey AWN2, I'm sorry for the delay, I'm not that active lately. I have read the article before and I sure liked it. Well, not much has changed now, it's still well balanced, and even improved (especially with the refs about the proscription). I don't really have other comments, but I'll make some suggestions if something comes to my mind. And I won't comment on Laveol's comment, since I am an animal ;) I'm here if you need any help on the matter (it's my mother tongue you know :D). --iNkubusse^? 00:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Laveol, thanks for looking over the article. With regard to your comments, perhaps we can look at this with reverse logic -- which Bulgarians do not consider Macedonian to be a dialect of Bulgarian? This may help us out in the wording... Cheers, AWN AWN2 (talk) 06:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Laveol, what about rewording the article with "There is much controversy and acrimony between some Bulgarian nationalists and Macedonians over the issues of separate Macedonian ethnicity and language, with many Bulgarians claiming that ethnic Macedonians are in fact ethnic Bulgarians, and that the Macedonian language is a dialect of Bulgarian"? (Changes underlined) Cheers, AWN2 (talk) 08:41, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

For me at least, that looks pretty good. It represents the view, without "justifying" it (if you know what I mean). BalkanFever 11:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

It still misses the fact that not many, but most (if not even all) Bulgarians consider Macedonian to be a dialect (including linguists and on official level). --Laveol ^T 11:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

That still doesn't make them correct. We don't want this going into undue weight. BalkanFever 12:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

No, no, I meant that it's not many, but most, if not all, Bulgarians. --Laveol ^T 12:23, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I don't see much of a difference between many and most, but that's just me. I don't think we should generalise into "all", because I've met some, but it probably is above 99%. BalkanFever 12:57, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Cool, so if we all agree that it's "most" Bulgarians who believe Macedonian is a dialect of Bulgarian, I will run with that, do a final check and then put up the article some time in the next few days :-) Ideally, if we could source something about what proportion and who in Bulgaria think Macedonian is a dialect, that would be great, but I think this is the best we can do for now! I'll let you know when the article "goes live". Thanks for your help Alex and Laveol -- I really could not have done this without you guys! Cheers, AWN2 (talk) 04:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I will make the changes as discussed above, do a final check, and then put the article up! ;-) Cheers, AWN2 AWN2 (talk) 02:17, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll be watching ;-D. BalkanFever 02:38, 22 March 2008 (UTC)