Learning Serbian /Croatian/Bosnian

Originally Posted by Kejo

If I for example go to Sarajevo - will everyone there be "Bosnian" because they live in the country of Bosnia, or they still stick to their family heritage. Maybe the ethnic split is fulfilled, so only Bosnians in Bosnia, Serbs in Serbia, Croates in Croatia?

If you go to Sarajevo the vast majority will be Bosnian muslims. I happen to know the only two Serbs left in town...
I read a report that stated that nowadays there are more Chinese people in Sarajevo than Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian Croats – which of course was not the situation before the war.
After the Dayton peace agreement in 1995 basically all the Serbs left town. So in Sarajevo you speak Bosnian, and stay out of politics – especially after a few drinks
The situation is the opposite in the second biggest city, Banja Luka, which resides in Republika Srpska (the other entity in Bosnia). Here they mainly speak Serbian.

In my point of view Serbs, Croats and Bosnjaks are the same people – with the same language, appearance and culture (if you disregard religion).
Only different great powers demands through the centuries has messed up this people. But this stance is not undisputed.

Originally Posted by Kejo

Thank you! I think I will use the term serbo-croatian when speaking to people that are not from the region. And otherwise, I think "vaš jezik" was splendid, because it seems very tricky to figure out if a person is Serb, Bosnian or
Croatian, if they haven't told me. If I for example go to Sarajevo - will everyone there be "Bosnian" because they live in the country of Bosnia, or they still stick to their family heritage. Maybe the ethnic split is fulfilled, so only Bosnians in Bosnia, Serbs in Serbia, Croates in Croatia?

I guess I'll just learn to say vaš jezik to be on the safe side. And hope I can make it to Sarajevo soon (and learn some more before that)

yeah, "vas jezik" is a great idea.
right now, "bosnian" is only a regional term a not a national, like 'texan' or 'bavarian'
you have 50% who describe themselfs as bosnikas (muslims), 35% who describe themselfs as serbs and 15% as croats. (there is a big tension between the groups there and i doubt they will call themselves one nation any time soon)

I can also say they were Croats for Bosnians I mean.

Originally Posted by ina

And 2/3 of "Bosnikas" were Serbs, like Montenegrins are Serbs from Montenegro.

yeah, croatian nationalists claim that 90% of bosniaks are acutally of croatian descent, with serbian nationalists it's the other way round.
though i find this discussions of who is from whom decent rather stupid,
we are all totally mixed up, there is no such thing as a homogenous nation on the balkans nor such a thing as a croatian or serbian dna.
also the idea of nationality is a very young one, when bosnia was invaded by the ottomans 1000 years ago there was no such thing as a clear defined croatian or serbian nationality, rather all kinds of clans that didn't have any developed national feelings.

^yep I agree with you... Croats can say those were Croats, Serbs can say those were Serbs...
anyway I also heard some Serbs saying that Croats are actually catholic Serbs... and so on...
nonsenses.

I have heard stories that Croatian ancestors came from Iran, and that gipsies and Serbs are the same people, while the Bosniaks have their own tribe, traced from Bulgaria (the Bogomils).
That's why I prefer to do my research on my own, and skip to listen to all the propaganda from the nationalists

Dva imena – isti narod!
Hrvati i Srbi!
Da li je tako teško?

It seems that people are going crazy down there. One recent example is Crna Gora, and if I understand it correctly it seems like the province Vojvodina wants more autonomy – which of course is the wrong way to go. I hope Belgrade is decisive here, otherwise I am afraid we will have a new "Crna Gora" in some years ahead of us, which of course is plain nonsense.

Kusturica izgleda kao pametan čovek

Something that has been bugging me since I started to study vaš jezik is the use of "je" vs "jeste".

I understand which form to use in the following contexts:
1)
– Da li je Dragan kod kuće?
– Jeste.
2)
– Jeste li Englez?
– Jesam.

And I understand when to use the shorter form "je", which I use 10 times out of 10 when speaking and writing Yugo.
But both in spoken language and in written language I sometimes come across the longer form "jeste".
A recent example:
"Mislim da Fenerbahče jeste veliki i bogat klub, ..."

Why do they use the long form here?
I would have written:
"Mislim da je Fenerbahče veliki i bogat klub, ..."

So, why and in which context to use the longer form "jeste"?

