On 30/01/06, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
Well Node, [snip] discussion.
.
It's not [snip] coherency?
Yes, it is.
Now, [snip] the following.
That's not neutral as it considers your POV -- that Moldovan and Romanian are "the same language" -- to be a Fact, which it is not, and will never be. There is no such thing as "the same language", for any two varieties -- it's a political discourse and not a linguistic one.
- *Ro.wiki keeps its Romanian content as normal*.
...
- *ro-cyr.wiki gets content in Cyrillic Romanian* using this alphabet
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Cyrillic_alphabet ), if some one deems it necessary to have such a Wikipedia. It is, by the way, the alphabet that Grigore Ureche used to write his works (and not the Moldovan Cyrillic alphabet), but about this later. Ro.wiki should not get biscriptal because this alphabet is not representative of modern Romania and you will not find Romanians able to actually use this script. It was used till 1860, when Moldavia united Wallachia to create Romania
And when was it used until in Bessarabia? Bessarabia wasn't part of Moldavia in 1860.
- *mo-cyr.wiki gets its content in Moldovan Cyrillic* using this
alphabet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_alphabet), invented in the 1930s by good old godfather Stalin, if you deem necessary to keep this Wikipedia. It should probably be named more appropriatly something like Moldovan/Romanian Cyrillic, but we logically cannot have two Romanian Cyrillics.
Stalin didn't invent it. Stalin may have had some cursory knowledge of linguistics, but I'm certain he didn't invent the Moldovan alphabet.
*Please note* that all these three scripts are used for writing the one and same language - Romanian (and Node, you can dispute this as long as you wish, but you cannot pronounce yourself on this matter without having any knowledge in Romanian).
I know more Romanian than you and your unionist cronies claim. After all, I can understand Pavel, can't I? And I have produced coherent or at least mostly coherent statements in the past.
Of course the language evolves in time and the Romanian used by Grigore Ureche differs quite a lot from the one used by, say, Mihai Eminescu, who is also Moldovan and the national most known Romanian poet (he is someone of a hero in Romania).
"The same language" is, again, political rather than linguistic discourse. Moldovan and Romanian, Italian and Italian, Portuguese and Portuguese, My English and Your English, will never be "the same language" because there is no such concept, linguistically.
- *mo.wiki becomes [snip] rid of this Cyrillic script.
Not neutral.
What concerns Transnistria, it is the 14th, Russian 14th army that decides which language is more appropriate to the local population.
That's not exactly true, but then you already knew that. Read more about Transdniester and you will find the true situation.
Moldovan parents now have the freedom of choice in Transdniester, and the majority have chosen Cyrillic, despite the fact that they could send their kids to Latin schools. One could argue that they are afraid of consequences (political, social, economic) that might come from sending their kids to such a school, but it is their choice nonetheless.
Your point [snip] you?
No, it wasn't -- they were two very different places. The article about Chisinau at the mowiki and the article at the rowiki were very different byte-by-byte, but post-Pavel, they were identical. His fault.
Don't worry Node. If you have still not noticed it, I am currently trying from all my powers to FIX IT! By making this content be moved or deleted.
That's not "fixing it". If there are errors in an article on the English Wikipedia, if you advocate to move it or delete it, people will laugh in your face, even if it is full of them. You repair the errors individually, rather than deleting the whole product.
Like the popular phrase, "the operation was a success, but the patient is dead." You can't fix the errors in a product by simply eliminating the product.
Aftewards, [snip] Wikipedia.
That's because you haven't followed the events. I was there, first of all, and beyond that, there were at least 2 other native speakers (Elnoel and Vertaler) and possibly more.
As long as you wish.
GFY...
How come 0? What about this: "*The precision of numbers about nationality/ethnicity and language was questioned.*"? (take this http://www.azi.md/news?ID=31931 and this http://www.azi.md/news?ID=31416 for reference). This census concerned languages as well, although I couldn't find statistics on this. Not yet. Although, logically, if one calls himself Romanian, he speaks Romanian. Russian - Russian. Ukrainian - either Russian or Ukrainian. Gagauz - Gagauz. About Moldovans - when someone tells you he is Moldovan
Well, that's a faulty assumption. If you look at any census results from any country which include language, you will find that it is almost never that everybody who claims a certain ethnic group is exactly congruent with language. I think it's probable that in Chisinau, there are Moldovans who only know Russian (or at least it is their mother tongue), Russians who only know Moldovan, Ukrainians who only know Gagauz, Bulgars who only know Ukrainian, Belarusans who only know Moldovan.
