# Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian (BCS): citizen of Bosnia of Serbian ethnicity



## Kolan

_Context - read this thread, please._



Duya said:


> That's tentatively the same in Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian (-ac for male citizen). However, I've never heard anyone say "Uzbekinja" or "Tadžikinja" -- the second form will be used instead, even if it's technically a different thing.


Just a question: how would you call a native Serbian woman, citizen of Bosnia and Herzegovina, for example, who conserves her Serbian identity and language living there?

On the other hand, I remember that we used to say чехословацкий спортсмен, чехословак, although it was obvious that he could be only either чех or словак at a time. Because, I think, in sport events the state nationality, banner, anthem prevail over the national identity. However, in _Czechoslovakia_ case it did not work entirely for women, we said чехословацкая спортсменка, not _чехословачка _.


----------



## Athaulf

(Throughout this post, I'll write ethnic and regional names in the form _masculine version_/_feminine version_.)



Kolan said:


> _Context - read this thread, please._
> 
> Just a question: how would you call a native Serbian woman, citizen of Bosnia and Herzegovina, for example, who conserves her Serbian identity and language living there?



The noun _Srbin_/_Srpkinja_ is used for all ethnic Serbs, regardless of their place of birth or residence. 

Also, regardless of ethnicity, any person from Bosnia can be described as _Bosanac_/_Bosanka_, and any person from Herzegovina can be described as _Hercegovac_/_Hercegovka_. Thus, for example, it's correct to refer to me as a _Bosanac_ because I was born and raised in Bosnia, even though I'm an ethnic Croat. The same would be true for a Bosnian Serb. Of course, as you might guess, with all the ethnic tensions and chauvinism that exist in former Yugoslavia, some people might dislike being called by these names as a matter of principle. 

What makes things complicated, however, is the fact that the very similar word _Bošnjak_/_Bošnjakinja_ is nowadays used as the ethnic name for Bosnian Muslims. However strange it might sound, _musliman_ (= "Muslim") was used as an _ethnic_ name in former Yugoslavia, even by many people who weren't religious at all, not even formally. Nowadays, members of this ethnic group prefer to use the name _Bošnjak_/_Bošnjakinja_, which sounds different enough from _Bosanac_/_Bosanka_ in BCS, but creates total confusion in foreign languages. Theoretically, the correct English translations should be "Bosnian" for _Bosanac_ and _bosanski_ (the one that's applicable to natives of Bosnia of all ethnicities), and "Bosniak" for _Bošnjak _and_ bošnjački_. However, I'm not sure if even all the dictionaries have yet caught up on that distinction, let alone practical English usage... 

As a side observation, it doesn't make sense to talk about "Serbian [or Croatian] identity _and language_" when it comes to people from Bosnia-Herzegovina. In former Yugoslavia, people who grow up in the same region will normally speak the exact same regional dialect and/or the exact same regional variation of standard BCS, regardless of their ethnicity. As an ethnic Croat growing up in the Bosnian city of Banja Luka, my speech was absolutely indistinguishable from my Serbian and Bosniak (back then called Muslim) peers.* Since the rise of ethnic chauvinism in the late 1980s and early 1990s, some Croats and Serbs from Bosnia-Herzegovina have been trying to change their language to sound more Croatian or Serbian, but that's just posturing. It sounds about as ridiculous and unnatural as if an American proud of his Scottish ancestry suddenly decided to speak his best  imitation of Scottish English in everyday life in the U.S. 

* - As I've already mentioned in some previous threads, one could nitpick on this point by considering the religion-related vocabulary. A Catholic Croat, a Muslim Bosniak, and an Orthodox Serb might learn different words for the same thing in their respective places of worship. Thus even back in my Bosnian childhood, you would hear my family members say e.g. _Krist_ for "Christ", while our Serbian neighbors would say _Hrist_. However, this is an extremely small subset of vocabulary, which probably wouldn't even be used in a typical conversation.
 
