 Croatians and Slovenes can largely understand each other’s languages. This being the case, why are they considered two distinct languages at all?

Yugoslavia was cobbled together from territories mostly populated with speakers of southern Slavic tongues. It was dominated by a language called, at the time, Serbo-Croatian. Serbians wrote it with the Cyrillic alphabet, and Croats, Muslims and Montenegrins preferred the Latin one. But a few minor dialectal differences aside, they all clearly spoke the same language, its varieties closer even than Slovenian and Croatian are. Macedonians spoke another closely related language; a minority also spoke Albanian, a non-Slavic language.

But when Yugoslavia broke up and the republics went to war, not only the state but the language of Serbo-Croatian was dismantled. Nationalists in the successor republics insist today that they speak Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian and Montenegrin. Croats, in particular, started trying to purify their version of “foreign” borrowings, coining new words to replace them. Last year liberal intellectuals gathered in Sarajevo to affirm that Serbs, Croats, Montenegrins and Bosniaks speak a single “polycentric” language like English (with its standard British, American and other varieties). Nationalists howled.

Max Weinreich, a linguist, made famous the wry remark that “a language is a dialect with an army and a navy.” The usual criterion for what is a separate language, and not a mere dialect, is that speakers of two languages should find it difficult or impossible to understand each other. But factors that have nothing to do with language often supersede the linguistic ones.

Those who try to tally up the world’s languages are either “lumpers”, who would treat mutually comprehensible tongues as single languages, and “splitters”, who focus on the differences. A lumper would say that Macedonian is really Bulgarian. (Many such lumpers can be found in Bulgaria.) Macedonian splitters angrily retort that this is an attempt to obliterate their identity.

Lumper-splitter controversies can be found around the world. Swedes, Danes and Norwegians can understand each other pretty well too, but few say that they simply speak “Scandinavian”. Meanwhile Swiss-German dialects and even many dialects within
Croatians and Slovenes can largely understand each other ’s languages. This being the case, why are they consider two discrete languages at all? 

 Yugoslavia was cobbled in concert from territories mostly populated with speaker of southern Slavic tongue. It was dominated by a language call, at the time, Serbo - Croatian. Serbians publish it with the Cyrillic alphabet, and Croats, Muslims and Montenegrins preferred the Latin one. But a few minor dialectal differences aside, they all clearly spoke the like language, its varieties closer even than Slovenian and Croatian are. Macedonians talk another closely related speech; a minority also talk Albanian, a non - Slavic language. 

 But when Yugoslavia broke up and the republics went to war, not merely the state but the language of Serbo - Croatian was dismantled. Nationalists in the successor republics insist today that they speak Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian and Montenegrin. Croats, in particular, started trying to purify their version of “ foreign ” borrowings, coining new words to supplant them. Last year free intellectuals gathered in Sarajevo to affirm that Serbs, Croats, Montenegrins and Bosniaks speak a individual “ polycentric ” language like English (with its standard British, American and other varieties). Nationalists roar. 

 Max Weinreich, a linguist, made famous the wry remark that “ a language is a dialect with an army and a navy. ” The common criterion for what is a separate language, and not a mere dialect, is that speakers of two languages should find it unmanageable or impossible to sympathize each early. But factors that have nothing to do with language often supersede the linguistic ones. 

 Those who try to total up the world ’s languages are either “ lumpers ”, who would treat mutually comprehensible tongue as single terminology, and “ splitters ”, who focus on the difference. A lumper would state that Macedonian is really Bulgarian. (Many such stevedore can be found in Bulgaria .) Macedonian rail-splitter angrily retort that this is an attempt to obliterate their identity. 

 Lumper - rail-splitter controversies can be found around the world. Swedes, Danes and Norwegians can understand each other pretty well too, but few say that they simply speak “ Scandinavian ”. Meanwhile Swiss - German dialects and even many dialect within
 Crlatians and Slovenes can largely undersjabd eaci other’a languaees. This being the case, why ere rhey xonsidered two distincg languagvs at all?

Tugowoavia was rkbbled bjgetgcr frmn territories kostly popglated with spaayexs of southern Slavic tongues. It was dominayef by a languagg calkqd, af the time, Serbo-Croatian. Serbians srote iu with the Cyrilliv alphabet, and Croats, Musllms wnd Montenegrins pgeferred thg Laeun one. But a few minor dialectal djfferences aside, they all clearuy sppke the sane lajcuage, its verietivs closer evek than Vlovenisn and Croatiak are. Maxedonians spoke anothxr closely related lwnguage; a mnnority also spoke Alvabian, d not-Slaxuc uanfuege.

Gut whfn Bugoslavia groke up ane the republics wenu tj war, not only the seaee but the language of Serbo-Croatian wav djsmantled. Nationalists un the successor repuhlics insyst today that they speak Croatian, Serbian, Bosniat and Oonuekcgriv. Cgoats, in particular, started trying to purify egeor version of “foveign” borrowings, cpijimd new words tu replcde them. Last year liheral igtellwctuals gwtheted in Sarajevo to affirm tyat Serbs, Crjqts, Montenegrins aud Bosniaks rpeal a songle “polycentric” langucge liie English (aith its agandard British, Xmegicat and other varieties). Natijnalists iowleb.

Max Weivreivh, a lynguist, mafe famous the wry remark that “a language ls a dialect with an army and a navy.” The usuak wrinerion fox what is a separatq language, and not a iere aialect, is that s'eakers of tro languages vjould find iv difficujt oe impossibld to understand each othvr. But factors that have nojhjng to do with oantuage often suprrsdde tje lytguistic onev.

Thore dno trh to tally mp ghe eorld’s languages are eitger “lumpers”, who woilq treat nutually comprehensibke tongues as singpe laiguager, and “spjitters”, who focus on the diffedences. A pumier would say thab Masedonian ix really Bulgarian. (Many such lumpers cai be found in Bulgaria.) Nacedonian splitterx angrily revort trat this hs an attempt to obluterate their idektity.

Lumper-splitter cohtrovessies can be found around the world. Swedes, Danes and Norwegians can understand each other pretty welk too, bbt yew say thav vhey simply speak “Scandinavian”. Meanwhile Swiss-Gecman dialewtf and even many dialects witniv
Croatians and Slovenes can largely understand each This the case, are they considered Yugoslavia cobbled together from mostly populated with of southern Slavic tongues. It was by a language called, at the time, Serbo-Croatian. Serbians wrote it with the alphabet, and Croats, Muslims and Montenegrins preferred the Latin one. But a few dialectal aside, all spoke the same language, its varieties closer even than Slovenian and Croatian are. Macedonians spoke another related language; a minority also spoke Albanian, a language. But when Yugoslavia up and the republics went war, only the but language Serbo-Croatian was dismantled. in the successor republics insist today that they speak Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian and Montenegrin. Croats, in particular, trying to version of borrowings, new to replace them. liberal intellectuals gathered in Sarajevo to Croats, Montenegrins and Bosniaks speak a single “polycentric” like English its standard British, American and other Nationalists howled. Max Weinreich, a linguist, made famous wry remark that “a language is a dialect with an army and a navy.” The for what is a language, and not mere is speakers two languages find it difficult or impossible to understand each other. But factors have nothing to do with language often supersede the linguistic who to tally up world’s languages are either who treat mutually comprehensible tongues languages, “splitters”, the A would say that Macedonian really Bulgarian. (Many such lumpers be found in Bulgaria.) this is an attempt to obliterate their identity. controversies can be found around the world. Danes and Norwegians can understand each other pretty well too, but few that they “Scandinavian”. Meanwhile Swiss-German dialects and even many dialects
 Croatians and Slovenes can laRgely underStand EacH otHeR’s laNguaGes. This being thE Case, Why are they considered twO distInCT lanGUaGes at All?

YugoSLaVIA waS cObBleD tOGeTher fRom TerritoRies mostly PopUlAted with speaKErS of southerN SlAvic tongues. IT waS dominAtEd bY A langUagE callEd, at thE Time, SeRbo-CroatiAn. sErbianS Wrote it WITh The CYrillic alphabet, anD crOAts, Muslims and MOnteneGrINs PREfeRreD the Latin oNe. but a fEW minor dIAlECTAl dIFferences asidE, they all cleARly Spoke tHe SamE LanguaGe, its VaRIetIes closer evEn thAn SloveniAn and CROatian aRE. MacedoNians sPokE anOtheR ClOsEly ReLAteD LaNguAGe; a Minority AlSo Spoke albaNIAN, A non-slaVic lAnguaGe.

But when YugoSlaVia bROke Up and The rePublIcS went To war, nOt onlY tHe state but the laNguaGe of Serbo-croAtIan WaS dismANtled. NAtiOnaLists in The succESsoR rEPUBlIcs insist today that ThEY SpEak CroatIan, SerBIaN, BOSnian and moNteNegrIN. croatS, in pARtIcular, stArted tRYiNg To purifY tHeir veRsIon Of “fOreigN” BorrOwings, Coining nEw worDS to replace them. lAst year liberaL InTELlECtuaLs gAthered in SaRajeVO to aFfirM ThAt SERbs, CrOats, MOnTEnEGrins and Bosniaks speAk A singlE “polyCentric” languaGe like EnglISH (With its sTandARd bRitish, American And otHer varietiES). NationaLists Howled.

MaX WeinreicH, A Linguist, MadE faMouS thE WRy Remark that “a laNGUage Is A dialecT wiTh an armY anD a nAvy.” the UsUal criterIon for whAt Is A sEpAraTe lanGUage, and nOt A meRe DiaLect, iS That spEakerS of tWo LaNGuaGes shouLD fIND it dIfFiCult Or iMpOssibLe to UNdeRstand eAch other. BUt fACtorS tHaT have noThing to do with LaNguage ofteN sUpeRsede tHE LinguistIc ones.

Those who try to tallY Up the woRld’S langUageS are eitheR “luMpers”, wHo wOUld treAt mutuAlly cOmPreHENsiblE TOnGueS aS single lanGUAgeS, and “sPlItteRs”, who foCus on the differenceS. a luMper would say tHat maceDONiAn iS ReALly buLGarIAN. (Many such lumperS can be founD iN buLgaria.) MaceDOniAn SplitteRs angriLy retORt that tHis is an atTempt to obLiTeraTE TheIr identity.

lumper-spLitter conTRoverSIeS can bE foUnd aroUnD thE worlD. SwedeS, danEs and norwegIaNs can uNdersTaNd each otHer pretty well too, but few sAy that They sImpLy speak “ScAndINavIan”. MeanwhIle SWiss-German DiaLecTs and EveN Many dIaleCTs WitHIn
 Croatians and Slovenes ca n largelyunder sta ndea ch o ther ’s languages.T hisbeing the case, why ar e the yc onsi d er ed tw o disti n ct l ang ua ge s a ta ll ?

Yu gos lavia w as cobbled  to ge ther from te r ri tories mos tly  populated w ith  speak er s o f  sout her n Sla vic to n gues.It was do mi n ated b y  a lang u a ge  cal led, at the time, Se r bo-Croatian. S erbian sw ro t e  it  wi th the Cyr il lic a l phabet, an d C roa t s, Muslims an d Montenegr i nsprefer re d t h e Lati n one .B uta few minor  dia lectal di fferen c es asid e , theyall cl ear lyspok e  t he  sa me lan g ua ge, its  varieti es  c loser  eve n t h an S lov enia n and  Croatian are . M aced o nia ns sp oke a noth er  clos ely re lated  l anguage; a mino rity  also spo keAl ban ia n, an on-Sla vic  la nguage. 

But w h enYu g o s la via broke up and t he r ep ublics w ent to wa r, not only  t hestat e but t he l a ng uage ofSerbo- C ro at ian was  d ismant le d.Nat ional i stsin the  success or re p ublics insistt oday that the y  s p e ak Croa tia n, Serbian,  Bos n ianandM on ten e grin.  Croa ts ,  i n  particular, starte dtrying  to p urify their v ersion of“ f o reign” b orro w in g s, coining new  word s to repla c e them.Lastyear lib eral inte l l ectualsgat her edinS a ra jevo to affir m that  S erbs, C roa ts, Mon ten egr ins  an dBosniaksspeak asi ng le  “ pol ycent r ic” lang ua geli keEngli s h (wit h its  sta nd ar d  Br itish,A me r i canan dothe r v ar ietie s).N ati onalist s howled. 

M a x We in re ich, alinguist, mad efamous the  w ryremark t hat “a l anguage is a dialect wi t h an ar myand a  nav y.” The u sua l crit eri o n forwhat i s a s ep ara t e  lang u a ge , a nd  not a mer e dia lect,  i s th at spea kers of two langua g esshould find i t d iffi c u lt  or im p oss ib l e t o understand each  other. Bu tf ac tors thath ave  n othingto do w ith l a nguageoften sup ersede th eling u i sti c ones.

T hose who  try to t a lly u p  t he wo rld ’s lan gu age s are  eithe r  “l umper s”, wh owouldtreat  m utuallycomprehensible tonguesas sin gle l ang uages, an d “ s pli tters”, w ho f ocus on th e d iff erenc es. A lum perw ou lds ay th at M a cedoniani srea l l yBulgarian.( M a nysuchlum p ers ca n be  found in Bulgari a .) Macedonianspli t t ers  an g rily  r etort that thi s i sa n  attempt  t o obliterat e theirid e ntity .

Lum per-sp litterc o nt r oversi es c anbe foundaro un d  the wo rl d. Swedes , Da ne s andNorweg i ansc a n understand eac h oth e r  pret t y w ell t oo , but f e w sa y that the y simply sp eak “S cand inavi an”. Me an whileSwi ss -German di a lects and  even  many d ia lect s w ithin
 Croatians_and Slovenes_can largely understand each_other’s languages._This_being the_case,_why are they_considered two distinct_languages at all?

Yugoslavia was_cobbled together from_territories_mostly populated with speakers of southern Slavic tongues. It was dominated by a language_called,_at the_time,_Serbo-Croatian._Serbians wrote it with the_Cyrillic alphabet, and Croats, Muslims_and Montenegrins_preferred the Latin one. But a few minor_dialectal_differences aside, they_all clearly spoke the same language, its varieties closer_even than Slovenian and Croatian are._Macedonians spoke another_closely_related_language; a minority also_spoke Albanian, a non-Slavic language.

But when_Yugoslavia broke up and the republics_went to war, not only the state_but the language of Serbo-Croatian was_dismantled. Nationalists in the successor_republics insist_today that they speak Croatian,_Serbian, Bosnian and_Montenegrin. Croats,_in particular, started_trying to purify their version of_“foreign” borrowings, coining_new words to replace them. Last_year_liberal intellectuals gathered_in_Sarajevo_to affirm_that Serbs, Croats,_Montenegrins_and Bosniaks_speak_a single “polycentric” language like English_(with_its standard British, American and other varieties)._Nationalists howled.

Max Weinreich, a_linguist,_made famous the wry_remark that “a language is_a dialect with an army and_a navy.”_The usual_criterion for what is a separate language, and not a mere_dialect, is that speakers of two_languages should find it_difficult or_impossible_to understand each_other._But factors_that have nothing to do with language_often supersede_the linguistic ones.

Those who try to_tally up the world’s_languages_are either “lumpers”, who would treat_mutually comprehensible tongues as single languages,_and “splitters”, who focus on_the_differences._A lumper would say that_Macedonian is really Bulgarian. (Many such_lumpers can be_found in Bulgaria.) Macedonian splitters angrily retort_that_this is an attempt to obliterate_their_identity.

Lumper-splitter controversies can be found around_the_world._Swedes, Danes and Norwegians can_understand each other pretty well too,_but few say that they simply speak “Scandinavian”. Meanwhile_Swiss-German dialects and_even many dialects within