Talk:Serbian language

Serbian language in Ragusa

Can someone provide a source for the (dubious) claim that the Republic of Ragusa almost exclusively used Serbian in its communications with the hinterlands, or used it at all for that matter? 2A05:4F46:514:D000:45EB:3951:D630:A8FF (talk) 16:58, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

No one can, because this claim is a lie.

https://archive.org/details/2022.-velikosrpsko-nijekanja-hrvatskoga-jezika-i-prisvajanje-dubrovacke-knjizevnosti Mir Harven (talk) 16:32, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Proximity to Slovene and Macedonian, fake claim

Kindly provide some data for the false claim that Serbian "has lower intelligibility with the Eastern South Slavic languages Bulgarian and Macedonian, than with Slovene", because that is most certainly not the experience of most speakers of Serbian in Serbia, and I doubt that it is indeed an experience of Serbian speakers in Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina etc. Even Croats who speak Štokavian and not Kajkavian would be hard to decide whether Macedonian or Slovenw is closer to their own linguistic expression and for Serbs it is quite clearcut. The only thing Slovene and Serbo-Croat have in common is noun and adjective case endings (which Macedonian and Bulgarian have for the most part lost).— Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.245.225.151 (talk) 08:42, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

sign you comments with four tildas (~), and read the article - it's full of citations to Reliable Sources 50.111.1.232 (talk) 21:35, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

No scientific evidence "Latin script is used in Serbia by Serbs for centuries".

Also, the notion that cyrillic script is "traditional, nationalist, etc." is malicious. These conclusions are taken from political articles and debates, not from social psychological, linguist, historical, ethnological or other scientific papers. One of two newspaper articles are basis for these racist claims. Вавилен Нојман (talk) 08:21, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

I removed two unsourced statements, one of which has been tagged as needing citation for a year. Not sure which article Вавилен means with the last sentence, though, and if that's a reference we need to reconsider. ◅ Sebastian 04:42, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Sociolinguistics

I'm removing the link to Abstand and ausbau languages from See also since I see no obvious connection to the lemma. If anything, then I'd assume Serbian is a dachsprache, but I'm no expert on sociolinguistics; maybe someone else can contribute their knowledge and improve the article in this regard. ◅ Sebastian 04:48, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Spelling alphabet

While the "Avala Beograd Cetinje" is indeed the standard(ized) spelling alphabet for Serbian, having roots in Yugoslav People's Army times, it is virtually unknown outside of military and radio amateur circuits (and barely there). Therefore I challenge its inclusion on the WP:Due weight basis. Apart from the cited standard, I can't find much sources devoted to its use and popularity, and I'm sure it is not universally taught even in today's army. Here's a nice overview of the subject https://qrz.com.hr/sricanje-slova/ – not a reliable source but a radio amateur blog, stating that the spelling alphabet is basically obsolete. For what it's worth, here's an extensive list of spelling alphabets worldwide, but I'm doubtful whether that stuff is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia; Category:Spelling alphabets contains only a handful. Perhaps the best place to keep that material is next to wikt:Appendix:German spelling alphabet. No such user (talk) 09:15, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

I didn't look through it carefully when I undid my revert, but the Члан 24. of this official reference has an updated spelling alphabet that's not from JNA times (i.e. doesn't contain Yugoslavia-wide place names), should that one be added? I don't have a preference of whether it should be included or not. -Vipz (talk) 09:46, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

I did not look carefully either (no further than letter C), but my point about weight still stands. I think the alphabet is too obscure for inclusion in encyclopedia, particularly in the main language article. If one would write a textbook on Serbian, would it be included? Since the answer is resounding "no", I don't think we should either. Perhaps it could be split to separate Serbian spelling alphabet but I'm not sure it would pass and AfD on the notability basis. No such user (talk) 07:21, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

For a separate article I don't think so, it's merely a list and nothing else, they're already contained at Spelling alphabet#Table of other language additions. If it's not notable enough to be included in this article, it's hardly notable enough to have its own article. @Heffalump1974: please see this discussion, might apply to other language articles as well. -Vipz (talk) 13:34, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

History of Serbian language?

Why there is no section regarding “history”?!

In Serbian version of same article there is quite nice section of history. So why english speaking visitors are deprive from this informations? Calimero (talk) 06:00, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Miscitation under section “Writing system" > “Usage”

It quotes an article[1], saying that the listed statistics about the use of Cyrillic and Latin apply to the whole population. while the cited article mentions those same statistics for people between ages of 20 and 29.

Additionally, the last paragraph of the article says that the data was acquired through a telephone survey of 1011 people. Which might be too small of a sample size to give any useful information. --Mikister2012 (talk) 16:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Mikister2012: I don't think it's miscited. The lede states that "poslednje istraživanje koje je pokazalo da 47 odsto stanovnika Srbije piše latinicom, u odnosu na 36 odsto onih koji koriste ćirilicu.", while the sidebar referring to the population 20–29 gives a different piece of data (latinicu koriste čak 47 odsto više nego ćirilicu).
I'm not a statistician, but a sample of 1,011 is actually quite large, and if selected properly, should provide a very accurate picture of the overall distribution. For example, election polls are often conducted on less. See opinion poll#Potential for inaccuracy. No such user (talk) 09:08, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

You're right, it seems I'm the one who didn't read carefully enough. Also thanks for the link, I wasn't aware that 1k+ is considered a large sample size for polling. Mikister2012 (talk) 12:19, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Language

The language is also spoken by Montenegrins. At the beginning of the article you must say that it's a standard variety mainly spoken by Serbs and the majority of Montenegrins. Also you must add "majority of Montenegrins" in the "ethnicity" cell.

s variety mainly spoken by Serbs and the majority of Montenegrins. 79.106.124.205 (talk) 14:26, 20 August 2023 (UTC)