![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is your problem with the language that is used in his works? That is pure Macedonian. Your argument that there was not Macedonian at his time is not relevant and reliable since the language existed no matter what in BG thought and no matter the codification. I am bringing back that statement since you do not need political act to recognize language. Have you seen such stupid thing? Look at his works, and if you know a bit inguistics you will understand my point. Do not revert obvious things. -- MacedonianBoy ( talk) 18:23, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
He described himself and the Slavic poulation in Macedonia as Bulgarians. He described their language also as Bulgarian. The scientists of his time made the same. I undestand your point of view to change his identity postfactum, but I disagree. Jingby ( talk) 14:31, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Scientific nomenclature can be a bitch when it doesn't fit our POVs. A certain dialect does not become something else after its classification is revised. He wrote in Macedonian, but named it something else in accordance with his personal and contemporary views. We do not say the Earth was flat, but since YYYY it has become a spheroid. We also don't mention this historical tidbit every time the shape of the Earth is discussed, because other articles deal with that in detail. -- 124.150.40.224 ( talk) 15:46, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps someone should provide an excerpt from the third source. The fourth and fifth sources do not back the statement as Cepenkov was not referring to the language of his texts (not even implicitly). -- 124.169.77.241 ( talk) 13:28, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
For shure such language (Macedonian) did not exist at his time. Jingby ( talk) 14:55, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
So what language was the Macedonian populace speaking at that time? -- 124.150.35.70 ( talk) 16:03, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
The variety he wrote in is most definitely the Prilep-Bitola dialect which is a Macedonian dialect. I don't understand what you're objecting to. -- 124.150.35.70 ( talk) 16:10, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
The fourth source states, "If they are Bulgarians, fine—we will understand each other; but if they are Turks or Vlachs, how will we understand each other?". It does not support the statement that he considered his dialect a Bulgarian one, only that Bulgarians would understand him. The fifth is a story about a Bulgarian-speaker and Turkish-speaker not understanding each other. It does not support the statement that he considered his dialect a Bulgarian one, only that the two men in the story could not communicate in the same language. -- 203.59.88.177 ( talk) 02:39, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
In fact, in his own Autobiography he states, "I had already learned Bulgarian", "of the little Bulgarian I knew", "now I can sing in Bulgarian passably", "now I know Bulgarian somewhat". -- 203.59.88.177 ( talk) 02:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Also: In Cepenkov's tales a Macedonian speaking Christian is a Bugarin, a Macedonian speaking Muslim is a Pomak ... and the Macedonian language is called Nashincki or Bugarcki. See: "Developing cultural identity in the Balkans: convergence vs divergence", Raymond Detrez, Pieter Plas, Peter Lang, 2005, ISBN 9052012970, p. 27. Jingby ( talk) 10:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Nice quote. :) --
124.148.245.171 (
talk)
11:02, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Well, I suggest these 2 sentences to be just removed, as it is irrelevant how it is called today, and thus to remove the contradiction this way of course:
"Now his dialect is still considered Bulgarian dialect in Bulgaria.[8] Today, his dialect is classified as the Prilep-Bitola dialect of the Macedonian language.[citation needed]"
But unfortunately our EDITOR-IN-CHEIF Jingibay is here as he is everywhere... ;o)
95.42.33.131 (
talk)
14:45, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
"In Cepenkov's tales a Macedonian speaking Christian is a Bugarin, a Macedonian speaking Muslim is a Pomak [...] and the Macedonian language is called Nashincki or Bugarcki". — "Developing cultural identity in the Balkans: convergence vs divergence", Raymond Detrez, Pieter Plas, Peter Lang, 2005
In his own time, his language was described differently by different people. Some called it "Bulgarian", others "Macedonian" and even "South/Old Serbian". The politics of the Bulgarian government are of no importance in this article. The Prilep-Bitola dialect is universally classified as a Macedonian dialect by all experts. -- 124.148.245.171 ( talk) 12:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Only read the sources, but do not delete them! As you know, you are banned forever! Jingby ( talk) 13:12, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
He wrote in the Prilep-Bitola dialect of the Macedonian language. He identified as Bulgarian. It's fairly clear-cut. So why try and state that from a particular POV? -- WavesSaid ( talk) 03:03, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
The following are linguistic publications dealing with the Prilep dialect as Macedonian:
This one makes specific reference to the works of Cepenkov:
-- WavesSaid ( talk) 01:34, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
By the way, in the lead is a sentence: Today, his dialect is classified as the Prilep-Bitola dialect of the Macedonian language.{Citation needed|date=May 2011} If you wont, just add one. Jingiby ( talk) 08:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
His language was Bulgarian, but today it is classified as Macedonian, after such language was codified. Jingiby ( talk) 09:23, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
False. No chance. Full stop. Jingiby ( talk) 09:52, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Tags for biased article and original research were added without to be given any explanation. These tags were removed by me for now, while no discussion was held here to justify them. Jingiby ( talk) 05:58, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
jingby, ive edited the wiki to label marko tzepenkov as macedo-bulgarian, because he is a macedonian bulgarian
lets look at the definition of a macedo-bulgarian :
a macedo-bulgarian = is an ethnic bulgarian born in the region of ottoman macedonia/north macedonia
now you tell me jingby, how is this not an improvement? are you that stubborn that you don't even wanna label his ethnicity correctly? or do you love removing every single reference to macedonia in the wiki? you are either acting like an idiot on purpose or you just wanna wipe any usage of the word macedonia, you have to accept the facts that he isnt a bulgarian but a macedo-bulgarian Gurther ( talk) 19:34, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is your problem with the language that is used in his works? That is pure Macedonian. Your argument that there was not Macedonian at his time is not relevant and reliable since the language existed no matter what in BG thought and no matter the codification. I am bringing back that statement since you do not need political act to recognize language. Have you seen such stupid thing? Look at his works, and if you know a bit inguistics you will understand my point. Do not revert obvious things. -- MacedonianBoy ( talk) 18:23, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
He described himself and the Slavic poulation in Macedonia as Bulgarians. He described their language also as Bulgarian. The scientists of his time made the same. I undestand your point of view to change his identity postfactum, but I disagree. Jingby ( talk) 14:31, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Scientific nomenclature can be a bitch when it doesn't fit our POVs. A certain dialect does not become something else after its classification is revised. He wrote in Macedonian, but named it something else in accordance with his personal and contemporary views. We do not say the Earth was flat, but since YYYY it has become a spheroid. We also don't mention this historical tidbit every time the shape of the Earth is discussed, because other articles deal with that in detail. -- 124.150.40.224 ( talk) 15:46, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps someone should provide an excerpt from the third source. The fourth and fifth sources do not back the statement as Cepenkov was not referring to the language of his texts (not even implicitly). -- 124.169.77.241 ( talk) 13:28, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
For shure such language (Macedonian) did not exist at his time. Jingby ( talk) 14:55, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
So what language was the Macedonian populace speaking at that time? -- 124.150.35.70 ( talk) 16:03, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
The variety he wrote in is most definitely the Prilep-Bitola dialect which is a Macedonian dialect. I don't understand what you're objecting to. -- 124.150.35.70 ( talk) 16:10, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
The fourth source states, "If they are Bulgarians, fine—we will understand each other; but if they are Turks or Vlachs, how will we understand each other?". It does not support the statement that he considered his dialect a Bulgarian one, only that Bulgarians would understand him. The fifth is a story about a Bulgarian-speaker and Turkish-speaker not understanding each other. It does not support the statement that he considered his dialect a Bulgarian one, only that the two men in the story could not communicate in the same language. -- 203.59.88.177 ( talk) 02:39, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
In fact, in his own Autobiography he states, "I had already learned Bulgarian", "of the little Bulgarian I knew", "now I can sing in Bulgarian passably", "now I know Bulgarian somewhat". -- 203.59.88.177 ( talk) 02:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Also: In Cepenkov's tales a Macedonian speaking Christian is a Bugarin, a Macedonian speaking Muslim is a Pomak ... and the Macedonian language is called Nashincki or Bugarcki. See: "Developing cultural identity in the Balkans: convergence vs divergence", Raymond Detrez, Pieter Plas, Peter Lang, 2005, ISBN 9052012970, p. 27. Jingby ( talk) 10:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Nice quote. :) --
124.148.245.171 (
talk)
11:02, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Well, I suggest these 2 sentences to be just removed, as it is irrelevant how it is called today, and thus to remove the contradiction this way of course:
"Now his dialect is still considered Bulgarian dialect in Bulgaria.[8] Today, his dialect is classified as the Prilep-Bitola dialect of the Macedonian language.[citation needed]"
But unfortunately our EDITOR-IN-CHEIF Jingibay is here as he is everywhere... ;o)
95.42.33.131 (
talk)
14:45, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
"In Cepenkov's tales a Macedonian speaking Christian is a Bugarin, a Macedonian speaking Muslim is a Pomak [...] and the Macedonian language is called Nashincki or Bugarcki". — "Developing cultural identity in the Balkans: convergence vs divergence", Raymond Detrez, Pieter Plas, Peter Lang, 2005
In his own time, his language was described differently by different people. Some called it "Bulgarian", others "Macedonian" and even "South/Old Serbian". The politics of the Bulgarian government are of no importance in this article. The Prilep-Bitola dialect is universally classified as a Macedonian dialect by all experts. -- 124.148.245.171 ( talk) 12:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Only read the sources, but do not delete them! As you know, you are banned forever! Jingby ( talk) 13:12, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
He wrote in the Prilep-Bitola dialect of the Macedonian language. He identified as Bulgarian. It's fairly clear-cut. So why try and state that from a particular POV? -- WavesSaid ( talk) 03:03, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
The following are linguistic publications dealing with the Prilep dialect as Macedonian:
This one makes specific reference to the works of Cepenkov:
-- WavesSaid ( talk) 01:34, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
By the way, in the lead is a sentence: Today, his dialect is classified as the Prilep-Bitola dialect of the Macedonian language.{Citation needed|date=May 2011} If you wont, just add one. Jingiby ( talk) 08:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
His language was Bulgarian, but today it is classified as Macedonian, after such language was codified. Jingiby ( talk) 09:23, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
False. No chance. Full stop. Jingiby ( talk) 09:52, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Tags for biased article and original research were added without to be given any explanation. These tags were removed by me for now, while no discussion was held here to justify them. Jingiby ( talk) 05:58, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
jingby, ive edited the wiki to label marko tzepenkov as macedo-bulgarian, because he is a macedonian bulgarian
lets look at the definition of a macedo-bulgarian :
a macedo-bulgarian = is an ethnic bulgarian born in the region of ottoman macedonia/north macedonia
now you tell me jingby, how is this not an improvement? are you that stubborn that you don't even wanna label his ethnicity correctly? or do you love removing every single reference to macedonia in the wiki? you are either acting like an idiot on purpose or you just wanna wipe any usage of the word macedonia, you have to accept the facts that he isnt a bulgarian but a macedo-bulgarian Gurther ( talk) 19:34, 17 January 2023 (UTC)