ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Mar 29, 2010 15:12:17 GMT -5
It’s not fantasizing, it’s called learning history as it has been recorded by credible and non-bias sources.
I told you, today there is an ethnic Macedonian identity. We can all admit that and we are not arguing that there isn’t. All we are saying is that the vast majority of people who identify as ethnic Macedonians today, identified as ethnic Bulgarians some 50-60 years ago.
I’m a full time rocket scientist, a part time janitor, and am most likely half your age.
My comprehension skills are just fine, but I think you can benefit from a lesson or two.
Pfffffffff listen, don’t worry about me. Just don’t forget to breathe.
Look, some 95% of independent sources concur that the vast majority of the population in Macedonia identified as Bulgarians, and NEVER as Serbs. We can compare source by source if you’d like, but as I told you, my goal here has never been to change your mind or Pazar’s mind. You guys have a pre-determined anti-Bulgarian mindset, your views are relatively racist and hateful, so I don’t expect you to show any objectivity on the subject.
And BTW, your source, once again, DOES NOT discuss the overall population of Macedonia.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Mar 29, 2010 23:19:36 GMT -5
I am afraid Aziz, that before differentiating between "i want" and "i see", which is the first step which will upgrade you from the state of the vegetable (where you are right now) to the state of the (still sick) animal, what you have to do is beat your initial very denial. No patient ever got cured by overlooking his own problem.
So forget, for the moment what i wrote. Go to the mirror and say to your self. I WANNA BE CURED! Repeat the same exercise whenever you feel the tendency of coming here and humiliating your self again. SAY IT!!! I WANNA BE CURED!!
"some 95% "
LMAO!!! the fuking clown is now giving precise percentages!!!
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Mar 29, 2010 23:32:52 GMT -5
C'mon you guys! We went from a constructive conversation back to the beginning. I mean, if Pyrros and I can treat each other with respect, surely you can too.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Mar 29, 2010 23:33:12 GMT -5
Gyrro, the sources you've posted don't speak about what we are discussing. They merely show that there was some Serb presence in Macedonia, which is somthing that we've never disputed. These sources don't discuss the ethnic identification of Macedonia's population as a whole. Oh, and they are clearly mainly from Serb authors. So once more, please address the fact that practially all independent sources Western and Balkan, while discussing the identity of Macedonia as a whole, come the conclusion that the vast majority of Macedonians identified as ethnic Bulgarians until recently. LMAO!! Did you read it all Aziz? Now idiot, prepare a report, grouping by ethnicity of the source, year period and specific region in slavMakedonia (south Serbia). Come on, Aziz!! any rocket science should be able to do this in seconds. What sickens me, is that while, for them any number of pro-Serb sources can be easily degraded (e.g. its a serbian source, or its not about the whole of the land, bla bla bla) it is perfectly OK for them this joke: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuber to be a valid source of Bulgar presence in slav-Makedonia. i have ridiculed this wiki page in some 2-3 pages, line by line, Novi remembers this, and the bulgar trio, besides shutting their mouths, did not condemn the article's validity loud. I am sure, that when the matter is forgotten they will bring it up once again. they are dirty prostitutes and nothing more.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Mar 29, 2010 23:38:50 GMT -5
C'mon you guys! We went from a constructive conversation back to the beginning. I mean, if Pyrros and I can treat each other with respect, surely you can too. What i mean, is that Aziz is now forced to make some more homework. He has to prove quantitatively his claims. He has to cross the line of the pure idiotic propagandist denier and enter the area of the scientist and mathematician. I know that Aziz neither can nor want to do that. He has not shown any such signs. The qualitatively study is another story much harder to carry out, and surely beyond the mental abilities of anyone from the tatar-trio. What bothers me is that Aziz (and his other two partners) seem to only care to baptize smth as "simple bulgarian" as quickly as possible, instead of diving into more detailed examination, (which practically never happenes). That's what i said, that my 1st and main concern about this "bulgo-thing" is that it shouts from miles away that it is fake.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Mar 30, 2010 3:42:01 GMT -5
^ Pyrro its fake like those freaken stone inscriptions that even Sofia agreed upon.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Mar 30, 2010 3:47:39 GMT -5
^^^^ LMAO... However Novi, they have placed their whole existence around slavMakedonia (its like their Meka) and they cant step back...
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Mar 30, 2010 4:28:18 GMT -5
"Alright, so what you're saying is that us South-Slavs were all one and exact people once upon of time. Kind of obvious, even if not by language. Language reforms come at the expense of a common language (Back in those days). Reforms were done on a Zupa to Zupa (Oblast to Oblast) basis. Or at least the small quirks. Notice the large amount of dialects in every Slavic language?"
