Thread 216053744

Why do they pretend these are different languages

>>216053744 (OP)
i think it's croats that oppose it the most

>>216053744 (OP)
Because the retards in our government regard the modern Serbo-Croatian Croatian as "Standard Croatian" but apparently it's totally different from Serbian and Bosnian which happen to be based on the same Serbo-Croatian standard that was created in the 19. century.
Croats fucked themselves at the wrong time by creating a standard based on a southern Herzegovinian dialect which Serbs also picked. The languages and dialects people spoke in Croatia where southerners didn't move during Ottoman invasions are further from Bosnian and especially Serbian than Czech is from Slovak and Macedonian from Bulgarian. But we keep embarrassing ourselves by speaking the language of fez wearing illiterate Herzegovinian clans.

>>216054163
stfu purger, Herzegovians are master race

>>216054163
Herzegovians are the Christ of Croatia.
>>216053744 (OP)
Because in Eastern Europe if you want to steal someone's land you accuse them of being a fake ethncity. If they accepeted that their language is the same, that would be a casus belli for Serbia.

>>216053744 (OP)
Nobody wants to have anything with Serbs

>>216053744 (OP)
I guess the real difference is religious.

>>216054254
>Because in Eastern Europe if you want to steal someone's land you accuse them of being a fake ethncity. If they accepeted that their language is the same, that would be a casus belli for Serbia.
This.
People who are not from here may find it absurd but that's the actual answer. Serbian nationalism is based on logic such as: "we don't know where Croatian kings are buried, therefore Croats are a made up ethnicity and are actually Serbs in denial, therefore their land belongs to us".

How did Slovenia end up developing their own language?

>>216053744 (OP)
No idea, these guys do it too.

>>216053744 (OP)
The three Croatian "dialects" should themselves be considered three different languages.

>>216054373
They're some leftovers from Carantanians who used to populate both what is today Slovenia and at least half of modern Austria and had some overlap with West Slavs.

Are Slovenes basically west slavs?
They don't seem as subhuman as Serbocroatians.

>>216054373
>Slovenes didn't want to create a shared language with other South Slavs so they made a standard based on their local dialects unlike Croats which were raging pan-slavists in the 18. and 19. centuries and wanted unity with other larger neighboring Slavic groups.
>In the past Herzegovinians, Vlachs and other Sthokavian speakers from the south were a minority in Slovenia, mostly found in Bela Krajina.
>Unlike Croats, Slovenes didn't have a large ethnic population in places like Bosnia where they spoke like other Bosnians and Serbs so they didn't have any need to make their standard similar to their language.

>>216053744 (OP)
It's because Serbs are cunts. When after WWI Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia and Vojvodina formed a state, it was called the "State of SLOVENES, Croats and Serbs". Makes sense, because it's populated by those peoples, right? Seems the names are ordered from West to East, no big deal.

Then Kingdom of Serbia and K. Montenegro joined in, and now the state just HAD to be called "Kingdom of SERBS, Croats and Slovenes". They DEMANDED that Serbs come first. You might say it's because they're the most numerous group, but Slovenes weren't most numerous in State of SHS, so who gave a fuck? It's that Serbian pettiness that is extremely annoying and very telling of what they actually think. They're always like that, like some spoiled stupid brat who wants all of the cake and it's not even his birthday.

And, of course, they started fuming whenever Croats would say that we speak "Croato-Serbian", because we had to call it "Serbo-Croatian", God forbid you say it any way else. These Serbs also in the 19th century claimed that Croats are Catholic Serbs, they oppressed Croats after WWI, they massacred Croats during WWII and during second Yugoslavia kept whining about how they're eternally oppressed, how everyone is against them and how history is just a big conspiracy against Serbia.

>>216054971
They came up with absurd claims of Vukovar, Dubrovnik and Knin being Serbian cities since the dawn of time, and they still unironically claim that. Imagine that, medieval Croats found a city, had it as the capital of their kingdom, and 1000 years later some Serbs spouts "oh yeah, Knin, totally Serbian, always was" and then he goes to cry about Kosovo. They'll get upset when Croats say that we don't speak Serbian, but watch them fume in anger if you tell them that they speak Croatian. Their Yugoslavism is fake, it's not pan-Slavic, it's just "we're Serbs and you're Serbs too". And fuck that, we had prolific culture and literature since before the Renaissance, they didn't produce squat until the 18th century.

It's because of constant annoyances of Serbian retardation like that, that we refuse to budge, even if the topic is seemingly harmless and irrelevant, because if we went along with stuff like the "we all speak the Serbo-Croatian language" nonsense, those rabid dogs would just kept biting and stealing like they always do. You give them a finger, they take the whole hand.

This guy was the Croatian Charlie Kirk

>>216054900
>The three Croatian "dialects" should themselves be considered three different languages.
Most differences between the average Chakavian and Kajkavian dialects are
>the super soft "ć" in Chakavian
>"a" vs "e" in words
>german (and hungarian) loans vs romance loans
Besides that they're the same thing and it's obvious Chakavian came from the same Pannonian Slavic migration route like Kajkavian.

>>216053744 (OP)
>>216054163
The old serbian language was nothing alike the language they adopted in the 19th century, they basically stole the croatian language and masquerade it as their own.
Imagine if the US claimed they speak "American" and that Brits also speak "American" and that English does not exist, and all historic English literature is "American".

