# Serbian (BCS) vs Bulgarian: Mutual intelligibility



## Aguno

It's a question that has bugging me for a while, and I've seen that there is no specific thread just for this issue.*How mutual intelligible are serbian and bulgarian?* 
I know some of both, not much though, and the vocabulary is very similar, but serbs seem not to understand a damn thing of bulgarian, while bulgarians understand as much as 70 per cent.
A bulgarian friend of mine told me that he understands 50% or serbian words.
So, put your opinions here.

Let it be like a heavyweight match between serbian and bulgarian.


----------



## DarkChild

People from Western Bulgaria can understand almost everything in Serbian because their dialect is closer to it (dialect continuum). In Eastern Bulgaria we don't understand almost anything unless we learn it or spend some time listening to it.
Bulgarian is hard for others to understand because of the pronunciation, vowel reduction and dynamic stress. Serbian, on the other hand, has a very straight forward pronunciation, so it's easier on the foreign ear.


----------



## Orlin

I became interested in Serbian in the 1990s and before I learned to speak it, I could understand much (btw, I've always lived in Western Bulgaria and in 1998-2003 I watched Serbian TV much and was in Serbia in 2000). 
Because of being exposed to Serbian too much, I began understanding it well and it was quite easy to learn Serbian later.


----------



## Aguno

Still no serbs round here on this topic, I wonder what they have to say about mutual intelligibility between srb vs blg


----------



## Finner

Being a speaker of serbian language in advanced level i would say that they are not mutual intelligible.

Serbs seem to find it difficult to understand bulgarian.I would say that they are lazy  On the other hand a foreigner who studied first Serbian can easily learn Bulgarian.True story!


----------



## Aguno

Finner said:


> On the other hand a foreigner who studied first Serbian can easily learn Bulgarian.True story!



I totally agree.I was playing different bulgarian songs to serbs and they were just shrugging, even though there were many words similar, so that one could get an idea of what was about (even though he wasn't understanding allthe words).I can get an idea of what a text's general idea is if I know around 1/2 of the words.

BTW, I'm expanding my serbian + bulgarian vocabulary every day, and the best way to cement a new word in my memory is to find it similar in serb and bulgarian (for ex jedva (srb) vs. edva (blg) )


----------



## Orlin

Finner said:


> Being a speaker of serbian language in advanced level i would say that they are not mutual intelligible.


I think that this is not a "yes-no" category: "easiness" of communication can vary from easy to completely impossible, and if it's possible for a speaker of one of the languages to get the idea of something in the other language (certainly true for Bulgarian/Serbian), a certain level of mutual intelligibility exists (in the case Bulg./Serb. are for sure mutually intelligible *to some level *- let others say to what level because I speak both languages).
On the other hand, some people say that mutually intelligible languages are only those whose native speakers can participate in a *fluent* conversation - I don't know if Bulgarian and Serbian are m. i. _in this sense _(i. e. I don't know how fluent a Bulgarian-Serbian conversation can be).


----------



## Finner

Aguno said:


> I totally agree.I was playing different bulgarian songs to serbs and they were just shrugging, even though there were many words similar, so that one could get an idea of what was about (even though he wasn't understanding allthe words).I can get an idea of what a text's general idea is if I know around 1/2 of the words.
> 
> BTW, I'm expanding my serbian + bulgarian vocabulary every day, and the best way to cement a new word in my memory is to find it similar in serb and bulgarian (for ex jedva (srb) vs. edva (blg) )



Sometimes this language continuum can be fascinating!

The bulgarian Едва is written the same in Russian.But since the russian Е is JE its pronounced Jедва.There you go.Thats how the serbs got the word 

So i guess for foreigners yeah serbocroatian and bulgarian are mutually intelligible but for native speakers isnt.Again,this is not the rule!


----------



## Orlin

Finner said:


> So i guess for foreigners yeah serbocroatian and bulgarian are mutually intelligible but for native speakers isnt.Again,this is not the rule!


 
It seems very improbable to me because a foreigner most probably won't know the archaic, regional and other words that help a lot to understand the other language, so mutual intelligiblity between natives should be higher.


----------



## Finner

While studying russian in a foreigne languages school the professor noticed that because of my knowledge in Serbian i was learning much faster than his bulgarian students.

So i think that native speakers are not that "open-minded" (not using the expression in a bad way) and they dont use their imagination!


----------



## Salieri_Bar

I can't understand any of Bulgarian. Almost any Slavic language not being BCS sounds very soft for my ears.


----------



## Orlin

salieri_bar said:


> i can't understand any of bulgarian. Almost any slavic language not being bcs sounds very soft for my ears.


Сигурен ли си? Аз разбирах поне частично сръбски, преди да мога да го говоря, и затова може би също можеш да разбереш поне нещо, ако не говорим, то поне писмен български (с говоримия език, разбира се, винаги е по-трудно). Доколкото знам, в момента учиш руски, а руският няма как да не помага за разбирането на българския.


----------



## Duya

Orlin said:


> Сигурен ли си? Аз разбирах поне частично сръбски, преди да мога да го говоря, и затова може би също можеш да разбереш поне нещо, ако не говорим, то поне писмен български (с говоримия език, разбира се, винаги е по-трудно). Доколкото знам, в момента учиш руски, а руският няма как да не помага за разбирането на българския.



OK, I do know some Russian, but size of my vocabulary is fairly small, so it isn't of big help.

I can say that I understand some 50-90% of written Bulgarian, depending on context. I get the most of your sentence above, but I didn't really understand the red words, and green ones are so-so (i.e. need some time to decipher them).

Taking the random Bulgarian newspaper article, such as this (but where I do know the international context of the news), I have problems with the following words:

 въздушни пратки - hm, false friend with "praćka" (sling). Funny. That's a "pošiljka" (shipment) I guess?
срещата - meeting, apparently. false friend with "sreća" (happiness)
обсъжда - to handle?
предприеме - to prepare?
заловените - 
взривни вещества - no idea
редица - no idea
посолства  - true friend with "poslanstvo" (embassy)? Funny false friend with "posoliti" (to salt).
възлов - main?
 опитите за терористични атаки - apparent false friend with "opit" (experiment). 
засилен - strengthened, apparently, though not what immediately comes to mind.

So, already knowing a lot of context, I get the most of the text, but I'm not sure what I would make out of a novel, for example.


----------



## Orlin

Duya said:


> OK, I do know some Russian, but size of my vocabulary is fairly small, so it isn't of big help.
> 
> I can say that I understand some 50-90% of written Bulgarian, depending on context. I get the most of your sentence above, but I didn't really understand the red words, and green ones are so-so (i.e. need some time to decipher them).
> 
> Taking the random Bulgarian newspaper article, such as this (but where I do know the international context of the news), I have problems with the following words:
> 
> въздушни пратки - hm, false friend with "praćka" (sling). Funny. That's a "pošiljka" (shipment) I guess?
> срещата - meeting, apparently. false friend with "sreća" (happiness)
> обсъжда - to handle? BCS raspravljati, diskutirati, ruski обсуждать
> предприеме - to prepare?да предприема нещо = BCS početi raditi nešto (normalno kao otpor neke opasnosti) - formalno
> заловените - BCS uhvaćeni
> взривни вещества - no idea BCS eksplozivi (ruski взрывчатые вещества)
> редица - no idea BCS niz
> посолства - true friend with "poslanstvo" (embassy)? Funny false friend with "posoliti" (to salt).
> възлов - main? (samo približno, moram da razmislim za preciznije objašnjenje; възел=čvor)
> опитите за терористични атаки - apparent false friend with "opit" (experiment). BCS pokušaj
> засилен - strengthened, apparently, though not what immediately comes to mind.
> затова=zato
> може би=možda
> също=isto
> поне=bar(em)
> частично=delimično (част=deo)
> разбира се=naravno
> винаги=uvek
> писмен=pisan, pismen (http://hjp.srce.hr/index.php?show=search_by_id&id=eV1mXRU=&keyword=pismen u 1. značenju)
> So, already knowing a lot of context, I get the most of the text, but I'm not sure what I would make out of a novel, for example.


Zdravo, mislim da nema potrebe na engleskom. Možda smo dokazali da definitivno postoji *neki nivo* razumljivosti, što neki forero odriče, a po meni je uzajamna razumljivost definitivno ne "da-ne" kategorija i nešto izuzetno subjektivno. Nadam se da sam ti dovoljno dobro pomogao razumeti ovaj tekst.


----------



## Orlin

Duya said:


> So, already knowing a lot of context, I get the most of the text, but I'm not sure what I would make out of a novel, for example.


Da li neko želi probati ovu priču Ivana Vazova (ja je volim, a i prva mi je pala na pamet i stoga nisam postavio nešto savremenije, izvinjavam se): http://www.slovo.bg/showwork.php3?AuID=14&WorkID=5877&Level=3.


----------



## effeundici

DarkChild said:


> Serbian, on the other hand, has a very straight forward pronunciation, so it's easier on the foreign ear.


 

Confirm! It' so "crisp and clean"! It seems Italian.

I think all languages should adopt this policy!


