Eastern South Slavic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from East South Slavic languages)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Eastern South Slavic
Geographic
distribution
Central and Eastern Balkans
Linguistic classificationIndo-European
Subdivisions
Glottologeast2269
Balkan Slavic area. Macedonian:
  Northern Macedonian
  Western Macedonian
  Central Macedonian
  Southern Macedonian
  Eastern Macedonian
Bulgarian:
  Western Bulgarian
  Rup Bulgarian
  Balkan Bulgarian
  Moesian Bulgarian
The "Yat border" running approximately from Nikopol on the Danube to Thessaloniki on the Aegean Sea. This is the main isogloss separating the Eastern South Slavic dialects into Eastern and Western.
Front cover of the first grammar book of the modern Bulgarian language published by Neofit Rilski in 1835. Rilski was born in Bansko, eastern most Ottoman Macedonia, a town lying exactly on the Yat-border.[1] He tried to unify then Western and Eastern Bulgarian dialects.
Essay about the Bulgarian language, published by Parteniy Zografski in Balgarski knizhitsi (Bulgarian Booklets) magazine in 1858. Zografski was from the town of Galičnik, in western most Ottoman Macedonia. Here he espoused his ideas about a common literary Bulgarian standard based on the western most Macedonian dialects.
The first complete edition of the Bible in modern Bulgarian, printed in Istanbul 1871. The decision to publish the Bible in the Eastern dialects was the historical factor based on which the Modern Bulgarian language departed from its Western and the Macedonian dialect to adopt the Eastern dialect. Behind this translation was the intellectual Petko Slaveykov from Tryavna, a town of the central Pre-Balkan.
Front cover of On the Macedonian Matters published in 1903 by Krste Misirkov, in which he laid down the principles of modern Macedonian. Misirkov was from the village of Postol in Ottoman Central Macedonia.
Decision about the proclamation of the Macedonian as an official language on 2 August 1944 by ASNOM.
Decision about the Macedonian Alphabet 1 May 1945. Note it is written on Bulgarian typewriter using Й and there are hand-written Ѕ, Ј and Џ, and diacritics added to create Ѓ and Ќ. The rejection of the Ъ, together with the adoption of Ј, Џ, Љ and Њ, led some authors to consider this process led by Blaze Koneski to be part of conducted "serbianization".[2][3][4]

The Eastern South Slavic dialects form the eastern subgroup of the South Slavic languages. They are spoken mostly in Bulgaria, North Macedonia and adjacent areas in the neighbouring countries. They form the so-called Balkan Slavic linguistic area which encompasses the southeastern part of the dialect continuum of South Slavic.

Linguistic features[edit]

Languages and dialects[edit]

Eastern South Slavic dialects share a number of characteristics that set them apart from the other branch of the South Slavic languages, the Western South Slavic languages. This area consists of Bulgarian and Macedonian, and according to some authors encompasses the southeastern dialect of Serbian, the so-called Prizren-Timok dialect.[5] The last is part of the broader transitional Torlakian dialectal area. The Balkan Slavic area is also part of the Balkan Sprachbund. The external boundaries of the Balkan Slavic/Eastern South Slavic area can be defined with the help of some linguistic structural features. Among the most important of them are: the loss of the infinitive and case declension, and the use of enclitic definite articles.[6] In the Balkan Slavic languages, clitic doubling also occurs, which is characteristic feature of all the languages of the Balkan Sprachbund.[7] The grammar of Balkan Slavic looks like a hybrid of “Slavic” and “Romance” grammars with some Albanian additions.[8] The Serbo-Croatian vocabulary in both Macedonian and Serbian-Torlakian is very similar, stemming from the border changes of 1878, 1913, and 1918, when these areas came under direct Serbian linguistic influence.