Also, I have noticed "jest" – but I suppose that's the Croatian form of "jeste"?!

the long form is an emphasized. "Mislim da Fenerbahče jeste veliki i bogat klub" sounds like a response to someone saying that Fenerbahče is a little club and that only village people go there.

Also, you use "jeste" for one word sentences. You can't say "Jeste li Englez?" "sam" you have to say "jesam" there.

In a longer, full sentence, "je" is the unmarked, not emphasized word.


I've seen "jest" in the phrase tj, "to jest".

Dalmacia and Adriatic coasts were with Catholic Serbs, like in Trst (Trieste);

o_O

I don't wanna be rude but when I hear/read such nonsenses it really pisses me off. Please learn history for change.

The Croats arrived in what is today Croatia in the early 7th century. They organized into two dukedoms; the duchy of Pannonia in the north and the duchy of Littoral Croatia in the south. Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus wrote that Porga, duke of the Dalmatian Croats, who had been invited into Dalmatia by Byzantine Emperor Heraclius, sent to Heraclius for Christian teachers. At the request of Heraclius, Pope John IV (640-642) sent Christian teachers and missionaries to the Croatian Provinces.[7] These missionaries converted Porga, and also a great many of the clan that was under his immediate authority, to the Christian faith in 640. The Christianization of the Croats was mostly complete by the 9th century. Both duchies became Frankish vassals in late 8th century, and eventually became independent in the following century.
The first native Croatian ruler recognized by the Pope was duke Branimir, whom Pope John VIII called dux Croatorum ("duke of Croats") in 879.[8] Duke Tomislav of Littoral Croatia was one of the most prominent members of the House of Trpimirović. He united the Croats of Dalmatia and Pannonia into a single Kingdom in 925. Tomislav's state extended from the Adriatic Sea to the Drava river, and from the Raša river to the Drina river. Under his rule, Croatia became one of the most powerful kingdoms in Medieval Europe.[9] Tomislav defeated the invasions of the Arpads in battle and forced them across the Drava. He also annexed a part of Pannonia. This included the area between the rivers Drava, Sava and Kupa, so his Duchy bordered with Bulgaria for a period of time. This was the first time that the two Croatian Realms were united, and all Croats were in one state. The union was later recognised by Byzantium, which gave the royal crown to Stjepan Držislav[10] and papal crown to king Zvonimir. The medieval Croatian kingdom reached its peak during the reign of Kings Petar Krešimir IV (1058–1074) and Zvonimir (1075–1089).

Originally Posted by ina

Zahal, I think the stories of Iran and Gypsies refer to very distant history when this nations were not this nations as we have them today. We are even today small in number, so we were some migrated groups from Asia few hundreds years ago. Bulgarians are not Slavs, but they slovenized themselves and mixed with us and we with them.
Dalmacia and Adriatic coasts were with Catholic Serbs, like in Trst (Trieste); they were rich merchants and gentlemen, sponsors of many rebellions against Turks and what is more, they gave support and refuges to our intellectuals, writers, artists, leaders... (Para vrti gde burgija neće.)
I know that Kusturica (once Babić and I think he is Babić again) and Meša Selimović claimed they were Serbs and Ivo Andrić, who was I think Croatian, "turn into a Serb", he said that. But this is all nonsense really, to speak about it further.
When Spring returns from holiday, she'll ban us!

"when this nations were not this nations"
"we were migrated groups from asia a few hundred years ago"
"Bulgarians are not Slavs"
"Dalmacia and Adriatic coasts were with Catholic Serbs"

daj ina duso, nemoj se brukat molim te, i preskoci diskusije o "istoriji" ubuduce.

so, kako je vreme kod vas? ovde vruće vruće vruće. a da otvorim prozore, pojedu me komarice. Imam ujed velik kao šljiva na laktu zahvalajući jedne komarice koju nisam uspela da ubijem sinoć.

