fbpx
Wikipedia

Serbo-Croatian

January 12, 2023

This article is about the language. For other uses, see Serbo-Croatian (disambiguation).

Serbo-Croatian (/ˌsɜːrboʊkroʊˈeɪʃən/ (listen))[11][12] – also called Serbo-Croat (/ˌsɜːrboʊˈkroʊæt/),[11][12] Serbo-Croat-Bosnian (SCB),[13] Bosnian-Croatian-Serbian (BCS),[14] and Bosnian-Croatian-Montenegrin-Serbian (BCMS)[15] – is a South Slavic language and the primary language of Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro. It is a pluricentric language with four[16] mutually intelligible standard varieties, namely Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, and Montenegrin.[17][18]

Serbo-Croatian
  • srpskohrvatski / hrvatskosrpski
  • српскохрватски / хрватскосрпски
Native toSerbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, and Kosovo[a]
EthnicityBosniaks
Croats
Montenegrins
Serbs
Native speakers
19 million (2022)[1]
Standard forms
Dialects
Official status
Official language in
Recognised minority
language in
Regulated by
Language codes
ISO 639-1sh (deprecated)
ISO 639-3hbs – inclusive code
Individual codes:
bos – Bosnian
cnr – Montenegrin
hrv – Croatian
srp – Serbian
svm – Slavomolisano
Glottologsout1528
Linguasphere53-AAA-g
  Areas where Serbo-Croatian is spoken by a plurality of inhabitants (as of 2005)[needs update]

Note: a Kosovo independence disputed, see 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence

South Slavic languages historically formed a continuum. The turbulent history of the area, particularly due to expansion of the Ottoman Empire, resulted in a patchwork of dialectal and religious differences. Due to population migrations, Shtokavian became the most widespread dialect in the western Balkans, intruding westwards into the area previously occupied by Chakavian and Kajkavian (which further blend into Slovenian in the northwest). Bosniaks, Croats and Serbs differ in religion and were historically often part of different cultural circles, although a large part of the nations have lived side by side under foreign overlords. During that period, the language was referred to under a variety of names, such as "Slavic" in general or "Serbian", "Croatian" or "Bosnian" in particular. In a classicizing manner, it was also referred to as "Illyrian".

The process of linguistic standardization of Serbo-Croatian was originally initiated in the mid-19th-century Vienna Literary Agreement by Croatian and Serbian writers and philologists, decades before a Yugoslav state was established.[19] From the very beginning, there were slightly different literary Serbian and Croatian standards, although both were based on the same dialect of Shtokavian, Eastern Herzegovinian. In the 20th century, Serbo-Croatian served as the official language of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (when it was called "Serbo-Croato-Slovenian"),[20] and later as one of the official languages of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The breakup of Yugoslavia affected language attitudes, so that social conceptions of the language separated along ethnic and political lines. Since the breakup of Yugoslavia, Bosnian has likewise been established as an official standard in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and there is an ongoing movement to codify a separate Montenegrin standard.

Like other South Slavic languages, Serbo-Croatian has a simple phonology, with the common five-vowel system and twenty-five consonants. Its grammar evolved from Common Slavic, with complex inflection, preserving seven grammatical cases in nouns, pronouns, and adjectives. Verbs exhibit imperfective or perfective aspect, with a moderately complex tense system. Serbo-Croatian is a pro-drop language with flexible word order, subject–verb–object being the default. It can be written in either localized variants of Latin (Gaj's Latin alphabet, Montenegrin Latin) or Cyrillic (Serbian Cyrillic, Montenegrin Cyrillic) whose thirty letters mutually map one-to-one, and the orthography is highly phonemic in all standards.

Name

Serbo-Croatian generally goes by the individual names Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, and sometimes Montenegrin and Bunjevac.[21]

In the language itself, it is typically known as srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски "Serbo-Croatian", hrvatskosrpski / хрватскoсрпски "Croato-Serbian", or informally naški / нашки "ours".[18]

Throughout the history of the South Slavs, the vernacular, literary, and written languages (e.g. Chakavian, Kajkavian, Shtokavian) of the various regions and ethnicities developed and diverged independently. Prior to the 19th century, they were collectively called "Illyric", "Slavic", "Slavonian", "Bosnian", "Dalmatian", "Serbian" or "Croatian".[22] Since the nineteenth century the term Illyrian or Illyric was used quite often (thus creating confusion with the Illyrian language). Although the word Illyrian was used on a few occasions before, its widespread usage began after Ljudevit Gaj and several other prominent linguists met at Ljudevit Vukotinović's house to discuss the issue in 1832.[23] The term Serbo-Croatian was first used by Jacob Grimm in 1824,[24][25] popularized by the Viennese philologist Jernej Kopitar in the following decades, and accepted by Croatian Zagreb grammarians in 1854 and 1859.[26] At that time, Serb and Croat lands were still part of the Ottoman and Austrian Empires. Officially, the language was called variously Serbo-Croat, Croato-Serbian, Serbian and Croatian, Croatian and Serbian, Serbian or Croatian, Croatian or Serbian. Unofficially, Serbs and Croats typically called the language "Serbian" or "Croatian", respectively, without implying a distinction between the two,[27] and again in independent Bosnia and Herzegovina, "Bosnian", "Croatian", and "Serbian" were considered to be three names of a single official language.[28] Croatian linguist Dalibor Brozović advocated the term Serbo-Croatian as late as 1988, claiming that in an analogy with Indo-European, Serbo-Croatian does not only name the two components of the same language, but simply charts the limits of the region in which it is spoken and includes everything between the limits ('Bosnian' and 'Montenegrin').[29] Today, use of the term "Serbo-Croatian" is controversial due to the prejudice that nation and language must match.[30][31][32] It is still used for lack of a succinct alternative,[33] though alternative names have emerged, such as Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian (BCS),[34] which is often seen in political contexts such as the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.

History

Early development

 
Hval's Codex, 1404

In the 9th century, Old Church Slavonic was adopted as the language of the liturgy in churches serving various Slavic nations. This language was gradually adapted to non-liturgical purposes and became known as the Croatian version of Old Slavonic. The two variants of the language, liturgical and non-liturgical, continued to be a part of the Glagolitic service as late as the middle of the 19th century. The earliest known Croatian Church Slavonic Glagolitic manuscripts are the Glagolita Clozianus and the Vienna Folia from the 11th century.[35]

 
Speech example
An example of Old Croatian used in Baška tablet.
Problems playing this file? See media help.

The beginning of written Serbo-Croatian can be traced from the tenth century and on when Serbo-Croatian medieval texts were written in five scripts: Latin, Glagolitic, Early Cyrillic, Bosnian Cyrillic (bosančica/bosanica),[36] and Arebica, the last principally by Bosniak nobility. Serbo-Croatian competed with the more established literary languages of Latin and Old Slavonic in the west and Persian and Arabic in the east.

Old Slavonic developed into the Serbo-Croatian variant of Church Slavonic between the 12th and 16th centuries.

Among the earliest attestations of Serbo-Croatian are: the Humac tablet, dating from the 10th or 11th century, written in Bosnian Cyrillic and Glagolitic; the Plomin tablet, dating from the same era, written in Glagolitic; the Valun tablet, dated to the 11th century, written in Glagolitic and Latin; and the Inscription of Župa Dubrovačka, a Glagolitic tablet dated to the 11th century.

The Baška tablet from the late 11th century was written in Glagolitic.[37] It is a large stone tablet found in the small Church of St. Lucy, Jurandvor on the Croatian island of Krk that contains text written mostly in Chakavian in the Croatian angular Glagolitic script. It is also important in the history of the nation as it mentions Zvonimir, the king of Croatia at the time.

The Charter of Ban Kulin of 1189, written by Ban Kulin of Bosnia, was an early Shtokavian text, written in Bosnian Cyrillic.

The luxurious and ornate representative texts of Serbo-Croatian Church Slavonic belong to the later era, when they coexisted with the Serbo-Croatian vernacular literature. The most notable are the "Missal of Duke Novak" from the Lika region in northwestern Croatia (1368), "Evangel from Reims" (1395, named after the town of its final destination), Hrvoje's Missal from Bosnia and Split in Dalmatia (1404),[38] and the first printed book in Serbo-Croatian, the Glagolitic Missale Romanum Glagolitice (1483).[35]

During the 13th century Serbo-Croatian vernacular texts began to appear, the most important among them being the "Istrian land survey" of 1275 and the "Vinodol Codex" of 1288, both written in the Chakavian dialect.[39][40]

The Shtokavian dialect literature, based almost exclusively[citation needed] on Chakavian original texts of religious provenance (missals, breviaries, prayer books) appeared almost a century later. The most important purely Shtokavian vernacular text is the Vatican Croatian Prayer Book (c. 1400).[41]

Both the language used in legal texts and that used in Glagolitic literature gradually came under the influence of the vernacular, which considerably affected its phonological, morphological, and lexical systems. From the 14th and the 15th centuries, both secular and religious songs at church festivals were composed in the vernacular.

Writers of early Serbo-Croatian religious poetry (začinjavci) gradually introduced the vernacular into their works. These začinjavci were the forerunners of the rich literary production of the 16th-century literature, which, depending on the area, was Chakavian-, Kajkavian-, or Shtokavian-based.[35] The language of religious poems, translations, miracle and morality plays contributed to the popular character of medieval Serbo-Croatian literature.

One of the earliest dictionaries, also in the Slavic languages as a whole, was the Bosnian–Turkish Dictionary of 1631 authored by Muhamed Hevaji Uskufi and was written in the Arebica script.[42][43]

Standardization

 
Đuro Daničić, Rječnik hrvatskoga ili srpskoga jezika (Croatian or Serbian Dictionary), 1882
 
Gramatika bosanskoga jezika (Grammar of the Bosnian Language), 1890

In the mid-19th century, Serbian (led by self-taught writer and folklorist Vuk Stefanović Karadžić) and most Croatian writers and linguists (represented by the Illyrian movement and led by Ljudevit Gaj and Đuro Daničić), proposed the use of the most widespread dialect, Shtokavian, as the base for their common standard language. Karadžić standardised the Serbian Cyrillic alphabet, and Gaj and Daničić standardized the Croatian Latin alphabet, on the basis of vernacular speech phonemes and the principle of phonological spelling. In 1850 Serbian and Croatian writers and linguists signed the Vienna Literary Agreement, declaring their intention to create a unified standard.[44] Thus a complex bi-variant language appeared, which the Serbs officially called "Serbo-Croatian" or "Serbian or Croatian" and the Croats "Croato-Serbian", or "Croatian or Serbian". Yet, in practice, the variants of the conceived common literary language served as different literary variants, chiefly differing in lexical inventory and stylistic devices. The common phrase describing this situation was that Serbo-Croatian or "Croatian or Serbian" was a single language. In 1861, after a long debate, the Croatian Sabor put up several proposed names to a vote of the members of the parliament; "Yugoslavian" was opted for by the majority and legislated as the official language of the Triune Kingdom. The Austrian Empire, suppressing Pan-Slavism at the time, did not confirm this decision and legally rejected the legislation, but in 1867 finally settled on "Croatian or Serbian" instead.[45] During the Austro-Hungarian occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the language of all three nations in this territory was declared "Bosnian" until the death of administrator von Kállay in 1907, at which point the name was changed to "Serbo-Croatian".[46][47][48]

With unification of the first the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes – the approach of Karadžić and the Illyrians became dominant. The official language was called "Serbo-Croato-Slovenian" (srpsko-hrvatsko-slovenački) in the 1921 constitution.[20] In 1929, the constitution was suspended,[49] and the country was renamed the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, while the official language of Serbo-Croato-Slovene was reinstated in the 1931 constitution.[20]

In June 1941, the Nazi puppet Independent State of Croatia began to rid the language of "Eastern" (Serbian) words, and shut down Serbian schools.[50] The totalitarian dictatorship introduced a language law that promulgated Croatian linguistic purism as a policy that tried to implement a complete elimination of Serbisms and internationalisms.[51]

On January 15, 1944, the Anti-Fascist Council of the People's Liberation of Yugoslavia (AVNOJ) declared Croatian, Serbian, Slovene, and Macedonian to be equal in the entire territory of Yugoslavia.[52] In 1945 the decision to recognize Croatian and Serbian as separate languages was reversed in favor of a single Serbo-Croatian or Croato-Serbian language.[52] In the Communist-dominated second Yugoslavia, ethnic issues eased to an extent, but the matter of language remained blurred and unresolved.

In 1954, major Serbian and Croatian writers, linguists and literary critics, backed by Matica srpska and Matica hrvatska signed the Novi Sad Agreement, which in its first conclusion stated: "Serbs, Croats and Montenegrins share a single language with two equal variants that have developed around Zagreb (western) and Belgrade (eastern)". The agreement insisted on the equal status of Cyrillic and Latin scripts, and of Ekavian and Ijekavian pronunciations.[53] It also specified that Serbo-Croatian should be the name of the language in official contexts, while in unofficial use the traditional Serbian and Croatian were to be retained.[53] Matica hrvatska and Matica srpska were to work together on a dictionary, and a committee of Serbian and Croatian linguists was asked to prepare a pravopis. During the sixties both books were published simultaneously in Ijekavian Latin in Zagreb and Ekavian Cyrillic in Novi Sad.[54] Yet Croatian linguists claim that it was an act of unitarianism. The evidence supporting this claim is patchy: Croatian linguist Stjepan Babić complained that the television transmission from Belgrade always used the Latin alphabet[55]— which was true, but was not proof of unequal rights, but of frequency of use and prestige. Babić further complained that the Novi Sad Dictionary (1967) listed side by side words from both the Croatian and Serbian variants wherever they differed,[55] which one can view as proof of careful respect for both variants, and not of unitarism. Moreover, Croatian linguists criticized those parts of the Dictionary for being unitaristic that were written by Croatian linguists.[56] And finally, Croatian linguists ignored the fact that the material for the Pravopisni rječnik came from the Croatian Philological Society.[57][58] Regardless of these facts, Croatian intellectuals brought the Declaration on the Status and Name of the Croatian Literary Language in 1967. On occasion of the publication's 45th anniversary, the Croatian weekly journal Forum published the Declaration again in 2012, accompanied by a critical analysis.[59]

West European scientists judge the Yugoslav language policy as an exemplary one:[60][61] although three-quarters of the population spoke one language, no single language was official on a federal level.[62] Official languages were declared only at the level of constituent republics and provinces,[63][64][65] and very generously: Vojvodina had five (among them Slovak and Romanian, spoken by 0.5 per cent of the population), and Kosovo four (Albanian, Turkish, Romany and Serbo-Croatian).[63][66] Newspapers, radio and television studios used sixteen languages,[67] fourteen were used as languages of tuition in schools, and nine at universities.[63][68] Only the Yugoslav Army used Serbo-Croatian as the sole language of command, with all other languages represented in the army's other activities—however, this is not different from other armies of multilingual states,[69] or in other specific institutions, such as international air traffic control where English is used worldwide. All variants of Serbo-Croatian were used in state administration and republican and federal institutions.[63] Both Serbian and Croatian variants were represented in respectively different grammar books, dictionaries, school textbooks and in books known as pravopis (which detail spelling rules).[70] Serbo-Croatian was a kind of soft standardisation.[71] However, legal equality could not dampen the prestige Serbo-Croatian had: since it was the language of three quarters of the population, it functioned as an unofficial lingua franca.[72] And within Serbo-Croatian, the Serbian variant, with twice as many speakers as the Croatian,[73] enjoyed greater prestige, reinforced by the fact that Slovene and Macedonian speakers preferred it to the Croatian variant because their languages are also Ekavian.[74] This is a common situation in other pluricentric languages, e.g. the variants of German differ according to their prestige, the variants of Portuguese too.[75] Moreover, all languages differ in terms of prestige: "the fact is that languages (in terms of prestige, learnability etc.) are not equal, and the law cannot make them equal".[76]

Modern developments

In 2017, the "Declaration on the Common Language" (Deklaracija o zajedničkom jeziku) was signed by a group of NGOs and linguists from former Yugoslavia. It states that all variants belong to a common polycentric language.[77][78]

Demographics

 
  Countries where a standard form of Serbo-Croatian is an official language
  Countries where one or more forms are designated as minority languages

The total number of persons who declared their native language as either 'Bosnian', 'Croatian', 'Serbian', 'Montenegrin', or 'Serbo-Croatian' in countries of the region is about 16 million.

Serbian is spoken by 10 million people around the world, mostly in Serbia (7.8 million), Bosnia and Herzegovina (1.2 million), and Montenegro (300,000). Serbian minorities are found in Kosovo, North Macedonia and in Romania.[5] In Serbia, there are about 760,000 second-language speakers of Serbian, including Hungarians in Vojvodina and the 400,000 estimated Roma. In Kosovo, Serbian is spoken by the members of the Serbian minority which approximates between 70,000 and 100,000.[79][80] Familiarity of Kosovo Albanians with Serbian varies depending on age and education, and exact numbers are not available.

Croatian is spoken by 6.8 million people in the world, including 4.1 million in Croatia and 600,000 in Bosnia and Herzegovina.[81] A small Croatian minority that lives in Italy, known as Molise Croats, have somewhat preserved traces of Croatian. In Croatia, 170,000, mostly Italians and Hungarians, use it as a second language.

Bosnian is spoken by 2.7 million people worldwide, chiefly Bosniaks, including 2.0 million in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 200,000 in Serbia and 40,000 in Montenegro.[82]

Montenegrin is spoken by 300,000 people globally.[83] The notion of Montenegrin as a separate standard from Serbian is relatively recent. In the 2011 census, around 229,251 Montenegrins, of the country's 620,000, declared Montenegrin as their native language. That figure is likely to increase, due to the country's independence and strong institutional backing of the Montenegrin language.

Serbo-Croatian is also a second language of many Slovenians and Macedonians, especially those born during the time of Yugoslavia. According to the 2002 Census, Serbo-Croatian and its variants have the largest number of speakers of the minority languages in Slovenia.[84]

Outside the Balkans, there are over two million native speakers of the language(s), especially in countries which are frequent targets of immigration, such as Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Sweden, and the United States.

Grammar

 
Tomislav Maretić's 1899 Grammar of Croatian or Serbian
Further information: Serbo-Croatian grammar

Serbo-Croatian is a highly inflected language. Traditional grammars list seven cases for nouns and adjectives: nominative, genitive, dative, accusative, vocative, locative, and instrumental, reflecting the original seven cases of Proto-Slavic, and indeed older forms of Serbo-Croatian itself. However, in modern Shtokavian the locative has almost merged into dative (the only difference is based on accent in some cases), and the other cases can be shown declining; namely:

  • For all nouns and adjectives, the instrumental, dative, and locative forms are identical (at least orthographically) in the plural: ženama, ženama, ženama; očima, očima, očima; riječima, riječima, riječima.
  • There is an accentual difference between the genitive singular and genitive plural of masculine and neuter nouns, which are otherwise homonyms (seljáka, seljaka) except that on occasion an "a" (which might or might not appear in the singular) is filled between the last letter of the root and the genitive plural ending (kapitalizma, kapitalizama).
  • The old instrumental ending "ju" of the feminine consonant stems and in some cases the "a" of the genitive plural of certain other sorts of feminine nouns is fast yielding to "i": noći instead of noćju, borbi instead of boraba and so forth.
  • Almost every Shtokavian number is indeclinable, and numbers after prepositions have not been declined for a long time.

Like most Slavic languages, there are mostly three genders for nouns: masculine, feminine, and neuter, a distinction which is still present even in the plural (unlike Russian and, in part, the Čakavian dialect). They also have two numbers: singular and plural. However, some consider there to be three numbers (paucal or dual, too), since (still preserved in closely related Slovene) after two (dva, dvije/dve), three (tri) and four (četiCite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).ri), and all numbers ending in them (e.g. twenty-two, ninety-three, one hundred four, but not twelve through fourteen) the genitive singular is used, and after all other numbers five (pet) and up, the genitive plural is used. (The number one [jedan] is treated as an adjective.) Adjectives are placed in front of the noun they modify and must agree in both case and number with it.

There are seven tenses for verbs: past, present, future, exact future, aorist, imperfect, and pluperfect; and three moods: indicative, imperative, and conditional. However, the latter three tenses are typically used only in Shtokavian writing, and the time sequence of the exact future is more commonly formed through an alternative construction.

In addition, like most Slavic languages, the Shtokavian verb also has one of two aspects: perfective or imperfective. Most verbs come in pairs, with the perfective verb being created out of the imperfective by adding a prefix or making a stem change. The imperfective aspect typically indicates that the action is unfinished, in progress, or repetitive; while the perfective aspect typically denotes that the action was completed, instantaneous, or of limited duration. Some Štokavian tenses (namely, aorist and imperfect) favor a particular aspect (but they are rarer or absent in Čakavian and Kajkavian). Actually, aspects "compensate" for the relative lack of tenses, because aspect of the verb determines whether the act is completed or in progress in the referred time.

Phonology

Main article: Serbo-Croatian phonology

Vowels

The Serbo-Croatian vowel system is simple, with only five vowels in Shtokavian. All vowels are monophthongs. The oral vowels are as follows:

Latin script Cyrillic script IPA Description English approximation
a а /a/ open central unrounded father
e е /e/ mid front unrounded den
i и /i/ close front unrounded seek
o о /o/ mid back rounded lord
u у /u/ close back rounded pool

The vowels can be short or long, but the phonetic quality does not change depending on the length. In a word, vowels can be long in the stressed syllable and the syllables following it, never in the ones preceding it.

Consonants

The consonant system is more complicated, and its characteristic features are series of affricate and palatal consonants. As in English, voice is phonemic, but aspiration is not.