Areal[edit]

The external and internal boundaries of the linguistic sub-group between the transitional Torlakian dialect and Serbian and between Macedonian and Bulgarian languages are not clearly defined. For example, standard Serbian, which is based on its Western (Eastern Herzegovinian dialect), is very different from its Eastern (Prizren-Timok dialect), especially in its position in the Balkan Sprachbund.[9] As a whole, Torlakian is closer to Macedonian than to Serbian and falls into the Macedonian-Bulgarian diasystem.[10] However, this division is a matter of contention among linguists, and further research and linguistic consensus is needed to make a final conclusion. During the 19th century, the Balkan Slavic dialects were often described as forming the Bulgarian language.[11] At the time, the areas east of Niš were considered under direct Bulgarian ethnolinguistic influence and in the middle of the 19th century, that motivated the Serb linguistic reformer Vuk Karadžić to use the Eastern Herzegovina dialects for his standardisation of Serbian.[12] Bulgarian was standardized afterwards, at the end of the 19th century on the basis of its eastern Central Balkan dialect, while Macedonian was standardized in the middle of the 20th century using its west-central Prilep-Bitola dialect. Although some researchers still describe the standard Macedonian and Bulgarian languages as varieties of a pluricentric language, they have very different and remote dialectal bases.[13] Jouko Lindstedt has assumed that the dividing line between Macedonian and Bulgarian maybe in fact the Yat border,[14] which goes through the modern region of Macedonia along the VelingradPetrichThessaloniki line.[15] Many older Serbian scholars on the other hand believed that the Yat border divides the Serbian and Bulgarian languages.[16] However, modern Serbian linguists such as Pavle Ivic have accepted that the main isoglosses bundle dividing Eastern and Western South Slavic runs from the mouth of the Timok river alongside Osogovo mountain and Sar Mountain.[17] In Bulgaria this isogloss is considered the eastern most border of the broader set of transitional Torlakian dialects.

History[edit]

Some of the phenomena that distinguish western and eastern subgroups of the South Slavic people and languages can be explained by two separate migratory waves of different Slavic tribal groups of the future South Slavs via two routes: the west and east of the Carpathian Mountains.[18] The western Balkans was settled with Sclaveni, the eastern with Antes.[19] Haplogroup R1a, the major haplogroup among Slavic tribes, reveals that the haplogroup of the Serbo-Croat group is mainly constituted by R1a-L1280 or R1a-CTS3402, while the Macedono-Bulgarian is more associated with of the R1a-L1029.[citation needed] The early habitat of the Slavic tribes, that are said to have moved to Bulgaria, was described as being in present Ukraine and Belarus. The mythical homeland of the Serbs and Croats lies in the area of today Bohemia, in the present-day Czech Republic and in Lesser Poland. In this way, the Balkans were settled by different groups of Slavs from different dialect areas. This is evidenced by some isoglosses of ancient origin, dividing the western and eastern parts of the South Slavic range.

The extinct Old Church Slavonic which survives in a relatively small body of manuscripts, most of them written in the First Bulgarian Empire during the 10th century is also classified as Eastern South Slavic. The language has an Eastern South Slavic basis with small admixture of Western Slavic features, inherited during the mission of Saints Cyril and Methodius to Great Moravia during the 9th century.[20] New Church Slavonic represents a later stage of the Old Church Slavonic, and is its continuation through the liturgical tradition introduced by its precursor. Ivo Banac maintains that during the Middle Ages, Torlak and Eastern Herzegovinian dialects were Eastern South Slavic, but since the 12th century, the Shtokavian dialects, including Eastern Herzegovinian, began to separate themselves from the other neighboring Eastern dialects, counting also Torlakian.[21]

The specific contact mechanism in the Balkan Sprachbund, based on the high number of second Balkan language speakers there, is among the key factors that reduced the number of Slavic morphological categories in that linguistic area.[22] The Russian Primary Chronicle, written ca. 1100, claims that then the Vlachs attacked the Slavs on the Danube and settled among them. Nearly at the same time are dated the first historical records about the emerging Albanians, as living in the area to the west of the Lake Ohrid. There are references in some Byzantine documents from that period to "Bulgaro-Albano-Vlachs" and even to "Serbo-Albano-Bulgaro-Vlachs".[23] As a consequence, case inflection, and some other characteristics of Slavic languages, were lost in Eastern South Slavic area, approximately between the 11th–16th centuries. Migratory waves were particularly strong in the 16th–19th century, bringing about large-scale linguistic and ethnic changes on the Central and Eastern Balkan South Slavic area. They reduced the number of Slavic-speakers and led to the additional settlement of Albanian and Vlach-speakers there.

