David Gerard wrote:
On 02/12/06, Darko Bulatovic mail@itam.ws wrote:
Dont put words in my mouth, it is rude thing to do. As this is not key it is just one fact in the history of Balkan. And Balkan is not UK. And this comparison just shows that you don't have a clue what you talk about.
David,
I just asked people here to explain me with what facts they have build up their opinion. No one did that. They just gave stereotypes and assumptions. And now I will give some data.
I will give one part translation of one linguist on this matter: Sorbonne before 25 years had opened class on which was studied language which we called serbo-croatian and which today our students study under 3 names: Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian. Personally I think there will be place for Montenegrin. I am glad that that languages and literature are present on Sorbonne with thanks of me and my former colleague which has doctorate on "Njegos"(Montenegrin Philosopher). Importance and image of our University obligate us to maintain level and quality of study and we improve it all the times.
POL LUI TOMA, chief of Slavic Class(Katedra) on University of Sorbonne Paris.
So David Montenegrin is matter of quality on Sorbonne but not for you.
Same linguist :
Q: Which one linguistic reasons are that official French science admitted Bosnian or Bosnjak language and started to study it on Sorbonne? A: We are not here in domain of science, we are in social-linguistic domain. If they which speak one language and it is base on some differences, and if they see that they language is different and if their rules that differ even little, they can state that this is language which have different name. Why not?
Same linguist:
Difference between Language and dialect is very subjective matter. Is the korzikans language or dialect? Some of Korsikans will say it is language, and others will say it is one of Italian dialects.
So Much about your objectivity in this. Specially claiming that Montenegrin is dialect of Serbian as that is ridiculous and just show that you don't have a clue about South Slavic languages.
One reference to old times: Ljubomir Nenadovic in "Letters" from 1858 " I have found i Montenegrin schools they learn to talk Montenegrin language..."
Simo Matavulj in " Notes of one writer" he cite words of one Montenegrin Toma Vukotica about seeking some theatre group for performing " Balkan Queen"(Montenegrin performance) made by Montenegrin King Nikola: " Are indeed that people from street can speak our language, pure Montenegrin, like it is written? Let God save me! You would not understand every third word.... even the best actors in Belgrade cant talk out language...."
And newer date: Linguist Dubravko Skiljan 1996 Closest to be called as separated language is not Croatian it is Montenegrin - at that moment when they put "SH, DZJ, ZJ" like separate phonemes, which will probably have, which is not necessary, and separate graphical symbols, they will make far more dedicated step than what was done here in purpose of language distinctions . Because that is something that clearly make difference language structure - number or system of phoneme(fonem))
And to understand this problematic people need to know history of language in this region. But they seems do have time to negate and to make assumptions but not to study this problematics. I know it is easier.
But I think that Klein is right, many last replies was just with no productive value. I will wait for official explanation from committee, so we could go further in trying to solve this problem, as this discussion didn't give me any objective fact or argument that could support this denial of request.
Thank you Darko Bulatovic