--

Now, when it comes to words for citizens of Serbia or Serbs living withing the borders of Serbia, the situation is also complicated. In Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, people often use the word _Srbijanac_/_Srbijanka_ and the adjective _srbijanski_ to refer to Serbs from Serbia.  Furthermore, in these republics, the adjective _srbijanski_ is often also used to refer to something specifically related to the state and government of Serbia. For example, a minister in the government of Serbia will typically be called _srbijanski ministar_ in Croatian media (regardless of what ethnic group he might belong to).

However, many Serbs from Serbia don't like these words, since in northern parts of Serbia, they are used as slightly derogatory terms for people from Central Serbia. I actually had no idea about this until relatively recently, when I used _srbijanski_ with its usual Croatian meaning in front of a friend who is a Serb from Belgrade. Needless to say, he wasn't very happy about being placed under this designation, but at least I learned something new when we cleared the misunderstanding.


----------



## sokol

Athaulf said:


> Theoretically, the correct English translations should be "Bosnian" for _Bosanac_ and _bosanski_ (the one that's applicable to natives of Bosnia of all ethnicities), and "Bosniak" for _Bošnjak _and_ bošnjački_.


I am not sure that this would work, ever - be it in English or in German. (German, by the way, _has _a word "Bosniak", but it is the ancient word which was used in the Habsburg Empire, no one would use it any more except in historical contexts - it is only "Bosnier" in German nowadays.)
That is: I really can't quite imagine that this use of terms ever will catch in English, or German.



Athaulf said:


> Since the rise of ethnic chauvinism in the late 1980s and early 1990s, some Croats and Serbs from Bosnia-Herzegovina have been trying to change their language to sound more Croatian or Serbian, but that's just posturing.


I've once read an article of Bosnian Serbs switching to Ekavian Shtokavian in Bosnia*) - according to Daria Sito Sucic 1996: The Fragmentation of Serbo-Croatian into Three New Languages; in: Open Media Research Institute Prague; www source 1996; published in the periodical Transition 2/24, Prague, 29.11.1996. The foreign Ekavian seems to have been established, at least at the time and for the time being, as Serbian standard language in Bosnian Serb authorities.
I really would be interested if this still is the case: do Bosnian Serbs still try to "learn Ekavian"?

And is this article really accurate about the situation there - or was it only for the time, and the situation has changed since? (Of course in the mid 1990ies the political situation was completely different from the 2000s.)


*) For those not familiar with the situation of standard language in BCS: Jekavian (Ijekavian) = Croatian + Bosnian + Montenegrin standard language plus (at least traditionally) standard language of Bosnian Serbs; Ekavian = standard language of Serbs in Serbia.


----------



## Thomas1

Athaulf said:


> [...] However, many Serbs from Serbia don't like these words, since in northern parts of Serbia, they are used as slightly derogatory terms for people from Central Serbia. I actually had no idea about this until relatively recently, when I used _srbijanski_ with its usual Croatian meaning in front of a friend who is a Serb from Belgrade. Needless to say, he wasn't very happy about being placed under this designation, but at least I learned something new when we cleared the misunderstanding.


  Would that be Vojvodina where _Srbijanac_/_Srbijanka_ and the adjective _srbijanski_ are used with a tad of sarcasm? Then if they, Serbs, don’t like these word, do they have any alternatives to them?


----------



## Kolan

Thomas1 said:


> Would that be Vojvodina where _Srbijanac_/_Srbijanka_ and the adjective _srbijanski_ are used with a tad of sarcasm? Then if they, Serbs, don’t like these word, do they have any alternatives to them?


I will have to elaborate a more extensive thought on the whole thing, but at the first glance it looks very similar to "русский/россиянин" dilemma.

If you call an ethnic Russian россиянин while in Russia, he may suspect that you think of him as of non-Russian ethnicity and then it depends on how he would take it.

It may be used to designate all Russians, but never acquired a narrow ethnic sense.


----------



## Athaulf

Thomas1 said:


> Would that be Vojvodina where _Srbijanac_/_Srbijanka_ and the adjective _srbijanski_ are used with a tad of sarcasm?



