Talk:Slavic language (Greece)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Languages, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, and easy-to-use resource about languages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.	language Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

Contents 1 Excellent work 2 Further sources 3 Diaspora 4 Greeks 5 Mutually Intelligible 6 Albania 7 New edition of the Abecedar 8 Inappropriate title 9 "Linguistic classification"

[edit] Excellent work

Well done to the author(s) of this article. With both Bulgaria and FYR Macedonia claiming the language as it is spoken in Greece for themselves, creating a distinct article allows for a more balanced appraisal of its history. I hope to see the article it expand over time.--Damac 11:11, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

it is the same old argument everywhere, for the Catholic Slavs in Hungary, there is no clear line where Croadhood ends and being Slovene begins. In Florina, people from my town (Bitola) will not hesitate to call the Slavophones Makedonci, but I ask where does it truely end. The Slavophone continuum is sparse but runs right accross Northern Greece, south of Bulgaria and beyond - into Turkey, hence names like Lozengrad, possibly even accross the Black Sea into Asian Istanbul. I doubt my own uncles can seriously claim that they in Lozengrad are Macedonians! --Evlekis 12:07, 6 August 2006 (UTC) (Евлекис)

[edit] Further sources

Just came across this section of a bibliography on the web. Just in case somebody wants to research the topic further, there might be something interesting here:

• Voss 2000: Christian Voss, Das slavophone Griechenland. Bemerkungen zum Ende eines Tabus, Südosteuropa Mitteilungen 40/4, 351-363.

--124.178.44.136 10:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC)*Voss 2003a: Christian Voss, Macedonian ethnic and linguistic identity in Western Aegean Macedonia, Die Welt der Slaven 48/1, 53-68.

• Voss 2003b: Christian Voss, Verschriftungsversuche des Ägäis-Makedonischen, Zeitschrift für Slawistik 48/3, 339-356.
• Voss 2003c: Christian Voss, Zweisprachigkeit in Griechisch-Makedonien. Ein Forschungszwischenbericht, gbs-Bulletin. Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Bedrohte Sprachen 9, 8-11.
• Voss 2003d: Christian Voss, Sprachdiskurse in minoritären Ethnisierungs- und Nationalisierungsprozessen: Die slavischsprachige Minderheit in Griechenland, Südosteuropa 52/1-3, 116-135.
• Voss forthcoming: Christian Voss, The situation of the Slavic-speaking minority in Greek Macedonia – ethnic revival, cross-border cohesion, or language death? – Sevasti Trubeta/Christian Voss (eds.), Minorities in Greece. Historical issues and new perspectives. (=Jahrbücher für Geschichte und Kultur Südosteuropas 5)

If anybody is interested but lacks access, I might try to locate some of the stuff in the local library. Source, and further essay by the same author: [1] -- Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Some very interesting stuff. - FrancisTyers 13:01, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Diaspora

There is a substantial Diaspora of in Canada and Australia who self-identify as "Macedonians from Aegean Macedonia" and who identify their ancestral language as "Macedonian". See e.g. [2]]. I do not have solid sources for that but they should be easily found. I suppose that this issue is connected to events during WWII and the Greek Civil War. I do not feel qualified to elaborte on this but would suggest that something in these lines be included in the article.   Andreas   ^(T) 15:38, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Greeks

Recent ed. sum. no Greek is silly enough to deny ANY connection. they are all slavic languages

Actually there are, and I'd be happy to look up references if people are interested... - FrancisTyers 11:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Calling the language Slavic is itself admitting a connection. Claiming that Greeks deny "any" connection to Bulgarian is patently ridiculous. They may argue that the Slavic dialects spoken in Greece should not be named Bulgarian or "Macedonian", but that's a separate issue entirely. Even Greek is related to the Slavic languages via Indo-European.--203.206.205.125 13:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