----------



## Tjahzi

Greetings

First of all, this is not a question of _if_ or _how well_ BCS and Bulgarian are intelligible. Mainly from this forum, I've learned that the level of comprehensibility between these languages is high or very high (correct me if I'm wrong). However, what puzzles me is _why_ that is. 

I'm interested in linguistic typology and as such have a decent general linguistic knowledge. My native language is Swedish, which shares a number of grammatical features such as suffixing definite articles, absence of grammatical cases for nouns (more or less), a relatively large inventory of compound tenses etc, with Bulgarian. I have also studied Russian, at least to the degree that I would say that I'm familiar with the case system of BCS and that I can read it (BCS) with a dictionary. 

However, based on this knowledge, it seems to me that, although both obviously being Slavic languages and as such are related and share a decent amount of vocabulary, they are very grammatically distant and as such, I can't understand how the level of intelligibility could be so high. Also, I've got the impression that speakers of BCS even find it easier to understand Bulgarian than Slovenian, which of course further sparkles my confusion given the fact that Slovenian is grammatically closer to BCS and that Slovenia and BCS, until the early nineties, was part of the same country, which to some extent, must have exposed speakers of BCS to Slovenian. 
However, all, or any, of the assumptions that Slovenian and BCS are more similar,  that BCS speakers understand Bulgarian better and that they have been exposed to Slovenian could be wrong.

So what could it be? Speakers from the southern parts of former SFRY are likely to be bilingual in Macedonian (whose status as a language or Bulgarian dialect appears to be somewhat disputed) and BCS, but that does not in anyway explain the widespread intelligibility. Neither do I believe every citizen of SFRY studied Macedonian (and hence acquired a knowledge of Bulgarian), if so, they should know Slovene equally well. And even if that was the case, this was 20 years ago and shouldn't apply to people under 25-30 of age, which again rules it out. 

I look at the phonology and although it's very similar, it's no perfect match (by my standards) either, given the Bulgarian palatalization, lack of palatal fricatives and the stress/pitch accent system of BCS (shared with Swedish!). 

The only plausible explanation that remains to me seems to be that the core vocabulary must indeed be very similar. That is, to the degree that the seemingly major grammatical differences are still easily overcome.  

Oh well, that was all I had. I'm aware that some of the above babbling is not exactly necessary to present my question, but I just wanted to ponder it once more, in writing. 

Obviously I would very much appreciate if you could help me add some sense to this. Thanks in advance!


----------



## Duya

Well, to start with... a Serbian mocking reference to Macedonian is "Serbian without cases" . Of course, it is rude, but it carries a part to the answer. 

While the difference in grammar between Bulgarian/Macedonian and Serbian is significant, it is not a particular obstacle for communication. I think that the fact that they share a common basic vocabulary, including a large number of Turkish loans and Old Church Slavonic remnants, significantly affects the intelligibility. Especially so with Macedonian (whom Bulgarian cynics might call "Bulgarian with Serbian vocabulary"), and to a lesser extent with Bulgarian. 

Generally, Bulgarian phonology is tougher for Serbian ears to understand than Macedonian, but I suppose it only takes a while to adapt. 

As with most similar situations, the intelligibility is probably not identical in both directions (compare that Romanians can understand a fair deal of e.g. Italian, but Italians can make a lot less of Romanian). However, we haven't established with certainty who understands better whom, at least not on this Forum (there's an recent thread around).

As for Slovenian, while its grammar and phonology is more similar to BCS, what makes it difficult to understand (especially for those remote from the border) is rather specific vocabulary of Slovenian which is simultaneously 1) full of archaisms 2) full of recent inventions and 3) full of false friends (many common Slavic words in Slovenian has a subtly or less subtly different meaning).


----------



## Orlin

Duya said:


> While the difference in grammar between Bulgarian/Macedonian and Serbian is significant, it is not a particular obstacle for communication. I think that the fact that they share a common basic vocabulary, including a large number of Turkish loans and Old Church Slavonic remnants, significantly affects the intelligibility. Especially so with Macedonian (whom Bulgarian cynics might call "Bulgarian with Serbian vocabulary"), and to a lesser extent with Bulgarian.
> 
> 
> As for Slovenian, while its grammar and phonology is more similar to BCS, what makes it difficult to understand (especially for those remote from the border) is rather specific vocabulary of Slovenian which is simultaneously 1) full of archaisms 2) full of recent inventions and 3) full of false friends (many common Slavic words in Slovenian has a subtly or less subtly different meaning).


Hteo bih dodati da je visoki nivo razumljivosti bugarskog i BCS rezultat pre svega teritorijalne blizine i nekih važnih zajedničkih faktora za jezički razvoj (npr. je većina bug./BCS zemalja bila unutar Osmanske Imperije u 15.-19. veku, uticaj crkvenoslovenskog), što objašnjava opšti bazisni vokabular (ili neki kažu "reči nižeg registra"). U većini 20. veka je politička i socijalna situacija u Bugarskoj i ex-Jugoslaviji veoma različita, što je uzrok nekog "jezičkog udaljavanja" bugarskog i BCS jezika - posebno šta se tiče tzv. "višeg registra", koji uključuje terminologiju u različitim oblastima - lako je vidno da BCS i bugarski često koriste sasvim različite termine, što ponekad smanjuje razumljivost. Moj utisak je da makedonski koristi terminologiju uglavnom sličnu srpskoj, i zato neki kažu da *samo specijalizirani makedonski tekstovi* moraju da se prevode na bugarski dok se svi ostali tekstovi lako razumeju od strane Bugara. Druga relativno važna razlika koja nekako utiče na razumljivost je broj rusizama u bug./BCS jezika - bugarski ih ima značajno više uglavnom zbog različitog političkog razvoja i odnosa s Rusujom/SSSR u 19.-20. veku.
Slovenački mi je "srednje" razumljiv većinom zbog mnogih nepoznatih reči, ali znanje BCS je naravno presudno - da nisam znao BCS, razumeo bih mnogo manje.


----------



## Orlin

> също=takođe(r), isto


Dodatak, slučajno sam primetio nešto važno.


----------



## Aguno

The whole issue concerning mutual intelligibility between Serbian and Bulgarian revolves around the pronounciation. Serbian is a tonal language, plus the accent on the syllables is fixed (especially in 2 slb words) which makes it a very predictable language. Bulgarian on the other hand, has dynamic stress.
But still, a serb should be able to pick some words out of it; for example the same word in both languages, different stress : ZHE-na (serbian) and zhe-NA (bulgarian)

By the way, it would be interesting to read some funny situations concerning mutual intelligibility, from serbs that were in Bulgaria and needed to get around, or bulgarians visiting Serbia, so don't be shy and post them. I hope I don't make it too chatty.


----------



## Duya

Aguno said:


> Serbian is a tonal language, plus the accent on the syllables is fixed (especially in 2 slb words) which makes it a very predictable language.



Whoa, hold on, that is exactly the opposite of truth. Apart from some basic rules where an accent *cannot* be, the type and placement of stress in neo-Štokavian is far from predictable (unless you're a native, or a trained Slavicist). OK, granted, for 2-syllable words the accent can fall only on the first, but as soon they enter declination they become 3-syllable words. For example, see the first paragraph of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Croatian_phonology#Pitch_accent.


----------



## Maja

I can only speak from personal experience. 
A very good friend of mine is Bulgarian, but we always communicate in English. Only when we cannot think of a certain word in English (as it is not, after all, our native language), we use Serbian / Bulgarian word instead. 
It is just easier and quicker that way! 

However, when I went to visit her it took me a while to get the hang of it, but eventually I could understand much that was being said to me and talked without many obstacles with her parents. I was speaking Serbian, of course, and they were speaking Bulgarian. 
Also, I had no problems when holidaying at the Black Sea with reading menus, asking for directions, booking a hotel etc. 

But it must be also said that I had to be concentrated, and if I was not spoken to but only listening to other people's conversation (esp quick and dynamic ones), I'd found it really hard to follow. 

Written Bulgarian is, I think, a bit easier for understanding, and I can smt even read for instance a newspaper article that my friends post on a social network, or follow some "internet" BG messaging in Latinic script with numbers (4-ч, 6-ш) and letters (q-я, j-ж ... ) as substitutes for Cyrillic letters.


----------



## Mantae

DarkChild said:


> People from Western Bulgaria can understand almost everything in Serbian because their dialect is closer to it (dialect continuum). In Eastern Bulgaria we don't understand almost anything unless we learn it or spend some time listening to it.
> Bulgarian is hard for others to understand because of the pronunciation, vowel reduction and dynamic stress. Serbian, on the other hand, has a very straight forward pronunciation, so it's easier on the foreign ear.


It should be added that Serbian is really understood well by those who actually speak western Bulgarian dialects. While Sofia, for example, is located in Western Bulgaria, most inhabitants use standard Bulgarian, which is mostly based on the eastern dialects and have a correspondingly lower understanding of Serbian.


