|
Post by odel on Sept 8, 2011 13:02:20 GMT -5
moral of the story : a moron can only make an oxy-moron ;D lol! quotable! Well, he's more of a moron if he uses a word he clearly doesn't know what means, even if it was wrong, which it isn't it wouldn't have been an oxymoron.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Sept 9, 2011 4:21:52 GMT -5
ooops i didn't know odel is a chechen.... how funny.... a chechen supporting the muslim slavs (ex-serbs) in bosnia.... when half of his countrymen (south albania) are certified vlahs who still speak romanian. (ohhh and live in villages with serbian names lol)
|
|
|
Post by derk on Sept 9, 2011 14:35:08 GMT -5
ooops i didn't know odel is a chechen.... how funny.... a chechen supporting the muslim slavs (ex-serbs) in bosnia.... when half of his countrymen (south albania) are certified vlahs who still speak romanian. (ohhh and live in villages with serbian names lol) Your stupidity knows no bounds Pyyross. BTW your jokes make my ears hurt... You are such an idiot that you are a plague to mankind...
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Sept 10, 2011 8:37:24 GMT -5
^^^ at least i don't beg for attention like you, mrs attention mega-whore.
|
|
|
Post by Croatian Vanguard on Sept 10, 2011 9:10:08 GMT -5
Pyrros, did you even read anything from the link? Because you're on a completely different line. Basically: Vlachs populated areas in Bosnia that were depopulated; these Vlachs were Orthodox; they were assimilated into the Serb ethnos. It was Ottoman policy to make sure depopulated areas were populated again; in this case with Vlachs, and they were Orthodox. The Vlachs were easy assimilation targets as they had little sense of ethnic identity and they were assimilated by the Serbs. And as I said I ignored most of your arguements due to them being irrelevant and logically false. Don't try to reason with this bafoon. People like him do not listen , they plug their ears and yell 'la la la' to any valid argument against their bs and then they regurgitate same bs over and over no matter how much its discredited. Example below : This 19t century "argument" is discredited among all but a handful of neo-seseljites. Western Stokavian has always been part of the Croatian ethnos. It was we who wrote the first official text seven centuries ago with the title 'Croatian' in the Stokavian dialect. Serbs were speaking 'slavoserbian' a the time which is a pretty much incomprehensible language to any 'Serbo-Croatian' speaker today and more closely resembles east south slav languages Torlak , Bulgarian ,and Macedonian. I have less respect for Serbs because they had to copy Croatian literary tradition because they virtually had none of their own. Even skeptics in Belgrade were not at first happpy about Karadzic 'corrupting' Serbian with 'his Croatian.' Kaj, Ca ,and Sto all still belong to the same family of West south Slavonic. While there are different words borrowed the universal grammer is still pretty much in tact and except for the way extreme areas like the mixed Slovene villages in N.Croatia or the Croat villages in S.Slovenia , they are still all mutually intelligible. Old Serbian was not even West south Slavonic. It was closer to East which means its grammer was like that of Bulgarian. It shouldn't surprise you as to why Karadzic developed his grammer from the western areas encircled by Croats and not the heart of Serbia like Sumadija. I also respect Serbs less for taking on the name 'Serb.' These nameless Slavs could've chosen something more noble for themselves than an international word for 'slave' & 'smelly shoe.' You would have more honor if you remained calling yourselves Rascians and not the name your masters bestowed upon you.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Sept 10, 2011 13:55:03 GMT -5
Pyrros, did you even read anything from the link? Because you're on a completely different line. Basically: Vlachs populated areas in Bosnia that were depopulated; these Vlachs were Orthodox; they were assimilated into the Serb ethnos. It was Ottoman policy to make sure depopulated areas were populated again; in this case with Vlachs, and they were Orthodox. The Vlachs were easy assimilation targets as they had little sense of ethnic identity and they were assimilated by the Serbs. And as I said I ignored most of your arguements due to them being irrelevant and logically false. Don't try to reason with this bafoon. People like him do not listen , they plug their ears and yell 'la la la' to any valid argument against their bs and then they regurgitate same bs over and over no matter how much its discredited. Example below : This 19t century "argument" is discredited among all but a handful of neo-seseljites. Western Stokavian has always been part of the Croatian ethnos. It was we who wrote the first official text seven centuries ago with the title 'Croatian' in the Stokavian dialect. Serbs were speaking 'slavoserbian' a the time which is a pretty much incomprehensible language to any 'Serbo-Croatian' speaker today and more closely resembles east south slav languages Torlak , Bulgarian ,and Macedonian. I have less respect for Serbs because they had to copy Croatian literary tradition because they virtually had none of their own. Even skeptics in Belgrade were not at first happpy about Karadzic 'corrupting' Serbian with 'his Croatian.' Kaj, Ca ,and Sto all still belong to the same family of West south Slavonic. While there are different words borrowed the universal grammer is still pretty much in tact and except for the way extreme areas like the mixed Slovene villages in N.Croatia or the Croat villages in S.Slovenia , they are still all mutually intelligible. Old Serbian was not even West south Slavonic. It was closer to East which means its grammer was like that of Bulgarian. It shouldn't surprise you as to why Karadzic developed his grammer from the western areas encircled by Croats and not the heart of Serbia like Sumadija. I also respect Serbs less for taking on the name 'Serb.' These nameless Slavs could've chosen something more noble for themselves than an international word for 'slave' & 'smelly shoe.' You would have more honor if you remained calling yourselves Rascians and not the name your masters bestowed upon you. well that's fundamentally wrong because "slaveno-srpski" was a church language used only amongst clergy and the upper class, and what vuk karadzic did was record the common serbs' language and put a stamp on it. and this while no croatian language formally existed. dont throw stones while in a (traditional) croat glass-house. we serbs make our houses from stone
|
|
|
Post by uz on Sept 10, 2011 16:32:40 GMT -5
You already know the above is not true, the term "Serb" was never signifying slavery.
the original definition; Indo-European root *ser- 'to watch over, protect', akin to Latin servare 'to keep, guard, protect, preserve, observe'.
|
|
|
Post by Moe Lester on Sept 10, 2011 19:41:09 GMT -5
You already know the above is not true, the term "Serb" was never signifying slavery. the original definition; Indo-European root *ser- 'to watch over, protect', akin to Latin servare 'to keep, guard, protect, preserve, observe'.A Macedonian guy (There's heaps of them in Australia) told me "Srbi" meant something was itching. as well as being the name for Serbs.
|
|
|
Post by uz on Sept 10, 2011 19:43:34 GMT -5
Svrbi is to itch/scratch .... Serbian as well uses that term. Serb/Srb/Srbi is completely different.
|
|
|
Post by Moe Lester on Sept 10, 2011 20:03:31 GMT -5
Svrbi is to itch/scratch .... Serbian as well uses that term. Serb/Srb/Srbi is completely different. Which one came first?
|
|
|
Post by Moe Lester on Sept 10, 2011 20:05:07 GMT -5
Also, what's with Pyrros having 20% warning level? What is that?
|
|
|
Post by uz on Sept 10, 2011 20:08:58 GMT -5
Svrbi is to itch/scratch .... Serbian as well uses that term. Serb/Srb/Srbi is completely different. Which one came first? The Serb entity came before the language was devised, that's fairly obvious. If you heard both terms in context with proper pronounciation, you wouldn't make the mistake of thinking it's the same.