Latin script Cyrillic script IPA Description[85] English approximation
trill
r р /r/ alveolar trill rolled (vibrating) r as in carramba
approximants
v в /ʋ/ labiodental approximant roughly between vortex and war
j ј /j/ palatal approximant year
laterals
l л /l/ alveolar lateral approximant light
lj љ /ʎ/ palatal lateral approximant roughly battalion
nasals
m м /m/ bilabial nasal man
n н /n/ alveolar nasal not
nj њ /ɲ/ palatal nasal British news or American canyon
fricatives
f ф /f/ voiceless labiodental fricative five
z з /z/ voiced dental sibilant zero
s с /s/ voiceless dental sibilant some
ž ж /ʒ/ voiced postalveolar fricative television
š ш /ʃ/ voiceless postalveolar fricative sharp
h х /x/ voiceless velar fricative loch
affricates
c ц /t͡s/ voiceless dental affricate pots
dž џ /d͡ʒ/ voiced postalveolar affricate as English jam
č ч /t͡ʃ/ voiceless postalveolar affricate as English check
đ ђ /d͡ʑ/ voiced alveolo-palatal affricate roughly jeans
ć ћ /t͡ɕ/ voiceless alveolo-palatal affricate roughly cheese
plosives
b б /b/ voiced bilabial plosive book
p п /p/ voiceless bilabial plosive top
d д /d/ voiced dental plosive dog
t т /t/ voiceless dental plosive stop
g г /ɡ/ voiced velar plosive good
k к /k/ voiceless velar plosive duck

In consonant clusters all consonants are either voiced or voiceless. All the consonants are voiced if the last consonant is normally voiced or voiceless if the last consonant is normally voiceless. This rule does not apply to approximants – a consonant cluster may contain voiced approximants and voiceless consonants; as well as to foreign words (Washington would be transcribed as VašinGton), personal names and when consonants are not inside of one syllable.

/r/ can be syllabic, playing the role of the syllable nucleus in certain words (occasionally, it can even have a long accent). For example, the tongue-twister navrh brda vrba mrda involves four words with syllabic /r/. A similar feature exists in Czech, Slovak, and Macedonian. Very rarely other sonorants can be syllabic, like /l/ (in bicikl), /ʎ/ (surname Štarklj), /n/ (unit njutn), as well as /m/ and /ɲ/ in slang.[citation needed]

Pitch accent

Further information: Pitch accent § Serbo-Croatian, and Serbo-Croatian phonology § Pitch accent

Apart from Slovene, Serbo-Croatian is the only Slavic language with a pitch accent (simple tone) system. This feature is present in some other Indo-European languages, such as Norwegian, Ancient Greek, and Punjabi. Neo-Shtokavian Serbo-Croatian, which is used as the basis for standard Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, and Serbian, has four "accents", which involve either a rising or falling tone on either long or short vowels, with optional post-tonic lengths:

Serbo-Croatian accent system
Slavicist
symbol		 IPA
symbol		 Description
e [e] non-tonic short vowel
ē [eː] non-tonic long vowel
è [ě] short vowel with rising tone
é [ěː] long vowel with rising tone
ȅ [ê] short vowel with falling tone
ȇ [êː] long vowel with falling tone

The tone stressed vowels can be approximated in English with set vs. setting? said in isolation for a short tonic e, or leave vs. leaving? for a long tonic i, due to the prosody of final stressed syllables in English.

General accent rules in the standard language:

  1. Monosyllabic words may have only a falling tone (or no accent at all – enclitics);
  2. Falling tone may occur only on the first syllable of polysyllabic words;
  3. Accent can never occur on the last syllable of polysyllabic words.

There are no other rules for accent placement, thus the accent of every word must be learned individually; furthermore, in inflection, accent shifts are common, both in type and position (the so-called "mobile paradigms"). The second rule is not strictly obeyed, especially in borrowed words.

Comparative and historical linguistics offers some clues for memorising the accent position: If one compares many standard Serbo-Croatian words to e.g. cognate Russian words, the accent in the Serbo-Croatian word will be one syllable before the one in the Russian word, with the rising tone. Historically, the rising tone appeared when the place of the accent shifted to the preceding syllable (the so-called "Neo-Shtokavian retraction"), but the quality of this new accent was different – its melody still "gravitated" towards the original syllable. Most Shtokavian (Neo-Shtokavian) dialects underwent this shift, but Chakavian, Kajkavian and the Old-Shtokavian dialects did not.

Accent diacritics are not used in the ordinary orthography, but only in the linguistic or language-learning literature (e.g. dictionaries, orthography and grammar books). However, there are very few minimal pairs where an error in accent can lead to misunderstanding.

Orthography

Serbo-Croatian orthography is almost entirely phonetic. Thus, most words should be spelled as they are pronounced. In practice, the writing system does not take into account allophones which occur as a result of interaction between words:

  • bit će – pronounced biće (and only written separately in Bosnian and Croatian)
  • od toga – pronounced otoga (in many vernaculars)
  • iz čega – pronounced iščega (in many vernaculars)

Also, there are some exceptions, mostly applied to foreign words and compounds, that favor morphological/etymological over phonetic spelling:

  • postdiplomski (postgraduate) – pronounced pozdiplomski

One systemic exception is that the consonant clusters ds and dš are not respelled as ts and tš (although d tends to be unvoiced in normal speech in such clusters):

  • predstava (show)
  • odšteta (damages)

Only a few words are intentionally "misspelled", mostly in order to resolve ambiguity:

  • šeststo [ʃêːsto] (six hundred) – pronounced šesto (to avoid confusion with "šesto" [sixth], pronounced the same)
  • prstni [př̩sniː] (adj., finger) – pronounced prsni (to avoid confusion with "prsni" [pr̩̂sniː] [adj., chest]), differentiated by tone in some areas (where the short rising tone contrasts with the short falling tone).

Writing systems

Main articles: Gaj's Latin alphabet, Serbian Cyrillic alphabet, and Yugoslav Braille

Through history, this language has been written in a number of writing systems:

The oldest texts since the 11th century are in Glagolitic, and the oldest preserved text written completely in the Latin alphabet is Red i zakon sestara reda Svetog Dominika, from 1345. The Arabic alphabet had been used by Bosniaks; Greek writing is out of use there, and Arabic and Glagolitic persisted so far partly in religious liturgies.

Today, it is written in both the Latin and Cyrillic scripts. Serbian and Bosnian variants use both alphabets, while Croatian uses the Latin only.

Latin script has become more and more popular in Serbia, as it is easy to input on phones and computers.[86]

The Serbian Cyrillic alphabet was revised by Vuk Stefanović Karadžić in the 19th century.

The Croatian Latin alphabet (Gajica) followed suit shortly afterwards, when Ljudevit Gaj defined it as standard Latin with five extra letters that had diacritics, apparently borrowing much from Czech, but also from Polish, and inventing the unique digraphs ⟨lj⟩, ⟨nj⟩ and ⟨dž⟩. These digraphs are represented as ⟨ļ⟩, ⟨ń⟩ and ⟨ǵ⟩ respectively in the Rječnik hrvatskog ili srpskog jezika, published by the former Yugoslav Academy of Sciences and Arts in Zagreb.[87] The latter digraphs, however, are unused in the literary standard of the language. All in all, this makes Serbo-Croatian the only Slavic language to officially use both the Latin and Cyrillic scripts, albeit the Latin version is more commonly used.

In both cases, spelling is phonetic and spellings in the two alphabets map to each other one-to-one:

Latin to Cyrillic
A a B b C c Č č Ć ć D d Dž dž Đ đ E e F f G g H h I i J j K k
А а Б б Ц ц Ч ч Ћ ћ Д д Џ џ Ђ ђ Е е Ф ф Г г Х х И и Ј ј К к
L l Lj lj M m N n Nj nj O o P p R r S s Š š T t U u V v Z z Ž ž
Л л Љ љ М м Н н Њ њ О о П п Р р С с Ш ш Т т У у В в З з Ж ж
Cyrillic to Latin
А а Б б В в Г г Д д Ђ ђ Е е Ж ж З з И и Ј ј К к Л л Љ љ М м
A a B b V v G g D d Đ đ E e Ž ž Z z I i J j K k L l Lj lj M m
Н н Њ њ О о П п Р р С с Т т Ћ ћ У у Ф ф Х х Ц ц Ч ч Џ џ Ш ш
N n Nj nj O o P p R r S s T t Ć ć U u F f H h C c Č č Dž dž Š š
Sample collation
Latin collation order Cyrillic
collation
order
Latin Cyrillic
equivalent
Ina Ина Ина
Injekcija Инјекција Инјекција
Inverzija Инверзија Инверзија
Inje Иње Иње

The digraphs Lj, Nj and Dž represent distinct phonemes and are considered to be single letters. In crosswords, they are put into a single square, and in sorting, lj follows l and nj follows n, except in a few words where the individual letters are pronounced separately. For instance, nadživ(j)eti "to outlive" is composed of the prefix nad- "out, over" and the verb živ(j)eti "to live". The Cyrillic alphabet avoids such ambiguity by providing a single letter for each phoneme: наджив(ј)ети.

Đ used to be commonly written as Dj on typewriters, but that practice led to too many ambiguities. It is also used on car license plates. Today Dj is often used again in place of Đ on the Internet as a replacement due to the lack of installed Serbo-Croat keyboard layouts.

Montenegrin alphabet, adopted in 2009, provides replacements of sj and zj with digraphs ⟨ś⟩ and ⟨ź⟩ in both Latin and Cyrillic, but they remain largely unused, even by the Parliament of Montenegro which introduced them.[88]

Unicode has separate characters for the digraphs lj (LJ, Lj, lj), nj (NJ, Nj, nj) and dž (DŽ, Dž, dž).

Dialects

Main article: Dialects of Serbo-Croatian
See also: South Slavic dialect continuum

South Slavic historically formed a dialect continuum, i.e. each dialect has some similarities with the neighboring one, and differences grow with distance. However, migrations from the 16th to 18th centuries resulting from the spread of Ottoman Empire on the Balkans have caused large-scale population displacement that broke the dialect continuum into many geographical pockets. Migrations in the 20th century, primarily caused by urbanization and wars, also contributed to the reduction of dialectal differences.

The primary dialects are named after the most common question word for what: Shtokavian uses the pronoun što or šta, Chakavian uses ča or ca, Kajkavian (kajkavski), kaj or kej. In native terminology they are referred to as nar(j)ečje, which would be equivalent of "group of dialects", whereas their many subdialects are referred to as dijalekti "dialects" or govori "speeches".

The pluricentric Serbo-Croatian standard language and all four contemporary standard variants are based on the Eastern Herzegovinian subdialect of Neo-Shtokavian. Other dialects are not taught in schools or used by the state media. The Torlakian dialect is often added to the list, though sources usually note that it is a transitional dialect between Shtokavian and the Bulgaro-Macedonian dialects.

 
Likely distribution of major dialects prior to the 16th-century migrations
 
Shtokavian subdialects (Pavle Ivić, 1988). Yellow is the widespread Eastern Herzegovinian subdialect that forms the basis of all national standards, though it is not spoken natively in any of the capital cities.
 
Mid-20th-century distribution of dialects in Croatia

The Serbo-Croatian dialects differ not only in the question word they are named after, but also heavily in phonology, accentuation and intonation, case endings and tense system (morphology) and basic vocabulary. In the past, Chakavian and Kajkavian dialects were spoken on a much larger territory, but have been replaced by Štokavian during the period of migrations caused by Ottoman Turkish conquest of the Balkans in the 15th and the 16th centuries. These migrations caused the koinéisation of the Shtokavian dialects, that used to form the West Shtokavian (more closer and transitional towards the neighbouring Chakavian and Kajkavian dialects) and East Shtokavian (transitional towards the Torlakian and the whole Bulgaro-Macedonian area) dialect bundles, and their subsequent spread at the expense of Chakavian and Kajkavian. As a result, Štokavian now covers an area larger than all the other dialects combined, and continues to make its progress in the enclaves where non-literary dialects are still being spoken.[89]

The differences among the dialects can be illustrated on the example of Schleicher's fable. Diacritic signs are used to show the difference in accents and prosody, which are often quite significant, but which are not reflected in the usual orthography.

Division by jat reflex

Main article: yat

A series of isoglosses crosscuts the main dialects. The modern reflexes of the long Common Slavic vowel jat, usually transcribed *ě, vary by location as /i/, /e/, and /ije/ or /je/. Local varieties of the dialects are labeled Ikavian, Ekavian, and Ijekavian, respectively, depending on the reflex. The long and short jat is reflected as long or short */i/ and /e/ in Ikavian and Ekavian, but Ijekavian dialects introduce a ije/je alternation to retain a distinction.

Standard Croatian and Bosnian are based on Ijekavian, whereas Serbian uses both Ekavian and Ijekavian forms (Ijekavian for Bosnian Serbs, Ekavian for most of Serbia). Influence of standard language through state media and education has caused non-standard varieties to lose ground to the literary forms.

The jat-reflex rules are not without exception. For example, when short jat is preceded by r, in most Ijekavian dialects developed into /re/ or, occasionally, /ri/. The prefix prě- ("trans-, over-") when long became pre- in eastern Ijekavian dialects but to prije- in western dialects; in Ikavian pronunciation, it also evolved into pre- or prije- due to potential ambiguity with pri- ("approach, come close to"). For verbs that had -ěti in their infinitive, the past participle ending -ěl evolved into -io in Ijekavian Neo-Štokavian.

The following are some examples:

English Predecessor Ekavian Ikavian Ijekavian Ijekavian development
beautiful *lěp lep lip lijep long ě → ije
time *vrěme vreme vrime vrijeme
faith *věra vera vira vjera short ě → je
crossing *prělaz prelaz prеlaz or
prijelaz 		prеlaz or
prijelaz 		pr + long ě → prije
times *vrěmena vremena vrimena vremena r + short ě → re
need *trěbati trebati tribat(i) trebati
heat *grějati grejati grijati grijati r + short ě → ri
saw *viděl video vidio vidio ěl → io
village *selo selo selo selo e in root, not ě

Present sociolinguistic situation

 
A "trilingual" warning sign in Latin and Cyrillic script on the pack of Drina cigarettes: all three inscriptions are identical.

The nature and classification of Serbo-Croatian has been the subject of long-standing sociolinguistic debate.[90] The question is whether Serbo-Croatian should be called a single language or a cluster of closely related languages.[91][14][92][93]

Comparison with other pluricentric languages

See also: Declaration on the Common Language

Enisa Kafadar argues that there is only one Serbo-Croatian language with several varieties.[94] This has made it possible to include all four varieties in new grammars of the language.[15][95] Daniel Bunčić concludes that it is a pluricentric language, with four standard variants spoken in Serbia, Croatia, Montenegro, and Bosnia-Herzegovina.[96] The mutual intelligibility between their speakers "exceeds that between the standard variants of English, French, German, or Spanish".[97] "There is no doubt of the near 100% mutual intelligibility of (standard) Croatian and (standard) Serbian, as is obvious from the ability of all groups to enjoy each others' films, TV and sports broadcasts, newspapers, rock lyrics etc."[98] Other linguists have argued that the differences between the variants of Serbo-Croatian are less significant than those between the variants of English,[99] German,[100] Dutch,[101] and Hindustani.[102]

Among pluricentric languages,[103][104] Serbo-Croatian was the only one with a pluricentric standardisation within one state.[105][106] The dissolution of Yugoslavia has made Serbo-Croatian even more of a typical pluricentric language, since the variants of other pluricentric languages are also spoken in different states.[107][108]

As in other pluricentric languages, all Serbo-Croatian standard varieties are based on the same dialect (the Eastern Herzegovinian subdialect of the Shtokavian dialect) and consequently, according to the sociolinguistic definitions, constitute a single pluricentric language (and not, for example, several Ausbau languages[109]).[110] According to linguist John Bailyn, "An examination of all the major 'levels' of language shows that BCS is clearly a single language with a single grammatical system."[98]

In 2017, numerous prominent writers, scientists, journalists, activists and other public figures from Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia signed the Declaration on the Common Language, which states that in Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Montenegro a common polycentric standard language is used, consisting of several standard varieties, such as German, English or Spanish.[111][112][113][114]

Contemporary names

 
Ethno-political variants of Serbo-Croatian as of 2006

The use of Serbo-Croatian as a linguistic label has been the subject of long-standing controversy. Wayles Browne calls it a "term of convenience" and notes the difference of opinion as to whether it comprises a single language or a cluster of languages.[93] Ronelle Alexander refers to the national standards as three separate languages, but also notes that the reasons for this are complex and generally non-linguistic. She calls BCS (her term for Serbo-Croatian) a single language for communicative linguistic purposes, but three separate languages for symbolic non-linguistic purposes.[115][92]

The current Serbian constitution of 2006 refers to the official language as Serbian,[116] while the Montenegrin constitution of 2007 proclaimed Montenegrin as the primary official language, but also grants other languages the right of official use.[117]

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has specified different Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) numbers for Croatian (UDC 862, abbreviation hr) and Serbian (UDC 861, abbreviation sr), while the cover term Serbo-Croatian is used to refer to the combination of original signs (UDC 861/862, abbreviation sh). Furthermore, the ISO 639 standard designates the Bosnian language with the abbreviations bos and bs.

While it operated, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, which had English and French as official languages, translated court proceedings and documents into what it referred to as "Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian", usually abbreviated as BCS. Translators were employed from all regions of the former Yugoslavia and all national and regional variations were accepted, regardless of the nationality of the person on trial (sometimes against a defendant's objections), on the grounds of mutual intelligibility.[118]

For utilitarian purposes, Serbo-Croatian is often called "naš jezik" ("our language") or "naški" (sic. "ourish" or "ourian") by native speakers. This term is frequently used to describe Serbo-Croatian by those who wish to avoid nationalistic and linguistic discussions.[119][120] Native speakers traditionally describe their language as "jedan ali ne jedinstven"—"one but not uniform".[121]

Views of linguists in the former Yugoslavia

Serbian linguists

In 2021, the Board for Standardization of the Serbian Language issued an opinion that Serbo-Croatian is one language, and that it should be referred to as "Serbian language", while "Croatian", "Bosnian" and "Montenegrin" are to be considered merely local names for Serbian language. This opinion was widely criticized by Croatian government and representatives of the Croatian minority in Serbia.[122] Serbian linguist Ranko Bugarski called this opinion "absurd" and "legacy of the 19th century linguistics". He said that Serbo-Croatian should be considered one language in a scientific sense under the "Serbo-Croatian" label, but four different languages in an administrative sense.[123] Legally, Croatian, Bosnian and Montenegrin are all officially recognized minority languages in Serbia.[123] the Serbian Government also officially recognized Bunjevac language as a standard minority language in 2018[124] and was approved by the Serbian Ministry of Education for learning in schools.[125]

Croatian linguists

The opinion of the majority of Croatian linguists[citation needed] is that there has never been a Serbo-Croatian language, but two different standard languages that overlapped sometime in the course of history. However, Croatian linguist Snježana Kordić has been leading an academic discussion on this issue in the Croatian journal Književna republika[126] from 2001 to 2010.[127][128] In the discussion, she shows that linguistic criteria such as mutual intelligibility, the huge overlap in the linguistic system, and the same dialect basis of the standard language are evidence that Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian and Montenegrin are four national variants of the pluricentric Serbo-Croatian language.[129][130] Igor Mandić states: "During the last ten years, it has been the longest, the most serious and most acrid discussion (…) in 21st-century Croatian culture".[131] Inspired by that discussion, a monograph on language and nationalism has been published.[132]

The view of the majority of Croatian linguists that there is no single Serbo-Croatian language but several different standard languages has been sharply criticized by German linguist Bernhard Gröschel in his monograph[133] Serbo-Croatian Between Linguistics and Politics.[134]

A more detailed overview, incorporating arguments from Croatian philology and contemporary linguistics, would be as follows:

Serbo-Croatian is a language
One still finds many references to Serbo-Croatian, and proponents of Serbo-Croatian who deny that Croats, Serbs, Bosniaks and Montenegrins speak different languages. The usual argument generally goes along the following lines:
  • Standard Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian, and Montenegrin are completely mutually intelligible.[135][136] In addition, they use two alphabets that perfectly match each other (Latin and Cyrillic), thanks to Ljudevit Gaj and Vuk Karadžić. Croats exclusively use Latin script and Serbs equally use both Cyrillic and Latin. Although Cyrillic is taught in Bosnia, most Bosnians, especially non-Serbs (Bosniaks and Croats), favor Latin.
  • The list of 100 words of the basic Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian, and Montenegrin vocabulary, as set out by Morris Swadesh, shows that all 100 words are identical.[137] According to Swadesh, 81 per cent are sufficient to be considered as a single language.[138]
  • Typologically and structurally, these standard variants have virtually the same grammar, i.e. morphology and syntax.[139][140]
  • Serbo-Croatian was standardised in the mid-19th century, and all subsequent attempts to dissolve its basic unity have not succeeded.
  • The affirmation of distinct Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian, and Montenegrin languages is politically motivated.
  • According to phonology, morphology and syntax, these standard variants are essentially one language because they are based on the same, Štokavian dialect.[141]
Serbo-Croatian is not a language
Similar arguments are made for other official standards which are drawn from identical or nearly identical material bases and which therefore constitute pluricentric languages, such as Malaysian (Malaysian Malay), and Indonesian (together called Malay),[142] or Standard Hindi and Urdu (together called Hindustani or Hindi-Urdu).[143] However, some argue that these arguments have flaws:
  • Phonology, morphology, and syntax are not the only dimensions of a language: other fields (semantics, pragmatics, stylistics, lexicology, etc.) also differ slightly. However, it is the case with other pluricentric languages.[144] A comparison is made to the closely related North Germanic languages (or dialects, if one prefers), though these are not fully mutually intelligible as the Serbo-Croatian standards are. A closer comparison may be General American and Received Pronunciation in English, which are closer to each other than the latter is to other dialects which are subsumed under "British English".
  • Since the Croatian as recorded in Držić and Gundulić's works (16th and 17th centuries) is virtually the same as the contemporary standard Croatian (understandable archaisms apart), it is evident that the 19th-century formal standardization was just the final touch in the process that, as far as Croatian is concerned, had lasted more than three centuries. The radical break with the past, characteristic of modern Serbian (whose vernacular was likely not as similar to Croatian as it is today), is a trait completely at variance with Croatian linguistic history. In short, formal standardization processes for Croatian and Serbian had coincided chronologically (and, one could add, ideologically), but they have not produced a unified standard language. Gundulić did not write in "Serbo-Croatian", nor did August Šenoa. Marko Marulić and Marin Držić wrote in a sophisticated idiom of Croatian some 300–350 years before "Serbo-Croatian ideology" appeared. Marulić explicitly called his Čakavian-written Judita as u uerish haruacchi slosena ("arranged in Croatian stanzas") in 1501, and the Štokavian grammar and dictionary of Bartol Kašić written in 1604 unambiguously identifies the ethnonyms Slavic and Illyrian with Croatian.

The linguistic debate in this region is more about politics than about linguistics per se.

The topic of language for writers from Dalmatia and Dubrovnik prior to the 19th century made a distinction only between speakers of Italian or Slavic, since those were the two main groups that inhabited Dalmatian city-states at that time. Whether someone spoke Croatian or Serbian was not an important distinction then, as the two languages were not distinguished by most speakers.

However, most intellectuals and writers from Dalmatia who used the Štokavian dialect and practiced the Catholic faith saw themselves as part of a Croatian nation as far back as the mid-16th to 17th centuries, some 300 years before Serbo-Croatian ideology appeared. Their loyalty was first and foremost to Catholic Christendom, but when they professed an ethnic identity, they referred to themselves as "Slovin" and "Illyrian" (a sort of forerunner of Catholic baroque pan-Slavism) and Croat – these 30-odd writers over the span of c. 350 years always saw themselves as Croats first and never as part of a Serbian nation. It should also be noted that, in the pre-national era, Catholic religious orientation did not necessarily equate with Croat ethnic identity in Dalmatia. A Croatian follower of Vuk Karadžić, Ivan Broz, noted that for a Dalmatian to identify oneself as a Serb was seen as foreign as identifying oneself as Macedonian or Greek. Vatroslav Jagić pointed out in 1864:

As I have mentioned in the preface, history knows only two national names in these parts—Croatian and Serbian. As far as Dubrovnik is concerned, the Serbian name was never in use; on the contrary, the Croatian name was frequently used and gladly referred to ...

At the end of the 15th century [in Dubrovnik and Dalmatia], sermons and poems were exquisitely crafted in Croatian by those men whose names are widely renowned by deep learning and piety.

— The History of the Croatian Language, Zagreb, 1864.

On the other hand, the opinion of Jagić from 1864 is argued not to have firm grounds. When Jagić says "Croatian", he refers to a few cases referring to the Dubrovnik vernacular as ilirski (Illyrian). This was a common name for all Slavic vernaculars in Dalmatian cities among the Roman inhabitants. In the meantime, other written monuments are found that mention srpski, lingua serviana (= Serbian), and some that mention Croatian.[145] By far the most competent Serbian scientist[editorializing] on the Dubrovnik language issue, Milan Rešetar, who was born in Dubrovnik himself, wrote behalf of language characteristics: "The one who thinks that Croatian and Serbian are two separate languages must confess that Dubrovnik always (linguistically) used to be Serbian."[145]

Finally, the former medieval texts from Dubrovnik and Montenegro dating before the 16th century were neither true Štokavian nor Serbian, but mostly specific a Jekavian-Čakavian that was nearer to actual Adriatic islanders in Croatia.[146]

Political connotations

Nationalists have conflicting views about the language(s). The nationalists among the Croats conflictingly claim either that they speak an entirely separate language from Serbs and Bosniaks or that these two peoples have, due to the longer lexicographic tradition among Croats, somehow "borrowed" their standard languages from them.[citation needed] Bosniak nationalists claim that both Croats and Serbs have "appropriated" the Bosnian language, since Ljudevit Gaj and Vuk Karadžić preferred the Neo-Štokavian Ijekavian dialect, widely spoken in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as the basis for language standardization, whereas the nationalists among the Serbs claim either that any divergence in the language is artificial, or claim that the Štokavian dialect is theirs and the Čakavian Croats'— in more extreme formulations Croats have "taken" or "stolen" their language from the Serbs.[citation needed]

Proponents of unity among Southern Slavs claim that there is a single language with normal dialectal variations. The term "Serbo-Croatian" (or synonyms) is not officially used in any of the successor countries of former Yugoslavia.

In Serbia, the Serbian standard has an official status countrywide, while both Serbian and Croatian are official in the province of Vojvodina. A large Bosniak minority is present in the southwest region of Sandžak, but the "official recognition" of Bosnian is moot.[147] Bosnian is an optional course in first and second grade of the elementary school, while it is also in official use in the municipality of Novi Pazar.[148] However, its nomenclature is controversial, as there is incentive that it is referred to as "Bosniak" (bošnjački) rather than "Bosnian" (bosanski) (see Bosnian language#Controversy and recognition for details).

Croatian is the official language of Croatia, while Serbian is also official in municipalities with significant Serb population.

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, all three standard languages are recorded as official. Confrontations have on occasion been absurd. The academic Muhamed Filipović, in an interview to Slovenian television, told of a local court in a Croatian district requesting a paid translator to translate from Bosnian to Croatian before the trial could proceed.[citation needed]

The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia referred to the language as "Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian", usually abbreviated as BCS. Translators were employed from all regions of the former Yugoslavia and all national and regional variations were accepted, regardless of the nationality of the person on trial (sometimes against a defendant's objections), on the grounds of mutual intelligibility.[118]

ISO classification

Since the year 2000, the ISO classification only recognizes Serbo-Croatian as a 'macrolanguage', since the original codes were removed from the ISO 639-1 and ISO 639-2 standards.[149] That left the ISO 639-3 'macrolanguage' (a book-keeping device in the ISO 639-3 standard to keep track of which ISO 639-3 codes correspond with which ISO 639-2 codes)[150] stranded without a corresponding ISO 639-2 code.

Words of Serbo-Croatian origin

 
Wiktionary has a category on English terms derived from Serbo-Croatian.
  • Cravat, from French cravate "Croat", by analogy with Flemish Krawaat and German Krabate, from Serbo-Croatian Hrvat,[151] as cravats were characteristic of Croatian dress
  • Polje, from Serbo-Croatian polje "field"[152]
  • Slivovitz, from German Slibowitz, from Bulgarian slivovitza or Serbo-Croatian šljivovica "plum brandy", from Old Slavic *sliva "plum" (cognate with English sloe)[153]
  • Tamburitza, Serbo-Croatian diminutive of tambura, from Turkish, from Persian ṭambūr "tanbur"[154]
  • Uvala, from Serbo-Croatian uvala "hollow"[155]
  • Vampire, from Serbo-Croatian vampir via German Vampir or French Vampire[156]

Sample text

Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Serbo-Croatian, written in the Latin alphabet:[157][158]

Sva ljudska bića rađaju se slobodna i jednaka u dostojanstvu i pravima. Ona su obdarena razumom i sv(ij)ešću i treba jedni prema drugima da postupaju u duhu bratstva.

Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Serbo-Croatian, written in the Cyrillic script:[159]

Сва људска бића рађају се слободна и једнака у достојанству и правима. Она су обдарена разумом и св(иј)ешћу и треба једни према другима да поступају у духу братства.

Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in English:[160]

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

See also

Notes

  1. ^ a b The political status of Kosovo is disputed. Having unilaterally declared independence from Serbia in 2008, Kosovo is formally recognised as an independent state by 101 UN member states (with another 13 states recognising it at some point but then withdrawing their recognition) and 92 states not recognizing it, while Serbia continues to claim it as part of its own territory.

References

Citations

  1. ^ Serbo-Croatian at Ethnologue (25th ed., 2022)  
  2. ^ "Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo" (PDF). p. 2. Retrieved 2012-08-17.
  3. ^ http://www.brg-lienz.tsn.at/events/.../minorities/.../austrian%20minorities%20legislation.doc[permanent dead link]
  4. ^ 1993, Minorities Act No. LXXVII
  5. ^ a b c Serbian at Ethnologue (25th ed., 2022)  
  6. ^ "Legge Regionale n.15 del 14 maggio 1997 - Tutela e valorizzazione del patrimonio culturale delle minoranze linguistiche nel Molise - Bollettino Ufficiale n. 10 del 16.5.1997" (PDF). Sardegna Cultura. Retrieved 2018-07-15.
  7. ^ 2007, National Minority Status Law, Article 3(2)
  8. ^ . B92.net. Archived from the original on 2013-11-10. Retrieved 2013-09-01.
  9. ^ "Minority Rights Group International : Czech Republic : Czech Republic Overview". Minorityrights.org. Retrieved 2012-10-24.
  10. ^ "Minority Rights Group International : Macedonia : Macedonia Overview". Minorityrights.org. Retrieved 2012-10-24.
  11. ^ a b Wells, John C. (2008), Longman Pronunciation Dictionary (3rd ed.), Longman, ISBN 978-1-4058-8118-0
  12. ^ a b Jones, Daniel (2003) [1917], Peter Roach; James Hartmann; Jane Setter (eds.), English Pronouncing Dictionary, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-3-12-539683-8
  13. ^ Čamdžić, Amela; Hudson, Richard (2007). "Serbo-Croat-Bosnian clitics and Word Grammar" (PDF). Research in Language. UCL Psychology and Language Sciences. doi:10.2478/v10015-007-0001-7. hdl:11089/9540. S2CID 54645947. Retrieved 11 September 2013.
  14. ^ a b Alexander 2006, p. XVII.
  15. ^ a b Thomas, Paul-Louis; Osipov, Vladimir (2012). Grammaire du bosniaque, croate, monténégrin, serbe [Grammar of Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, and Serbian]. Collection de grammaires de l'Institut d'études slaves (in French). Vol. 8. Paris: Institut d'études slaves. p. 624. ISBN 9782720404900. OCLC 805026664.
  16. ^ Mørk, Henning (2002). Serbokroatisk grammatik: substantivets morfologi [Serbo-Croatian Grammar: Noun Morphology]. Arbejdspapirer ; vol. 1 (in Danish). Århus: Slavisk Institut, Århus Universitet. p. unpaginated (Preface). OCLC 471591123.
  17. ^ Šipka, Danko (2019). Lexical layers of identity: words, meaning, and culture in the Slavic languages. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. pp. 206, 166. doi:10.1017/9781108685795. ISBN 978-953-313-086-6. LCCN 2018048005. OCLC 1061308790. S2CID 150383965. Serbo-Croatian, which features four ethnic variants: Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, and Montenegrin
  18. ^ a b "Is Serbo-Croatian a language?". The Economist. 10 April 2017.
  19. ^ Blum 2002, pp. 130–132.
  20. ^ a b c Busch, Birgitta; Kelly-Holmes, Helen (2004). Language, Discourse and Borders in the Yugoslav Successor States. Multilingual Matters. p. 26. ISBN 978-1-85359-732-9.
  21. ^ "The same language [Croatian] is referred to by different names, Serbian (srpski), Serbo-Croat (in Croatia: hrvatsko-srpski), Bosnian (bosanski), based on political and ethnic grounds. […] the names Serbian, Croatian, and Bosnian are politically determined and refer to the same language with possible slight variations." (Brown & Anderson 2006, p. 294)
  22. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2010). "Moderne Nationalbezeichnungen und Texte aus vergangenen Jahrhunderten" [Modern nation names and texts in the past]. Zeitschrift für Balkanologie (in German). 46 (1): 40–41. ISSN 0044-2356. SSRN 3440016. CROSBI 495349. ZDB-ID 201058-6. (PDF) from the original on 1 June 2012. Retrieved 11 May 2014.
  23. ^ Despalatović, Elinor Murray (1975). Ljudevit Gaj and the Illyrian Movement. New York and London: East European Quarterly; Columbia University Press. p. 64. ISBN 978-0-914710-05-9.
  24. ^ Lencek 1976, p. 46.
  25. ^ Pohl 1996, pp. 209–210.
  26. ^ Lencek 1976, p. 49.
  27. ^ Brown & Anderson 2006, p. 259.
  28. ^ "In 1993 the authorities in Sarajevo adopted a new language law (Službeni list Republike Bosne i Hercegovine, 18/93): In the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Ijekavian standard literary language of the three constitutive nations is officially used, designated by one of the three terms: Bosnian, Serbian, Croatian." (Bugarski & Hawkesworth 2006, p. 142)
  29. ^ Brozović, Dalibor (1988). "Jezik, srpskohrvatski/hrvatskosrpski, hrvatski ili srpski" [Language, Serbo-Croatian/Croato-Serbian, Croatian or Serbian : Extract From the Second Edition of the Encyclopedia of Yugoslavia]. Jezik, srpskohrvatski/hrvatskosrpski, hrvatski ili srpski : izvadak iz II izdanja Enciklopedije Jugoslavije (in Serbo-Croatian). Zagreb: Jugoslavenski Leksikografski zavod "Miroslav Krleža". p. 4. ISBN 978-86-7053-014-0. OCLC 645757653.
  30. ^ Richter Malabotta, Melita (2004). "Semantics of War in Former Yugoslavia". In Busch, Brigitta; Kelly-Holmes, Helen (eds.). Language, Discourse and Borders in the Yugoslav Successor States. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. p. 81. OCLC 803615012.
  31. ^ Mappes-Niediek 2005, p. 30.
  32. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2010). "Ideologija nacionalnog identiteta i nacionalne kulture" [The ideology of national identity and culture] (PDF). In Ajdačić, Dejan; Lazarević Di Đakomo, Persida (eds.). U čast Pera Jakobsena: zbornik radova (PDF). Studia in honorem ; vol. 1 (in Serbo-Croatian). Beograd: SlovoSlavia. pp. 225–239. ISBN 978-86-87807-02-0. OCLC 723062357. S2CID 132883650. SSRN 3439190. CROSBI 522531. (PDF) from the original on 1 June 2012.
  33. ^ Obst, Ulrich (2004). "Zum genitivus qualitatis und zu alternativen Möglichkeiten in den drei 'Buddenbrooks'-Übersetzungen aus dem kroatischen und serbischen Sprachgebiet". In Okuka, Miloš; Schweier, Ulrich (eds.). Festschrift für Peter Rehder zum 65. Geburtstag. Welt der Slaven ; vol. 21 (in German). Munich: Otto Sagner. p. 212. OCLC 55018584.
  34. ^ Tomasz Kamusella. The Politics of Language and Nationalism in Modern Central Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. pp. 228, 297.
  35. ^ a b c Price, Glanville (1998). Encyclopedia of the languages of Europe. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. p. 425. ISBN 978-0-631-19286-2.
  36. ^ Kapetanovic, Amir (2005). "HRVATSKA SREDNJOVJEKOVNA LATINICA". Hrvatska Srednjovjekovna Latinica.
  37. ^ Fučić, Branko (September 1971). "Najstariji hrvatski glagoljski natpisi". Slovo (in Serbo-Croatian). 21.
  38. ^ "Hrvoje's Missal ~ 1403–1404". Retrieved 9 March 2012.
  39. ^ "VINODOLSKI ZAKON (1288)". Archived from the original on 14 March 2012. Retrieved 9 March 2012.
  40. ^ "Istarski Razvod". Archived from the original on 7 July 2012. Retrieved 9 March 2012.
  41. ^ "Vatikanski hrvatski molitvenik". Archived from the original on 11 October 2017. Retrieved 9 March 2012.
  42. ^ (in Norwegian). University of Oslo. 2012-04-10. Archived from the original on 2015-09-24. Retrieved 2013-12-09.
  43. ^ Tanović-Miller, Naza (2001). Testimony of a Bosnian. Texas A&M University Press. p. 209; "Turkish–Bosnian" dictionary, one of the first Slavic dictionaries in Europe, was written by a Bosnian ethnographer and poet, Muhamed Hevai Uskufi, from Tuzla in 1631.
  44. ^ Greenberg 2004, p. 24.
  45. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2007). Visković, Velimir (ed.). [Pseudoscience at work]. Književna republika. No. 7–9. Zagreb. pp. 243–250. ISSN 1334-1057. OCLC 190812698. Archived from the original on 23 October 2016.
  46. ^ Sugar, Peter F. (1963). Industrialization of Bosnia-Hercegovina: 1878–1918. University of Washington Press. p. 201.
  47. ^ Ramet, Sabrina P. (2008). "Nationalism and the 'Idiocy' of the Countryside: The Case of Serbia". Serbia, Croatia and Slovenia at Peace and at War: Selected Writings, 1983–2007. LIT Verlag Münster. pp. 74–76. ISBN 978-3-03735-912-9.
  48. ^ Velikonja, Mitja (1992). Religious Separation and Political Intolerance in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Texas A&M University Press. ISBN 978-1-58544-226-3.
  49. ^ Tomasevich, Jozo (1969). Contemporary Yugoslavia. University of California Press. pp. 8–9.
  50. ^ David M. Crowe (13 September 2013). Crimes of State Past and Present: Government-Sponsored Atrocities and International Legal Responses. Routledge. pp. 61–. ISBN 978-1-317-98682-9.
  51. ^ Busch, Brigitta (2004). Sprachen im Disput (PDF) (in German). Klagenfurt: Drava. p. 205. ISBN 3-85435-428-2. Retrieved 16 May 2022.
  52. ^ a b Greenberg 2004, p. 115.
  53. ^ a b Jonke, Ljudevit (1968). "Razvoj hrvatskoga književnog jezika u 20. stoljeću" [The Development of the Croatian language in the 20th century]. Jezik (in Serbo-Croatian). 16 (1): 18. ISSN 0021-6925.
  54. ^ Kordić 2010, pp. 303–304.
  55. ^ a b Babić, Stjepan (2004). Hrvanja hrvatskoga [Croatian Language Quarrels] (in Serbo-Croatian). Zagreb: Školska knjiga. p. 36. ISBN 978-953-0-61428-4.
  56. ^ Milutinović, Zoran (2011). (PDF). The Slavonic and East European Review. 89 (3): 522–523. ISSN 0037-6795. OCLC 744233642. ZDB-ID 209925-1. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-10-04. Retrieved 25 May 2014.
  57. ^ Jonke, Ljudevit (1955). "Drugi i treći sastanak Pravopisne komisije" [The second and third meeting of The Orthographic Commission]. Jezik (in Serbo-Croatian). 4 (2): 59. ISSN 0021-6925.
  58. ^ Jonke, Ljudevit (1961). "Pravopis hrvatskosrpskoga književnog jezika" [Serbo-Croatian Spelling-Book]. Jezik (in Serbo-Croatian). 9 (2): 57–59. ISSN 0021-6925.
  59. ^ Kordić, Snježana (16 March 2012). "SOS ili tek alibi za nasilje nad jezikom" [SOS, or nothing but an alibi for violence against language] (in Serbo-Croatian). Zagreb: Forum. pp. 38–39. ISSN 1848-204X. CROSBI 578565. from the original on 21 December 2012. Retrieved 9 April 2013.
  60. ^ Gröschel 2009, p. 72.
  61. ^ Mappes-Niediek 2005, pp. 18, 64.
  62. ^ Blum 2002, pp. 41–42.
  63. ^ a b c d Gak, Vladimir G. (1989). "K tipologii form jazykovoj politiki" [Towards a typology of language policy]. Voprosy Jazykoznanija (in Russian). 5: 122–123.
  64. ^ Blum 2002, pp. 47–48.
  65. ^ Gröschel 2003, pp. 160–161.
  66. ^ Blum 2002, p. 65.
  67. ^ Blum 2002, p. 81.
  68. ^ Blum 2002, pp. 73–79.
  69. ^ Blum 2002, pp. 69–80.
  70. ^ Kordić 2010, pp. 291–292.
  71. ^ Busch, Brigitta; Kelly-Holmes, Helen, eds. (2004). "Semantics of War in Former Yugoslavia". Language, Discourse and Borders in the Yugoslav Successor States. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. pp. 51, 54. OCLC 803615012.
  72. ^ Kordić 2010, pp. 294–295.
  73. ^ Gröschel 2009, p. 38.
  74. ^ Kordić 2010, p. 299.
  75. ^ Ammon 1995, pp. 484, 494–497.
  76. ^ "die Tatsache, dass Sprachen (in ihrem Prestige, ihrer Erlernbarkeit etc.) nicht gleich sind und auch per Gesetz nicht gleich gemacht werden können" (Blum 2002, p. 170)
  77. ^ "Post-Yugoslav 'Common Language' Declaration Challenges Nationalism". Balkan Insight. 2017-03-30.
  78. ^ "Is Serbo-Croatian a language?". The Economist. 2017-04-10.
  79. ^ Ramet, Sabrina P.; Valenta, Marko (2016-09-22). Ethnic Minorities and Politics in Post-Socialist Southeastern Europe. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-316-98277-8.
  80. ^ "Kosovo's Demographic Destiny Looks Eerily Familiar". Balkan Insight. 2019-11-07. Retrieved 2021-06-29.
  81. ^ Croatian at Ethnologue (25th ed., 2022)  
  82. ^ Bosnian at Ethnologue (25th ed., 2022)  
  83. ^ Montenegrin at Ethnologue (25th ed., 2022)  
  84. ^ "Raziskava Položaj in status pripadnikov narodov nekdanje Jugoslavije vRS.pdf" (PDF) (in Slovenian).
  85. ^ Kordić 2006, p. 5.
  86. ^ Crosby, Alan; Martinović, Iva (August 28, 2018). "In The Age Of The Internet, Serbia Aims To Keep Its Cyrillic Alive". Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Retrieved 5 September 2018.
  87. ^ (in Serbo-Croatian) Gramatika hrvatskosrpskoga jezika, Group of Authors (Ivan Brabec, Mate Hraste and Sreten Živković), Zagreb, 1968.
  88. ^ Šćepanović, Lela (2 February 2017). "Crnogorski se govori i bez ś" [Montenegrin is also spoken without ś] (in Serbo-Croatian). Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Retrieved 29 October 2022. Slova ś i ź odnedavno ne koristi ni Skupština Crne Gore, prva i jedina državna institucija koja ih je nakon reforme crnogorskog jezika koristila u zvaničnoj komunikaciji. [The letters ś and ź have recently not been used even by the Parliament of Montenegro, the first and only state institution that used them in official communication after the reform of the Montenegrin language.]
  89. ^ E.g., big coastal Croatian cities Rijeka and Split together with their hinterland become basically completely Štokavianised during the 20th century, which had been Čakavian-speaking urban centres.
  90. ^ Ćalić, Jelena (2021). "Pluricentricity in the classroom: the Serbo-Croatian language issue for foreign language teaching at higher education institutions worldwide". Sociolinguistica: European Journal of Sociolinguistics. De Gruyter. 35 (1): 113–140. doi:10.1515/soci-2021-0007. ISSN 0933-1883. S2CID 244134335. Retrieved 9 June 2022. The debate about the status of the Serbo-Croatian language and its varieties has recently shifted (again) towards a position which looks at the internal variation within Serbo-Croatian through the prism of linguistic pluricentricity
  91. ^ Greenberg 2004, p. 13.
  92. ^ a b Alexander 2013, p. 341.
  93. ^ a b "Serbo-Croatian language". Encyclopedia Britannica.
  94. ^ Kafadar, Enisa (2009). "Bosnisch, Kroatisch, Serbisch – Wie spricht man eigentlich in Bosnien-Herzegowina?" [Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian – How do people really speak in Bosnia-Herzegovina?]. In Henn-Memmesheimer, Beate; Franz, Joachim (eds.). Die Ordnung des Standard und die Differenzierung der Diskurse; Teil 1 (in German). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. p. 103. ISBN 9783631599174. OCLC 699514676.
  95. ^ Ronelle Alexander, Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian: A Grammar with Sociolinguistic Commentary (2006, The University of Wisconsin Press)
  96. ^ Bunčić, Daniel (2008). "Die (Re-)Nationalisierung der serbokroatischen Standards" [The (Re-)Nationalisation of Serbo-Croatian Standards]. In Kempgen, Sebastian (ed.). Deutsche Beiträge zum 14. Internationalen Slavistenkongress, Ohrid, 2008. Welt der Slaven (in German). Munich: Otto Sagner. p. 93. OCLC 238795822.
  97. ^ Thomas 2003, p. 325.
  98. ^ a b Bailyn, John Frederick (2010). (PDF). Journal of Slavic Linguistics. 18 (2): 181–219. ISSN 1068-2090. Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 October 2019. Retrieved 9 October 2019.
  99. ^ McLennan, Sean (1996). "Sociolinguistic Analysis of "Serbo-Croatian"" [Sociolinguistic Analysis of 'Serbo-Croatian'] (PDF). Calgary Working Papers in Linguistics. 18: 107. ISSN 0823-0579. Retrieved 10 August 2014.
  100. ^ Pohl 1996, p. 219.
  101. ^ Gröschel 2003, pp. 180–181.
  102. ^ Blum 2002, pp. 125–126.
  103. ^ Brozović, Dalibor (1992). "Serbo-Croatian as a pluricentric language". In Clyne, Michael G. (ed.). Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations. Contributions to the sociology of language. Vol. 62. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 347–380. ISBN 9783110128550. OCLC 24668375.
  104. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2009). "Policentrični standardni jezik" [Polycentric Standard Language] (PDF). In Badurina, Lada; Pranjković, Ivo; Silić, Josip (eds.). Jezični varijeteti i nacionalni identiteti (PDF) (in Serbo-Croatian). Zagreb: Disput. pp. 85–89. ISBN 978-953-260-054-4. OCLC 437306433. SSRN 3438216. CROSBI 426269. (PDF) from the original on 29 May 2012. (ÖNB).
  105. ^ Ammon 1995, p. 46.
  106. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2004). "Pro und kontra: "Serbokroatisch" heute" [Pro and con: "Serbo-Croatian" nowadays] (PDF). In Krause, Marion; Sappok, Christian (eds.). Slavistische Linguistik 2002: Referate des XXVIII. Konstanzer Slavistischen Arbeitstreffens, Bochum 10.-12. September 2002 (PDF). Slavistishe Beiträge (in German). Vol. 434. Munich: Otto Sagner. p. 141. ISBN 978-3-87690-885-4. OCLC 56198470. SSRN 3434516. CROSBI 430499. (PDF) from the original on 1 June 2012. (ÖNB).
  107. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2008). "Nationale Varietäten der serbokroatischen Sprache" [National Varieties of Serbo-Croatian] (PDF). In Golubović, Biljana; Raecke, Jochen (eds.). Bosnisch – Kroatisch – Serbisch als Fremdsprachen an den Universitäten der Welt (PDF). Die Welt der Slaven, Sammelbände – Sborniki ; vol. 31 (in German). Munich: Otto Sagner. p. 95. ISBN 978-3-86688-032-0. OCLC 244788988. SSRN 3434432. CROSBI 426566. (PDF) from the original on 19 September 2011. (ÖNB).
  108. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2009). "Plurizentrische Sprachen, Ausbausprachen, Abstandsprachen und die Serbokroatistik" [Pluricentric languages, Ausbau languages, Abstand languages and Serbo-Croatian studies]. Zeitschrift für Balkanologie (in German). 45 (2): 213–214. ISSN 0044-2356. OCLC 680567046. SSRN 3439240. CROSBI 436361. ZDB-ID 201058-6. (PDF) from the original on 29 May 2012. Retrieved 21 January 2019.
  109. ^ Mader Skender, Mia (2022). "Schlussbemerkung" [Summary]. Die kroatische Standardsprache auf dem Weg zur Ausbausprache [The Croatian standard language on the way to ausbau language] (PDF) (Dissertation). UZH Dissertations (in German). Zurich: University of Zurich, Faculty of Arts, Institute of Slavonic Studies. pp. 196–197. doi:10.5167/uzh-215815. Retrieved 8 June 2022. Obwohl das Kroatische sich in den letzten Jahren in einigen Gebieten, vor allem jedoch auf lexikalischer Ebene, verändert hat, sind diese Änderungen noch nicht bedeutend genug, dass der Terminus Ausbausprache gerechtfertigt wäre. Ausserdem können sich Serben, Kroaten, Bosnier und Montenegriner immer noch auf ihren jeweiligen Nationalsprachen unterhalten und problemlos verständigen. Nur schon diese Tatsache zeigt, dass es sich immer noch um eine polyzentrische Sprache mit verschiedenen Varietäten handelt.
  110. ^ Zanelli, Aldo (2018). Eine Analyse der Metaphern in der kroatischen Linguistikfachzeitschrift Jezik von 1991 bis 1997 [Analysis of Metaphors in Croatian Linguistic Journal Language from 1991 to 1997]. Studien zur Slavistik ; 41 (in German). Hamburg: Kovač. p. 21. ISBN 978-3-8300-9773-0. OCLC 1023608613. (NSK). (FFZG)
  111. ^ Trudgill, Peter (30 November 2017). "Time to Make Four Into One". The New European. p. 46. Retrieved 7 April 2018.
  112. ^ Nosovitz, Dan (11 February 2019). "What Language Do People Speak in the Balkans, Anyway?". Atlas Obscura. from the original on 11 February 2019. Retrieved 3 March 2019.
  113. ^ Milekić, Sven (30 March 2017). "Post-Yugoslav 'Common Language' Declaration Challenges Nationalism". London: Balkan Insight. from the original on 30 March 2017. Retrieved 1 July 2017.
  114. ^ J., T. (10 April 2017). "Is Serbo-Croatian a Language?". The Economist. London. ISSN 0013-0613. from the original on 10 April 2017. Retrieved 9 October 2018. Alt URL
  115. ^ Alexander 2006, p. 424-426.
  116. ^ "10", 2006 Constitution of Serbia
  117. ^ Constitution of Montenegro, 2007, The official language in Montenegro shall be Montenegrin.[…]Serbian, Bosniac, Albanian and Croatian shall also be in the official use.
  118. ^ a b Decision of 23 June 1997, Prosecutor v. Delalic and Delic
  119. ^ Štiks, Igor (2015). Brothers United: The Making of Yugoslavs. Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 27. ISBN 9781474221542. Retrieved 1 May 2018.
  120. ^ Đorđe, Tomić (2017). "From "Yugoslavism" to (Post-)Yugoslav Nationalisms: Understanding Yugoslav Identities". In Roland, Vogt (ed.). European National Identities: Elements, Transitions, Conflicts. Routledge. p. 287. ISBN 9781351296465.
  121. ^ Alexander 2006, p. 425.
  122. ^ "Bura u javnosti zbog sadržaja u udžbenicima za srpski: Hrvatski (ni)je južnoslovenski jezik". Danas. 7 October 2021. Retrieved 30 October 2021.
  123. ^ a b Bugarski, Ranko (17 October 2021). "O južnoslovenskim jezicima". Danas. Retrieved 30 October 2021.
  124. ^ "Odluka o utvrđivanju standarda bunjevačkog jezika: 18/2018-192" Одлука о утврђивању стандарда буњевачког језика: 18/2018-192 [Decision of the National Council of Bunjevci no. 18/2018-192] (in Serbian). from the original on 2021-09-02. Retrieved 2020-07-30 – via Pravno-informacioni sistem RS.
  125. ^ Šolaja, Dragan (2007-10-25). "Bunjevački jezik u školskom programu". Blic (in Serbian). from the original on 2012-10-08. Retrieved 2011-05-25.
  126. ^ "Kordić's publications in Književna republika". Bib.irb.hr. Retrieved 2013-09-01. ZDB-ID 2122129-7.
  127. ^ Petković, Nikola (5 September 2010). [A nasty mirror reflects back at linguists] (in Serbo-Croatian). Rijeka: Novi list. p. 7 in the arts section Mediteran. ISSN 1334-1545. Archived from the original on 15 March 2012. Retrieved 18 July 2012.
  128. ^ Šnajder, Slobodan (10 October 2010). [Linguistic battle] (in Serbo-Croatian). Rijeka: Novi list. p. 6 in the arts section Mediteran. ISSN 1334-1545. Archived from the original on 13 March 2012. Retrieved 6 July 2012.
  129. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2003). "Demagogija umjesto znanosti (odgovor Daliboru Brozoviću)" [Demagogy instead of science (response to Dalibor Brozović)] (PDF). Književna Republika (in Serbo-Croatian). 1 (7–8): 176–202. ISSN 1334-1057. S2CID 171739712. SSRN 3433060. CROSBI 430252. ZDB-ID 2122129-7. (PDF) from the original on 1 June 2012. Retrieved 8 April 2022. (CROLIB).
  130. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2004). "Autizam hrvatske filologije (odgovor Ivi Pranjkoviću)" [The autism of Croatian philology (response to Ivo Pranjković)] (PDF). Književna Republika (in Serbo-Croatian). 2 (7–8): 254–280. ISSN 1334-1057. SSRN 3433015. CROSBI 430121. ZDB-ID 2122129-7. (PDF) from the original on 29 May 2012. Retrieved 1 March 2015. (NSK).
  131. ^ Mandić, Igor (21 November 2010). "Svojom polemikom možda pokušava izbrisati naš identitet... Što, zapravo, hoće ta žena?" [She is perhaps trying to destroy our identity by polemicising... What does that woman really want?]. Jutarnji list (in Serbo-Croatian). Zagreb. p. 19. ISSN 1331-5692. from the original on 29 September 2012. Retrieved 12 August 2013.
  132. ^ Kordić 2010.
  133. ^ Gröschel 2009.
  134. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2009). "Svijet o nama: Bernhard Gröschel, Das Serbokroatische zwischen Linguistik und Politik" [About us – World point of view: Bernhard Gröschel, Serbo-Croatian Between Linguistics and Politics] (PDF). Književna Republika (in Serbo-Croatian). 7 (10–12): 316–330. ISSN 1334-1057. SSRN 3441854. CROSBI 445818. CEEOL 29944. ZDB-ID 2122129-7. (PDF) from the original on 1 June 2012. Retrieved 6 October 2013. (NSK).
  135. ^ Trudgill, Peter (2003). A glossary of sociolinguistics. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. p. 119. ISBN 9780748616237. OCLC 50768041.
  136. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2007). "La langue croate, serbe, bosniaque et monténégrine" [The Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian, and Montenegrin Language] (PDF). In Madelain, Anne (ed.). Les langues des Balkans. Au sud de l'Est (in French). Vol. 3. Paris: Non Lieu. p. 74. ISBN 978-2-35270-036-4. OCLC 182916790. SSRN 3439662. CROSBI 429734. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 August 2012.
  137. ^ Brozović, Dalibor (2002). "Europske integracije i hrvatski jezik" [European integration and the Croatian language]. Jezik (in Serbo-Croatian). 49 (4): 124. ISSN 0021-6925.
  138. ^ Kloss, Heinz (1976). "Abstandsprachen und Ausbausprachen" [Abstand-languages and Ausbau-languages]. In Göschel, Joachim; Nail, Norbert; van der Els, Gaston (eds.). Zur Theorie des Dialekts: Aufsätze aus 100 Jahren Forschung. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie and Linguistik, Beihefte, n.F., Heft 16. Wiesbaden: F. Steiner. p. 303. OCLC 2598722.
  139. ^ Pohl 1996, p. 214.
  140. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2004). "Le serbo-croate aujourd'hui: entre aspirations politiques et faits linguistiques" [Serbo-Croatian today: Between political aspirations and linguistic facts]. Revue des études slaves (in French). 75 (1): 34–36. doi:10.3406/slave.2004.6860. ISSN 0080-2557. OCLC 754207802. S2CID 228222009. SSRN 3433041. CROSBI 430127. ZDB-ID 208723-6. (ÖNB).
  141. ^ Blum 2002, p. 134.
  142. ^ Haji Omar, Asmah (1992). "Malay as a pluricentric language". In Clyne, Michael G. (ed.). Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations. Contributions to the sociology of language 62. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 401–419. ISBN 978-3-11-012855-0. OCLC 24668375.
  143. ^ Dua, Hans Raj (1992). "Hindi-Urdu as a pluricentric language". In Clyne, Michael G. (ed.). Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations. Contributions to the sociology of language 62. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 381–400. ISBN 978-3-11-012855-0. OCLC 24668375.
  144. ^ Ammon 1995, pp. 154–174.
  145. ^ a b Mladenovic. Kratka istorija srpskog književnog jezika. Beograd 2004, 67
  146. ^ S. Zekovic & B. Cimeša: Elementa montenegrina, Chrestomatia 1/90. CIP, Zagreb 1991
  147. ^ Official communique, 27 December 2004, Serbian Ministry of Education (in Serbian)
  148. ^ "Opštinski službeni glasnik opštine Novi Pazar" (PDF).[permanent dead link] (65.8 KB), 30 April 2002, page 1
  149. ^ "Codes for the representation of names of languages (Library of Congress)". www.loc.gov.
  150. ^ "hbs - ISO 639-3". iso639-3.sil.org.
  151. ^ "cravat". Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.)
  152. ^ "polje". Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.)
  153. ^ "slovovitz". Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.)
  154. ^ "tamburitza". Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.)
  155. ^ "uvala". Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.)
  156. ^ "vampire". Dictionary.com Unabridged (Online). n.d. Retrieved 2022-11-01.
  157. ^ "Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Serbian (Latin)". unicode.org.
  158. ^ "Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Croatian". unicode.org.
  159. ^ "Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Serbian (Cyrillic)". unicode.org.
  160. ^ "Universal Declaration of Human Rights". un.org.

