Proposed BCMS/SC profile

Discuss the LLORG's and HTLAL forum's past and its future here.
Daniel N.
Green Belt
Posts: 357
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 12:44 pm
Languages: Croatian (N), English (C1), German (beginner)
x 733
Contact:

Re: Proposed BCMS/SC profile

Postby Daniel N. » Tue Apr 12, 2016 1:03 pm

Longinus wrote:The majority of the bookstore links are dead. I haven't tried the other links yet. I have also ordered books from:

http://ri-exlibris.hr/

Algoritam and Profil have merged, the link is algoritam.hr
0 x
Check Easy Croatian (very useful for Bosnian, Montenegrin and Serbian as well)

Daniel N.
Green Belt
Posts: 357
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 12:44 pm
Languages: Croatian (N), English (C1), German (beginner)
x 733
Contact:

Re: Proposed BCMS/SC profile

Postby Daniel N. » Wed Apr 13, 2016 8:05 am

After re-reading this few times, I'm getting convinced that, unfortunately, this text contains a number of partially inaccurate and misleading statements, and even worse (in my view), oversimplifications of the actual situation.

Chung wrote:The region’s dialectal variation is most apparent among Croats but is also present to a certain degree among Bosniaks, Montenegrins and Serbs.

Actually, it's most apparent in regions that were not part of the Ottoman empire, including a good part of today's Croatia and entire Slovenia. Any references to today's nations (Serbs, Croats etc) and dialects are at best misleading. The main difference between a Serb and a Croat living next by is tradition, and religion especially.

Chung wrote:Although some language planners and more nationally-minded folk in Croatia would like to elevate the profile and place of Kajkavski or Čakavski dialects as a way of distinguishing standard Croatian from the other standards, relatively few items from Čakavski or Kajkavski vocabulary and virtually none from their respective phonology or morphology have become codified or entrenched in modern standard Croatian.

This again oversimplifies the actual situation:
  • there are people in Croatia who would like to have more varieties of Standard Croatian (like Serbian has)
  • there are people in Croatia who would like to have three standard languages in Croatia
  • there are people in Croatia who would like to have more features of spoken language in the standard language
  • there are people in Croatia who strongly oppose all these proposals, since they think it will divide Croatia into several mini-nations
Some of them are nationally-minded (that is, nationalist), some are not. There are polemic books and round tables in packed rooms. A group of people recently succeeded in getting an ISO standard code for Kajkavian standard language (as a historic language, though).
Chung wrote:Thus the forms *trijebati or *trjebati do not exist.

Unfortunately, this is also not correct. Such forms are found in old Dubrovnik/Ragusan literature, for example by Marin Držić, and that corresponds to the actual speech (at that times) quite well. Just Google for "Ma se trijeba".
Chung wrote:When one notes the lexicons used by Bosnians, Croats, Montenegrins and Serbs one can also notice that Bosnians and Croats tend to prefer certain usages over ones used in Montenegro and Serbia, while on the other hand Bosnians, Montenegrin and Serbs prefer certain usages over those used in Croatia. It can be bewildering to a foreigner who tries to learn the nonstandard speech of natives.

This is partially true, but again, this is not really the issue. As some people noted, non-standard forms are everywhere: in books, in movies, and quite important - in pop songs. It's impossible to understand a great deal of Croatian music without at least some knowledge of non-standard forms.

At this brings us to this question: what is a language, anyway? What do you want to learn? Do you want to learn what people really use in speech, what is really found in fiction books and songs, or what is used to write laws and most stuff in newspapers, and how TV hosts speak?

I know that some people consider absurd having so much diversity in such a small region, but that's how things are.

In addition to the native Slavonic vocabulary, BCMS/SC has borrowed many words from other languages, including Czech, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian and Turkish. Latin and Old Church Slavonic loanwords are also present because of the influence of Roman Catholicism and Orthodox Christianity respectively. English loanwords are more prevalent nowadays than in older varieties of BCMS/SC because of the influence of American pop culture, the internet and sports.

This is again an oversimplification, as the oldest layer of borrowings came from the Romance speech Slavs encountered when settling (e.g. dupin, pogača) and they cannot be called "Italian". Also, there are very few Latin loanwords due to Catholic Church influence, one I can think of is misa mass that replaced older loan (probably from Gothic?) maša/meša.

Additionally, there are words that are Slavic, but they are confined to South Slavic, or even to just a part of it, e.g. ručak lunch, confined to Štokavian, and Macedonian/Bulgarian area (and now used everywhere due to influence of standard languages.)

However when loanwords appear in any of the standards, there is a tendency for Croatian prescriptions to be more tolerant toward loanwords or constructions of Latin, Hungarian, Germanic, Greek or Western Slavonic origin, while Bosnian ones are most likely to incorporate elements of Arabic, Iranic or Turkish origin. Montenegrin and Serbian lexicons are more likely to contain words or expressions that entered as borrowings from Greek, Old Church Slavonic, Russian and Turkish.

This is again an oversimplification, and a bit contradictory: Croatian favors Greek, but also Serbian favors Greek. It would be very hard to find a loan from Hungarian that's accepted in Croatia but not in Serbia (and easy to find one other way round, e.g. šargarepa carrot). It would be very hard to find a word in Bosnian that came directly from Iranic. They all came from Turkish, and witnessed influences of Turkish phonology, and the ultimate origin of a word is irrelevant anyway when borrowing.

EDIT: I will propose a completely new paragraph on loans, based on the Brozović & Ivić summary of Serbian/Croatian from 1988, likely a best short description written ever. http://documents.tips/documents/dalibor ... rpski.html

This also brings me to your comparisons on the old HTLAL site. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find time to examine all of them in detail, but they are carefully made. However, there are some details I would like to comment upon.

The problem is: what are we comparing? Standard languages? Forms used most often? Forms actually used? Forms used in non-fiction books and newspapers? Actual diversity?

To illustrate the problem, let's take the phrase zračna luka which is airport in Standard Croatian, and zrakoplov airplane. These words almost nobody uses in speech, and you will very rarely find this word in original fiction (some translators are fans of Standard Croatian, writers are less), in casual writing, and much more important - when talking to people from Croatia, you will always hear words aerodrom and avion (some people will stress it as avion, others as avion - we skip that detail for now, but that's also not trivial). These are the same words used in Bosnia and Serbia.

So, is this a real difference? How do you describe it?

Another problem: you look for a word for tomato in a Croatian dictionary, you'll see rajčica. But again, hardly anyone uses that word in speech. Some people use paradajz (either as paradajz or paradajz) - the same word as in Bosnia and Serbia - while others use pom (or a variant pomidor / pomidor). Is this a difference?

Which leads to your description of špek bacon. Is this a real difference? For someone going to Croatia, visiting Zagreb, deciding to have a pizza, this the word that will appear on the menu, describing various toppings. Most people in Croatia (but not an overwhelming majority!) use špek; slanina is, of course, also used (e.g. you will hear it in Split), and it's the same word as in Bosnia and Serbia. But an average Croat can say: isn't real Croatian not what is prescribed, but how most Croatians actually speak? If it isn't so, is then the real Croatian zračna luka.

These are no trivial questions, they have been debated in Croatia for 150 years.

What about suh vs. suv dry? The first is standard in Croatian and Bosnian, the second is standard in Serbian, but you will often hear (and see written) suv in both Slavonia and Dalmatia - used by Croats.

Approach to take a word pair, and decide is it a true Croatian-Serbian difference is hopeless. The only way would be to draw a map for each word. It's best to say that some pairs (and triplets) map roughly to Croatian-Serbian differences, and some do not.

Also, your comparisons contain some errors. For instance:

sjedalo vs sjedište = they are really not synonyms. The word sjedište also means "seat of the government", "seat of a bishop" while sjedalo is only a seat in a car, bus or train.

navijati ~ naviti = they both mean wind up, but only navijati means support, cheer.

točno vs tačno = this is not a spelling difference. The word točno is a loan from Russian (also: točka), while tačno is an adaptation, what you would expect if there were a native form (as ъ > o in Russian, but ъ > a in most of Štokavian and Čakavian).

kat vs sprat = sprat is also heard in Croatia. The word kat is a loan from Turkish, one instance where Croatian uses Turkish loans more (another is sat vs. čas).

kupaonica vs kupatilo = The second word is also used in parts of Croatia; besides, there's the third form kupaona

režije vs troškovi = The word režije is actually colloquial.

deterdžent vs deterdžent = the actual issue is that Standard Croatian is less accepting forms that don't conform to abstract rules (e.g. stress cannot be on the last syllable). Those Croatians that have that rule in their speech really use deterdžent, while others (likely a majority) use deterdžent.

However, the issue of using non-standard accent places is also debated in Serbia.

dođem k tebi vs dođem kod tebe = the first form is actually very rare; people in Croatian will use either dođem tebi or dođem kod tebe, but the second form is regarded as non-standard.

Trebam odmor. vs Treba mi odmor. = both are used in Croatia; many people in Serbia perceive the first form as strange

Trebao sam ispeći tortu. vs Trebalo je da ispečem tortu. = it's more complicated than it seems. The first form is unacceptable in Standard Serbian, but it's used in casual speech; both are now Standard in Croatian, but traditionalists insist on the second (impersonal) form. So it's not that "language planners" always want to make a difference against Serbian. They mostly think Croatian is already a separate language, but also that language change is decay, and more forms used in real life a danger to national unity.

