Talk:Shtokavian

Migration of people and Shtokavian speakers from eastern Herzegovina
I quote part of this article " By far the most numerous, mobile and expansionist migrations were those of Ijekavian-Shtokavian speakers of eastern Herzegovina, who have spread into most of Western Serbia, many areas of eastern and western Bosnia, large swathes of Croatia (Banovina, Kordun, Lika, parts of Gorski kotar, continental parts of northern Dalmatia, some places north of Kupa, parts of Slavonia, southeastern Baranya etc.). This is the reason Eastern Herzegovinian is the most spoken Serbo-Croatian dialect today, and why it bears the name that is only descriptive of its area of origin. These migrations also played the pivotal role in the spread of Neo-Shtokavian innovations. ".... We do not have any history documents which talks about migration of peoples from eastern Herzegovina to western Bosnia, Croatia (Banovina, Kordun, Lika, parts of Gorski kotar, continental parts of northern Dalmatia, some places north of Kupa, parts of Slavonia, southeastern Baranya etc.. Only larger migration that I know is migration to the Dubrovnik area and to the Venetian Dalmatian side. How can that information be there when it's not true, I see that some Serbian historian is quoted as the source of this information "Okuka, Miloš (2008), Srpski dijalekti,(Serbian dialects) SDK Prosvjeta". Therefore in that source there is no evidence that this migration exist. Also it states that I quote "migrations were those of Ijekavian-Shtokavian speakers" Historical sources for this area speak differently I quote "Najbrojniji su jezični spomenici na ovim prostorima natpisi sa stećaka. Na njima do druge polovice 15. st. nailazimo isključivo na ikavske odraze jata, u 15. st.18 ikavski odrazi uvjerljivo pretežu, ali nalazimo i sve brojnije ijekavske, u 16. st. podjednako često nalazimo i ikavske i ijekavske odraze jata... The most numerous linguistic monuments in this region are inscriptions from the stećak tombstones. On them until in the second half of the 15th century we find exclusively the reflections of Ikavian, in the 15th c. they are convincingly prevalent, but we also find more and more Jekavian ones. Domagoj Vidović Institute for Croatian Language and Linguistics, Republic of Austria 16, Zagreb..Ikavian I ijekavian speech in the wider Neretva area, page 6. In this source we also have listed and documents at Ikavian from year 1241, 14th and 15th centurie, 1416, 1380-1390, 1419, there are also mentioned and Ikavian toponyms. Further, concrete example is given here I quoted "" A group of Croats immigrants from eastern Herzegovina to south Chakavian region Korcula (cf. Fazinic 2004). Many refugees found refuge there in yeare 1672. this families originating from eastern Herzegovina, mostly from Popovo (Botica, Curic, Franic, Matic, Šušak) and Dubrava (Borovac, Dabelić).""page 9. Although they came from areas(eastern Hezegovina) where today speak Ijekavian-Shtokavian in Racista(Korcula) they speaking Ikavian not Ijekavian. It says that migrants from area of eastern Hezegovina bring Ikavian speech not Ijekavian and as I said migrants go to Venetian Dalmatia(if we follow written records) not to " Croatia (Banovina, Kordun, Lika, parts of Gorski kotar, continental parts of northern Dalmatia,etc, etc)" as it stated in this article. Final conclusion of the source (scientific paper), I quote "CONCLUSION, The dialectologically area of the Neretva region is very diverse. In that area in the past was bordered  Šćakavian and Štakavian speeches, and today borders Ikavian and Ijekavian-Shtokavian speeches." Considering that this part of the article does not correspond with material truth I suggest to remove this part of the article and replace with true data that speaks about history of population and speeches in eastern Herzegovina.