Sources

  • Alexander, Ronelle (2006). Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian, a Grammar: With Sociolinguistic Commentary. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. ISBN 9780299211936.
  • Alexander, Ronelle (2013). "Language and Identity: The Fate of Serbo-Croatian". Entangled Histories of the Balkans. Vol. 1. Leiden, South Holland; Boston, MA: Brill. pp. 341–417. ISBN 9789004250765.
  • Ammon, Ulrich (1995). Die deutsche Sprache in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz: das Problem der nationalen Varietäten [German Language in Germany, Austria and Switzerland: The Problem of National Varieties] (in German). Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter. p. 575. OCLC 33981055.
  • Blum, Daniel (2002). Sprache und Politik : Sprachpolitik und Sprachnationalismus in der Republik Indien und dem sozialistischen Jugoslawien (1945–1991) [Language and Policy: Language Policy and Linguistic Nationalism in the Republic of India and the Socialist Yugoslavia (1945–1991)]. Beiträge zur Südasienforschung (in German). Vol. 192. Würzburg: Ergon. p. 200. ISBN 978-3-89913-253-3. OCLC 51961066.
  • Brown, Edward Keith; Anderson, Anne, eds. (2006). Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Amsterdam: Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-08-044299-0. OCLC 3945869.
  • Bugarski, Ranko; Hawkesworth, Celia, eds. (2006). Language in the Former Yugoslav Lands. Bloomington: Slavica Publishers. p. 325. ISBN 978-0-89357-298-3. OCLC 52858529.
  • Greenberg, Robert D. (2004). Language and Identity in the Balkans: Serbo-Croatian and its Disintegration (1st ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780191514555.
  • Greenberg, Robert D. (2008). Language and Identity in the Balkans: Serbo-Croatian and its Disintegration (2nd updated ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199208753.
  • Gröschel, Bernhard (2003). "Postjugoslavische Amtssprachenregelungen – Soziolinguistische Argumente gegen die Einheitlichkeit des Serbokroatischen?" [Post-Yugoslav Official Languages Regulations – Sociolinguistic Arguments Against Consistency of Serbo-Croatian?]. Srpski Jezik (in German). 8 (1–2): 135–196. ISSN 0354-9259. Retrieved 18 May 2015. (COBISS-Sr).
  • Gröschel, Bernhard (2009). Das Serbokroatische zwischen Linguistik und Politik: mit einer Bibliographie zum postjugoslavischen Sprachenstreit [Serbo-Croatian Between Linguistics and Politics: With a Bibliography of the Post-Yugoslav Language Dispute]. Lincom Studies in Slavic Linguistics (in German). Vol. 34. Munich: Lincom Europa. p. 451. ISBN 978-3-929075-79-3. LCCN 2009473660. OCLC 428012015. OL 15295665W. COBISS 43144034. Contents.
  • Kordić, Snježana (2006), Serbo-Croatian, Languages of the World/Materials, vol. 148, Munich & Newcastle: Lincom Europa, ISBN 978-3-89586-161-1, OCLC 37959860, OL 2863538W, CROSBI 426503
  • Kordić, Snježana (2010). Jezik i nacionalizam [Language and Nationalism] (PDF). Rotulus Universitas (in Serbo-Croatian). Zagreb: Durieux. p. 430. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3467646. ISBN 978-953-188-311-5. LCCN 2011520778. OCLC 729837512. OL 15270636W. S2CID 220918333. CROSBI 475567. (PDF) from the original on 1 June 2012. Retrieved 21 April 2022.
  • Lencek, Rado (1976). "A few remarks for the history of the term 'Serbocroatian' language". Zbornik Za Filologiju I Lingvistiku. 19 (1): 45–53. ISSN 0514-6143.
  • Mappes-Niediek, Norbert (2005). Die Ethno-Falle: der Balkan-Konflikt und was Europa daraus lernen kann [The Ethnic Trap: the Balkan conflict and what Europe can learn from it] (in German). Berlin: Christoph Links Verlag. p. 224. ISBN 978-3-86153-367-2. OCLC 61665869.
  • Pohl, Hans-Dieter (1996). "Serbokroatisch – Rückblick und Ausblick" [Serbo-Croatian – Looking backward and forward]. In Ohnheiser, Ingeborg (ed.). Wechselbeziehungen zwischen slawischen Sprachen, Literaturen und Kulturen in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart : Akten der Tagung aus Anlaß des 25jährigen Bestehens des Instituts für Slawistik an der Universität Innsbruck, Innsbruck, 25. – 27. Mai 1995. Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Kulturwissenschaft, Slavica aenipontan (in German). Vol. 4. Innsbruck: Non Lieu. pp. 205–219. OCLC 243829127.
  • Thomas, Paul-Louis (2003). "Le serbo-croate (bosniaque, croate, monténégrin, serbe): de l'étude d'une langue à l'identité des langues" [Serbo-Croatian (Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, Serbian): from the study of a language to the identity of languages]. Revue des études slaves (in French). 74 (2–3): 311–325. doi:10.3406/slave.2002.6801. ISSN 0080-2557. OCLC 754204160. ZDB-ID 208723-6.

Further reading

  • Banac, Ivo: Main Trends in the Croatian Language Question. Yale University Press, 1984.
  • Bunčić, D., 2016. Serbo-Croatian/Serbian: Cyrillic and Latin. Biscriptality: A Sociolinguistic Typology, pp. 231–246.
  • Franolić, Branko: A Historical Survey of Literary Croatian. Nouvelles éditions Latines, Paris, 1984.
  • Franolić, B., 1983. The development of literary Croatian and Serbian. Buske Verlag.
  • Franolić, Branko (1988). Language Policy in Yugoslavia with special reference to Croatian. Paris: Nouvelles Editions Latines.
  • Franolić, Branko; Žagar, Mateo (2008). A Historical Outline of Literary Croatian & The Glagolitic Heritage of Croatian Culture. London & Zagreb: Erasmus & CSYPN. ISBN 978-953-6132-80-5.
  • Greenberg, Robert D. (1999). "In the Aftermath of Yugoslavia's Collapse: The Politics of Language Death and Language Birth". International Politics. 36 (2): 141–158.
  • Greenberg, Robert D. (2013). "Language, Religion, and Nationalism: The Case of the Former Serbo-Croatian". Typen slavischer Standardsprachen: Theoretische, methodische und empirische Zugaenge. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. pp. 217–231. ISBN 9783447100281.
  • Ivić, Pavle: Die serbokroatischen Dialekte. the Hague, 1958.
  • Jakobsen, Per (2008). "O strukturalno-lingvističkim konstantama srpskohrvatskog jezika (inventar fonema i fonotaktička struktura)" [Serbocroatian structural-linguistic constants (inventory of phonemes and phonotactic structure)]. In Ostojić, Branislav (ed.). Jezička situacija u Crnoj Gori – norma i standardizacija (in Serbo-Croatian). Podgorica: Crnogorska akademija nauka i umjetnosti. pp. 25–34. ISBN 978-86-7215-207-4. (COBISS-CG) 2018-10-05 at the Wayback Machine.
  • Kristophson, Jürgen (2000). "Vom Widersinn der Dialektologie: Gedanken zum Štokavischen" [Dialectological Nonsense: Thoughts on Shtokavian]. Zeitschrift für Balkanologie (in German). 36 (2): 178–186. ISSN 0044-2356. ZDB-ID 201058-6.
  • Magner, Thomas F.: Zagreb Kajkavian dialect. Pennsylvania State University, 1966.
  • Magner, Thomas F. (1991). Introduction to the Croatian and Serbian Language (Revised ed.). Pennsylvania State University.
  • Merk, Hening (2008). "Neka pragmatična zapažanja o postojanju srpskohrvatskog jezika". In Ostojić, Branislav (ed.). Jezička situacija u Crnoj Gori – norma i standardizacija (in Serbo-Croatian). Podgorica: Crnogorska akademija nauka i umjetnosti. pp. 295–299. ISBN 978-86-7215-207-4. (COBISS-CG) 2018-10-05 at the Wayback Machine.
  • Murray Despalatović, Elinor: Ljudevit Gaj and the Illyrian Movement. Columbia University Press, 1975.
  • Spalatin, C., 1966. Serbo-Croatian or Serbian and Croatian?: Considerations on the Croatian Declaration and Serbian Proposal of March 1967. Journal of Croatian Studies, 7, pp. 3–13.
  • Zekovic, Sreten & Cimeša, Boro: Elementa montenegrina, Chrestomatia 1/90. CIP, Zagreb 1991.