Listen, linguists have found that Serbo-Croat and Slovenian are the product of a common language and that they were spoken even before the grouping (of the slavic tribes) in the regions they occupy today took place. Now referring to the speakers of proto-Slavic, Max Vasmer says that "before the more important dialectal differences began to emerge, they inhabited a region whose individual areas were subject to mutual linguistic modification". "Where we find Slavs," says J.J. Mikkola, "who call themselves Slavs, we must derive them from a single proto-tribe."
It is interesting to note that, despite all the vicissitudes of fortune to which the Slavic tribes were, during the centuries, exposed, linguistic oases have survived in the south which testify to the kinship of the southern tribes with those which inhabit present-day Slovenia and Korushka. During World War 1, Ljubomir Pavlovich discovered, in the Slav villages around Ostrovo, a language group which resembles Slovenian. "The language of these Slavs," he reports, "is nearest to that of the Slovenes. There have been many Slovenes in the Serbian front who had no difficulty in conversing with these Slavs. Moslems from Meglen stated that linguistically they are nearest to the Slovenian volunteers in the Serbian army. A respecfted householder from Edessa stated that after a conversion with a lieutenant colonel of the serbian army who came from Slovenian, that he understands the Slovenes better than he does of the Serbs and Bulgarians. Slavic customs associated with weddings, "slava," funerals, domestic and agricultural life are almost identical with those in the mountain villages of Old Serbia and Montenegro."
What l'm saying MiG is that when the slavs arrived in the Balkans and even a few centuries later still spoke alike, modification occured later due to their surroundings.
Again i'll say it again, in the Pirin region of Bulgaria they use the pronouns On/Ona/Oni (he/she/it) just like in serbo-croat, so by logics sakes should l refer to them as Serbs?
When l was using the example of Mleko in Fyromian and Mlayko in Bulgarian you say they are just words...no.....my point was that ya in Mlyako evolved into e as in Mleko which Serbian/Croatian/Fyromian pronounce it.
In your same post you say if we remove the serbian influence then Fyromian would be exactly Bulgarian....no....because how has Fyromian for instance developed more definite articles than Bulgarian?.....doesn't it suggest to you that Fyromian developed independantly from bulgarian?
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Mar 30, 2010 4:58:46 GMT -5
"A respecfted householder from Edessa"
Edessa = Vodena. I must go there for some research!!!
"doesn't it suggest to you that Fyromian developed independantly from bulgarian?"
however i doubt Bulgarian evolved independently of Fyromian....... i think Bulgarians just copied the makedonian language/culture and made it their own.
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Mar 30, 2010 13:54:30 GMT -5
It is a Serbian source, and it does not discuss the overall population of Macedonia.
Sorry, but the sources we post are descriptive of the ethnic identity of Macedonians as a whole.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Mar 30, 2010 19:00:12 GMT -5
"however i doubt Bulgarian evolved independently of Fyromian....... i think Bulgarians just copied the makedonian language/culture and made it their own."
The point i'm making is that the people who settled there did not come from modern day Bulgaria. The Serbs of the sixth century didn't speak a langauge that is Serbian today, they spoke a slavic language completely different, its like comparing Ancient Greek with Modern Greek (you could correct me if l'm wrong). People here are really missing the point because they arn't considering the historical aspect of it all, for instance, Porphyrogenitus said that Serbs settled near Thessaloniki in a district called 'ta Serblia', did those Serbs then, who arrived much earlier in time than Bulgars speak a modern Serbian, bulgarian or Vardarian language?, no ofcourse not, they spoke something that was probably most closest to modern Slovenian. J. Mikotcy affirmed that in 640 the Serbs spread first over Macedonia, THEN illyria. Again these Serbs were there 41 years before the Bulgars founded their Turkic capital or 'Abode' Pliska in 681. The map of 814AD still confirms that much of this Turkic ruling nation Bulgaria was behind the Danube. Pyrro, its a technicality or a coincidence that Vardarian has similar aspects to modern Bulgarian because as Max vasmer says, " before the more important dialectual differences began to emerge, they inhabited a region whose individual areas were subject to mutual linguistic modification."
Pyrro, this wasn't directed towards you but for curious posters like MiG. I'm giving him objective reasonings with a historical aspect to it all without a 19th century Bulgarian propaganda twist that contains no history.
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Mar 30, 2010 21:59:18 GMT -5
Pazar, all you keep saying is Bulgarian propaganda this Bulgarian propaganda that.. yet you still fail to address the fact that practically all of the American, German, British, French, Italian, Russian, Ottoman, Greek, and even earlier Serbian sources that discuss the overall population of Macedonia describe that the vast majority of Macedonians identified as ethnic Bulgarians.
According to you, Bulgaria was so powerful and wealthy that it was able to buy the opinions of the world powers and a whole bunch of other independent nations all the while it was not even on the map of Europe at the time.
