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
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/
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.
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.
Chung wrote:Thus the forms *trijebati or *trjebati do not exist.
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.
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.
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.
For one reason or another, večer in standard Croatian is feminine despite appearing to be masculine by ending in a consonant
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.
.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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
Example: (ě “yat”)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
reineke wrote:Bitka na Neretvi
http://www.jutarnji.hr/direktor-filmskog-centra-sarajevo-tvrdi-da-je--quot-bitka-na-neretvi-quot--bih-film/1090027/
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.
Chung wrote:reineke, Daniel N, hvala puno na novim komentarima. Daniel N, čekam Vaš doprinos o tuđicama. Bez žurbe.
Return to “LLORG & HTLAL discussion area”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests