|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jan 13, 2012 2:57:59 GMT -5
^ Demonstrate where Ioan? ?? Has he proven the name Bulgar is Slavic, NO Has he disproven the name SRBIN, NO Has he proven the Iranian origin of Bulgars, NO Has he disproven Old Bulgarian words from Asparuch's time in Danube Bulgarian language, NO Can he prove that the Serbian declension system in OCS is in fact OLD Bulgarian? Now l want to ask you a BULGARIAN a simple, simpleton question. Ioan, you classify Asparuch's people as Bulgars, while you classify your people Bulgarians. Then why arn't the Chuvashi, Bulgarians and even the Gagauzi, Bulgarians, when one states the name BULGARIAN doesn't it mean nation? Wasn't Asparuch, when he settled in the Danube delta, considered to be BULGARIAN?
|
|
elemag
Senior Moderator
Posts: 369
|
Post by elemag on Jan 13, 2012 4:55:40 GMT -5
What a plank this Guzar is. In 6 years he still hasn't grasped the very simple fact that the Bulgarian nation was formed by unification of different ethnicities and bears the name of the people who founded the state.
|
|
|
Post by Moe Lester on Jan 13, 2012 5:13:44 GMT -5
Hence the reason why their ruling stratum passed on the Turkic name to their subjects, right Moe? Of course, though Slavic culture and language became dominant among the Bulgarians, their name was retained from their supposedly Turkic ancestors. So if the Russians were calling them Hrvati, instead of Bu Lgari, they all would had called them Hrvati, don't understand your logic Moe. The Turkic Bulgars of Asparuch passed on this Turkish name, he pronounced it in Turkish fashion, hence why they also today pronounce it in Turkish fashion because that L is a sign of Bulgarian influence. Your logic, and your direction to all of this is stating, if all of the other slavic nations are spelling it BULgarin, then it rules out the Turkic theory of Bulgarians because its a slavic linguistic feature, . The u- L in BuLgarin is a Turkish/Turkic feature when they pronounce the name, its pronounced in a similar way when the Turks or Germans have an Umlaut on top of a U. "Bulgar" is a name, probably of Turkic origin. The first Slavic account of "Bulgaria" was spelt "Bolgariya" (in old East Slavic), other Slavic languages followed. Then, for some odd reason, the Serbs and Croats took out the L. Both a Slavic translations for "Bulgaria". I have told Chento that when someone pronounces BuLgarin with U (B ugarin) instead of L (B' Lgarin) you are dealing with SERBIANISM in a population (Vardar, Western Bugarska, Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia). Now, you're going to have to talk to one of the Bulgarians about the regional differences in Bulgarian. I only know of standard Bulgarian. Just as l have explained, when one looks at this FUNDAMENTAL SERBIANISM, doesn't make you wonder if the Bulgarian settlement theory of Kuber is false and if the Bulgarian empires had an lasting effect on the Serbian populace in Vardar. As mentioned before, these Bulgarian empires were ONLY of a political nature. This is the KEY MOE to understanding these people are Serbs NOT Bu Lgari. Macedonians are neither Serbs, nor Bulgarian. They've been influenced by both empires. Macedonians didn't start using Bulgarian names over night, they didn't start using Bulgarian grammar overnight. Also you have to remember that when the Macedonians were forming their identity, they were living among Serbs. Tito's Yugoslavia also had an impact on their culture and language. So the ruling Turkish Bulgars dropped Turkish Bulgar for Slavic overnight? Moe, the Slavs and the Turkish Bulgars were Alien to each other, they weren't considered a single entity until around the 10th century, hence they called themselves the Empire of the Bulgars AND Slavs. They called their language "The Slavic Language" before they called it "Bulgarian". They formed a single ethnicity when they arrived in the Balkans and mixed. I again don't understand YOUR logic Moe, Asparuch Bulgars in 681 were a NATION TOO, arn't they ALSO BULGARIANS or OLD BULGARIANS? Your selling this theory that when Bulgars and Slavs united they became BULGARIANS, do you understand how laughable this is? There is a nation of Bulgarians in Russia also called the Chuvashi, so in your opinion they are Bulgars not BULGARIANS? Or even in Bulgaria itself, there is a people called Gagauzi, they arn't Bulgarians because they don't have slavic part, so they are just BULGARS? The Chucash are a mix of Bulgars and Suars, like the Bulgarians are a mixture of Slavs and Bulgars. You're logic is flawed, the Chuvash can't be Bulgarians since Bulgarians are a mix of Bulgars and the seven slavic tribes who inhabited modern-day Bulgaria. The Chuvash are not Bulgarians, they are Chuvash. No, not exactly Moe, we have a Bulgarian source that backs Carl Waldman, Catherine Mason and Mine of Turkic/Turkish Bulgarian vocabulary in modern Slavic Danubian Bulgarian, here: www.kroraina.com/b_lang/bl_u_kh.htmlYes, exactly. Modern-day Bulgarian was influenced by Turkish during the Ottoman occupation of Bulgaria. Also, you'll have to check with the Bulgarians on this forum, but from the translators and Bulgarian dictionaries I've used, I cannot find the words on the list on that website that claim these words are in the modern Bulgarian language. So there is no credible evidence for it so far. This is the reason WHY l have said, they spoke of variation of slavic with Turkic influence. I think the word you're looking for is "Turkish", since all Turkic words in Bulgarian are Turkish (brought over from the Ottomans). Turkic/Turkish theory is just an OPINION while BULGARIAN SOURCES have more crediblity because they propagate that Asparuch and his Turkmen are Iranian from the Pamirs. Sorry, no one buys this unless your biased and have a pro-danube bulgar agenda. However MY sources arn't Serbian, whereas your two are BULGARIAN sources. So, whenever someone posts a western source about the Serbian language that you disagree with, they know nothing because how can non-serbs know more about the Serbian language than Serbs. But when I post Bulgarian sources about the Bulgarian language, it's state propaganda. Looks like you have a bias, Novi. Also, my sources have as much credibility as yours since yours have shown now evidence of Bulgarian stemming form Turkic, only opinions. I could travel to Romania and talk about my experiences there and make opinions on their language and culture, but that wouldn't necessarily mean it's true. Again the name is pronounced and spelt with SERBIANISM. And? The surname was "Bugarski". Why would he have such a surname if it didn't mean he wasn't a Bulgarian? So now its just FASHION to excuse it once again, fathers naming their male sons as SRBIN indicates their nationality. This occurred during ZERO serbian influence and with 100% Bulgar influence we haven't seen them name their male sons Bu Lgarin. Why arn't they calling their male sons SRBIN anymore? Its like me saying to you why are they more orientated towards Serbia and feel closer to Serbs than Bulgars? How does naming your son "Srbin" mean he's a Serb. That's just narcissistic. So by your flawed logic, Bosniaks, Serbs, Montenegrins and West Bulgarians should've been calling their sons "Srbin", but no, it was only Macedonians. Which would mean it wasn't to signify their ethnic origin, it was most likely to pay homage to Serbs for something (maybe protecting them, maybe Serbs did something great for the Macedonians that they wanted to name some of their kids "Srbin"?). Bad example and a bad excuse, its obviously due to dialect NOT influence. I could excuse this and say, well Mihail is Hebrew and not Bulgarian and Dimitar is of Greek and not Bulgarian. But the name SRBIN is the elephant in the room Moe. Oh, so now it's dialect? So now Macedonian is Bulgarian, as opposed to your former claim that Macedonian is Serbian. You're much like a pendulum, Novi; you go to the left, then to the right, and back to the left. You're always changing your views depending on what you're trying to prove. SPOKE VARIATION OF SLAVIC WITH TURKIC INFLUENCE Ah, the old "If I say it loud enough, it must be true" method. Unfortunately for you, Novi, this doesn't work in the real world. Has he proven the name Bulgar is Slavic, NO That wasn't what I was debating. Has he disproven the name SRBIN, NO Yup. Has he proven the Iranian origin of Bulgars, NO I wasn't trying to, I was only showing how your "evidence" had as much validity as the sources I posted claiming Bulgarian was of Iranian origin. Has he disproven Old Bulgarian words from Asparuch's time in Danube Bulgarian language, NO The source you posted about this, so far, has proven to be false. But you'd have to consult the Bulgarians since they know much more about their language than I do. Can he prove that the Serbian declension system in OCS is in fact OLD Bulgarian? When were we arguing this? You were arguing that with the Bulgarians, not me.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Jan 13, 2012 6:52:56 GMT -5
And once again what we are witnessing: NOTHING GETS RAPED IN SLAVIC LINGUISTICS BY A FRENCHMAN!!!
|
|
|
Post by Moe Lester on Jan 13, 2012 7:01:23 GMT -5
Could you explain your language to him. You know more about your language than I do. I'm tired of proving Novi wrong, over and over again.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Jan 13, 2012 7:15:28 GMT -5
He doesnt listen and he doesnt understand simple facts.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Jan 13, 2012 8:05:42 GMT -5
^^^ Why have I not seen any two Serb-haters actually disagreeing with each other? ever? Serb-hating must have something like a connecting glue, which gets stronger the gayer the persons are... (and we have loads of them in the forums).
|
|
|
Post by Moe Lester on Jan 13, 2012 8:17:57 GMT -5
which gets stronger the gayer the persons are... (and we have loads of them in the forums). Are you 5 years old?
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Jan 13, 2012 8:50:25 GMT -5
or rather 3 years old. Its the old tactic in action: when Gyrro has nothing to say he resent to the namecalling to distract the attention from the discussion. The antibulgarism has proven to be quite a glue for Pyrro and Nothing, the so-called "brothers".
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Jan 13, 2012 8:51:11 GMT -5
By the way I m not antiserbian, I m objective.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Jan 13, 2012 9:02:51 GMT -5
BTW, i may not be 3 or 5 yrs old, but i swear to God i have less free time than you. What do you do for living guys? Are you unemployed? Is this *so* bad? Especially molested seems not only absolutely obsessed with the forums (about things he does not know) (lol), but also a person with unlimited amounts of free time...
As the ancient Greeks said "Argia mitir pasis kakias" --> unemployment (doing nothing) is the mother of all wickedness.
|
|
elemag
Senior Moderator
Posts: 369
|
Post by elemag on Jan 13, 2012 12:11:10 GMT -5
Says the man who is always here... Pyrro, don't try to transfer your own very distinct features to other guys. You will die without this forum.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Jan 13, 2012 13:46:43 GMT -5
exactly, pyrro you can be encountered often here... and nothing writes his long nonsense over and over again. moe obviouslly feels compelled to response to the nonsense. the same applies to most, because no one likes the lies of nothing.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Jan 13, 2012 13:56:32 GMT -5
i dont spend much time on forums any more. Its a waste of time. Thankfully, i can make up for the lost time. I hope for you the same.
|
|
elemag
Senior Moderator
Posts: 369
|
Post by elemag on Jan 13, 2012 18:05:29 GMT -5
You don't spend much time here? Hey, back to your senses.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jan 13, 2012 22:10:06 GMT -5
"Of course, though Slavic culture and language became dominant among the Bulgarians, their name was retained from their supposedly Turkic ancestors." ARE you such a dumb a$$ Moe, honestly. Do you have a BRAIN? Everybody will agree with me that this name Bulgaria is not Slavic but Turkic/Turkish. Are you such a GOOF to say SUPPOSEDLY Turkic ancestors, so in your opinion they were Iranian from the Pamirs, as postulated from the institute of Sofia? WHY SUPPOSEDLY? "Bulgar" is a name, probably of Turkic origin. The first Slavic account of "Bulgaria" was spelt "Bolgariya" (in old East Slavic), other Slavic languages followed. Then, for some odd reason, the Serbs and Croats took out the L. Both a Slavic translations for "Bulgaria". Lets take your arguement, the SERBS have taken out the u- L pronouncination, as witnessed by SERBIAN populations from Vardar, Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia, Albania, Croatia, Western Bugarska and Northern Greece. WE ARE DEALING WITH SERBIANISMS as noted by Vatroslav Oblak. So in essence these Slavs ARE SERBIAN? Your beginning to CONTRADICT yourself Moe or Ivo "Now, you're going to have to talk to one of the Bulgarians about the regional differences in Bulgarian. I only know of standard Bulgarian." When its convenent to back away, don't back away now, you've put yourself into this mess and your going to explain to me, not the Bu Lgari. I want you to explain to me, l'm going to use a pro-bulgar analysis of comparing dialects to modern evolved forms of languages. In Western Bugarska, the Torlakian regions, my lost serbian brothers, tell me, why do they say the following words for l, you, he, she, as: I = Ja He = On She = Ona They = Oni But not I = Az He = Toj She = Tya They = Toa These above words are cave man words. "Macedonians are neither Serbs, nor Bulgarian. They've been influenced by both empires. Macedonians didn't start using Bulgarian names over night, they didn't start using Bulgarian grammar overnight. Also you have to remember that when the Macedonians were forming their identity, they were living among Serbs. Tito's Yugoslavia also had an impact on their culture and language." They are SERBS, they follow all Serbian traditions, their ancestors are Serbs. Moe, then explain why Old Church Slavonic is actually Old Church Bulgarian when Modern Serbian has a fully DECLENSIONAL language as Old Church Bulgarian. Old Church Bulgarian HAS Serbian grammar, whereas Bulgarian doesn't, get where l'm going with this. If we are to use a simplistic approach and link dialects to modern standard EVOLVED forms of language, then its safe to say 30% of Bulgaria speaks Serbian, 50% of Vardar speaks Serbian, and finally, the language that the great two greek brothers whom they devised Cyrillic from, learnt their slavic from an old Serbian language (Old Church Slavonic) considering it is completely STRUCTURALLY Serbian Slavic unlike BuLgartski that is STRUCTURALLY LIKE MODERN ROMANIAN A ROMANCE LANGUAGE. "They called their language "The Slavic Language" before they called it "Bulgarian". They formed a single ethnicity when they arrived in the Balkans and mixed." Why is that Moe? Because Slavic was practically ONE language mass from Thessaloniki to Novgorod (Modern Russia) there was no differentiation between all Slavs from the Balkans, we all spoke ONE damn dialect before a NATURAL EVOLUTION OCCURRED due to pressures surrounding the slavic speakers at specific locations. This is the main reason why l tell people here that we must AVOID linking people with languages or modern evolved forms of dialects because it doesn't take into account the real historical story of the slavs (balkan slavs). To get your answer Moe, you must look at migration, culture (folklore, weddings, funerals, music) etc...not languages. If that was the case then the Wends of Germany are Poles because their modern evolved language resembles Polish speakers from Poland and we Balkan Serbs can't be related to them because their language is alien to us.....understand? "The Chucash are a mix of Bulgars and