Separation between Macedonian and Bulgarian[edit]

The rise of nationalism under the Ottoman Empire began to degrade its specific social system, and especially the so-called Rum millet, through constant identification of the religious creed with ethnicity.[24] The national awakening of each ethnic group was complex and most of the groups interacted with each other.

During the Bulgarian national revival, which occurred in the 19th century, the Bulgarian and Macedonian Slavs under the supremacy of the Greek Orthodox clergy wanted to create their own Church and schools which would use a common modern "Macedono-Bulgarian" literary standard, called simply Bulgarian.[25] The national elites active in this movement used mainly ethnolinguistic principles to differentiation between "Slavic-Bulgarian" and "Greek" groups.[26] At that time, every ethnographic subgroup in the Macedonian-Bulgarian linguistic area wrote in their own local dialect and choosing a "base dialect" for the new standard was not an issue. Subsequently, during the 1850s and 1860s a long discussion was held in the Bulgarian periodicals about the need for a dialectal group (eastern, western or compromise) upon which to base the new standard and which dialect that should be.[27] During the 1870s this issue became contentious, and sparked fierce debates.[28] The general opposition arose between Western and Eastern dialects in the Eastern South Slavic linguistic area. The fundamental issue then was in which part of the Bulgarian lands the Bulgarian tongue was preserved in a most true manner and every dialectal community insisted on that. The Eastern dialect was proposed then as a basis by the majority of the Bulgarian elite. It was claiming that around the last medieval capital of Bulgaria Tarnovo, the Bulgarian language was preserved in its purest form. It was not a surprise, because the most significant part of the new Bulgarian intelligentsia came from the towns of the Eastern Sub-Balkan valley in Central Bulgaria. This proposal alienated a considerable part of the then Bulgarian population and stimulated regionalist linguistic tendencies in Macedonia.[29] In 1870 Marin Drinov, who played a decisive role in the standardization of the Bulgarian language, practiclaly rejected the proposal of Parteniy Zografski and Kuzman Shapkarev for a mixed eastern and western Bulgarian/Macedonian foundation of the standard Bulgarian language, stating in his article in the newspaper Makedoniya: "Such an artificial assembly of written language is something impossible, unattainable and never heard of."[30][31][32]

In 1878, a distinct Bulgarian state was established. The new state did not include the region of Macedonia which remained outside its borders in the frame of the Ottoman Empire. As a consequence, the idea of a common compromise standard was finally rejected by the Bulgarian codifiers during the 1880s and the eastern Central Balkan dialect was chosen as a basis for standard Bulgarian.[33] Macedono-Bulgarian writers and organizations who continued to seek greater representation of Macedonian dialects in the Bulgarian standard were deemed separatists.[a] One example is the Young Macedonian Literary Association, which the Bulgarian government outlawed in 1892. Though standard Bulgarian was taught in the local schools in Macedonia till 1913,[39] the fact of political separation became crucial for the development of a separate Macedonian language.[40]

With the advent of Macedonian nationalism, the idea of linguistic separatism emerged in the late 19th century,[41] and the need for a separate Macedonian standard language subsequently appeared in the early 20th century.[42] In the Interwar period, the territory of today's North Macedonia became part of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Bulgarian was banned for use and the local vernacular fell under heavy influence from the official Serbo-Croatian language.[43] However, the political and paramilitary organizations of the Macedonian Slavs in Europe and the Americas, the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO) and the Macedonian Patriotic Organization (MPO), and even their left-wing offsets, the IMRO (United) and the Macedonian-American People's League continued to use literary Bulgarian in their writings and propaganda in the interbellum. During the World wars Bulgaria's short annexations over Macedonia saw two attempts to bring the Macedonian dialects back towards Bulgarian. This political situation stimulated the necessity of a separate Macedonian language and led gradually to its codification after the Second World War. It followed the establishment of SR Macedonia, as part of Communist Yugoslavia and finalized the progressive split in the common Macedonian–Bulgarian language.[44]