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Mar 30, 2010 22:02:59 GMT -5
Furthermore, your arguments are all based on showing that there was some Serbian presence in Macedonia. This is something that we never disputed, however, the vast majority of the population never identified as Serbian. There's plenty of independent sources, facts, and evidence that corroborate the fact that the vast majority of Macedonians NEVER identified as Serbs.
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Mar 30, 2010 22:10:06 GMT -5
Which is what I said in the first place. You didn't need to explain that to me, which I already knew.
Do you not? But what is more important here is what they refer to themselves as, which you should recognize as them being. Correct? How does it feel when people say you're a Bulgarian, when you view yourself as Serbian?
By logic's sake, you should take into account the actual opinion of the people from that region, or the people closest to their Kin (Rest of Bulgaria).
We say Mlijeko, in Croatia and Bosnia. Mlyako is very close to that.
Your argument is that pronunciation and spelling of certain words make or break a theory of which Slavic branch certain people belong to. It's impossible, since there are words in Croatian which Serbs rarely ever use (Užas - Ужас, as an example), and Ukrainians use widely as Croats do. Does that mean that Croats are Ukrainians, or Ukrainians are really Croats? No. That's an completely improper way of looking at it.
You're telling me that if you removed Serbo-Croatian linguistic influence over the last 100 years, that it wouldn't change the outlook of Makedonski today?
Sure it does. Except that because of regional affiliation, it became a dialect, and today a language.
Other than the small differences (1-2% of the words) in Croatian and Serbian, what is the real major difference? Latin and Cyrillic script. Other than that, we understand and can speak to each other with no problems whatsoever. Correct?
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Mar 30, 2010 22:39:57 GMT -5
I’d like to say that Bulgarians use “mleko” and “mliako/mlyako” interchangeably, just like “hliab/hlyab” and “hleb” and even “liab/lyab” and “leb”. Different regions lean towards one or the other, however, “mleko”, “hleb”, and “leb” are not isolated to Western Bulgaria alone.
Bulgarians also use “uzhas/ujas – óæàñ” quite often.
I would also like to note that while these linguistic influences were occurring in Macedonia, at the same time Bulgarian was influenced by Russian.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Mar 31, 2010 1:58:11 GMT -5
Which is what I said in the first place. You didn't need to explain that to me, which I already knew. Do you not? But what is more important here is what they refer to themselves as, which you should recognize as them being. Correct? How does it feel when people say you're a Bulgarian, when you view yourself as Serbian? By logic's sake, you should take into account the actual opinion of the people from that region, or the people closest to their Kin (Rest of Bulgaria). However, i have never noticed you criticizing the fact that the tatars here have been claiming as Bulgarian the whole part of Serbia, since i dont know when, and considering as *real* serbs only Montenegrins and "Surbs" from Republika "Surbska".... Or the fact the there is no slav-makedonian from here who has ever aligned with the bulgarian views.... yet you lecture Novi on this. Novi's responses were always in the form of *COUNTER*attacks and not attacks per se.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Mar 31, 2010 2:01:40 GMT -5
People here are really missing the point because they arn't considering the historical aspect of it all, for instance, Porphyrogenitus said that Serbs settled near Thessaloniki in a district called 'ta Serblia', did those Serbs then, who arrived much earlier in time than Bulgars speak a modern Serbian, bulgarian or Vardarian language?, no ofcourse not, This Serb town is very alive and well even today, as a monument of the Great Serb Presence in the southern part of Balkan penisula. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Servia,_Greece
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Mar 31, 2010 2:10:26 GMT -5
Well, they do it because Novi states that Western Bulgaria in its entirety is populated with Serbs. I never denied that Torlak Speaking Serbs are Serbian. Why should I? They know they're Serbian, and I take their word for it wholeheartedly. That's what Arsenije said. Arsenije conciders Torlak Speaking Serbs as wannabe's and Bulgarians in disguise. Just ask Srbobran or search up them two going at it. Macedonians never align themselves with any of their neighbors. I know why, and I admire that. They do their own thing, because that's what they are. Their own people, with their own image. I respect that more than anything. I don't really know who started it, but ridiculous claims have to stop. "My grandfathers great-grandfather was born in Odessa! That makes Odessa Bulgarian!" (Just an example, as nobody here ever said this) But you understand how I view the petty differences you guys have, and the way you stoop down to the nothing of nothings just to prove an insignificant point of which people took the majority of s**ts on which stretch of land. You know what I mean? Servia is a very beautiful looking city btw... static.panoramio.com/photos/original/1500834.jpg
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Mar 31, 2010 2:31:44 GMT -5
Mig, the tatars started it, calling Novi as "simple bulgarian", among the myriads of their falsifications, fabrications, (the Bitola inscription, the Kuber inscription, etc... their whole existence is based on mere "creativity" upon history)
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Mar 31, 2010 3:17:31 GMT -5
^ Pyrro, i've given MiG a historical reasoning above, l know he won't agree.
|
|