Suars, like the Bulgarians are a mixture of Slavs and Bulgars. You're logic is flawed, the Chuvash can't be Bulgarians since Bulgarians are a mix of Bulgars and the seven slavic tribes who inhabited modern-day Bulgaria. The Chuvash are not Bulgarians, they are Chuvash." Aha, so the Chuvashi cannot be classified as BULGARIANS because they don't have this slavic component? Hang-on, haven't they mixed with some Russian Slavs, so your logic makes me believe they ARE Bulgarians, right Moe? Even the Gagauzi from Bulgaria, can't they be classified as Bulgarians because they don't have this slavic component? Your logic is twisted Moe, when one says Bulgarian, it means a nation, Asparuch was a Bulgarian with NO slavic blood, he was inactual fact a PURE BULGARIAN TURK. "Yes, exactly. Modern-day Bulgarian was influenced by Turkish during the Ottoman occupation of Bulgaria. Also, you'll have to check with the Bulgarians on this forum, but from the translators and Bulgarian dictionaries I've used, I cannot find the words on the list on that website that claim these words are in the modern Bulgarian language. So there is no credible evidence for it so far." Its a Bulgarian source and they tell us of the Old Bulgar vocab in modern Bulgarian, these Turkic words are prior to the Ottomans. The link shows from U to Z, but from prior dealings here l have shown from A to Z, and my favorite Old Turkic/Turkish Bulgarian word is BUNAR, it describes you very well. "And? The surname was "Bugarski". Why would he have such a surname if it didn't mean he wasn't a Bulgarian?" Exarchos 1872 - 1912. Again, the name SRBIN was prevalent with the vardarian serbs prior to the establishment of the demon known as the Bulgarian Exarchos. Surnames Moe, were basically absent with pesants 200 years ago, and fathers kept naming their sons SRBIN, as attested with Turkish Ottoman sources. "How does naming your son "Srbin" mean he's a Serb. That's just narcissistic. So by your flawed logic, Bosniaks, Serbs, Montenegrins and West Bulgarians should've been calling their sons "Srbin", but no, it was only Macedonians. Which would mean it wasn't to signify their ethnic origin, it was most likely to pay homage to Serbs for something (maybe protecting them, maybe Serbs did something great for the Macedonians that they wanted to name some of their kids "Srbin"?)." Can you prove this? This is just your desparate attempt to write it off and excuse the OBVIOUS, your kicking a dead horse again Moe. "Oh, so now it's dialect? So now Macedonian is Bulgarian, as opposed to your former claim that Macedonian is Serbian. You're much like a pendulum, Novi; you go to the left, then to the right, and back to the left. You're always changing your views depending on what you're trying to prove." Read above, again. I've explained that if we are to view standard vardarian as Bulgarian dialect, then could we view Torlakian/shopi that is spoken in Vardar (Northern and Eastern regions), Bulgaria (Western and Pirin regions) as Serbian dialect? "Yup." Not at all Moe, no sources and evidences doesn't make you defeat my arguement here, so try again. "I wasn't trying to, I was only showing how your "evidence" had as much validity as the sources I posted claiming Bulgarian was of Iranian origin." BS, not true.
|
|
|
Post by Moe Lester on Jan 14, 2012 2:16:00 GMT -5
ARE you such a dumb a$$ Moe, honestly. Do you have a BRAIN? Sorry, but in the real world, calling people "dumbasses" doesn't make you right. Everybody will agree with me that this name Bulgaria is not Slavic but Turkic/Turkish. Are you such a GOOF to say SUPPOSEDLY Turkic ancestors, so in your opinion they were Iranian from the Pamirs, as postulated from the institute of Sofia? Did you even read anything I posted? "Bulgar" is Turkic, "Bulgaria" is Slavicised, which comes from the Turkic "Bulgar". Because you love extreme historical revisionism so much. ;D Lets take your arguement, the SERBS have taken out the u- L pronouncination, as witnessed by SERBIAN populations from Vardar, Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia, Albania, Croatia, Western Bugarska and Northern Greece. WE ARE DEALING WITH SERBIANISMS as noted by Vatroslav Oblak. So in essence these Slavs ARE SERBIAN? By the same flawed logic you exert here, then the Slavic