External links

 
Serbo-Croatian edition of Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Wikiquote has quotations related to Serbo-Croatian.
 
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Serbo-Croatian language.
  • Ethnologue – the 15th edition of Ethnologue (released 2005) shows changes in this area:
  • Serbian and Croatian alphabets at Omniglot.
  • "Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, Or Montenegrin? Or Just 'Our Language'?", Radio Free Europe, February 21, 2009
  • Browne, Wayles; Alt, Theresa (2004), A Handbook of Bosnian, Serbian, and Croatian (PDF), SEELRC

January 12, 2023
serbo, croatian, this, article, about, language, other, uses, disambiguation, ɜːr, listen, also, called, serbo, croat, ɜːr, serbo, croat, bosnian, bosnian, croatian, serbian, bosnian, croatian, montenegrin, serbian, bcms, south, slavic, language, primary, lang. This article is about the language For other uses see Serbo Croatian disambiguation Serbo Croatian ˌ s ɜːr b oʊ k r oʊ ˈ eɪ ʃ en listen 11 12 also called Serbo Croat ˌ s ɜːr b oʊ ˈ k r oʊ ae t 11 12 Serbo Croat Bosnian SCB 13 Bosnian Croatian Serbian BCS 14 and Bosnian Croatian Montenegrin Serbian BCMS 15 is a South Slavic language and the primary language of Serbia Croatia Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro It is a pluricentric language with four 16 mutually intelligible standard varieties namely Serbian Croatian Bosnian and Montenegrin 17 18 Serbo CroatianSerbian Croatian Bosnian Montenegrinsrpskohrvatski hrvatskosrpski srpskohrvatski hrvatskosrpskiNative toSerbia Croatia Bosnia and Herzegovina Montenegro and Kosovo a EthnicityBosniaksCroatsMontenegrinsSerbsNative speakers19 million 2022 1 Language familyIndo European Balto SlavicSlavicSouth SlavicWestern South SlavicSerbo CroatianStandard formsSerbian Croatian Bosnian MontenegrinDialectsDialects of Serbo Croatian Shtokavian standard Bunjevac Slavomolisano Torlakian Chakavian KajkavianWriting systemLatin Gaj Cyrillic Serbian and Montenegrin Yugoslav BrailleOfficial statusOfficial language in Serbia as Serbian Croatia as Croatian Bosnia and Herzegovina as Bosnian Croatian Serbian Montenegro as Montenegrin Kosovo a as Serbian 2 European Union as Croatian Recognised minoritylanguage in Austria Burgenland 3 Hungary 4 5 Italy Molise 6 Romania 7 5 in Carașova Lupac citation needed Slovakia 8 Czech Republic 9 North Macedonia 10 Regulated byInstitute of Croatian Language and Linguistics Croatian Board for Standardization of the Serbian Language Serbian Language Institute at University of Sarajevo Bosnian Faculty for Montenegrin language and literature formerly Institute for Montenegrin language and literature Montenegrin Language codesISO 639 1 span class plainlinks sh span deprecated ISO 639 3 a href https iso639 3 sil org code hbs class extiw title iso639 3 hbs hbs a inclusive codeIndividual codes a href https iso639 3 sil org code bos class extiw title iso639 3 bos bos a Bosnian a href https iso639 3 sil org code cnr class extiw title iso639 3 cnr cnr a Montenegrin a href https iso639 3 sil org code hrv class extiw title iso639 3 hrv hrv a Croatian a href https iso639 3 sil org code srp class extiw title iso639 3 srp srp a Serbian a href https iso639 3 sil org code svm class extiw title iso639 3 svm svm a SlavomolisanoGlottologsout1528Linguasphere53 AAA g Areas where Serbo Croatian is spoken by a plurality of inhabitants as of 2005 needs update Note a Kosovo independence disputed see 2008 Kosovo declaration of independenceSouth Slavic languages historically formed a continuum The turbulent history of the area particularly due to expansion of the Ottoman Empire resulted in a patchwork of dialectal and religious differences Due to population migrations Shtokavian became the most widespread dialect in the western Balkans intruding westwards into the area previously occupied by Chakavian and Kajkavian which further blend into Slovenian in the northwest Bosniaks Croats and Serbs differ in religion and were historically often part of different cultural circles although a large part of the nations have lived side by side under foreign overlords During that period the language was referred to under a variety of names such as Slavic in general or Serbian Croatian or Bosnian in particular In a classicizing manner it was also referred to as Illyrian The process of linguistic standardization of Serbo Croatian was originally initiated in the mid 19th century Vienna Literary Agreement by Croatian and Serbian writers and philologists decades before a Yugoslav state was established 19 From the very beginning there were slightly different literary Serbian and Croatian standards although both were based on the same dialect of Shtokavian Eastern Herzegovinian In the 20th century Serbo Croatian served as the official language of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia when it was called Serbo Croato Slovenian 20 and later as one of the official languages of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia The breakup of Yugoslavia affected language attitudes so that social conceptions of the language separated along ethnic and political lines Since the breakup of Yugoslavia Bosnian has likewise been established as an official standard in Bosnia and Herzegovina and there is an ongoing movement to codify a separate Montenegrin standard Like other South Slavic languages Serbo Croatian has a simple phonology with the common five vowel system and twenty five consonants Its grammar evolved from Common Slavic with complex inflection preserving seven grammatical cases in nouns pronouns and adjectives Verbs exhibit imperfective or perfective aspect with a moderately complex tense system Serbo Croatian is a pro drop language with flexible word order subject verb object being the default It can be written in either localized variants of Latin Gaj s Latin alphabet Montenegrin Latin or Cyrillic Serbian Cyrillic Montenegrin Cyrillic whose thirty letters mutually map one to one and the orthography is highly phonemic in all standards Contents 1 Name 2 History 2 1 Early development 2 2 Standardization 2 3 Modern developments 3 Demographics 4 Grammar 5 Phonology 5 1 Vowels 5 2 Consonants 5 3 Pitch accent 6 Orthography 6 1 Writing systems 7 Dialects 7 1 Division by jat reflex 8 Present sociolinguistic situation 8 1 Comparison with other pluricentric languages 8 2 Contemporary names 8 3 Views of linguists in the former Yugoslavia 8 3 1 Serbian linguists 8 3 2 Croatian linguists 8 4 Political connotations 8 5 ISO classification 9 Words of Serbo Croatian origin 10 Sample text 11 See also 12 Notes 13 References 13 1 Citations 13 2 Sources 14 Further reading 15 External linksNameSerbo Croatian generally goes by the individual names Serbian Croatian Bosnian and sometimes Montenegrin and Bunjevac 21 In the language itself it is typically known as srpskohrvatski srpskohrvatski Serbo Croatian hrvatskosrpski hrvatskosrpski Croato Serbian or informally naski nashki ours 18 Throughout the history of the South Slavs the vernacular literary and written languages e g Chakavian Kajkavian Shtokavian of the various regions and ethnicities developed and diverged independently Prior to the 19th century they were collectively called Illyric Slavic Slavonian Bosnian Dalmatian Serbian or Croatian 22 Since the nineteenth century the term Illyrian or Illyric was used quite often thus creating confusion with the Illyrian language Although the word Illyrian was used on a few occasions before its widespread usage began after Ljudevit Gaj and several other prominent linguists met at Ljudevit Vukotinovic s house to discuss the issue in 1832 23 The term Serbo Croatian was first used by Jacob Grimm in 1824 24 25 popularized by the Viennese philologist Jernej Kopitar in the following decades and accepted by Croatian Zagreb grammarians in 1854 and 1859 26 At that time Serb and Croat lands were still part of the Ottoman and Austrian Empires Officially the language was called variously Serbo Croat Croato Serbian Serbian and Croatian Croatian and Serbian Serbian or Croatian Croatian or Serbian Unofficially Serbs and Croats typically called the language Serbian or Croatian respectively without implying a distinction between the two 27 and again in independent Bosnia and Herzegovina Bosnian Croatian and Serbian were considered to be three names of a single official language 28 Croatian linguist Dalibor Brozovic advocated the term Serbo Croatian as late as 1988 claiming that in an analogy with Indo European Serbo Croatian does not only name the two components of the same language but simply charts the limits of the region in which it is spoken and includes everything between the limits Bosnian and Montenegrin 29 Today use of the term Serbo Croatian is controversial due to the prejudice that nation and language must match 30 31 32 It is still used for lack of a succinct alternative 33 though alternative names have emerged such as Bosnian Croatian Serbian BCS 34 which is often seen in political contexts such as the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia HistoryEarly development Hval s Codex 1404 In the 9th century Old Church Slavonic was adopted as the language of the liturgy in churches serving various Slavic nations This language was gradually adapted to non liturgical purposes and became known as the Croatian version of Old Slavonic The two variants of the language liturgical and non liturgical continued to be a part of the Glagolitic service as late as the middle of the 19th century The earliest known Croatian Church Slavonic Glagolitic manuscripts are the Glagolita Clozianus and the Vienna Folia from the 11th century 35 Speech example source source source track An example of Old Croatian used in Baska tablet Problems playing this file See media help The beginning of written Serbo Croatian can be traced from the tenth century and on when Serbo Croatian medieval texts were written in five scripts Latin Glagolitic Early Cyrillic Bosnian Cyrillic bosancica bosanica 36 and Arebica the last principally by Bosniak nobility Serbo Croatian competed with the more established literary languages of Latin and Old Slavonic in the west and Persian and Arabic in the east Old Slavonic developed into the Serbo Croatian variant of Church Slavonic between the 12th and 16th centuries Among the earliest attestations of Serbo Croatian are the Humac tablet dating from the 10th or 11th century written in Bosnian Cyrillic and Glagolitic the Plomin tablet dating from the same era written in Glagolitic the Valun tablet dated to the 11th century written in Glagolitic and Latin and the Inscription of Zupa Dubrovacka a Glagolitic tablet dated to the 11th century The Baska tablet from the late 11th century was written in Glagolitic 37 It is a large stone tablet found in the small Church of St Lucy Jurandvor on the Croatian island of Krk that contains text written mostly in Chakavian in the Croatian angular Glagolitic script It is also important in the history of the nation as it mentions Zvonimir the king of Croatia at the time The Charter of Ban Kulin of 1189 written by Ban Kulin of Bosnia was an early Shtokavian text written in Bosnian Cyrillic The luxurious and ornate representative texts of Serbo Croatian Church Slavonic belong to the later era when they coexisted with the Serbo Croatian vernacular literature The most notable are the Missal of Duke Novak from the Lika region in northwestern Croatia 1368 Evangel from Reims 1395 named after the town of its final destination Hrvoje s Missal from Bosnia and Split in Dalmatia 1404 38 and the first printed book in Serbo Croatian the Glagolitic Missale Romanum Glagolitice 1483 35 During the 13th century Serbo Croatian vernacular texts began to appear the most important among them being the Istrian land survey of 1275 and the Vinodol Codex of 1288 both written in the Chakavian dialect 39 40 The Shtokavian dialect literature based almost exclusively citation needed on Chakavian original texts of religious provenance missals breviaries prayer books appeared almost a century later The most important purely Shtokavian vernacular text is the Vatican Croatian Prayer Book c 1400 41 Both the language used in legal texts and that used in Glagolitic literature gradually came under the influence of the vernacular which considerably affected its phonological morphological and lexical systems From the 14th and the 15th centuries both secular and religious songs at church festivals were composed in the vernacular Writers of early Serbo Croatian religious poetry zacinjavci gradually introduced the vernacular into their works These zacinjavci were the forerunners of the rich literary production of the 16th century literature which depending on the area was Chakavian Kajkavian or Shtokavian based 35 The language of religious poems translations miracle and morality plays contributed to the popular character of medieval Serbo Croatian literature One of the earliest dictionaries also in the Slavic languages as a whole was the Bosnian Turkish Dictionary of 1631 authored by Muhamed Hevaji Uskufi and was written in the Arebica script 42 43 Standardization Đuro Danicic Rjecnik hrvatskoga ili srpskoga jezika Croatian or Serbian Dictionary 1882 Gramatika bosanskoga jezika Grammar of the Bosnian Language 1890 In the mid 19th century Serbian led by self taught writer and folklorist Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic and most Croatian writers and linguists represented by the Illyrian movement and led by Ljudevit Gaj and Đuro Danicic proposed the use of the most widespread dialect Shtokavian as the base for their common standard language Karadzic standardised the Serbian Cyrillic alphabet and Gaj and Danicic standardized the Croatian Latin alphabet on the basis of vernacular speech phonemes and the principle of phonological spelling In 1850 Serbian and Croatian writers and linguists signed the Vienna Literary Agreement declaring their intention to create a unified standard 44 Thus a complex bi variant language appeared which the Serbs officially called Serbo Croatian or Serbian or Croatian and the Croats Croato Serbian or Croatian or Serbian Yet in practice the variants of the conceived common literary language served as different literary variants chiefly differing in lexical inventory and stylistic devices The common phrase describing this situation was that Serbo Croatian or Croatian or Serbian was a single language In 1861 after a long debate the Croatian Sabor put up several proposed names to a vote of the members of the parliament Yugoslavian was opted for by the majority and legislated as the official language of the Triune Kingdom The Austrian Empire suppressing Pan Slavism at the time did not confirm this decision and legally rejected the legislation but in 1867 finally settled on Croatian or Serbian instead 45 During the Austro Hungarian occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina the language of all three nations in this territory was declared Bosnian until the death of administrator von Kallay in 1907 at which point the name was changed to Serbo Croatian 46 47 48 With unification of the first the Kingdom of the Serbs Croats and Slovenes the approach of Karadzic and the Illyrians became dominant The official language was called Serbo Croato Slovenian srpsko hrvatsko slovenacki in the 1921 constitution 20 In 1929 the constitution was suspended 49 and the country was renamed the Kingdom of Yugoslavia while the official language of Serbo Croato Slovene was reinstated in the 1931 constitution 20 In June 1941 the Nazi puppet Independent State of Croatia began to rid the language of Eastern Serbian words and shut down Serbian schools 50 The totalitarian dictatorship introduced a language law that promulgated Croatian linguistic purism as a policy that tried to implement a complete elimination of Serbisms and internationalisms 51 On January 15 1944 the Anti Fascist Council of the People s Liberation of Yugoslavia AVNOJ declared Croatian Serbian Slovene and Macedonian to be equal in the entire territory of Yugoslavia 52 In 1945 the decision to recognize Croatian and Serbian as separate languages was reversed in favor of a single Serbo Croatian or Croato Serbian language 52 In the Communist dominated second Yugoslavia ethnic issues eased to an extent but the matter of language remained blurred and unresolved In 1954 major Serbian and Croatian writers linguists and literary critics backed by Matica srpska and Matica hrvatska signed the Novi Sad Agreement which in its first conclusion stated Serbs Croats and Montenegrins share a single language with two equal variants that have developed around Zagreb western and Belgrade eastern The agreement insisted on the equal status of Cyrillic and Latin scripts and of Ekavian and Ijekavian pronunciations 53 It also specified that Serbo Croatian should be the name of the language in official contexts while in unofficial use the traditional Serbian and Croatian were to be retained 53 Matica hrvatska and Matica srpska were to work together on a dictionary and a committee of Serbian and Croatian linguists was asked to prepare a pravopis During the sixties both books were published simultaneously in Ijekavian Latin in Zagreb and Ekavian Cyrillic in Novi Sad 54 Yet Croatian linguists claim that it was an act of unitarianism The evidence supporting this claim is patchy Croatian linguist Stjepan Babic complained that the television transmission from Belgrade always used the Latin alphabet 55 which was true but was not proof of unequal rights but of frequency of use and prestige Babic further complained that the Novi Sad Dictionary 1967 listed side by side words from both the Croatian and Serbian variants wherever they differed 55 which one can view as proof of careful respect for both variants and not of unitarism Moreover Croatian linguists criticized those parts of the Dictionary for being unitaristic that were written by Croatian linguists 56 And finally Croatian linguists ignored the fact that the material for the Pravopisni rjecnik came from the Croatian Philological Society 57 58 Regardless of these facts Croatian intellectuals brought the Declaration on the Status and Name of the Croatian Literary Language in 1967 On occasion of the publication s 45th anniversary the Croatian weekly journal Forum published the Declaration again in 2012 accompanied by a critical analysis 59 West European scientists judge the Yugoslav language policy as an exemplary one 60 61 although three quarters of the population spoke one language no single language was official on a federal level 62 Official languages were declared only at the level of constituent republics and provinces 63 64 65 and very generously Vojvodina had five among them Slovak and Romanian spoken by 0 5 per cent of the population and Kosovo four Albanian Turkish Romany and Serbo Croatian 63 66 Newspapers radio and television studios used sixteen languages 67 fourteen were used as languages of tuition in schools and nine at universities 63 68 Only the Yugoslav Army used Serbo Croatian as the sole language of command with all other languages represented in the army s other activities however this is not different from other armies of multilingual states 69 or in other specific institutions such as international air traffic control where English is used worldwide All variants of Serbo Croatian were used in state administration and republican and federal institutions 63 Both Serbian and Croatian variants were represented in respectively different grammar books dictionaries school textbooks and in books known as pravopis which detail spelling rules 70 Serbo Croatian was a kind of soft standardisation 71 However legal equality could not dampen the prestige Serbo Croatian had since it was the language of three quarters of the population it functioned as an unofficial lingua franca 72 And within Serbo Croatian the Serbian variant with twice as many speakers as the Croatian 73 enjoyed greater prestige reinforced by the fact that Slovene and Macedonian speakers preferred it to the Croatian variant because their languages are also Ekavian 74 This is a common situation in other pluricentric languages e g the variants of German differ according to their prestige the variants of Portuguese too 75 Moreover all languages differ in terms of prestige the fact is that languages in terms of prestige learnability etc are not equal and the law cannot make them equal 76 Modern developments In 2017 the Declaration on the Common Language Deklaracija o zajednickom jeziku was signed by a group of NGOs and linguists from former Yugoslavia It states that all variants belong to a common polycentric language 77 78 Demographics Countries where a standard form of Serbo Croatian is an official language Countries where one or more forms are designated as minority languages This section needs additional citations for verification Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources Unsourced material may be challenged and removed January 2010 Learn how and when to remove this template message The total number of persons who declared their native language as either Bosnian Croatian Serbian Montenegrin or Serbo Croatian in countries of the region is about 16 million Serbian is spoken by 10 million people around the world mostly in Serbia 7 8 million Bosnia and Herzegovina 1 2 million and Montenegro 300 000 Serbian minorities are found in Kosovo North Macedonia and in Romania 5 In Serbia there are about 760 000 second language speakers of Serbian including Hungarians in Vojvodina and the 400 000 estimated Roma In Kosovo Serbian is spoken by the members of the Serbian minority which approximates between 70 000 and 100 000 79 80 Familiarity of Kosovo Albanians with Serbian varies depending on age and education and exact numbers are not available Croatian is spoken by 6 8 million people in the world including 4 1 million in Croatia and 600 000 in Bosnia and Herzegovina 81 A small Croatian minority that lives in Italy known as Molise Croats have somewhat preserved traces of Croatian In Croatia 170 000 mostly Italians and Hungarians use it as a second language Bosnian is spoken by 2 7 million people worldwide chiefly Bosniaks including 2 0 million in Bosnia and Herzegovina 200 000 in Serbia and 40 000 in Montenegro 82 Montenegrin is spoken by 300 000 people globally 83 The notion of Montenegrin as a separate standard from Serbian is relatively recent In the 2011 census around 229 251 Montenegrins of the country s 620 000 declared Montenegrin as their native language That figure is likely to increase due to the country s independence and strong institutional backing of the Montenegrin language Serbo Croatian is also a second language of many Slovenians and Macedonians especially those born during the time of Yugoslavia According to the 2002 Census Serbo Croatian and its variants have the largest number of speakers of the minority languages in Slovenia 84 Outside the Balkans there are over two million native speakers of the language s especially in countries which are frequent targets of immigration such as Australia Austria Brazil Canada Chile Germany Hungary Italy Sweden and the United States Grammar Tomislav Maretic s 1899 Grammar of Croatian or Serbian Further