ChrisPhilipou wrote:
Risto the Great wrote:
ChrisPhilipou wrote:
Risto the Great wrote:
ChrisPhilipou wrote:
Can you provide any similar references that describe the continuity of the Macedonian language from the ancient Macedonians to the modern Macedonians? Can any one of you?
Read any slavic bible Filipov.
And then answer me a question ... Justinian (of Macedonia), widely regarded as the founder of modern law wrote in what language?
Risto the Great
Risto I was refering to the language of the ancient macedonians, not the post Cyril and Methodius language (they codified the language which could then be used for religious texts such as the bible you refer to) So what about the language between Alexander's time and Cyril's time? Which credible unbiased scholar relates the two and connects your modern Macedonian language with that of the before Christ Macedonians?
This is the theory espoused in here is it not? Correct me if I am wrong. I am genuinely interested in learning this.
You didn't answer my question. It was not mutually exclusive ... the answer to that explains many things. Here is hoping that you would like to enter into reasoned dialogue after you respond.
Risto the Great
And you did not answer any of my questions.

But,for the sake of the reasoned dialogue here is your chance to educate me Risto. Tell me about Justinian, first or second?, and his ethnic background and the language he wrote in.
You see ... I was answering your questions but you didn't want to listen.
Here, you can read about Justinian on the following link:
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Justinian
(Note the slavic descent bit)
What you most likely do not know about this man is that he could neither read nor write. I wonder what you think of this. Perhaps you might think this person was of limited intellect. Clearly this was not the case. So how does a leader leave such a mark on civilisation and yet not have what appears to be a basic level of read/write capability? We assume these abilities are a measure of social standing in this present day and age.
In your wildest imagination, could you possibly comprehend a situation where written language was not as prevalent as now. Could you imagine a situation where everything was written in whatever the language scholars were using at the time. They were using Latin at the time ... I know .. I know ... it wasn't for a very long time ... maybe 1800 years maximus (oops ... maximum).
So, when you read Latin texts from germany and england ... do you automatically assume they are Romans who have written the text? I think you have exactly one poofteenth of intelligence and agree with me that the written language has nothing to do with the ethnicity of the people.
It is at this point that I would like to introduce another issue. The number of written languages in the world at the time you have decided to question were quite possibly able to to be counted on one hand. Certainly this is not the case nowadays. With your (same) poofteenth of intellect, do you accept the possibility that written language was not held in the same regard as it is in this day and age. You know ... something best left for the academics or something.
Now tell me about all of the written greek texts over the 500 years under ottoman rule in greece proper. How many can you count? This was a time when many written languages existed and there is barely a whisper to record the daily goings on during this time. So you tell me what you would expect to learn about the ethnicity of the ancient Macedonians in light of the above information.
Risto the Great