@slovak
please dont use the term "slav/slavs/slavic" in that case here.
4 an foreigner who reads here, it will be more than heavy to have a clear view....

in the ancient times there were MACEDONIANS and NOT slavs and therefore they spoke in MACEDONIAN.

nowhere in the ancient times were a nation or a group mentioned named slavs!

call it please like it is or take another name 4 slav term @slovak!

but to use "slav" in the ancient time is totally wrong coz, as u know in the ancient times we belived NOT IN ONE GOD ONLY !!!

There is no other term to use. Everyone apparently has their own definition of the term Slavic so I figured a long time ago it would be a waste of time explaining what it means. The term Slavic was coined in the 10th century to depict that language group, before that it hadn't had a common name since every author calls it by his own name which is at the same time name only of one of the groups in the greater group. For example Herodotus who called Thracians and all of the groups that belong to the same greater group as Thracians. We today call this greater group Slavic even though before the 10th century it was the name only of a small part of that group, perhaps correctly named Slavonic. In Slovak there is a clear distinction between Slavic (Slovanský) and Slavonic (Sloviensky).
And Dimko, we are living now, not 2000 years ago. There is no logic in not using modern terms.

slovakche, ONLY a very small group on this earth knows what do you mean and iam one of them. BUT the majority really think that there must exist a land named SLAVIJA/SLAVISTAN from where the SLAVS cames from.

u have rightly figured out that the term slavic was established @ the 10th century, coz this term is like i say to a dissenter "hey u all are motherfucking CATHOLICS" it has NOTHING to do with a ethnicum it is and was always a term 4 a religiosity!

i hope u understand my point and my fearness, i dont have to show u the stupid arguments from the greek propaganda in that case.
so pls, dont use it without to explain always what do u mean when u write "slav"


p.s.
ok we live 2000 and more years in the future, but it doesnt mean that we are smarter and more tolerant than that ancient people

So let me ask you -
- you say that analytic lang. evolve from inflected, is that right??

So why is it then when i say something in Macedonian and translate it to Serbian, Serbian seems like a logical progression from Macedonian - while i talk the anaytic Macedonian i almost have the need to transform it to a inflected one (or with cases,cuz it has more flow like that and some unnececery things from Mako are lost). From this logic it seems to me that inflected tongues evolved from analytic not the other way around - cuz why would i had the need when i speak to inflect my analytic - when acc to you analytic evolved from inflected,,-a thing that would have in itself the natural progression from infl to analy - the same one i feel the other way round.

I told my knowledgable friend about this discussion and bout the inflected-analytic conversation - he just laughed and said that as much as the history is wrong that much your linguistic theories are wrong...


You say Thai is analytic - for many many centuries, right?Someone said to you that Macedonian isnt 'slavic' cuz the word slavic is a very unfortunate one.Macedonian is Macedonian not Slavic - Slavic is Macedonian but Macedonian isnot Slavic. So if its that old - it well can be analytic since who knows when,as Thai is - cuz its not slavic - its Macedonian. It belongs to that group only cz of bad knowledge.

Ok, you no longer make any sense. If you want to discuss analytic with inflected etc. then open a new thread for that, but first buy a book and learn what actually is an analytic and what is an inflected language. The first part of your post is simply ridiculous.

And one more thing.

I'll admit the Rosetta Stone is written in ancient Macedonian only if you shut the fuck up with your idiotic theories unless I come to Macedonia and cut that stupid yapping sheep tongue of yours with an axe and eat it!!!

Have a nice day and don't you ever talk to me again.

Magedon, here is a translation of the last part of the Rosetta inscription :
*************************************************************
god who maketh himself beautiful, whose deeds are beautiful, the priests have decreed] that this DECREE shall [be inscribed] upon a stele of hard stone in the writing of the words of the gods, and the writing of the books, and in the writing of HAUI-NEBUI (i.e., Greeks), and it shall be set up in the sanctuaries in the temples which [are called] by his name, of the first, second, and third [class], near the statue of the HORUS, the King of the South and North Ptolemy, ever-living, beloved of Ptaḥ, the god who maketh himself manifest, whose deeds are beautiful.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/egy/trs/trs07.htm
************************************************************

COMMENTS
As you see, it clearly says it will be inscribed in -3- languages

"...shall [be inscribed] upon a stele of hard stone in the writing of the words of the gods(1), and the writing of the books(2), and in the writing of HAUI-NEBUI (i.e., Greeks)(3),"

So, the first two are the Egyprian languages and the third is Greek. So do not tire yourself. And, believe me, nobody takes seriously the two gentlemen who try to find Macedonian where it does not fit.

Slovak, that 'tongue' made me gag!

What a terrible distraction this Rosetta Stone farce has been. It reflects very negatively on us.

You are of course all amateurs and wannabe linguists.