----------



## DarkChild

Tjahzi said:


> Greetings
> 
> First of all, this is not a question of _if_ or _how well_ BCS and Bulgarian are intelligible. Mainly from this forum, I've learned that the level of comprehensibility between these languages is high or very high (correct me if I'm wrong). However, what puzzles me is _why_ that is.
> 
> I'm interested in linguistic typology and as such have a decent general linguistic knowledge. My native language is Swedish, which shares a number of grammatical features such as suffixing definite articles, absence of grammatical cases for nouns (more or less), a relatively large inventory of compound tenses etc, with Bulgarian. I have also studied Russian, at least to the degree that I would say that I'm familiar with the case system of BCS and that I can read it (BCS) with a dictionary.
> 
> 
> The only plausible explanation that remains to me seems to be that the core vocabulary must indeed be very similar. That is, to the degree that the seemingly major grammatical differences are still easily overcome.



I don't see why people think the case system somehow makes it overwhelmingly difficult to understand another language. I might be wrong but I think cases are easily understood by Bulgarians because they appear frequently in older literature and also is preserved in many dialects. In addition, exposure to Russian also has made cases something ordinary to our ears.
Tense system also isn't that big of a deal. The only think I can think is that when listening to other Slavic languages, including Serbian, their past simple tense is the same as our past renarrative mood which we use for things we did not witness or are not sure happened. So when I listen to Serbian, it always sounds like they aren't sure about what happened. 
Now, I don't know what that tone business is. I've heard about it but I've never seen an example nor have noticed it when listening to Serbian.


----------



## Orlin

darkchild said:


> now, i don't know what that tone business is. I've heard about it but i've never seen an example nor have noticed it when listening to serbian.


Между впрочем, става въпрос за това, че в босненския, хърватския и сръбския език ударението е тоническо (музикално) - т. е. ударената сричка се определя от промяната височината на тона, докато при нас тя се определя от силата на звука (или по друг начин казано, от напрежението на артикулация) - динамическо ударение. При езиците с динамическо ударение височината на тона също се изменя, но не това е определящият признак. Затова, когато носителите на език с динамическо ударение слушат език с тоническо такова, могат и да не забележат нещо особено - те пак ще усетят, че една от сричките в думата е акцентирана. (Лично за мене е горе-долу така - аз знам всичко това общо взето само на теория и почти не различавам при слушане.) Така тоническото ударение почти не влияе на разбираемостта - със сравнително редките изключения на двойки думи, при които единствената разлика е това дали ударението е възходящо или низходящо, но дори и тогава слушащият обикновено не е в безизходица, защото контекстът често помага.
Накрая, регионалните различия в акцентирането са твърде големи, а освен това, доколкото знам, в Южна Сърбия не използват тоническо ударение.


----------



## Tjahzi

DarkChild said:


> I don't see why people think the case system somehow makes it overwhelmingly difficult to understand another language. I might be wrong but I think cases are easily understood by Bulgarians because they appear frequently in older literature and also is preserved in many dialects. In addition, exposure to Russian also has made cases something ordinary to our ears.


Thanks, that makes sense. My only reference is Swedish, which recognizes only genitive for nouns as well as accusative for pronouns (no vocative at all), and when Swedes try to study German (which recognizes accusative, dativ and genitive for nouns and pronouns) they usually have great troubles and most never even figure out the very concept of cases. That said, neither dialects nor older literature contains any regular case usage. Also, German is no longer known to a degree that it could be said to influence the general knowledge of cases. 



DarkChild said:


> Tense system also isn't that big of a deal. The only think I can think is that when listening to other Slavic languages, including Serbian, their past simple tense is the same as our past renarrative mood which we use for things we did not witness or are not sure happened. So when I listen to Serbian, it always sounds like they aren't sure about what happened.



Haha!


----------



## Duya

DarkChild said:


> Now, I don't know what that tone business is. I've heard about it but I've never seen an example nor have noticed it when listening to Serbian.



What Orlin said. Tonal accents are a prominent feature of Serbo-Croatian (that is, neo-štokavian accents on which all standard SC forms are based), but foreigners may not hear or recognize them (except perhaps as a peculiarity in prosody), and lack of tones does not particularly hamper understanding. To our ears though, placement and usage of tones readily gives out the origin of the speaker (within the BCS area), or betrays a stranger (because they're notoriously difficult to master for a L2 speaker). 

I don't think that 95% of native BCS speakers is able to consciously *tell* one accent type from another and name them, but they are of course able to use them subconsciously.


----------



## Orlin

Međutim, kakve tonove osećaju izvorni BCS govornici kad slušaju neki jezik s dinamičkim akcentom (bugarski, ruski, engleski, francuski ili kakav god drugi)?


----------



## Duya

Orlin said:


> Međutim, kakve tonove osećaju izvorni BCS govornici kad slušaju neki jezik s dinamičkim akcentom (bugarski, ruski, engleski, francuski ili kakav god drugi)?



_Ne osećaju_.  Prosto, koncept nije primenjiv na druge jezike, niti mislim da bilo ko očekuje nekakvu komponentu tona. Prosto, drugi jezici imaju drugačiju "melodiju".


----------



## Orlin

Duya said:


> _Ne osećaju_.  Prosto, koncept nije primenjiv na druge jezike, niti mislim da bilo ko očekuje nekakvu komponentu tona. Prosto, drugi jezici imaju drugačiju "melodiju".


Mislim da se u jezicima bez tonemičkog akcenta visina tona isto nekako menja kod akcentovanog sloga, ali to se ne percipira kao ton u kontekstu BCS iz nekog razloga (npr. pošto se melodijska kontura nekog drugog jezika ne prepoznaje kao nešto slično BCS tonovima).


----------



## DarkChild

Orlin said:


> Между впрочем, става въпрос за това, че в босненския, хърватския и сръбския език ударението е тоническо (музикално) - т. е. ударената сричка се определя от промяната височината на тона, докато при нас тя се определя от силата на звука (или по друг начин казано, от напрежението на артикулация) - динамическо ударение. При езиците с динамическо ударение височината на тона също се изменя, но не това е определящият признак. Затова, когато носителите на език с динамическо ударение слушат език с тоническо такова, могат и да не забележат нещо особено - те пак ще усетят, че една от сричките в думата е акцентирана. (Лично за мене е горе-долу така - аз знам всичко това общо взето само на теория и почти не различавам при слушане.) Така тоническото ударение почти не влияе на разбираемостта - със сравнително редките изключения на двойки думи, при които единствената разлика е това дали ударението е възходящо или низходящо, но дори и тогава слушащият обикновено не е в безизходица, защото контекстът често помага.
> Накрая, регионалните различия в акцентирането са твърде големи, а освен това, доколкото знам, в Южна Сърбия не използват тоническо ударение.





Duya said:


> What Orlin said. Tonal accents are a prominent feature of Serbo-Croatian (that is, neo-štokavian accents on which all standard SC forms are based), but foreigners may not hear or recognize them (except perhaps as a peculiarity in prosody), and lack of tones does not particularly hamper understanding. To our ears though, placement and usage of tones readily gives out the origin of the speaker (within the BCS area), or betrays a stranger (because they're notoriously difficult to master for a L2 speaker).
> 
> I don't think that 95% of native BCS speakers is able to consciously *tell* one accent type from another and name them, but they are of course able to use them subconsciously.



OK, for a moment I thought it was the same as in Chinese.


----------



## DarkChild

Tjahzi said:


> Thanks, that makes sense. My only reference is Swedish, which recognizes only genitive for nouns as well as accusative for pronouns (no vocative at all), and when Swedes try to study German (which recognizes accusative, dativ and genitive for nouns and pronouns) they usually have great troubles and most never even figure out the very concept of cases. That said, neither dialects nor older literature contains any regular case usage. Also, German is no longer known to a degree that it could be said to influence the general knowledge of cases.
> 
> 
> 
> Haha!


So understanding for us is not a big problem, but using them correctly in other languages is always a mess


----------



## Christo Tamarin

Mantae said:


> DarkChild said:
> 
> 
> 
> People from Western Bulgaria can understand almost everything in Serbian because their dialect is closer to it (dialect continuum). In Eastern Bulgaria we don't understand almost anything unless we learn it or spend some time listening to it.
> 
> 
> 
> It should be added that Serbian is really understood well by those who actually speak western Bulgarian dialects. While Sofia, for example, is located in Western Bulgaria, most inhabitants use standard Bulgarian, which is mostly based on the eastern dialects and have a correspondingly lower understanding of Serbian.
Click to expand...

I think the dialect continuum is actually in the past since most people now use standard languages. 
The fact that people of Western Bulgaria can better understand Serbian than those of Eastern Bulgaria can be explained by the radio and TV. Even in pre-satelite era, Serbian TV could be catched in Sofia, Western Bulgaria, e.g. And, Serbian TV was assigned the role of iideological indoctrination in less extent than Bulgarian TV.


----------



## Aleksey Groz

DarkChild said:


> The only think I can think is that when listening to other Slavic languages, including Serbian, their past simple tense is the same as our past renarrative mood which we use for things we did not witness or are not sure happened. So when I listen to Serbian, it always sounds like they aren't sure about what happened.



This is very interesting! Could you, please, find or recall some example?


----------



## iobyo

Christo Tamarin said:


> I think the dialect continuum is actually in the past since most people now use standard languages.



This is definitely not the case for Macedonians, many Croats and Slovenes.


----------



## Orlin

Aleksey Groz said:


> This is very interesting! Could you, please, find or recall some example?