Dobra večer vs Dobro veče!

For one reason or another, večer in standard Croatian is feminine despite appearing to be masculine by ending in a consonant

It's not so simple. The older form is večer, and that word lost -r in many Štokavian dialects, and became re-interpreted as a neuter, but only in the nominative and accusative case! When it gets e.g. a dative ending, it switches gender in Standard Serbian back to the original feminine. To verify: http://www.vokabular.org/forum/index.php?topic=1260.0

kuhati vs kuvati = h was mostly lost in Štokavian, and then the resulting -ua- changed to -uva-. But of course, there are many people in Croatia that say kuvati, a one-hour drive from Zagreb. The majority uses kuhati.

I have more remarks, but this post is already getting long. It maybe seems that I have objections to almost everything, but the devil lies in details.
3 x
Check Easy Croatian (very useful for Bosnian, Montenegrin and Serbian as well)

User avatar
Chung
Blue Belt
Posts: 529
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 9:39 pm
Languages: SPEAKS: English*, French
STUDIES: Hungarian, Italian, Ukrainian
OTHER: Czech, German, Polish, Slovak
STUDIED: Azeri, BCMS/SC, Estonian, Finnish, Korean, Latin, Northern Saami, Russian, Slovenian, Turkish
DABBLED: Bashkir, Chuvash, Crimean Tatar, Inari Saami, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Latvian, Lithuanian, Meadow Mari, Mongolian, Romanian, Tatar, Turkmen, Tuvan, Uzbek
x 2309

Re: Proposed BCMS/SC profile

Postby Chung » Wed Apr 13, 2016 9:28 pm

Hvala puno svima na komentarima!

I will update links (that's rather embarrassing) and add comments about Hippocrene's "Beginners' Croatian" and "Beginners' Serbian" (as well as "Spoken World Croatian") since I did use them and overall came to like them, in addition to tidying up the text.

Daniel N:

I'm impressed by your response ranging from the recommendations of movies to the breakdown of the linguistic bits. Obviously I'll need some time to work them into the profile but it may be that I'll end up dropping some points / examples. I definitely do not dispute the accuracy or currency of your observations but I'm not sure if it's that helpful to a propsective learner (the intended audience of these types of profiles) to see that many examples with the accompanying remarks/usage notes. Of course, I would keep at least a few examples with the fuller explanations just to give a sense of what goes on behind the scenes, and it does make for interesting trivia to anyone who's even half serious about learning BCMS/SC.

In a subsequent message (or PM?) we'll go over your points about the comparisons that I put into my old log. The background for that comparative exercise stemmed from finding out that Hippocrene's new "Beginners' Croatian" and "Beginners' Serbian" courses were done by the same authors and after allowing for some locational differences (the Croatian course is set in Croatia while the Serbian one is set in Serbia and Montenegro) they had very high overlap with each other right from the dialogues' storylines (including the speakers' lines) to the sequence of grammar and word stock taught. Thus I could easily pick out a lot of the differences between the courses' dialogues (some of them are arguably stylistic as in using s(j)edalo for s(j)edište for a seat on an airplane while others are "classic" differences such as tvrtka vs. preduzeće), and analyze them using Anić et al.'s and Matica Srpska's dictionaries, notes from my textbooks, and forum posts by Croats and Serbs on usage or word choice. Despite your apparent criticism or nitpicking of my original observations, I think that we actually agree. Much of what is presented as good "Serbian" is fine in "Croatian" (especially outside formal contexts despite language planners' ideas) and vice-versa. Indeed, I learned a lot just by looking things up in Anić et al.'s dictionary. Many of the differences between "Beginners' Serbian" and "Beginners' Croatian" aren't quite substantive to begin with (of the top of my head, things like muzika and desiti se surprised me a bit since I had learned that those were Serbian counterparts to glazba and dogoditi se. A simple reading of the corresponding dialogues in "Beginners' Croatian" and "Beginners' Serbian" would have made me to keep concluding the same but for the fact that I dug a little deeper in HJP). Because these textbooks used are meant for English-speaking beginners, what's used is standard language (e.g. the protagonists in "Beginners' Croatian" refer to the zračna luka in the 1st chapter but those in "Beginners' Serbian" refer to the aerodrom). I knew though that avion and aerodrom are used by some Croats anyway, if my ears weren't lying when I was last in Zagreb about 10 years ago and overhearing my friends and others on the bus.