|
|
|
Post by Moe Lester on Sept 10, 2011 20:24:48 GMT -5
The Serb entity came before the language was devised, that's fairly obvious. If you heard both terms in context with proper pronounciation, you wouldn't make the mistake of thinking it's the same. To me, it sounds the same.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Sept 10, 2011 20:50:21 GMT -5
You already know the above is not true, the term "Serb" was never signifying slavery. the original definition; Indo-European root *ser- 'to watch over, protect', akin to Latin servare 'to keep, guard, protect, preserve, observe'.A Macedonian guy (There's heaps of them in Australia) told me "Srbi" meant something was itching. as well as being the name for Serbs. it's a different word completely, it's root is vrbiti the s simply acts as a reflexive. Serb actually finds it's origins in old indo-european, preserved in sanskrit - sarva - 'all' 'everything', and armenian surb - 'holy'.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Sept 14, 2011 6:51:34 GMT -5
nice to see Radiate raped once again. Good job TR. PS Ustaso : STFU
|
|
|
Post by Croatian Vanguard on Sept 14, 2011 7:32:28 GMT -5
Don't try to reason with this bafoon. People like him do not listen , they plug their ears and yell 'la la la' to any valid argument against their bs and then they regurgitate same bs over and over no matter how much its discredited. Example below : This 19t century "argument" is discredited among all but a handful of neo-seseljites. Western Stokavian has always been part of the Croatian ethnos. It was we who wrote the first official text seven centuries ago with the title 'Croatian' in the Stokavian dialect. Serbs were speaking 'slavoserbian' a the time which is a pretty much incomprehensible language to any 'Serbo-Croatian' speaker today and more closely resembles east south slav languages Torlak , Bulgarian ,and Macedonian. I have less respect for Serbs because they had to copy Croatian literary tradition because they virtually had none of their own. Even skeptics in Belgrade were not at first happpy about Karadzic 'corrupting' Serbian with 'his Croatian.' Kaj, Ca ,and Sto all still belong to the same family of West south Slavonic. While there are different words borrowed the universal grammer is still pretty much in tact and except for the way extreme areas like the mixed Slovene villages in N.Croatia or the Croat villages in S.Slovenia , they are still all mutually intelligible. Old Serbian was not even West south Slavonic. It was closer to East which means its grammer was like that of Bulgarian. It shouldn't surprise you as to why Karadzic developed his grammer from the western areas encircled by Croats and not the heart of Serbia like Sumadija. I also respect Serbs less for taking on the name 'Serb.' These nameless Slavs could've chosen something more noble for themselves than an international word for 'slave' & 'smelly shoe.' You would have more honor if you remained calling yourselves Rascians and not the name your masters bestowed upon you. well that's fundamentally wrong because "slaveno-srpski" was a church language used only amongst clergy and the upper class, and what vuk karadzic did was record the common serbs' language and put a stamp on it. and this while no croatian language formally existed. dont throw stones while in a (traditional) croat glass-house. we serbs make our houses from stone Don't pretend you know what Serbs actually spoke because you can't know that. Serbs had no literary tradition before Vuk Karadzic. All your documents were written in a universal Slav language like you already said. The only thing you guys had was oral tradition which can easily be translated into different languages. Even Belgrade scoffed at Karadzic for his imposition of Croatian in his 'Serbian' dictionary. We already had a literary tradition and the first formal stokavian text (ever - in any language) was called the Croatian Prayer book. You consider the diversity in the Croatian language a 'weakness' of ours when its quite the contrary. Only idiots that try fruitlessly to prove their nation is homogenous run into these road blocks and consider diversity a 'glass house.' Truth is you deny your own diversity but at the same time try to use it to make an argument lol. Case in point : You wish to call Timok , Macedonian, and Western Bulgarian language 'Serbian' while at the same time try to call standard Croatian 'Serbian' as well. Lol wth? As if you are completely unaware that these are not just mere dialects ( like the different ways of saying 'what') but fundmentally different branches of Slavic language altogether. It's like you're caught between the East S.Slavic and West S.Slavic. You want it all but logically you cannot have it. Croatia was divided among 3 or more major empires for most of its history and the Croatian language in all of these areas developed differently as you would expect since all of those empires spoke their own foreign language. Regardles , different ways of saying 'what' isn't enough to divide the languages from their core - they are all West S.Slavic and follow the same rules of grammer for the most part. Not counting foreign words ( Italian , Turkish , German) if all 3 dialects had a universal Slavonic vocabulary they would be mutually intelligible , which they are. My good friend is from Novalja. On that island they don't speak Shto, Cha , or Kaj , but Ca ( Tsa) and Ki instead of Tko. If he uses common Croatian vocabulary ( i.e. not so much Croatianized Italian words) I can understand him just fine even using his dialect. I understand him better than a Serb meatshop owner we have here from Bolisegrad , Serbia. This guy uses Slavic vocabulary but the way he says words is bizzare to me. Im sure a Macedonian or Bulgarian would have an easier time with his Serbian. I'd rather have a house of glass all around rather than just one wall stone and the rest empty.