Ova činjenica ima relativno prosto objašnjenje: naš renarativni glagolski način se formira otprilike kao perfekt indikativa, a bugarski perfekt indikativa je praktički jednak kao oblik BCS perfektu. Dakle, kad Bugarin čuje obični BCS perfekt, on mu asocira ili na bugarski perfekt indikativa ili na renarativ, a mi koristimo perfekt indikativa ili renarativ za prošle radnje koje nismo lično videli ili u kojima nismo potpuno sigurni.


----------



## Aleksey Groz

Orlin said:


> Ova činjenica ima relativno prosto objašnjenje: naš renarativni glagolski način se formira otprilike kao perfekt indikativa, a bugarski perfekt indikativa je praktički jednak kao oblik BCS perfektu. Dakle, kad Bugarin čuje obični BCS perfekt, on mu asocira ili na bugarski perfekt indikativa ili na renarativ, a mi koristimo perfekt indikativa ili renarativ za prošle radnje koje nismo lično videli ili u kojima nismo potpuno sigurni.



Da, to sam shvatio. Ali hteo sam samo da vidim par primera kao bih lakše mogao to da vizualizujem i pokušam da shvatim kakav utisak bugarski govornik ima kad čuje BCS perfekt.


----------



## Orlin

Aleksey Groz said:


> Da, to sam shvatio. Ali hteo sam samo da vidim par primera kao bih lakše mogao to da vizualizujem i pokušam da shvatim kakav utisak bugarski govornik ima kad čuje BCS perfekt.


Mislim da to mogu reći samo Bugari koji ne poznaju aktivno nijedan od BCS jezika, iz moje perspektive nije lako reći. Ali kazao bih da će biti zabavno Bugarima slušati razgovore na BCS u kojima se koristi samo perfekt - mi bismo shvatili da svaki govori samo iz pozicije nesvedoka (mnogo nerealno, zar ne?). Prosto mi jako očekujemo da aorist indikativa prevladava u velikoj većini svakodnevnih razgovora o prošlim radnjima. Ali ne mislim da to vredi za mene lično jer aktivno koristim BCS jezike.


----------



## Aleksey Groz

Orlin said:


> Mislim da to mogu reći samo Bugari koji ne poznaju aktivno nijedan od BCS jezika, iz moje perspektive nije lako reći. Ali kazao bih da će biti zabavno Bugarima slušati razgovore na BCS u kojima se koristi samo perfekt - mi bismo shvatili da svaki govori samo iz pozicije nesvedoka (mnogo nerealno, zar ne?). Prosto mi jako očekujemo da aorist indikativa prevladava u velikoj većini svakodnevnih razgovora o prošlim radnjima. Ali ne mislim da to vredi za mene lično jer aktivno koristim BCS jezike.



Prećiću sada na engleski, pošto možda bude interesantno i drugim učesnicima foruma.

Similar funny situation could happen with BCS speakers who are listening Bulgarian. That frequent usage of aorist (and imperfect also?), sounds a bit archaic and maybe a bit informal. Some BCS speaker could have an impression that Bulgarian speaker is not very serious.


----------



## Orlin

Aleksey Groz said:


> Prećiću sada na engleski, pošto možda bude interesantno i drugim učesnicima foruma.
> 
> Similar funny situation could happen with BCS speakers who are listening Bulgarian. That frequent usage of aorist (and imperfect also?), sounds a bit archaic and maybe a bit informal. Some BCS speaker could have an impression that Bulgarian speaker is not very serious.


Mislim da je ipak bolje koristiti srpski i/ili bugarski jer je tema o njihovoj uzajamnoj razumljivosti, i isto pretpostavjam da bugarski učesnici razumeju našu diskusiju.
Sličnost u obliku i istovremeno bitne razlike u frekvenciji upotrebe i nekako u značenju prošlih vremena u BCS i bugarskom po meni je samo uzrok da zvuči čudno govorniku respektivnog drugog jezika ali gotovo nikako ne utiče na razumljivost. To je po mom mišljenju mnogo važnije za aktivnu upotrebu jezika - npr. je meni trebalo vreme da se naviknem koristiti u BCS perfekt kao "univerzalno prošlo vreme", a s druge strane sam samo teoretski upoznat s BCS aoristom i imperfektom (ja u stvari mogu da prepoznam ali ne da formiram BCS imperfekt), i ne verujem da će mi nekada pasti na pamet njih upotrebiti.


----------



## Aleksey Groz

Orlin said:


> Mislim da je ipak bolje koristiti srpski i/ili bugarski jer je tema o njihovoj uzajamnoj razumljivosti, i isto pretpostavjam da bugarski učesnici razumeju našu diskusiju.
> Sličnost u obliku i istovremeno bitne razlike u frekvenciji upotrebe i nekako u značenju prošlih vremena u BCS i bugarskom po meni je samo uzrok da zvuči čudno govorniku respektivnog drugog jezika ali gotovo nikako ne utiče na razumljivost. To je po mom mišljenju mnogo važnije za aktivnu upotrebu jezika - npr. je meni trbalo vreme da se naviknem koristiti u BCS perfekt kao "univerzalno prošlo vreme", a s druge strane sam samo teoretski upoznat s BCS aoristom i imperfektom (ja u stvari mogu da prepoznam ali ne da formiram BCS imperfekt), i ne verujem da će mi nekada pasti na pamet njih upotrebiti.



Da, razumljivost nije ni dovođena u pitanje. Razlike postoje, ali se svakako razume da su to samo drugačiji načini izažavanja i strukture dotičnog jezika.
Ono na šta sam ja ciljao je više utisak, "šmek" jezika, kakvu atmosferu stvara jezik (za Bugare BCS zvuči nesigurno, za BCS korisnike bugarski zvuči malo neozbiljno). Ali to ni u kom slučaju ne dovodi u pitanje suštinu i samo sporazumevanje.
Aorist, barem u Srbiji, se koristi. Ali njegova upotreba je specifična. Po definiciji to je prošlo svršeno vreme koje se završilo u najbliskijoj prošlosti, nedavno, maločas. U praksi, aorist se isključivo koristi u neformalnom razgovoru, kao sredstvo za postizanje ironije ili humorističnih tonova, ponekad sa aluzijama na provincijalne dijalekte i provincijalnu kulturu uopšte. Zbog toga, upotreba aorista u Srbiji zvuči pomalo neozbiljno.
Imperket se u praksi uopšte ne upotrebljava. Čak i u književnosti je njegova upotreba retka, minimalna.


----------



## Arath

Aleksey Groz said:


> Prećiću sada na engleski, pošto možda bude interesantno i drugim učesnicima foruma.
> 
> Similar funny situation could happen with BCS speakers who are listening Bulgarian. That frequent usage of aorist (and imperfect also?), sounds a bit archaic and maybe a bit informal. Some BCS speaker could have an impression that Bulgarian speaker is not very serious.



Yes, we do use imperfect, too. In fact, imperfect has more uses than aorist and is more easily conjugated. The only irregular verb in imperfect is "*съм*" (to be).

For example, a nontraditional usage of imperfect is when we ask for confirmation of something we think it's true. English uses the past simple in a very similar (if not identical) fashion:

_Ти се *казваше* Деян, нали?_ - Your name was Deyan, right?
_Вие *живеехте* на горния етаж, нали?_ - You lived on the floor above ours, right?

Although those are imperfect verb forms, they don't refer to the past at all, they refer to the present.

We also use the imperfect in conditional clauses:

_Ако *знаех*, *щях* да ти кажа._ -If I knew, I'd tell you.

I'd like to know how the lack of grammatical cases is perceived by BCS speakers. Does using only nominative forms sound utterly wrong? Is it similar to not knowing the gender of a noun? In Bulgarian, for example, it sounds very bad and ugly when the gender of an adjective does not match the gender of the noun it modifies.

Also, do BCS speakers notice the definite articles in Bulgarian? Do they wonder why a familiar word ends in an additional *ът*, *та*, *то*, or *те*?


----------



## Orlin

arath said:


> i'd like to know how the lack of grammatical cases is perceived by bcs speakers. Does using only nominative forms sound utterly wrong? Is it similar to not knowing the gender of a noun? In bulgarian, for example, it sounds very bad and ugly when the gender of an adjective does not match the gender of the noun it modifies.
> 
> Also, do bcs speakers notice the definite articles in bulgarian? Do they wonder why a familiar word ends in an additional *ът*, *та*, *то*, or *те*?


Извинявам се, че се намесвам, защото въпросът не е адресиран към българите, но според мен всички тези сериозни граматически разлики не са решаващи за разбирането и са по-скоро проблем на активното овладяване на езика. Разбира се, по аналогия с проблемите с глаголните времена тези непознати граматически феномени би трябвало да звучат странно на носителите на босненски, хърватски или сръбски език, особено докато свикнат. Познати ми са и други мнения, че граматическите различия не са толкова важни - например същите проблеми са налице например и в комбинацията български/руски език, но взаимна разбираемост в тази двойка езици безспорно има (спомням си, че Вие не сте учили руски, но веднъж споделихте на този форум, че го разбирате).

P. S.: Бих споделил и нещо, за което не съм сигурен, че е по темата: за първи път с непознати граматически категории се сблъсках на около 9 г., когато започнах да уча руски. Много време е минало оттогава и не си спомням много, но във всички случаи не мисля, че съм имал особени трудности с възприемането на падежите - не само да не ми звучат странно, но и да ги употребявам. Впоследствие в сръбския също ми беше елементарно със склоненията.


----------



## Aleksey Groz

Arath said:


> I'd like to know how the lack of grammatical cases is perceived by BCS speakers. Does using only nominative forms sound utterly wrong? Is it similar to not knowing the gender of a noun? In Bulgarian, for example, it sounds very bad and ugly when the gender of an adjective does not match the gender of the noun it modifies.



Well, that's specific situation. Many other languages do not have cases, but it doesn't sound strange. Bulgarian and Macedonian are, on the other side Slavic languages, plus they are our neighbors, so BCS's (predominantly in Serbia) impression is based on their own dialects connected with those two language. But that just first impression. When BCS speaker realise that it's a separate language, and not a dialect, lacking of cases sounds completely normal. The similar situation happened to me in Sofia. One taxi driver said to me that he perfectly understands Serbian, but my Serbian sounded to him very strange and unintelligible. The thing was that a lot of his costumers were from Pirot region (south-east Serbian, near Bulgarian boarder) who speak a dialect close to Bulgarian. My (standard, or at least Belgrade's dialect) was strange for him, and Pirot's accent sounded a bit "селски" to him. The reason is, I suppose, fact that Pirot's accent is close to rural dialect of western Bulgaria, around Sofia.

Wrong matching of adjectives and nouns with gender doesn't sound good (as in any other language as well). Hungarians, who does not have genders, have a big problem with that. But, maybe because we used on it, it can sound a sympathetic (although, still very irregular).     



Arath said:


> Also, do BCS speakers notice the definite articles in Bulgarian? Do they wonder why a familiar word ends in an additional *ът*, *та*, *то*, or *те*?



No, nothing familiar. To make it ''worse'', regular BCS's speaker, who have never been learnt any foreign language with articles, can not understand what's the point of articles at all. I learnt few such languages, but I still have a HUGE problem to realise when I have to use article and when not.


----------



## iobyo

Arath said:


> Do they wonder why a familiar word ends in an additional *ът*, *та*, *то*, or *те*?



Some Serbs I've met thought they were something like the cases in Serbian, which reminds me of a saying they have: _makedonski je srpski sa govornata manata._


----------



## DenisBiH

iobyo said:


> Some Serbs I've met thought they were something like the cases in Serbian, which reminds me of a saying they have: _makedonski je srpski sa govornata manata._




Not sure how relevant, but where perception of articles is concerned, there's also that joke:

_What's the Macedonian word for rifle? Puškata.
What's the Macedonian word for machine-gun? Puškatatatatatatatata.

_Personally I'd say that Macedonian uses of prepositions instead of cases and Macedonian verb forms are at least, if not more, notable and marked Macedonian differences from Bosnian / BCS from my point of view. There's a small "BCS - Macedonian dictionary" circling the net that should give the impression of what BCS speakers find strange enough to joke about (here, look for the section "Bosanko-makedonski rječnik"). Note there is a number of jokes dealing with the use of "na".


----------



## Aleksey Groz

iobyo said:


> Some Serbs I've met thought they were something like the cases in Serbian, which reminds me of a saying they have: _makedonski je srpski sa govornata manata._



I didn't understand you well. Some Serbs said what about cases?
Yes, I know that "joke" and I think it's very rude (if not worse).


----------



## iobyo

Aleksey Groz said:


> I didn't understand you well. Some Serbs said what about cases?
> Yes, I know that "joke" and I think it's very rude (if not worse).



That the _-от, -та_, etc. endings are analogous to _-u, -om, -og_, etc.

Sure, but I can't imagine it being used in a mean-spirited way.


----------



## Orlin

Zdravo svima! Mi smo već mnogo komentirali o bitnim gramatičkim razlikama BCS vs. bugarski/makedonski i koliko čudno svi ti nepoznati fenomeni zvuče govornicima drugoj grupi jezika. Ali tema je ovde *uzajamna* *razumljivost* - zanima me da li te gramatičke razlike sprečuju razumljivost.


----------



## iobyo

Orlin said:


> zanima me da li te gramatičke razlike sprečuju razumljivost.



I've wondered the same and usually thought they wouldn't, but... as silly as it may sound, how about Bulgarianizing a Serbian text (with a sort of approximated grammar) and then getting a Serb to 'decypher' it?


----------



## Aleksey Groz

iobyo said:


> That the _-от, -та_, etc. endings are analogous to _-u, -om, -og_, etc.



Well, I would never think that. It's quit obvious that they are not cases' sufux's. As I mentioned in some post above, articles in BCS sounds just like unnecessary endings in the word. To be precise, I don't think that they are unnecessary in other languages, but for BCS grammar and vocabulary they are. 



iobyo said:


> I've wondered the same and usually thought they wouldn't, but... as silly as it may sound, how about Bulgarianizing a Serbian text (with a sort of approximated grammar) and then getting a Serb to 'decypher' it?



It's not a bad idea! Give me to try!


----------



## Aleksey Groz

Orlin said:


> Zdravo svima! Mi smo već mnogo komentirali o bitnim gramatičkim razlikama BCS vs. bugarski/makedonski i koliko čudno svi ti nepoznati fenomeni zvuče govornicima drugoj grupi jezika. Ali tema je ovde *uzajamna* *razumljivost* - zanima me da li te gramatičke razlike sprečuju razumljivost.



Mislim da gramatičke razlike (posebno ako govorimo o vremenima) ne otežavaju komunikaciju. Mislim da je veća prepreka razlike u vokabularu i posebno antonimi (kao i klimanje glavom u suprotnim smerovima za da i ne  ).


----------



## iobyo

So how does this sound to a Serb? 



> *Predviđenite klimatski promeni je alarmiraat Srbija*
> 
> Ako prosečnite temperaturi u Srbija nastavat da rastat, zemljata može da bude pogođena od suši, nestašica na hrana i tropski bolesti, se navodi u izveštajot za klimatskite promeni na Ministarstvoto za životna sredina i prostorno planiranje, koji ga usvoji vladata.
> 
> Prema izveštajot, objavljen porano ova godina, prosečnite temperaturi u Srbija će se povećaat za otprilika jedan stepen Celzijusov do 2030. godina, ako se nastavi zagađivanjeto. Rastot na temperaturata može da iznosi između 2,4 i 3 stepeni do krajot na vekot.
> 
> Istovremeno, količinata na padavinite značajno će se smanji. Srbija, sa to, može da se suoči sa veliki suši koji bi rezultirale sa nestašica na hrana.
> 
> U izveštajot takođe se navodi da dugite letnji suši može da budat prošarani sa kraći periodi na jaki pljuskovi, što je dovoljno da izazovaat poplavi u određeni delovi na zemljata.


----------



## Aleksey Groz

iobyo said:


> So how does this sound to a Serb?



_*Predviđene klimatske promene alarmiraju Srbiju*

Ukoliko prosečne temperature u Srbiji nastave da rastu, zemlja može biti pogođena sušom, nestašicom hrane i tropskim bolestima, navodi se u izveštaju Ministarstva za životnu sredinu i prostorno planiranje, koji je usvojila vlada.

Prema izveštaju, objavljenom ranije ove godine, prosečne temperature u Srbiji će se povećavati za otprilike jedan stepen Celzijusa do 2030. godine, ukoliko se nastavi zagađivanje. Rast temperature može da iznosi između 2,4 i 3 stepena do kraja veka.

Istovremeno, količina padavina će se značajno smanjiti. Srbija, time, može da se suoči sa velikim sušama koje bi dovele do nestašice hrane.

U izveštaju se takođe navodi da duge letnje suše mogu biti prošarane kraćim periodima jakih pljuskova, što bi bilo dovoljno da se izazovu poplave u određenim delovima zemlje._

Kao što rekoh, gramatika nije problem. Problem su reči


----------



## Orlin

> *Predviđenite klimatski promeni je alarmiraat Srbija*
> 
> *Ako prosečnite temperaturi u Srbija nastavat da rastat, zemljata može da bude pogođena od suši, nestašica na hrana i tropski bolesti, se navodi u izveštajot za klimatskite promeni na Ministarstvoto za životna sredina i prostorno planiranje, koji ga usvoji vladata.*
> 
> *Prema izveštajot, objavljen porano ova godina, prosečnite temperaturi u Srbija će se povećaat za otprilika jedan stepen Celzijusov do 2030. godina, ako se nastavi zagađivanjeto. Rastot na temperaturata može da iznosi između 2,4 i 3 stepeni do krajot na vekot.*
> 
> *Istovremeno, količinata na padavinite značajno će se smanji. Srbija, sa to, može da se suoči sa veliki suši koji bi rezultirale sa nestašica na hrana.*
> 
> *U izveštajot takođe se navodi da dugite letnji suši može da budat prošarani sa kraći periodi na jaki pljuskovi, što je dovoljno da izazovaat poplavi u određeni delovi na zemljata. *


 
Ja lako razumem ovo, i čini mi se da mi ovaj tekst jako zvuči kao "pravi" makedonski - moj lični utisak je da makedonski koristi specijaliziranu terminologiju uglavnom mnogo blisku srpskoj, i zato mi specijalizirani makedonski tekstovi stvarno zvuče kao "srpski s makedonskom gramatikom".
Oprostite mogući off-topic.