31.217.27.56 (talk) 12:05, 1 October 2019 (UTC)mikola

Serbian propaganda or truth
If i said that there are no written historical sources which prove migration of someone from eastern Herzegovina towards I quote "western Bosnia, large swathes of Croatia (Banovina, Kordun, Lika, parts of Gorski kotar, continental parts of northern Dalmatia, some places north of Kupa, parts of Slavonia, southeastern Baranya etc." then my statement is true when there is no evidence for that migration. I noted that area of eastern Herzegovina before these alleged migration are and Ikavian and Šćakavian(where these people migrated?). Therefore I give it a few more days that someone remove that part because it is untrue and unprovable or I will start deleting that part myself in the article. On the source link is a book "Okuka, Miloš (2008), Srpski dijalekti, SDK Prosvjeta" used as evidence for that part of the article but there is no evidence which prove migration from eastern Herzegovina. We cannot quote a book that talks about some migration when there is no evidence in that book which proves that migration. Where is article on English Wikipedia that talking about Serbian migration from eastern Herzegovina? Therefore everything is clear. 46.188.148.21 (talk) 09:03, 21 October 2019 (UTC)mikola
 * I can see no sense whatsoever, just wishful thinking and clear, stupid, bias. Sadkσ   (talk is cheap)  10:47, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 * You can think whatever you want, but there is still no written historical records that proves this migration from eastern Herzegovina. If that proof does not exist then that part of the article is a lie and as such it must be dropped from the article.