I agree fully that simplistic two-column lists of "Croatian" and "Serbian" words/phrases or even Brodnjak's dictionary make you wonder about their usefulness. At minimum they could stand to use some usage notes - much like what you and I have done when confronted with a pair or doublet. Your suggestion to map a word or doublet's (or triplet's?) frequency is the most sensible approach to me, but then apart from the expense or work needed to accomplish it, it'd ruin the world-view of those who insist that suh, dogoditi se, kupaonica are neat and accurate markers of someone's "Croatianess" while suv, desiti se and kupatilo are similar markers of someone's "Serbianess"
3 x

Daniel N.
Green Belt
Posts: 357
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 12:44 pm
Languages: Croatian (N), English (C1), German (beginner)
x 733
Contact:

Re: Proposed BCMS/SC profile

Postby Daniel N. » Fri Apr 15, 2016 8:32 am

I would like to suggest few modifications/rephrasings to this profile, with a more consolidated information. My modifications follow each paragraph, written in green, and explanations are after a modification, in black.

Bosnian (bosanski/босански), Croatian (hrvatski), Montenegrin (crnogorski/црногорски) and Serbian (srpski/српски) are standard languages derived from a sub-dialect of Neo-Štokavski previously spoken natively in far southern Croatia, southeastern Bosnia and Herzegovina, northern Montenegro and southwestern Serbia.

... used in modern Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro and Serbia, all largely derived from a single dialect.

(Dialects and their geo position is a stuff for later)

However the current nomenclature reflects an explicit link between language and national identity held by language planners in Bosnia, Croatia, Montenegro and Serbia regardless of the standard languages' common derivation from a particular sub-dialect in the recent past
.
It's not just "language planners", they are legally considered different languages, but I don't know how to rephrase this.

For this profile, I will use the label "BCMS/SC" acknowledging the nomenclature used in the recent past and that some potentially useful learning material were published before the discarding of the term "Serbo-Croatian" by the successor states of communist Yugoslavia.

I'd leave out "communist" since it's irrelevant in this context.

The intra-relationship of BCMS/SC also reflects political decisions and the history of the region's ethnic relations. The differences between them are quite subtle and do not often hinder understanding or can at times even be imperceptible to native speakers.

This is contradictory to what is said later, rather I'd say: and very rarely

Moreover, the differences in linguistic features do not match the geographical divisions in the area because of natural migration and forced eviction of people throughout the history of the Balkans.

This is completely misleading. It's way better to say:

Differences in linguistic features don't match differences in national (or 'ethnic') self-identification of the speakers, and neither matches political borders.

Why is it so is an extremely complex issue that cannot be explained briefly.

The similarity between Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin and Serbian is much higher than that between various Chinese “dialects” or between Norwegian and Swedish. In this way, it is possible to rely on only one standard language (from Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin or Serbian) and be able to communicate effectively and seamlessly with all educated natives of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro, and Serbia. In cases where speakers would feel that their words would be unclear, they would use a term which is considered to be better understood.

I'd leave this out since it's obvious from what is said before and later.

Varieties/dialects

A national standard of BCMS/SC is taught in all schools and as noted above bear status as official languages in those former Yugoslavian republics. Regardless of the arguments made in emphasizing the distinctiveness of each “letter” in BCMS/SC or suggesting mutual unintelligibility, one can almost always rely on knowledge of whatever standard language he or she has learned when communicating with Bosnians, Croats, Montenegrins or Serbs. However recall that BCMS/SC represents standard languages that derive from a particular sub-dialect (East Herzegovinian Neo-Štokavian) that is actually not native to many people from the former Yugoslavia. The region’s dialectal variation is most apparent among Croats but is also present to a certain degree among Bosniaks, Montenegrins and Serbs.

I'd completely rephrase this:

At the moment, there are 5 or 6 BCMS standards. They really don't correspond to countries, but are understood as belonging to ethnic groups, e.g. Croats living in Serbia will have an opportunity to send their children to a school where classes are given in Standard Croatian, Serbs in Croatia will have textbooks in one variant of Standard Serbian, three languages (Croatian, Bosnian, and Serbian its "Ijekavian" variant) are official in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and so on. Since Croats dominate Croatia, Standard Croatian is the official language of Croatia, likewise, Standard Serbian (Ekavian) is official in Serbia.
Bosnian (also called Bosniak, the name is disputed)
Bunjevac (its existence is disputed; it's used by a small number of people in the northermost part of Serbia)
Croatian
Montenegrin (emerging; some Montenegrins declare that they speak Serbian instead)
Serbian (Ijekavian) - used by Serbs living outside Serbia
Serbian (Ekavian) - used in Serbia


The native dialects of Croats can be broadly classified into three groups: Čakavski, Kajkavski and Štokavski. These names are based on the word meaning “what” (i.e. “ča”, “kaj”, “što”) in the respective groups.
The dominant group is Štokavski and one of its sub-dialects is the basis of modern standard Croatian. The second-most prevalent one is Kajkavski and spoken in northwestern Croatia including the capital, Zagreb. Despite the historical importance of Kajkavski as “Zagreb’s dialect”, the local dialect has been overwhelmed by Štokavski thanks to migration of Croats from other regions and public education elevating the Neo-Štokavski standard language. The third group is Čakavski and is now confined to the coastline of Croatia and its islands.