information Serbo Croatian grammar Serbo Croatian is a highly inflected language Traditional grammars list seven cases for nouns and adjectives nominative genitive dative accusative vocative locative and instrumental reflecting the original seven cases of Proto Slavic and indeed older forms of Serbo Croatian itself However in modern Shtokavian the locative has almost merged into dative the only difference is based on accent in some cases and the other cases can be shown declining namely For all nouns and adjectives the instrumental dative and locative forms are identical at least orthographically in the plural zenama zenama zenama ocima ocima ocima rijecima rijecima rijecima There is an accentual difference between the genitive singular and genitive plural of masculine and neuter nouns which are otherwise homonyms seljaka seljaka except that on occasion an a which might or might not appear in the singular is filled between the last letter of the root and the genitive plural ending kapitalizma kapitalizama The old instrumental ending ju of the feminine consonant stems and in some cases the a of the genitive plural of certain other sorts of feminine nouns is fast yielding to i noci instead of nocju borbi instead of boraba and so forth Almost every Shtokavian number is indeclinable and numbers after prepositions have not been declined for a long time Like most Slavic languages there are mostly three genders for nouns masculine feminine and neuter a distinction which is still present even in the plural unlike Russian and in part the Cakavian dialect They also have two numbers singular and plural However some consider there to be three numbers paucal or dual too since still preserved in closely related Slovene after two dva dvije dve three tri and four cetiCite error There are lt ref gt tags on this page without content in them see the help page ri and all numbers ending in them e g twenty two ninety three one hundred four but not twelve through fourteen the genitive singular is used and after all other numbers five pet and up the genitive plural is used The number one jedan is treated as an adjective Adjectives are placed in front of the noun they modify and must agree in both case and number with it There are seven tenses for verbs past present future exact future aorist imperfect and pluperfect and three moods indicative imperative and conditional However the latter three tenses are typically used only in Shtokavian writing and the time sequence of the exact future is more commonly formed through an alternative construction In addition like most Slavic languages the Shtokavian verb also has one of two aspects perfective or imperfective Most verbs come in pairs with the perfective verb being created out of the imperfective by adding a prefix or making a stem change The imperfective aspect typically indicates that the action is unfinished in progress or repetitive while the perfective aspect typically denotes that the action was completed instantaneous or of limited duration Some Stokavian tenses namely aorist and imperfect favor a particular aspect but they are rarer or absent in Cakavian and Kajkavian Actually aspects compensate for the relative lack of tenses because aspect of the verb determines whether the act is completed or in progress in the referred time PhonologyMain article Serbo Croatian phonology Vowels The Serbo Croatian vowel system is simple with only five vowels in Shtokavian All vowels are monophthongs The oral vowels are as follows Latin script Cyrillic script IPA Description English approximationa a a open central unrounded fathere e e mid front unrounded deni i i close front unrounded seeko o o mid back rounded lordu u u close back rounded poolThe vowels can be short or long but the phonetic quality does not change depending on the length In a word vowels can be long in the stressed syllable and the syllables following it never in the ones preceding it Consonants The consonant system is more complicated and its characteristic features are series of affricate and palatal consonants As in English voice is phonemic but aspiration is not Latin script Cyrillic script IPA Description 85 English approximationtrillr r r alveolar trill rolled vibrating r as in carrambaapproximantsv v ʋ labiodental approximant roughly between vortex and warj ј j palatal approximant yearlateralsl l l alveolar lateral approximant lightlj љ ʎ palatal lateral approximant roughly battalionnasalsm m m bilabial nasal mann n n alveolar nasal notnj њ ɲ palatal nasal British news or American canyonfricativesf f f voiceless labiodental fricative fivez z z voiced dental sibilant zeros s s voiceless dental sibilant somez zh ʒ voiced postalveolar fricative televisions sh ʃ voiceless postalveolar fricative sharph h x voiceless velar fricative lochaffricatesc c t s voiceless dental affricate potsdz џ d ʒ voiced postalveolar affricate as English jamc ch t ʃ voiceless postalveolar affricate as English checkđ ђ d ʑ voiced alveolo palatal affricate roughly jeansc ћ t ɕ voiceless alveolo palatal affricate roughly cheeseplosivesb b b voiced bilabial plosive bookp p p voiceless bilabial plosive topd d d voiced dental plosive dogt t t voiceless dental plosive stopg g ɡ voiced velar plosive goodk k k voiceless velar plosive duckIn consonant clusters all consonants are either voiced or voiceless All the consonants are voiced if the last consonant is normally voiced or voiceless if the last consonant is normally voiceless This rule does not apply to approximants a consonant cluster may contain voiced approximants and voiceless consonants as well as to foreign words Washington would be transcribed as VasinGton personal names and when consonants are not inside of one syllable r can be syllabic playing the role of the syllable nucleus in certain words occasionally it can even have a long accent For example the tongue twister navrh brda vrba mrda involves four words with syllabic r A similar feature exists in Czech Slovak and Macedonian Very rarely other sonorants can be syllabic like l in bicikl ʎ surname Starklj n unit njutn as well as m and ɲ in slang citation needed Pitch accent Further information Pitch accent Serbo Croatian and Serbo Croatian phonology Pitch accent Apart from Slovene Serbo Croatian is the only Slavic language with a pitch accent simple tone system This feature is present in some other Indo European languages such as Norwegian Ancient Greek and Punjabi Neo Shtokavian Serbo Croatian which is used as the basis for standard Bosnian Croatian Montenegrin and Serbian has four accents which involve either a rising or falling tone on either long or short vowels with optional post tonic lengths Serbo Croatian accent system Slavicistsymbol IPAsymbol Descriptione e non tonic short vowele eː non tonic long vowele e short vowel with rising tonee eː long vowel with rising toneȅ e short vowel with falling toneȇ eː long vowel with falling toneThe tone stressed vowels can be approximated in English with set vs setting said in isolation for a short tonic e or leave vs leaving for a long tonic i due to the prosody of final stressed syllables in English General accent rules in the standard language Monosyllabic words may have only a falling tone or no accent at all enclitics Falling tone may occur only on the first syllable of polysyllabic words Accent can never occur on the last syllable of polysyllabic words There are no other rules for accent placement thus the accent of every word must be learned individually furthermore in inflection accent shifts are common both in type and position the so called mobile paradigms The second rule is not strictly obeyed especially in borrowed words Comparative and historical linguistics offers some clues for memorising the accent position If one compares many standard Serbo Croatian words to e g cognate Russian words the accent in the Serbo Croatian word will be one syllable before the one in the Russian word with the rising tone Historically the rising tone appeared when the place of the accent shifted to the preceding syllable the so called Neo Shtokavian retraction but the quality of this new accent was different its melody still gravitated towards the original syllable Most Shtokavian Neo Shtokavian dialects underwent this shift but Chakavian Kajkavian and the Old Shtokavian dialects did not Accent diacritics are not used in the ordinary orthography but only in the linguistic or language learning literature e g dictionaries orthography and grammar books However there are very few minimal pairs where an error in accent can lead to misunderstanding OrthographyThis section does not cite any sources Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources Unsourced material may be challenged and removed December 2013 Learn how and when to remove this template message Serbo Croatian orthography is almost entirely phonetic Thus most words should be spelled as they are pronounced In practice the writing system does not take into account allophones which occur as a result of interaction between words bit ce pronounced bice and only written separately in Bosnian and Croatian od toga pronounced otoga in many vernaculars iz cega pronounced iscega in many vernaculars Also there are some exceptions mostly applied to foreign words and compounds that favor morphological etymological over phonetic spelling postdiplomski postgraduate pronounced pozdiplomskiOne systemic exception is that the consonant clusters ds and ds are not respelled as ts and ts although d tends to be unvoiced in normal speech in such clusters predstava show odsteta damages Only a few words are intentionally misspelled mostly in order to resolve ambiguity seststo ʃeːsto six hundred pronounced sesto to avoid confusion with sesto sixth pronounced the same prstni pr sniː adj finger pronounced prsni to avoid confusion with prsni pr sniː adj chest differentiated by tone in some areas where the short rising tone contrasts with the short falling tone Writing systems Main articles Gaj s Latin alphabet Serbian Cyrillic alphabet and Yugoslav Braille Through history this language has been written in a number of writing systems Glagolitic alphabet chiefly in Croatia Bosancica Arebica mostly in Bosnia and Herzegovina Cyrillic script various modifications of the Latin and Greek alphabets The oldest texts since the 11th century are in Glagolitic and the oldest preserved text written completely in the Latin alphabet is Red i zakon sestara reda Svetog Dominika from 1345 The Arabic alphabet had been used by Bosniaks Greek writing is out of use there and Arabic and Glagolitic persisted so far partly in religious liturgies Today it is written in both the Latin and Cyrillic scripts Serbian and Bosnian variants use both alphabets while Croatian uses the Latin only Latin script has become more and more popular in Serbia as it is easy to input on phones and computers 86 The Serbian Cyrillic alphabet was revised by Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic in the 19th century The Croatian Latin alphabet Gajica followed suit shortly afterwards when Ljudevit Gaj defined it as standard Latin with five extra letters that had diacritics apparently borrowing much from Czech but also from Polish and inventing the unique digraphs lj nj and dz These digraphs are represented as l n and ǵ respectively in the Rjecnik hrvatskog ili srpskog jezika published by the former Yugoslav Academy of Sciences and Arts in Zagreb 87 The latter digraphs however are unused in the literary standard of the language All in all this makes Serbo Croatian the only Slavic language to officially use both the Latin and Cyrillic scripts albeit the Latin version is more commonly used In both cases spelling is phonetic and spellings in the two alphabets map to each other one to one Latin to Cyrillic A a B b C c C c C c D d Dz dz Đ đ E e F f G g H h I i J j K kA a B b C c Ch ch Ћ ћ D d Џ џ Ђ ђ E e F f G g H h I i Ј ј K kL l Lj lj M m N n Nj nj O o P p R r S s S s T t U u V v Z z Z zL l Љ љ M m N n Њ њ O o P p R r S s Sh sh T t U u V v Z z Zh zhCyrillic to Latin A a B b V v G g D d Ђ ђ E e Zh zh Z z I i Ј ј K k L l Љ љ M mA a B b V v G g D d Đ đ E e Z z Z z I i J j K k L l Lj lj M mN n Њ њ O o P p R r S s T t Ћ ћ U u F f H h C c Ch ch Џ џ Sh shN n Nj nj O o P p R r S s T t C c U u F f H h C c C c Dz dz S sSample collation Latin collation order CyrilliccollationorderLatin CyrillicequivalentIna Ina InaInjekcija Inјekciјa InјekciјaInverzija Inverziјa InverziјaInje Iњe IњeThe digraphs Lj Nj and Dz represent distinct phonemes and are considered to be single letters In crosswords they are put into a single square and in sorting lj follows l and nj follows n except in a few words where the individual letters are pronounced separately For instance nadziv j eti to outlive is composed of the prefix nad out over and the verb ziv j eti to live The Cyrillic alphabet avoids such ambiguity by providing a single letter for each phoneme nadzhiv ј eti Đ used to be commonly written as Dj on typewriters but that practice led to too many ambiguities It is also used on car license plates Today Dj is often used again in place of Đ on the Internet as a replacement due to the lack of installed Serbo Croat keyboard layouts Montenegrin alphabet adopted in 2009 provides replacements of sj and zj with digraphs s and z in both Latin and Cyrillic but they remain largely unused even by the Parliament of Montenegro which introduced them 88 Unicode has separate characters for the digraphs lj LJ Lj lj nj NJ Nj nj and dz DŽ Dž dž DialectsMain article Dialects of Serbo Croatian See also South Slavic dialect continuum South Slavic historically formed a dialect continuum i e each dialect has some similarities with the neighboring one and differences grow with distance However migrations from the 16th to 18th centuries resulting from the spread of Ottoman Empire on the Balkans have caused large scale population displacement that broke the dialect continuum into many geographical pockets Migrations in the 20th century primarily caused by urbanization and wars also contributed to the reduction of dialectal differences The primary dialects are named after the most common question word for what Shtokavian uses the pronoun sto or sta Chakavian uses ca or ca Kajkavian kajkavski kaj or kej In native terminology they are referred to as nar j ecje which would be equivalent of group of dialects whereas their many subdialects are referred to as dijalekti dialects or govori speeches The pluricentric Serbo Croatian standard language and all four contemporary standard variants are based on the Eastern Herzegovinian subdialect of Neo Shtokavian Other dialects are not taught in schools or used by the state media The Torlakian dialect is often added to the list though sources usually note that it is a transitional dialect between Shtokavian and the Bulgaro Macedonian dialects Likely distribution of major dialects prior to the 16th century migrations Shtokavian subdialects Pavle Ivic 1988 Yellow is the widespread Eastern Herzegovinian subdialect that forms the basis of all national standards though it is not spoken natively in any of the capital cities Mid 20th century distribution of dialects in CroatiaThe Serbo Croatian dialects differ not only in the question word they are named after but also heavily in phonology accentuation and intonation case endings and tense system morphology and basic vocabulary In the past Chakavian and Kajkavian dialects were spoken on a much larger territory but have been replaced by Stokavian during the period of migrations caused by Ottoman Turkish conquest of the Balkans in the 15th and the 16th centuries These migrations caused the koineisation of the Shtokavian dialects that used to form the West Shtokavian more closer and transitional towards the neighbouring Chakavian and Kajkavian dialects and East Shtokavian transitional towards the Torlakian and the whole Bulgaro Macedonian area dialect bundles and their subsequent spread at the expense of Chakavian and Kajkavian As a result Stokavian now covers an area larger than all the other dialects combined and continues to make its progress in the enclaves where non literary dialects are still being spoken 89 The differences among the dialects can be illustrated on the example of Schleicher s fable Diacritic signs are used to show the difference in accents and prosody which are often quite significant but which are not reflected in the usual orthography Neo Stokavian Ijekavian Ekavianovca i konjiovca koja nije imala vȕne vȉd j ela je konje na br ij egu Jedan je od njih vȗkao teska kȍla drȕgi je nosio veliku vrȅcu a trȅci je nosio cov j eka ovca rȅce konjima Sȑce me boli glȅdajuci cov j eka kako jȁse na konju A konji rȅkose Slȕsaj ȏvco nȃs sȑca bole kada vȉdimo da cov j ek gospodar rȃdi vȕnu od ovaca i prȁvi od j ecu za se I ȍnda ovca nȇma vȉse vȕne Cȗvsi tō ovca pȍb j eze ȕ polje Old Stokavian Orubica Posavina ovca i konjiovca koja ni imala vȕne vȉdla konje na brigu Jedan od njȉju vũkō tȇska kȍla drȕgi nosȉjo vȅliku vrȅcu a trȅci nosȉjo covȉka ovca kȃza kȍnjima Svȅ me bolĩ kad glȅdam kako covik na konju jȁsi A konji kazȁse Slȕsaj ȏvco nas sȑca bolũ kad vȉdimo da covik gȁzda prȁvi vȕnu od ovac i prȁvi rȍbu za se od njẽ I ȍnda ōvcȁ nema vȉse vȕne Kad tȏ cȕ ōvcȁ ȕtece ȕ polje Cakavian Matulji near Rijeka Ovcȁ i konji Ovcȁ kȃ ni imȅla vȕni vȉdela je konjȉ na brȇge Jedȃn je vȗkal tȇski vȏz drȕgi je nosil vȅlu vrȅt u a trȅt i je nosil covȅka Ovcȁ je reklȁ konjȇn Sȑce me bolĩ dok glȅdan covȅka kako jȁse na konjȅ A konjȉ su reklȉ Poslȕsaj ovcȁ nȃs sȑca bolẽ kad vȉdimo da covȅk gospodar dȅla vȕnu od ovac i dȅla rȍbu zȃ se I ȍnda ovcȁ nĩma vȉse vȕni Kad je tȏ cȕla ovcȁ je pobȅgla va pȍje Kajkavian Marija Bistrica ofca i kȍjniofca tera ni je imȅ la vȕne vȉdla je kȍjne na briẽgu Jȇn od nih je vlẽ ke l tẽska kȍla drȕgi je nȍsil vȅliku vrȅ cu a trẽjti je nȍsil covȅ ka ofca je rȇkla kȍjnem Sȑce me bolĩ kad vidim covȅka kak jȃse na kȍjnu A kȍjni su rȇkli Poslȕhni ofca nȃs sȑca bolĩju kad vidime da cȍve k gospodar dȇ la vȕnu ot ofci i dȇ la oblȅ ku zȃ se I ȏnda ofca nȇma vȉse vȕne Kad je to cȗla ofca je pobȇ gla f pȍlje English languageThe Sheep and the Horses On a hill a sheep that had no wool saw horses one of them pulling a heavy wagon one carrying a big load and one carrying a man quickly The sheep said to the horses My heart pains me seeing a man driving horses The horses said Listen sheep our hearts pain us when we see this a man the master makes the wool of the sheep into a warm garment for himself And the sheep has no wool Having heard this the sheep fled into the plain Division by jat reflex Main article yat A series of isoglosses crosscuts the main dialects The modern reflexes of the long Common Slavic vowel jat usually transcribed e vary by location as i e and ije or je Local varieties of the dialects are labeled Ikavian Ekavian and Ijekavian respectively depending on the reflex The long and short jat is reflected as long or short i and e in Ikavian and Ekavian but Ijekavian dialects introduce a ije je alternation to retain a distinction Standard Croatian and Bosnian are based on Ijekavian whereas Serbian uses both Ekavian and Ijekavian forms Ijekavian for Bosnian Serbs Ekavian for most of Serbia Influence of standard language through state media and education has caused non standard varieties to lose ground to the literary forms The jat reflex rules are not without exception For example when short jat is preceded by r in most Ijekavian dialects developed into re or occasionally ri The prefix pre trans over when long became pre in eastern Ijekavian dialects but to prije in western dialects in Ikavian pronunciation it also evolved into pre or prije due to potential ambiguity with pri approach come close to For verbs that had eti in their infinitive the past participle ending el evolved into io in Ijekavian Neo Stokavian The following are some examples English Predecessor Ekavian Ikavian Ijekavian Ijekavian developmentbeautiful lep lep lip lijep long e ijetime vreme vreme vrime vrijemefaith vera vera vira vjera short e jecrossing prelaz prelaz prelaz orprijelaz prelaz orprijelaz pr long e prijetimes vremena vremena vrimena vremena r short e reneed trebati trebati tribat i trebatiheat grejati grejati grijati grijati r short e risaw videl video vidio vidio el iovillage selo selo selo selo e in root not ePresent sociolinguistic situation A trilingual warning sign in Latin and Cyrillic script on the pack of Drina cigarettes all three inscriptions are identical The nature and classification of Serbo Croatian has been the subject of long standing sociolinguistic debate 90 The question is whether Serbo Croatian should be called a single language or a cluster of closely related languages 91 14 92 93 Comparison with other pluricentric languages See also Declaration on the Common Language Enisa Kafadar argues that there is only one Serbo Croatian language with several varieties 94 This has made it possible to include all four varieties in new grammars of the language 15 95 Daniel Buncic concludes that it is a pluricentric language with four standard variants spoken in Serbia Croatia Montenegro and Bosnia Herzegovina 96 The mutual intelligibility between their speakers exceeds that between the standard variants of English French German or Spanish 97 There is no doubt of the near 100 mutual intelligibility of standard Croatian and standard Serbian as is obvious from the ability of all groups to enjoy each others films TV and sports broadcasts newspapers rock lyrics etc 98 Other linguists have argued that the differences between the variants of Serbo Croatian are less significant than those between the variants of English 99 German 100 Dutch 101 and Hindustani 102 Among pluricentric languages 103 104 Serbo Croatian was the only one with a pluricentric standardisation within one state 105 106 The dissolution of Yugoslavia has made Serbo Croatian even more of a typical pluricentric language since the variants of other pluricentric languages are also spoken in different states 107 108 As in other pluricentric languages all Serbo Croatian standard varieties are based on the same dialect the Eastern Herzegovinian subdialect of the Shtokavian dialect and consequently according to the sociolinguistic definitions constitute a single pluricentric language and not for example several Ausbau languages 109 110 According to linguist John Bailyn An examination of all the major levels of language shows that BCS is clearly a single language with a single grammatical system 98 In 2017 numerous prominent writers scientists journalists activists and other public figures from Croatia Bosnia Herzegovina Montenegro and Serbia signed the Declaration on the Common Language which states that in Croatia Serbia Bosnia Herzegovina and Montenegro a common polycentric standard language is used consisting of several standard varieties such as German English or Spanish 111 112 113 114 Contemporary names Ethno political variants of Serbo Croatian as of 2006 The use of Serbo Croatian as a linguistic label has been the subject of long standing controversy Wayles Browne calls it a term of convenience and notes the difference of opinion as to whether it comprises a single language or a cluster of languages 93 Ronelle Alexander refers to the national standards as three