"Connection" means that the languages spoken in northern Greece are dialects of Bulgarian or Macedonian. Trudgill argues that calling them Slavic instead of Bulgarian or Macedonian could imply that they are seperate languages, not mere dialects. --Telex 13:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Then that should be clearly stated. While it can be argued that the Slavic dialects spoken in Greece are mere dialects of Bulgarian or "Macedonian", it can also be argued that they are not, in light of many speakers' separate ethnic self-identification as Greeks. After all, "Macedonian" seceded from Bulgarian for purely political reasons; a similar secession of Greek Slavic from both Bulgarian and "Macedonian" is not entirely out of the question. The current wording suggests that the Greeks believe the Slavic spoken in Greece is completely unrelated to the languages spoken across the border. As this is clearly impossible, the Greek argument, which actually pertains to the identity of the language and its speakers and not its proximity to other languages, is invalidated by sheer misrepresentation.--58.170.206.198 14:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mutually Intelligible

Very few speakers can understand written Macedonian and Bulgarian, and according to Euromosaic, the dialects spoken in Greece are not readily mutually intelligible with either standard Macedonian or Bulgarian ...

This is just plain stupidity. I can accept them not being able to understand written Macedonian (or even spoken Bulgarian), but not being mutually intelligible with standard Macedonian is just a joke.

I am from the Republic of Macedonia, and currently live in Australia, and I've personally met dozens of families living in Australia (from Aegean Macedonia) who speak Macedonian as well as visiting my family in Lerin and Voden. The only difference between they way they speak and the way I speak, is the stress and, what I have assumed to be, Greek terms.

If it means anything, they consider themselves Macedonians, as do many of their Macedonian speaking friends and neighbours. --124.178.44.136 10:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

The cited source says the opposite: "La compréhension mutuelle ne pose pas de problèmes particuliers" - "The mutual understanding does ot pose particular problems". (It is not clear from the source if this relates to standard Mac. or Bulg.)   Andreas   ^(T) 13:00, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

We discussed this also on Talk:Macedonian language. The segment was removed. - FrancisTyers · 15:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Albania

DIe Albanian authorities promote assimilation of non-Albanian-speaking muslims? Are there sources for this?   Andreas   ^(T) 12:42, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New edition of the Abecedar

A new edition of the Abecedar has recently appeared at Batavia Editions in Thessaloniki[3]. It has an ISBN number (ISBN 960-89330-0-5) but does not appear in any major online catalogs under this number. Does anybody have any idea what is in this book?   Andreas   ^(T) 00:25, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

There were protests against the Abecedar, both in Athens and Thessaloniki, by Greek nationalist organisations. [4] [5] This should be added to the article. Mitsos 10:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inappropriate title

I think the title "Slavic language (Greece)", suggests an inappropriate specificity, as if one could say "Slavic language" and anyone would have any idea that you might be referring to the various Slavic dialects spoken in Greece. I also note that the supposed Greek name, "Σλάβικα Slávika", has virtually no google hits outside of Wikipedia mirrors. So I suggest we move this to a more descriptive name, something like Slavic dialects of Greece.--Pharos 21:39, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, I've made a very silly mistake about the google hits. Still, there are almost not English hits for "Slávika" under this definition.--Pharos 22:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

An even better title would be Slavomacedonian language in Greece" or "Macedonian language in Greece". The current title is a Greek POV. The reference to Trudgill is absolutely misleading. Trudgill just mentions that Greek use the term Slavika. He does not agree with the use of the term. --Michkalas 21:56, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

But wouldn't that exclude the dialects that are closer to standard Bulgarian, which also seem to fall under the purview of this article?--Pharos 22:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

In this article there no reference to Pomakika, the major Bulgarian dialect spoken in Greece. All the article is about (Slavo)Macedonian. --Michkalas 22:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

So? Trudgill does say that the classification is uncertain because of the "rooflessness". If you want to discuss Pomak feel free to if you can find sources (I can't).--Domitius 22:20, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

There is this cool Pomak dictionary [6] though.--Domitius 22:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Trudgill says (in his paper mentioned in the article, p. 259): "It seems most sensible, in fact, to refer to the language of the Pomaks as Bulgarian and to that of the Christian Slavonic-speakers in Greek Macedonia as Macedonia". So, Trudgill is clear about the classification and the name of the language, but the article here is misleading as to the view of Tridgill. Trudgill also estimates that the speakers of Macedonian in Greece are about 50,000. I believe we must include that in the article too. Note, by the way, that the votes of Rainbow are actually misleading as a hint of how many are the speakers as minorities can not be counted on the basis of voting for a particular, even minority based, party, and because speaking Macedonian doesn't mean that you are also ethnic Macedonian -many have Greek national consciousness beyond any doubt. Finally, apart from changing the title -and a few things in the article to avoid Greek POV- this article has a lot of valuable information and must be included to the Template:Macedonian language, as it is part of the series of articles on Macedonian language.--Michkalas 12:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Let's look at Trudgill's quote in context, shall we? Taking things out of context one can prove anything.

“

There is, of course, the very interesting Ausbau sociolinguistic question as to whether the language they speak is Macedonian or Bulgarian, given that both these languages have developed out of the South Slavonic dialect continuum that embraces also Serbian, Croatian, and Slovene. In former Yugoslav Macedonia and Bulgaria there is no problem, of course. Bulgarians are considered to speak Bulgarian and Macedonians Macedonian. The Slavonic dialects of Greece, however, are "rootless" dialects whose speakers have no access to education in the standard languages. Greek non-linguists, when they acknowledge the existence of these dialects at all, frequently refer to them by the label Slavika, which has the implication of denying that they have any connection with the languages of the neighboring countries. It seems most sensible, in fact, to refer to the language of the Pomaks a, Bulgarian and to that of the Christian Slavonic-speakers in Greek Macedonia as Macedonian.

”

In other words he's saying there it is unclear and is adding that in his opinion it's most sensible to call them Macedonian. As for the Rainbow's votes, they are not used to assess the number of speakers but the popularity of the party's line. If we are to say that this is Macedonian, include it in the relevant categories etc, then we must do the same for Bulgarian, an NPOV requirement.--Domitius 12:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Of course, we can provide the whole article -and, in fact, Trudgill's whole work- as context. He doesn't say it is unclear. He says it is Macedonian and also, as you quote, "Greek non-linguists, when they acknowledge the existence of these dialects at all, frequently refer to them by the label Slavika, which has the implication of denying that they have any connection with the languages of the neighboring countries. So in "Slavic language (Greece)" we have exactly this opinion of "Greek non-linguists".

BTW, "Slavic language (Greece)" has nothing to do with the Bulgarian dialect of Pomakika, so there is no need to include it somewhere in connection with the Bulgarian language.--Michkalas 13:08, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

There is, of course, the very interesting Ausbau sociolinguistic question as to whether the language they speak is Macedonian or Bulgarian. Is that tantamount to saying "they are Macedonian not Bulgarian" in your view? He just say that in his opinion it seems most sensible, in fact, to refer to the language of the Pomaks a, Bulgarian and to that of the Christian Slavonic-speakers in Greek Macedonia as Macedonian. Also, I've seen sources (of FYROM origin) calling Pomak "Macedonian" dialects, does that nullify the perception that they are Bulgarian.--Domitius 13:15, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

That there is a question doesn't imply that there isn't a clear answer. I am sure there would be "sources" from FYROM/Macedonia claiming that Pomakika is Macedonian. There also "source" from Greece claiming that no Slavic language or dialect is spoken in Greek Macedonia. Trudgill is not, of course, a low-level source as these.--Michkalas 13:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict)The problem here is, probably, that the article currently relies too much on Trudgill alone. While Trudgill is certainly a highly authoritative voice, this one quote alone is a bit thin for a decision. So, he himself opts for regarding these varieties as varieties of MKD. Fine. He is cautious about it, hinting that this identification is not absolutely straightforward and could be called into question. Fine. However, he does not say that anybody in particular has in fact questioned it. The only persons to whom he ascribes such a view are anonymous "Greek non-linguists". We would still do well to check how other reliable sources treat the issue, and unless we come across one that actually proposes a conflicting identification, there's really no reason we should not present this one as a fact. By conflicting identification, I do not mean voices that deny the language status of MKD as a whole, but voices which, while affirming the existence of MKD, treat the Greek varieties as something substantially separate from it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

