Talk:Boykos

Rusyns

The discussion wether "Rusyn" is a separate ethnicity or not does not belong to this page. Suppose it is, then what it has to do with Boykos? All of them or at least overhelming majority indentify themselves as Ukrainians. (Actually they fill themselves even more Ukrainian then "Easterners"). I understand that my personal impressions cannot be consider as a reliable source for Wikipedia article, but there are the census results. Well there was no ethnicity "Rusyn" in the list, but there was an option not to answer the question. So would do I, if my ethnicity would not be in the list. In fact, practically the whole population of the Boyko region did answered the question and the answer was "Ukrainian".

On the other hand, if somebody has a source that any considereble group of Boykos clame they were not Ukrainian but Rusysns, please add this information along with the appropriate reference.--AndriyK 12:30, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Whether Rusyns are Ukrainians is indeed the issue that goes beyond the scope of this article. The issue is already discussed and there are complaints both in Rusyn media about Ukrainization of them (that is refusal to officially admit the existence of their identity and language) and from Kiev about Political Rusynizm card being played up to disintegrate Ukraine. Suppose Rusyns is just a subgroup of Ukrainians, just like Bukovynians. Still, should there have been an option to answer Rusyn in the census, we have no idea whether they would have checked Rusyn or Ukrainians. The lack of this opition in census is controvercial and was discussed at several wiki-talk pages. So, I would suggest just not to go into whether Boiko's are Ukrainians or not, since it is undecided whether Rusyns are Ukrainians or not and the latter belongs to other articles. --Irpen 21:14, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I fact, there was there was an option to answer "Rusyn" (unfortunatelly along with, rather than alternative to Ukrainian ethnisity, i.e. within the concept that Rusyns are ethnic group of Ukrainians, rather than a separate ethnos). About 10000 people in Zakarpattia used this option. (Check the census result carefully and you'll find it.) Most of these 10000 people or even all of them live in Transcarpatian lowland (Mukacheve, Uzhhorod etc.) (Unfortunatelly the distribution of Rusyns among the raions is not available online, I know this from other sources).

Very likely that a part of these 10000 (or even all of them) would preffer to be considered as a separate ethnos, not as ethnic group. In my opinion, their wish should be satisfied. It might be that some people identifying themselves as Rusyns used another option: do not answer the question about ethnicity (національність) because their ethnicity was not in the list of possible answers. But, again, the number of people who used this option is very small.

This article is about Boykos. There is no indication that any considerable number of Boykos (as well as Hutsuls or other highlanders) identify themselves as not Ukrainian. If you can prove the opposite, please provide sourses.

In any case. please do not delete the information about the census results, this information is factural and clearly belong to the article.--AndriyK 09:35, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

AndriyK, let me just make sure I understand your point because I am confused. IMO there are two questions here:

1. Are Boyko Rusyns
2. Are Rusyns just a subgroup of Ukrainians or they are a separate ethnic group

To the latter question there are clearly two opposing views that aren't reconsiled and, as such, we need to present both when discussing it. However, this is indeed an issue better left to other articles. To the former question, from what I read the answer is that Boyko, like Lemko are Rusyns. Are you saying that they aren't? Because if they are, than by adding to the article the phrase that Boyko, being Rusyns, "consider themselves Ukrainian", you answer the question 2 that has no answer yet.

Also, could you please post a link to the census page where Rusyns are metnioned as an option. I didn't find it there but the web-site is not made easy to navigate.

I am glad that you find the articles I added as references to Rusyns page so useful that you add them to other pages. Of course I don't mind that, but the particular article you picked doesn't belong here. That article is about how the Ukrainians as the nation got their current name. It has nothing to do with the question of people who are called Rusyns in the 20th century.

And why did you remove the very mention of the Austrian Empire. It is not by coinsidence, that Ukrainians who lived under the Empire became known today as Rusyns. The reason is that Austria encouraged the view that they are not the same people as other Ukrainians to further detach them from Ukrainians that where under Russia. In return for Ukrainianss (or Rusyns') loyalty, Austria was carrying the most permissive policies towards the Ukrainian culture. For example books written by Ukrainian writers could not be printed in Russian Empire where publishing in Ukrainian was banned by the Ems Ukaz. They were published in Austria-controlled parts of the Western Ukraine and smuggled to the East. --Irpen 05:24, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Please do not take it personally, but the phrase "Boyko, being Rusyns, "consider themselves Ukrainian" is a complete nonsence. I am, what I wish to be. So are Boykos. Nobody else is autorized to define what they are.

To be more precise, let's formulate the question differently:

How Boykos identify their ethnicity?

To my best knowlege, they identify themselves as Ukrainians. If you have any other information, feel free to add it, provided that you can confirm it by creadible sources. (With Lemkos the situation is somewhat different. Please wait a bit I'll explain the Lemko article, this will make the point even more clear.)

