On 30/01/06, Liviu Andronic <landronimirc(a)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