>>216055140
did he have aids or something?

When I was once watching NHKs documentary on turks in West China, I could hear their language and words like "saat" which I understood before I saw the subtitles.
This superpower was gifted to us by our Serbian brothers after they liberated us. My grandparents when they were kids and all of their ancestors before could only understand the word "ura" but since then we were enlightened to speak like Serbs so the entire world could understand us!

Melania got the genius visa for knowing all these languages, I wonder why more slav bros don’t use this method

>>216059239
We can understand standard Serbian enough to have a normal conversation and vice versa but we would absolutely fail at each other's language exams because of small but noticeable grammar differences, certain vocabulary and so on.

Explain -kavian autism to me. How relevant it is?

>>216060088
Fake-ish terms to classify Croatian dialects under the umbrella of Serbo-Croatian which is just "Sthokavian"
Što, Kaj, Ča are words meaning "what".
>Chakavian
Old most original Croatian that was spoken from East Istria to Western Bosnia and down to the town of Split. Today associated with strong Romance influence and ikavian yat reflex (similar to Ukrainian) but northern varieties are also ekavian. Generally the group with the most archaic Slavic and IE features in Croatia (in Croatian the dual form can only be found here). The closest dialect group is Kajkavian but Chakavian is growing more similar to Sthokavian, especially in Dalmatia.
>Kajkavian
The actual name should be (Lower) Pannonian or Slavonian but the latter would confuse people in the modern era.
Always considered as the closest dialect group to the Slovenian dialects but most Kajkavian dialects are quite easy to distinguish from Slovene and more intelligible to Croats. Like Chakavian, it was more widespread in the past before the turks displaced southern groups. Today somewhat pure Kajkavian dialects can only be found in north Croatia north of Zagreb and the Medvednica mountain range. Pure Kajkavian is arguably the most similar South Slavic dialect to West Slavic, even more so than Slovene in most cases. Kajkavian toponyms exist south close to the Bosnian border indicating a much bigger historic range.
Burgenland Croatian is a mix of mostly Chakavian and some Kajkavian dialects that were spoken in north-west Bosnia.
https://youtu.be/f8sYyLO1eag?si=cymZwGC2eO6ZH66B

>>216054900
>The three Croatian "dialects" should themselves be considered three different languages.
Difficult topic.
So what is actual original Croatian language (and ethnicity)?
What I get id that the Chakavian sort of first with early medieval Croatian state, so maybe that?
And if Kajkavian is Pannonian or Slavonian, is it not Croatian?
And what is Sthokavian, after all, Serbian, Bosnian?

>>216060088
Also this map is at least 100 years outdated and sometimes completely incorrect.
>Torlak and Bulgarian dialects so widespread in Serbia
>Kajkavian in Zagreb and south (not since the Ottomans came)
>Lower Carniolan dialects spoken east of Delnice in Gorski kotar
>Istria barely showing signs of post-WW2 immigration of Serbs and Bosnians
>Overrepresentation of Slovenes in Italy and Austria, same for Burgenland Croats, while in reality it's a few people in some villages and towns surrounded by many times more speakers of the native lang and other immigrant groups

>>216062225
It's probably more of a mix of things from different eras. Some of the Bulgarian villages around Bucharest from 1880 are now parts of neighborhoods in the city.
Also the Banat Bulgarian areas wasn't a continuous areas it was more like the ones in South Romania.

What is missing in the Banat around Reșița are the Carașoveni.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krashovani

>>216053744 (OP)
I don't mind it because the alternative is calling it "Serbo-Croatian" or god forbid "Bosnian-Croatian-Montenegrin-Serbian"

>>216062001
>Pannonian
It makes more sense calling it that or Slavonian over some "what" word.
>are they Croats
Yes, way longer than some other groups that are extremely nationalistic Croats today. But they were assimilated by Chakavian Croats way back in the past while their northern bros were conquered by Hungarians and Slovenians by Bavarian Germans.
>Sthokavian
Modern popular form of Sthokavian originates from Herzegovinia which itself is a mess but genetically they're mostly a pure form of dinarics and share many cultural similarities with each other. I'd call it a form of Bosnian or Montenegrin more than anything else if we go by modern state or some ethnic term. Serbs from Serbia historically spoke a bit more like Bulgarians.

>>216062001
Croatiam is whatever we agree is Croatian. First Croat state was in North Dalmatia and the earliest stone tablets and shit not in Latin were mainly in Chakavian. Shtokavian formed in Herzegovina, Southernmost Dalmatia and Bosnia. The earliest Serb state was more around the borders of Bosnia, Montenegro, Kosovo, Macedonia and only parts of modern Serbia. North Croatia (Kajkavian) and Slavonia were originally non-Croat non-Serb Slavs who adopted a Croat identity as the Croatian state spread out.

Ultimately, it makes more sense to describe Shtokavian, Kajkavian and Chakavian as closer to real languages, and Croatian, Bosnian, Serbian as political languages. I don't see the point in attempting to ascribe a certain dialect to a certain ethnic group as the dialect lines didn't neatly follow ethnic lines.

Croatian is so diverse... we even have esoteric Chakavian dialects! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hw0NZd7JZY4

>>216053744 (OP)
balkan rivalry