46.188.147.77 (talk) 16:36, 21 October 2019 (UTC)mikola

Deleting parts of the article that have no evidence in the original historical records
"By far the most numerous, mobile and expansionist migrations were those of Ijekavian-Shtokavian speakers of eastern Herzegovina, who have spread into most of Western Serbia, many areas of eastern and western Bosnia, large swathes of Croatia (Banovina, Kordun, Lika, parts of Gorski kotar, continental parts of northern Dalmatia, some places north of Kupa, parts of Slavonia, southeastern Baranya etc.)" This claim from article is based on information from book of "Okuka, Miloš (2008), Srpski dijalekti, SDK Prosvjeta", Evidence (original historical records) for migration  of someone from  eastern Herzegovina to western Bosnia, large swathes of Croatia (Banovina, Kordun, Lika, parts of Gorski kotar, continental parts of northern Dalmatia, some places north of Kupa, parts of Slavonia, southeastern Baranya etc, do not exist in historical documents and for this reason that claim cannot be part of this article. Southeastern Baranya and parts of Slavonia(eastern) might stay because there peoples are coming from Serbian area "Great Migrations of the Serbs"  but someone this part of article has prove it with a source and also noted that and in this area of Croatia Vlachs have been mentioned who have nothing to do with these newcomers. However and this migration of Serbs does not starts from eastern Herzegovina either, so that must be known too. Mikola22 (talk) 07:35, 22 October 2019 (UTC)Mikola22
 * Once again that people understand, in historiography there is no data on migration from eastern Herzegovina at least not in most of the Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Historical data, history books talk about mass migration to the Dubrovnik area and along the Adriatic coast (Venetian side).Mikola22 (talk) 17:56, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Quote requested
The section that repeatedly has been removed in the current edit war, is sourced by Okuka, Miloš (2008) Srpski dijalekti, SDK Prosvjeta. Since the facts supposedly supported by this source has been repeatedly challenged by one editor, it would be very nice if someone could present quotes from the book (with translation into English), thereby perhaps avoiding further edit war. --T*U (talk) 21:59, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Okuka, Miloš (2008)Najbrojnije, najpokretljivije i najekspanzivnije bile su seobe štokavaca ijekavaca istočnohercegovačkog porijekla. Oni su preplavili veći dio zapadne Srbije, mnoga predjela u istočnoj i zapadnoj Bosni, veliki dio Hrvatske (Baniju, Kordun, Liku, dio Gorskog kotara, dio kopna sjeverne Dalmacije, neka mjesta sjeverno od Kupe, neke dijelove Slavonije, jugoistočne Baranje itd.). Doprli su i u pojedine predjele Slovenije i Mađarske. ("The most numerous, mobile and  expansive were the migrations of Stokhavian ijekavians of eastern Herzegovinan origin. They have flooded much of western Serbia, many parts of eastern and western Bosnia, much of Croatia (Baniju, Kordun, Lika, part of Gorski Kotar, part of mainland northern Dalmatia, some places north of Kupa, some parts of Slavonia, southeast Baranja, etc.) . They also reached certain regions of Slovenia and Hungary.") page 16. Stokhavian ijekavian Croats live in Banija, Kordun, Lika, Gorski Kotar, Dalmatia, Slavonia, Hungary and there is no historical information or history books who talk about migration from eastern Herzegovina into these areas, there is also no information for Bosniaks or Croatian Serbs. Domagoj Vidović (Institute for Croatian Language and Linguistics ) "S obzirom na činjenicu da s područja istočno od Neretve nemamo ni jednu veću kompaktnu iseljeničku skupinu koja se iselila prije turskoga prodora, rekonstrukcija je predmigracijske dijalektne slike tih krajeva nepotpuna" "Due to the fact that from  area east of Neretva(eastern Herzegovina) we do not have one bigger compact emigrant group that emigrated before  arrival of the Turks reconstruction of the pre-migration dialect image of these regions is incomplete." Mikola22 (talk) 09:11, 7 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you,, for the quote and the translation. As far as I can see, Okuka is a widely published and widely quoted scholar, so there should be no doubt that his works in general will be considered to be reliable sources. To remove the content that is sourced to him, is thus disruptive. If there are other WP:RS telling a different story, this may be added as a "second opinion", but it can never be used as a pretext for removing the sourced text already there. --T*U (talk) 11:40, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
 * He can be RS but that part of the book and his claim is not RS. He follows an older Serbian sources. I quote "The most notable Serbian linguist of the 19th century, Vuk Karadžić, was a follower of the view that all south Slavs that speak the Shtokavian dialect (of Serbo-Croatian) were Serbs, speaking the Serbian language." I can add sources that say otherwise but that clame is not true and includes Bosniaks and Croats. However we do not have history sources or history books that talk about Serbian migration from eastern Herzegovina and we don't even need to talk about Croats and Bosniaks. This quote is false and not in good faith. This is not about linguism but about historical data of migration from some area. "The most numerous, mobile and  expansive were the migrations of Stokhavian ijekavians of eastern Herzegovinan origin, They have flooded much of western Serbia, many parts of eastern and western Bosnia, much of Croatia (Baniju, Kordun, Lika, part of Gorski Kotar, part of mainland northern Dalmatia, some places north of Kupa, some parts of Slavonia, southeast Baranja, etc.). They also reached certain regions of Slovenia and Hungary.. No historian talks about it because there is no historical data that would prove this migration to that areas. Serbs goes from central Serbia to parts of Slavonia and Hungary but eastern Herzegovina is mentioned here. Serbian academic and historian in book "Serbs" 2004. (part of book "escaping, relocating, settling") does not mention mass migration from eastern Herzegovina. He mentions some Vlach movements from Herzegovina not eastern Hezegovina and that Serbs from Smederevo area  going to Hungary and Slavonia. It is relevant history. Mikola22 (talk) 12:34, 7 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I find it just a bit boring to have to repeat the same things over and over again. If you want to contribute to Wikipedia, you need to be familiar with the basics, in this case WP:V and WP:RS. I do not know if you have not read it, or if you have read it and not understood it. If we have concluded that a source is reliable, we cannot choose to accept some statements from the source and reject other parts because we think the author is wrong. And we cannot reject one reliable source because another reliable source says something different. We report what the RS says. We cannot say "Source X says so-and-so, but that is wrong". If we have other sources saying otherwise, we can say things like "Source A says this, while source B says that", provided both sources are reliable. --T*U (talk) 15:58, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know if you are right or wrong on this but this is getting really tiresome. Mikola and Ceha are in conflict with just about everyone, from Poland and White Croatia to Bosnia and Donji Kraji, and it would be arduous to list all ANs, DRNs, RSNs and TP infinite discussion where these two have brought their bias and tendentious editing in righting great wrongs. This has to stop. There are at least half of dozen of editors who found themselves pin-down by duo.-- ౪ Santa ౪  99°  22:21, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

mismatch in classification (New/Old) between the map and the article
The classification on doesn't match the groupings in Shtokavian. Namely, I've noticed that:


 * Slavonian and East Bosnian are Old Shtokavian in the article, but Neo-Shtokavian on the map.

x-post to Commons Imz (talk) 12:20, 22 September 2023 (UTC)