During the first half of the 20th century the national identity of the Macedonian Slavs shifted from predominantly Bulgarian to ethnic Macedonian and their regional identity had become their national one.[45][46][47] Although, there was no clear separating line between these two languages on level of dialect then, the Macedonian standard was based on its westernmost dialects. Afterwards, Macedonian became the official language in the new republic, Serbo-Croatian was adopted as a second official language, and Bulgarian was proscribed. Moreover, in 1946–1948 the newly standardized Macedonian language was introduced as a second language even in Southwestern Bulgaria.[48] Subsequently, the sharp and continuous deterioration of the political relationships between the two countries, the influence of both standard languages during the time, but also the strong Serbo-Croatian linguistic influence in Yugoslav era, led to a horizontal cross-border dialectal divergence.[49] Although some researchers have described the standard Macedonian and Bulgarian languages as varieties of a pluricentric language,[50] they in fact have separate dialectal bases; the Prilep-Bitola dialect and Central Balkan dialect, respectively. The prevailing academic consensus (outside of Bulgaria and Greece) is that Macedonian and Bulgarian are two autonomous languages within the eastern subbranch of the South Slavic languages.[51] Macedonian is thus an ausbau language; i.e. it is delimited from Bulgarian as these two standard languages have separate dialectal bases.[52][53][54] The uniqueness of Macedonian in comparison to Bulgarian is a matter of political controversy in Bulgaria.[55][56][57]

