Talk:Slavomolisano language/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Slavomolisano language. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Jugoslaven, kindly explain why you insist on Serbo-Croatian here, too. Molise Slavic split off from its parent South Slavic language way before the term "Serbo-Croatian" was in use, so using it instead of the current term "Croatian" (in the opinion of Ethnologue/SIL as of late, too, not to mention the representatives of those people and Italians) makes no sense to me. --Joy [shallot] 23:22, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Serbo-Croatian dialects - Jugoslaven

So frickin' what? Do you not grasp the concept of "Serbo-Croatian" being outdated terminology? Or that two different pages need not use the very same criteria to explain a versatile subject. I mean, come on. --Joy [shallot] 08:34, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

See it:Lingue parlate in Italia: ...in it:Molise in alcuni centri esistono ancora comunità parlanti il croato... So, Italians definitively call this language croatian. --Sombrero 08:55, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Stop linking "three", that's like linking "the". Wikipedia:Make only links relevant to the context - Jshadias 20:17, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

That's just User:Jugoslaven being obtrusive, he's reverting without regard to collateral damage. --Joy [shallot] 08:34, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'll add a sample soon, from a Russian source. --VKokielov 22:19, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

The article says:

Three villages in the Campobasso province — Montemitro (Mundimitar), Aquaviva Collercroce (Živavoda Kruč) and San Felice del Molise (Filić) — have approximately 3,000 speakers of Molise Slavic.

I have been made aware of a community known as Guglionese, in which a Slavic language is spoken. The name of this language was given to me by my informant as -- here I am spelling the name phonetically, I have no idea whatsoever how the name ought to be spelled -- yoomeshane.

Does anybody know about this language, or dialect, or whatever one may call it?

David Pinto Montreal, Canada david_e_pinto@yahoo.ca

Maybe it is about Slavic community in Italian province Giula near Slovenian border. Luka Jačov 08:09, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

is a term that Venetians use for their colonies in the eastern Adriatic coast. They also use Schiavoni, so in venice, we have Riva degli Schiavoni, named after Croats from the eastern Adriatic coast, who were selling their goods there. Also, historical sources from the western Adriatic coast called medieval Croatian dukes as Slavs... so, saying that Molisisans are not considering themselves Croats, and using this sort of argument is political, and not a scientifical approach.

First of all, try to make a user account so we can have normal communication. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 14:21, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

About naming: This is not the question for anyone outside Molise. If those people say that they are Zlavs, then they are Zlavs, if they say that they are Croats, they are Croats. In the part of the article Molise Croats should be described how they came into Molise, are they Croats by origin etc. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 14:21, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Language is called "Molise Slavic" because it is usualy to call this language just as "Molisian" and I think that some people said that "Molisian" can mean "Molisian Itialian", too; so they added suffix. (I think that it should be named as just "Molisian".) --millosh (talk (sr:)) 14:21, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Slavi or Zlavs is a "nickname" (often pejorative) used by Italians for all the Slavic peoples in Italy, simply because they won't bother with individual nationalities. Therefore, if a Molise Croat is calling himself "Slav", it's because he doesn't know any better. There are many other analogous cases in Europe: Lapps/Sami, Tzigans/Roma etc. --Zmaj 14:44, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Moved from the page. Please verify that it is Molise Croatian, not Burgenland Croatian ("Gradiscanski Hrvati")! --millosh (talk (sr:)) 12:48, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

It is defenetly Molisan. You can see it by Italian borrowings: funia, maneštra Luka Jačov 15:01, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

OK if you say so. Why it is related to Burgenland (Gradiscanski) Croatian. Just the name of the journal? --millosh (talk (sr:)) 16:10, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

An anonymous poem (from Hrvatske Novine: Tajednik Gradišćanskih Hrvatov):

SIN MOJ
Mo prosič solite saki dan
ma što činiš, ne govoreš maj
je funia dan, je počela noča,
maneštra se mrzli za te čeka.
Letu vlase e tvoja mat
gleda vane za te vit.
Boli život za sta zgoro,
ma samo mat te hoče dobro.
Sin moj!
Nimam već suze za još plaka
nimam već riče za govorat.
Srce se guli za te misli
što ti prodava, oni ke sve te išće!
Palako govoru, čelkadi saki dan,
ke je dola droga na vi grad.
Sin moj!
Tvoje oč, bihu toko lipe,
sada jesu mrtve,
Boga ja molim, da ti živiš
droga ja hočem da ti zabiš,
doma te čekam, ke se vrniš,
Solite ke mi prosiš,
kupiš paradis, ma smrtu platiš.