The article doesn't say it is a separate language. What it's basically saying is "we don't know if it's MKD or BUL", so we're going to treat it and its specific history here under the name "Slavic" so as to avoid answering the question, and this is exactly what Trudgill is doing.--Domitius 13:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

It is true that more sources are needed, but the only source the article cites as to the name and the linguistic classification of the Slavonic languages in Greece is Trudgill and he is cited misleadingly. Identification, as generally with all the ausbau languages and, in this case, with South Slavonic dialect continuum, is not easy, but, in the end, there is an identification. Let's face it: treating the Slavonic language of Greek Macedonia as "Slavic" is not avoid "answering the question", is the Greek majority public opinion and Greek Foreign Affairs Ministry answer to the question.--Michkalas 14:17, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Isn't it also the majority public opinion of the people who actually speak the language? Or do they not count? ·ΚέκρωΨ· 14:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

No, they don't, and I can't stress that often enough. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:50, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

As I have just written at "Macedonian langauge": When it comes to linguistic classification of a language I can't see how this can be decided by a majority vote or -even worse- by the a government. BTW, this majority was formed through suppression by the state. --Michkalas 14:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Your "Macedonian" is the example par excellence of a language created by government decree, while the "Macedonian" majority of the "Republic of Macedonia" was formed through suppression of the Bulgarian identity by the Yugoslav state. What's your point? ·ΚέκρωΨ· 14:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

But we in Wikipedia aren't calling it Macedonian because the government said so. We are calling it Macedonian because all the relevant literature has picked up that usage in the meantime. Kekrops, with all due respect, you really have an unfortunate tendency of deflecting discussions away from the only thing that matters on Wikipedia: reflecting what the literature says (although I admit, in this instance Michkalas did the same). Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:03, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

And with all due respect, Herr, the literature says nothing definite other than that there is a "question" regarding the classification of the "Slavonic dialects of Greece". Trudgill's preference for "Macedonian" is just that, a preference, at least by my reading of the text. He doesn't bother to explain why it is "most sensible", while his assertion that "Slavika" has "the implication of denying that they have any connection with the languages of the neighboring countries" is simply preposterous. It has nothing of the sort. If the Greeks wanted to deny "any connection", they might not have used the name of the language family to which the languages of the neighbouring countries belong. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 15:08, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Τί δέ με καλεῖτε, Κύριε Κύριε, καὶ οὐ ποιεῖτε ἃ λέγω; (Lk 6:46) Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Τι ακριβώς θες να κάνω, δηλαδή; Να το βουλώσω; ·ΚέκρωΨ· 15:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Ξέρω'γω; Αφού εσύ άρχισες να με αποκαλείς αφέντη σου... Παρ' το απόφαση... ;-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Βρε δεν πάτε να γράφετε ό,τι θέλετε. Οι Μακεδόνες θα εξακολουθούν να σας γράφουν στα παπάρια τους. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 15:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I believe we should stick to the linguistic classification of the language, not how a nation came into being. Kekrops, with what you have just said [before your last comment] is like saying that in Greek Macedonia everyone who speaks a Slavonic language speaks Bulgarian. Unless, there is no one speaking any Slavonic language in Greek Macedonia. --Michkalas 15:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Ηρέμησε, φίλε. No one on this talk page has claimed that there are no Slav-speakers in Macedonia, so don't even try that line of argument. I'm not calling it "Bulgarian" or "Macedonian"; I agree with Trudgill that there is a question regarding its classification but I don't agree with his preference for the latter. I would prefer to see a source that bothers to explain why it should be called "Macedonian" and nothing else. Other than sheer laziness, of course. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 15:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