I'd completely rewrite this.

Putting standard languages aside, all dialects spoken in the BCMS region are traditionally grouped into three groups: Čakavian, Kajkavian and Štokavian; names are based on the word meaning “what” (i.e. “ča”, “kaj”, “što”) in the respective groups. Čakavian and Kajkavian are spoken only in Croatia: Kajkavian mainly in northwestern Croatia including the capital, Zagreb, and Čakavian in the western regions, most islands and parts of the coast.

Štokavian areas are most of Croatia, all of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro and traditionally all of Serbia, but dialects in southeastern Serbia are often grouped into their own, “Torlak” group. Kajkavian dialects and Čakavian dialects in western Croatia show common features with dialects in Slovenia, while dialects in southeastern Serbia resemble dialects in Macedonia and Bulgaria. Dialectal differences involve differences in sounds, types and places of accents, details of grammar, number of cases, case endings, verbal tenses, to the point of incomprehensibility to speakers of another dialect.

The traditional grouping does not take into consideration modern urban dialects in Croatia: Zagreb has today a dialect with a mix of Kajkavian and Štokavian features, while Rijeka and Split have a mix of Čakavian and Štokavian features. Spoken language in everyday communication, including semi-official occasions in these cities shows a number of differences in comparison to the Standard Croatian. Influence of dialects can be also seen today in Croatia in movies and especially popular music.


Although some language planners and more nationally-minded folk in Croatia would like to elevate the profile and place of Kajkavski or Čakavski dialects as a way of distinguishing standard Croatian from the other standards,relatively few items from Čakavski or Kajkavski vocabulary and virtually none from their respective phonology or morphology have become codified or entrenched in modern standard Croatian.

I'd say simpler
All modern standard languages are almost completely based on Štokavian, even Standard Croatian has relatively few items from Čakavian or Kajkavian vocabulary and virtually none from their respective phonology or morphology.

All of the other peoples natively use a form of Štokavski although some of their sub-dialects differ noticeably from the respective standard languages despite their derivation from the same Štokavski sub-dialect. Indeed there are also “Old-Štokavski” dialects (as opposed to the aforementioned “Neo-Štokavski” ones) which differ primarily in accentuation and these are used in parts of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro and Serbia. Furthermore the Old-Štokavski dialects encountered in Kosovo and far southeastern Serbia (also known as “Torlak” dialects) resemble Bulgarian and Macedonian to the point that some Bulgarian linguists treat “Torlak” as a group of Bulgarian subdialects.

I'd rather say something on the lines:
Štokavian dialects are traditionally divided according to two criteria: accentuation (into "new" and "old" dialects) and outcome of the evolution of an old vowel called “yat”, which in "new" dialects turned into either e, (i)je or i sometimes in the Middle Ages. According to the outcome, the dialects are called "Ekavian", "(I)jekavian" or "Ikavian". These again don't correspond to ethnic or political borders: for instance, most of Serbia is Ekavian area, but southwestern parts are Ijekavian; Ikavian areas are parts of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, but also appear in northern Serbia: dialectal maps are extremely complicated.

It is for political reasons that BCMS/SC was codified using a particular Neo-Štokavski sub-dialect. The decisive codification efforts occurred starting in the 19th century despite the creation of literature or texts dating from the Renaissance or earlier in Čakavski, Kajkavski or Slaveno-Serbian (a hybrid liturgical/literary language combining a Štokavski dialect with Old Church Slavonic and Early Modern Russian).

I'd move it a bit later. And change all Kajkavski to Kajkavian and so on since these forms are used in literature written in English.

There is another set of variations that the learner may encounter that corresponds partially to the national standards. This set of variations arises from the evolution of a vowel called “yat” and is sometimes spelled as ě (likely pronounced as “ae”). The vowel evolved into e, (i)je or i starting no later than the Middle Ages. The terms “ekavski”, “(i)jekavski” and “ikavski” are often used to represent the outcomes of this sound-change.

I'd leave this out completely.

Example: (ě “yat”)

I think one example is enough, details are much more complicated (e.g. grijati vs grejati, non-standard case endings, the comparative suffix, etc.)

