|
Post by shejtani on Oct 1, 2009 12:23:46 GMT -5
Bulgrians who converted to Islam. Point !
|
|
Rhezus
Moderator
DERZA STURIA TRAUS
Posts: 1,674
|
Post by Rhezus on Oct 5, 2009 4:16:58 GMT -5
Mamma mia, paradox again..
It should still be referred as Slavonic language, since "old Bulgarian" also means the old language of Bulgars (and this lang. was not slavic one)!
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Oct 5, 2009 10:32:28 GMT -5
Old Bulgarian equals Church Slavonic. The medieval Slavic language used in the translation of the Bible by Cyril and Methodius and in early literary manuscripts and still used as a liturgical language by several churches of Eastern Orthodoxy. Also called Church Slavonic, Old Bulgarian. www.answers.com/topic/old-church-slavonic
|
|
|
Post by peccafly on Oct 7, 2009 19:12:25 GMT -5
isnt there any connection btween bulgarian bogomilists & present day's pomaks ?
|
|
|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Oct 7, 2009 23:39:04 GMT -5
Old Bulgarian equals Church Slavonic. The medieval Slavic language used in the translation of the Bible by Cyril and Methodius and in early literary manuscripts and still used as a liturgical language by several churches of Eastern Orthodoxy. Also called Church Slavonic, Old Bulgarian. www.answers.com/topic/old-church-slavonicRuse, since when has old church slavonic also been referred to as old Bulgarian?
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Oct 8, 2009 0:08:15 GMT -5
since always. it was based on the language the bulgarians spoke at the time.
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Oct 8, 2009 14:09:25 GMT -5
Read the link, Arsenije, or check the net. It is not my conclusion. Unlike some of your Serbian compatriots (who do not speak Serbian), I don't have the habit to claim something as Bulgarian when it is not.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Oct 15, 2009 23:36:40 GMT -5
"Old Bulgarian equals Church Slavonic."
Nope, it was at one stage termed Old Slovenian.
Just want to ask, did old bulgarian have the case system?
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Oct 16, 2009 0:01:13 GMT -5
yes they did. NOvi, you do not speak NOR SERBIAN NEITHER SIMPLE BULGARIAN so please stop talking about southslavic language about which you have 0 knowledge. Go RESEARCH in the only language you can master: ENGLISH WITH HARD AUSTRALIAN ACCENT. When you learn Simple Bulgarian, come back.
|
|
|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Oct 16, 2009 0:25:30 GMT -5
"Old Bulgarian equals Church Slavonic." Nope, it was at one stage termed Old Slovenian. Just want to ask, did old bulgarian have the case system? It seems a bit ironic to me that Bulgarians claim FYROMian as a Bulgarian dialect due to the gramatical case system and yet it's the opposite with Old Church slavonic.
|
|
|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Oct 16, 2009 1:13:03 GMT -5
Novi I just went back & had a look at one of your posts. It does seem missleading to call Old Church slavonic Old Bulgarian...
"It was perfectly reasonable that the Slavs' first literary language should be called "Slav." After much research, Matija Murko came to the conclusion that it is incorrect to call this language Bulgarian. "It is unhistorical and even more dangerous," he says, "to use the term 'Old Bulgarian,' since this latter was the Turkish language." P.A Lavrow drew attention to the fact that in the "Pannonian legends" - as the Lives of Cyril and Methodius were called - the expressions Bulgarin and Bulgarsk are not to be found - a circumstance which distinguishes the Legends significantly from the Greek Vita Clementi. From this one might infer that Clement was of Macedonian origin, since at that time these expressions were not used in Macedonia. In the early redactions of his writings, therefore, Clement is more accurately described as being "slovensk," i.e., Slav. It cannot, moreover, have been fortuitous that the Emperor Simeon, in 893, appointed him as the first Slav bishop. Ferdo Shishic states that, at the beginning of the tenth century, Slav figured as a literary language side by side with Greek and Latin. "It is known," he says, "that this language florished in the tenth century in Macedonia and Bulgaria and that from there it began to spread toward the West, where a separate literary center came into being in Croatia and maintained its existence despite all difficulties." During the following centuries, we find a living Slavic tradition among writers in this region, even though they lived and worked within the Bulgarian state. In the manuscript by the Exarch Jovan, which dates from the late eleventh or early twelfth century, there occur the expressions "slovensk" (Slav) and "slovensk jazik" (Slavic language), while the priest Grigorije has "slovenski jazik"; "Russkaya pravda"(1020) contains the word "Slovenin" (Slav), while in the writings of the monk Hrabar (of the tenth or eleventh century) we find the expressions "slovenska rech" (slavic speech), "rod slovensk" (Slavic people) and "pismena slovenska" (Slavic characters). In the Prologue to some Lives of the Saints dating from the thirteenth century, there occur the forms "slovensku jeziku," "slovenskih Knjig," "slovenski ucheniki," etc. It is also of interest that in an inscription of 1295 in the Krmchija it is stated that "the rules emerged into the light of the Slavic language." The translator of Dionysius the Areopagite, in a manuscript of Bulgarian recension, calls the Slav language "our" language, and, comparing it with Greeks, says that it was also created by God and found good, but that it lacks the wealth of expression and nuances that Greek has. With reference to a collection of sermons dealing with the Gospels, it is stated that they were translated from Greek into Slav.