So, you don't agree with Trudgill. Please write in English only and be WP:CIVIL. --Michkalas 15:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Where was I uncivil? ·ΚέκρωΨ· 15:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

It's called an ad hominem.--Domitius 15:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I still don't get why Pomak in Thrace is "Bulgarian" and Slavic in Macedonian is "Macedonian". What about Britannica which says that Bulgarian and Macedonian is spoken in Greek Macedonia or something like that?--Domitius 15:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd not rely on Britannica too much here. Go straight for the specialist literature. You need to check the works of Christian Voss and those of Alexandra Ioannidou (Institute for Balkan Studies, Thessaloniki). You might also want to check the other contribution in this conference volume: Jahrbücher für Geschichte und Kultur Südosteuropas vol 5 (2003) Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Or Peter Hill. Not. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 16:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I remember the Euromosaic project saying that there are people declaring as Bulgarians in Greek Macedonia. Michkala, what language do they speak? Bulgarian or Macedonian?--Domitius 16:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I should say again that language doesn't equal national conscience/identity. Otherwise, the speakers of Arvanitika would be ethnic Albanians and Vlachs Romanians.--Michkalas 16:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Domitius raises a valid point, nonetheless. What on earth separates Bulgarian from "Macedonian" other than national conscience/identity? ·ΚέκρωΨ· 16:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Not our problem to solve. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:25, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

So what do the self-declared Bulgarians of Macedonia speak, then? Or does "Macedonian" have an absolute monopoly? ·ΚέκρωΨ· 16:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Check the literature. I don't know. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:29, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm quite happy with the current agnostic name. Let those who wish to rename it do the work. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 16:35, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

So we can quote correctly Trudgill's opinion, the only source of the article for the issue of classification, and mark it POV until is fixed? --Michkalas 16:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

There's little point in doing that. What exactly do you want to achieve? How can it be fixed?--Domitius 17:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I have written all these in the talk page to avoid an edit war. I could just change the article (without new sources) and then just say "I am happy with the current name. Let those who wish to rename it do the work." Michkalas 17:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Michkala, the article was created like this and has been like this for months until you decided to dispute something I still don't understand. You want to change the article, you'll have to make clear what you want to change and why.--Domitius 17:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I have mada more than clear what I would like to change. At least, I have one source. Can i make the changes?Michkalas 17:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Well for some reason, only you seem to know what it is. Feel free to make the change whatever it is, but if it's something weird and POV, don't be hurt if you get reverted. Re article names, controversial titles are usually changed with a rename poll.--Domitius 17:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Simple proposal: modify the article with a paragraph or two in such a way that it covers not just the "Macedonian" Slavic, but also the uncontroversially "Bulgarian" Pomak. That way, the title "Slavic language (Greece)" becomes uncontroversial, because there's no doubt "Slavic" can serve as an NPOV cover term for both - and that's the main usage people like Trudgill and Voss seem to be following too. Then, there should be no problem discussing the various identificatory options within the article, and also noting the fact (which should be easily sourcable) that most linguistic classifications treat the Greek varieties as MKD, as does Trudgill. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree. In this case, a better title would be "Slavic languages in Greece".Michkalas 17:49, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Slavic languages of Greece includes Russian and Ukrainian as spoken by large numbers of Pontian Greek immigrants (Ρωσοπόντιοι).--Domitius 17:52, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