Modern standard Bosnian, modern standard Croatian and the emerging modern standard Montenegrin are “Štokavski-(I)jekavski”; Modern standard Serbian comes in two sub-variants being either “Štokavski-(I)jekavski” like the other three standards or “Štokavski-Ekavski”. The degree of these codifications being “ekavski”, “ikavski” or “(i)jekavski” do not conform to the neat borders of an atlas. For example, some dialects in northern Serbia are “Štokavski-Ikavski” rather than “Štokavski-Ekavski” or “Štokavski-(I)jekavski” as in modern standard Serbian. Ikavski dialects are also spoken in parts of Croatia and Bosnia. In turn, the Ikavski dialects of Croatia tend to be “Čakavski-Ikavski” in addition to “Štokavski-Ikavski”, as is found in Bosnia. In far southeastern Serbia, the “Torlak” dialects encountered are strictly speaking “Štokavski-Ekavski” but as noted earlier their noticeable similarity to Bulgarian and Macedonian give rise to contention that such dialects are not Serbian but rather extensions of Macedonian or Bulgarian instead. There are also the Krashovani living in Romania who are native-speakers of a “Torlak” dialect but consider themselves to be Croats.

I'd completely trim this: all standards are based on the "new" Štokavian accentuation; all are Ijekavian, except for the Ekavian Serbian, and disputed Bunjevac, which is Ikavian.

The variations are interesting from a linguist's viewpoint but are a headache for politicians and nationalists who try to identify or settle territorial disputes and ethnic differences using linguistic criteria. When one notes the lexicons used by Bosnians, Croats, Montenegrins and Serbs one can also notice that Bosnians and Croats tend to prefer certain usages over ones used in Montenegro and Serbia, while on the other hand Bosnians, Montenegrin and Serbs prefer certain usages over those used in Croatia. It can be bewildering to a foreigner who tries to learn the nonstandard speech of natives.

I'd leave this out completely, as this mixes two completely different things: nonstandard speech and preferences in the standard languages.

iv) The Montenegrin alphabet includes the letters ś / ć and ź / з́ which could be represented in the original alphabets for BCMS by šj / шj and žj / жj respectively. The addition of new letters in the Montenegrin alphabet has been criticized as politically-motivated since the sounds represented by the new letters of the Montenegrin alphabet are not observed reliably among Montenegrins and could have been expressed visually without modification of the existing alphabets.

I'd leave out political motivation: any changes in orthography in this region were always criticized as "political" since 19th century.

My proposal for the loanwords will come later.
Last edited by Daniel N. on Fri Apr 15, 2016 1:07 pm, edited 2 times in total.
1 x
Check Easy Croatian (very useful for Bosnian, Montenegrin and Serbian as well)

Daniel N.
Green Belt
Posts: 357
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 12:44 pm
Languages: Croatian (N), English (C1), German (beginner)
x 733
Contact:

Re: Proposed BCMS/SC profile

Postby Daniel N. » Fri Apr 15, 2016 11:42 am

Chung wrote:Obviously I'll need some time to work them into the profile but it may be that I'll end up dropping some points / examples. I definitely do not dispute the accuracy or currency of your observations but I'm not sure if it's that helpful to a propsective learner (the intended audience of these types of profiles) to see that many examples with the accompanying remarks/usage notes.

Actually, I think you should not include any of examples I've written. One example for each feature is enough. If you want to illustrate differences within dialects, but also vs. e.g. Russian, only one or two words are needed, my suggestion would be e.g. vjetar < větrъ or petak < pętъkъ, they can show everything in a very compact way. TORT's and TOLT's are not important for a learner unless he or she is interested in comparative Slavic linguistics.

What a learner needs to know is e.g. that klapa singing is a feature originating from a region within Croatia, and that their lyrics are almost always non-standard. Otherwise, people will be puzzled by many words they find in such songs.

It's also worth knowing that HJP is a descriptive Croatian dictionary (with many 'Serbian' entries) which nevertheless omits many forms that someone will hear on the street or in a song. For instance, it includes đe (which is a form of where in some Štokavian dialects, you can hear it in Dubrovnik and Montenegro, also in Herzegovina), but leaves out di (which is a very frequent form of where, heard in Split area all the time, but also common in Zagreb), and forms like kade or kadi are completely absent (they are Čakavian forms of where, from northern Adriatic areas). So even HJP does not help for words in klapa songs, and this a learner should know.