SOURCES:
M. Murko, Geschichte der alteren sudslawischen literatur, leipzig, 1908, p.58
P.A. Lavrow, Die neuesten Forschungen uber den slawischen Clemens," Archiv fur Slawische Philologie, Vol. XXVII, 1905, p.365
Ferdo Sisic, Letopis popa Dukljanina (The Chronicle of the Priest Dukljanin), Belgrade-Zagreb, 1928, p.3
Ljub. Stojanovic, Stari srpski zapisi i natpisi (Old Serbian Records and Inscriptions), Belgrade, 1905, Vol. III, p.139
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Oct 16, 2009 1:23:58 GMT -5
"yes they did. NOvi, you do not speak NOR SERBIAN NEITHER SIMPLE BULGARIAN so please stop talking about southslavic language about which you have 0 knowledge. Go RESEARCH in the only language you can master: ENGLISH WITH HARD AUSTRALIAN ACCENT. When you learn Simple Bulgarian, come back."
Ioan je prv otvoriv usta.......zashto ne Ruse?.
Ioan, che mu kazhes (ruse) na mene, ne lazhe od dupe.... mu oleknuva, ti znash.
ti davol!.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Oct 16, 2009 1:43:49 GMT -5
"It does seem missleading to call Old Church slavonic Old Bulgarian..."
Ofcourse it is as Old Bulgarian is the language of the Turks.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Oct 16, 2009 1:47:57 GMT -5
Novi your ignorance is astonishing my Simple Bulgarian!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Oct 16, 2009 1:50:51 GMT -5
"It does seem missleading to call Old Church slavonic Old Bulgarian..." Ofcourse it is as Old Bulgarian is the language of the Turks. Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Oct 16, 2009 2:18:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Oct 16, 2009 2:20:33 GMT -5
And when are you going to read a link for a change and get the meaning of what is written inside instead of talking out of your arse?
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Oct 16, 2009 2:27:42 GMT -5
"Exactly."
Its dangerous vizier and unhistorical to equate old bulgarian with old church slavonic.
Rhezus is absolutely spot on when he calls it a paradox.
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Oct 16, 2009 2:33:14 GMT -5
It is dangerous when you don't read a single link on that issue. And the only one with no knowledge on history here is you. Not to mention your lingusitic skills...
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Oct 16, 2009 2:36:04 GMT -5
I don't see what is there not to understand:
Old Church Slavonic, also known as Old Bulgarian,[1][2][3] or Old Macedonian,[4][5][6] was the first literary Slavic language, based on the old Slavic dialect of the Thessalonica region, employed by the 9th century Byzantine Greek[7] missionaries, Saints Cyril and Methodius, who used it for translation of the Bible and other Ancient Greek ecclesiastical texts, and for some of their own writings. It played a great role in the history of Slavic languages and served as a basis and model for later Church Slavonic traditions, where Church Slavonic is used as a liturgical language to this day by some Orthodox and Greek-Catholic Churches of the Slavic peoples. The language was standardized for the mission of the two apostles to Great Moravia in 863 (see Glagolitic alphabet for details). For that purpose, Cyril and his brother Methodius first codified Old Church Slavonic from the Southern Slavic dialect spoken in the hinterland of Thessalonica, in the region of Macedonia (Ѳåññàëîí¿êà; in Old Church Slavonic, Ñëîâѣíüñêú), in the Byzantine Empire. As part of the preparation for the mission, in 862/863, the Glagolitic alphabet was created and the most important prayers and liturgical books, including the Aprakos Evangeliar (a Gospel Book lectionary containing only feast-day and Sunday readings), the Psalter, and Acts of the Apostles, were translated. (The Gospels were also translated early, but it is unclear whether Sts. Cyril or Methodius had a hand in this). The language and the alphabet were taught at the Great Moravian Academy (Veľkomoravské učilište) and were used for government and religious documents and books between 863 and 885. The texts written during this phase contain characteristics of the Slavic vernaculars in Great Moravia.
In 885, the use of the Old Church Slavonic in Great Moravia was prohibited by the Pope in favour of Latin. Students of the two apostles, who were expelled from Great Moravia in 886, brought the Glagolitic alphabet and the Old Church Slavonic language to the Bulgarian Empire. It was taught at two Bulgarian academies – in Preslav (capital 893–972) and Ohrid (capital 991/997–1015). The Cyrillic alphabet was developed shortly afterwards in the Preslav Literary School and replaced the Glagolitic one. The texts written during this era contain characteristics of the vernacular of Bulgaria. There are some linguistic differences between texts written in the two academies.
Thereupon the language, in its Bulgarian recensions, spread to other South-Eastern and Eastern European Slavic territories, most notably to Croatia, Serbia, Bohemia, Lesser Poland, and principalities of the Kievan Rus'. The texts written in each country contain characteristics of the local Slavic vernacular.
Much later, local redactions of Old Church Slavonic were created for ecclesiastical and administrative use, and are collectively known as Church Slavonic – Bulgarian: öúðêîâíîñëàâÿíñêè åçèê (ts'rkovnoslavyanski (j)ezik); Macedonian: öðêîâíîñëîâåíñêè ¼àçèê (crkovnoslovenski jazik); Serbian: öðêâåíîñëîâåíñêè ¼åçèê / crkvenoslovenski jezik; Russian: öåðêîâíîñëàâÿ́íñêèé ÿçû́ê (tserkovnoslavyánskiy yazík) – but these terms are often confused. Church Slavonic maintained a prestige status, particularly in Russia, for many centuries – among Slavs in the East it had a status analogous to that of the Latin language in western Europe, but had the advantage of being substantially less divergent from the vernacular tongues of average parishioners. Some Orthodox churches, such as the Russian Orthodox Church, Bulgarian Orthodox Church and Serbian Orthodox Church, as well as several Greek Catholic churches, still use Church Slavonic in their services and chants today.
You got it, Novi? Please note the article even speaks of some 'macedonian' language, which I disagree with, but in this way you won't say it was written by a Bulgarian, will you?
|
|