So now we are playing hide and seek. Good. In Greek Wikipedia, without a single Macedonian participating, at least we have agreed to call the language Slavomakedonika. --Michkalas 18:01, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, so?--Domitius 18:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Without a single Macedonian? How can you be so sure? There must have been at least a couple from Thessaloniki, surely. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 18:09, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding that, by "Macedonian" do you mean a person from FYROM? Where do you live, because I've lived in Greece for most of my life and I've never heard anyone anywhere ever call them "Macedonians". You're not one of those people who think that Greece should cede half the Aegean Islands to Turkey, stop pressuring Albania and Turkey to treat the Greek minorities well yet recognize non-existing minorities in Greece, and abolish the Greek Orthodox Church but let all other religions function, are you?--Domitius 18:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

No, he's an antinationalist by his own admission, which presumably means he'd rather Greece didn't exist at all. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 18:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion, anti-nationalism does not exist. A Greek anti-nationalist is the same thing as a FYROM or Turkish nationalist, whereas a Turkish anti-nationalist (who demands that Turkey withdraws from Cyprus, recognizes the Armenian Genocide, compensates the victims of the Istanbul Pogrom etc) is the same thing as a Greek nationalist.--Domitius 18:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

That's always been my problem with antinationalism in practice - replacing the nationalism of one's own country with that of others. I suppose one could argue for the abolition of nation-states altogether, but what would we have in their place? ·ΚέκρωΨ· 18:23, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

According to Benedict Anderson, the nation state substitutes the religious organization of peoples which preceded (Ἀδελφοὶ ἐν Χριστῷ etc) or something like that. Do you think that's better?--Domitius 18:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I suppose this page is not for discussing my or your political views.--Michkalas 18:14, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Why not? I believe Greece should exist. You're free to disagree. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 18:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Nowhere is inappropriate to discuss political views. But back to the article. WHY do you remove what Trudgill says?! It's a direct quote.--Domitius 18:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) :::Domitius, I have explained already, in the beginning of this discussion, why. Fragmenting somebody's discourse and summarising it without giving the general impression of what he says is not "direct quote". BTW, whatever your answer, I 'll be offline and I can't respond immediately. --Michkalas 18:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I respond below.--Domitius 18:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Neither of the two versions is particularly good. The reason is still simply that it doesn't look good for a whole paragraph of the article to be a paraphrase of a single paper, as if there was nothing else on the topic. By the way, if that was a direct quote, why wasn't it marked as such? Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[Edit conflict] Maybe "direct quote" is not good because there are no quotation marks. It's a paraphrase of the original quote (see near the top of this section) for reasons I don't understand (other than Francis wanting to include Bosniak in the list of South Slav languages). I have no problem with a quotation marked direct quote.--Domitius 18:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

“

Apart from certain peripheral areas in the far east of Greek Macedonia, which in our opinion must be considered as part of the Bulgarian linguistic area (the region around Kavala and in the Rhodope Mountains, as well as the eastern part of Drama nomos), the dialects of the Slav minority in Greece belong to Macedonia diasystem.

”

from: Schmieger, R. 1998. "The situation of the Macedonian language in Greece: sociolinguistic analysis", International Journal of the Sociology of Language 131, 125-55. Abstract. Special issue on Macedonian.

It can be embedded in the article as it is, I believe.--Michkalas 20:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem. If you want a map of where the border is, I think the "yat border" is the closest you can get to it. I guess this means the plan of making this article about "Macedonian" only is out of the window.--Domitius 20:48, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Why? --Michkalas 21:13, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I can't escape from you and your POV pushing on the English or the Greek Wikipedia! Isn't there a desert island Wikipedia anywhere? Regarding your question: because they clearly say that they don't consider all dialects of Macedonia as Macedonian, but some as Bulgarian (Drama Prefecture was in Macedonia last time I checked)! They disagree with Trudgill who says that in his opinion all dialects of Macedonia are Macedonian. Therefore there are two options: option A (all dialects are Macedonian) and option B (some are Macedonian and some are Bulgarian). What is your idea of neutrality - selecting A or B? In my opinion, none. You say "some people say A and some people say B", and you have to pick a title which doesn't exclude either of them. Let's try and put it in Greek, maybe you're confused: γιατί είμαστε τόσο υποχρεωμένοι να ακολουθούμε τη γραμμή του "Ουρανίου Τόξου" που είσαι διατεθειμένος να αγνοήσεις τις ίδιες σου τις πηγές; Ξεκάθαρα δε λένε ότι δε θεωρούν όλες τις διαλέκτους της (ελεύθερης) Μακεδονίας ως (σλαβο)μακεδονικές;--Domitius 21:38, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Please, don't write in Greek in English language Wikipedia. This is RUDE!

The quote confirms -in more detailed manner than Trudgill- that apart from the region mentioned Slavika in Greek Macedonia is Macedonian. Anyway, I 'll put in the article as it and let the readers decide. --Michkalas 21:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

In the age of babelfish (OK, dubious translations as a rule, but still comprehensible), nothing is RUDE! If it's that RUDE why don't you tell off Future Perfect, he does it as well ;-) I have no objections to you adding that to the article - the more detailed and sourced, the better.--Domitius 21:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Surely Russian and Ukrainian can't count as "languages of Greece". They're certainly not in Category:Languages of Greece. I suppose they are languages used in Greece, but the South Slavic dialects are fundamentally different as they have been spoken by peoples of northern Greece for a long time.--Pharos 05:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I found something more. In 2001, the Minority Groups Research Center (KEMO) published the volume Language and "Otherness in Greece"(publisher Alexandreia), with the transcripts of four closed seminars KEMO organized in 1998, with EU funds, on minority languages in Greece. There is included a seminar/ chapter on “The Slavic dialects of [Greek] Macedonia” coordinated/edited by Alexandra Ioannidou. Peter Hill, asked to identify the linguistic differences between the western and eastern dialects of the eastern group of South Slavic languages, uses the yat isogloss as criterion and in the area of Greek Macedonia locates the isogloss west of Drama (p. 207-208). This is the same region identified by Schmieger in the International Journal of the Sociology of Language. According to these references, the Wikipedia map on yat is not exact, at least showing the isogloss in Greek Macedonia. So, according to Hill too, apart from the Drama region, a small part of Greek Macedonia (see map) in the eastern part of the region, while the majority of slavic speaking population, apart from Pomaks, lives in western Greek Macedonia (Florina etc.), the Slavic dialects in Greek Macedonia are western dialects of the eastern group of South Slavic languages. The standardised dialect of the eastern group of South Slavic languages is standard Macedonian, isn't it so?

Also, an indirect source, an abstract from Christian Voss's paper "Verschriftungsversuche des Ägäis-Makedonischen im 20. Jahrhundert (Attempt to write down the Aegean Macedonian dialects in the 20th century"). I mention this just for the name he uses to identify the dialects.

If their is a suggestion for some specific papers on the Slavic dialects in Greek Macedonia from Voss or Ioannidou, maybe I can find it in our University library. From Scholar Google I couldn't find anything more.

Pharos, I couldn't agree more with your point. --Michkalas 15:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

So you, along with Peter Hill, who is vociferously pro-Skopje, accept then that not all the Slavic dialects spoken in Macedonia should be classified as "Macedonian". You cannot exclude the Drama region simply because it suits you; it is as much a part of Macedonia and Greece as "Lerin" or "Voden". If anything, your source demonstrates why this article should not be renamed, does it not? ·ΚέκρωΨ· 15:36, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Linguistic classification"

Does anyone think that the "linguistic classification" section is starting to look a bit ugly? Just two quotes and that's it. How about paraphrasing them?--Domitius 22:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

It seems we can't have a consensus on what would be a good, acceptable paraphrasing. So, for the time at least, leave it as it is. And let reader draw a conclusion. I have moved a little bit to the top the photo. It looks better now.--Michkalas 22:20, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow talk about subtle 'biasism'. It seems some Greeks will do anything to make their beloved northern region seem entirely Greek, but the sad part is that northern Greece has been anything but Greek in the past.