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Цонев, Р. 2008: Говорът на град Банско. Благоевград: Унив. изд. Неофит Рилски, 375 с. Заключение + образци; ISBN 978-954-9438-04-8
  2. ^ When Blaze Koneski, the founder of the Macedonian standard language, as a young boy, returned to his Macedonian native village from the Serbian town where he went to school, he was ridiculed for his Serbianized language.Cornelis H. van Schooneveld, Linguarum: Series maior, Issue 20, Mouton., 1966, p. 295.
  3. ^ ...However this was not at all the case, as Koneski himself testifies. The use of the schwa is one of the most important points of dispute not only between Bulgarians and Macedonians, but also between Macedonians themselves – there are circles in Macedonia who in the beginning of the 1990s denounced its exclusion from the standard language as a hostile act of violent serbianization... For more see: Alexandra Ioannidou (Athens, Jena) Koneski, his successors and the peculiar narrative of a “late standardization” in the Balkans. in Romanica et Balcanica: Wolfgang Dahmen zum 65. Geburtstag, Volume 7 of Jenaer Beiträge zur Romanistik with Thede Kahl, Johannes Kramer and Elton Prifti as ed., Akademische Verlagsgemeinschaft München AVM, 2015, ISBN 3954770369, pp. 367–375.
  4. ^ Kronsteiner, Otto, Zerfall Jugoslawiens und die Zukunft der makedonischen Literatursprache : Der späte Fall von Glottotomie? in: Die slawischen Sprachen (1992) 29, 142–171.
  5. ^ Victor Friedman, The Typology of Balkan Evidentiality and Areal Linguistics; Olga Mieska Tomic, Aida Martinovic-Zic as ed. Balkan Syntax and Semantics; vol. 67 от Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today Series; John Benjamins Publishing, 2004; ISBN 158811502X; p. 123.
  6. ^ Jouko Lindstedt, Conflicting Nationalist Discourses in the Balkan Slavic Language Area in The Palgrave Handbook of Slavic Languages, Identities and Borders with editors: Tomasz Kamusella, Motoki Nomachi and Catherine Gibson; Palgrave Macmillan; 2016; ISBN 978-1-137-34838-8; pp. 429–447.
  7. ^ Olga Miseska Tomic, Variation in Clitic-doubling in South Slavic in Article in Syntax and Semantics 36: 443–468; January 2008; doi:10.1163/9781848550216_018.
  8. ^ Jouko Lindstedt, Balkan Slavic and Balkan Romance: from congruence to convergence in Besters-Dilger, Juliane & al. (eds.). 2014. Congruence in Contact-induced Language Change. Berlin – Boston: De Gruyter. ISBN 3110373017; pp. 168–183.
  9. ^ Motoki Nomachi, “East” and “West” as Seen in the Structure of Serbian: Language Contact and Its Consequences; p. 34. in Slavic Eurasian Studies edited by Ljudmila Popović and Motoki Nomachi; 2015, No.28.
  10. ^ Robert Lindsay, Mutual Intelligibility of Languages in the Slavic Family in Last Voices/Son Sesler; 2016 DOI: https://www.academia.edu/4080349/Mutual_Intelligibility_of_Languages_in_the_Slavic_Family .
  11. ^ Friedman V A (2006), Balkans as a Linguistic Area. In: Keith Brown, (Editor-in Chief) Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics, Second Edition, volume 1, pp. 657–672. Oxford: Elsevier.
  12. ^ Drezov, Kyril (1999). "Macedonian identity: An overview of the major claims". In Pettifer, James (ed.). The New Macedonian Question. MacMillan Press. p. 53. ISBN 9780230535794.
  13. ^ Ammon, Ulrich; de Gruyter, Walter (2005). Sociolinguistics: an international handbook of the science of language and society. p. 154. ISBN 3-11-017148-1. Retrieved 2019-04-27.
  14. ^ Tomasz Kamusella, Motoki Nomachi, Catherine Gibson as ed., The Palgrave Handbook of Slavic Languages, Identities and Borders, Springer, 2016; ISBN 1137348399, p. 436.
  15. ^ Енциклопедия „Пирински край“, том II. Благоевград, Редакция „Енциклопедия“, 1999. ISBN 954-90006-2-1. с. 459.
  16. ^ Roland Sussex, Paul Cubberley, The Slavic Languages, Cambridge Language Surveys, Cambridge University Press, 2006; ISBN 1139457284, p. 510.
  17. ^ Ivic, Pavle, Balkan Slavic Migrations in the Light of South Slavic Dialectology in Aspects of the Balkans. Continuity and change with H. Birnbaum and S. Vryonis (eds.) Walter de Gruyter, 2018; ISBN 311088593X, pp. 66–86.
  18. ^ The Slavic Languages, Roland Sussex, Paul Cubberley, Publisher Cambridge University Press, 2006, ISBN 1139457284, p. 42.
  19. ^ Hupchick, Dennis P. The Balkans: From Constantinople to Communism. Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. ISBN 1-4039-6417-3
  20. ^ Lunt, Horace G. (2001). Old Church Slavonic Grammar (7th ed.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter; p.1; ISBN 978-3-110-16284-4.
  21. ^ Ivo Banac, The National Question in Yugoslavia: Origins, History, Politics, Cornell University Press, 1988, ISBN 0801494931, p. 47.
  22. ^ Wahlström, Max. 2015. The loss of case inflection in Bulgarian and Macedonian (Slavica Helsingiensia 47); University of Helsinki, ISBN 9789515111852.