----------



## Arath

Here's a Serbianized Bulgarian text, I've tried to keep it as grammatically and phonetically close to Standard BCS, as I can (I have never studied it, actually). Does using BCS grammar make it easier to understand Bulgarian, or are there too many vocabulary differences?Amerikanski sajt je obrkao predstave ljubitelja zodiakalnih znaka, kato je dobavio novu trinadesetu zodiju kam sućestvuvaćima 12 - zodiju Zmijenosca. U spisku poznatih 12 zodija, amerikanski učeni vmakvaju 13-u zodiju među Skorpiona i Strelca od 29 noemvrija do 17 dekemvrija. Spored bugarskim astrolozima, takvu zodiju nema. ​"Za tri dana sam polučio 60 imejla. Usućnost, otricatelji astronomije, za sažalenije između kojih ima astronome, mnogo običaju puštati tozi material. Zodiju Zmijenosca nema, ima sazvezdije Zmijenosca. Predi mnogo godina u drevnosti su sućestvuvali 14 zodiakalna znaka”, je kazao astrolog. Jedna od dopuniteljnih je Pauk - rođenih prez maj, a vtora Zmijenosac - rođenih prez dekemvri.​"Osobeno onezi, koji su u Pauku, su bili agresivniji, gotovi da podstrekavaju kam vojennim dejstvijima, kam ubijstvima. Za razliku od Pauka, tezi hora, podvlastni Zmijenoscu, nisu bili tolkova agresivni. No su bili hora, koji trudno su gonili svoj vrh i razvitije, običali su streljati otdolu, otrovno, i nisu uspevali postignuti cele si. Imali su vragove glavno i az se radujem, če su otpadnuli od astrologije”, je kazao toj. ​Za astroloze povdiganje te teme je provokacija. I za teh, i za astronome Zmijenosac je sazvezdie, a ne zodija. ​"Če ima Zmijenosca, ima. Taj koji uzeme zvezdnu kartu, će se ubediti, če ima. Sazvezdija su 13, a ne 12, kak je mnogo razprostraneno. Prvoobraz mu je drevan učitelj Asklepij ili Eskolap. Spored legendi toj je polučio od zmije lečebne treve, kojima je mogao sabuždati mrtve, Zevs se jadosao i munijom go prevrnuo u sazvezdije, ne predstavljava nekakvu zabeležimu konfiguraciju, no tova sazvezdije je čast neba ošte od drevnosti”, je kazao doc. Evgeni Semkov, Institut po astronomiji.​Nebe je razdeljeno na 88 sazvezdija ošte prez 1922 g. i ottogava čovek nito može otkrivati nova sazvezdija, nito im promenjati granice.​


----------



## iobyo

Aleksey Groz said:


> Kao što rekoh, gramatika nije problem. Problem su reči



I think it's the combination of both that can present a problem and stress too (which has already been mentioned). A similar test could be done using Bulgarian words and Serbian grammar. With Bulgarian, intelligibility is further hampered by the numerous Russian loans which, from my observations, varies dramatically in frequency. Nevertheless, how does the following sound to you?

Edit: Arath's phonetically closer text much better illustrates the point.


----------



## iobyo

Orlin said:


> Ja lako razumem ovo, i čini mi se da mi ovaj tekst jako zvuči kao "pravi" makedonski - moj lični utisak je da makedonski koristi specijaliziranu terminologiju uglavnom mnogo blisku srpskoj, i zato mi specijalizirani makedonski tekstovi stvarno zvuče kao "srpski s makedonskom gramatikom".
> Oprostite mogući off-topic.



Apart from the palatal affricates and lateral, and the odd word here and there, this is indeed very close to Macedonian.

Your observation is much like mine for Bulgarian: where Macedonian uses a specialized word similar to Serbian, Bulgarian uses a specialized word similar to Russian. One could also, by being selective, show a greater preference for neologisms in Macedonian.

 For comparison and my own amusement, Macedonian with Serbian grammar:



> *Српски наставници предводе бран штрајкова*
> 
> По[крај] наставника, кои штрајкују веќ[е] шести ден, вработени во више сектора во Србии исто така стапувају во штрајк барајќи веќе плате.
> 
> Очекуе се да ќе наскоро и медицински и фармацевтски работници отпочети сопствени штрајк, додека е протест полицаеца веќ[е] во теку.
> 
> Наставници сакају да се укине двегодишње замрзнувања плата и барају зголемување од 25%. Просечна месечна плата просветних работника во Србии изнесуе 340 евра, што е мање од просека земје.


----------



## Arath

aleksey groz said:


> it's not a bad idea! Give me to try!



Here's a Bulgarianized Serbian text, using Bulgarian grammar and orthography.
*Първи три-де снимки на Слънцето*​Користейки специални стерео сонди, тим  научници от НАСА  успя да направи първите фотографии и снимки, които  омогъщяват да се  види цялата површина на звездата, чак и иза хоризонта.  То ще помогне знатно в  прогнозирането на всемирските условия и нихния  утицай на Земята.  ​„Америчката агенция за всемирски изтраживания  (НАСА) за пръв път обявява три-де фотографии и снимки на Слънцето, които  омогъщяват да се  види неговата цяла површина", обявено е на сайта на  агенцията.​Снимките на Слънцето са направени с помощта на  две стерео сонди (на които научниците  са надянали името "STEREO", а и  изтраживачкият програм носи истия назив) които  са снимали звездата от  две различни страни.​Научниците оцениха, да фотографиите и снимките на Слънцето ще омогъщят   значаен напредък в прогнозирането на всемирските условия и нихния утицай  на  Земята, а ще помогнат и при случай на слане на бъдещи мисии.​„За пръв път в  историята можем да гледаме соларните активности в пълна  тридименсионална  величанственост", каза Ангелос Вурлидас, член на тима  научници, и додаде,  да това е веома важен тренутък в соларната физика.​„'STEREO' откри Слънцето онакова, каквото е заиста - сфера от вряла  плазма и изпреплетена  мрежа от магнитни полета", обясни Вурлидас.​Лика Гухатхакурта, член на тима задължени за програмата "STEREO",  изтъкна, да благодарение на сондите сада можем да летим око Слънцето, за  да видим ща се догажда иза  хоризонта, али без да излизаме из  канцеларията.​Гухатхакурта изтъкна,  да най-значайното е това, що от сада е могъщно да  се види ща се догажда  на страната на Слънцето, която без сонди не беше  достъпна. 
​Here's the original:http://www.rts.rs/page/magazine/ci/story/501/Занимљивости/838972/Први+три-де+снимци+Сунца.html if you want to compare the differences.


----------



## Aleksey Groz

First iobyo's text I understood perfectly. The second one (with some protesters on Bulgarian-Greek boarder wasn't easy. In fact, I'm not sure if I understood it well, at all. 
The first Arath text is also a bit hard, but I get the context. The second one I understand perfectly!

So, I would conclude that for BCS speakers ( or at least for those from Serbia... or at least for me  ), the main thing for understanding of Bulgarian and Macedonian is vocabulary and not grammar. The simple example is with Slovene. BCS and Slovene have similar grammar (with exception of dual), but vocabulary is quit different. That's why I can not understand, sometimes, neither a context of some text.


----------



## Orlin

Aleksey Groz said:


> First iobyo's text I understood perfectly. The second one (with some protesters on Bulgarian-Greek boarder wasn't easy. In fact, I'm not sure if I understood it well, at all.
> The first Arath text is also a bit hard, but I get the context. The second one I understand perfectly!
> 
> So, I would conclude that for BCS speakers ( or at least for those from Serbia... or at least for me  ), the main thing for understanding of Bulgarian and Macedonian is vocabulary and not grammar. The simple example is with Slovene. BCS and Slovene have similar grammar (with exception of dual), but vocabulary is quit different. That's why I can not understand, sometimes, neither a context of some text.


Ja se isto slažem da je vokabular prioritetnije od gramatike šta se razumljivosti tiče: već se ponavljam ali rećiću opet da npr. bugarsko-ruska razumljivost definitivno postoji na veoma značajnom nivou usprkos "strašno" različitim gramatikama. A ja razumem slovenački na srednjem nivou i moje teškoće su skoro isključivo s nepoznatim rečima: ima ih mnogo. 
Takođe bih rekao da uzajamna razumljivost je mnogo lična stvar i izuzetno mnogo zavisi od ličnog iskustva s jezikom u pitanju: regularni kontakti s nekim srodnim jezikom relativno brzo smanjuju broj nerazumljivih reči i razumljivost značajno raste: npr. sam ja imao relativno mnogo "susreta" sa slovenačkim na ovom forumu i sad se osećam mnogo komfornije kad čitam slovenački.
Bilo mi je zabavno čitati sve "eksperimentalne" tekstove na ovoj temi: ja razumem sve kombinacije vokabulara i gramatike prosto zbog toga što govorim i bugarski i srpski.