Yes, although my impression is that the word has such meaning not only in Vojvodina, but also in Belgrade and perhaps some other places just south of Vojvodina. My friend mentioned in the above post, who was unhappy about being called this way, is a Serb from Belgrade. 



> Then if they, Serbs, don’t like these word, do they have any alternatives to them?


I don't know about any.


----------



## Athaulf

sokol said:


> I am not sure that this would work, ever - be it in English or in German. (German, by the way, _has _a word "Bosniak", but it is the ancient word which was used in the Habsburg Empire, no one would use it any more except in historical contexts - it is only "Bosnier" in German nowadays.)
> That is: I really can't quite imagine that this use of terms ever will catch in English, or German.



This is why I still often use the ethnic name "Bosnian Muslim" when I want to make it unambiguous that I'm referring to this ethnic group, rather than inhabitants of Bosnia in general. Otherwise, one can easily get into a hopeless confusion whenever discussing Bosnian ethnic issues with English speakers. 



> I've once read an article of Bosnian Serbs switching to Ekavian Shtokavian in Bosnia*) - according to Daria Sito Sucic 1996: The Fragmentation of Serbo-Croatian into Three New Languages; in: Open Media Research Institute Prague; www source 1996; published in the periodical Transition 2/24, Prague, 29.11.1996. The foreign Ekavian seems to have been established, at least at the time and for the time being, as Serbian standard language in Bosnian Serb authorities.
> I really would be interested if this still is the case: do Bosnian Serbs still try to "learn Ekavian"?


First, to avoid any confusion, I will emphasize again that a Bosnian speaker switching to Ekavian cannot sound other than utterly ridiculous. The combination of Ekavian with Bosnian accentuation and prosody, as well as Bosnian words that are not used in Serbia, which will inevitably slip through all the time, actually makes my above example of an American trying to imitate Scottish English look sane in comparison. One really has to be carried away with a schizophrenic level of nationalist lunacy to engage in such ridiculous posturing. Needless to say, an actual Ekavian-speaking Serb from Belgrade could react to these attempts with only laughter and contempt.

As for the situation in practice, the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina works with three official languages, called "Bosnian", "Croatian",  and "Serbian". Among those, "Croatian" is more or less identical to the standard language used in Croatia, "Bosnian" is the old Serbo-Croatian variant that was used in B-H before the war, spelled in Latin, and "Serbian" is more or less the same as "Bosnian", except that it's spelled in Cyrillic. So, the official "Serbian" in Bosnia is Ijekavian, both in the usage of the central government and of the institutions of the Republic of Srpska (see e.g. here).  It seems like even the most tough-headed nationalists among Bosnian Serbs have realized how ridiculous they sound when they try to imitate Belgrade speech -- most of all to Belgrade Serbs themselves. 

At this point, you might be wondering why Bosnian official "Croatian", unlike "Serbian", is actually more or less the same as Croatian used in Croatia. I'd say the reason is that Croatian nationalists are generally much more obsessed with language issues than Serbian ones. For a typical Serbian nationalist, language is a fairly marginal issue; he won't care much as long as it's comprehensible to him, spelled in Cyrillic, and officially called "Serbian". For a typical Croatian nationalist, however, language is at the very heart of his worldview and language purity is among the very top issues on his agenda. Thus, I'm not surprised that B-H Croats insist that their official Croatian is identical to the one used in Croatia. Also, I would dare say that since standard Croatian is Ijekavian, and the accentuation and prosody of the speech in Herzegovina, where most B-H Croats live nowadays, isn't that far from that of the neighboring parts of southern Croatia, their attempts to speak standard Croatian don't really rise to the same level of ridiculousness as Bosnian Serbs' attempts to speak standard Serbian. Of course, when B-H Croats try imitating Zagreb speech with its Kajkavian influences, it sounds even worse -- in 11 years of living in Zagreb after I came there from Bosnia, I never dared to utter a single _kaj_, for a justified fear of sounding ridiculous. 



> And is this article really accurate about the situation there - or was it only for the time, and the situation has changed since? (Of course in the mid 1990ies the political situation was completely different from the 2000s.)