separate languages but also notes that the reasons for this are complex and generally non linguistic She calls BCS her term for Serbo Croatian a single language for communicative linguistic purposes but three separate languages for symbolic non linguistic purposes 115 92 The current Serbian constitution of 2006 refers to the official language as Serbian 116 while the Montenegrin constitution of 2007 proclaimed Montenegrin as the primary official language but also grants other languages the right of official use 117 Most Bosniaks refer to their language as Bosnian Most Croats refer to their language as Croatian Most Serbs refer to their language as Serbian Montenegrins refer to their language either as Serbian or Montenegrin Ethnic Bunjevci refer to their language as Croatian or Bunjevac The International Organization for Standardization ISO has specified different Universal Decimal Classification UDC numbers for Croatian UDC 862 abbreviation hr and Serbian UDC 861 abbreviation sr while the cover term Serbo Croatian is used to refer to the combination of original signs UDC 861 862 abbreviation sh Furthermore the ISO 639 standard designates the Bosnian language with the abbreviations bos and bs While it operated the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia which had English and French as official languages translated court proceedings and documents into what it referred to as Bosnian Croatian Serbian usually abbreviated as BCS Translators were employed from all regions of the former Yugoslavia and all national and regional variations were accepted regardless of the nationality of the person on trial sometimes against a defendant s objections on the grounds of mutual intelligibility 118 For utilitarian purposes Serbo Croatian is often called nas jezik our language or naski sic ourish or ourian by native speakers This term is frequently used to describe Serbo Croatian by those who wish to avoid nationalistic and linguistic discussions 119 120 Native speakers traditionally describe their language as jedan ali ne jedinstven one but not uniform 121 Views of linguists in the former Yugoslavia Serbian linguists In 2021 the Board for Standardization of the Serbian Language issued an opinion that Serbo Croatian is one language and that it should be referred to as Serbian language while Croatian Bosnian and Montenegrin are to be considered merely local names for Serbian language This opinion was widely criticized by Croatian government and representatives of the Croatian minority in Serbia 122 Serbian linguist Ranko Bugarski called this opinion absurd and legacy of the 19th century linguistics He said that Serbo Croatian should be considered one language in a scientific sense under the Serbo Croatian label but four different languages in an administrative sense 123 Legally Croatian Bosnian and Montenegrin are all officially recognized minority languages in Serbia 123 the Serbian Government also officially recognized Bunjevac language as a standard minority language in 2018 124 and was approved by the Serbian Ministry of Education for learning in schools 125 Croatian linguists The opinion of the majority of Croatian linguists citation needed is that there has never been a Serbo Croatian language but two different standard languages that overlapped sometime in the course of history However Croatian linguist Snjezana Kordic has been leading an academic discussion on this issue in the Croatian journal Knjizevna republika 126 from 2001 to 2010 127 128 In the discussion she shows that linguistic criteria such as mutual intelligibility the huge overlap in the linguistic system and the same dialect basis of the standard language are evidence that Croatian Serbian Bosnian and Montenegrin are four national variants of the pluricentric Serbo Croatian language 129 130 Igor Mandic states During the last ten years it has been the longest the most serious and most acrid discussion in 21st century Croatian culture 131 Inspired by that discussion a monograph on language and nationalism has been published 132 The view of the majority of Croatian linguists that there is no single Serbo Croatian language but several different standard languages has been sharply criticized by German linguist Bernhard Groschel in his monograph 133 Serbo Croatian Between Linguistics and Politics 134 A more detailed overview incorporating arguments from Croatian philology and contemporary linguistics would be as follows Serbo Croatian is a language One still finds many references to Serbo Croatian and proponents of Serbo Croatian who deny that Croats Serbs Bosniaks and Montenegrins speak different languages The usual argument generally goes along the following lines Standard Croatian Serbian Bosnian and Montenegrin are completely mutually intelligible 135 136 In addition they use two alphabets that perfectly match each other Latin and Cyrillic thanks to Ljudevit Gaj and Vuk Karadzic Croats exclusively use Latin script and Serbs equally use both Cyrillic and Latin Although Cyrillic is taught in Bosnia most Bosnians especially non Serbs Bosniaks and Croats favor Latin The list of 100 words of the basic Croatian Serbian Bosnian and Montenegrin vocabulary as set out by Morris Swadesh shows that all 100 words are identical 137 According to Swadesh 81 per cent are sufficient to be considered as a single language 138 Typologically and structurally these standard variants have virtually the same grammar i e morphology and syntax 139 140 Serbo Croatian was standardised in the mid 19th century and all subsequent attempts to dissolve its basic unity have not succeeded The affirmation of distinct Croatian Serbian Bosnian and Montenegrin languages is politically motivated According to phonology morphology and syntax these standard variants are essentially one language because they are based on the same Stokavian dialect 141 Serbo Croatian is not a language Similar arguments are made for other official standards which are drawn from identical or nearly identical material bases and which therefore constitute pluricentric languages such as Malaysian Malaysian Malay and Indonesian together called Malay 142 or Standard Hindi and Urdu together called Hindustani or Hindi Urdu 143 However some argue that these arguments have flaws Phonology morphology and syntax are not the only dimensions of a language other fields semantics pragmatics stylistics lexicology etc also differ slightly However it is the case with other pluricentric languages 144 A comparison is made to the closely related North Germanic languages or dialects if one prefers though these are not fully mutually intelligible as the Serbo Croatian standards are A closer comparison may be General American and Received Pronunciation in English which are closer to each other than the latter is to other dialects which are subsumed under British English Since the Croatian as recorded in Drzic and Gundulic s works 16th and 17th centuries is virtually the same as the contemporary standard Croatian understandable archaisms apart it is evident that the 19th century formal standardization was just the final touch in the process that as far as Croatian is concerned had lasted more than three centuries The radical break with the past characteristic of modern Serbian whose vernacular was likely not as similar to Croatian as it is today is a trait completely at variance with Croatian linguistic history In short formal standardization processes for Croatian and Serbian had coincided chronologically and one could add ideologically but they have not produced a unified standard language Gundulic did not write in Serbo Croatian nor did August Senoa Marko Marulic and Marin Drzic wrote in a sophisticated idiom of Croatian some 300 350 years before Serbo Croatian ideology appeared Marulic explicitly called his Cakavian written Judita as u uerish haruacchi slosena arranged in Croatian stanzas in 1501 and the Stokavian grammar and dictionary of Bartol Kasic written in 1604 unambiguously identifies the ethnonyms Slavic and Illyrian with Croatian The linguistic debate in this region is more about politics than about linguistics per se The topic of language for writers from Dalmatia and Dubrovnik prior to the 19th century made a distinction only between speakers of Italian or Slavic since those were the two main groups that inhabited Dalmatian city states at that time Whether someone spoke Croatian or Serbian was not an important distinction then as the two languages were not distinguished by most speakers However most intellectuals and writers from Dalmatia who used the Stokavian dialect and practiced the Catholic faith saw themselves as part of a Croatian nation as far back as the mid 16th to 17th centuries some 300 years before Serbo Croatian ideology appeared Their loyalty was first and foremost to Catholic Christendom but when they professed an ethnic identity they referred to themselves as Slovin and Illyrian a sort of forerunner of Catholic baroque pan Slavism and Croat these 30 odd writers over the span of c 350 years always saw themselves as Croats first and never as part of a Serbian nation It should also be noted that in the pre national era Catholic religious orientation did not necessarily equate with Croat ethnic identity in Dalmatia A Croatian follower of Vuk Karadzic Ivan Broz noted that for a Dalmatian to identify oneself as a Serb was seen as foreign as identifying oneself as Macedonian or Greek Vatroslav Jagic pointed out in 1864 As I have mentioned in the preface history knows only two national names in these parts Croatian and Serbian As far as Dubrovnik is concerned the Serbian name was never in use on the contrary the Croatian name was frequently used and gladly referred to At the end of the 15th century in Dubrovnik and Dalmatia sermons and poems were exquisitely crafted in Croatian by those men whose names are widely renowned by deep learning and piety The History of the Croatian Language Zagreb 1864 On the other hand the opinion of Jagic from 1864 is argued not to have firm grounds When Jagic says Croatian he refers to a few cases referring to the Dubrovnik vernacular as ilirski Illyrian This was a common name for all Slavic vernaculars in Dalmatian cities among the Roman inhabitants In the meantime other written monuments are found that mention srpski lingua serviana Serbian and some that mention Croatian 145 By far the most competent Serbian scientist editorializing on the Dubrovnik language issue Milan Resetar who was born in Dubrovnik himself wrote behalf of language characteristics The one who thinks that Croatian and Serbian are two separate languages must confess that Dubrovnik always linguistically used to be Serbian 145 Finally the former medieval texts from Dubrovnik and Montenegro dating before the 16th century were neither true Stokavian nor Serbian but mostly specific a Jekavian Cakavian that was nearer to actual Adriatic islanders in Croatia 146 Political connotations Nationalists have conflicting views about the language s The nationalists among the Croats conflictingly claim either that they speak an entirely separate language from Serbs and Bosniaks or that these two peoples have due to the longer lexicographic tradition among Croats somehow borrowed their standard languages from them citation needed Bosniak nationalists claim that both Croats and Serbs have appropriated the Bosnian language since Ljudevit Gaj and Vuk Karadzic preferred the Neo Stokavian Ijekavian dialect widely spoken in Bosnia and Herzegovina as the basis for language standardization whereas the nationalists among the Serbs claim either that any divergence in the language is artificial or claim that the Stokavian dialect is theirs and the Cakavian Croats in more extreme formulations Croats have taken or stolen their language from the Serbs citation needed Proponents of unity among Southern Slavs claim that there is a single language with normal dialectal variations The term Serbo Croatian or synonyms is not officially used in any of the successor countries of former Yugoslavia In Serbia the Serbian standard has an official status countrywide while both Serbian and Croatian are official in the province of Vojvodina A large Bosniak minority is present in the southwest region of Sandzak but the official recognition of Bosnian is moot 147 Bosnian is an optional course in first and second grade of the elementary school while it is also in official use in the municipality of Novi Pazar 148 However its nomenclature is controversial as there is incentive that it is referred to as Bosniak bosnjacki rather than Bosnian bosanski see Bosnian language Controversy and recognition for details Croatian is the official language of Croatia while Serbian is also official in municipalities with significant Serb population In Bosnia and Herzegovina all three standard languages are recorded as official Confrontations have on occasion been absurd The academic Muhamed Filipovic in an interview to Slovenian television told of a local court in a Croatian district requesting a paid translator to translate from Bosnian to Croatian before the trial could proceed citation needed The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia referred to the language as Bosnian Croatian Serbian usually abbreviated as BCS Translators were employed from all regions of the former Yugoslavia and all national and regional variations were accepted regardless of the nationality of the person on trial sometimes against a defendant s objections on the grounds of mutual intelligibility 118 ISO classification Since the year 2000 the ISO classification only recognizes Serbo Croatian as a macrolanguage since the original codes were removed from the ISO 639 1 and ISO 639 2 standards 149 That left the ISO 639 3 macrolanguage a book keeping device in the ISO 639 3 standard to keep track of which ISO 639 3 codes correspond with which ISO 639 2 codes 150 stranded without a corresponding ISO 639 2 code Words of Serbo Croatian origin Wiktionary has a category on English terms derived from Serbo Croatian Cravat from French cravate Croat by analogy with Flemish Krawaat and German Krabate from Serbo Croatian Hrvat 151 as cravats were characteristic of Croatian dress Polje from Serbo Croatian polje field 152 Slivovitz from German Slibowitz from Bulgarian slivovitza or Serbo Croatian sljivovica plum brandy from Old Slavic sliva plum cognate with English sloe 153 Tamburitza Serbo Croatian diminutive of tambura from Turkish from Persian ṭambur tanbur 154 Uvala from Serbo Croatian uvala hollow 155 Vampire from Serbo Croatian vampir via German Vampir or French Vampire 156 Sample textArticle 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Serbo Croatian written in the Latin alphabet 157 158 Sva ljudska bica rađaju se slobodna i jednaka u dostojanstvu i pravima Ona su obdarena razumom i sv ij escu i treba jedni prema drugima da postupaju u duhu bratstva Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Serbo Croatian written in the Cyrillic script 159 Sva љudska biћa raђaјu se slobodna i јednaka u dostoјanstvu i pravima Ona su obdarena razumom i sv iј eshћu i treba јedni prema drugima da postupaјu u duhu bratstva Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in English 160 All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood See also Language portal Linguistics portal Bosnia and Herzegovina portal Croatia portal Serbia portalAusbau languages Comparison of standard Bosnian Croatian Montenegrin and Serbian Declaration on the Common Language 2017 Dialects of Serbo Croatian Language secessionism in Serbo Croatian Pluricentric Serbo Croatian language Serbo Croatian relative clauses Serbo Croatian kinshipNotes a b The political status of Kosovo is disputed Having unilaterally declared independence from Serbia in 2008 Kosovo is formally recognised as an independent state by 101 UN member states with another 13 states recognising it at some point but then withdrawing their recognition and 92 states not recognizing it while Serbia continues to claim it as part of its own territory ReferencesCitations Serbo Croatian at Ethnologue 25th ed 2022 Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo PDF p 2 Retrieved 2012 08 17 http www brg lienz tsn at events minorities austrian 20minorities 20legislation doc permanent dead link 1993 Minorities Act No LXXVII a b c Serbian at Ethnologue 25th ed 2022 Legge Regionale n 15 del 14 maggio 1997 Tutela e valorizzazione del patrimonio culturale delle minoranze linguistiche nel Molise Bollettino Ufficiale n 10 del 16 5 1997 PDF Sardegna Cultura Retrieved 2018 07 15 2007 National Minority Status Law Article 3 2 B92 net B92 net Archived from the original on 2013 11 10 Retrieved 2013 09 01 Minority Rights Group International Czech Republic Czech Republic Overview Minorityrights org Retrieved 2012 10 24 Minority Rights Group International Macedonia Macedonia Overview Minorityrights org Retrieved 2012 10 24 a b Wells John C 2008 Longman Pronunciation Dictionary 3rd ed Longman ISBN 978 1 4058 8118 0 a b Jones Daniel 2003 1917 Peter Roach James Hartmann Jane Setter eds English Pronouncing Dictionary Cambridge Cambridge University Press ISBN 978 3 12 539683 8 Camdzic Amela Hudson Richard 2007 Serbo Croat Bosnian clitics and Word Grammar PDF Research in Language UCL Psychology and Language Sciences doi 10 2478 v10015 007 0001 7 hdl 11089 9540 S2CID 54645947 Retrieved 11 September 2013 a b Alexander 2006 p XVII a b Thomas Paul Louis Osipov Vladimir 2012 Grammaire du bosniaque croate montenegrin serbe Grammar of Bosnian Croatian Montenegrin and Serbian Collection de grammaires de l Institut d etudes slaves in French Vol 8 Paris Institut d etudes slaves p 624 ISBN 9782720404900 OCLC 805026664 Mork Henning 2002 Serbokroatisk grammatik substantivets morfologi Serbo Croatian Grammar Noun Morphology Arbejdspapirer vol 1 in Danish Arhus Slavisk Institut Arhus Universitet p unpaginated Preface OCLC 471591123 Sipka Danko 2019 Lexical layers of identity words meaning and culture in the Slavic languages New York NY Cambridge University Press pp 206 166 doi 10 1017 9781108685795 ISBN 978 953 313 086 6 LCCN 2018048005 OCLC 1061308790 S2CID 150383965 Serbo Croatian which features four ethnic variants Serbian Croatian Bosnian and Montenegrin a b Is Serbo Croatian a language The Economist 10 April 2017 Blum 2002 pp 130 132 a b c Busch Birgitta Kelly Holmes Helen 2004 Language Discourse and Borders in the Yugoslav Successor States Multilingual Matters p 26 ISBN 978 1 85359 732 9 The same language Croatian is referred to by different names Serbian srpski Serbo Croat in Croatia hrvatsko srpski Bosnian bosanski based on political and ethnic grounds the names Serbian Croatian and Bosnian are politically determined and refer to the same language with possible slight variations Brown amp Anderson 2006 p 294 Kordic Snjezana 2010 Moderne Nationalbezeichnungen und Texte aus vergangenen Jahrhunderten Modern nation names and texts in the past Zeitschrift fur Balkanologie in German 46 1 40 41 ISSN 0044 2356 SSRN 3440016 CROSBI 495349 ZDB ID 201058 6 Archived PDF from the original on 1 June 2012 Retrieved 11 May 2014 Despalatovic Elinor Murray 1975 Ljudevit Gaj and the Illyrian Movement New York and London East European Quarterly Columbia University Press p 64 ISBN 978 0 914710 05 9 Lencek 1976 p 46 Pohl 1996 pp 209 210 Lencek 1976 p 49 Brown amp Anderson 2006 p 259 In 1993 the authorities in Sarajevo adopted a new language law Sluzbeni list Republike Bosne i Hercegovine 18 93 In the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina the Ijekavian standard literary language of the three constitutive nations is officially used designated by one of the three terms Bosnian Serbian Croatian Bugarski amp Hawkesworth 2006 p 142 Brozovic Dalibor 1988 Jezik srpskohrvatski hrvatskosrpski hrvatski ili srpski Language Serbo Croatian Croato Serbian Croatian or Serbian Extract From the Second Edition of the Encyclopedia of Yugoslavia Jezik srpskohrvatski hrvatskosrpski hrvatski ili srpski izvadak iz II izdanja Enciklopedije Jugoslavije in Serbo Croatian Zagreb Jugoslavenski Leksikografski zavod Miroslav Krleza p 4 ISBN 978 86 7053 014 0 OCLC 645757653 Richter Malabotta Melita 2004 Semantics of War in Former Yugoslavia In Busch Brigitta Kelly Holmes Helen eds Language Discourse and Borders in the Yugoslav Successor States Clevedon Multilingual Matters p 81 OCLC 803615012 Mappes Niediek 2005 p 30 Kordic Snjezana 2010 Ideologija nacionalnog identiteta i nacionalne kulture The ideology of national identity and culture PDF In Ajdacic Dejan Lazarevic Di Đakomo Persida eds U cast Pera Jakobsena zbornik radova PDF Studia in honorem vol 1 in Serbo Croatian Beograd SlovoSlavia pp 225 239 ISBN 978 86 87807 02 0 OCLC 723062357 S2CID 132883650 SSRN 3439190 CROSBI 522531 Archived PDF from the original on 1 June 2012 Obst Ulrich 2004 Zum genitivus qualitatis und zu alternativen Moglichkeiten in den drei Buddenbrooks Ubersetzungen aus dem kroatischen und serbischen Sprachgebiet In Okuka Milos Schweier Ulrich eds Festschrift fur Peter Rehder zum 65 Geburtstag Welt der Slaven vol 21 in German Munich Otto Sagner p 212 OCLC 55018584 Tomasz Kamusella The Politics of Language and Nationalism in Modern Central Europe Palgrave Macmillan 2008 pp 228 297 a b c Price Glanville 1998 Encyclopedia of the languages of Europe Oxford UK Blackwell Publishers Ltd p 425 ISBN 978 0 631 19286 2 Kapetanovic Amir 2005 HRVATSKA SREDNJOVJEKOVNA LATINICA Hrvatska Srednjovjekovna Latinica Fucic Branko September 1971 Najstariji hrvatski glagoljski natpisi Slovo in Serbo Croatian 21 Hrvoje s Missal 1403 1404 Retrieved 9 March 2012 VINODOLSKI ZAKON 1288 Archived from the original on 14 March 2012 Retrieved 9 March 2012 Istarski Razvod Archived from the original on 7 July 2012 Retrieved 9 March 2012 Vatikanski hrvatski molitvenik Archived from the original on 11 October 2017 Retrieved 9 March 2012 Gammel ordbok i ny drakt in Norwegian University of Oslo 2012 04 10 Archived from the original on 2015 09 24 Retrieved 2013 12 09 Tanovic Miller Naza 2001 Testimony of a Bosnian Texas A amp M University Press p 209 Turkish Bosnian dictionary one of the first Slavic dictionaries in Europe was written by a Bosnian ethnographer and poet Muhamed Hevai Uskufi from Tuzla in 1631 Greenberg 2004 p 24 Kordic Snjezana 2007 Viskovic Velimir ed Pseudoznanost na djelu Pseudoscience at work Knjizevna republika No 7 9 Zagreb pp 243 250 ISSN 1334 1057 OCLC 190812698 Archived from the original on 23 October 2016 Sugar Peter F 1963 Industrialization of Bosnia Hercegovina 1878 1918 University of Washington Press p 201 Ramet Sabrina P 2008 Nationalism and the Idiocy of the Countryside The Case of Serbia Serbia Croatia and Slovenia at Peace and at War Selected Writings 1983 2007 LIT Verlag Munster pp 74 76 ISBN 978 3 03735 912 9 Velikonja Mitja 1992 Religious Separation and Political Intolerance in Bosnia Herzegovina Texas A amp M University Press ISBN 978 1 58544 226 3 Tomasevich Jozo 1969 Contemporary Yugoslavia University of California Press pp 8 9 David M Crowe 13 September 2013 Crimes of State Past and Present Government Sponsored Atrocities and International Legal Responses Routledge pp 61 ISBN 978 1 317 98682 9 Busch Brigitta 2004 Sprachen im Disput PDF in German Klagenfurt Drava p 