|
|
|
Post by Croatian Vanguard on Sept 14, 2011 7:39:20 GMT -5
I will say this however. While theres nothing wrong with taking (Western) stokavian as the standard , since most Croats for centuries have spoke some variation of it ( see shchakvian too) , I don't really understand why we took Ijekavian. Ijekavian standard we did borrow from Vuk even though Vuk borrowed that from Croatian learning centers in Dubrovnik. Most Croats spoke Ikavian by and large. Why take a Montenegrin and Herzegovian dialect when they accounted for only a fraction of our population? To me , the most common Croatian , the way it was , can be found among the Bunjevci and Sokci in Vojvodina and Slavonia - stokavian/ikavian. These settlers brought their language with them from Lika and didn't change it much. I'm proud my region is Ikavian for the most part. Let's make the change!
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Sept 14, 2011 12:38:52 GMT -5
"The Croatian prayer book"
wow, quite a book!
Its actually well known, that he modeled his standardization on the eastern herzegovinian dialect, which he himself spoke in Eastern Serbia.
Eastern Herzegovina & Montenegro are completely Serbian, so I don't know where you're getting this stuff about 'croatian'.
Priso, i do not consider your 'diversity' to be your weakness, instead i consider your copying most things serbian and mass-praising of fascists to be your (Croats') weakness.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Sept 14, 2011 12:41:36 GMT -5
I will say this however. While theres nothing wrong with taking (Western) stokavian as the standard , since most Croats for centuries have spoke some variation of it ( see shchakvian too) , I don't really understand why we took Ijekavian. Ijekavian standard we did borrow from Vuk even though Vuk borrowed that from Croatian learning centers in Dubrovnik. Most Croats spoke Ikavian by and large. Why take a Montenegrin and Herzegovian dialect when they accounted for only a fraction of our population? To me , the most common Croatian , the way it was , can be found among the Bunjevci and Sokci in Vojvodina and Slavonia - stokavian/ikavian. These settlers brought their language with them from Lika and didn't change it much. I'm proud my region is Ikavian for the most part. Let's make the change! if you want to know, i can help you. it's because before 1900, the majority in that land now known as croatia were catholic serbs, and even after becoming 'croats' and killing their own, they would never start speaking another language.
|
|
|
Post by branislavnusic on Aug 23, 2018 6:58:22 GMT -5
I will say this however. While theres nothing wrong with taking (Western) stokavian as the standard , since most Croats for centuries have spoke some variation of it ( see shchakvian too) , I don't really understand why we took Ijekavian. Ijekavian standard we did borrow from Vuk even though Vuk borrowed that from Croatian learning centers in Dubrovnik. Most Croats spoke Ikavian by and large. Why take a Montenegrin and Herzegovian dialect when they accounted for only a fraction of our population? To me , the most common Croatian , the way it was , can be found among the Bunjevci and Sokci in Vojvodina and Slavonia - stokavian/ikavian. These settlers brought their language with them from Lika and didn't change it much. I'm proud my region is Ikavian for the most part. Let's make the change! if you want to know, i can help you. it's because before 1900, the majority in that land now known as croatia were catholic serbs, and even after becoming 'croats' and killing their own, they would never start speaking another language. This video will shock Croats:
|
|