P. S.: Međutim, koje tekstove smatrate razumljivijim - na "pravom" bugarskom i srpskom (takvih već ima dovoljno i na ovoj temi) ili "naše čudne eksperimentalne kombinacije" vokabulara jednog jezika s gramatikom respektivnog drugog?


----------



## Bukovik

Колико времена је потребно некому који се једино служи стандардним бугарским да научи разумети србски просто једино слушајући србски - у просеку, отприлике?


----------



## pastet89

Bukovik said:


> Колико времена је потребно некому који се једино служи стандардним бугарским да научи разумети србски просто једино слушајући србски - у просеку, отприлике?


Pa naravno i da bi samo slušao trebaće da gleda reči u rečniku inače ne bi prošlo. 
Inače zavisi puno od nivoa razumevanja. Po meni za najosnovinje stvari i osnovne razgovore u svakodnevici (gramatički neispravno A2), možda negde između 2 i 4 nedelje. Ukoliko hoće da razume baš sve pa i komplikovane sednice u vladi, rep pesme ili knjige Ive Andrića, doduše i ja to ne razumem na 100% nakon 6 godina bavljenja srpskim.


----------



## Милан

pastet89 said:


> Ukoliko hoće da razume baš sve pa i* komplikovane sednice u vladi*, rep pesme ili knjige Ive Andrića, doduše i ja to ne razumem na 100% nakon 6 godina bavljenja srpskim.



Sreća tvoja, veruj mi.


----------



## pastet89

Kako misliš?


----------



## Bukovik

pastet89 said:


> Pa naravno i da bi samo slušao trebaće da gleda reči u rečniku inače ne bi prošlo.
> Inače zavisi puno od nivoa razumevanja. Po meni za najosnovinje stvari i osnovne razgovore u svakodnevici (gramatički neispravno A2), možda negde između 2 i 4 nedelje. Ukoliko hoće da razume baš sve pa i komplikovane sednice u vladi, rep pesme ili knjige Ive Andrića, doduše i ja to ne razumem na 100% nakon 6 godina bavljenja srpskim.



Која је разлика у основној лексици између бугарског и србског? Колико има различитих речи које отежавају разумевање? Постоји ли речник разлика - разликовни речних србско-бугарски?


----------



## pastet89

Bukovik said:


> Која је разлика у основној лексици између бугарског и србског? Колико има различитих речи које отежавају разумевање? Постоји ли речник разлика - разликовни речних србско-бугарски?


Postoji normalan srpsko-bugarski rečnik sa svim rečima, jer to su dva ozbiljno odvojena jezika, ne kao srpski i hrvatski. 
Po mojoj proceni, slično zvuči ili isto je najmanje 70% reči, ali puno ih je false friendsa (različito značanje a iste reči), koje ponekad mogu biti vrlo bliskog značanja, a ponekad nešto sasvim različizom. Ako uračunamo i to, mislim da različitih je oko 50%. I opet moram da naglasim, da je kontekst i komplikovanost teksta vrlo važan. Jer mislim da sam već spomenuo na tom forumu, ali meni se čini, da najčešće reči u svakodnevici i najbitnije za razumevanje su iste u srpskom i bugarskom, a različite u bugarskom i ruskom, (to su ne više od 50 reči, ali zaista su najčešće i najbitnije), dok osnovni deo komplikovane leksike kao u literaturi, je mnogo sličniji između bugarskog i ruskog, nego srpskog i bugarskog. Dakle, bugarinom, koji ne zna niti jednog jezika, biće neuporedivo lakše da se razume sa srbinom na ulici za neke jednostavne stvari ili čak da provede neki razgovor srednog nivoa, mada i sa objašnjenima i korišćenjima sinonima kad bi trebalo. Ali, istovremeno, ukoliko nauči samo bukvalno 20 tih najčešćih ruskih reči, biće mu lakše da pročita knjigu na ruskom nego na srpskom.  To je valjda zbog toga da puno bugarske leksike u našoj literaturi ima ruski uticaj još od početka 20. veka. Dok su osnovne reči u svakodnevici valjda isti u srpskom i bugarskom zbog geografske blizine. 

Puno bugara bi reklo da razume skoro sve srpskog ali ja mogu da potvrdim to opet samo za jednostavne razgovore. Mogu sigurno da tvrdim, da ukoliko dođe do gledanja filma ili čitanja knjige, to apsolutno nikome ne bi pošlo za rukom, ako se nije bavio neko vreme ozbiljno srpskim. Čini mi se takođe, da što se tiče osnovnog razumevanja, što je lako za skoro sve bugare, nije tako lako za srbe, i dok 90% nas razume osnovne stvari u srpskom, najviše 50% srba to može da uradi u obrnutom smeru. To je valjda zbog specifične leksike bugarskog. Recimo, "on", "ona", to su reči, koje su iste u svim slovenskim jezicima, a isto prisutni su i u našim narečjima kao arhaizmi, i svaki bugarin ih zna. Ali niti jedan srbin valjda ne bi znao "toj" i "tja", što su naše reči za "on" i "ona". Isto je sa "otac" i "bašta", "ljudi" i "hora" i tako dalje....


----------



## pastet89

Malo offtopic, ali evo na šta sam naišao, što me je nateralo da razmislim u vezi stepna razumevanja i konteksta



> the 75 most common words make up 40% of occurrences
> the 200 most common words make up 50% of occurrences
> the 524 most common words make up 60% of occurrences
> the 1257 most common words make up 70% of occurrences
> the 2925 most common words make up 80% of occurrences
> the 7444 most common words make up 90% of occurrences
> the 13374 most common words make up 95% of occurrences
> the 25508 most common words make up 99% of occurrences


----------



## Bukovik

pastet89 said:


> Ali, istovremeno, ukoliko nauči samo bukvalno 20 tih najčešćih ruskih reči, biće mu lakše da pročita knjigu na ruskom nego na bugarskom.



Da li treba da stoji "srpskom"? A koliko srpskih reči moraš da naučiš da bi mogao da pratiš, recimo, ovakav razgovor ovde na forumu ili  da čitaš srpsku vikipediju, a  da ne previše proveriš značenje pojedinih reči?


----------



## pastet89

Bukovik said:


> Da li treba da stoji "srpskom"? A koliko srpskih reči moraš da naučiš da bi mogao da pratiš, recimo, ovakav razgovor ovde na forumu ili da čitaš srpsku vikipediju, a da ne previše proveriš značenje pojedinih reči?


Dabome, hvala na ispravci. 
Rekao bih da je false friendsa stvarno previše tako da se možeš varati da pratiš, a da ne znaš o čemu se zaista radi. Recimo isto ja pre no što sam počeo da studiram sam mislio da razumem 80% slobodno, a onda se ispostavilo, da puno tekstova imaju prilično različito značanje od toga, što sam ja prethodno pretpostavljao, po meni ti false friends najviše smetaju, jer kad naletiš na 2 ključne reči, koji ti odlučuju osnovni smisao teksta, možeš da onda protumačiš sve pogrešno prema njima, tako da malo zavisi i od šanse, na kakav tekst ćeš naleteti, može da bude da stvarno ukapiraš sve tačno u 15 rečenicama za redom, a možda bukvalno zbog par takvih pogrešnih tumačenja da kreneš u sasvim drugi smer. Na bugarskom netu recimo je puno "prevoda" srpskih pesama koji "prevode" ljudi koji očigledno ne znaju srpski i u najboljem slučaju gledaju u rečniku samo različite reči. Upravo ti tekstovi su puni gluposti zbog false friendsa, koji ostaju neprevedeni ali imaju ponekad sasvim drugo značanje. Tako da po meni je težko proceniti prosečno. 

Evo dva teksta posebno izabrani onako za primer:

Хорaтa в столицaтa сa нaдути и кaрaт без дa обръщaт внимaние нa товa, дaли по време нa дъжд не могaт дa опръскaт някой пешеходец, нaмирaщ се нaоколо. Веднъж еднa колa опръскa едно семейство и бaщaтa хубaво се скaрa нa шофьорa, обиждaйки го с думaтa "капут". Въпроснaтa случкa се рaзигрa пред aкaдемиятa зa изобрaзително изкуство.

Ljudi u glavnom gradu su uobraženi i voze, ne obraćajući pažnju na to, da li za vreme kiše neće isprskati nekog pešaka, nalazeći se unaokolo. Jednom je jedan auto isprskao jednu porodicu, pa se je otac lepo izdrao na šofera, uvredivši ga rečju "barabom". Događaj, koji je u pitanju, se odigrao ispred akademije slikovne umetnosti. 

Днес е разкошен ден, защото майка ни има рожден ден. Ние с брат ми имаме изненада за нея, купили сме ѝ аквариум с риби, защото това е нейна мечта от отдавна. Баба ни вчера беше болна, и се надяваме да оздравее до довечера, за да ни дойде на гости.

Danas je raskošan dan, zato što majka ima rođen dan. Mi sa bratom imamo iznenađenje za nju, kupili smo joj akvarijum s ribicama, jer to je njena mašta od davno. Baka je juče bila bolna, pa se nadamo da ozdravi do uveče, kako bi nam došla u goste.