205 ISBN 3 85435 428 2 Retrieved 16 May 2022 a b Greenberg 2004 p 115 a b Jonke Ljudevit 1968 Razvoj hrvatskoga knjizevnog jezika u 20 stoljecu The Development of the Croatian language in the 20th century Jezik in Serbo Croatian 16 1 18 ISSN 0021 6925 Kordic 2010 pp 303 304 a b Babic Stjepan 2004 Hrvanja hrvatskoga Croatian Language Quarrels in Serbo Croatian Zagreb Skolska knjiga p 36 ISBN 978 953 0 61428 4 Milutinovic Zoran 2011 Review of the Book Jezik i nacionalizam PDF The Slavonic and East European Review 89 3 522 523 ISSN 0037 6795 OCLC 744233642 ZDB ID 209925 1 Archived from the original PDF on 2012 10 04 Retrieved 25 May 2014 Jonke Ljudevit 1955 Drugi i treci sastanak Pravopisne komisije The second and third meeting of The Orthographic Commission Jezik in Serbo Croatian 4 2 59 ISSN 0021 6925 Jonke Ljudevit 1961 Pravopis hrvatskosrpskoga knjizevnog jezika Serbo Croatian Spelling Book Jezik in Serbo Croatian 9 2 57 59 ISSN 0021 6925 Kordic Snjezana 16 March 2012 SOS ili tek alibi za nasilje nad jezikom SOS or nothing but an alibi for violence against language in Serbo Croatian Zagreb Forum pp 38 39 ISSN 1848 204X CROSBI 578565 Archived from the original on 21 December 2012 Retrieved 9 April 2013 Groschel 2009 p 72 Mappes Niediek 2005 pp 18 64 Blum 2002 pp 41 42 a b c d Gak Vladimir G 1989 K tipologii form jazykovoj politiki Towards a typology of language policy Voprosy Jazykoznanija in Russian 5 122 123 Blum 2002 pp 47 48 Groschel 2003 pp 160 161 Blum 2002 p 65 Blum 2002 p 81 Blum 2002 pp 73 79 Blum 2002 pp 69 80 Kordic 2010 pp 291 292 Busch Brigitta Kelly Holmes Helen eds 2004 Semantics of War in Former Yugoslavia Language Discourse and Borders in the Yugoslav Successor States Clevedon Multilingual Matters pp 51 54 OCLC 803615012 Kordic 2010 pp 294 295 Groschel 2009 p 38 Kordic 2010 p 299 Ammon 1995 pp 484 494 497 die Tatsache dass Sprachen in ihrem Prestige ihrer Erlernbarkeit etc nicht gleich sind und auch per Gesetz nicht gleich gemacht werden konnen Blum 2002 p 170 Post Yugoslav Common Language Declaration Challenges Nationalism Balkan Insight 2017 03 30 Is Serbo Croatian a language The Economist 2017 04 10 Ramet Sabrina P Valenta Marko 2016 09 22 Ethnic Minorities and Politics in Post Socialist Southeastern Europe Cambridge University Press ISBN 978 1 316 98277 8 Kosovo s Demographic Destiny Looks Eerily Familiar Balkan Insight 2019 11 07 Retrieved 2021 06 29 Croatian at Ethnologue 25th ed 2022 Bosnian at Ethnologue 25th ed 2022 Montenegrin at Ethnologue 25th ed 2022 Raziskava Polozaj in status pripadnikov narodov nekdanje Jugoslavije vRS pdf PDF in Slovenian Kordic 2006 p 5 Crosby Alan Martinovic Iva August 28 2018 In The Age Of The Internet Serbia Aims To Keep Its Cyrillic Alive Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty Retrieved 5 September 2018 in Serbo Croatian Gramatika hrvatskosrpskoga jezika Group of Authors Ivan Brabec Mate Hraste and Sreten Zivkovic Zagreb 1968 Scepanovic Lela 2 February 2017 Crnogorski se govori i bez s Montenegrin is also spoken without s in Serbo Croatian Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty Retrieved 29 October 2022 Slova s i z odnedavno ne koristi ni Skupstina Crne Gore prva i jedina drzavna institucija koja ih je nakon reforme crnogorskog jezika koristila u zvanicnoj komunikaciji The letters s and z have recently not been used even by the Parliament of Montenegro the first and only state institution that used them in official communication after the reform of the Montenegrin language E g big coastal Croatian cities Rijeka and Split together with their hinterland become basically completely Stokavianised during the 20th century which had been Cakavian speaking urban centres Calic Jelena 2021 Pluricentricity in the classroom the Serbo Croatian language issue for foreign language teaching at higher education institutions worldwide Sociolinguistica European Journal of Sociolinguistics De Gruyter 35 1 113 140 doi 10 1515 soci 2021 0007 ISSN 0933 1883 S2CID 244134335 Retrieved 9 June 2022 The debate about the status of the Serbo Croatian language and its varieties has recently shifted again towards a position which looks at the internal variation within Serbo Croatian through the prism of linguistic pluricentricity Greenberg 2004 p 13 a b Alexander 2013 p 341 a b Serbo Croatian language Encyclopedia Britannica Kafadar Enisa 2009 Bosnisch Kroatisch Serbisch Wie spricht man eigentlich in Bosnien Herzegowina Bosnian Croatian Serbian How do people really speak in Bosnia Herzegovina In Henn Memmesheimer Beate Franz Joachim eds Die Ordnung des Standard und die Differenzierung der Diskurse Teil 1 in German Frankfurt am Main Peter Lang p 103 ISBN 9783631599174 OCLC 699514676 Ronelle Alexander Bosnian Croatian Serbian A Grammar with Sociolinguistic Commentary 2006 The University of Wisconsin Press Buncic Daniel 2008 Die Re Nationalisierung der serbokroatischen Standards The Re Nationalisation of Serbo Croatian Standards In Kempgen Sebastian ed Deutsche Beitrage zum 14 Internationalen Slavistenkongress Ohrid 2008 Welt der Slaven in German Munich Otto Sagner p 93 OCLC 238795822 Thomas 2003 p 325 a b Bailyn John Frederick 2010 To what degree are Croatian and Serbian the same language Evidence from a Translation Study PDF Journal of Slavic Linguistics 18 2 181 219 ISSN 1068 2090 Archived from the original PDF on 9 October 2019 Retrieved 9 October 2019 McLennan Sean 1996 Sociolinguistic Analysis of Serbo Croatian Sociolinguistic Analysis of Serbo Croatian PDF Calgary Working Papers in Linguistics 18 107 ISSN 0823 0579 Retrieved 10 August 2014 Pohl 1996 p 219 Groschel 2003 pp 180 181 Blum 2002 pp 125 126 Brozovic Dalibor 1992 Serbo Croatian as a pluricentric language In Clyne Michael G ed Pluricentric Languages Differing Norms in Different Nations Contributions to the sociology of language Vol 62 Berlin amp New York Mouton de Gruyter pp 347 380 ISBN 9783110128550 OCLC 24668375 Kordic Snjezana 2009 Policentricni standardni jezik Polycentric Standard Language PDF In Badurina Lada Pranjkovic Ivo Silic Josip eds Jezicni varijeteti i nacionalni identiteti PDF in Serbo Croatian Zagreb Disput pp 85 89 ISBN 978 953 260 054 4 OCLC 437306433 SSRN 3438216 CROSBI 426269 Archived PDF from the original on 29 May 2012 ONB Ammon 1995 p 46 Kordic Snjezana 2004 Pro und kontra Serbokroatisch heute Pro and con Serbo Croatian nowadays PDF In Krause Marion Sappok Christian eds Slavistische Linguistik 2002 Referate des XXVIII Konstanzer Slavistischen Arbeitstreffens Bochum 10 12 September 2002 PDF Slavistishe Beitrage in German Vol 434 Munich Otto Sagner p 141 ISBN 978 3 87690 885 4 OCLC 56198470 SSRN 3434516 CROSBI 430499 Archived PDF from the original on 1 June 2012 ONB Kordic Snjezana 2008 Nationale Varietaten der serbokroatischen Sprache National Varieties of Serbo Croatian PDF In Golubovic Biljana Raecke Jochen eds Bosnisch Kroatisch Serbisch als Fremdsprachen an den Universitaten der Welt PDF Die Welt der Slaven Sammelbande Sborniki vol 31 in German Munich Otto Sagner p 95 ISBN 978 3 86688 032 0 OCLC 244788988 SSRN 3434432 CROSBI 426566 Archived PDF from the original on 19 September 2011 ONB Kordic Snjezana 2009 Plurizentrische Sprachen Ausbausprachen Abstandsprachen und die Serbokroatistik Pluricentric languages Ausbau languages Abstand languages and Serbo Croatian studies Zeitschrift fur Balkanologie in German 45 2 213 214 ISSN 0044 2356 OCLC 680567046 SSRN 3439240 CROSBI 436361 ZDB ID 201058 6 Archived PDF from the original on 29 May 2012 Retrieved 21 January 2019 Mader Skender Mia 2022 Schlussbemerkung Summary Die kroatische Standardsprache auf dem Weg zur Ausbausprache The Croatian standard language on the way to ausbau language PDF Dissertation UZH Dissertations in German Zurich University of Zurich Faculty of Arts Institute of Slavonic Studies pp 196 197 doi 10 5167 uzh 215815 Retrieved 8 June 2022 Obwohl das Kroatische sich in den letzten Jahren in einigen Gebieten vor allem jedoch auf lexikalischer Ebene verandert hat sind diese Anderungen noch nicht bedeutend genug dass der Terminus Ausbausprache gerechtfertigt ware Ausserdem konnen sich Serben Kroaten Bosnier und Montenegriner immer noch auf ihren jeweiligen Nationalsprachen unterhalten und problemlos verstandigen Nur schon diese Tatsache zeigt dass es sich immer noch um eine polyzentrische Sprache mit verschiedenen Varietaten handelt Zanelli Aldo 2018 Eine Analyse der Metaphern in der kroatischen Linguistikfachzeitschrift Jezik von 1991 bis 1997 Analysis of Metaphors in Croatian Linguistic JournalLanguagefrom 1991 to 1997 Studien zur Slavistik 41 in German Hamburg Kovac p 21 ISBN 978 3 8300 9773 0 OCLC 1023608613 NSK FFZG Trudgill Peter 30 November 2017 Time to Make Four Into One The New European p 46 Retrieved 7 April 2018 Nosovitz Dan 11 February 2019 What Language Do People Speak in the Balkans Anyway Atlas Obscura Archived from the original on 11 February 2019 Retrieved 3 March 2019 Milekic Sven 30 March 2017 Post Yugoslav Common Language Declaration Challenges Nationalism London Balkan Insight Archived from the original on 30 March 2017 Retrieved 1 July 2017 J T 10 April 2017 Is Serbo Croatian a Language The Economist London ISSN 0013 0613 Archived from the original on 10 April 2017 Retrieved 9 October 2018 Alt URL Alexander 2006 p 424 426 10 2006 Constitution of Serbia Constitution of Montenegro 2007 The official language in Montenegro shall be Montenegrin Serbian Bosniac Albanian and Croatian shall also be in the official use a b Decision of 23 June 1997 Prosecutor v Delalic and Delic Stiks Igor 2015 Brothers United The Making of Yugoslavs Bloomsbury Publishing p 27 ISBN 9781474221542 Retrieved 1 May 2018 Đorđe Tomic 2017 From Yugoslavism to Post Yugoslav Nationalisms Understanding Yugoslav Identities In Roland Vogt ed European National Identities Elements Transitions Conflicts Routledge p 287 ISBN 9781351296465 Alexander 2006 p 425 Bura u javnosti zbog sadrzaja u udzbenicima za srpski Hrvatski ni je juznoslovenski jezik Danas 7 October 2021 Retrieved 30 October 2021 a b Bugarski Ranko 17 October 2021 O juznoslovenskim jezicima Danas Retrieved 30 October 2021 Odluka o utvrđivanju standarda bunjevackog jezika 18 2018 192 Odluka o utvrђivaњu standarda buњevachkog јezika 18 2018 192 Decision of the National Council of Bunjevci no 18 2018 192 in Serbian Archived from the original on 2021 09 02 Retrieved 2020 07 30 via Pravno informacioni sistem RS Solaja Dragan 2007 10 25 Bunjevacki jezik u skolskom programu Blic in Serbian Archived from the original on 2012 10 08 Retrieved 2011 05 25 Kordic s publications in Knjizevna republika Bib irb hr Retrieved 2013 09 01 ZDB ID 2122129 7 Petkovic Nikola 5 September 2010 Mrsko zrcalo pred licima jezikoslovaca A nasty mirror reflects back at linguists in Serbo Croatian Rijeka Novi list p 7 in the arts section Mediteran ISSN 1334 1545 Archived from the original on 15 March 2012 Retrieved 18 July 2012 Snajder Slobodan 10 October 2010 Lingvisticka bojna Linguistic battle in Serbo Croatian Rijeka Novi list p 6 in the arts section Mediteran ISSN 1334 1545 Archived from the original on 13 March 2012 Retrieved 6 July 2012 Kordic Snjezana 2003 Demagogija umjesto znanosti odgovor Daliboru Brozovicu Demagogy instead of science response to Dalibor Brozovic PDF Knjizevna Republika in Serbo Croatian 1 7 8 176 202 ISSN 1334 1057 S2CID 171739712 SSRN 3433060 CROSBI 430252 ZDB ID 2122129 7 Archived PDF from the original on 1 June 2012 Retrieved 8 April 2022 CROLIB Kordic Snjezana 2004 Autizam hrvatske filologije odgovor Ivi Pranjkovicu The autism of Croatian philology response to Ivo Pranjkovic PDF Knjizevna Republika in Serbo Croatian 2 7 8 254 280 ISSN 1334 1057 SSRN 3433015 CROSBI 430121 ZDB ID 2122129 7 Archived PDF from the original on 29 May 2012 Retrieved 1 March 2015 NSK Mandic Igor 21 November 2010 Svojom polemikom mozda pokusava izbrisati nas identitet Sto zapravo hoce ta zena She is perhaps trying to destroy our identity by polemicising What does that woman really want Jutarnji list in Serbo Croatian Zagreb p 19 ISSN 1331 5692 Archived from the original on 29 September 2012 Retrieved 12 August 2013 Kordic 2010 Groschel 2009 Kordic Snjezana 2009 Svijet o nama Bernhard Groschel Das Serbokroatische zwischen Linguistik und Politik About us World point of view Bernhard Groschel Serbo Croatian Between Linguistics and Politics PDF Knjizevna Republika in Serbo Croatian 7 10 12 316 330 ISSN 1334 1057 SSRN 3441854 CROSBI 445818 CEEOL 29944 ZDB ID 2122129 7 Archived PDF from the original on 1 June 2012 Retrieved 6 October 2013 NSK Trudgill Peter 2003 A glossary of sociolinguistics Oxford amp New York Oxford University Press p 119 ISBN 9780748616237 OCLC 50768041 Kordic Snjezana 2007 La langue croate serbe bosniaque et montenegrine The Croatian Serbian Bosnian and Montenegrin Language PDF In Madelain Anne ed Les langues des Balkans Au sud de l Est in French Vol 3 Paris Non Lieu p 74 ISBN 978 2 35270 036 4 OCLC 182916790 SSRN 3439662 CROSBI 429734 Archived PDF from the original on 4 August 2012 Brozovic Dalibor 2002 Europske integracije i hrvatski jezik European integration and the Croatian language Jezik in Serbo Croatian 49 4 124 ISSN 0021 6925 Kloss Heinz 1976 Abstandsprachen und Ausbausprachen Abstand languages and Ausbau languages In Goschel Joachim Nail Norbert van der Els Gaston eds Zur Theorie des Dialekts Aufsatze aus 100 Jahren Forschung Zeitschrift fur Dialektologie and Linguistik Beihefte n F Heft 16 Wiesbaden F Steiner p 303 OCLC 2598722 Pohl 1996 p 214 Kordic Snjezana 2004 Le serbo croate aujourd hui entre aspirations politiques et faits linguistiques Serbo Croatian today Between political aspirations and linguistic facts Revue des etudes slaves in French 75 1 34 36 doi 10 3406 slave 2004 6860 ISSN 0080 2557 OCLC 754207802 S2CID 228222009 SSRN 3433041 CROSBI 430127 ZDB ID 208723 6 ONB Blum 2002 p 134 Haji Omar Asmah 1992 Malay as a pluricentric language In Clyne Michael G ed Pluricentric Languages Differing Norms in Different Nations Contributions to the sociology of language 62 Berlin amp New York Mouton de Gruyter pp 401 419 ISBN 978 3 11 012855 0 OCLC 24668375 Dua Hans Raj 1992 Hindi Urdu as a pluricentric language In Clyne Michael G ed Pluricentric Languages Differing Norms in Different Nations Contributions to the sociology of language 62 Berlin amp New York Mouton de Gruyter pp 381 400 ISBN 978 3 11 012855 0 OCLC 24668375 Ammon 1995 pp 154 174 a b Mladenovic Kratka istorija srpskog knjizevnog jezika Beograd 2004 67 S Zekovic amp B Cimesa Elementa montenegrina Chrestomatia 1 90 CIP Zagreb 1991 Official communique 27 December 2004 Serbian Ministry of Education in Serbian Opstinski sluzbeni glasnik opstine Novi Pazar PDF permanent dead link 65 8 KB 30 April 2002 page 1 Codes for the representation of names of languages Library of Congress www loc gov hbs ISO 639 3 iso639 3 sil org cravat Oxford English Dictionary Online ed Oxford University Press Subscription or participating institution membership required polje Oxford English Dictionary Online ed Oxford University Press Subscription or participating institution membership required slovovitz Oxford English Dictionary Online ed Oxford University Press Subscription or participating institution membership required tamburitza Oxford English Dictionary Online ed Oxford University Press Subscription or participating institution membership required uvala Oxford English Dictionary Online ed Oxford University Press Subscription or participating institution membership required vampire Dictionary com Unabridged Online n d Retrieved 2022 11 01 Universal Declaration of Human Rights Serbian Latin unicode org Universal Declaration of Human Rights Croatian unicode org Universal Declaration of Human Rights Serbian Cyrillic unicode org Universal Declaration of Human Rights un org Sources Alexander Ronelle 2006 Bosnian Croatian Serbian a Grammar With Sociolinguistic Commentary Madison University of Wisconsin Press ISBN 9780299211936 Alexander Ronelle 2013 Language and Identity The Fate of Serbo Croatian Entangled Histories of the Balkans Vol 1 Leiden South Holland Boston MA Brill pp 341 417 ISBN 9789004250765 Ammon Ulrich 1995 Die deutsche Sprache in Deutschland Osterreich und der Schweiz das Problem der nationalen Varietaten German Language in Germany Austria and Switzerland The Problem of National Varieties in German Berlin amp New York Walter de Gruyter p 575 OCLC 33981055 Blum Daniel 2002 Sprache und Politik Sprachpolitik und Sprachnationalismus in der Republik Indien und dem sozialistischen Jugoslawien 1945 1991 Language and Policy Language Policy and Linguistic Nationalism in the Republic of India and the Socialist Yugoslavia 1945 1991 Beitrage zur Sudasienforschung in German Vol 192 Wurzburg Ergon p 200 ISBN 978 3 89913 253 3 OCLC 51961066 Brown Edward Keith Anderson Anne eds 2006 Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics Amsterdam Elsevier ISBN 978 0 08 044299 0 OCLC 3945869 Bugarski Ranko Hawkesworth Celia eds 2006 Language in the Former Yugoslav Lands Bloomington Slavica Publishers p 325 ISBN 978 0 89357 298 3 OCLC 52858529 Greenberg Robert D 2004 Language and Identity in the Balkans Serbo Croatian and its Disintegration 1st ed New York NY Oxford University Press ISBN 9780191514555 Greenberg Robert D 2008 Language and Identity in the Balkans Serbo Croatian and its Disintegration 2nd updated ed New York NY Oxford University Press ISBN 9780199208753 Groschel Bernhard 2003 Postjugoslavische Amtssprachenregelungen Soziolinguistische Argumente gegen die Einheitlichkeit des Serbokroatischen Post Yugoslav Official Languages Regulations Sociolinguistic Arguments Against Consistency of Serbo Croatian Srpski Jezik in German 8 1 2 135 196 ISSN 0354 9259 Retrieved 18 May 2015 COBISS Sr Groschel Bernhard 2009 Das Serbokroatische zwischen Linguistik und Politik mit einer Bibliographie zum postjugoslavischen Sprachenstreit Serbo Croatian Between Linguistics and Politics With a Bibliography of the Post Yugoslav Language Dispute Lincom Studies in Slavic Linguistics in German Vol 34 Munich Lincom Europa p 451 ISBN 978 3 929075 79 3 LCCN 2009473660 OCLC 428012015 OL 15295665W COBISS 43144034 Contents Kordic Snjezana 2006 Serbo Croatian Languages of the World Materials vol 148 Munich amp Newcastle Lincom Europa ISBN 978 3 89586 161 1 OCLC 37959860 OL 2863538W CROSBI 426503 Kordic Snjezana 2010 Jezik i nacionalizam Language and Nationalism PDF Rotulus Universitas in Serbo Croatian Zagreb Durieux p 430 doi 10 2139 ssrn 3467646 ISBN 978 953 188 311 5 LCCN 2011520778 OCLC 729837512 OL 15270636W S2CID 220918333 CROSBI 475567 Archived PDF from the original on 1 June 2012 Retrieved 21 April 2022 Lencek Rado 1976 A few remarks for the history of the term Serbocroatian language Zbornik Za Filologiju I Lingvistiku 19 1 45 53 ISSN 0514 6143 Mappes Niediek Norbert 2005 Die Ethno Falle der Balkan Konflikt und was Europa daraus lernen kann The Ethnic Trap the Balkan conflict and what Europe can learn from it in German Berlin Christoph Links Verlag p 224 ISBN 978 3 86153 367 2 OCLC 61665869 Pohl Hans Dieter 1996 Serbokroatisch Ruckblick und Ausblick Serbo Croatian Looking backward and forward In Ohnheiser Ingeborg ed Wechselbeziehungen zwischen slawischen Sprachen Literaturen und Kulturen in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart Akten der Tagung aus Anlass des 25jahrigen Bestehens des Instituts fur Slawistik an der Universitat Innsbruck Innsbruck 25 27 Mai 1995 Innsbrucker Beitrage zur Kulturwissenschaft Slavica aenipontan in German Vol 4 Innsbruck Non Lieu pp 205 219 OCLC 243829127 Thomas Paul Louis 2003 Le serbo croate bosniaque croate montenegrin serbe de l etude d une langue a l identite des langues Serbo Croatian Bosnian Croatian Montenegrin Serbian from the study of a language to the identity of languages Revue des etudes slaves in French 74 2 3 311 325 doi 10 3406 slave 2002 6801 ISSN 0080 2557 OCLC 754204160 ZDB ID 208723 6 Further readingBanac Ivo Main Trends in the Croatian Language Question Yale University Press 1984 Buncic D 2016 Serbo Croatian Serbian Cyrillic and Latin Biscriptality A Sociolinguistic Typology pp 231 246 Franolic Branko A Historical Survey of Literary Croatian Nouvelles editions Latines Paris 1984 Franolic B 1983 The development of literary Croatian and Serbian Buske Verlag Franolic Branko 1988 Language Policy in Yugoslavia with special reference to Croatian Paris Nouvelles Editions Latines Franolic Branko Zagar Mateo 2008 A Historical Outline of Literary Croatian amp The Glagolitic Heritage of Croatian Culture London amp Zagreb Erasmus amp CSYPN ISBN 978 953 6132 80 5 Greenberg Robert D 1999 In the Aftermath of Yugoslavia s Collapse The Politics of Language Death and Language Birth International Politics 36 2 141 158 Greenberg Robert D 2013 Language Religion and Nationalism The Case of the Former Serbo Croatian Typen slavischer Standardsprachen Theoretische methodische und empirische Zugaenge Wiesbaden Harrassowitz Verlag pp 217 231 ISBN 9783447100281 Ivic Pavle Die serbokroatischen Dialekte the Hague 1958 Jakobsen Per 2008 O strukturalno lingvistickim konstantama srpskohrvatskog jezika inventar fonema i fonotakticka struktura Serbocroatian structural linguistic constants inventory of phonemes and phonotactic structure In Ostojic Branislav ed Jezicka situacija u Crnoj Gori norma i standardizacija in Serbo Croatian Podgorica Crnogorska akademija nauka i umjetnosti pp 25 34 ISBN 978 86 7215 207 4 COBISS CG Archived 2018 10 05 at the Wayback Machine Kristophson Jurgen 2000 Vom Widersinn der Dialektologie Gedanken zum Stokavischen Dialectological Nonsense Thoughts on Shtokavian Zeitschrift fur Balkanologie in German 36 2 178 186 ISSN 0044 2356 ZDB ID 201058 6 Magner Thomas F Zagreb Kajkavian dialect Pennsylvania State University 1966 Magner Thomas F 1991 Introduction to the Croatian and Serbian Language Revised ed Pennsylvania State University Merk Hening 2008 Neka pragmaticna zapazanja o postojanju srpskohrvatskog jezika In Ostojic Branislav ed Jezicka situacija u Crnoj Gori norma i standardizacija in Serbo Croatian Podgorica Crnogorska akademija nauka i umjetnosti pp 295 299 ISBN 978 86 7215 207 4 COBISS CG Archived 2018 10 05 at the Wayback Machine Murray Despalatovic Elinor Ljudevit Gaj and the Illyrian Movement Columbia University Press 1975 Spalatin C 1966 Serbo Croatian or Serbian and Croatian Considerations on the Croatian Declaration and Serbian Proposal of March 1967 Journal of Croatian Studies 7 pp 3 13 Zekovic Sreten amp Cimesa Boro Elementa montenegrina Chrestomatia 1 90 CIP Zagreb 1991 External links Serbo Croatian edition of Wikipedia the free encyclopedia Wikiquote has quotations related to Serbo Croatian Wikimedia Commons has media related to Serbo Croatian language Ethnologue the 15th edition of Ethnologue released 2005 shows changes in this area Previous Ethnologue entry for Serbo Croatian Ethnologue 15th Edition report on western South Slavic languages Serbian and Croatian alphabets at Omniglot Serbian Croatian Bosnian Or Montenegrin Or Just Our Language Radio Free Europe February 21 2009 Browne Wayles Alt Theresa 2004 A Handbook of Bosnian Serbian and Croatian PDF SEELRC Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Serbo Croatian amp oldid 1133186385, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.