Especially considering the pre-independence linguistic trends of RSSM, it is naïve to think that ethnicity and language align 100%, or even 90%.
and you ask him about the language he speaks, he will mostly certain give you one answer: Moldovan. However, big however, he will think of the Moldovan dialect that he is speaking day-to-day, and not of the Romanian language he is writing in any day-to-day documents, at school, etc. And still, my point stays: these millions of people (which cannot phisically be more than 3.6 million; which in half makes 1.8 millions - ça va for millions disagree) were not necessarily able to openly declare their ethnic (which comprises language) origin. Otherwise, if you dispose of other statistics, please tell me.
1.8 million is still "millions". Ethnic DOES NOT COMPRISE LANGUAGE. Although the two are linked, they are far from identical. How is it that many Tibetans don't know Tibetan, or that almost all Cornish people speak only English?
Well, Node. I have to give [snip] Romanian.
For the first few articles, yes. Beyond that, NO!
Thirdly - how did you come [snip] and practice it.
You know it, you probably speak it, you just don't write it. You can find examples of it in lots of poetry.
Do you understand what you are saying? Where did you come up with this language also? For the reference, it is Romanian that was always used in Wallachia, and that Wallachia is used only to distinguish the historical region called "Ţara Românească" - Romanian Country -, and modern Romania that is more or less the combination of Wallachia, Transilvania and Moldavia. I recall you that Moldavia is united with Romania and that in Moldavia they strangely enough write in Romanian and have nothing against it and speak either Romanian or something one may with difficulty classify as a Moldavian dialect. And that Moldova - present time Moldova - by mistake is not part of Romania. Moldova historically is a Romanian province!
You're deluded if you think Moldovan writing is historically identical to Wallachian (or "Romanian"). Moldovan developed and continues to develop (but in a much more limited capacity) separate from Wallachian/Romanian.
Always imposed: beginning with 1930's - Stalin (MASSR), beginning with 1940
- same Stalin (MSSR), beginning with 1989 - Russian 14th Army
(Transnistria).
No... since a couple of years ago, it was a choice in Transnistria, also, many of the key policymakers in earlier times were themselves Moldovans.
In Transnistria, some of the Latin schools were
re-opened.
Please cite your sources. I couldn't find one word on this in Moldovan electronic newspapers. Better said nowhere on the net.
Hah. Everywhere says that -- they were re-opened as private schools -- even the PMR official website!! There are one or two high schools in Tiraspol which use the Latin alphabet today. Private schools which supposedly charge no fee but are funded by external sources.
Funny question. Why did you go to school? But, so that I not be personal, why did I go to school? Because as a kid I was told to do so. Why the parents give their children to school? Because they want that their children have a future, that they get a minimum of education - the minimum that Transnistria under Putin can offer. And sometimes when it comes the question of the kids future, you don't ask much questions regarding the language.
They could send their kids to a Latin school, home-school, send them to a Russian school, attempt to flee to Moldova or ROmania, or any number of other options. Instead, they chose to send their kids to a Cyrillic school. Your parents probably didn't have a choice.
But somehow I doubt most Moldovans care, or have ever really cared, about the alphabet they use, considering Moldova is the poorest country in Europe today and has almost always been largely agrarian in nature. And since when to farmers fight to the death over alphabets?
Strange. Ro.wikipedia also agrees with Anittas absurdities: ( http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grigore_Ureche#Opera - don't search too much, last paragraph). And even stranger, Grigore Ureche also agrees with these absurdities: „Rumânii, câţi să află lăcuitori la Ţara Ungurească şi la Ardeal şi la Maramoroşu, de la un loc suntu cu moldovénii şi toţi de la Râm să trag." (
Still not seeing it. I still think it's more telling than anything the title of the chapter than any of its contents.
Mark
-- "Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin