What is Macedonia and who are Macedonians?

[ammvbg]

Different regions have been called "Macedonia" during different historical periods. Ancient Macedonia does not exactly correspond to the territory of Roman Macedonia or even the Republic of Macedonia. This does not necessarily mean the basic population migrated...

I'm not inventing new history now...I've read that.If you can show me an authoritative source where it is written that this is not true,ok.
Maybe you should read before you laugh,ok?
Macedonian dynasty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't know about that... did the Sagudats settle in what is now Bulgaria?

well...you almost killed me...
sagudats are a slavic tribe and in 5th and 6th centuries when they settled in macedonia there was no difference between all south slavs.

Dimitrov is hardly a credible historian.

that is only your personal opinion, nothing more...

Macedonians are not part of a "divided" Bulgarian nation. They have a fully developed national identity and the only ones claiming to be such [Bulgarians] are those looking for Bulgarian passports... and we all know what that means.

well...I agree that macedonians in FYROM NOW(from 1944 towards) have their own national identity.But why macedonians in Bulgaria dont?Maybe this is because the serbian-communist propaganda in Yugoslavia?Dont you think?
And my grandmother was born in Kresna so she (that means partially I,too) is also macedonian.But,of course she never thinks that she is not bulgarian.As I said,we in Bulgaria have some different sub-ethnos groups...
For example the region around Sofia is populated by Shops.The Sofia itself has citizens from all groups...
Also,excluding the rediculous statements about your connection with ancient macedonians,most "macedonian" heroes (until 1944) are heroes of Bulgaria,too.What does this mean?That our history is one and the same(so we are just one nation).You simply call bulgarians,born in Macedonia "macedonians".For XIX century towards this is true - they are really macedonians(sub-ethnos of bulgarians),but to say that Car Samuil is macedonian is just ridiculous...

[Hegumen]

Originally Posted by ammvbg

I'm not inventing new history now...I've read that.If you can show me an authoritative source where it is written that this is not true,ok.

Maybe you should read before you laugh,ok?

I don't know what you're trying to prove here.

Originally Posted by ammvbg

sagudats are a slavic tribe and in 5th and 6th centuries when they settled in macedonia there was no difference between all south slavs.

No one can say that with any certainty, or am I wrong?

Originally Posted by ammvbg

that is only your personal opinion, nothing more...

And it's your personal opinion that he's is such.

Originally Posted by ammvbg

Also,excluding the rediculous statements about your connection with ancient macedonians,most "macedonian" heroes (until 1944) are heroes of Bulgaria,too.What does this mean?

Which "heroes" did I mention that weren't Macedonians?

[ammvbg]

Which "heroes" did I mention that weren't Macedonians?

sorry for the misunderstanding...In the last passage by "you" I meant "you macedonians", not especially you.

[Gromoljut]

Concerning Old Church Slavonic: no modern Slavic language is in any way the descendent of OCS, but the latter features in many as an adstratum (literary russian is particularly known to have borrowed many words, sporadically, from OCS - native голова vs borrowed главное instead of the expected головное, ...).

Consider this: Old Church Slavonic is a literary language. The difference between actually spoken language/dialect and literary language can be described most easily like this: if spoken language is a child, then a literary language is the photograph of this child. The child grows, the photograph stays the same (or you make a new one, ie update/reform the literary language). When the child is adult, it has children of its own (East South Slavic branching into Macedonian and Bulgarian dialects), and one may or may not decide to make photographs of them. If there are none, all we can do is reconstruct their appearence judging by the looks of their descendants and other relatives ("uncles and aunts" - which is what OCS is to Macedonian and Bulgarian).

As for modern Serbian đ and Macedonian ѓ, these have absolutely nothing to do with děrvь. They are the reflex of psl. *d'. The most famous word, used to illustrate this, is *med'a - sln. meja, sb./cro. međa, macedonian меѓа, bul. межда, pol. miedza, cze. meza, rus. межа, ...
Děrvь is a letter derived from Greek and was only used in loanwords like ang'el and evang'elije (but - at least initially - it was indeed spoken very similar to modern Macedonian ѓ).

If one takes into account vocabulary, Bulgarian and Macedonian are most likely closer to OCS than any other Slavic language.
Grammatically, anything can be said. No Slavic language has conserved the whole Protoslavic grammatical system. Some languages have the vocative (Croatian, Serbian, Bulgarian, Polish, Czech, Ukranian, ...), some have dual (Slovenian, Upper and Lower Sorbian), some have definite and indefinite adjectives (which emerge sporadically in different flexioned forms of the adjectives), some have aorist (Bulgarian, Macedonian? - I am not sure), some construct the future tense in the same way ("to be" in the future tense + active participle - sln. bom znal, cze. budem znal, pol. będę znał, ...)
And, last, phonologically: I am sorry to dissapoint you but no modern South Slavic language is in any way closer phonologically to OCS than modern East Slavic languages (and to a lesser degree Polish). OCS separated hard from soft consonants, hard ъ from soft ь, hard y from soft i, jat from e (and a), nasal vowels from oral ones (only Polish and Kashubian retain nasals), ... No modern South Slavic language makes such distinctions.

[Heretik]

Eastern slavic languages are closer to old slavic than south slavic. Mainly due to influence of turks, krauts and pizzaspaghettination in southern lands

[Hegumen]

Originally Posted by ammvbg

there was no difference between all south slavs.

I guess the White Croats and White Serbs were an identical people too?