Unfortunately, I don't have the time to read the article right now, but I might comment on it later. However, we're getting off-topic with this, so you might perhaps want to start a separate thread.


----------



## Kolan

Athaulf said:


> I don't know about any.


Isn't that


Athaulf said:


> The noun *Srbin/Srpkinja* is used for all ethnic Serbs, regardless of their place of birth or residence.


?


----------



## Athaulf

Oh, sorry for the misunderstanding -- what I meant is that I don't know of any word used in Serbia that would have the same meaning as _Srbijanac_ has in Croatia, i.e a neutral term for a Serb who comes specifically from Serbia.


----------



## Kolan

Athaulf said:


> word used in Serbia that would have the same meaning as _Srbijanac_ has in Croatia, i.e a neutral term for a Serb who comes specifically from Serbia.


_Srbin_/_Srpkinja_ - not specifically from Serbia, or it is not neutral for Serbs?


----------



## Athaulf

Kolan said:


> _Srbin_/_Srpkinja_ - is it not specifically from Serbia, or it is not neutral for Serbs?



_Srbin_/_Srpkinja_ is used for any and all ethnic Serbs, regardless of their native dialect, place of birth and upbringing, and whether they have any connections with the lands that are within Serbia nowadays.


----------



## Kolan

Athaulf said:


> _Srbin_/_Srpkinja_ is used for any and all ethnic Serbs, regardless of their native dialect, place of birth and upbringing, and whether they have any connections with the lands that are within Serbia nowadays.


It is used in Serbian, but as I could understand, in Bosnian/Croatian of neighboring countries (_ex-Yu_) these terms are no longer accepted and now are substituted by the names _Srbijanac_/_Srbijanka_ that Serbs themselves would not like nor even tolerate?


----------



## Athaulf

Kolan said:


> It is used in Serbian, but as I could understand, in Bosnian/Croatian of neighboring countries (_ex-Yu_) these terms are no longer accepted and now are substituted by the names _Srbijanac_/_Srbijanka_ that Serbs themselves would not like nor even tolerate?



No, _Srbin_/_Srpkinja_ is an absolutely neutral, universal, and standard term in all varieties of Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian. It is a name of pride for all Serbs everywhere, and it has no negative connotations in any context, except of course for nationalist chauvinists of other ethnicities who would consider the fact that someone is a Serb as something negative by itself. 

It seems like you misunderstood my explanation of the term  _Srbijanac_/_Srbijanka_. The problem with this term is that unlike _Srbin_/_Srpkinja_, it has different meanings in different varieties of Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian. In Croatia and Bosnia, it's used as a neutral term for a Serb from Serbia (as opposed to a Serb from some other country or a non-Serb), whereas in Serbia, it's a mildly derogatory term for people from Central Serbia (who are stereotyped by some inhabitants of northern parts of Serbia as backward). As far as I've observed, most people on both sides are unaware that the term has a different meaning on the other side. 

To make things further complicated, the adjective _srbijanski_, derived from _Srbijanac_, has an additional meaning in Croatia and Bosnia: it can refer to the official institutions of the Republic of Serbia, a meaning totally alien and unrecognized in Serbia itself. 


If this sounds paradoxically complicated, well, I can only assure you that this is often the case with ethnic and regional designations in the Balkans.  There are many other examples of ethnic names that can have drastically different meanings depending on who's using them.


----------



## dudasd

Some more confusion  :

The original name for a Serb was Srb. Srbin is a derived word already. (As well as Srpkinja - it's not derived from "Srbin", otherwise it would be "Srbinka" or something like that. It's also derived directly from the word "Srb".) Non-Serbian people in some areas of Bosnia and Croatia would use "Srb" if they wanted to show a bit of despite. And it does sound a bit offensive. That word is containing - if I feel the nuance well - meaning of "stubborn and combative being", because it points out the roots of the man it was applied at. (For those who don't know, Serbs ARE a bit stubborn... a bit...)

