Talk:Shtokavian/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Common shtokavian dialect = coming from the same ethnic stock (despite national lines)?

Judging by the existence of a common dialect, it is possible to argue that people who speak shtokavian actually come from the same ethnic stock despite the fact that they are divided in national terms into Serbs, Croats, Bosniaks and Montenegrins. Shtokavian is essentially an 'organic' dialect - a mother tongue for the people who speak it. It is spoken across the national lines without being a product of a colonial situation (example of this being the prevalence of the English language in Ireland).

Are the speakers of shtokavian dialect (as a 'multinational dialect') an example of the same ethnic stock divided by national lines similar to the speakers of a common Niederdeutsch/Nedersaksisch dialect in Germany/the Netherlands?

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.80.113.166 (talk) 04:28, 19 January 2007 (UTC).

Some of the peoples from that "same ethnic stock" declare themselves under their different national names for over a thousand years.
But, before the Ice Age, many of Indoeuropean peoples were part of the same language stock :) Kubura 07:22, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course that people who speak shtokavian actually come from the same ethnic stock despite the fact that they are divided in national terms into Serbs, Croats, Bosniaks and Montenegrins. All those 4 'nations' are actually a same ethnic stock, sharing same mentality, same language and almost identical genes.(All they love to listen to the new Turbo-folk music, lately spreading all around Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia, etc.:)) ) Here's an interesting link by a famuous italian slavist(Mr. Merlocampi), which explains everything about the Stokavian Dialect, as a basis for Serbo-Croatian language. It is in Serbo-Croatian. Link: http://govori.tripod.com/ Enjoy. Cheers.24.86.110.10 04:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

"famuous italian slavist(Mr. Merlocampi)" with no hits on Google?! Plantago (talk) 13:32, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, he is on google for sure, just type:,stokavski jezik'('stokavian language' in serbocroatian)and you'll get there, a HUUGE article on this beautiful language, common for Serbs, Croats, Montenegrians, Dalmatians, Bosnians, Bunjevacs. This language is a live proof that all those 'divisions' into 'nations' or 'regional groups' of South Slavs are an absurd and a nonsense. Serbs and Croats and all their 'derivates'are of SAME ethnicity, they speak same language-SerboCroatian or Stokavian and it's only the religion that is different between them. If you want to know more on the unity of the Serbo-Croatian Language, see the latest articles of the croatian linguist Dr. Ivo Pranjkovic, which were published in split's daily paper 'Slobodna Dalmacija'in 2006. Oh, by the way, where is the map of the stokavian dialect of the Serbo-Croatian Language? There are maps of the other its dialects. It should be presented clearly. And another thing, about the statistics above, there are MUCH MORE catholics whose native tongue is Stokavian. All Dalmatia is now Stokavian, not just its Southern part. Regards;207.34.170.129 (talk) 21:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

To be more accurate to the facts, the sentence in the article: "The Štokavian dialect is spoken in Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the southern part of Austria’s Burgenland, and in part of Croatia" should be written as: "The Štokavian dialect is spoken in Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, THE MAJOR PART OF CROATIA, and Burgenland in Austria." It's a fact that nowadays The Stokavian dialect is spoken by the vast majority of Croatians (approx=80%). The other 'dialects' (which are scientifically languages, not dialects) are spoken just in area north of Zagreb (kajkavian~12%) and on the islands in north Dalmatia (cakavian~8%). Those are the facts that should not be hidden behind some irrational 'wishy-wishes', presented by a few nationalistic coloured individuals who are totally isolated in their ideas on wikipedia. Cheers.24.86.127.209 (talk) 04:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

As I told you, that's just a POV, that directly sends a message of separatism and hatred. That's what is isolating you and your 'supporters' from the real world and makes you being BALKAn instead of EU. It will be like that until you accept the reality and face the truth, which is the facts I that I listed above. Adios.24.86.116.250 (talk) 14:57, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Ekavian, Ikavian, and Ijekavian

These definitely need to have their own article or articles. I couldn't find anything showing that they once had articles, but were changed to redirect to Shtokavian. Shtokavian is simply not the same thing, even if they usually conincide (outside of Serbia). There is a lot of phonetic and dialect information that would have to be included there, and not on Shtokavian. Maybe this should all be on the article for Yat, even though it relates to all Slavic languages. Serbo-Croatian_language#Rendering_of_yat has some useful information, but more is needed. The implication that Croatian and Serbian are both the same dialect should be obviously false regardless of where you stand on that dispute.

Does anyone know how and why the redirect and how it could be changed? As we Kajkavians, hvala lepa.

Coldipa (talk) 15:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, the pragmatical divison on yat-reflexes is completely orthogonal to that of dialectology and standardology. I've redirected those to Yat. There is no such thing as "Ekavian dialect" or "Ijekavian dialect", this silly prejudice is a remnant of times when this, truth be telled - not so important isogloss was a major differentiating factor among "varieties" of "our common language", or "ethnical subdialects".. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 19:25, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

The map in the article doesn't present the whole shtokavian area

The author of the article should change the map of Shtokavian language or dialect, as it doesn't show the whole Shtokavian area. The Shtokavian is spoken in Croatia, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Serbia and Montenegro, but on the map you have in the article there's only the areas of Croatia and Bosnia/Herzegovina shown, which is just a half of the shtokavian area. Please correct this and put the right map. A good one is found on this wiki-link: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Shtokavian_Subdialect_en.png

Thanks and regards.24.86.116.250 (talk) 05:29, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that map is made with intention of showing just dialect's of Croatian language in Croatia and BiH. While there are speakers of other languages (Serbia and Bosnian) in that area, as speakers of Croatian outside that area (Northern Bačka in Vojvodina and Hungary, Northern Baranja in Hungary and Krašovani in Romania) those are not main points of that map. Map image which is given is somewhat impricise (low detailed) and for what I can see borders of Torlakian dialect are wrong.
If you wish you can made map of the whole shtokavian dialects, but I would ask you to leave the Croatian language map in Croatia and BiH intact.
Thanx.
--Čeha (razgovor) 10:49, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but there's NO LOGIC to cut one dialect ( in this case - Shtokavian ) into 2, and presenting it just partially. As first, all the speakers of Shtokavian dialect speak SAME LANGUAGE, call it serbian, croatian or bosnian, so there's NO speakers of other languages in the whole Shtokavian area spredaing through Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia. It's a fact and no matter what lies you present in your article, it will stay a recognized fact. As second, there are thousands of maps on internet presenting Shtokavian dialect, so it's very easy to put one. Here's the first link from 'google' to one of the maps, made by a croatian linguist: http://ostava.012webpages.com/Slika%20dijalekata%20po%20D.%20Brozovicu.htm

As third, I really don't have time to go through all the registration process on wikipedia, reading the rules and being involved activelly in it. But if I had, I would have changed many, many things (most of them concerning the languages and culture of South Slavs) that are not presented right on wikipedia, things that are a product of a pathetic, failed and senseless cro nationalistic propaganda, which is slowly, but surely expiring forever. Bye.24.86.116.250 (talk) 04:28, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually Štokavian is not "one language", it's not even one dialect. Before the invasion of genocidal Ottomans[as you can see on that map, that's a bit obsolete after the 1990s war which has caused relocation of 3.5 million ppl, "istočnohercegovački" is spoken even in the Slavonia, which is a bit self-contradictory do you think?], there were two major groupings: Western [more related to Kajkavian and Čakavian; see e.g. the Molise Crotian texts on mundimitar.it on how it looked like ^_^]), and Eastern [more related to Torlakian, which is itself some kind of pijinized Štokavian with a massive overlay of Bulgaro-Macedonian dialectal features]. Croatian language OTOH is three-dialectal, Croatian standard language is based on Neoštokavian, so the equation Croatian=Štokavian, Serbian=Štokavian; ergo Croatian=Serbian is wrong if for any reason, for that one (reminds of that famous one "All Serbs are Štokavian, ergo all Štokavians are Serbs" :)) WP should adhere to current prevalent opinion on the literature, and on WP:NPOV. Also please be civil, insultive and irrelevant comments will be removed. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 09:54, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Look, if you want to go on some serbian holy crusade you should read WP:NPOV as Štambuk told you. And if you don't have enough time to speand for some time on wikipedia, I'm not going to spend mine's on you.

Adios,

--Čeha (razgovor) 22:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

As first, you should learn English if you want to present the things correctly on wikipedia, and as second what you wrote above - those are all lies, that are a result of the the holy-pathetic-cro-nationalistic propaganda, :)) nothing else. There's NO division in the Shtokavian dialect, and all that trash about 'Western Shtokavian' and 'Eastern Shtokavian' is just a part of your failed propaganda. And also I am not presenting here any serbian propaganda, but the factual state of the things, recognized in the whole world. Here's a link to an article of the most famous linguist in Croatia today-Dr.Ivo Pranjkovic, publshed in 'Slobodna Dalmacija', who clearly and loudly says that Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian, which are based on Shtokavian dialect are ONE and SAME language. It might be painful for you to accept, but the facts are the facts and nobody can hide them any more. Adios!

http://arhiv.slobodnadalmacija.hr/20060207/kultura01.asp

And one more thing, stop threatning me because you will be the one who will be reported to the administrators and you will be the one who will be banned from editing wikipedia, not me. Wikipedia doesn't need any misinterpretators of the factual states on its pages. Adios - 100 times. 24.86.116.250 (talk) 05:37, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

No they are not "lies" or "propaganda", they're facts you can read in every South Slavic dialectology book. Even I blind man can see that on the modern map you provide there was some large-scale mixing, that is not reflective of the state before the migrations called by the invasion of Ottoman slayers. That SD article that you link, stating the opinion of a declared Yugoslavophile, says it all: Na standardološkoj razini.. "On a standardological level.." But languages are just a bit more than "standardological levels": Crotian language is three-dialectal in basis and has 900 years of written literature, writers in all three dialects calling their language Croatian, and stating the affiliation to Croatian nation. The facts that Serbs and subsequently Bosniaks and Montenegrins have chosen a standard language the related dialect as Croats, is completely orthogonal to the issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.53.74.66 (talk) 10:13, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

As I told you, that's just a POV, that directly sends a message of separatism and hatred. That's what is isolating you and your 'supporters' from the real world and makes you being BALKAN instead of EU. It will be like that until you accept the reality and face the truth, which is the facts I that I listed above. Adios. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.86.116.250 (talk) 15:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

This is not some "POV", these are facts that you can find in handbooks written by professional linguists. Try e.g. this book; it was written recently by a renown linguists, 100% proffesionally and without bias. Quoting: Budući da se za cijelo južnoslavensko područje ne mogu utvrditi zajedničke inovacije, kao potvrda njegova genetskog jedinstva, to je još manje moguće za »srednjojužnoslavenski« jezični kompleks. Po Matasoviću, »srednjojužnoslavenski« može biti »samo konvencionalan naziv za skupinu dijalekata između slovenskoga i bugarsko-makedonskoga« (umjesto politički nekorektnoga dosadašnjeg naziva »hrvatskosrpski« ili »srpskohrvatski«), ali nipošto ne može figurirati i kao »termin koji ima genetskolingvistički smisao«, tj. iz njega se ne može valjano zaključivati da su jezici koje »pokriva« (hrvatski, srpski, bošnjački, crnogorski) potekli iz istoga prajezika i da su genetski jedinstveni, a još je manje opravdano tvrditi da ih to određuje kao jedinstven književni jezik (kojim govore Hrvati, Srbi, Bošnjaci i Crnogorci). Perhaps Đorđe's inability to list common innovations for this alleged "Central South Slavic language" will be convince you more. SC/CSSD is just an arbitrary grouping of dialects; enforced in the past by the Communists, today anachronistic and insulting to some. There are no common innovations that cover all Čakavian dialects, let alone for all the other ones in this "Central South Slavic" area. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 11:25, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

As you surely know wikipedia is not an forum or a place for making your personal research (or POV). And by insulting a whole country you are not making yourself credible. As I said, I'm not going to waste my time on a forum based discussion. Read Wikipedia policy and if you had something meaningfull to say, we can talk. Otherwise...
P.S. I didn't know you can speak so much of spanish lanuage. Amazing! I only hope you are not going to start a crusade claiming it is basicaly the same language as Portugese :)
--Čeha (razgovor) 22:08, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

..Read Wikipedia policy and if you had something meaningfull to say, we can talk. Otherwise...This applies to you as well, so please no more nonsense like the one above in your P.S. 'section':). Bye.24.86.116.250 (talk) 02:12, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Recent edits by Luzzifer

[1] - Luzzifer, can you please explain what exactly are you doing by removing the content? This pan-Serbian appropriation of Ijekavian Neoštokavian (as that's what this fantasy group "Eastern Herzegovian" is by definition) is particularly disturbing. I mean, I'm a native speaker of this dialect and don't have recollection of "strong Serb immigration" in my home town. How can that be oh dear Lord? --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 00:32, 18 February 2009 (U Uzimajući u obzir istorijske činjenice,kao i geografsku rasprostranjenost štokavskog narečja smatram da ne postoji mogućnost da neko da racionalno objašnjenje da su Srbi(koji su od pamtiveka u većoj ili manjoj meri brojniji i od Hrvata i od svih ostalih južnoslovenskih naroda) mogli preuzeti narečje Hrvata,kojih ne samo mnogo manje,nego imaju još 2 potpuno drugačija narečja koja se sa pravom mogu smatrati sasvim drugim jezicima,uzimajući u obzir njihove razlike...ne želim da dajem ikakvu političku konotaciju raspravi ali želim da razjasnim par stvari,koje neki hrvatski pisci wikipeije uporno izvrću,ignorišu(namerno ili ne u to takodje ne ulazim)...Prvo Vuk nije ničiji jezik uzeo niti pozajmio,on je samo PROGLASIO narodni jezik za književni i standardizovao ga,njegovom hrabro poduhvatu su se vrlo brzo pridružili i ostali veliki srpski umovi tadašnjice(Njegoš,Daničić itd).Naglašavam da to nije bio tako lak zadatak tada,uzimajući u obzir vrlo moćne protivnike toga a i samu nepismenost i nezainteresovanost tadašnjeg naroda za to...upravo su i Hrvati to osetili to na sopstvenoj koži sa madjarskim jezikom,zbog čega je i formiran Ilirski pokret da sad dublje ne ulazim u razloge manje,više svima je sve poznato na ovu temu...Druga stvar,ne manje bitna je da se uporno torlački dijalekt(koje neosporno postoji) pokušava nametnuti kao sasvim drugo narečje u Srba...Istina je da postoje razlike ali su te razlike zaista smešne,MNOGO veće razlike u govoru imaju npr Dalmatinci i Slavonci a obe grupe su štokavskog narečja,nego torlačko i štokavsko narečje(ovo govorim iz ličnog iskustva)...e sad se postavlj logično pitanje istorijskog porekla govornika svih ovih različitih narečja i dijalekata...to je već mnogo šire pitanje,kom ne može a da se ne da politička konotacija,niti ostati ravnodušan.Ipak smatram da svako ko želi logično i racionalno da razmišlj o ovoj temi(bez predrasuda) može izvući sasvim logičan zaključak koji je svima očigledan

Koja je točno poanta ove jedva-čitljive planine od teksta? --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 15:28, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

STOKAVIAN DIALECT SISTEM MAP

• Stokavian/Štokavian dialect (sistem) map 2009.

[2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.237.97.120 (talk) 17:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

STOKAVIAN DIASISTEM

HISTORY AND CLASSIFICATION STOKAVIAN DIASISTEM:

• 1.Western stokavian dialectand čakavian in kajkavian history šćakavian Croatian dialect;(Šćakavian, mostly ikavian and minority ijekavian in croatian variant ekavin (e=ie))
  • Slavonian (majority ikavian and minority jekavian in ekavian) old western stokavian subdialect, majority ethnic Croatian. (variant podravina, variant posavina, variant east and western slavonia).
  • Eastbosnian (ijekavian) old western stokavian subdialect, ethnic majority Bosnian and minority Croatian,(Variant central bosnian, north bosnian and history Dubrovnik in Zahumlje (western eastherzegovina; Stolac, Ravno, Buna, Konjic, Mostar)).
• 2.East stokavian dialectsand torlakian dialect history štakavian (šwa) Serbian dialect, (Štakavian, mostly ekavian and minority ijekavian)
  • Kosovo-resava subdialect (ekavian) old east subdialect, ethnic majority Serbian. Variant Smederevo-vrsac.
  • Zeta subdialect (ijekavian) old east subdialect, majority Montenegrian and minority Serbian, (history western Raska and Travunja (Užice, Trebinje, Nevesinje)).

Ottoman empire invasion Western stokavian dialects and east stokavian dialects convergence=NEW STOKAVIAN MIX DIALECT;

• • Eastherzehovina subdialect: new stokavian ijekavian subdialect (history eastbosnian+zeta=mix)
    • 1.Variant Croatian; Dubrovnik-eastherzegovina speak
    • 2.Variant Serbian; Užice-eastherzegovina speak (migration in Bosnian-kraina and enclaves in Croatia).
  • Western dialect (Dalmatia-bosnia): new stokavian ikavian subdialect (history slavonian)
    • 1.Variant Croatian=Western stokavian ikavian speak
    • 2.Variant Bosnian=East stokavian ikavian speak
  • Šumadia-vojvodina new stokavian ekavian subbialect (history kosovo-resava subdialect)
    • 1.Variant Serbian Šumadia speak
    • 2.Variant Serbian Vojvodina speak

STOKAVIAN DIALECT SISTEM

• Convergence 2 old dilect and 4 old subdialect in 3 new came into existence subdialect, total 1 dialect-sistem, 7 subdialect and 19 variant subdialect.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.237.97.120 (talk) 17:59, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

TORLAKIAN DIALECT

[[3]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.237.115.133 (talk) 18:32, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Language

Is there really enough difference to call Croatian and Serbian different languages? To me it seems that Croatia, Bosnia, Montenegro and Serbia speak the same extremely well constructed language which can be written in two scripts and one sound is represented by one letter. There is a difference between language and dialect. 99.236.221.124 (talk) 01:18, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, etc. are only variants of ONE standard language, and that is Serbo-Croatian. Therefore all these names represent ONE language, more precisely - the few accents of it. This fact is clear to every serious linguistic institution in the world and to every normal person who speaks this language, and who is not influenced by the pathetic nationalistic propaganda, which is now losing every battle and is dying slowly and definitely. A parallel can be made with English or Spanish. American English and British English are only variants (accents) of ONE language-the English. They have different spelling and pronunciation of some words, but basically it's a same language. Same is with Serbo-Croatian and many other world languages; Regards;207.216.132.111 (talk) 04:41, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

How can language be based on a dialect?

Language is language and dialects are all other forms that do not conform with the language, or? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.178.138.137 (talk) 01:34, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

The standard language of a nation is based on one, usually the largest dialect of that language. In the case of Serbo-Croatian language Shtokavian is the greatest and most spoken dialect of it, besides chakavian and kajkavian. So, Serbo-Croatian (Croato-Serbian, Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian, Dalmatian..etc..it has thousand names now) language standard is based on Shtokavian ijekavian dialect from Eastern Hercegovina. Those are the facts; Regards; 207.216.132.111 (talk) 04:25, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Burgenland Austrian

Is not based on stokavian, but on chakavian. Better somenone fix that.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.178.138.137 (talk) 01:34, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Standard Serbian

As discussed with VVladimir [4], according to Novi Sad Agreement [5] Standard serbian is based on Vojvodina-Šumadija accent which is part of eastern Shtokavian group. Standard Serbian language was never based on Eastern Herzegovian dialect (Croato Serbian was). There exist none western NeoShtokavian Ekavian accent. All western neoShtokavian are eather ijekavian,jekavian or ikavian and all eastern neoShtokavian are ekavian (which is clearly visible from the text). So please correct this. Čeha (razgovor) 22:59, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

There is no such thing as "Ekavian accent". Ekavian refers to jat reflex, nothing more. "Accent" in linguistics refers to accentual system, in case of Neo-Štokavian dialects to the 4 accents/tones system with post-tonic lengths, as opposed to some other accentual system (of 2, 3 or 5 accents, with or without distinctive lengths). See Pitch_accent#Serbo-Croatian for more specific info. Original "Serbian language" was of course based on Eastern Herzegovinian accentuation (of which Karadžić was a native speaker, so he basically codified his mother tongue), as is the modern Serbian. Some accents have changed from the 19th century, but it's still pretty much the same thing. You can compare accents in his original 1818 dictionary [6] with that of in any modern Serbian dictionary (or Ijekavian Croatian for that matter - it's all the same s*it).

Šumadija-Vojvodina dialects have a number of prosodical (accentual) differences to EH, despite being Neo-Štokavian. Modern literary Serbian is EH in its accentual core, though I can guess that Šumadija-Vojvodina dialects have made some isolated impacts. One also needs to make a difference between a codified norm and actual, local speech, because these can vary on the whole Serbo-Croat area. Even in Croatia urban idioms of big cities such as Zagreb and Rijeka are not pure 4-accentual with distinctive lengths, but rather stress-based without distinctive lengths (according to survey by M. Kapović). --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 13:36, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

There are a two meanings of the word "accent" in English: local pronunciation (such as ekavian and ijekavian) and tone/prosody/stress, as in the SC pitch accent system. We just need to be clear which we mean when we say "accent". — kwami (talk) 22:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Relationship towards neighboring dialects

I tagged s.t. for clarification. The original wording suggested that Kajkavian shares kaj w Shtokavian, and an alternate reading suggests it shares it w Chakavian. We need to clarify what exactly is being distinguished: Do the various features distinguish all three dialects? Or do they distinguish Kajkavian vs. Shtokavian + Chakavian in the one case, and Chakavian vs. Shtokavian + Kajkavian in the other? — kwami (talk) 22:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

They distinguish Shtokavian vs. Chakavian, and Shtokavian vs. Čakavian. This is an article on Shtokavian dialect, so only its point of reference is used. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 10:16, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

"Shtokavian dialect = Serbian language"

Shtokavian dialect was exclusively and solely used by Serbian population all over Balkan peninsula. From 1850.[[7]]. Croats and Slovenes (using kajkavian and chakavian dialect) have agreed to use Shtokavian as grammatical reference. It is a pure BS to even mention so called "Croatian, Bosnian, Montenegrin" as part of shotkavian dialect. If people from those countries speak with Shtokavian they can speak only and only Serbian. Cut the crap

Neo-Shtokavian??

This article does not explain clearly the rationale behind the sorting of Shtokavian dialects into Old- and Neo-Shtokavian categories. There doesn't seem to be a geographical or historical origin to this distinction explained. As someone who studied Shtokavian in college, I have to say I couldn't tell you what the difference is. If someone with expertise could put this crucial information in the intro paragraph, that would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.173.81 (talk) 07:50, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Wouldn't that be the neo-štokavian retraction/shift, where all non-initial accents went back one syllable and became "rising" and where all initial accents stayed where they were and became "falling"? 68.4.243.145 (talk) 09:06, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

I finally found some time to add the basic information, in Shtokavian accentuation section. No such user (talk) 13:52, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

"Shtokavian dialect"

Is this a dialect or is it a language? Never mind the political stigmatization of the true definition of a language in former-yugoslav countries (Mon, BiH, Cro, Srb) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.250.28.230 (talk) 10:08, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

It is normally conceived as the most important dialect of the Serbo-Croatian language. However, the mutual intelligibility between the Serbo-Croatian dialects is apparently rather low, which would make the dialects actually distinct languages. That said, I should add that the national standard languages are all based on the same subdialect and are easily mutually intelligible and hence part of the same language. --JorisvS (talk) 23:02, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

There is no dividing line between the two. I think if people reported on Shto, Cha, and Kaj as separate languages, no-one would bat an eyelash. But AFAICT they're not so different they'd have to be different languages either – but then, that's true for most Slavic languages. — kwami (talk) 07:45, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

accent

The word accent when used for Slavic languages usually never refers to Accent (sociolinguistics) but almost always to Accent (phonetics). So referring to Ijekavian/Ekavian forms as "accents" is a bit misleading. Furthermore, article confusingly uses the term in both senses. The former usage does make sense in the context of English which uses etymological orthography, but not in Serbo-Croatian which uses phonological. mleko and mlijeko are two different words, not two different "accents" of some single, underlying word. The usual term for Ijekavian/Ekavian/Ikavian distinction is pronunciation (izgovor in SC). I already replaced usages of accent to pronunciation in some articles, but many more (like this one) continue to use it. I'm posting this here for notification purposes and to encourage others to rectify such usages. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 01:28, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

The problem is that "pronunciation" does not capture the distinction. Saying that mleko and mlijeko are two different "pronunciations" is like saying "often" and "offen" are two different pronunciations: There's no implication that they correspond to other words in the language. We're not talking about different pronunciations of random words, but of a systemic difference of pronunciation of all words – in other words, of accents. If the two uses of the word are confusing, then we should reword it so it's not confusing. — kwami (talk) 06:13, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

@Kwamikagami: Yes but that is the terminology. The word pronunciation has special meaning when dealing with Serbo-Croatian - e.g. see here. So the division in terms of Western/Eastern varieties of Serbo-Croatian, or Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian varieties that exists today is orthogonal to the division Ijekavian/Ekavian/Ikavian (each of the variants could have either "pronunciation" in theory). Although, explaining this special meaning of the term pronunciation in every single article that uses it would be cumbersome. I'd rather that we not use the term accent due its 1) ambiguity as per above 2) complete lack of use in scholarship when referring to Ijekavian/Ekavian/Ikavian forms of SC. I'm not sure what to do :/ --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 16:49, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

It's jargon, and we should avoid unnecessary jargon. It's not even general linguistic jargon, which would at least be consistent between articles. You're right: placing a note at the top of every SC article explaining that when we use the word "pronunciation", we don't actually mean pronunciation, is not helpful for a general-use encyclopedia. "Accent" is correct, so there's no problem with that as long as we're clear which of the two uses we intend. If you can think of another term, let's hear it! — kwami (talk) 23:26, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

sän and dän instead of san and dan

What is the "ä" referring to? Is it IPA? Is it æ? Is it this? It's not clear at all. Author - please clarify and remove reference to (sound) "between e and a" because that's not clear either. (E and A in which language? What is the a? A as in dark? law? cat?)

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pastapasha (talk • contribs) 01:18, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

I think it is [æ] indeed. Peter238 (talk) 16:29, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Asked here: http://forum.wordreference.com/threads/bcs-dialects-pronunciation-s%C3%A4n-and-d%C3%A4n.3109862/. Unfortunately, it is not properly sourced, so it is best removed. The "SDZ" source is actually "Kašić, Zorka. "Govor Konavala", Srpski dijalektološki zbornik, XLI/1995, str. 241-395.", but it likely confirms only the subsequent sentence, on pronunciation of /ʝ/ in the Dubrovnik area.
Judging on hr:Bokeljsko perojski dijalekt, also unsourced (but apparently written by someone with access to literature), Peter238 is probably right, as it describes refleks slabog poluglasa kao otvoreno e, uz mjestimično čuvanje poluglasa for a Boka Kotorska dialect and otvoreno e dominantantni refleks poluglasa, s time da je u nenaglašenim slogovima otvorenost manja for dijalect of Montenegrin settlers in Peroj, Istria. No such user (talk) 10:15, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Supradialect - dialect - subdialect

It seems that this article in its current form suffers from some striking inconsistencies regarding the use of basic dialectological terms like "dialect" and "subdialect". Throughout the text, same dialectological categories are labeled sometimes as "dialects", other times as "subdialects". And confusion comes from the fact that article is not explaining, nor mentioning that in Serbian and Croatian dialectology, Štokavian is not classified as "dialect" at all, but as "narječje" (наречје) or supradialect - a category above dialect, between the levels of language and dialect. In dialectological terms, the language is primarily divided into three supradialects: Štokavian, Kajkavian and Čakavian. Further on, every supradialect is divided into dialects, and dialects are further divided into subdialects. And believe it or not - that is one of those very rare points of agreement between Serbian and Croatian linguists, since both sides are unanimous in classifying Štokavian as "narječje" (наречје) or supradialect. Similar problems exist also in article Dialects of Serbo-Croatian, not to mention articles as Serbo-Croatian and other basic articles from that linguistic group. Sorabino (talk) 19:15, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Old Shtokavian accentuation

In the Neoshtokavian dialect, the famous retraction took place, but preceding the retraction all old tonal distinctions were neutralised, leaving only length and accent position. What is the situation for Old Shtokavian dialects in this regard? Do they preserve the Proto-Slavic tones like Chakavian dialects do? Or are they like Neoshtokavian, with the tone neutralisation but without the retraction? Rua (mew) 07:57, 21 June 2019 (UTC)