people of Karas, Romania are Bulgarians because they write "Wolf" as "Влк" as opposed to the Serbian "Вук", same for the Serbs in Vranje, Serbia who write it as "Вълк". This would mean, using your logic, that these people are in fact Bulgarians. Do you follow this (your) logic? When its convenent to back away, don't back away now, you've put yourself into this mess and your going to explain to me, not the Bu Lgari. We weren't talking about this in the first place, every time I proved you wrong you changed the subject. Now we're talking about whether Macedonians were Serbs or Bulgarians because you couldn't prove Bulgarian was a Turkic language. I want you to explain to me, l'm going to use a pro-bulgar analysis of comparing dialects to modern evolved forms of languages. In Western Bugarska, the Torlakian regions, my lost serbian brothers, tell me, why do they say the following words for l, you, he, she, as: I = Ja He = On She = Ona They = Oni But not I = Az He = Toj She = Tya They = Toa These above words are cave man words. And in south-Eastern Serbia, there are Torlaks that use grammar similar to Bulgarian. Torlaks say Den like the Bulgarians, Torlaks say Zdravja, instead of Zdravlja. By your logic, south-eastern Serbs were originally Bulgarians (I don't think this, I'm just trying to show how using your logic, we come to ridiculous conclusions and this is an inconsistent way of knowing who's who. They are SERBS, they follow all Serbian traditions, their ancestors are Serbs. Macedonians were influenced by the Serbs as well as the Bulgarians. You pick out the Serbian elements of Macedonian culture, and ignore the Bulgarian elements. And when your shown the Bulgarians elements you call it propaganda. You create massive contradictions. Moe, then explain why Old Church Slavonic is actually Old Church Bulgarian when Modern Serbian has a fully DECLENSIONAL language as Old Church Bulgarian. Old Church Bulgarian HAS Serbian grammar, whereas Bulgarian doesn't, get where l'm going with this. If we are to use a simplistic approach and link dialects to modern standard EVOLVED forms of language, then its safe to say 30% of Bulgaria speaks Serbian, 50% of Vardar speaks Serbian, and finally, the language that the great two greek brothers whom they devised Cyrillic from, learnt their slavic from an old Serbian language (Old Church Slavonic) considering it is completely STRUCTURALLY Serbian Slavic I wasn't arguing this, if you want to talk about old Church slavonic, discuss it with the Bulgarians. Stick to the topic. unlike BuLgartski that is STRUCTURALLY LIKE MODERN ROMANIAN A ROMANCE LANGUAGE. So first it was Mongol, then it was Turkic, now it's a Romance language? You're a funny fella, Novi Why is that Moe? Because Slavic was practically ONE language mass from Thessaloniki to Novgorod (Modern Russia) there was no differentiation between all Slavs from the Balkans, we all spoke ONE damn dialect before a NATURAL EVOLUTION OCCURRED due to pressures surrounding the slavic speakers at specific locations. This is the main reason why l tell people here that we must AVOID linking people with languages or modern evolved forms of dialects because it doesn't take into account the real historical story of the slavs (balkan slavs). To get your answer Moe, you must look at migration, culture (folklore, weddings, funerals, music) etc...not languages. If that was the case then the Wends of Germany are Poles because their modern evolved language resembles Polish speakers from Poland and we Balkan Serbs can't be related to them because their language is alien to us.....understand? Oh man, so many contradictions to keep up with. Just before you were trying to prove Western Bulgarians are Serbs through the language they speak, and trying to prove OCS is Serbian by language as well, and that Macedonians are Serbs by looking at their language. Have some integrity, please. Also, They started calling their language "Bulgarian" during the middle Bulgarian period (12-15 century), whereas other slavs called their language by something else (not "Slavic") at earlier dates, eg, Slovene (972-1093, Freising manuscripts), Croatian (1100, Baška tablet) and Russian (1000). So Bulgarians were on the last ones ones to call their language something other than "Slavic" (along