On the other hand, "Srbijanac" can have two meanings: a Serb living in Serbia (gramatically), and another, hidden: "someone who lives in Serbia and calls himself a Serb, but being not a real Serb, because living in Serbia doesn't make one a real Serb". So a Serb from Serbia (usually) won't be offended if a Croat or a Bosniak says "Srbijanac", but if it's used by another Serb - I can't bet it would be accepted as a compliment.

To make the story shorter: terms Srbin and Srpkinja really are the most appropriate ones, concerning all the historical and political context, so actually there's no real need to make derivates of derivates like Srbijanac. (Be it in a friendly or nonfriendly intention.) But there's another problem (and this would mean a new thread, but I am not going to start it, for it's a problem that just can't be solved):

How one should call a non-Serb from Serbia - supposing that we don't know his ethnicity precisely, and thus we can't say "Croat from Serbia", "Bosniak from Serbia" etc? I am sure that such a person would no way accept the term "Srbijanac" (which literally means "one from Serbia"). No chance!

So, it remains a question without an answer...


----------



## venenum

dudasd said:


> How one should call a non-Serb from Serbia - supposing that we don't know his ethnicity precisely, and thus we can't say "Croat from Serbia", "Bosniak from Serbia" etc? I am sure that such a person would no way accept the term "Srbijanac" (which literally means "one from Serbia"). No chance!
> 
> So, it remains a question without an answer...



I don't see why it should be a problem... I live in Croatia. My ethnicity... well, 'twas a big melting pot 'round here, but the paper says I'm Slovak. Nevertheless, since I've lived in Croatia my whole life, I would never oppose to being referred as "Croatian", or correct anyone for doing so. It's the only home I know, Croatian is my first language, and I think it would be ridiculous asking people to refer to me as "Croatian Slovak".
Also, most of the people I know, who are of different ethnicity, are fairly assimilated* and they identify themselves more with the country they live in (in this case, Croatia), than with their ethnic origins. 

*unless they come from families and/or surroundings which are trying very hard to preserve their national identity and slow down the assimilation process - often through rejecting Croatian language and speaking only their own, which, except in case of Serbs, causes some serious problems with social integration, but that's another topic...


----------



## sokol

Athaulf said:


> (...) It seems like even the most tough-headed nationalists among Bosnian Serbs have realized how ridiculous they sound when they try to imitate Belgrade speech -- most of all to Belgrade Serbs themselves. (...)


I am glad to hear that some sence for normality finally has come back to Bosnia & Hercegovina. 



Athaulf said:


> At this point, you might be wondering why Bosnian official "Croatian", unlike "Serbian", is actually more or less the same as Croatian used in Croatia. I'd say the reason is that Croatian nationalists are generally much more obsessed with language issues than Serbian ones. For a typical Serbian nationalist, language is a fairly marginal issue; he won't care much as long as it's comprehensible to him, spelled in Cyrillic, and officially called "Serbian". For a typical Croatian nationalist, however, language is at the very heart of his worldview and language purity is among the very top issues on his agenda.


That was my impression too when I did some research on the region in the late 1990ies.

Also I can very well follow your argument that because of the greater similarities between Bosnian varieties (be they of whatever ethnic origin) to the Croatian standard sets less of an obstacle against using Croatian standard language there. It's more about changing words (avoiding 'Bosnian looking' words - i. e. 'Muslim' or 'Serb' words which they aren't really because they also are used by Croatians in Bosnia) than about changing accent and prosody like it would be with implementation of Ekavian in Bosnia.



Athaulf said:


> Of course, when B-H Croats try imitating Zagreb speech with its Kajkavian influences, it sounds even worse -- in 11 years of living in Zagreb after I came there from Bosnia, I never dared to utter a single _kaj_, for a justified fear of sounding ridiculous.


I can imagine  probably would be comparable to Germans trying to imitate Austrian colloquial speech which sounds utterly ridiculous, except if they really get the accent right and don't utter Austrian speech with German phonetics.

I'll try and start a new thread about the article as you suggested - you'll find *here.** 

*I really can't contribute to the topic as such, I only can ask the questions.  A comprehensive summary of the article will be found there too.