I think such information is much more important for a learner than some fine details of which dialects are Novoštokavski, etc.
0 x
Check Easy Croatian (very useful for Bosnian, Montenegrin and Serbian as well)

User avatar
reineke
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3570
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 7:34 pm
Languages: Fox (C4)
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... =15&t=6979
x 6554

Re: Proposed BCMS/SC profile

Postby reineke » Sat Apr 23, 2016 1:11 am

Daniel N. wrote:This is an excellent post, however, I found few details (that are common in views from outside) worth commenting upon.

Chung wrote:In total approximately 20 million people worldwide are native speakers of these standard languages

Nobody can be a "native speaker of a standard language", and, in fact, many people in Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, even Bosnia don't really speak a standard language, even in the most official situations (e.g. in a court of law). It all depends on the dialect they were raised in, if it's quite distant from the standard, then most people are actually unable (and often unwilling) to speak standard — and it involves even very educated people.




The notional perfect native speaker of standard Croatian may not exist in the wild but a large number of native speakers speak a language that is much closer to standard Croatian than the pure version of their local dialect. If an educated person's native dialect is distant from the standard, then such a person should be able to speak standard Croatian — all my Čakavian -speaking friends were able to switch between the dialect and standard Croatian. If one's dialect is close to the standard language, such a person may afford to use colorful regional expressions. Different dialects also have their own dynamics:

http://www.slobodnadalmacija.hr/scena/kultura/clanak/id/266247/kajkavski-proglasen-jezikom-cakavica-pred-nestajanjem

...

"Which leads to your description of špek bacon. Is this a real difference? For someone going to Croatia, visiting Zagreb, deciding to have a pizza, this the word that will appear on the menu, describing various toppings. Most people in Croatia (but not an overwhelming majority!) use špek; slanina is, of course, also used (e.g. you will hear it in Split)..."

After a quick look at some local menus I have found plenty of examples of "slanina" being used in Zagreb. "Slanina" is also used in Slavonia and other parts of Croatia. Zagorski špek, slavonska slanina and dalmatinska panceta also exist as delicious regional varieties of bacon. You'll travel farthest with "slanina" in Croatia and elsewhere.

...

Bilingual Dictionaries:

It's Željko Bujas, not Zeljko Bujaš. I would also mention Rudolf Filipović. Their bilingual dictionaries are in a completely different league from Langenscheidt's pocket dictionaries. I would simply describe them as the best desk/pocketbook dictionaries as the case may be.

Literature/TV/Music/Cinema deserve their own (expanded) sections especially since you're bundling BCMS into a single profile.

Old Dubrovnik writers are important but perhaps not popular reads. Saying that Jergović is "far more influential" than Gundulić is like comparing Ben Jonson with a living novelist. If you're trying to present a historical overview of literature you can't skip Dubrovnik. If not, you can do whatever you want.

...

Some ideas about popular/influential Croatian writers:

http://www.jutarnji.hr/top-lista-hrvatskih-pisaca-na-googleu/153011/

http://www.vecernji.hr/knjige/na-svim-listama-najposudivanijih-naslova-na-prvom-su-mjestu-zene-905245

Popular TV series (ex-Yu):

http://www.tportal.hr/showtime/tv/216989/Najbolje-humoristicke-serije-uz-koje-smo-odrastali.html

Bitka na Neretvi
http://www.jutarnji.hr/direktor-filmskog-centra-sarajevo-tvrdi-da-je--quot-bitka-na-neretvi-quot--bih-film/1090027/
0 x

Daniel N.
Green Belt
Posts: 357
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 12:44 pm
Languages: Croatian (N), English (C1), German (beginner)
x 733
Contact:

Re: Proposed BCMS/SC profile

Postby Daniel N. » Sat Apr 23, 2016 8:27 pm

reineke wrote:The notional perfect native speaker of standard Croatian may not exist in the wild but a large number of native speakers speak a language that is much closer to standard Croatian than the pure version of their local dialect. If an educated person's native dialect is distant from the standard, then such a person should be able to speak standard Croatian — all my Čakavian -speaking friends were able to switch between the dialect and standard Croatian.

Of course traditional dialects are changing and disappearing. However, I think that a rather small number of people are able to switch to Standard Croatian, and by Standard Croatian, I mean all phonemes as in Standard, all rising and falling intonations, all unstressed and stressed long vowels etc. What most people do instead is to switch to the dialect of the nearest big city, which is Osijek in the case of Slavonia, and then you get virtually Standard pronunciation. But in Zagreb, Rijeka, Split, Pula, Dubrovnik, you'll get /č/=/ć/. And that's immediately non-Standard.

This is something to read (in Croatian): http://hrcak.srce.hr/file/14526


This is only a tip of the iceberg. Actually, Kajkavian is disappearing much faster than Čakavian. Turn on the radio and try finding any popular song with anything "Kajkavian". Open daily newspapers published in Zagreb and look for anything in Kajkavian. Even the Kaj radio station rarely broadcast anything Kajkavian. You find much more Čakavian things in Novi list, Slobodna Dalmacija, and on the radio. Next, look for Čakavian dictionaries online and then for Kajkavian ones.