with the Czechs and Poles). Aha, so the Chuvashi cannot be classified as BULGARIANS because they don't have this slavic component? Hang-on, haven't they mixed with some Russian Slavs, so your logic makes me believe they ARE Bulgarians, right Moe? Even the Gagauzi from Bulgaria, can't they be classified as Bulgarians because they don't have this slavic component? Your logic is twisted Moe, when one says Bulgarian, it means a nation, Asparuch was a Bulgarian with NO slavic blood, he was inactual fact a PURE BULGARIAN TURK. The Chuvash are Bulgars. The Gaugaz people are Turkic. Asparuh was a Bulgar, just like Rurik was a "Rus" but considered a "Russkije" today. No Slavic blood? He wasn't pure Turkic either, just like the Serbs aren't pure slavs, they don't have much Slavic DNA, does that make them non-slavs? No, it doesn't. They're still slavs. Also, Bulgarian is a nationality and an ethnicity. Just like French is both an ethnicity and nationality. Its a Bulgarian source and they tell us of the Old Bulgar vocab in modern Bulgarian, these Turkic words are prior to the Ottomans. The link shows from U to Z, but from prior dealings here l have shown from A to Z, and my favorite Old Turkic/Turkish Bulgarian word is BUNAR, it describes you very well. I've been trying to find these words in the Bulgarian language and couldn't find them, I guess you should discuss this with a native Bulgarian speaker. I guess you don't check your sources before you post them. I was also trying to find "Bunar" in Bulgarian dictionaries and couldn't find it either. I'll check with Ioan or Ivo whether that's actually a Bulgarian word. Exarchos 1872 - 1912. Again, the name SRBIN was prevalent with the vardarian serbs prior to the establishment of the demon known as the Bulgarian Exarchos. Surnames Moe, were basically absent with pesants 200 years ago, and fathers kept naming their sons SRBIN, as attested with Turkish Ottoman sources. So now you're saying the "big, bad Bulgarians" were trying to Bulgarianise the Macedonians? This map says Bosniaks and Croats are Serbs, but the people of Macedonian are Bulgarians. Why would they stop with Bosniaks and Croats? Why not add the Macedonians as well? Because some Macedonians were in fact Bulgarians, and some were in fact Serbs. Did you know that After the Christian population of the bishoprics of Skopje and Ohrid voted in 1874 overwhelmingly in favour of joining the Exarchate (Skopje by 91%, Ohrid by 97%) the Bulgarian Exarchate became in control of the whole of Vardar and Pirin Macedonia. So this proves that Macedonians weren't forced into anything, except for living in a Bulgarian and Serbian nation after the Ottomans. Can you prove this? This is just your desparate attempt to write it off and excuse the OBVIOUS, your kicking a dead horse again Moe. All you've done is prove that some Macedonians named their sons "Srbin" but not why. You speculated why, which has no validity. My reason has as much credibility as yours. Read above, again. I've explained that if we are to view standard vardarian as Bulgarian dialect, then could we view Torlakian/shopi that is spoken in Vardar (Northern and Eastern regions), Bulgaria (Western and Pirin regions) as Serbian dialect? But Macedonian isn't a dialect, it's a language. Aww,just like that ? No sources, no nothing, just calling it "BS"? Well, If me not using sources means I proved nothing, than you didn't either ;D. Have a nice day .
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Jan 14, 2012 4:51:19 GMT -5
Says the man who is always here... Pyrro, don't try to transfer your own very distinct features to other guys. You will die without this forum. lilly idiot, just because my session is set up to never expire, and my home computer has an uptime (currently) of 84 days, it does not mean i have spent the last 84 days on the forums. oopps i exceeded my daily limit just writing to you. I guess the next idiot (or you) will have to wait till tomorrow for an answer. lol
|
|
|
Post by ulf on Jan 14, 2012 21:25:38 GMT -5
What do you find of this map?(it was German view prior to/during Balkan Wars)
|
|
|
Post by Moe Lester on Jan 14, 2012 21:30:12 GMT -5
What do you find of this map?(it was German view prior to/during Balkan Wars) +1 Macedonians aren't Serbs, not Bulgarians.
|
|