Обговорення користувача:Gutsul/Шаблон Словянські мови (24.08.2010—01.09.2010)

Повний архів: Обговорення_користувача:Gutsul/АвтоАрхів

Обговорення: Обговорення_користувача:Gutsul

Шаблон:Слов'янські мови

Pryvit, Gutsule!
I've seen here [1] that you've protected this page from editing.
(sad | pret) 10:20, 30. lipnja 2009. Gutsul (Razgovor | doprinosi) m (3.701 bajt) (Захист на Шаблон:Слов'янські мови встановлено: непродуктивна війна редагувань ([edit=autoconfirmed] (безстроково) [move=autoconfirmed] (безстроково)))
Can you change few lines on that Шаблон?
Currently is this, uncorrect version:
Південні: староцерковнослов'янська (давньоболгарська) † • церковнослов'янська • болгарська • македонська • сербохорватська: боснійська - сербська - хорватська - чорногорська • словенська
Correct version should be:
Південні: староцерковнослов'янська (давньоболгарська) † • церковнослов'янська • болгарська • македонська • боснійська - сербська - хорватська - чорногорська • словенська
"сербохорватська †" must go into штучні мови; it's something like язичіє. Этот язик пропагировали/пропагироваю югоунитаристи и хорватски сербофіли, (прихильники мовної єдності of Croatian language and Serbian language).
Эцли ты хочеш, я могу писать тебя по-русски, но мое знание русского лингвистичной терминологии плохо. Kubura 03:55, 24 серпня 2010 (UTC)

I have take a look at the same template in other languages (Polish, Czech, German, English) end everywhere is the Serbo-Croatian language a South Slavic. So your idea to move it to artificial languages need some conclusive argumentation. --Gutsul 07:47, 24 серпня 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a source for itself.
If you want to play it that way: have you checked the same template in Croatian, Bosnian, Macedonian, Lithuanian, Slovakian, Serbian? Polish, Czech, German and English wikis aren't better than those wikis.
These wikis have listed all South Slavic languages as separate. Croatian is not a part of phantomic "Serbo-Croatian".
I agree that so-called "Serbo-Croatian language" is South Slavic, no doubt about that.
But there're some things that make confusion.
The template on en.wiki is looking that way because some admins, that don't speak any South Slavic language, brutally impose their self-will, their personal point of view.
Other wikis that have same template have copied the "solution from en.wiki", without any checking.
All our attempts to prove them (on en.wiki) something were invain. We, users from hr.wiki, tried to elaborate and explain them. Invain. The opposers' arguments (pro "Serbo-Croatian") were none ("it's so because I say so"; "everybody knows", "others have told me") or they give some obsolete references from 19th century.
In any case, have in mind that writing Croatian as part of some so-called "Serbo-Croatian" is the same thing as writing Ukrainian as a part of Russian.
Here's something about so-called Serbo-Croatian [2] (in Croatian), interview with linguist Ranko Matasović: Srpsko-hrvatski nikada nije ostvaren, jer nije postojao (Serbo-Croatian has never come into the reality, since it never existed).
It's important for the Croatian language to permanently emphasize that it's different from the Serbian standard language, as well as from Bosnian and Montenegrin no matter how interintelligible they are. It's hard for the non-experts to understand that there're people that understand each other very good when they speak about the everyday things, but when the things come to the standard language, then other things come in front: suptile things like scientific and juristic terminology, that's especially different from the one in Serbian and Bosnian language. There one must be determined and consistent in order to respect that identity of Croatian as special standard language.
How 'd you explain the difference between Croatian and Serbian?
– It must be explained to people that that difference is not the difference as the one between the American and the British English. These are closely related idioms that have differences on pronunciation, orthographic level, some syntactic constructions, but the scientific and juristic terminologies in British and American English almost identical, since there was big cooperation and fluidity of humans and ideas between Great Britan and USA in the times when standardizations have been implemented. Because of different cultural and historical conditions in which the standardizations of Croatian and Serbian language were carried out, the terminologies are in high degree different. Just look at the list of chemical elements. Academist Brozović often emphasized that as example. I wouldn't know to write in Serbian language the elementary school or middle school task. My children wouldn't understand that. On everyday communication level, the differences are really minimal, but when we come to technical stuff, legal formulations and declarations on the products, the differences are sizeable and these must be respected.
Is Serbo-Croatian that was learned in the schools of former Yugoslavia, dead language? Many people that have left abroad during the war are still speaking some variant of language they've been learning!
– That language was the project in the heads (note by Kubura: "head" as human anatomy) of groups of linguists and many politicians.. Despite the pressures against the Croatian language, the uniformization of standard forms in Croatian and Serbian has never been carried out. Ideological pressure wasn't equally strong in all times of Communist rule, pressures were looser and stronger, but the total uniformization of standard languages has never been carried out. As standard language, Serbo-Croatian has never existed. It was the project that has never been materialized. As a language, seen from the angle of genetic linguistics, he (Serbo-Croatian) has never existed because of the reasons I'm talking about in the book.
There's more in that text in [3], but this is helpful enough. Kubura 00:37, 25 серпня 2010 (UTC)

The current condition on en.wiki has been imposed by the persons that think that they can own the article and the topic.
See the history of the template [4] and the inexistence of consensus.
Just see the previous version [5]. It's just a matter of time when'll involved admin protect the template on his version. Kubura 02:30, 25 серпня 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation and for the argumentation. I'm not an expert in South Slavic languages but from the sources I have read that Serbo-Croatian existed and had all attributes of spoken language and it was the language of Yugoslavia (at least on paper). I can't say that it is an artificial language (I didn't find enough reasons for it), so I change the template so that the Serbo-Croatian is one of South Slavic languages (not the parent language of languages of Yugoslavia). I think it's enough. --Gutsul 11:41, 25 серпня 2010 (UTC)

Я очен тебя благодарен (Как сказать эта по-украински?). Kubura 04:04, 28 серпня 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome (in Ukrainian: Будь ласка). Russian "Я очень тебе благодарен" can be translated into Ukrainian as "Я дуже тобі вдячний". --Gutsul 07:57, 31 серпня 2010 (UTC)

Puno ti hvala. Thank You a lot. Kubura 02:40, 1 вересня 2010 (UTC)