  23. ^ John Van Antwerp Fine, The Late Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Late Twelfth Century to the Ottoman Conquest, University of Michigan Press, 1994, ISBN 0472082604, p. 355.
  24. ^ Detrez, Raymond; Segaert, Barbara; Lang, Peter (2008). Europe and the Historical Legacies in the Balkans. pp. 36–38. ISBN 90-5201-374-8. Retrieved 2021-07-04.
  25. ^ Bechev, Dimitar (2009-04-13). Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Macedonia Historical Dictionaries of Europe. Scarecrow Press. p. 134. ISBN 0-8108-6295-6. Retrieved 2021-07-04.
  26. ^ From Rum Millet to Greek and Bulgarian Nations: Religious and National Debates in the Borderlands of the Ottoman Empire, 1870–1913. Theodora Dragostinova, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
  27. ^ "Венедиктов Г. К. Болгарский литературный язык эпохи Возрождения. Проблемы нормализации и выбора диалектной основы. Отв. ред. Л. Н. Смирнов. М.: "Наука"" (PDF). 1990. pp. 163–170. (Rus.). Retrieved 2021-07-04.
  28. ^ Ц. Билярски, Из българския възрожденски печат от 70-те години на XIX в. за македонския въпрос, сп. "Македонски преглед", г. XXIII, София, 2009, кн. 4, с. 103–120.
  29. ^ Neofit Rilski, Bulgarian Grammar in Late Enlightenment: Emergence of the Modern 'National Idea', Discourses of Collective Identity in Central and Southeast Europe (1770–1945) with editors Balázs Trencsényi and Michal Kopeček, Central European University Press, 2006, ISBN 6155053847, pp. 246–251
  30. ^ Makedoniya July 31st 1870
  31. ^ Tchavdar Marinov. In Defense of the Native Tongue: The Standardization of the Macedonian Language and the Bulgarian-Macedonian Linguistic Controversies. in Entangled Histories of the Balkans – Volume One. doi:10.1163/9789004250765_010 p. 443
  32. ^ Благой Шклифов, За разширението на диалектната основа на българския книжовен език и неговото обновление. "Македонската" азбука и книжовна норма са нелегитимни, дружество "Огнище", София, 2003 г. . стр. 7–10.
  33. ^ Clyne, Michael G., ed. (1992). Pluricentric languages: differing norms in different nations. Walter de Gruyter & Co. p. 440. ISBN 3110128551. Retrieved 2021-07-04.
  34. ^ "Macedonian Language and Nationalism During the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries", Victor Friedman, p. 286
  35. ^ Nationalism, Globalization, and Orthodoxy: The Social Origins of Ethnic Conflict in the Balkans, p. 145, at Google Books, Victor Roudometof, Roland Robertson, p. 145
  36. ^ "Though Loza adhered to the Bulgarian position on the issue of the Macedonian Slavs' ethnicity, it also favored revising the Bulgarian orthography by bringing it closer to the dialects spoken in Macedonia." Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Macedonia, Dimitar Bechev, Scarecrow Press, 2009, ISBN 0-8108-6295-6, p. 241.
  37. ^ The Young Macedonian Literary Association's Journal, Loza, was also categorical about the Bulgarian character of Macedonia: "A mere comparison of those ethnographic features which characterize the Macedonians (we understand: Macedonian Bulgarians), with those which characterize the free Bulgarians, their juxtaposition with those principles for nationality which we have formulated above, is enough to prove and to convince everybody that the nationality of the Macedonians cannot be anything except Bulgarian." Freedom or Death, The Life of Gotsé Delchev, Mercia MacDermott, The Journeyman Press, London & West Nyack, 1978, p. 86.
  38. ^ "Macedonian historiography often refers to the group of young activists who founded in Sofia an association called the ‘Young Macedonian Literary Society’. In 1892, the latter began publishing the review Loza [The Vine], which promoted certain characteristics of Macedonian dialects. At the same time, the activists, called ‘Lozars’ after the name of their review, ‘purified’ the Bulgarian orthography from some rudiments of the Church Slavonic. They expressed likewise a kind of Macedonian patriotism attested already by the first issue of the review: its materials greatly emphasized identification with Macedonia as a genuine ‘fatherland’. In any case, it is hardly surprising that the Lozars demonstrated both Bulgarian and Macedonian loyalty: what is more interesting is namely the fact that their Bulgarian nationalism was somehow harmonized with a Macedonian self-identification that was not only a political one but also demonstrated certain ‘cultural’ contents. "We, the People: Politics of National Peculiarity in Southeastern Europe", Diana Miškova, Central European University Press, 2009, ISBN 963-97762-8-9, p. 120.
  39. ^ Banač, Ivo (1988). The National Question in Yugoslavia: Origins, History, Politics. Cornell University Press. p. 317. ISBN 0-8014-9493-1. Retrieved 2021-07-04.