I'm not saying that some of the stuff thrown up now and then is not interesting. Most of it is. I'm not saying I know more, because I may not.

But you take yourselves too seriously on this subject - because really how many of you are qualified ?

Then again, not that 'qualified' necessarily means anything, but when it comes to language I think it means alot. Let it go.....

I'd like to see more on the Macedonian writing in the Dura-Europos inscriptions.

But thats another thread.

Hummmm...did i ever mentioned in my post something about the roseta stone????

I told u a million times am not in the least some suporter of t n b work, and that i just want the truth - same as you!!!So u already can admit that roseta is written in Macedonian coz I (at least) never claimed that - and besides - what makes my theories stupid and yours smart?The fact that youv read few books more than me about the subject???You say i should go by some books and than talk - would you give me that same advice for history books??MMmm, i think not coz, neli, all history is wrong - while in my scientific chair ALL is right and correct and perfect.You linguists already got it all,dont ya???Promise to think about this a bit when you go to sleep, ok??And try to explain me the read bellow:

You say the first part is ridiculous - can u tell me why?And more importantly can you tell me why i feel that serbian is logical progression from macedonian - not the other way around - i know both languages like very good-i can probably say that i know better serbian than mako - so can you explain to me why do i have that strange sensation when i read a book on macedonian that serbian is natural progression from this language ful of uneeded things wich apparently are ... gone in serbian!Do you want me to believe that languages evolve in louser forms of their former selves?You said once Macedonian sounds like a caveman tongue to you - so you now want me to believe that a slavic language sounding like a caveman one EVOLVED FROM YOUR 'REAL SLAVIC SOUNDING LANGUAGES'?????


Think about this when you go to sleep,promise?

What can I do for you to never reply to me posts, hm? What? Tell me? You are a very boring person and I don't want anything to do with you. So go ahead, but this is the last post I have written to you.

Hey Magedon,

You won't get an arguement out of me about this.

I agree you.

I'm convinced that the ancient Macedonians spoke a Slavic language, and that it is not too dissimilar from the Macedonian language today. And that Macedonia has always been the home of the Slavic language - as far back as some dark and distant past. These are the ''barbarians'' of ancient times.

Finding Slavic writing in an isolated ancient Macedonian garrison (Dura-Europos) is a very powerful discovery. It throws up enormous questions about so many things.

But there are other things. Strabo was clear that the Macedonians were 'bi-lingual'. Among the Macedonian writing there were found a small number of obvious Greek words.

There are the obvious phonetic differences between Macedonian and Greek. It is an important point because it puts the ancient Macedonian language closer to Thracian.

Not an insignificant point. The Thracians made up much of the Macedonian war-machine. This suggests that the languages were very similar if not the same.

Then there is an irrefutible artefact where the Macedonians used a 'translator' between possibly the only Greek commander in Alexander's enterouge and the Macedonian soldiers he was put in charge of. A sure sign that the everyday Macedonian soldier could not speak or understand the Greek language.

It goes on and on. I think Slavic, as we know it today has always been in Macedonia, and always spoken by Macedonians (and her neighours) down the ages.

The ''modern Greek'' discourse of illegitimacy when it comes to anything ethnic Macedonian is essentially a colonial discourse. In other words it is designed to strip the Macedonian identity away from its people. It is in reality the continuation of war. The Greeks are making great efforts to finish what they started in 1913. Their single purpose is to wipe the Macedonian identity as it has been known for thousands of years off the face of the map. Out of memory.

Ambitious? Take a look at what they did to the Albanians and Vlachs and Turks on that sad day they suddenly found themsevles living under a new and foriegn adminitration. The Macedonians were surely next in line after 1913.

Pretty sad state of affairs.

And now they want to ''negotiate'' a name and an identity that was never Greek ?

p.

Oh and you do replay to my posts, huh? You will write something, as your last enlightening post - but that something says nothing really. The obvious answer that you dont want to do anything with me is that YOU CANT ANSWER THE QUESTIONS I'V ASKED YOU - SO YOU NOW ESCAPE IN "your boring,stupid,lalala". So here i am - a stupid guy - and here you are an 'smart' guy - so why dont you just try to ANSWER to what iv asked you????

Why am i boring?Coz i chalenge your views?Than answer me plain and simple what iv asked you and youll surely wont find me boring anymore...

You know, your behaviour becomes incrisingly, by the day, untolerable - not just with me - but i read an all sides how posters 'dont deserve to waste mr19 year old sveznalica time" Wow. So you got it all correct, huh? You know, i used to have respect for you, but that respect faded away in direct proportion with the rising of your all-knowing arrogant behaviur. Da mali, ti si pocicao sve znanje sveta direktno od bozje sise....The last sentence in your post - ' So go ahead, but this is the last post I have written to you.' - sums it up pretty nicely.


paul

are you saying that you agree that there is huge logic in what i wrote?