Kao što je predložio kolega na drugom forumu, da bi se videla realnost najbolje je naći neki slučajno realan tekst pa da pokušaš da razumeš i recimo da javiš tu šta si razumeo, pa da ti neko potvrdi da li je tačno ili si se prevario. U svakom slučaju varijacija je stvarno prilična tako da trebaće za normalnu procenu nekoliko teksta sa različitih područja.


----------



## lowhum

Aleksey Groz said:


> So, I would conclude that for BCS speakers ( or at least for those from Serbia... or at least for me  ), the main thing for understanding of Bulgarian and Macedonian is vocabulary and not grammar.



There is one more problem with BCS speakers understanding Bulgarian - there are a lot of Bulgar words in Bulgarian, beside the slavic ones and they are used very often in everyday speech. For example, the following text will be probably unintelligible to any Slavic ear, besides Bulgarian:

Баща ми тръшна пръчката върху гърба на масата. Тя се строши. В коша тропаха дребни бръмбари. Тя се спъна, но успя да прекрачи локвата. Хубавата кака тръпнеше в мерак. „Карам обич за батко.“ – каза тя и тръгна към мазата.


(translation: My father slammed the stick on the back of the table. It broke.Tiny beetles were clattering in the basket. She stumbled, but managed to step over the puddle. The beautiful older sister was trembling with desire. "I am driving love for my older brother" she said and left for the basement.)


----------



## lowhum

The 


Bukovik said:


> Колико времена је потребно некому који се једино служи стандардним бугарским да научи разумети србски просто једино слушајући србски - у просеку, отприлике?



Not more than a week... and a bottle of rakija  Though it helps if you speak Russian, too.


----------



## lowhum

pastet89 said:


> Postoji normalan srpsko-bugarski rečnik sa svim rečima, jer to su dva ozbiljno odvojena jezika, ne kao srpski i hrvatski.
> Po mojoj proceni, slično zvuči ili isto je najmanje 70% reči, ali puno ih je false friendsa (različito značanje a iste reči), koje ponekad mogu biti vrlo bliskog značanja, a ponekad nešto sasvim različizom. Ako uračunamo i to, mislim da različitih je oko 50%. I opet moram da naglasim, da je kontekst i komplikovanost teksta vrlo važan. Jer mislim da sam već spomenuo na tom forumu, ali meni se čini, da najčešće reči u svakodnevici i najbitnije za razumevanje su iste u srpskom i bugarskom, a različite u bugarskom i ruskom, (to su ne više od 50 reči, ali zaista su najčešće i najbitnije), dok osnovni deo komplikovane leksike kao u literaturi, je mnogo sličniji između bugarskog i ruskog, nego srpskog i bugarskog. Dakle, bugarinom, koji ne zna niti jednog jezika, biće neuporedivo lakše da se razume sa srbinom na ulici za neke jednostavne stvari ili čak da provede neki razgovor srednog nivoa, mada i sa objašnjenima i korišćenjima sinonima kad bi trebalo. Ali, istovremeno, ukoliko nauči samo bukvalno 20 tih najčešćih ruskih reči, biće mu lakše da pročita knjigu na ruskom nego na srpskom.  To je valjda zbog toga da puno bugarske leksike u našoj literaturi ima ruski uticaj još od početka 20. veka. Dok su osnovne reči u svakodnevici valjda isti u srpskom i bugarskom zbog geografske blizine.
> 
> Puno bugara bi reklo da razume skoro sve srpskog ali ja mogu da potvrdim to opet samo za jednostavne razgovore. Mogu sigurno da tvrdim, da ukoliko dođe do gledanja filma ili čitanja knjige, to apsolutno nikome ne bi pošlo za rukom, ako se nije bavio neko vreme ozbiljno srpskim. Čini mi se takođe, da što se tiče osnovnog razumevanja, što je lako za skoro sve bugare, nije tako lako za srbe, i dok 90% nas razume osnovne stvari u srpskom, najviše 50% srba to može da uradi u obrnutom smeru. To je valjda zbog specifične leksike bugarskog. Recimo, "on", "ona", to su reči, koje su iste u svim slovenskim jezicima, a isto prisutni su i u našim narečjima kao arhaizmi, i svaki bugarin ih zna. Ali niti jedan srbin valjda ne bi znao "toj" i "tja", što su naše reči za "on" i "ona". Isto je sa "otac" i "bašta", "ljudi" i "hora" i tako dalje....



To su Proto-Bugarski reči. U Bugarski ima mnogo takvih parova - jedna reč je slovenska, a druga - proto-bugarska.


----------



## Christo Tamarin

lowhum said:


> To su Proto-Bugarski reči. U Bugarski ima mnogo takvih parova - jedna reč je slovenska, a druga - proto-bugarska.


This is not true. Examples, please.

This is an open list of Bulgarian words with hypothetical Proto-Bulgar origin:

шар, шарен, шарка, шаря, ..
бѣлѣг, бѣлѣжа, бѣлѣжит, забѣлѣзвам, ..
шейна
шаран
тояга
ковчег
шиле
шуртя
урва
корем
The hypothesis of word pairs cannot be supported.


----------



## lowhum

Christo Tamarin said:


> This is not true. Examples, please.
> 
> This is an open list of Bulgarian words with hypothetical Proto-Bulgar origin:
> 
> шар, шарен, шарка, шаря, ..
> бѣлѣг, бѣлѣжа, бѣлѣжит, забѣлѣзвам, ..
> шейна
> шаран
> тояга
> ковчег
> шиле
> шуртя
> урва
> корем
> The hypothesis of word pairs cannot be supported.



ОК, almost everything about Proto-Bulgarian is hypothetical, but these pairs exist, and the (hypotheticaly) Bulgar words (exept if borrowed) are not to be found in any other Slavic language.
Just to name a few:

Bulg - Slav
------------
баща - отец
хубав - красив
обич - любов
къща - дом
вървя - ходя
тръгвам - отпътувам
кух - празен
къс - кратък 
коловоз - бразда
въже - канап
пъргав - бърз
первам, цапвам - удрям
скитам - странствам
цяр (диал.) - лек
карам - водя
куче - пес (диал.)
багра, шарка - цвят
крак - нога


----------



## Christo Tamarin

lowhum said:


> ОК, almost everything about Proto-Bulgarian is hypothetical, but these pairs exist, and the (hypotheticaly) Bulgar words (exept if borrowed) are not to be found in any other Slavic language.
> Just to name a few:
> 
> Bulg - Slav
> ------------
> баща - отец
> хубав - красив
> обич - любов
> къща - дом
> вървя - ходя
> тръгвам - отпътувам
> кух - празен
> къс - кратък
> коловоз - бразда
> въже - канап
> пъргав - бърз
> первам, цапвам - удрям
> скитам - странствам
> цяр (диал.) - лек
> карам - водя
> куче - пес (диал.)
> багра, шарка - цвят
> крак - нога



Except for шарка (given in my list, too), no Proto-Bulgarian origin can be supposed for the other words in your list.

Check an academic etymological dictionary, please.


----------



## martinkunev

the following are not proto-bulgar according to wiktionary

хубав - from persian: خوب /xub/ "beautiful"
вървя - from връв, върволица (a group of people moving together)
кух - from greek κούφιος "hollow"
коловоз - From Proto-Slavic _*kolovozъ_ (“rut, wheel track”). Equivalent to _kȍlo_ (“wheel, cart wheel”) + _vȏz_ (“cart load")
цяр - from persian _čare_ "means"
карам - from latin _carrus_ "car"
куче - there is the serbian word кучак. the etymology is unclear but it's likely a turkish word
крак - this is a slavic word

Words which are considered to be almost certainly of Bulgar origin are, for example: бъбрек “kidney”, бисер “pearl”, кумир “idol”, чертог “castle”.


----------



## cHr0mChIk

I apologise in advance for not reading the whole thread.

When I've been to Bulgaria on a trip back in college, with my collegemates, we did not use any English. We spoke Serbian to people and they responded in Bulgarian, and we had absolutely no issue communicating at all, so I'd say they're pretty highly mutually intelligible.

Also as we'd pass by billboards and signs, they'd always be reacting like "Omg I can understand this!" They were surprised how they didn't even know how similar Bulgarian is to Serbian.

Of course, there is a bunch of things to point out. Pretty much all of our interactions with people were very basic, like meeting people, talking to the waiter in the café, talking to the cashier at the stores, etc.

Of course, such communication is very different from watching a video of Bulgarian or hearing Bulgarian on TV, etc.

On the other hand, it's always mind boggling for me when I see fellow Serbian people not being able to understand (at least very basic) Bulgarian or even worse, Macedonian.

It's so similar, me and a lot of other people I spoke with, can understand it with an ease, and in the past I was even able to translate it in real time, without any issue (I translated an interview which was in Bulgarian to a non-Slavic person in real time).

It's such a close language to Serbian from my personal view.

I think it all comes to training one's ear perhaps. Because from personal experience I realised that even slight changes in pronunciation, and slight alterations of words can reduce inteligibility very significantly...

And if one isn't familiar with Bulgarian accent, it might seem as if it's so different and unintelligible.

In my opinion, after only 1 day of exposure to Bulgarian, an average Serb should be able to understand it 90%


----------