----------



## Duya

Athaulf said:


> First, to avoid any confusion, I will emphasize again that a Bosnian speaker switching to Ekavian cannot sound other than utterly ridiculous. The combination of Ekavian with Bosnian accentuation and prosody, as well as Bosnian words that are not used in Serbia, which will inevitably slip through all the time, actually makes my above example of an American trying to imitate Scottish English look sane in comparison.



I plead guilty, then . However, I acquired ekavian through 17 years in Serbia by means of "natural" assimilation, rather than through a conscious effort. But I also have a sub-conscious tendency to quickly switch back to ijekavian among fellow Bosnians, or insert a Smederevo-accented word here and there when in _tazbina_. It's just me I suppose.



Athaulf said:


> It seems like you misunderstood my explanation of the term  _Srbijanac_/_Srbijanka_. The problem with this term is that unlike _Srbin_/_Srpkinja_, it has different meanings in different varieties of Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian. In Croatia and Bosnia, it's used as a neutral term for a Serb from Serbia (as opposed to a Serb from some other country or a non-Serb), whereas in Serbia, it's a mildly derogatory term for people from Central Serbia (who are stereotyped by some inhabitants of northern parts of Serbia as backward).





dudasd said:


> Some more confusion  :
> 
> On the other hand, "Srbijanac" can have two meanings: a Serb living in Serbia (gramatically), and another, hidden: "someone who lives in Serbia and calls himself a Serb, but being not a real Serb, because living in Serbia doesn't make one a real Serb". So a Serb from Serbia (usually) won't be offended if a Croat or a Bosniak says "Srbijanac", but if it's used by another Serb - I can't bet it would be accepted as a compliment.
> 
> To make the story shorter: terms Srbin and Srpkinja really are the most appropriate ones, concerning all the historical and political context, so actually there's no real need to make derivates of derivates like Srbijanac. (Be it in a friendly or nonfriendly intention.)



I think you're exaggerating a bit. *Unless* the word "Srbijanac" is apparently used in a loaded manner (by e.g. a Vojvodinian or a Montenegrin), an inhabitant of Central Serbia will not get offended in any way (unless he's has a *highly* nationalistic frame of mind). On the contrary, "Srbijanac" is used by inhabitants of Central Serbia as a proud self-reference (remember the folk song "Odakle si sele" "...zar ne vidiš brale da sam Srbijanka?").

Athaulf is right, though: among Serbs, word "Srbijanac" exclusively denotes inhabitants of Central Serbia, and almost never "citizen of Serbia" (compare e.g. sporting comments: they refer to the national team as "naša reprezentacija", "reprezentacija Srbije" or "srpska reprezentacija" but never "srbijanska reprezentacija"). In the latter sense, it is used in Bosnian and Croatian (but again, I don't see that an offensiveness is perceived).

See also:
http://forum.b92.net/index.php?showtopic=33853


----------



## Athaulf

Duya said:


> I plead guilty, then . However, I acquired ekavian through 17 years in Serbia by means of "natural" assimilation, rather than through a conscious effort. But I also have a sub-conscious tendency to quickly switch back to ijekavian among fellow Bosnians, or insert a Smederevo-accented word here and there when in _tazbina_. It's just me I suppose.



Oh, I didn't have in mind people who move from Bosnia to Serbia or Croatia and then naturally assimilate into the local variant of BCS. Their speech will assimilate enough local elements to make it sound OK, even though they will usually end up speaking with a distinct accent, and their speech will also inevitably pass through a funny-sounding phase -- mine sure did when I first moved to Croatia. What I had in mind are Bosnian Croats and Serbs who try to artificially make their language more Croatian or Serbian while still living in Bosnia. This inevitably results in superficial grafting of Croatian/Serbian elements onto a language that is still clearly Bosnian in accentuation, prosody, and most of vocabulary, and the end result is, in my opinion, truly tragicomic. (Of course, it doesn't help that such behavior is usually a reliable indicator of a high level of nationalism.) This is why I used the analogy with a hypothetical American of Scottish ancestry attempting to imitate Scottish speech while still living in the U.S.


----------