  40. ^ Fisiak, Jacek (1985). Papers from the Sixth International Conference on Historical Linguistics, v. 34. John Benjamins Publishing. pp. 13–14. ISBN 90-272-3528-7. ISSN 0304-0763. Retrieved 2021-07-04.
  41. ^ Fishman, Joshua A.; de Gruyter, Walter (1993). The Earliest Stage of Language Planning: The "First Congress" Phenomenon. pp. 161–162. ISBN 3-11-013530-2. Retrieved 2021-07-04.
  42. ^ Danforth, Loring M. (1995). The Macedonian conflict: ethnic nationalism in a transnational world. Princeton University Press. p. 67. ISBN 0-691-04356-6. Retrieved 2021-07-04.
  43. ^ Hupchick, Dennis P. (1995-03-15). Conflict and Chaos in Eastern Europe. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 143. ISBN 0-312-12116-4. Retrieved 2021-07-04.
  44. ^ Language, discourse and borders in the Yugoslav successor states – Current issues in language and society monographs, Birgitta Busch, Helen Kelly-Holmes, Multilingual Matters. 2004. pp. 24–25. ISBN 1-85359-732-5. Retrieved 2021-07-04.
  45. ^ "Up until the early 20th century and beyond, the international community viewed Macedonians as a regional variety of Bulgarians, i.e. Western Bulgarians." Nationalism and Territory: Constructing Group Identity in Southeastern Europe, Geographical perspectives on the human past : Europe: Current Events, George W. White, Rowman & Littlefield, 2000 at Google Books, ISBN 0-8476-9809-2.
  46. ^ "At the end of the WWI there were very few historians or ethnographers, who claimed that a separate Macedonian nation existed... Of those Slavs who had developed some sense of national identity, the majority probably considered themselves Bulgarians, although they were aware of differences between themselves and the inhabitants of Bulgaria... The question as of whether a Macedonian nation actually existed in the 1940s when a Communist Yugoslavia decided to recognize one is difficult to answer. Some observers argue that even at this time it was doubtful whether the Slavs from Macedonia considered themselves a nationality separate from the Bulgarians." The Macedonian conflict: ethnic nationalism in a transnational world, Loring M. Danforth, Princeton University Press, 1997, p. 66, at Google Books, ISBN 0-691-04356-6
  47. ^ "During the 20th century, Slavo-Macedonian national feeling has shifted. At the beginning of the 20th century, Slavic patriots in Macedonia felt a strong attachment to Macedonia as a multi-ethnic homeland. They imagined a Macedonian community uniting themselves with non-Slavic Macedonians... Most of these Macedonian Slavs also saw themselves as Bulgarians. By the middle of the 20th. century, however Macedonian patriots began to see Macedonian and Bulgarian loyalties as mutually exclusive. Regional Macedonian nationalism had become ethnic Macedonian nationalism... This transformation shows that the content of collective loyalties can shift." Region, Regional Identity and Regionalism in Southeastern Europe, Ethnologia Balkanica Series, Klaus Roth, Ulf Brunnbauer, LIT Verlag Münster, 2010, p. 147, at Google Books, ISBN 3-8258-1387-8.
  48. ^ Performing Democracy: Bulgarian Music and Musicians in Transition, Donna A. Buchanan, University of Chicago Press, 2006, p. 260, at Google Books, ISBN 0-226-07827-2.
  49. ^ Kortmann, Bernd; van der Auwera, Johan; de Gruyter, Walter (2011-07-27). The Languages and Linguistics of Europe: A Comprehensive Guide. p. 515. ISBN 3-11-022026-1. Retrieved 2021-07-04.
  50. ^ Ammon, Ulrich; de Gruyter, Walter (2005). Sociolinguistics: an international handbook of the science of language and society. p. 154. ISBN 3-11-017148-1. Retrieved 2021-07-04.
  51. ^ Trudgill, Peter (1992), "Ausbau sociolinguistics and the perception of language status in contemporary Europe", International Journal of Applied Linguistics 2 (2): 167–177
  52. ^ The Slavic Languages, Roland Sussex, Paul Cubberley. Cambridge University Press. 2006-09-21. p. 71. ISBN 1-139-45728-4. Retrieved 2021-07-04.
  53. ^ The Changing Scene in World Languages: Issues and Challenges, Marian B. Labrum. John Benjamins Publishing. 1997. p. 66. ISBN 90-272-3184-2. Retrieved 2021-07-04.
  54. ^ Fishman, Joshua. "Languages late to literacy: finding a place in the sun on a crowded beach". In: Joseph, Brian D. et al. (ed.), When Languages Collide: Perspectives on Language Conflict, Competition and Coexistence; Ohio State University Press (2002), pp. 107–108.
  55. ^ Mirjana N. Dedaić, Mirjana Misković-Luković. South Slavic discourse particles (John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2010), p. 13
  56. ^ Victor Roudometof. Collective memory, national identity, and ethnic conflict: Greece, Bulgaria, and the Macedonian question (Greenwood Publishing Group, 2002), p. 41
  57. ^ Language profile Macedonian Archived 2009-03-11 at the Wayback Machine, UCLA International Institute