Milose, ja sam ovo slozio ondje i mogu utvrditi da sam to uzeo iz dijela o Molizkoslavenskom.  :) Tajednik zaista je samo izvor. --VKokielov 23:50, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

:) E, dobro je. Mislim, u svakom slucaju ce biti dobro jer ce neko ko opet pomisli da je los primer -- da vidi raspravu na strani. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 16:19, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

It can be said that "Molise Slavic language is spoken by Croats", but language is not the dialect of another language: not the dialect of Croatian, not the dialect of Serbo-Croatian. Please, look at the definitions of both terms. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 16:10, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

E, Luka, mrzi me da se prepucavam na engleskom; tj. mrzi me da se prepucavam uopste. Ako je nesto jezik, onda nije dijalekat. Nema veze da li tu stoji srpskohrvatski ili hrvatski; i nema veze kako se jezik zove (moliski sl(o|a)venski ili moliski hrvatski). Otprilike, to mu dodje kao da kazes "kuca A je prozor kuce B". Dakle, ako hoces da se ovo zove dijalektom, trazi da se clanak zove "molisko slovenski dijalekat". --millosh (talk (sr:)) 12:49, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Ako ti nije bitno dogovorit cemo se - meni je svejedno da li ces ga nazvati jezikom, ili dijalektom, dok je u pitanju HRVATSKI, jer su Molisani HRVATI. A sve nesto sumnjam da hoces. Dajte se vise ostavite Hrvatske, Hrvata, hrvatske povijesti i kulture na miru i prestanite glumiti "Engleze".

Ima mnogo takozvanih jezika koji nisu ništa drugo nego dijalekti-Meänkieli. Kad sam započeo članak nazvao sam ga language jer je več bio crveni link na članku List of endagered languages, no možda bi stvarno bilo bolje da se prebaci u Molise Slavic language. Druga stvar, ovaj anonimni editor te optužuje za vandalizam.

Ti 24.... tko si ti uopče i kome se obračaš? Što se tiče tvrdnje da su Moližani Hrvati; jesi ti Moliški Zlav da to možeš reč u njihovo ime?! Mogu samo citirat mještane sela Mundimitar: Ma kakvi Hrvati! Taj narod nikad nije ni postojao, več je sve to izmišljotina Vatikana!

A i uostalom oni sami sebe nazivaju Zlavima a ne Hrvatima.

HA, HA, HA, ovo je dobar dokaz jalovosti hrvatske politike u prisvajanju Moliskih Slavena. Uskoro ce se otkriti i sve ostale jalove provokacije i lazi koje plasira hdz-ovska politika u pogledu tzv. 'hrvatskog' jezika, pripadnosti nekih nacionalnih grupa 'Hrvatima' i sve slicne providne gluposti! Cheers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.86.110.10 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 29 July 2007

Još bih ti preporučio da pročitaš ovaj putopis: http://www.srpsko-nasledje.co.yu/sr-l/1998/03/article-17.html Luka Jačov 14:14, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Bravo Luka, uvijek nadjes pravi odgovor na svako pitanje. Ovaj link dokazuje da su Molizanski Slaveni Srbi a ne Hrvati.( ako cemo uopce dijeliti ljude u S-H dijasistemu na 'Srbe' i Hrvate')..Cheers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.86.110.10 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 29 July 2007

Dakle, ko je sta po nacionalnosti/etnicitetu, to je na njemu da odluci (verujem da odgovor na to mozemo dobiti i na italijanskoj Vikipediji). Ako ljudi kazu da su Hrvati, onda su Hrvati, ako kazu da su Sloveni, onda su Sloveni; ako kazu da su Hrvati a da govore moliski slovenski, onda je to tako itd. Nema tu sta mnogo da se prica. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 16:09, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

(Usput, aj potpisujte redove ili bar koristite uvlacenje i sl. da bih znao ko sta prica.) --millosh (talk (sr:)) 16:09, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Moliski se uci u skolama. Dakle, ne uci se standardni (srpsko)hrvatski, nego se uci ikavski stokavski koji ne postoji ni u jednoj normi: ni u sh, ni u hr ni u bs. Dakle, oni ne govore ni po jednom standardu, vec po nekom svom skolskom. Dakle, imaju svoj standard koji je razlicit od ma kog srspkohrvatskog standarda. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 16:09, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

To je bila prica o standardnom jeziku. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 16:09, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Druga je stvar o "jeziku kao sistemu dijalekata". U tom smislu, kao sto sam ti onomad i rekao, to se moze tretirati "srpskohrvatskim dijalektom" iskljucivo ako se ti ljudi tamo tako odredjuju. A ako se neko odredjuje kao Zlav, onda je logicno da svoj jezik ne zove "srpskohrvatskim". Mada i to treba proveriti. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 16:09, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Opet da ponovim (tebi, Luka), kajkavski, cakavski, stokavski i torlacki imaju isto toliko veze koliko i npr. ceski i slovacki ili poljski i kasupski ili kajkavski i slovenacki... I stvarno ne razumem potrebu za trpanje cetiri razlicita jezicka sistema u jednu vrecu. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 16:09, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Glede clanka: Neki srpski ucenjak je napisao da su Molizani Srbi. I sta sa tim? Kako se ti ljudi danas osecaju? Mislim, mozemo ustanovljavati ko je sta istorijski bio i to je istorijski relevantno, ali za danas je vazno ustanoviti kako se ti ljudi danas osecaju. Etnicka i nacionalna pripadnost ne tece u venama nego je stvar licnog odredjenja i drustvenog prihvatanja. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 16:09, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I na kraju, bolje je ne odrediti etnicku/nacionalnu pripadnost (joj, jos samo ako nam dodje neko ko ce stavljati da je to "dijalekat srpskog jezika"), nego stavljati vrlo problematicnu "opstu" pripadnost. Bolje je jezik definisati lingvisticki ako postoje politicke tenzije, nego pokusati unifikovati to i pokrenuti jos veci problem. Dakle, do konkretnih istrazivanja (uzmimo, zamolimo nekog iz Italije da nam to objasni, porazgovaramo, ako imamo srece, sa nekim od tih ljudi itd.) mislim da je izuzetno korisno da se manemo corava posla i ne pokusavamo odredjivati jezik politicki (sto je, preko konstatacije "kuca je prozor", jos jedna izuzetno losa stvar, pa bilo to "dijalekat srpskohrvatskog" ili "dijalekat hrvatskog"). --millosh (talk (sr:)) 16:09, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Here is mentioned village Mundimitar, please check their webpages:

• Nemojte zabit nas lipi jezik, or
• Moliski Hrvati cuvari hrvatskog jezika i kulture u Italiji. If I haven't forget wikipedia is not a place for original research, but for established facts, and they are telling us there are no Molise Serbo-Croat, but only Croat. SpeedyGonsales 16:28, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

U školama se uči standardni hrvatski a njihov standard. Imaju učiteljicu iz Hrvatske. Luka Jačov 19:59, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Inače ti mene odgovoraš na nešto što uopče nije bilo namjenjeno tebi:). Luka Jačov 20:01, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Hm. Ako se uci standardni hrvatski, onda clanak treba nazvati dijalektom, a opisati da uce standardni hrvatski u skolama, tj. da je to njihov standard. U tom smislu se moze reci u politickom smislu da je "dijalekat deo hrvatskog", dok nije preterano smisleno govoriti da je deo srpskohrvatskog. Takodje, dobro bi bilo da posaljes neki link koji potvrdjuje da uce standardni hrvatski a ne svoj ikavski. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 20:25, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

A sta sam ti odgovarao sto nije bilo meni upuceno? Ono za clanak? --millosh (talk (sr:)) 20:25, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Ono je bilo upučeno anonimnom useru. Luka Jačov 16:51, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

You can relativize everything like that claiming that every local dialect is a separate language which everbody sees you tend do it . The fact is that science consider those 4 dialects close enough to consider them to be the part of one language. I dont recall any study that claims differently and if it those then it is not widely accepted. What you are doing here you are intrusing your personal opinion to all of us. Luka Jačov 16:51, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

So, this article should be moved into Molise Slavic. I don't think that we should name it as a "dialect", but it should not be named as "language". --millosh (talk (sr:)) 14:14, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

I hope that we can agree about that. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 14:14, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

What does Molise Slavic mean?! Nothing! It is just pronoun! Molise Slavic what? Luka Jačov 16:34, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Come now, Luka, don't pretend to be a fool. Molise Slavic what? Finnish what? Serbo-Croatian what? --VKokielov 21:39, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Request not fulfilled due to lack of consensus. Rob Church ^Talk 12:14, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

request for adding information: Medo Pucić was a Serbian nobleman, politician and poet from Dubrovnik who was the president of the Serbian Party (which won municipal elections in 1855.) He cried for the Serbdom of old Dubrovnik HolyRomanEmperor 17:43, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Agree with millosh, this page should not be named as "dialect". - FrancisTyers 17:33, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

It is not correct that they lost their last names; they just became italinized so for example Đorđević became Giorgetta, Stanišić became Stanischia and so on. Luka Jačov 15:49, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Giorgetta is Jurjević (Italian for Jure/Juraj is Giorgio); surname Stanić is fournd among coastal Croats, Lalli is Lalić, etc. Some families here still have living memories on their cousins that migrated to Italy, and you're selling you greaterserbianist propaganda. Open your eyes and read the text on Molise Croat webpages, Luka. Stop living in your fake world. Your lies won't help you in your life. Enjoy looking at Mundimitar football team shirts. Kubura 15:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

As I already said on the "Molise Croats" talk page, the concept of "Molise Slavs" is breaking the Wikipedia rule of "no original research", since the existing literature overwhelmingly prefers "Molise Croats". You can't promote your pet theories here, but accept what is considered general knowledge. The dialect logically follows from the ethnic name. --Zmaj 15:11, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

No original research. Look at other wikipedia's. Stop your Great-Croatian propaganda. Luka Jačov 22:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Other Wikipedias cannot be considered as proof. Since there is a global consensus that those people are called "Molise Croats", there is absolutely no justification to call their language "Slavic". --Zmaj 07:17, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

If they call themselfs simply Slavs and scientist call it Molise Slavic there is nothing u can do. Luka Jačov 21:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

You are deliberately ignoring all the links and local Molisan web pages where they call themselves Croats. This is pure and simple sabotage on your part. --Zmaj 20:49, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

<nationmaster link> Molise-Croatian-dialect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molise_Croatian_dialect

One of the above is shameful plagiarism. I have no clue which, though I have my bias.... Wgroleau (talk) 00:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I offer u compromise by keeping current name and mentioning alternative names in brackets. Luka Jačov 23:23, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, no chance. Only Molise Croat dialect. Molise Croats declare themselves as Croats and they are recognised minority in Italy. Kubura 10:35, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Just wanted to point to administrators that most of people that voted for support were mobilized from Croatian wikipedia. User:Sombrero and User:Damirux registered themselves in sole purpose to vote in this matter. Luka Jačov 23:23, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Of course they are. Who, on earth, is to have a (nay, the) say on the Croatian language, but the Croats ? Mir Harven 01:40, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

It seems, Luka Jačov, that you've registered on english wikipedia only to spread this greaterserbianist propaganda. Kubura 10:37, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Ok, Kubura what is Greatserbian in my work?! Define greatserbianism?! Luka Jačov 23:56, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

The Molisians, I would say. Besides, you know damn well that it is preferrential to add to the discussion, not simply show up, vote, and then leave, am I correct? Has anyone heard this language spoken, because I'm quite skeptical of the 'extensive' studies of three villages. Regardless, the article states that their Croatian is archaic, and highly Italized, can you still claim that only Croats can lay claim to what is said and done about this? Why not the Italians as well?--Hurricane Angel 03:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

To call the language Slavic is to hand the Italians the battle. I understand what the Croats have against the name now. It's an insult, you see, a way for the Italians to spit in the face of the rednecks. It's an old tradition. Even though the locals call themselves Slavs, it does not bide well for them to be called Slavs by the informed or educated. --VKokielov 05:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

And everyone lived happily ever after. I retract my point, on the basis that I put my full trust in you (a Russian Jew?, interesting), and that everything stated is 100% accurate. Namely, that their dialect is closer to shtokavian (in which case it's also close to Serbian, but there were no Dalmatian Serbs) and that they are of Dalmatian Croat descent. And "Second, how in the world can a Dalmatian dialect be close to Serbian?" I don't know what you're trying to tell me there?--Hurricane Angel 11:34, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

What in the world does it matter what I am? I'm not approaching the question from the side you are. Now when we Russian Jews get called just 'Americans' here, we become cranky. Pardon me, but we aren't wrong to be cranky. If the Italians can be called Italians, and the Irish can be called Irish, then we sure as hell can be called Jews. --VKokielov 11:46, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I just said it was interesting. Theres no need to get into defensive reasons as to what your namesake rights are.--Hurricane Angel 20:59, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

And who are you to tell me what to get into and what to steer around? --VKokielov 22:09, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I really don't know what you're talking about, you made your point and I accepted it. Where do you get off on the fact that I told you to steer clear of this issue, I have said no such thing. --Hurricane Angel 01:35, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I misread what you wrote as sarcastic. --VKokielov 02:03, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

That's the problem when it comes to typing, and not speaking. --Hurricane Angel 06:00, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

A zato imamo nekoliko postojecih ... konvencija... koje omogucuju da mi dopunimo ono sto nama fali. --VKokielov 06:08, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

The voting is hereby closed after the period of 5 days, in accordance with the policy of Wikipedia:Requested moves, where the voting request was placed on 17 February 2006. A clear consensus for the page move has not been reached. However, the policy of requested moves allowes a page to be moved if 60% or more users support the moving of the article. There have been 10 "Support" votes and 3 "Oppose" votes, which makes for a 76% majority, meeting even the supermajority principle. Therefore, I will now move the page to Molise Croatian dialect. This does not mean that the issue is closed. Users opposing this decision can use the channels provided by the Wikipedia policy, such as consulting a third party, filing a request for comment (on the article in question), and requesting mediation. The article may not be moved to other names than Molise Croatian dialect without following the official policy steps. I have followed the official policy to the letter and expect others to do the same. --Zmaj 09:05, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

For some reason, I can't move the page, so I'll wait for the administrator to do it. --Zmaj 09:42, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

User Luka Jačov renamed the article without proper authorization. I used his talk page to inform him of today's voting results, the administrator's action and the appropriate steps for opposing the decision. --Zmaj 14:52, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I also informed the administrator Nightstallion of Luka Jačov's unauthorized action. --Zmaj 15:05, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I moved the page back to "Molise Croatian dialect" per vote. --Elephantus 15:38, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. —Nightstallion (?) 17:31, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Molise Croatian dialect → Molise Slavic dialect – high nationalist conotation - copied from the entry on the WP:RM page

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~

• Support - as above. Luka Jačov 09:07, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose — this has been voted on already, and decided. A vote might be possible some time in the future, but immediately re-opening a vote is disruptive to writing an encyclopaedia and makes you suffer loss of credibility here. For what it's worth, Ethnologue supports the view of this as a Croatian variety [2]. — Gareth Hughes 17:28, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
• Support - Seems the move was voted through nationalistically. --estavisti 21:13, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
• Support - --M. Pokrajac 00:40, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Luka, requesting a new vote to revert the move that was voted yesterday is pointless. Any administrator will tell you that. Instead of embarrasing yourself, you could use some of the appropriate official steps I listed above. --Zmaj 10:08, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

NOTE TO ADMINISTRATORS: Don't be conned into moving the page. See what the administrator Gareth Hughes says above. This has already been voted and decided. --Zmaj 07:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Revert-move-vote-warring is not the way to go. File an RfC or an RfM. Mediation might be the best way, actually. —Nightstallion (?) 09:12, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I want another administrator on this case cos Nightstallion proved to be biased by not anwsering questions i left on his talk page. Luka Jačov 10:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

The voting is hereby closed after the period of 5 days, in accordance with the policy of Wikipedia:Requested moves, where the voting request was placed on 23 February 2006. A clear consensus for the page move has not been reached. However, the policy of requested moves allowes a page to be moved if 60% or more users support the moving of the article. There have been 3 "Support" votes and 1 "Oppose" votes, which makes for a 75% majority, meeting even the supermajority principle. Therefore, I will now move the page to Molise Slavic language. This does not mean that the issue is closed. Users opposing this decision can use the channels provided by the Wikipedia policy, such as consulting a third party, filing a request for comment (on the article in question), and requesting mediation. The article may not be moved to other names than Molise Slavic language without following the official policy steps. I have followed the official policy to the letter and expect others to do the same. --Luka Jačov 10:34, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Luka, you are acting like a small child, repeating the words of adults without understanding their meaning. It's pitiful. --Zmaj 11:27, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Luka, please, read WP:CITE and WP:NOR. Therefore, Wikipedia insists you cite your sources. This guy removes sources from this page. He adds unsuported claims. If he leaves the references alone and adds some to support his thesis, then everything would be fine.

And as for "The guy is native,what better sources do u need". The statement is contradictory. Let me prove that consistently. Your statement implies that being native makes a person a living reference. Good. I'm native Slavic, and therefore I'm reference for Slavs. I, as a reference for Slavs, claim that Slavs are not born with a priori exhaustive and accurate knowledge of history of their native language. Therefore, the guy cannot be used as a source for his own native language. But, since I derrived this fact from the premise that he can, the premise is inconsistent. Now, lets do something useful and provide sources for that. If you don't know what to do, you can try this or this. --Dijxtra 13:37, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

The words that these "new" "native" (how naive; Luka, read natives' pages, enjoy looking at checquered t-shirts!) contributors use, seem already seen here. Luka, try those childish tricks somewhere else. Kubura 01:27, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Dokon pop jariće krsti. Mir Harven 23:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

The hot discussion has been going on for ages, various people have used the slogan "Cite your sources!", but nobody has done.

• Walter Breu. "Das Moliseslavische". In: Einführung in die slavischen Sprachen. Ed. Peter Rehder. 2nd ed. Darmstadt 1991. 274-278 (ISBN 3-534-13647-0).
• Walter Breu. "Aspekte der Deklination im Moliseslavischen". In: Slavistische Linguistik 1994. Ed. Daniel Weiss. München 1995. 65-96 (ISBN 3-87690-622-9).
• Aleksandr Duličenko. "Molizsko-slavjanskij literaturnyj mikrojazyk". In: Slavjanskie literaturnye mikrojazyki: obrazcy tekstov. 2 vols. Tartu 2003-2004 (ISBN 9985-56914-8).

All sources speaking of a "Molise Croatian dialect" are either older than ten years (i.e. before the general acceptance of the notion of microlanguages) or written by Croatians (like this Wikipedia article). Non-Croatians may use slightly differing name forms (including such names as Italo-Croatian), but they will definitely not call this microlanguage a "dialect".

Consequently, the best name for the article would really be Molise Slavic language, but as a compromise I would also propose Molise Croatian microlanguage. Dialect is awful: if it was a dialect, we wouldn't need an article – or does anyone want to write articles about the Buzet Croatian dialect, the Lastovo Croatian dialect or the Podravina Croatian dialect?

--Daniel Bunčić 18:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

One of wikipedia's policies is no original research. You cant give terms names yourself, if Molise Slavic is used in literature this term should be used here as well. Regarding microlanguage, articles about other small languages are not labeled as such so we shouldnt labeled it here. There are many articles about dialects, I dont see your logic why dialects shouldnt have there own articles and they have (Chakavian dialect, etc). Slavic/Croatian is used to make point that it isnt Italian dialect. Conclusion: Article should be renamed to "Molise Slavic". Luka Jačov 21:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Fully agree with you. Of course I did not mean that there should be no articles about dialects. But Čakavian, Kajkavian and Štokavian are a much bigger division; Molise Slavic is actually based on a Štokavian dialect, but this one is spoken by only 4,000 people. It would be great if Wikipedia had articles about every dialect spoken by 4,000 people. However, the reason that only this article here already exists is that this dialect – in contrast to most other Serbo-Croatian dialects – is roofed not by the Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian or Montenegrin standard language but by another (developping) standard language. --Daniel Bunčić 08:54, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Look people, if we wrote this article 20 years ago, the title would likely be "Molise Slavic". One of points at the RM (and the reason I voted for the current name) is that those people themselves, described in the article Molise Croats appear to started feeling increasingly Croat due to overall Croatian national awakening, and the increasing cultural influence from state of Croatia. The existing literature you refer to is irrelevant for that—for very similar reasons, we have article Montenegrin language (for which term you'll find very little linguistic literature) rather than Zeta dialect (for which term you will find plenty of sources, I'm sure). Duja 09:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

The question of national identity has nothing to do with the classification of languages. People may nationally identify as Germans and nonetheless speak Frisian or Upper Sorbian, and they may identify as Austrians and speak German. --Daniel Bunčić 14:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

The analogy is wrong. Germans speaking Frisian is analogue to Italian (propably of croatian ancestry) speaking Molise Croatian. Austrian do speak German just like Indians speak English. But, there is no language called "Slavic". --Ante Perkovic 14:46, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

The classification of dialects is a complicated thing. For example, the dialects along the German-Dutch border are virtually identical on both sides of the border. The only difference is that people on the Dutch side switch from these dialects to Standard Dutch when they are in a situation requiring a standard language, whereas the people on the German side switch to Standard German. --Daniel Bunčić 14:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Basicaly, this perfectly explains why Croatian and Serbian can be considered different language. Otherwise, it's offtopic here. --Ante Perkovic 14:46, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

You are WRONG! It doesn't explain ANYTHING connected to Serbian and Croatian standard of SerboCroatian Language. Serbocroatian is ONE language with 4 writting standards, while Duch and German are 2 different languages, whose dialects get in touch on the border of the 2 countries. You cannot spread your meaningless propaganda here and anywhere, otherwise you will be BANNED from here and everywhere. Cheers.24.86.110.10 (talk) 07:44, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Your personal point of view. If you're dissatisfied with the fact that peoples call their languages with their respective names, feeling them as different, that's your problem. Please, don't ignore the feelings of millions of nationally conscious persons and miles of scientific works. 4 writing standards? Come on, you don't know what are you talking about. Do you know what does that mean? Have you ever read anything about lexic, syntax and other features that divide Croatian and Serbian (more and more). You can't turn back the thime, it was long ago when all Slavs spoke same language. Dutch and German? Do you know, where does word "Dutch" comes from? From "Deutsch". About: "You will be banned...". Don't project your fears on other users. Kubura (talk) 11:02, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Must go. Will continue later. --Ante Perkovic 14:46, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Heinz Kloss called this "roofing" (Überdachung).

Clearly, the dialects spoken in the Molise valley are not roofed by Standard Croatian, the speakers do not know standard Croatian. --Daniel Bunčić 14:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

The thing that dialects spoken in the Molise valley are not roofed by Standard Croatian is completely irrelevant for the subject. Molise Croatian is basically old chakavian forzen in time. --Ante Perkovic 18:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Traditionally, they switched to Standard Italian, but recently they have started to have a small standard language of their own, with its own orthography and standardized grammar, which can be used in newspapers and radio broadcasts. This is what Aleksandr Duličenko has termed a microlanguage.--Daniel Bunčić 14:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Since both Aleksandr Duličenko and microlanguage are red links at the moment, I have a strong feeling that we are not talking about widely accepted scientist nor ideas.

Google search for "Aleksandr+Dulicenko"+microlanguage&btnG=Search "Aleksandr Dulicenko" microlanguage gives ZERO results, so, You might have problem proving that your sources are relevant, if existing at all!--Ante Perkovic 18:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Consequently, in linguistics it's the older literature that used to call these dialects "Serbo-Croatian dialects in Italy". In principle, this is not wrong, as the dialects spoken there are in fact Štokavian of course. However, modern linguistics (of the last 10-20 years) has recognized Duličenko’s concept of microlanguages. --Daniel Bunčić 14:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

"Aleksandr+Dulicenko"+microlanguage&btnG=Search Google: "Aleksandr Dulicenko" microlanguage. So much for your claim modern linguistics (of the last 10-20 years) has recognized Duličenko’s concept of microlanguages. This smells like heavy WP:OR.

And whenever we have a standard language anywhere, we write an article about this language, not about the dialects spoken in the same area when the speakers are at home with their families. Sometimes we have both, e.g. there is both an article German language and an article German dialects. Go ahead and split this article if you consider this useful and make one Molise Slavic language (about the standardization of that language) and one Molise Slavic dialects (about the dialects spoken their). --Daniel Bunčić 14:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

The idea about Molise Slavic language and its dialect sounds bizare if we take into account the number od speakers (1700 people!). How many "dialects" that language can have? --Ante Perkovic 18:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Mhm. Where should I start? Whether Molisan is (semi-)standardised or not is IMO totally irrelevant for the article name. Further, I consider your proposal of split into two articles quite unproductive. For Christ's sake, it's a language of 1,700 people, and it has its own dialects? Many dialects within Croatia itself are fairly abstand from standard Croatian, and Molisan is indeed the most abstand of all (which can also explain why it was so interesting for the researches). However, I still don't see how anything of what you said affects the article title; and I disagree with your statement that:

The question of national identity has nothing to do with the classification of languages.

it has everything to do with sociolinguistic classification of languages. If it hadn't, we probably wouldn't have Bosnian and Montenegrin, and likely even not Serbian and Croatian. Duja 15:51, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Please do not tear my arguments apart like that any more. Some thoughts need more than two sentences in a row to be understandable. Now I'll make one last attempt to answer your questions, and then I'll be away for two or three weeks.

• I never said there were any analogies between Frisian and Molise Slavic. I only said that just because a group might nationally identify as Croatians (do they really? aren't they rather Italians?) this does not mean that they speak Croatian. If you want to know what language they speak, you have to use linguistic arguments.
• These linguistic arguments can surely not be historic ("a frozen dialect" – whatever that may be) if we are interested the present state.
• The example of the dialects along the German-Dutch border was meant to illustrate that we cannot conclude what language someone speaks just because of the dialect they speak at home. One has to know what standard language they switch to. If this is Standard Croatian, then the dialect can be considered a Croatian dialect. The Slavic inhabitants of Molise do not use Standard Croatian. They increasingly switch to Standard Molise Slavic.
• "But, there is no language called 'Slavic'" - my, don't be ridiculous! The name is not Slavic, it's Molise Slavic.
• Your Google search is even more ridiculous. First, the real scholarly work is still going on in books and journals, that is on paper, not on the internet. Have a look at this library meta-catalogue, borrow the books you find there, read them, and then we can talk further. Second, if you had sought for Duličenko, Дуличенко, mikrojazyki, микроязыки, mikrojezici or even Dulicenko microlanguages, you would have found something.
• "Whether Molisan is (semi-)standardised or not is IMO totally irrelevant for the article name." How can it be if the article name includes the word dialect? Dialects are never standardized, not even semi-.
• Note that sociolinguistics includes the word linguistics. If you look only at sociology, you will notice that Serbs, Croats, South-Slavic speaking Muslims (now Bosnians) and Montenegrins have existed for some centuries, but only now have they started to build their own languages. Why haven't they had separate languages as long as they existed as separate ethnic groups?
• "For Christ's sake, it's a language of 1,700 people, and it has its own dialects?" Every language, even one spoken by a single person, has at least one dialect. In this case, the three villages where Molise Slavic is spoken (Acquaviva Collecroce, San Felice del Molise and Montemitro) display quite considerable differences in dialect. Such dialectal differences are often a serious problem for small languages.

--Daniel Bunčić 22:28, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, shall we WP:RM it back? - FrancisTyers · 09:37, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm in for it. I've never done such a thing, so it would be great if you could do it. --Daniel Bunčić 14:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

"All sources speaking of..."? Are you sure? Or you've pick up only the sources you want to see? What about (see the literature list), e.g.,

• Charles Barone (...la parlata croata...),
• N.Gliosca (...delle minoranze linguistiche degli...e Croati del Molise...)
• A.Piccoli and A.Sammartino (Dizionario croato-molisano di Montemitro), (...lingua croatomolisana...).

Have in mind that the ideology of author M.Rešetar was pro-"Serbo-croat", and he himself as author in certain things didn't had neutral point of view.

• At least, here's what says Italian law [3] and UNESCO

Kubura 14:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Pa mogli bi točnije prevest ono "na našo" kao "ON our language"... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.131.47.20 (talk) 04:28, 13 September 2008 (UTC)