There is also more "theoretical" question:

How Boykos' dialect, folk culture, etc. is classified by linguists, folklorists, etc.

Most of schoolars consider Boykos' dialect as a dialect of Ukrainian. But there are also those considering it as a dialect Rusyn language. Both POVs should be present in the article and they are already there.

Крім того вперше зібрані дані, які характеризують етнічні групи та самоназви окремих національностей. Зокрема до складу української національності входить етнічна група – русини . Всього по області назвали себе русином - 10,1 тис.осіб .[1] (in the bottom of the page).

Concerning the Austrian Empire, well... I'll suggest you to use at least half of the time you spend at Wikipedia for reading books/journals about Ukrainian/Rusyn history, linguistics, etc., if you would like to contribute to the topic. This will save a lot of your own and other user's time that is now being wasted for pointless discussions or edit wars.

You'll see that the post-Austrian period is even more important for Ukrainian and especially for modern Rusyn identity than the Austrian one.

The reference to "MW" article is relevant as it explains why Boykos, who called themselves "Ruthenians" (Rusyns) in 19th century now identify themselves as Ukrainians. This just the sources supporting a part of my contribution.--AndriyK 11:09, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Please avoid condenscending remarks on how I should spend my time. With this recent spree of yours you should do much writing before you can be talking to others about productive time. You didn't answer the question about your exclusion of the mention of the Austrian Empire. As for the ref, the article you added has nothing to do with the issue since it is about Ukrainians in general and about the etymolgy of the term. If you want to add a ref that argues that Rusyns in general and Boykos in particular are Ukrainians, you may use a different article from the same paper [2] that says:

Говорити про збірну ментальність, властиву всім мозаїчним складовим українців Закарпаття (гуцулам, бойкам, долинянам і лемкам), доволі складно. Прихильники політичного русинства, не знаходячи доказів окремішності, заговорили про «національну й соціальну психологію закарпатців», «центральноєвропейський культурно-психологічний менталітет», «Дунайський менталітет», «автономістський менталітет закарпатців» тощо... and further in this paragraph

Talking is a good way to resolve differences. --Irpen 19:48, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

I did answer the question about the Austrian Empire. Read carefully.--AndriyK 20:10, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Bobko

I have ancestors with the surname Bobko and I'm 95% sure some of them lived in Dolyna. Anyone know if Bobko is essentially the same (changed spelling over the years) as Boiko/Bojko/Boyko? Could the surname mean someone from this Slavic tribe?

Bobko have certainly ukrainian surname pattern, but this is certainly not the same as boiko. Very much people of ukrainian origin have surname ending -ko. This is very common. Yatsko, Hlushko, Liashko etc.

77.52.154.29 (talk) 07:44, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

issues

I thought it might come from the Boi tribe? a Celtic tribe which settled the area in pre history, also note the areas name galacia and the celtic hill forts ie krakow mound in near by lesser poland. Thats my guess anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.237.142.10 (talk) 15:08, 13 October 2011 (UTC) 1) "Boykos identify themselves as part of the Ukrainian ethnos." - I suppose this is deducted from the census. Its credibility is however contrvoersial (pressure etc.). On top of this, the author forgot the Boyko living in other countries (eg. Poland). 2) "The Boyko language is based on the Ruthenian language" - please enlighten me what it means. The source is some touristy page of Podkarpackie voivodship in Poland. I'd pretty much rather see "The Boyko speak a dialect of the Ruthenian language" or its like 3) Nu, bo vono tak i ye." "was first coined by a priest Joseph Levytsky" - come on, did they start saying so just because one Father Levytsky coined it in his grammar book?

With regard to the discussion, please mind that ethnicity is not only about self-identity and declaration. I can't speak Chinese and have no Chinese roots. Suppose that from tomorrow on, I start identifying myself as Chinee. Does it make me any Chinese? I agree the "declrativeness" is essential here but the issue is much more complex. Zbihniew 08:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zbihniew (talk • contribs)

the fact that boikos claim that they are ukrainians is not from the census. You're welcome to conduct yours own and then tell here about that and maybe all this bullshit around boikolemkorussyn martians nonukrainians which speak unattested unheared language which is known only for moscovy and pollish chauvinistic dumb4sses, maybe then all that achynea will dissapear from here. What a pressure on census? Come on! I responded that census. What you're talking about? Boikos speak in dialect that any psychically normal linguist calls belonging to ukrainian lang. All this stuff with playing names ruthenian/ukrainian etc is political garbage. I am living in ukraine is shocked about what a sh1t is put here onto articles covering mountain ukrainian subgroups. This all haven't nothing with the reality and if you don't believe me, then don't read polish slovak russian crappy sources, just come in ukraine in carpaths and investigate by yourself

77.52.154.34 (talk) 08:24, 14 June 2013 (UTC) angried ukrainian