Ovde je isto vruce

Originally Posted by miki444

"Bulgarians are not Slavs"

just to say : the PRAbulgarians actually weren't slavs but they mixed up with a definitively bigger number of the Seven slavic tribes and they created a co-federation called Bulgaria but with mostly slavic population.When Bulgaria became christianized in 9 th century Slavic language became official cause as I said Slavs were quite a bigger number. So the new-formed Bulgarian nation is Slavic with some mix of the prabulgarian element which disappered in the next centuries.
Sorry for offtopic..very sorry

Originally Posted by tedinkyyy

just to say : the PRAbulgarians actually weren't slavs but they mixed up with a definitively bigger number of the Seven slavic tribes and they created a co-federation called Bulgaria but with mostly slavic population.When Bulgaria became christianized in 9 th century Slavic language became official cause as I said Slavs were quite a bigger number. So the new-formed Bulgarian nation is Slavic with some mix of the prabulgarian element which disappered in the next centuries.
Sorry for offtopic..very sorry

yeah, but there is no "slavic nation" that is "pure", we have all mixed to some extent with other tribes.
what makes somebody slavic is the culture, customs and language.

in that case,we're all slavs -Bulgarians,Macedonians,Serbians,Bosnians,Croatians ,Montenegrians,Slovenians... so we'd better stop discussing topics in which nobody is right and we just should feel much closer to each other cuz we really have close languages and cultures...actually we've spoken one language many centuries ago... so it's pretty ugly so close ppl to hate each other and that envy between them. :|

Hi everyone,

I wanna learn Serbian language because i listen to so many serbian songs and i wanna learn because then i will understand more when i listen to the songs.
I`ve heard about an englisch book: Colloquial Serbian, written by Jelena Calic & Celia Hawkesworth. I think there`s a lot of information in it.
I wanna ask if someone knows that book and did you learn much from it?

I started today with learning some grammar, but it`s a little difficult.. especially the use of je li and jeste .. i just don`t get it.

When u got to the cases u'll find je li/jeste quite easier
(don't wanna despair u from now but learning a language with cases when they aren't in ur own is terrible ... I've experienced it )

Originally Posted by Paulien

I`ve heard about an englisch book: Colloquial Serbian, written by Jelena Calic & Celia Hawkesworth. I think there`s a lot of information in it.
I wanna ask if someone knows that book and did you learn much from it?
I started today with learning some grammar, but it`s a little difficult.. especially the use of je li and jeste .. i just don`t get it.

Hi Paulien,
When I started studying this language, my teacher at that point, a former student at the language faculty in Belgrade, strongly recommended this book.
And I have to say it is an excellent book for a beginner!
It covers basically all the grammar – and I am still repeating this book when I want to refresh certain parts of the grammar and daily expressions.
I also think you should buy the CD:s to this book, it is helpful for the pronounciation.

There is another good text book, "Introduction to the Croatian and Serbian language" by Thomas F. Magner. It is a little bit different, and discuss the grammar more thoroughly. The structure is somewhat more difficult, and it is not so easy to follow for a complete beginner, which Colloquial Serbian is.

Thus I recommend you to start with Colloquial Serbian, and to continue with Magner's book after that!

Srećno! (Good luck!)

Yeah i know.. it`s difficult in the beginning but the most difficult thing is also that the book is Englisch - Serbian and my Englisch grammar is good but not perfect so sometimes when I read Englisch explanation I don`t understand everything so I have to look on the internet to understand
But when I got the meaning of everything it will be easier i`ll take my time.

But are you also study Serbian language Tedinkyyy?

Originally Posted by Zahal

Hi Paulien,
When I started studying this language, my teacher at that point, a former student at the language faculty in Belgrade, strongly recommended this book.
And I have to say it is an excellent book for a beginner!
It covers basically all the grammar – and I am still repeating this book when I want to refresh certain parts of the grammar and daily expressions.
I also think you should buy the CD:s to this book, it is helpful for the pronounciation.

There is another good text book, "Introduction to the Croatian and Serbian language" by Thomas F. Magner. It is a little bit different, and discuss the grammar more thoroughly. The structure is somewhat more difficult, and it is not so easy to follow for a complete beginner, which Colloquial Serbian is.

Thus I recommend you to start with Colloquial Serbian, and to continue with Magner's book after that!

Srećno! (Good luck!)

Thank you for the information Zahal , when I understand more of the Serbian language I will look for the other book and for now I will start with this book.
I bought it without the cd`s because in the book they discribe how you should say the letters (how to speak) and if I don`t know I`ll ask one of my friends.
But for know I wanna start by learning grammar and understand words when I read them and when it get better then I will study on how to speak