As for the "Kajkavian is a language now", and counter-arguments by prof. Žanić, that's barely worth commenting upon... Besides, anyone claiming that Baška and Valun tablets are written "in Čakavian" obviously never studied texts on these two tablets, and has very little idea about history of language (of course, that's understandable that random people will give such statements, but it's a problem when statements originate from people who should know better).

reineke wrote:After a quick look at some local menus I have found plenty of examples of "slanina" being used in Zagreb. "Slanina" is also used in Slavonia and other parts of Croatia. Zagorski špek, slavonska slanina and dalmatinska panceta also exist as delicious regional varieties of bacon. You'll travel farthest with "slanina" in Croatia and elsewhere.

The point was that, in Chung's opinion, špek was mentioned as a "difference" in a Croatian vs. Serbian wordlist only to increase differences Croatian vs. Serbian. That could be the true motive, but somebody who really wants to describe differences between vocabulary in Zagreb vs. Belgrade would conclude that both use paradajz and frižider (despite standards and dictionaries telling something else), but they differ in špek vs. slanina (despite dictionaries telling both Croatian and Serbian use slanina).

My point is that it's at least unfair to describe how people in Croatia speak without mentioning that about 30-50% of people use špek (including the most important city in Croatia!). For people who use it, it's a real difference vs. Serbia, but of course, vs. how people speak in Dalmatia, etc.

reineke wrote:If you're trying to present a historical overview of literature you can't skip Dubrovnik. If not, you can do whatever you want.

From a learner's perspective, what is most interesting would be a list of books and authors that are worth reading. I don't think Gundulić is the best choice for someone who's learning Croatian.


Of course there are some disputes regarding that movie, and I've already written it would be maybe best to call it "Yugoslav". But this small article is far from any serious journalism.
1 x
Check Easy Croatian (very useful for Bosnian, Montenegrin and Serbian as well)

User avatar
Chung
Blue Belt
Posts: 529
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 9:39 pm
Languages: SPEAKS: English*, French
STUDIES: Hungarian, Italian, Ukrainian
OTHER: Czech, German, Polish, Slovak
STUDIED: Azeri, BCMS/SC, Estonian, Finnish, Korean, Latin, Northern Saami, Russian, Slovenian, Turkish
DABBLED: Bashkir, Chuvash, Crimean Tatar, Inari Saami, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Latvian, Lithuanian, Meadow Mari, Mongolian, Romanian, Tatar, Turkmen, Tuvan, Uzbek
x 2309

Re: Proposed BCMS/SC profile

Postby Chung » Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:58 pm

reineke, Daniel N, hvala puno na novim komentarima. Daniel N, čekam Vaš doprinos o tuđicama. Bez žurbe.

I haven't forgotten about editing the profile but I've become tied up with things outside the forum. I should be able to get back to working on this and other profiles starting next week.
0 x

User avatar
reineke
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3570
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 7:34 pm
Languages: Fox (C4)
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... =15&t=6979
x 6554

Re: Proposed BCMS/SC profile

Postby reineke » Mon Apr 25, 2016 8:18 pm

Chung wrote:reineke, Daniel N, hvala puno na novim komentarima. Daniel N, čekam Vaš doprinos o tuđicama. Bez žurbe.

I haven't forgotten about editing the profile but I've become tied up with things outside the forum. I should be able to get back to working on this and other profiles starting next week.


The girth and the ready availability of various dictionaries of foreign words and phrases in almost every Croatian household are a good indication that this is an important subject. A separate article on foreign loanwords is a great idea but I would not ban loanwords from the above general description of the differences between individual languages. Daniel has made a very good point that we need to be clear what's being described (literary vs spoken language, regional use etc.)
0 x

Daniel N.
Green Belt
Posts: 357
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 12:44 pm
Languages: Croatian (N), English (C1), German (beginner)
x 733
Contact:

Re: Proposed BCMS/SC profile

Postby Daniel N. » Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:43 pm

Chung wrote:reineke, Daniel N, hvala puno na novim komentarima. Daniel N, čekam Vaš doprinos o tuđicama. Bez žurbe.

It's in making...

Side note: I must say that use of "Vaš" in such a forum is quite rare, "tvoj" completely prevails (unless we had a very different status in the RL, e.g. if you were a member of government, an ambassador, etc. and if I knew it).
0 x
Check Easy Croatian (very useful for Bosnian, Montenegrin and Serbian as well)


Return to “LLORG & HTLAL discussion area”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests