CEU eTD Collection Advisor: Professor Rogers Brubaker Manufacturing Division: TheBosnian Project In partialfulfillment oftherequirements forthedegree of Nationalism Studies Program CentralEuropean University Budapest, Kevin .Kenjar Master ofArts Submitted to 2007 By CEU eTD Collection Primary Sources WORKS CITED Evading theCategories: The Naš Phenomenon Still Going? Project Is the CONCLUSION Review of Institutional Carriers Aftermath of the 1998 Constitutional Status Change Post-Dayton LinguisticPlanning and Shifts in Status The Federation and Pseudo-Separation of the Standard Status in andShifts Publications Linguistic Wartime CONTEMPORARYTHE PROJECT LANGUAGE BOSNIAN and 1974 Reforms The Post-War Era: Supra-Nation The Rise of : A PureNation with a PureLanguage The Kingdom of Yugoslavia: Nation, One Three Peoples Béni Kállay: A Bosnian Nation and a Dispute the in Involvement Hungarian The Yugoslav Movement: ALinguisticNation of Genetic Peoples Vuk Karadži Vuk Karadži Vuk BEGINNING BOSNIANTHE OFTHE LANGUAGE PROJECT The Shift in Power Education The State and Language LANGUAGE AND NATION AS A SINGLE DOMAIN INTRODUCTION ü ü : Serbs, All and Everywhere! and the andtheIllyrian 84 77 54 18 25 86 81 77 73 71 67 65 57 51 48 46 40 37 35 33 19 17 13 12 6 3 2 CEU eTD Collection do not havelanguagesnot self-identifyingfeatures do as However, state.” nation, one one language, maxim “One by the asevidenced function, the from Asso-called “in-group” a “out-group”. the common languagenational became soon inclusion,national languages alsoeffectively barrierserected ofexclusion, separating the of marker a being from Apart society. stratified horizontally a as themselves perceived who individuals among solidarity and commonality of marker a as function symbolic key understand partin and take national governmentthe of state, the language soon on a took to citizens allowed it i.. function, communicative a exclusively, almost served, initially languages national While state. the of component important an became citizens ordinary when important became only language national common a of notion The development. a parallel experienced concepts these that understand to important it nationality, and Introduction Nationalist movements,Nationalist however,always have not succeeded in maintaining or achieving patronage. beingbodiesintellectuals with while by of state regulated often regulatory nascentnationalfor identities through media, and, assuch,werepromoted education and aspalladia served subsequently languages national achieved, were political aspirations these When aspirations. political fuelingfor of“nations” thereby status granted the were peoples language, said wellas of standardization as alanguage,the as through social engineeringThrough projects. classificationthe or group of a , of , giving intellectuals (primarily andphilologists linguists) akey role innation-building defined. the Thisledconfluence oflinguistic to classification and aspiration, political sine quanon In study any of of a nation, the symbolic function soon overtook the communicative a language, in its language, understanding of popular language”,a “national per se , they must be operationally must they , 3 CEU eTD Collection divided.being Despite linguistically relatively homogenous, the citizens Bosnia-of heavily Bosnia-Herzegovina left have claims national competing and realities political asthe interest, isparticular of in Bosnia-Herzegovina case The mentioned trends. while in institutions weremarked andrival by established Croatia, above- the eliminated, Serbo-Croatian, were language, of official the carriers andpromulgators institutional the movements, nationalist to succumbed state the As Yugoslavia. of through introductionthe neologisms,of and calques, archaisms spurious origins.of performed this factthat isoften the despite shift”, language “reversing intellectuals, among and, “purism”, “revivalism”, “protection”, of pretext under the often conducted classification. Given the authority of the new classifications over the old, these trends are languagefrom both oldthe languageand included neighboringthe dialects the under national new the dissimilating at aimed planning linguistic well as classifications, discredit linguistic previous to by the necessarily attempts isshift accompanied provepromulgators inadequately flexible orareotherwise eliminated. Thisintellectual areadopted as oldthe institutional newcarrierscorpora and established,and educational bodies are newregulatory acceptance, aregain official classifications linguistic rival realties shift, and these rival nationalistmovements are empowered, their concomitant learners,is and notforto easierlearning. power, for When a status demand political advantages obvious any bring not does it when one, established the than other culture or in useof education Clearly, a language/dialect privileged establishment. the demand any language, of promote classificatory of claims the torivaling havesought those political ambitions. Thesemovements,nationalist understanding the symbolic function Perhaps the leading exemplar of such linguistic separatism is the case of isof collapse case the separatism linguistic such of leading exemplar the Perhaps 4 CEU eTD Collection engage theirengage language. andby on contemplated to reflexively Bosniansareleftcitizens commented its speakers, but used, simply is not language that Given intimidation”. of “circles competing to follow, as asthose used byhis herwell neighbors, friends or andresulting in family, chooses she or he media the by used those from differ may school in one’ taught variants speaker’s inclusion exclusionto or from a particular nationality.Furthermore, the the marking nationality, of shibboleth a as serves conventions, lexical importantly, most and, grammatical, orthographic, their particular useof by indicated the as authorities, lexical grammatical, Theobedience toany variants. and linguistic particularof these exposedcompeting to linguistic authorities, each promoting competing orthographic, media Thisleavesthe citizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina andnationalistinstitutions outlets. their through educational respective promulgated are andBosnian) (Serbian, Croatian, languages official intelligible mutually three but one, not lines, national along divided mass reproduction. However, as the Bosnian-Herzegovinian state and civil society remain have newthe promulgated mass language,and media have thelanguage reified through have thenewnational body, andestablished standardized language educators aregulatory linguists continuity, of impartation the through claims classificatory their legitimizing nation-building social engineering project: philologists havebecomein engaged new a led has This Accord. Dayton the through recognition international given and state states. However, a linguisticthird classification, Bosnian, hasbeen empowered by the Croat and Serb Herzegovinaoftenheavily divided in are national sentiments,with their identifying those as adhering to the linguistic classifications of their respective kin- 5 CEU eTD Collection For some,conceptions. different with such participants of variety wide a with time, through occurring as the 19 is is adiscussion this that fact the from stems asfixed aretreated concepts these not asfixed,understood otherwise “real”, or essentialized. My ambiguity as towhether or in discussants categoriesof“nation”this the discourse, may and“language” in factbe for the course, my study. Of of focus the themthatbecomes between relationship” domain;phenomena in asconceptual categories itisa singleintegrated the “categorial two treat these to my Iplan approach, In described. otherwise definitively or discerned, world”between with can relationship beingthem the something that be measured, “in-the- entities real ontologically fixed, as language a and nation the of phenomena treatingcan necessitate something wouldbe the assuch that a determination determined, is relationshipthe not suggests that shiftingnecessary. This itwas deemed another, itwas symbolic, atanother nation, and the language for yet purely at was communicative function of the At point one change. else, by, all above wascharacterized relationship this shows, my introduction as and studies, nationalism of field in the discussed language”.“alinkage and between nation The the alanguageis frequently topic and “thenation” categories, conceptual between two relationship centuries) the regarding in most project. the recentdevelopments merely the of one language” inBosnia“Bosnian is to project” andHerzegovina. The “language regard a at looking be I will Rather, intention. my not is This Bosnian. the of as a project onthe“Bosnian language”,immediately Iaimsuggesting study to LANGUAGE AND NATION AS A DOMAINSINGLE In short, the aim is to focus on a continuous debate, spanningfocusis onadebate, generations (even In short, theaim continuous to The title Iwill of this paper suggests Bosnian the be language examining project th century Slavists, it is immediately apparent that neither a neither that apparent immediately is it Slavists, century continuous creation 6 CEU eTD Collection classifications, i.e.categories: classifications, arenotbe asgroups groups strictly to of asgroups understood people, butrather of suggested by inBrubaker in groups regard to impediment to this study, but rather its foundation. isan not two between establishthe the relationship to inattempting categories of these fixedness the on disagree participants these that fact The realities. ontological 21 of the sociolinguists key several thesefor left were which languages, Slavists have to had they nations, have to order in Thus, latter. the to createas a classificationbased on dialects, while the former were treated as being contingent on through nor alanguagenation werebeingdiscussedasfixedentities, being with regarded later the their classifications. For other participants, such as not all) of the speakers themselves, speakers the of all) not such many asfixedas participants, Forother (but entities. whichweretreated collected, according(nations, groups classes,the from to ethnic etc.) was groups, which data the this grouping wasnot beto madeaccording not to featuresthe themselves,butrather lookingway However,a variety groupedtogether. of at linguisticfeatures of discernable below we can studygenerally embedded in multifarious forms of “governmentality”. From the “micropolitics” entrenched,and organizationally articulated, discursively institutionalized, of categories,imposed, propagated, arefocus proposed, inwhichcategories ontheways the ways we can From above, below. from both and above of politics categories, in which symbolically resonant myths, memories, and narratives and memories, myths, resonant symbolically administrative routines and embeddedin culturally powerful and processthe though which they become institutionalized and in entrenched of – categories careers discursive and organizational the We analyze can The way I plan on examining “language this is project” through methodology the st century, language asaclassification, wastreated a century, both the nation and the language were regarded as regarded were language and the thenation Ethnicity withoutEthnicity Groups . We can study We canstudy the . In this way, 7 CEU eTD Collection 1 institutions. particularly institutions, educational the other these deal with agreat interacted hastypically state the know that to Herzegovina Bosnia and for of High Representative the andthe Office Yugoslavia, communist State of wartimeCroatia, Independent Kingdom the the Empires, of Yugoslavia, Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman the of bureaucracies the on expert an be not need One institutions. with interacts these other state in degree which on degrees depending the the various areseenin though to effects repercussive institutions, the these institutions, this is that focus primarily, though notwhenexclusively, on the state (and at times, states). The reason for a particularlymay extend seem the scope of to thisbeyond paper that whichismanageable, Iplan to Whilethis the rest. effects has repercussive category institutions these byeven of one category is of a entrenchment the stress that to itis important but media, andthe organizations entrenched by the state,institutions. above all rejectedby these or either accepted are conceptions whose finds the categorizers other always almost one whom among whoarecategorized, by those evaded, andtransformed subverted, internalized, are thewaysin categories these concepts, these of entrenchment institutional such of “micropolitics” the examine will I Furthermore, time. particular one at categories both or of either conception particular one and entrench accept by “nation” moderated butrelationship and“language”, between institutions adebate that the on debate ongoing an as only not project” “language the examine thus will I Rogers Brubaker, Rogers EthnicityGroups without categories that are imposed on areon them. imposed that categories the or transform evade, subvert, internalize, appropriate, categorized the The institutions examine Iaim to hereinclude state, academia, the cultural 1 , (Cambridge:2004), 13. Harvard UP, 8 CEU eTD Collection Fishman, (Oxford: Oxford 77-93 UP,1999),82. 2 from etc. period literature, this 20-year of works newspapers, dictionaries, extantgrammars, For the philological future debate. debates, shapewill future eventually abandon the classification, the effects of this periodhave changed the data that may in case of While Ministry carriers,our the Education, etc. literature, institutional the influencing in ageneration and theway evidencedwrite innewspapers, they speak, aswell etc. as dictionaries, manuals,grammars, publication orthographic the of necessarily) lead not couldto forof (though aperiod years, language20 schools of the classification, a of entrenchment institutional the example, For time. over place takes reification let usobjective datawith Keywhich they work. to understanding is this notionthe that say, thealso the but themselves, discussants the affects only not reification Ministry itself; discussion of shapesthe fundamentally but categories, of the the“micropolitics” shapes “real”, Education declaration of “Bosnian” as the national sentiment that is capable of being politicized” being of is capable that sentiment national in intodialectita toturn of vehicleexpression fora proper order the that restructure and legitimize, upgrade, must The elite dialect. speakasemiliterate whooften peasants, of the that necessarily is not elite] of the ““[The language Aswrites, Safran materials”. “raw with work to had linguists as scratch, from done not is it that is languages andin lexicon of grammar traces this change (particularly people of speech can the as classification, William Safran, “Identity,” Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity The process of reification, i.e. the process in which these categories are made are categories inwhich these process i.e. the of reification, The process An often repeated, almost axiomatic, phrase regarding the construction of construction the regarding phrase almost axiomatic, An repeated, often can be discerned,if sought. 2 Brubaker expounds on “raw these on expounds Brubaker a people, e.. a nation), in nation), which a e.g. people, , ed. Joshua can be in used 9 CEU eTD Collection 3 people wrote and spoke. Yet, I’ neglecting what is perhaps the mostimportant point. If way the reshaped they fundamentally hadbeeninternalized, these Once categorized. languages.isinto say, That hadbeento various they internalized, to degrees, by those Slavist, aVienna-based of desk mereon “concepts” the from linguistic classifications these functioneddocuments as then, asthey now, reifying do elements, turning the dictionaries, scripts, literature, etc. followed these 19 This is onlywho Those form. some in to day this to speakis continuing it that show to I intend fact, in century; of the physical relics,“dialects”. Philological for work done on the Southall Slavicof languagesthose did not stop classifications, in the previous 19 with working were philologists then even century), 19 in the in Bosnia was it (as in history point one at true been have may dialects literate” “raw”?is Though description Safran’s and classifying, gathering, of “semi- upgrading possibilities of group-making in the present”, and Ibelieve they do, then what about them the condition and “constrain they and are, that believe I and predicaments”, and and If “productstruggles precipitate of arethe crucial, materials past these adjustment. but one small,butwith on, nearly dead are observations Brubaker’s argue that I would be considered“creation” should apart: materials” concerning “group-making successful efforts”, of which such language but were rather but Brubaker, 14. deliberate group-making strategy. deliberate group-makingin thereremains present, the scope considerable for struggles and predicaments–constrain andcondition possibilitiesthe for andpast precipitate of product the such rawmaterials –themselves cultural and psychological materials they have towork with….while Yet the of as aresultin part so do less) or succeed (more do that [Those] th heavily assembled century philologists were left with materials that were far from from were far “raw”, materials that with wereleft philologists century and 3 processed , including, manuals, orthographic 10 th th CEU eTD Collection “variants”, “literary languages”, “expressions”, etc. “expressions”, languages”, “literary “variants”, “dialects”, suchas units, new sociolinguistic into is re-conceptualized “Language” “tribes” soon. and “genetic peoples”, “nationalities”, “nations”, becoming “nation” through re-conceptualizing into them various “new” divisions and subdivisions, with these both categories reshapes and continuously, and“nation”“language” effectively, between show, isas Iintend regarding relationship the to theacademicdiscourse we see, what and pre- post-Yugoslavia), (both Bosnia caseof In the importance. utmost is of them the between the and“nation”, “language” relationship both institutionalized state Given the that reified concept. becameahighly nation the accounting”, social of units “fundamental as nationalities and nations treating By “nation”. the as keyinstitutional the alsoservedlanguage carrier of asfor keyinstitutional the carrier organizations, and educational institutions. academic and cultural namely thestate, are capableof them, that delivering relationship domain, discursiveintegrated the in“nation” careerof the analyzing asingle brings me back This in including created wakeof the classifications. materials, these “nations” the to my original deal raw of these all with hadto projects All future “nation”. the with relation categorial point, the speaking about become“real” I’m,course, aswell? have of linguistic classifications, namely that sole behind dominantthe these wouldconception indeed reason not to time,the of and we must then “languages”, and became thus internalized, been had classifications philological the look at “language” and There is yet one more point that needs to be addressed. This is the fact the state, factthe is be This the addressed. needs to moreis yet that point one There between the categories of “language” and “nation”, as well theinstitutions aswell as and“nation”, of“language” categories between the conceptual 11 CEU eTD Collection 4 roles, played by institutions these in reifying entities. Concerning the role of the state, Safran Safran writes: state, rolethe the of Concerning entities. political international and multinational to as well as etc.), cantons, entities, (republics, political power is beto extendedsub-state to levels of political power, however classified of theexercise through such reification course, language. Of the to been ascribed have itlegitimacylaw, throughenshrininginto it aswell usageof through the normsthe that The State and Language itdegrees, is muchmore cacophonous. in which institutionskey have have (or not)embraced Bosnianthe language tovarious variety of ways. At times, this is done in concert.in a other each influence for clearly they in Othererror, be would separately institutions these times, such as current situation Safran, 83-84. I will proceed I willby looking proceed institutions atthe named above, briefly detailing the Afrikaans. language, ashappenedin case of the Slovak, Moldavian,Czech, and a into a dialect transforming by – it politicizing by respectable idiom makes an state is the it that isno doubt There ingredients. state-specific laden a a language and andestablish,legitimates develops with culture once andin state, the a state, of which facilitates thecreation language itis isnation in reciprocal; a which a preexistent process two-way political) cultural)an ‘ethnic’ relationship(or (or and between a ‘civic’ based onSlavic Theforegoing regional dialects… that suggests the are of states languages majority national European the east-central of all,after based idiomsspoken by on a large amount of The people. hand. National languages are not created out of the thindevelopment air; most of modern of themnationalism are, should not be dismissed thatexistedbefore languages “primordial” community. the out Nevertheless, of of a politicized areartifacts nations, “civic” or like modern languages, of products conscious publicis andit policy, inthatsense thatnational whichare mass media, spreadof andthe of educations compulsory result a as idioms state national and scientific, standard, becomes “Language The state clearly plays a key role in reifying language,a most directly by granting 4 a language . To regard the reifying roles of 12 CEU eTD Collection perhaps more accurately, “Because, that is the rule.” Deborah Cameron clearly linksthe clearly Cameron Deborah is the rule.” that “Because, accurately, perhaps more Or is!” it “Because told, be likely than more would they explanation, an demand would students with infinitive. If an future tenseis thatthe constructed or particular ending, a feminine is that told a aparticular genitivespelled way,or aword plural declines with fewAfterstudents who them. question all,demand when students anexplanation rarely to aredisseminated andstandards It is language levels at these classifications where writes, AsSteinberg “incorrectly”. and both “correctly” andwritten spoken, learned, being “real”of asitbecomes capable language, and for particular that reifying effects the very act of educating students on useof standard on the of students very educating the act 1987), 206.1987), History of Language 5 useofastandard the promote also but standard, useof the a particular notonly promote materials Educational secondary education. wields incredible influence is that of the educational institutions, particularly primary and Education carrier, sometimes quite directly depending on the politics of the state at the time. institution other every nearly affects strongly state the decrees.However, executive be legislation andin directly acts and most can manyinstances, standards seen through influence The promulgation inlanguagelegitimation state’s and terms categories of of Jonathan Steinberg, “The Historian and the understood by understood phrasethe Culture in the broad sense forms part of the authority which Gramsci values of society, so does does tolanguage. attitude so the of values society, on him her.in Justasteachinghistory or the expresses schools prevailing of expression culture majority standard or accentenforces the or grammar One such institutional carrier of classifications and standards over which the state the andstandards overwhich carrierclassifications of institutional One such , ed. Peter Burke and Roy Porter (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, egemonia culturale. egemonia questione della lingua questione something 5 Correcting achild’s , namely, a language. Thus, language. a namely, , a language ,” in The Social has tremendous 13 CEU eTD Collection “ “ made andjustified with hierarchieselaborate andesotericforeign or terminology (e.g., from ina consensus field. Concerning languages,competing classifications areoften university courses on thedemanded, butthey are provided as well.anybody Of course, hassamewho two attended topic taught differentare notonly andstandards classifications categories, for explanations academia, professors knows thatscholars there is far what is exactly explanations Demanding fields. related and linguistics in of field the these fieldsof an explanation. However, Iwould argue that there are clear exceptions, particularly in are in the business of doing. Importantly, at this level of 6 “properly” in her knowing future university the level education how tospell construct tense without or of beAfter all, would likelynot fairly would already concrete. make astudent itto the andstandards categories these forstudents, many university suspect that I Of course, influence overcurriculums. (generally) hasless direct state the setting, university where will.” collective our represent to claiming Education in being theideology accordancewith as espoused by ruling politicians the of Ministry bythe selected orthography is “That particularly rule inthe the explanation, be incredibly with unlikely aprimary that school astudent provide would the teacher in of authority.” kind invested a certain have actively authority,linguistic and norms to “defenders conventions stating that, of precedent… Deborah Cameron, Verbal Hygeine Verbal Cameron, Deborah Sprachgefühl Ausbausprache Of course, the sort of explanation found above is more likely to be found in a ”). While there is some agreement on common terminology, there remains there terminology, common on agreement some is there While ”). ”, “literary language”, “diasystem”, “variants”, “inorganic idiom”, “inorganic language”,“diasystem”, “variants”, ”, “literary own language (and possibly andlikely pursuit hadgivenupthe (and possibly others), , (London: Routledge,13., (London: 1995), 6 Though this may the case, it would 14 CEU eTD Collection government to permit education in Basque and Breton, as this would run counter tothe as wouldcounter this inBasqueBreton, permit run and education to government 7 runs counter to the state.” that value-system a positing as of “thought are proponents) their (or materials such when officialof banand prosecution.threat As Safran occurprimarily observes, suchsituations not publicationsalso but theyproduce, in anddiscouraging delegitimizingsame the through financially – andlegitimizing organizations, particular societies, institutions and the thus fulfilling a key requirement of the state. orthographic manuals, tobe dictionaries and disseminated tolower levels of education, grammars, textbooks, publication of the with are commissioned institutions that istradition). such andcultural societies, and precisely It organizations, academic literary Serbian glorious in the trend unfortunate an simply is canon literary Croatian entire the that belief the espousing actively while Society” Literary “Croatian the of for membershipcriteria one in such(e.g., could hardly organizations amemberbecome as serves often such tenets of espousal The more ephemeral. JAZU),others or Sciences, Arts and Academy of theYugoslav (e.g. lasting are quite which someof organizations, andcultural academic of particular tenets become the often schools of these (often “school” of named institution itwhere the thought after The principals developed). it aconceptual under gathered is is consensus, often a highdegreeof Where there be known. to they come under which appellations asfor the aswell classifications, such for criteria the the classifications, concerning deal disagreement of a great Safran, 85. providing This oflinguistic support. sort can discouragement formthe also take an of It should be noted that the state not only plays a key role in –often supporting key role not plays a only thatstate the shouldbenoted It 7 Such examples of wouldthis includethe refusal of French the 15 CEU eTD Collection arguably such an effort was partially successful with was partially successful arguably suchaneffort 1992 destruction of the with Sarajevo the cannot simplyimportant claims, be inanyfurther role thisrecord erased (though and play an documents real fixed, such and ontologically of as both areconceived categories as long asthese But nation today. of Croat the nor language Croatian neither the reflects empowerment by the state. and alevel embracement of thestatus, of is a record things, many other among leave us, Of course, what the “Croatianlearning.” language” was in the and status notforis easier tolearners, power, for a obvious demand advantages 1860s standard in education or culture other than the established one, when it does not bring any or classification linguistic a of use official or privileged the for demand “any writes, As and asweshall Hobsbawm in or, “protection” see, empowerment. attack need of “suppressed nation”, both with nationthe andits languagebeing as perceived underbeing of a as serves a palladium effectively language” for the“national mobilization, means of nationalist movements frequently invoke (and thus (and invoke frequently movements nationalist Thus, influence. political seeking andparties movements ideological for subaltern positing ideology runs can theminto an of rallying that counter to that state turn points reasons to be discussed). The very fact that the organizations and publications are seen as for butchers lamb advertising under the name (Winter 1996), 1065.(Winter 1996), 8 espoused by Paveli the Bund, or the Yiddishernationalismitspromotion tothe opposition ofHebrewas as staunch well interfere Israel’s assuch with productions would productions, Yiddish theatrical ban on state’s early nation, the Israeli French indivisible a unitary and of ideology Eric Hobsbawm,“Language, Culture, and National Identity,” Social Research 63:4 8 Thus, what the orthographic manuals, dictionaries, and other publications dictionaries, orthographicthe andother manuals, what Thus, ü regime imposing a fine and short prisonshort a fine imposing regime sentence and jagnjetina evoke as opposed to asopposed ) “national asa “national languages” ) janjetina (for 16 CEU eTD Collection classifications,lexical and standards, variants as their own and inneedof defense, and, such accept mobilized be whoare to which those to degree the particularly of various factors, in lexical elevation largely depends other on status variant) a particular the rule or orthographic aparticular defense asminor something asthe (or classification in gaining mass such mobilization for constitutionally enshrining a particular linguistic the by been condemned whichhad organizations cultural and academic the assistance of the through introductionthe neologisms,of and calques, archaisms spurious origins,of with performed this factthat isoften the despite shift”, language “reversing intellectuals, among and, “purism”, “revivalism”, “protection”, of pretext under the often conducted classification. Given the authority of the new classifications over the old, these trends are standard as neighboring that the mayhavebeenincluded standards well under the from old both language national new the dissimilating at necessarily) aimed not todiscreditattempts previousthe linguistic classifications. by accompanied is necessarily shift intellectual This eliminated. areotherwise flexible or proveinadequately as and promulgators areadopted oldinstitutional carriers the corpora educational new and acceptance official gain classifications linguistic rival concomitant Power in The Shift and manuscripts dating from Ottomanthe and Austro-Hungarian period). itsdocuments collection of extensive with andHerzegovina, Library National Bosnia of régime ancienne Of course, Of Aside from shifts in status, linguistic Aside from instatus, shifts usually isoften conducted, planning (though Whenshift do political realties and subaltern areempowered appeased, or their not all movements are successful in mass mobilization, as the success the as mobilization, mass in successful are movements all not . 17 CEU eTD Collection the constructionthe of Bosnianthe language in 1990’s.the is a background necessary in what tounderstand “rawmaterials” order wereavailablefor such Furthermore, classifications. philological and their concomitant conceptualizations nationalist competing the of story the without incomplete is language Bosnian the Bosnian language of today developed and the implications it bears, for the story of the in which the understand context isto necessary historical background admittedly cursory 1990’s. inthe late This 20th century,throughout the in particularly Bosnia-Herzegovina of “nation” and“language” impactdiscourse of shapethe standards,which would the several figures,movements, andkey linguistic classifications, appellations, and treat briefly nonetheless Iwill such classifications, for understanding necessary contexts social political and historical letalone the provide from early period, this classifications linguistic politically-loaded often their and philologists various the of sentiments national lands. While it is nationalism tookhold first of intellectualsthe in andBosnia-Herzegovina the surrounding is Bosnia-Herzegovina mid-19 the idiom in spoken of the classifications historical atthe look brief begin this place to philologists following most the on (more in be natural will this sections), discussed the The Beginning oftheBosnian Language Project have beeninternalized terminology) most importantly, the degree to which the classifications of the nation (and analogous Despite the seemingly obligatory calls to the ancient past employed by various past employed ancient the callsto obligatory seemingly Despite the far beyond scopeof the detail paper this to political the and affiliations th century, when the eastward diffusion of Romantic and accepted. 18 CEU eTD Collection the National Assembly,in in, and and aswell key follow, occurring discussions otherwise debates participate leading to a better The French played read,discuss, language the population aprimary inenabling to role understand of the political processes of the Hobsbawm function. AsEric writes, communicative hada primarily originally language national conceptof the a single be that it seen can undifferentiated French citizens, which was seen as the core of French nationhood. fate among share acommon will to and the experiences, values, common inculcating the Frenchfor importance no of was it say to not is that but nation, French in the nation.membership their Renanfact many that French notspeakcitizens did chancellery/literary French notpreclude did stressedthe Renan, For state. French the and nation, French the language, French that the between the French concerning therelationship discourse by begin the early Letus examining categories. language between the relationship the as aswell “nation” “language”, and both categories of was seen as theconceptual concerning Romantic nationalism, particularly spreadof regard the is itand toexamine important Herzegovina, occurring in outsideof theevents country the 10 9 Vuk Karadži (Renan 1947: 903-904). Hobsbawm, 19. in French was, therefore, essential for French citizens… Abbéminority?in the of This Gregoire 1794.Education argument was the parliamentbefore 1840?Would government this notguarantee by an elite language –foran incomprehensible in example, Latin, asin Hungarian the in, part alonein of theircountry governmentif itwasconducted take the let understand, citizens couldcultural. How not democratic, was entirely toreadandsupposed it… write The original for astandard language case had to language havewritten the and state; the of a relationcomponent important an became to the spokenA single national language became only when important ordinary citizens language only when these citizens were In order to understand the current linguisticunderstandin to In the current Bosnia classificationsorder occurring ü and the Illyrian Movement theIllyrian and 10 a mode 9 Thus, of 19 CEU eTD Collection “At St. Helena, Napoleon sometimes liked to browse In this [French]grammar… the likedto Helena, sometimes St. Napoleon “At relationship between nation and language. In language. and nation between relationship Corsican-born and Bonaparte, Napoleon one can again see ashiftin the conceptionof the In language forcibly Frenchtime, was taught. the became Republic anempire under 12 Nations and Nationalism 11 the into integration and allegiance state tothe learning coulddemonstrate aswashowone function, French symbolic a strong carried surely language theFrench state, to the be athreat feltto those executed ruthlessly regime As Robespierre’s purpose. different entirely an served have and theroleconcerning state, language of and the French averagecitizen would the conceptions different had Robespierre, of government “Terror” the and movement, Jacobin as the such Others, loaded. ideologically itself is,necessarily, this description Thus, latter. the of functions the over control have former the where state, the and citizen between the presupposes relationship a specific etc.) in government”, the participation ideas”, “maximum “freeflow of the (i.e. values democratic of transmission the about by some otherlanguage ifit proved be to a superior means of communication. bereplaced day one might language French the that possibility to open even was Renan Thus, concern. primary the was which nation, the and citizenship of values and ideas Île de Paris. power, of political in center the concentrated of them most idiom, chancellery/literary the 13 percentin could understand population the of to However, state. French 12 1789, only Safran, 88. Tomasz . Kamusella, “Language asan instrument nationalism of in Central Europe,” While this may have been the argument of Abbé Gregoire and Renan, any talk any Renan, and Gregoire Abbé of argument the been have may this While 11 Surely such a high level of level ahigh such Surely nation , 7:2 (2001), 237., 7:2(2001), . Thus, the local illiteracy Le Mauvais Le Mauvais démiurge patois would have impeded the diffusion of was stamped out and the French , Emil Cioran writes, Cioran Emil , 12 20 CEU eTD Collection Swabians, and Franks – were re-conceptualized under a new hierarchical newclassification, under a hierarchical –wereSwabians, andFranks re-conceptualized heard. could be German where standard lands should all encompass nation-state a German that who proclaimed Arndt, Moritz Address totheGerman Nation Johann Gottlieb firstFichte lauded standard German as superior toall inhistongues other was leveled, with the becameAustrian followingso Napoleon’s march across Europe, in which the Holy Roman Empire Empire survivingWhile thisunderstanding of culture maynothavebeen inherently political,itsoon as its rump. It was at this point that that concept, as espoused by Herder, was not inherently political. As Kamusella writes, 127-8. 15 14 13 as foremost,a cultural unit bylanguage demarcated ( ( people the wherein nation, or apeople of spirit was HerderHerder. It whofirst posited the Romantic theory of dramatic shiftin understanding the culture, evidenced of by works the of Johann Gottlieb isvalue, if better understandto and communicate with his Helena. guards St. at communicative language’s French the for them browse he didn’ that likely is it intention, manner,he perhaps, provedhewasaFrenchman,” JoshuaFishman, and Language Nationalism Ibid, 238. Qtd. in Kamusella, 235. all languages as coming from God. based ontheequality of were Hisopinions andin commenced… Prussia (especiallyother language-speakers Slavic) Holy in Roman the Empire motherthrough tongues. theGermanization Thus, of heopposed projects One the other hand, spirits of nations could be most fully becultivated. butshould destroyed,not expressed something sacredthat therefore, only Herder believed that every every [ believedthat Herder Around the same time of the emergence of the French nation-state, one can a see can one nation-state, French of the emergence timethe of same the Around (1807), soon (1807), intopoliticaltranslated action by Ernst Volk ] was a manifestation of the Divine, and, 15 14 This meant that the “tribes” – the Saxons, the – “tribes” the that meant This , (Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 1973), 13 Volk Whether or not this wasNapoleon’s not or Whether Sprache ) would be understood, first) wouldbe and understood, ). It is important to note Volksgeist , being the being , 21 CEU eTD Collection actualized, different models have been posited. to rediscover, legitimate, or restructure a ‘primordial’ idiom. a‘primordial’ restructure legitimate, or to rediscover, Romantic nationalism byintellectuals among the Slavic-speaking lands made it necessary of serving asa“national language”. Thus,HansKohn notes, as promotionthe of was capable that chancellery/literary lacked astandardized lands of mostthese However, nation, and thus the become had language a common standardized that clear became came to be seen asrepresent, it they came to “suppressed” independence the for outrightautonomy, or the key vehiclenation. for attaining such languageand between relationshipthe in and German, other scholars discussed, authors, political aims.Congress, convened in Prague by František Palacký.At the Congress,linguists, folklorist, 1848Pan-Slav the leading to regions, in Europe Slavic-speaking the Central and Eastern throughout diffused was concept the as particularly established, firmly been had nation a and language a between ties The Empire. Austrian in the politicians and intellectuals Moritz’s callsfell on all ears, that is, all ears capable of understanding German, being the is citizenry. collective nation where the the 17 16 language. byacommon of tothat superior tribe, defined and synthesis of Herder’s equation of equation synthesis Herder’s of (Kohn 1945) Hobsbawm, 1065. While the Congress of Vienna (1815) largely reestablished the old order, Ernst largely old order, reestablished (1815) While the Congressof Vienna the Whether these scholars were interested in some form form in someinterested of protection, cultural were scholars Whether these Volk and Sprache , with the French “civic” nationalism, “civic” French the with , 16 17 This can be understood as be This understood can As to how this can be sine quanon of of the 22 CEU eTD Collection 35. 20 19 Nations Analysis of the Social Compostition of Patriotic Groups Among the Smaller European 18 phases. comprised of separate languagemultiphaseisthree project, national a involves the increased use of the new standard in a variety use ininvolves of avariety theincreased Finally, newstandard of the the social contexts. key translations, such as holy texts andliterary classics. The “elaboration of function” standardizationthe involving itself,process the production grammars,of and dictionaries, form” involves of The “codification dialects. selected to the superordinate hierarchically serve continuum language, as to newstandardbebase for which the dialectal the would community”. by the “acceptance the ultimately and function”, of “elaboration the form”, then model proposed with “selection of begins a norm”, by the “codification followed the of the members of the nation and it is gradually elaborated.” becomes among anation gains group language and acceptance the national widespread activists of movementspearheaded national mass bythehard-core Phase ; ethnic the a final period (Phase ), summed up by Kamusella as the phase “[marking] the rise of the standardthe national language and how its form codified should look. This isfollowed by forbebasis usedas the areto dialects/creoles what scholars decide of ahandful in which is B,a followed by material culture.This itsperiod Phase and of literature identification oral of collection the through extent group’s ethnic an delimit folklorists and antiquarians inA), which (Phase interest scholarly a of with period begins project description, the Einar Haugen, “Dialect, Language, Nation,” American Anthropologist 68 Anthropologist American Language,Nation,” Einar “Dialect, Haugen, Kamusella, 240-1, Miroslav Hroch, Social Preconditions of a National Revival in Europe: a Comparative One such model is that of Miroslav Hroch, who argued that the creation of a argued that the creation of of model Hroch, who isMiroslav One that such An alternative, though similar, multiphase model is that of Einar Haugen, whose Haugen, Einar of isthat model multiphase similar, though alternative, An , (Cambridge: Cambridge UP,1985),23-4. 20 The “selection of a norm” involves selecting a band along the dialectal the along band a selecting involves norm” a of “selection The 19 (1966)922- 18 In his In 23 CEU eTD Collection (predominately by used Orthodox the churchmen), andamodified script Cyrillic Franciscans), the by used (predominately Glagolitic including scripts, of a variety belonged few, Literacy in totheprivileged Štokavian dialect. (and literature), whowrote of the speakers entirely of composed was Herzegovina Bosnia and population the of sort of classificationlessphilological wasmore oflinguistic or one in homogeneity, that Herzegovina. and in Bosnia particularly region, the impacton have, enormous an to continue bases had,and literary dialectal and of selections and rules, orthographical classifications, philological is dispute between of that Vuk Stefanofi dialectal literary bases. such substantially and/or One same,or selecting the overlapping, despite rules, orthographical with appellations made underdifferent were classifications competing now), and then (both field in their others with in agreement been have not may or may intellectuals As particular scholars. individual to left were nation) (ideallybe thesame newthe appellation languagewhat usedfor the asthatto take would and be used should rules orthographic the what language, literary this for base literary be the should used as literature works of aswhat aswell thebecome would “nation”), who speakers (i.e. the encompass new should base language a selection dialectal the of defined “standardized bya decisions the language”, literary regardingcommon the language”. “national itthus becoming from a community the intended,creating which was by acceptance newlanguage the of clearly,by the involves, community” “acceptancethe It is important to note that the linguistic situation in Ottoman Bosnia prior to any While a broad consensus can be seen at the time regarding the “nation” being “nation” the regarding time the at seen be can consensus broad a While ü Karadži ü and Ljudevit and Gaj. Their 24 CEU eTD Collection selecting the Štokavianfurther for hisnewselectbase language, as hisliterary came ballads these literary to dialect in which Empire), Ottoman the battles against dealinghistoric with those (particular ballads folk they were writtenKaradži Slavists. fellow as his of theclassifications dialectal base for followinghis in Vienna in exile lived and Empire), Ottoman the of part (then inSerbia theborn was “First Serbian Uprising” against Ottoman rule, came to challenge the resembles the dialects agreed upon as being agreedupon dialects the resembles “Slovenian”). closely itcontention,of as being apoint surrounding inthe region dialect spoken classification based the on “Illyrian“Dalmatian”, “Bosnian”, “Slovenian”, the into dialects Slavic south the classified who or were those of AugustSerbian” . von Schlözer, Jan Kollár, and Pavel Josef Šafarik, ( Vuk Karadži “orientalisms” aretobe found former the throughout Ottoman lands andbeyond. confinedthis wasnot MuslimOttoman tothe or population, to forBosnia, such andwords expression “oriental”,i.e.of Islamic andOttoman Turkish, origin. Of course, pepper speech with the their in tendedto centers, urban population, particularly those Bosan appellation the under largely known now Cyrillic, and Glagolitic both of elements which had almost entirely fallen out of use by 19 the Cornell UP, 1993),80-81. 21 ( Ivo Banac, The National Question in Yugoslavia: Origins, History, Politics History, Origins, Yugoslavia: in Question National The Banac, Ivo þ ica At the beginning of At beginning 19 the of the ), usedlargely by Muslim dominantthe land-owning population. script, Another . Concerning lexical variation, it is important to note that the Muslim the that note to important is it variation, lexical Concerning . ü : Serbs, All and Everywhere! All : Serbs, Illyrisch oderSerbisch Illyrisch ý akavian dialect of akavian dialect of Istrianthe with peninsula, the th century, the dominant philological classifications philological dominant the century, ü , an avid folklorist who compiled Slavic compiled who folklorist avid an , ), and), finally “Croatian” final(this th century, wasauniquewith script 21 Stefanovi Vuk ü , (Ithaca: Karadži 25 ü , CEU eTD Collection could in brothers of aspect almostthat say other ours those of all Turkish faith speak 1845 quote: “True, by his be Serbsandspeakersof asevidenced Serbian, population Bosnia Ottoman to of in their towns and cities they use a lot of Turkish words, but one ( and everywhere!” by not identifyingthose with Serb the nationality) of his“Serbs, infamous statement all in hand with nationalisthis Whilemuch has beenmade conception. Serbian (particularly they single they undera were united Serbian, Ottoman or Austro-Hungarian rule, and regardless of religious affiliation, for Serbian nation as being comprised of all speakers of the Štokavian dialect, whether under “ (i.e. Latin the incorporating most controversially, newcharacters, several by creating phonetic further controversy by reforming the Cyrillic alphabet of the Church into a strictly as it is written” ( as itis written” His “Writeusing asyourule: alphabet. speakandread singleorthographical aphonetic many epic folkKaradži ballads. in used dialect the also but dialect, native his only not was This grammars. subsequent all Herzegovinian)first for as (East dialectin grammar his standard (published 1818)and the National History,” The History of Serbian Culture 22 Karadži “Serbian”. appellation the under heclassified language, which new Porthill, 1998) jat Pavle Ivi ". 22 Concerning the specifics of standardization, he selected Neo-Štokavian-Ijekavian heselected standardization, of Concerningthespecifics Karadži ü , “StandardLanguage as of an InstrumentCulture and Product the of Catholic ü ’s classification and standardization of the went hand languagewent of Serbian the standardization and ’s classification Piši kaoštogovoriš i Srbi, svi isvugdje! ) letter “”) anddropping the ChurchSlavonic (i.e. ü Volksgeist further standardized further orthography, an easy when task ), itis), important tounderstand that heenvisaged the þ itaj kako je napisano . Thus, he would have considered the entire , (Edgware, Middlessex, England: ). Orthodox ü created ) letter ) 26 CEU eTD Collection standards). Slovak and Czech, Polish, today’s for basis the (i.e., dialects Slavic northern the with initiate radicalsought to hopes in orthographic reforms inof bringing the line thedialects thus and classification, broadpan-Slavic an extremely advocated school” philological and Kajkavian in dialect(the spoken Zagreb and theZagorje region); “Rijekathe (Fiume) with Central ); the “Zagreb philological school” advocated the fusing of Štokavian and Posavina, Western Herzegovina, in , Western dialectBosnia,the spoken thiswas (arguing Štokavian-Ikavian usethe the dialect philological of school” supported “Zadar the ideas: philological own their with each philologists, of variety a with each Empire, Austrian the of lands Slavic southern in the circles philological of variety were to have the largest impact on the development of language in language region. of the impacton development havethe largest were to the “Illyrianwith a Slavic ( movement” asthe known pan-South movement, part in byKaradži Serbiannation the as conceptualized a played longer no which Church, Orthodox Serbian the to adherents describe to strictly havingchange in of“Serbian”, previously been theterm conceptualization the used of a radical isindicative faith. This Orthodox Serbian describe the to term “Greek” Disintegration 25 24 Sarajevo,(Svjetlost: 1992),17. 23 Roman faith.” ofGreekor peasants Serbian the than better RobertGreenburg, Language and Identity in Balkans:the Serbo-Croatian andits Banac, 80. Qtd. in Alija Isakovi ý akavian (largely confined to and scattered islandsIstria to Adriatic) andscattered inthe northern akavian confined (largely Vuk Karadži 25 Ultimately, the classifications and standardizations of philologists affiliated philologists of andstandardizations classifications Ultimately, the , (Oxford:Oxford UP,2004),28. ü was clearly not the only ambitious Slavist infor Slavist region, not the onlyambitious awide clearly was ü , Dictionary of Characteristic Words of the Bosnian Language ü . 24 23 Notice Karadži ilirski pokret ü uses the , 27 ), CEU eTD Collection Difference,” Social Social Research Difference,” “TheIrvine, Boundaries of Languages and Disciplines: How Ideologies Construct controversial, and remain so to this day. For more on this, see Sue Gal and Judith T. isoglosses between the dialects of southern Serbia and western were highly 27 1996). International Studies Seminar, University Kansas:of Reinvention of Tradition, April Linguistics among the People of the Former Yugoslavia,” (paper presented at Faculty 26 Slovenian and Bulgarian languages. in standard become would the what in occurring scope wakeof standardization the this narrowed later movement Illyrian The dialect). Kajkavian native his to opposed Slavs(as Štokavian south languageforall basedon literary acommon standardize influence had literary produced inZagreb. agreatworks Gajsoughtto Thus, on the in and dialect Štokavian werewritten literary the works These (modern-day Dubrovnik). “Illyrian thanfolkthe rather of Ragusa selected classics” ballads, andthus literature When itcame tocreating literary astandard opted language, forselected ‘high’ Gaj heldpeople that Hapsburg Empire. by for within Croat tothe the Hungarians the similar Slavicpan-South believing nationalism, be itto a means of attaining the privileged status two key institutions. The first was Dubrovnik. of classics Illyrian in the used orthography etymological the advocated a ‘folkish’ highly readable language thanin thehigh literary diffusing classics, and thus northern languages.Slavic Concerningin orthography, Gaj waslessinterested producing marksinthe and used diacritical adoption the of new letters of several creation the by accomplished language, Illyrian fitthe to alphabet Latin the of standardization was the The idiom spoken in several dialectal the Macedonia, where continuum undergoes Marc L. Greenberg, “The Role of Language and the Creation of Identity: Myths in The Illyrian movement’s chief wasLjudevitphilologist Gaj,firm a supporter of The Illyrian movement worked for the promotion of Illyrian culture, setting up , (Winter 1995). 26,27 Matica Ilirska One of Gaj’s major achievements toward this end , a cultural organization established to 28 CEU eTD Collection Literary Literary Agreement. Thisopens agreement with followingthe paragraph: movement(Gaj part), concluding notdid take in the signingof infamousthe 1850 Vuk Karadži “Turkishvernacular, words”). excluding Štokavian simple . lexis literary Kajkavian the of (inclusive base lexical desired andeven the v. Cyrillic), (reformed reformed v. phonetic), (etymological orthography namely standardization, in differences substantial in their also but bases, literary respective their in only not differ classifications These coincide. way no Karadži Vuk LjudevitGaj and Croat, Slovene, and Bulgar names.” Serb, ‘genetic’ the out root not could which surname, Slavic South neutral a than more no Volkgeist a single nation with andacommon Illyrian peoples” as“genetic what heperceived Dalmatia. throughout thelands language, weredistributed and Hapsburg Croatia, Slavonia of which LjudevitGaj, which newspaperspublished and aliterary magazine in new the Illyrian 28 ( House” “National Publishing The second the was literature. classical Illyrian publication andof distribution Illyrian the promote culture through Banac, 78. literature, andseeingliterature, how literature withis sorrow our not only disunited,one have should nation one that knowing declaration, this of signers The resolvemeeting to In thissituation,between a order washeld in1850 inVienna One thing shouldbe apparentinlooking atthe philological classifications of between nation,differentiated Gaj Illyrian the of conception Gaj’s Concerning the . As Banac writes, “[Gaj] repeatedly stressed that the Illyrian appellation was appellation Illyrian the that stressed repeatedly “[Gaj] writes, As Banac . ü , hiscolleague Ĉ ü is that these classifications substantially overlap, but in but overlap, substantially is classifications thatthese uro Dani uro 28 þLü , and several representatives of of , andseveralIllyrian the representatives Narodna TisakaraNarodna ) of 29 CEU eTD Collection widely circulated amongst the Štokavian-speaking Orthodox served population, thus and Orthodox Štokavian-speaking amongst the widely circulated to be a strong bespeaking in able institutional population to read theprovingmother NewTestament tongue, their intoTestament his ‘folkish’ Serbian with phonetic orthography allowed theŠtokavian carrier for his reforms, as this vernacular translation was and Russian. Despite this, Karadži language of language of Dositej Obradovi whofavoredalsowith the‘high’literary but those previous classifications, favored the Serbian Literacy ( Literacy Serbian Illyrians. Concerning Karadži nor wereagreements madenor thescript, lexicalor orthography. base, concerning no importantly, decision was made new theappellation of regarding standard,this literary of confined Empire’s smallparts but Slavic possessions, toonly Hapsburg the Herzegovinian Štokavski-Ijekavski dialect standard, asthe being this despite dialect 30 29 with Karadži with and Karadži both Illyrians the it. In agreement, the perceived thenation, for language mutual literary acommon asthey of goal each establishing impeding their were “languages) (i.e. classifications and orthographies, scripts, separate their that recognizing further oneliterature, only have should nation one that consensus a nonetheless was there classification, in their differed representatives the though Thus, Greenburg, Qtd. in Monnesland, 1107. Let us now turn totheinstitutions Karadži us nowLet turn theworksof embracing as much as possible. literature, discuss and wecould our agree tounite how these inorder days in but alphabet, in also language and orthography,have come together 28. ü accepting the phoneme /x/ and the Illyrians accepting the East the accepting Illyrians /x/ andthe phoneme the accepting Srpsko u ü 29 eno društo ü ü ’s language, itinitiallySerbian by opposed Society the of , created by , created elementsof grafting localthe idiom onto ), coming into conflict not only with those who those with only not conflict into coming ), ü ’s 1824 translation of the New ü made concessions, key 30 ü andthe 30 CEU eTD Collection Bosnia and Herzegovina.introduction The to journalthis in reads, part: in nationalism” “literary Illyrian of sense a instilling at specifically aimed being as seen štamparija Press ( Vilayet by Sarajevo-basedschools Bosnian published the used in Orthodox ballads and folk of textbooks collections publications, particularly same decade saw the adoption of Karadži same of sawtheadoption decade Friend” ( Ottoman as Bosnia well. of One journalsthese from Gaj’s publishing house,“Bosnian newspapers and literary journals, notonly in portions of Austrian the inEmpire, but by Karadži favored pronunciation Ijekavian the where Vojvodina, of possession Austrian continued 33 ed. Svein Mønnesland, (Institut zaJezik: Sarajevo, 2005). Bosnian Serbs],” in Jezik i uBosni Hercegovini in [Language Bosnia and Herzegovina] 32 31 for Karadži1860s, the Society SerbianLiterary adopted to reifyKaradži Gaja: predgovor. Zagreb, 1850), I. . Juki See Miloš Okuka, “Književni Jezici Bosanskih Srba [Literary Languages of the Greenburg,28. vocatur lazinessforwe wisdom: said that take Already, we are constantly singing: areconstantly we Already, smell to want don’t we and literature, national of flowers fragrant still sweetly All sleeps! us,kinnationsaround areenjoying the pleasantly up from woken ignorance deepsleepthe of indolence, and only Bosnia Almost country every Turkish has spacious the Empireof in Europe Concerning the , Gaj’s publishing house widely circulated widely house publishing Gaj’s language, Illyrian the Concerning Bosanski Prijatelj ). ü ü was looked down was upon as inferior tothe local Ekavianpronunciation. , ed., Bosanski Prijatelj 32 . 33 ü ’s classification and appellation of of as“Serbian”. language the By the and appellation ’s classification ), edited by ), Bosnian-born Franciscan monk I.F.Juki , (Bèrzotiskom narodne , (Bèrzotiskom dra.Ljudevitatiskarnice Dolce farniente ü ’s Serbian language by a variety byavariety language of ’s Serbian Quod segnities est sapientia ü ’s reforms, though ’s reforms, though opposition . About us, it can be can it us, About . bosansko-vilajetska ü ? , can , can be 31 This 31 , CEU eTD Collection Ijekavian the dialect, only features lexical distinguishing were variants, orthography, and amongpopulation. the Orthodox However, asallthese publications usedthe Štokavian- circulated largely been have would thus and schools in Orthodox used were ballads among the Catholicpublications usingand textbooks the standardwouldIllyrian havebeen largely circulated population,literary theBosnian Franciscan lines. thus organized Thus, along confessional while where was farfrom education universal,was leftto religious education and institutions the SerbianSerbian institutions. and standards werethe Bosnia, educational appellations In Ottoman and Illyrian the for textbooks carriers institutional primary Thus, time. this at law into standards and collections Kingdom the of none Serbia, classifications, the which of enshrined appellations, and the control ofof three different states, folkbeing the Austrian Empire, the , and under inwas time, question region the Atthis education. and with relationship its state had on the population of Ottoman Bosnia as follows: Franciscans],” inFranciscans],” Jezik u Bosni i Hercegovini in [Language Bosnia and Herzegovina] Svein Mønnesland, (Institut za Jezik: Sarajevo, 2005). 34 Gaj’s standard as well, evidenced by Franciscan publications from 1850s the and 1860s. in Furthermore, inFranciscan houses publishing Bosnia and had Herzegovina adopted SeeIvo Pranjkovi As discussed above, the primary institutional carrier for any classification is the any for carrier classification primary institutional the above, As discussed by carried out Gaj wereaccepted. “Illyrians” and the thing happened with The Latinthe alphabet. reforms of this alphabet, The same were dropped. exist people, of inthe livingspeech not didthe phonemes the which for graphemes, the and dialect, literary only the as wasaccepted the dialect Ijekavian Herzegovina, and inBosnia writing written by Naturally,tradition. adoption viewsthe onlanguage of Vuk’s only actually, existing the confirmed in reforms, reception Bosnia. These Vuk’s of reforms had the Cyrillic alphabet, language,and the agood Thus, Asim Pe ü , “Jezik Bosanskih Franjevaca [Language of Franjevacaof , “Jezik Bosanskih [Language Bonsian the ü sums up the effects Vuk Karadži ü and the Illyrian movement , ed. 32 34 CEU eTD Collection 36 Sarajevo, 2005). [Language in [Language Bosnia andHerzegovina] Conditions of the in the Ottoman Period,” in Jezik u Bosni i Hercegovini 35 built MonarchyembracingYugoslav thealready the of ruins Hapsburg the state, on nation which form would basisfor the ultimate the goal of establishing afederal nation, incultural language terms of of and conceived it this a common andculture, was common (i.e.Slavic be unified through though Yugoslav) South peoplesthese could andthusseparate, were conceived “genetic peoples” as of Again, Serbsand the ambitions. political different with though Illyrians, the of that to similar ideology Slavic Empire. Austrian the within autonomy municipal Croatia’s of defense in the or Dubrovnik of heritage literary in the interest particular no had who Slavs South teach and publish in modifiedthe . most importantly script. The Islamic schools and institutions at this point continued to The Yugoslav Movement: A Linguistic Nation of Genetic Peoples of Genetic Nation A Linguistic Movement: The Yugoslav Illyrianthe movement, asuccessor movement gained steady ground. of dissipation the of wake in the However, aims. their centered had Illyrians the which around Hungary, of level the on status autonomous Croatian for movement the to end and Hungary (with Croatia between wasdivided ideal autonomous movements in the Illyrian Empire, which the latter reigning over1867 the majority), effectively spelled an Banac, 78. Lejla Nakaš,“Kulturne Prilike uosmanskom Bošnjaka perioduperiodu [Cultural Ausgleich In time the Illyrian movement eventually dissipated, failing to attract masses The Yugoslav movement of Strossmayer and Ra and Strossmayer of movement Yugoslav The transformation of the Austrian Empire into the Austro-Hungarian the into Empire Austrian the of transformation , ed. Svein Mønnesland, (Institut za Jezik: 35 þ ki, which advocated a pan-South a advocated which ki, 36 Furthermore, the 33 CEU eTD Collection Karadži began as rift fulloccurred JAZU’s Yugoslav implementation a cultural of unitarists Vuk classifications, with keydifferencesthe being the appellations and This orthographies. Each publishing house continued publishing underthese linguistic different a rift occurred within the Zagreb philological community, causing community, philological Zagreb within the a riftoccurred classification known as “Croatian or Serbian” ( bring the standards developing inZagreb and Belgradeharmony, intointo the single suspend cooperation with JAZU and,in 1874, changed its name to “Serbian or Croatian” ( manywho incorporated subsequently Karadži of Dani language and can choose official asthe language Serbian’ or use ‘Croatian the to isallowed “Every citizen that, freely the Latin or declaredafter debates, heated sameyearCroatian the the Sabor, language.occurred This .” death in 1871, the philological work of by became of dominated in work institution the philological death 1871,the 39 38 37 with closely worked reforms), andMontenegro. of Serbia states independent znanosti iumjetnosti and Arts of Academy Sciences of Yugoslav Strossmayer,( the Josip Bratuli Qtd. in 29 Greenburg, Banac, 90 þLü JAZU, under the leadership of Bogoslav Šuslek (a harsh critic of leadership harsh of JAZU, the VukKaradži Bogoslav critic (aof Šuslek under , (the colleague of Karadži colleague of Vuk , (the ü ’s orthographic rule. ’s orthographic ü , : 1842-1997, Hrvatska: , Matica , JAZU) was established. srpski ili hrvatski ili srpski Matica Ilirska ü ) when published in the point, this Belgrade.At published ) when and signatory Agreement), 1850Literary the of andsignatory 37 to advance the development of a common 1997). (Zagreb: Matica Hrvatska, In 1867, through In1867,through extensivethe patronage ü hrvatski ilisrpski ’s linguistic in reforms an to effort 38 Jugoslavenska akademija Jugoslavenska However, after Šuslek’s after However, Matica Hrvatska ), also known as known also ), Matica Ilirska Ĉ uro to ü 34 . ’s 39 CEU eTD Collection Sciences (the organization into which the Society of Serbian literacy had been forcibly urban and Academy Royal of Arts Serbian Belgrade andcenters NoviSad)by the of abandoned(the infavorof inŠumadija-Vojvodinadialect spoken the dialect andaround before, was adecade standardthan asthe less embraced dialect, Štokavian-Ijekavian Serbiana greater into state. lands) Štokavian all (i.e. lands Serb all of incorporation entailed which Garašanin, Ilija Minister Interior the Serb nation under occupation,of as part Bosnia and Herzegovina of see theŠtokavian speaking population had to come faced a setback in regard tounder Austrian jurisdiction). this of Kingdom consequence One wasthe which of Serbia, the expansionist plans of (placed and Herzegovina Bosnia Empire occupied languages whentheAustro-Hungarian Dispute the in Involvement Hungarian of Serbian. with those the standards harmonize by a linguistic shift in both standardization and philological classification, as Karadži as classification, philological and standardization in both shift linguistic a by accompanied was Ottoman Macedonia.This to shifted was attention Hungarian Empire, 40 by lednow Dani JAZU, while orthography, etymological the to adhering classics, Illyrian the promoted to involvingnational butratherconceptions, duetodisputes language. over disagreements due to not suspended was cooperation organizations’ “peoples”. The “nation”, albeit genetic one dividedamong Yugoslav Serbian”,establish acommon and Ilirska Banac, 83. , cooperating in order topromotein a , cooperating order language,common literary or “Croatian In the 1878, a key political development reshaped the developing ideologies the developing and reshaped key developmentIn the political 1878, a In this period we see two cultural and scientific institutions, JAZU and þLü , adopted the orthographical reforms of Karadži reforms Vuk of the orthographical adopted , 40 Rather than directly challenge the Austro- Matica Ilirska ü in order to inorder Matica ü 35 ’s CEU eTD Collection Štokavian speakers, largely seen as a hotbed of Serbian national sentiment) into the into sentiment) national Serbian of a hotbed as seen largely speakers, Štokavian incorporation of the “Military ( Frontier” “Military the of incorporation of the hinder the efforts would that engineering projects undermine themovement, largely promotionthe through of a variety of social- demands for Croatian independence byAnteStar explicit the fearing Khuen-Héderváry, (1883-1903). Khuen-Héderváry Károly Count of in harmonizing standardsthe of Gaj and Karadži roughly sametimethe made “Croatian JAZU the Vukovites” significant developments of 45 by German cleric Johann M. Schleyerin in1879 to serveorder as a universal language 44 43 Disciplines: HowIdeologiesDifference” Construct 42 41 underaccumulated influence.”foreign andrust mud…is This… sediment Macedonian characteristic Volapük, the rusty is with “Macedonianspeech covered he where writes, Language of Macedonians”, the “Thepublication,Bulgarism on Penninsula: and Nationality History Balkan the of The merged). accounted for inaccounted various such as ways,by Radosavljevi proposed that Macedonian speech use of instead (e.g.the of prepositions were case declinations), of Serbian. asadialect Macedonia with This in that, aim theidiom admittedly was done, at stated the classifying spoken of bringing the Serbian standard phonologically closer totheidiom spoken in Macedonia. Qtd. in Banac, 107 This is a reference to short-lived Volapük,the language single-handedly of constructed Banac, 210 For more on this, see Sue Gal and Judith Irvine, “The Boundaries of Languages and Greenburg,28. Interestingly enough, the Serbian standard departed from Karadži from standarddeparted theSerbian Interestingly enough, 41 Importantly, this dialect used Ekavian pronunciation (rather than pronunciation than Ijekavian), Ekavian (rather Importantly, used dialect this 45 43 The extensive morphological difference in The morphological difference extensive Vojska ü þ , aided by largely absolutist regime the evi ü and the Party the Party and sought of Right, to , an area dominated by Orthodox , an area dominated pravaši . These included the . These ü ü ’s standardat inhis 1890 36 44 42 CEU eTD Collection corresponded to a different standards being published and circulated by respective their andcirculated published beingstandards toadifferent corresponded “ours” ( most succinctly, Slavic ( known colloquially under several including names,other simply“the language” ( Serbian ( was known under idiom the Bosnia andHerzegovina, of administration yearsAustro-Hungarian early of the different and being Nehring’svarious analysis in published publication circulated Gerd-Dieter of names: numberclassified ashocking In loaded. eachideologically of competing classifications, Croatian ( inHerzegovina we see (beginning theidiom 1878), inspoken Bosnia and Herzegovina Language aBosnian and Nation ABosnian Kállay: Béni its leaderFrank. after became Josip known to as “Frankism”, Svein Mønnesland, (Institut za Jezik: Sarajevo, 2005). Monarchy],” in Jezik i uBosni in Hercegovini [Language Bosnia and Herzegovina] in of [Development Language of Austro-Hungarian a Standard Times the the 48 47 46 ( Right of forming PureParty the cooperation Hrvatska Domovina newspaper the around gathering cooperation advocating faction the with nationalists, insuccessful,fractured the 1885ontheissue party as cooperation of with Serbian Héderváry attemptssentiment, and finally fundingextensively in JAZU 1883. national Slavonian of fostering the in schools, Cyrillic of to teaching the lands, Croatian stave off the growing popularity of the Gerd-Dieter Nehring, “Razvoj standardnog jezika za vrijeme austro-ugarske monarhije jezika zavrijeme Nehring, Gerd-Dieter standardnog “Razvoj austro-ugarske Banac, 96. Banac, 93. Thus, inThus, firstthe few years of Austro-Hungarian administration of Bosnia- slavenski hrvatski ili srpski ili hrvatski ), “the literary-school language” ( ), “the literary-school (“Croatian and the factionsuch Homeland”) to staunchly opposed ), naški Serbian or Croatian ( ). 48 As the above-mentioned classifications each classifications above-mentioned Asthe hrvatski ý ista stranka prava kniježevno-školski jezik srpski ili hrvatski ili srpski ), Serbian ( 46 47 As it turned out, Khuen- out, turned it As pravaši srpski ), a movement that movement a ), ), and wasfurther ), ), and, perhaps and, ), ), Croatian or werelargely , ed. jezik 37 ), CEU eTD Collection Bosnia-Herzegovina, sent the following letter toKállay:letter following sentthe Bosnia-Herzegovina, 51 Mønnesland, (Institut zaJezik: Sarajevo, 2005),351 Jezik uBosni i in [Language BosniaHercegovini andHerzegovina] 50 49 was “thesimply called languageof land”( the underin “Croatian”, appellation language the the conducted administration the of 1880 standards. being linguistically homogenous), relatively rather but aplethora of classifications and butinstitutions,a singlein was there (despite Bosnia-Herzegovina anything standard Jovan baron Apel, the Head of the State Government ( Government State the of Head the Apel, baron Jovan issue, this Concerning issue oflanguage. addressed the yet project soon the textbooks, asawhole. Herzegovina nationality Bosnian instilling of ( a sense Kállay’sThus, initiated a administration social-engineeringits of project own, at aimed would movements the andaway irredentist competing tear country from Austria.apart, claims populationthe for to of hecamebelieve andHerzegovina, Bosnia to that the movements, nationalist advancing all Serbian,which where Croatian,Yugoslav and of isolate BosniaKállay administration competing the from the soughtto (1882-1903), used by Count Khuen-Héderváry in Croatia. Under administrationthe of Béni (Benjamin) that than approach different with arather in debate, the involved became administration Šipka, 102. SretoTanasi Ibid. prevent this situation at all at costs. situation this prevent the population of here to the Serb or Croat affiliation nationalities,expresses it as and we wouldlands, like to in outside is everywhere it as Croatian, We would like toavoid the language here spoken beingcalled Serbian or While initially all formal communications of the Austrian administration were administration Austrian the of communications formal all initially While ü , “Jezik štampe do 1918., “Jezikštampe do godine [Language in Printing Houses -1918],” 50 This was done primarily through This through primarily publication the was done of geography 51 bošnjanstvo zemaljski jezik ) among the population of Bosnia- population of the ) among poglavar ). , ed. Svein Zemaljskog vlade 49 At this point, the ) of 38 CEU eTD Collection 54 53 52 ( ( inThus, 1883, Kállay’s administration the Commission forestablished Language institutions could continue publishing in Bosnianthe language. ( be “Serbo-Croatian” would henceforth andin official the language declared administration theproject, abandoned that 1907 inproduced Bosnianthe language duringKállay’s administration,subsequent the were publications of flurry a While scripts. Glagolitic and Cyrillic both of elements Bosnia’s ( section dedicated medievalto script unique phonetic continuity orthography. Furthermore, of languageisimpartedthe through a Schools”Secondary for Language Bosnian the of “Grammar title the under ( administration, the by its Bosnia first andHerzegovina,grammar, by accompanied published publication of the emerging from emerging from outside of yetBosnia-Herzegovina, each one including theidiom spoken of high treason. anact becoming “Serbian” appellation useof the the administration again changed policy, official the declaring language as“Croatian”, with Franz Ferdinandby Serbian triggeringa militantWar nationalist, World I,the Archduke Austrian of assassination Sarajevo the With Language”. Serbo-Croatian the “Grammar of the Bosnian Language” was being reprinted under a new title, “Grammar of as is areused, Karadži scripts Latin and reformedCyrillic both the reveals that bosanski jezik Komisija zajezik Ibid Ibid Nehring, 313. What we see in this era are a series of ideologically loadedclassifications we seein What aseries era are of this Gramatika bosanskog jezika za srednje školeGramatika jezikazasrednje bosanskog ), culminating inthe of declaration Bosnian as language official the of ) with ) with aim the of classifying andstandardizing the “Bosnian language” srpsko-hrvatski ), though theautonomous Muslim ), though ). bosan 52 A look atthis A grammar þ 53 ica Within a year, the 54 ), which contained ü 39 ’s CEU eTD Collection the 1921 Constitution scripts. Latin Cyrillic and the both with of the Kingdom of Serbs,along language, official be sole to the Croatian” wasdeclared or “Serbian Herzegovina, Croats, and Bosnia for Order and and Law of Code in the 1918, .In dynasty). Orthodox Serbian Article 3 of the (theby a being Yugoslavcapital headed state inBelgrade, federated as was a established Peoples Three Nation, One Yugoslavia: of The Kingdom despite theirlackperpetuated oflegitimation. be to continue classifications rival while all means, institutional other through gaining legitimation inthrough changes state,the as subsequently being strengthened entirethe history of with classificationsYugoslavia, competing andstandardizations in a“different” though fully intelligibleThis language. trend would continue throughout 55 Academy, Royal Serbian the institutional such rival through carriers, as thepublishinghouses of classifications JAZU, editions. However, subaltern (or foreign-based) ideologies had other means of reifying publication of materials,educational suchseenas in 1890grammarthe and subsequent dual notonly role, legitimizing achosen classification, reifying it butalso through the playeda state Each andstandardizations. classifications these with affiliated movements over the others as it shifted in its acceptance, or rejection, of the ideology espoused by the Serbia each played a key role in granting legitimacy to one philological classification Croatia,Austrian administration in the Kingdom andthe andHerzegovina, Bosnia of by the population of Bosnia-Herzegovina as a whole. The Hungarian administration in Zbornik zakona inaredbaza Bosnu iHercegovinu In wake the Worldof War I,thenew andof Kingdom Serbs, Croats, Slovenes Matica Hrvatska Matica 55 However, this changed with the ratification of ratification the with changed this However, , Matica Srpska , Art. 128, § 1-2. , and newspapers produced , and 40 CEU eTD Collection the exact dialect spoken in exactdialect spoken the Belgrade! institutions, simplyfollowing the standard orthographical rule in resulted one speaking governmentused Štokavian-Ekavian in publications Cyrillic)(and allstate and increasingly centrist Thus, the when Bosnia-Herzegovina. Serbia, Croatia, and “Write asyou speak and readitisas hadwritten” been throughoutwidely embraced from era. Austro-Hungarian the 1912 “Serbo-Croatian” textbook above names,all the while school system in Bosnia and Herzegovina continued usinga carriers, institutional withother the over control no to little a was there wideFurthermore, institutions. variety of grammars substantial instandardized, languagethe nordid not it anystate undergo reification was and orthographies published Kingdom the constitutionof Yugoslavia), of (andagain inthe1931constitution 1921 of under all of the declare.individuals to andleftup to Slovenes, Serbs,Croats, the peoples, of composed constituent three constitutionally enshrined concept of kingdom the as having one official nation, the reflects This around. way other the not language, the defines nation the that clear in nation have one itis this language, beliefthough only the case reflects one can that city Belgrade. It is important to keep inmindKaradži that is to important city Belgrade. It deal of reification for the Štokavian-Ekavian dialecta great but for appellation, little reification therewas state, the of institutions key reifying (i.e. standard Serbian) of the capital 57 56 Hrvatsko-Slovena constitution declared the sole official language as “Serbian-Croatian-Slovenian” ( Ibid. Šipka, 412. While “Serbian-Croatian-Slovenian” may have been official classified in the classified official been have may “Serbian-Croatian-Slovenian” While þ ko ). While nophilological society had classified such a language, it 56 ü ’s phonetic-orthographic rule, ’s phonetic-orthographic 57 When it came to the Srpsko- 41 CEU eTD Collection based ideologies,on rangingtheir own for federalists’the from “Croatian” demands and language(s) of remaining the reclassifications recognition for different parties advocated political Various classifications. of the rather arejection but of categories, equation the relationship inthecategorical wasaclear contradiction there fact that the in Interestingly, was use. between language a single conception that the have certainly hindered would almost differences, the languageused in Slovenia. Furthermore, differentscripts, with highly noticeabletheir graphic and the nationbe officially to waspermitted standardized“Slovenian” by fact that was exacerbated the did not lead to a rejection of the consciousness.” as a “low ita generallynot recognized heldto it levelof belief, attributing unitarist ( unity” “national Yugoslav of of principle the leading advocate the 58 Pribi even asaclassification, “Serbo-Croato-Slovenian” of acceptance no to little with surprising that not to isit Thus, language! on a common existence waspredicated and “language” based of the oninverse nation’s“nation”, where relationship categorical language (no more, no less). However, the notion of a unified Yugoslav one nationhave must was nation one that conception dominant the on based kingdom the of needs meetthe solely to created by fiat,was created It carriers. institutional any or other etc.) manuals, dictionaries, orthographic community from coming(standards, academic the reification no with constitution, the from solely legitimation its deriving Slovenian” Banac, 178. What we see in the situation described above is language “Serbo-Croato- a above we seein What situation described the 58 The lack of acceptance of the classification of “Serbo-Croato-Slovene” of classification of the Thelackof acceptance narodno jedinstvo ü evi 42 ü ) , CEU eTD Collection struggle for self-preservation and of a [Serb] consciousness and endurance, the Cyrillic the endurance, and consciousness [Serb] a of and self-preservation for struggle Serb] symbol [the of andagraphic fellow sufferer… became our thereby scriptCyrillic “For Literary Unity: of crystallize.Ferdinand to causedpro-Cyrillic Ina1918statementsentimententitled, The Questioncomplete ban Cyrillic by on Austro-Hungarianthe authorities following the assassination of Dialects and whatthroughout wouldbecomeenforce attempt a to (including Yugoslavia Slovenia), the Scripts”, and authors magazines and byunitarist foundthis favor wasembraced proposal (seen as a concession to Belgrade)involved a incompromise which Ekavian pronunciationthe would be embraced by all on the conditionsolutions had sincebeen proposed. One in solution, proposed 1913 by Jovan Skerli that Cyrillic be abandoned.unitarist nation-buildingas early effort the1850Literary Agreement, andas several While wasidentified as to an differenceobstacle scripts fact,the inthe become In obvious. 60 59 academics” as Stojanovi among “top particularly conception, dominant the (still nation the and language the between equation the iswith When this combined category.vague, somewhat reified adifferent, under albeit officially and were Slovenes Serbs, Croats, that thedespite fact inmind mustthat kept It be script. Cyrllic the with identifiable easily and reified, fairly was language” “Serbian the of classification the that light in be considered must dialect Štokavian-Ekavian the of state) or Serbian”, “Serbian or Croatian”. “Croatian “Croato-Serbian”, “Serbo-Croatian”, for demands centralists’ the to “Serbian”, Banac, 117 Ibid. The fact that there were a growing number of institutional carriers (namely the (namely carriers institutional of number agrowing were there that The fact sub-national classifications, these classifications still were predominant, further predominant, were still classifications these classifications, sub-national 59 ü , Beli ü , Cviji , û ü orovi , et al.), , ü writes that, “the 60 the problems the 43 ü , CEU eTD Collection 63 62 61 Serbs: Kajkavian Croats, speaking once they began speaking Štokavian, would“turn into” the that Party, Radical the Serbian as such parties nationalist Serbian of leadership it beandlanguage,at leastcame to believed, or by actively espoused the among nation between and with language”,combined of the “Croatian relationship conceived sentiment” andfailure use Cyrillic to was punished. “anti-state of evidence as seen Latin was of use the in forces, where armed the ignored in hold weredeclared scripts such to status Kingdom. official the However, equality was a concession.both LatinandCyrillic the great Thus, Latin,be seenastoo which would a mass refusal on the part including figures Krleža,was there in andas Miroslav Croatia, such Bosnia-Herzegovina of writers in Serbiawe must endure.” to abandon their which under beown abandoned,abanner cannot that emblems of remain one will the script script in favor of Ibid Ibid, 151. Qtd. in Banac, 212 will, even if itnational be called Serb the – Croatian?”to equal entirely will… that not is And will? instinctive mindedly,is itnot afact, then, this that expresses action apurely single- by isadopted Croats and voluntarily, more,the what adopted moreover is adopted, language awhole once that a fact not it “Is Serbs: became they expression,” literary languageas their the Serbian accepted štokavian adopted the Croats And kajkavian the once štokavian. speakers of the excluded always appellation Croat the that a belief to points views dialect, of their A reconstruction dialect. of štokavian nature Serbian strictly the whocooperated with(1886-1940) autonomists, aboutCroat hadnodoubt or in Proti Even the least supremacist Radicals, such as Proti language”, “Serbian the “Croat”, “Serb”, of conceptions dominate Thus, whenthe 61 While Skerli ü ’s proposal ’s had been proposal by embraced a numberof writers ü and Ivani 63 62 ü ’s terms, once the “Croats ü and Mom þ ilo Ivani ü 44 CEU eTD Collection speaking and writing inCyrillic Štokavian-Ekavian could nationality andin language, an article We entitled “Are Serbs Croats?”, publishedor in question”. “Muslim asthe be known to what came in nationality Serb or aCroat “declare” to community Muslim the on pressure increasing was there 1907, since institutional starvedcarriers of had beencompletely language) among the Muslim community Bosnia-Herzegovina.of Asthe“Bosnian” nationality (and “Serbianization”. front against a as movements autonomist Croatian by embraced been now had movements, nationalists “Serbian” and considered a threat to the Kajkavianand the to andconsideredathreat “Serbian” 66 65 64 he1920, complains: in officer one by registered complaint a In “Serbianization”. as centralism linguistic such many identifyperceived thenot autonomists, Croatian who of whom such as Serbs, did of population the portions the problematic,particularly quite Of thisamong was course, Furthermore, the Ijekavian dialect, once suggested by Vuk Karadži by Vuk oncesuggested Ijekavian dialect, the Furthermore, “Serbianization”. to of resistance symbolic became also script Latin Thus, the Ibid, 374. Ibid, 214. Qtd in Ibid,, 152. At this point, itis important to mention we see a different conception developing nationality. my of be deprived not shall I leading. is this me where to is plain And whenIam moreoverordered, under physical duress, touse Cyrillic,it am a Croat, body and soul, and I shall not allowwas saidusat to myself endthe of 1918 andbeginning the of 1919 – this or athief… I – though to be Serbianized. a traitor am I that imply not should army A- in the officer Frankists,we are who that claim “patriots,” by upbraided the are We, officers, Austrians – that we are unreliable… My service as an active 64 65 It is clear from this quote that it was believed that 66 transform ý Concerning the question of question the Concerning akavian dialects by dialects Croatian akavian aCroat into aSerb. ü as thepurest 45 CEU eTD Collection movement established by AntePaveli established movement (“Insurgent”) nationalistanti-Yugoslav the of radicalization intense an to led policies, unitarist clear its with territorial borders and a royal the and establishment of appellations dictatorship. This, movements, Kingdom of Yugoslavia wasdeclared,complete with effacementthe of historical the Belgrade.Within the nextsixmonths, the constitution was abolished, andaunitary figure, Stjepan Radi ultimatelyideological in particularly movements, 1928when anti-unitarista key political aPure with Nation APure Croatia: of The Rise leading lower than Bosnian hierarchically Muslim a “nation”. “people”, toserved the as institutionalCroats establishment (or wouldn’t),However, despite the fact that that Muslims would “declare” nationality as carrierseither Serbs or Muslimof their organizations own, promoting of such thethe as conceptionthe UstašaJMO and ofothers a specific effectively organizacija the organ of the Yugoslav Muslim Organization ( they will as before continue to choose Croat nationality. Croat choose to continue before as will they un in equally and that inequalitytheir being are that equatedwith Croats, allotted are development economic chances at that hitherto, haveas they observe, to continue they Butshould nationhood. Serb the choose certainly enjoy the samematerial can culturethey as the that Serbs, they will unconditionallydevelopment, and economic at chance fair their had have they feel Muslims the in Should general… culture is,material –that relations forminglongerlanguage, areno religion or economic but and social in nation- role strongest the acquired have nowadays that The factors In the later years of the kingdom, tensions greatly increased between rival the between increased greatly years tensions kingdom, In thelater the of , JMO), one reads: one JMO), , movement, a far-right offshoot of the Frankist Croatian nationalist ü , and five other deputies were assassinated in the parliament in in deputies wereassassinated parliament fivethe , and other ü while in exile. The Ustaša movement wasa movement The Ustaša in exile. while Jugoslavenska muslimanska Jugoslavenska 46 CEU eTD Collection Language, Its Language, Purity Its and which Spelling” included ten articles,including: issuedDecree: On Croatian the “Legal famous the Mile Budak, Minister of Education, Croatian language had been “Serbianized”. Thus, onAugust1941, 14, Paveli whichsee thedegreeto the from to exile upon returning andwas distressed right, greatly the issue of language, Paveli language religion, but by or rather genetics and national collective memory.Concerning the NDHincludedthe all Bosnia of and Herzegovina. 68 67 Ante Paveli leader with Ustaša Axisthe anddeclaredthe forces, IndependentState of Croatia (NDH)inApril 1941, of political by weregranted Warpower in World Ustaša and forces II, the by Italian German Yugoslavia’s King Alexander in 1934. includingactions achieve a state, in such to Croatian the involvement assassination of the Following its establishment, movement Ustaša became involved in militant various expressed by Frankist ideologue Milan inŠufflay 1921: best conception, national its sharing movement), Frankist the of offshoot militant radical Ibid, 269. Qtd. in Ibid, 260. the primary of by spelling pronunciation, andby meaningstyle is rules certain words, of the the by and area, national peculiar Croatian in the prevalence its by development, languageThe language spoken by by Croats, its pronunciation, byits historical of the Croatian people, and therefore As mentioned above, Paveli above, mentioned As mn national of imperative the but individuals, of play the not is politics in Historicism nation. the of – unit collective the of consciousness the is sum individual individual.subconsciousnesses each The awareness of national memory. The history of ancestors fills the subconscious with history are acquainted of a genetic cognition are privy to Those who PƝ – of national memory. national of – ü believed that all Croats spoke Croatian, as was their natural ü assuming the title of Leader ( of title the assuming ü believed that the Croats were not defined in by their by in defined not were Croats the that believed 67 68 When the Kingdom When Kingdom was occupied Yugoslavia of the Poglavnik ). Importantly, ). ü andhis 47 CEU eTD Collection Politics in-1918,” Jezik i uBosni Hercegovini [Language in Bosnia and Herzegovina] travanj ed. Svein (InstitutMønnesland, 161-173. zaJezik: Sarajevo, 2005). 69 brought be victory of The partisans’ loudest well-armed: to which happened partisans. the Supra-Nation Era: The Post-War Croatian non- “unclean” words, and orthography phonological employed proclamation, even official an in dating the proclamation Sarajevo, city of for the commandant NDH the even observes, Šipka asMilan However, with the consequences). the elseface (or decree the to adhere carriers would institutional month of who VIII), those deviate in ensuringthus all spelling (Art. thatpronunciation and linguistic for of anddetermining the penalties process Education to oversee cleansing the and III), Croatian institutions namesforMinistry entrusted of signs(Art. all and by fiat. useofnon- Thedecreefurther the language forbid theCroatian standardized Thus, and VII). VI), Paveli etymological orthography (Art. pronunciation as official (Art. IV), specific syntactic rules involving the future tense (Art. Ijekavian the established decree the standardization, of specifics Concerning the Milan Šipka, “Standardni jezik ijezi ). (Art. II) can be used whenitis difficult impossibleor tofind domestic equivalents. evenother, languages. similar special with Exceptionally, meanings words spirit borrowed language, Croatian the from of usuallyforeign words, pronunciation use whichand donotconform inspellingwords to with the nobody therefore should distort ordeform it. Thatis whyitis forbidden in The Croatian languageitis called theis “Croatian language”. (Art. theI) publicis any language. That nation'swhy common to related nor language,other other any of dialect a is it welfarenor language, other any with identical not of the Croatian people, and Of course, under the reign of the Ustaša regime there were dissenting voices, the voices, were dissenting there regime theUstaša of reign the under Of course, 69 þ ka politika Language [Standard and Language ü and Budakclassified april (not “pure” the , 48 CEU eTD Collection Muslims” ( Muslims” sub-division either Serb the Croatnations,of or under “indeterminate appellation the Muslim population were classified as still a sub-national group, recognized asbeing a category “Yugoslav”.of This shiftisin evident censuses.the In 1948census,the the a supra-national the creation of itself, with hierarchy “nation” the of conceptualization institutionally embraced are- roughly state sametime asthe occurring atthe language” ( Serbian” ( language “Serbian or Croatian” language“Serbian or ( resolved. Thus, 1946constitution the of Bosnia and the Herzegovinadeclared official meaning hadyettobe national the categorial situation”, that confusion and linguistic Macedonian”. The official language for republic wasdetermined by “specifictheir “Serbians, infor issued Croatian,equality 1944declaringand Slovenian, aproclamation AntifascistLiberation National language, forYugoslavia (AVNOJ) of Council the the institutionalized, as institutionalized, i.e. state, by the regarded was each that meant This each other. to known, parallel placednow in category and“Macedonian”,were previously highest “Montenegrin” the and “Croat” “Serb”, aswell of“Slovene”, theadditional appellations as appellations Thus, in equal already heavily government. secondYugoslavia, the one under the reified 70 ( nation each that i.e. nation, the concerning Tito) (namely partisans the in newnation(s) lineideology conceptions andlanguages(s), of the by with the espoused narodnosti Šipka, 422. However, one can see a state-endorsed re-conceptualization of “national of re-conceptualization canseeastate-endorsed one However, hrvatski ili srpski ili hrvatski neopredeljeni muslimani neopredeljeni ), a reflection of the Austro-Hungarian hierarchical a reflectionhierarchical Concerning of ), organization. Austro-Hungarian the nation in its own right. Below was a further category of “nationality” ) and in Serbia and Montenegro it was simply “Serbian”. srpski ili hrvatski ili srpski ). In 1953, the Muslims were re-conceptualized asa In 1953,the Muslimswere re-conceptualized ). ), while in Croatia it was “Croatian or narod ) was to be 70 49 CEU eTD Collection Hrvatska IX). Srpska and (SANU), of Arts Sciences Academy Serbian the (JAZU), and Sciences Arts Academyof Yugoslav by Zagreb-based appointed the byacommittee to overseen lifecultural VI),and(Art. ajointorthographic VII). manual (Art. This cooperation was joint dictionary (Art. V), common terminology for all spheres of economic, scholarly, and (Art. VIII), and that other the to variant one from translated be longer no should texts that and development, natural andits variant must Zagreb-centered the becare given to that articles stated III),that(Art. Ijekavian in Ekavianhave and Further equalstatus IV). (Art. all respects and Cyrillic have equalinclude statusthe names of the itsand constituent are parts, to i.e.be “Serb” language, I), Belgrade thethat nameof andis when Zagreb(Art. used officially,the to taught and “Croat” (Art. in II), schoolthat Latin to both of thecenters around thathad isasingleandMontenegrins language” developed Serbs and Croats Croats, Serbs, the languageof “national the that declaring standardization, with primarily language agreementregarding question. The theAgreement’s Novi conclusions dealtSad Sad, initiated by Sad, conference was held in Novi Sad, collection of scholars and intellectuals gathered in Novi Yugoslavs”. appellation “indeterminate underthe classification, yet supra-national the recognizedof asasub-division sub-nation classification, , In dual-edition first 1960, the orthographicby both manual was published Months later, this was reflected in later,Months this wasreflected an language.a of adjustment In 1954, the Matica Hrvatska Matica (using Ijekavian pronunciation)(using Ijekavian by and Matica Srpska Matica Matica Hrvatska Matica , and the Universities of Zagreb, Belgrade, and Sarajevo (Art. (and of course the Yugoslav state), and came to an and Matica SrpskaMatica Matica Srpska are to work together to create a (using Ekavian Matica Matica 50 CEU eTD Collection “Serbo-Croatian” ( “Serbo-Croatian” manual,initially inBosnia-Herzegovina schools compoundthe appellation adopted 71 of partisans concerning equality among the constituentnations: jezika Language” ( Literary Croatian the issued“Declaration Universities ofZagreb andZadar, the of andPosition on Name the the of both Literature and of Language Society, Department andthe Literature Croatian” ( ( Serbian” pronunciation) under the single, yet complex, appellation “Serbo-Croatian/Croato- institutions, including was inin It variety linguisticthat contextthis 1967a philologicalof societies and and in republics’ toward federal especially the financial government. regard to responsibilities should sufficeit of period, the detail context political the of to this paper scope beyondthe isWhile it to say agreementwas undermined bycompeting nationalist trends emerging inYugoslavia. that this the and Croatia, BosniaandHerzegovina, ofMontenegro, Republics the Serbia, was a time markedReforms 1974 and Spring Croatian by increasing federalist of Socialistthe Republic Bosnia and Herzegovina. tension, Šipka, 425. ). This declaration stated that the Novi Sad Agreement had violated theprincipleshad violated Agreement that Novi Sad the stated declaration ). This activity. Among those activity.Among includes attributes role those important the played by maximum development of not only its economy, but alsoits cultural each of right the includes equality offull and our sovereignty national of principle nationsThe to protect all attributes of its national existence and Though Novi the Sad Agreementwas a major stepin achieving linguistic in unity srpskohrvatski srpskohrvatski srpsko-hrvatski Matica hrvatska / hrvatskosrpski ) was named) was as official the language inthe 1963 Constitution of ), though ultimately the unhyphenated version “Serbo- version unhyphenated the ultimately though ), Deklaricija onazivu ipoložajuhrvatskog književnog , the Croatian Philological Society, the Croatian ). With ). With publicationthe jointthis of orthographic 71 51 CEU eTD Collection which was subsequently ordered to be sent to the nearest furnace, leading to several leadingfurnace, to be to senttothenearest which subsequently ordered was 1967, 359. 72 Croatian asacontroversial aswell languages, Croatian hrvatska In 1971, Agreement. Novi Sad ended the intounilaterally agreement) the coerced signersthe of andleading proponents NoviSadAgreement,the nowclaimingbe to ( became known ( to as“Croatian Spring” that movement “Croatian rights” ageneral into morphed and organizations for student andyear, Withineducators hadbecome declaration the a public workers. point arallying schools,newspapers, public and political life, television and radio, aswell as by officials, secondthe first beingthatthe be demand implementedthrough usethe in Croatian of languages, literary Macedonian identifiedCroatian,and and Slovenian, asthe Serbian, amendedinclude the to principleall for national of languagesequality Yugoslavia,of part. The declaration concluded with two demands, the first being that the constitution be hegemony” language” life,of incommunal and economic unified “state was which the a by The declaration tendencies of“statism, the continued denouncing and unitarism, were heldin Zagreb after masovni pokret “Deklaracija nazivu o i jezika,”književnog hrvatskog Telegram položaju belonging to some other nation in its entirety. its in nation other some to belonging even or it variant to be linguistic a form showing a separate phenomena of named its ownname, using regardless of work done on philological uses, nation Croatian the that becauselanguage the of name national own one’s having it is an inalienable right of each nation that its language is published a series of books detailing the differences between the Serbian and Serbian between the differences detailing the books of aseries published ). This movementreached its apex in 1971 whenmass demonstrations Matica hrvatskaMatica , under the leadership of Ljudevit Jonke (one of hrvatski prolje 72 ü language e ) or simply “mass movement” “mass simply or ) orthographic manual,orthographic , March , March 17, Matica 52 CEU eTD Collection of Serbo-Croatian, and thus not a national language a national not thus and Serbo-Croatian, of language”literary wasconsidered byYugoslav authoritiesthe tobe “westernvariant” the jezik language” ( literary “Croatian in the declaring Croatia This resulted constitution wasratified linguistichigher each a giving autonomy. degreeof republic was written Muslim in a religious sense is written sense in areligious Muslim narodnosti ( nationality” of sense in the “Muslims group: sub-national a full to them “upgrading” state the with Muslims, the of a re-classification wesee 1971, full language toeachnation havenot would right applied Muslim to the In population. left “declareMuslim beenlanguage”would have community, as of asto a extension the would haveleftlinguistically Bosnia and,moredivided, importantly, the Bosnia’s languages andSerbian between theCroatian conceptual division this of The implications Departments of the various universities publicly condemned the Croatian “Declaration”. 1990],” in1990],” Jezik u Bosni i in Hercegovini [Language Bosnia andHerzegovina] Nationalities Papers28:1 Nationalities 75 Mønnesland, (Institut zaJezik: Sarajevo, 2005). 74 73 hrvatska of closure forced the and publishers of “counter-revolutionary” the arrests Hugh “ThePoulton, Muslim in Experience Balkan 1919-1991,”the States, Josip Baoti Greenburg,32. ) to be in official usage. The adjective “literary” was necessary, for the “Croatian for the necessary, was “literary” adjective The usage. be inofficial ) to Ultimately, inUltimately, of movementachievedthe adegree 1974, success, asa new federal In Bosnia and Herzegovina, both the state and the Language and Literature andLanguage the state the both andHerzegovina, In Bosnia , 73 ). This is symbolized with the capitalization of the initial letter, when a when letter, initial the of capitalization the with symbolized is This ). Musliman ü , “Književnojezi . 75 , (2000). pp., (2000). 54 þ ka Politka 1970-1990 [Literary ka Politka 1970-1990 PoliticsLanguage 1970- musliman , while a Muslim in the nationality sense in , while nationality a Muslim the per se , as it was subordinate in itwas subordinate , as Muslimani usmislu hrvatski književni , ed. Svein Matica 53 74 CEU eTD Collection declared be to official by law. In Bosnia, this wasmarked period by polemics in the official in constitution inthe 1990. In Serbia in 1991,the “Serbian” was language jezik ( language” literary “Croatian the (where Croatia of With secession the scholars. the of arguments followingthe that this had classification significantly become reified, asevidenced by the reclassification of the Muslim population as a full “nation” inorder accommodate is previous the created reclassification through to “language” in 1981. It is clear that from in languageof parallels a development theearlier Yugoslavia, development that itsbearin tomind Itisimportant that language” wascreated. “thewhich Bosnian THE CONTEMPORARY LANGUAGE PROJECT BOSNIAN izraz 77 Internacional Sobre oBilingüismo at conference the present ofSerbo-Croatian,” Disintegration 76 “Bosnian-Herzegoviniancircles the Expression” ( as ( “Serbocroatian-Croatoserbian” under appellation the “inter-variant” the created: was conception sociolinguistic Tolerance” and similar held symposiums duringin the crises, yetwhich another Bosnia-Herzegovina was to follow the conclusions of the “Symposium on Linguistic of decision The variant”. “eastern as the known being “Serbo-Croatian”, appellation status. Baoti Svein Mønnesland, “Emergining Literary andStandards Nationalism: The ) had been used since the constitution of “Croatian”languagebecame the 1974), of ) hadbeen the constitution used since ). 77 76 The final years of Yugoslavia were marked by a sharpshiftin linguistic politics. development duringof important the 1990’s, through the In thissection,go Iwill ü The standard developed inBelgradeand Novi underSad continued the , 459. srpskohrvatski-hrvatosrpski , 1109. bosansko-hercegova Actas doiSimposio ), referred to in linguistic in to referred ), hrvatski književni þ ki standardni 54 CEU eTD Collection population of andHerzegovina.Bosnia Theambiguity appellationthe of in Jahi [bošnja respectively).Jahi (theepicsliterature of of and Kosovoselected battle Renaissance the the Dubrovnik, of bases literary hadbeen different though Serbo-Croatian established,was forerunner to same dialectal base had been selected by both Vuk Karadži byboth been base had selected same dialectal language, aswellaccurately hadobserving thatcontinuity for been the preserved, Jahi What narodnom i književnom jeziku bosanskih Muslimana 359), 374.359), National and Literary Language of the Bosnian Muslims],” Pregled 79 Jezik: Sarajevo,2005),482. 78 Pregled language. media, where proposals being made and demands “Bosnian” of were for adeclaration the Single Standard to Three Standard Situation],” JezikuBosni Situation],” i Hercegovini toThreeStandard Single Standard Dževad Jahi Dževad Svein Mønnesland, “Odzajedni linguistically imprecise Štokavian dialect. Štokavian imprecise linguistically tothe which thename indicated, a languagethan that broader to area as well as applied was name This expressed character. Slavic was linguistic and ethnic tradition actual their their it, With oriental-linguistic the Muslims. the from among distance tradition longest the has it used; widely name […]The languageinvestigated was,however, Bosnian(Bosniak) Muslim folk poetry is althoughevident, it hasnotyet been sufficiently the of language the of contribution the and language, literary Croatian played an important role in the initial phasedefined folklore inscholarly papers asaNeo-Štokavian koine. Thekoine of the formation of the Serbo- was established, inter-dialect poetic form of of a time, in course the in which, area, epic-lyrical Neo-Štokavian apartof developeda broader as began folk and poetry Muslim forms of as in literary tradition. oral other aswell epicliterature, folk very lyrical and is tongue rich inthe preserved mother in their Muslims Bosnian the of creations literary of continuity The þ entitled “On the Vernacular and Literary Language of Language ( BosnianMuslims” the of “OntheVernacularand Literary entitled ki] 78 ü In 1990, Dževad Jahi In1990,Dževad ) was widely used, and not strictly for the vernacular of the Muslim does in this article is established a dialectal and literary base for Bosnian for base literary and dialectal a established is article in this does ü , “O narodnom i književnom jeziku bosanskih Muslimana [On the [On Muslimana bosanskih jeziku i književnom “O narodnom , ü further argues that the appellation “Bosnian (Bosniak)”( appellation further the argues that þ kog standardado kog trostandardne stiuacije [From a ü published an article in the Sarajevo-based magazine Sarajevo-based inthe anarticle published 79 ), in which he writes, ü and the Illyrians when the when Illyrians andthe , (May-June1990, , (Institut za bosanski ü 55 ’s O CEU eTD Collection tongue” ( tongue” and thus participants in participate parties were to left elections,the allowed question open the language, of for political thefirst taken since the time nationally language.oriented This census, were allowedofficial in census, taken can 1991, one see a dramaticin shift conceptualizationthe of the to fill inHerzegovina, surely resonated with Bosnia-Herzegovina’s forMuslim in population, the a black space regardinglanguage backtousage.” their “mother own name… In such itisa situation, understandable thatMuslims bring will the Bosnian their contain even not did which name a in advocating vigorous more be to Muslims the “then itrenounce muchcome expect Serbo-Croatian/Croato-Serbian, to would betoo to “mother tongues” of the Republic of asfollows: of “mother were represented tongues” Republic of the Bosnia-Herzegovina mothertheir tongue. Language” ( 81 80 ( Muslims” publication Jahi of for issue The following noted, year, sawthe this yearslater. 1991, resurface would where“Bosnian”argument, and“Bosniak” areseemingly interchangeable, be should Mønnesland, “Od zajedni Senahid Halilovi These publications, and the abandonment of “Serbo-Croatian” outside of “Serbo-Croatian”Theseof of Bosnia- andtheabandonment publications, outside maternji jezik Other……………... >1% Yugoslav…………. 5.5% 17.3% Croat……………... Serb………………. 31.3% Muslim………….... Jezik bosanskihmuslimana Bosanski jezik NATIONALITY ü ü , The Bosnian Language ’s complete book ’s completeon book “The topic,the Languageof Bosnian the 81 ). Of the Muslim population, roughly 90% selected “Bosnian” Muslim the 90%selected as ). Of population, roughly According the results of the 1991 census, the “nations” and 80 ). In Halilovi In ). þ kog,” 482. kog,” 43.7% ), aswell Senahid Halilovi ü ’s book, he states that if Serbs and Croats had Croats and if Serbs that states he book, ’s , (Sarajevo: Bosanski Krug, 15. 1991), Hrvatskosrpski……... Hrvatski……………... Srpski………………... Srpskohrvatski……… Bosanski…………….. MOTHER TONGUEMOTHER ü ’s “The Bosnian 13.5% 18.8% 26.6% 37.5% 1.4% 56 CEU eTD Collection ü 82 reads: which later, amonth less than ratified Montenegro), Serbiaand between union a loose is in Federal timeamendment (atthe reflected of Republic of constitution the Yugoslavia citizens that it did withchoice of officialestablishing pronunciation had less to do linkswith empowering This indicateSerbia historically been eastern of regions the would proper. confined to to the Serbiaspoken idiom of the proper. historically been hasIn nativeSrpska, not this pronunciation asit eastof has Drina, fact, the wording inRepublika ofof territory the pronunciation official asan was declared pronunciation the in haveaclearand Ekavian,each Ijekavian article, this regional Ekavian usage. Though is future deemedofficial pronunciations tonotethatthe legislation. important through It be regulated was to script Latin as the priority, given hadbeen script Cyrillic the Clearly, language: Serbianwas official Srpskawasdrafted, asthe established Constitution of Republika following two official entities of state Agreement.the In Dayton the 1992,when the declared evolved intoseparatists Srpska,whichlater founding of one the of Republika out. During the Bosnian war, theofficial of status languagethe was shifted when Status in Shifts and Publications Linguistic Wartime irili “ U Republicijeu službenoj upotrebi srpski jezik iekavskogijekavskog i izgovora þ no pismo,alatini language of language of Ekavianthe and Ijekavian pronunciations andtheCyrillic In FederalRepublicthe in of Yugoslavia is usage the official Serbian (Službeni Republikeglasnik Srpskebroj 3/92) mannerthe established by law. in and and script pronunciations and Cyrillicthe the Ekavian Latin script, In in Republic,the isofficial languageusage the Serbian of Ijekavian the In following 1992, declaration Bosnia-Herzegovina’s independence, warbroke of þ no pismona na 82 þ in odre ÿ en zakonom. ” 57 CEU eTD Collection Fishman: position issuethe language,toward beginning by of with a quote sociolinguist Joshua Islamic Islamic Inhis Isakovi terminology. introduction, those of Ottomanprimarily entries, of number Turkish exhaustive an includes affiliation), national their expressed (and thus Arabic and Persian) they how four incenturies of past(regardless by Muslims published the Bosnian origin, extensivelyleksike ubosanskomjeziku colored by sa ustavom izakonom. ijekavskog izgovora i 83 ( Language” Bosnian ofthe Words Characteristic “Dictionary of Bosnian. appellation the of recognition the izraz In the territory controlled by the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbo-Croatian ( “ U Saveznoj RepubliciJugoslavijiuslužbenoj jeupotrebi srpski jezik ekavskog I ) continued to bewas demanding agrowing movement inofficial continued However, to usage. ) objective, unemotional, scientific term is term scientific unemotional, objective, of concept the explain Our language morality, is our it not does and require any special to effort natural natural to theirrightmother tongue andits namein is degree the question, the when Thus, neighbors. their from experiences different time with cultural ina separate group society, acquired centuries-old Bosnian the as Muslims, The Bosnian status. public its changed circumstances political course of untildevelopment beginning ofthethe 20 itis butlanguagehad language. an The its objective parallel own Bosnian them, from derived not is it language, Croatian the or Serbian the either that withinframeworknot of created languageopinion.” the was TheBosnian term a is it time same the at that and opinion, a value carries ‘language’ often the is in indication term language’, itself that of an judgment, that it is a term indicative of a certain emotion or (Article 15,FRY Constitution, 1992) law. and Constitution is script inuse while script, with the Latin accordance official the In 1992, linguist,the author and folklorist AlijaIsakovi ü ” irili þ ). The dictionary, drawing from wide body of literary works ko pismo, alatini 83 the Bosnianlanguage þ ko pismo je u službenoj upotrebi uskladu necessary ü clearly his clearly ideological espouses . “The fact itself that an itself that fact . “The in relation ‘oneto kind generates th century, when century, Rje emotion and emotion þ nik krarkteristi nik ü published his published þ bh. 58 ne CEU eTD Collection of the nation, consequently language to the negation of the of negation the to language consequently nation, the of marked isnegation bylack of continuity. The his nation theconceptual that of category relationshiplanguage of in nation and the mindset, a whereconstructivist acknowledging having a arguments and Isakovi arguments arguments. previous other from the radically differs language that nation and between relationship the regarding (Svjetlost: Sarajevo,(Svjetlost: 1992),7-9. 84 ancientHowever, Isakovi ontologicaltimes. back to reality, dating non-negotiable a as of is conceived nation, Muslim Bosnian the case in this nation, define The rather thenation but thenation, not language language. defines the does the in that language, use “Croatian” to the right the “Declaration” concerning 1967 in used the arguments the This echoes of national-preservation. amatter itsas choice of the velar-fricative phoneme /x/), but by the useof makescharacteristic population Muslim the he note does (though linguistic criteria Thus, Isakovi Alija Isakovi terminology of the 20 linguisticlanguage thedisappearancefrom For, the Bosnian the of language. ,the Croatian Serbianlanguage,the the Bosnian language isexplained by sociolinguistically analogous the terms: Muslims and speak,basically, Montenegrins samelanguage, the then the Bosnian Croats, if Serbs, Namely, […] essential not is of difference using the Bosnian language… assimilatedbe or emigrate, out, die not will moment historical any at smallest, and by greatest the do–both peoples as allindependent languagespontaneously, otherits named has community geopolitical original its in which peoples.people games. Ofcourse,with its everything place.time, A finds […] proper Descendantssociology was not a biological process, but the consequence of political from Yugoslav 20 Muslims Bosnian disappearance of the the of ancient Bosnians are still right ü believes thatlanguages, todialects, as opposed are be classifiedto by not , not so much as to a language,a history.so much to to but, not as Isakovi ü , Dictionary of Characteristic Words of the Bosnian Language th century for linguistic not century did occur just as reasons, 84 natural right ü recognizes conceives of recognizes conceives nation the as of a nation to use the appellation national ü makes a key makes akey point th century language, a ü , views the 59 CEU eTD Collection critique of critique of Isakovi Serbo-Croatian, characteristic the of bytheevidenced disparagement hadheritage theliterary thus of beenneglected, Bosnian Muslims the agreements, in andstandardization keyplanning the Muslims themselves participation weredenied dialectal base had been of that Bosnianthe Muslims (Štokavian-Ijekavian), Bosnian Croatian” is in some way an Isakovi (Svjetlost: Sarajevo,(Svjetlost: 1992),15,25-27. 85 Isakovi consequence of political manipulation andbe something that to can right.be set Thus, Alija Isakovi ü ü was by published both Language Literary Serbo-Croatian/Croato-Serbian of volume Dictionary andexisted good trained linguists among the Muslims.Also,when six- the time, already languagecommonin Atthat there language. Bosnian our is of place the –the that language, Bosnian the of characteristics basic manual of manual orthographic joint the that strange not is it Thus manuals. orthographic in in making or subsequent or any 1960, of of manual orthographic the the reason not asinglewhy in Muslimparticipated Novi the Sad Agreement, wasthe excommunication, linguistic national and between correlation the inYugoslavia, situation social tradition […] The andoral Herzegovinian legalized thatin which, purifiedbeenhad form, given by Bosnian the… refinement. and softness warmth, its tongue, mother their of contradiction in heritage, literary considerable oftheirown up incontradiction brought Croatian), or Serbian (Serbo-Croatian/Croato-Serbian, language up linguisticallybrought in the unitarian conception of a common standard generations a declarativenumerous this way only. model In occasion, wasreducedto provincial, Thus odd. Vuk Karadži oflexis wasmarked hereonly and there, andproclaimed was unliterary, Muslims,almost (only entirely were included),omitted 1.8% andtheir characteristic especially in the past fifty years, have been represented Bosnian language interests, Vuk(Karadži language interests, Bosnian represented Although Literary at the Conference (of Vienna,nobody 1850) thus discredits “Serbo-Croatian” by pointing out that even though the selected the though even that out pointing by “Serbo-Croatian” discredits thus places himself in a position where he must show that the classification “Serbo- classification the that must show he where in aposition himself places ü , Dictionary of Characteristic Words of the Bosnian Language 85 Matica srpska Matica unjust Maticas and ü consequence of political manipulation: political of consequence ends his introduction endshisintroduction with followingthe statement: (1967-1976), Muslim (1967-1976), literary sources were Matica hrvatskaMatica ü himself was betrayed and, on wasbetrayed himself on and, this lexis completely ignores the of of Followingsuch works. his ü ) practically , 60 CEU eTD Collection Muslimana ujeziku “For Equality inLanguage” ( Muslims Bosnian the of Bosnian Muslimintellectualsto President letter issued Alija Izetbegovi open an appellation “Bosnian”. lexical inembrace variants these both theirliterary vernacular under and language the independence of language,for Bosnian the Bosnianthe Muslim nation will continue to which this language naturally iscommon will comprised inresult the was made for the constitution to be amended to read, “In the Republic of Bosnia- Isakovi However, 87 Sarajevo,(Svjetlost: 1992),27. 86 Isakovi languages”, defined ina ispurely sociolinguistic It sense. the languagecommon that However, Isakovi language of all Bosnians and of all Herzegovinians and religions nationalities.” saying language,isit the without what of that regardless called hasbeenthe today, linguistic and communicativeThus, Isakovi sense. Elsewhere, he states this quite explicitly: “It goes Ibid, 19. Alija Isakovi ü In December key of emerged1992, another development when hundredover one calls for to be enriched by the lexical wealth of the Bosnian Muslim tradition. Muslim Bosnian the of wealth lexical the by be enriched to for calls nation: their morality, their spirituality and their refuge. their and spirituality their morality, their nation: Muslim Bosnian the to been always has it what remain will – literary and abandoning the agreedstandard, Bosnian language –both the vernacular separated, become greatly languages in national these however, time, tradition,our common Thewith presentlanguage Dictionary is the first attempt to put things right and to enrich the – which wealth everybody thatnames according the Bosnian to his own language had to offer. If, ü is essentially thatasserting thereexistsis a language,incommon a purely ü , Dictionary of Characteristic Words of the Bosnian Language ü ü argues that within this single language are found different “national found within different languagethis single are arguesthat implies that any further divergence of the “national languages” of languages” “national of the divergence anyfurther implies that ), published in thenewspaper ), published Oslobo ÿ enje Za ravnopravnostBosanskih . In this letter, the demand the letter, this In . 86 , ü linguistic entitled 61 87 CEU eTD Collection ruling stated that the text of the constitution shouldbe written as follows: This February arulingSerbo-Croatian24, 1993. pronunciation and on Ijekavian with Bosnia-Herzegovina, led by led Izetbegovi Bosnia-Herzegovina, months was published around this after three attack. language literary and tradition Muslim embody Bosnian to the thought artifacts Thus,cultural political and the (1896). building itself,builtin theMoorish stylerevivalist during Kállaythe administration from destroyingmany Austro-Hungarian as well as the and Ottoman the era dating collection), destroying several publications,million books, and documents, manuscripts, Herzegovina University much Sarajevo’s alsohoused Oriental of the (which of and Bosnia of National Library Sarajevo shells on the incendiary fired units paramilitary can be found in the context of August25 of war.On the can befound inthe context isit, presently under attackand direct inneed of protection. Perhaps abetter explanation impression the Bosnian the and that literary Muslim language ashe conceives tradition, Though Isakovi letter. in this reflected as intellectuals Muslim Bosnian among generated consensus publishing of this dictionary would be insufficientexplanationan for highdegree the of lexicon drawn from centuries of documents, publications and books, Ifeel that the simple oriental-flavored with adistinct alanguage as “Bosnian” of reify classification the Muslims Oslobo in Language],” 88 pronunciation.” Ijekavian of language Serbian and Croatian, Bosnian, the is usage in official Herzegovina “Za Bosanskih ravnopravnost Muslimana ujeziku Equality [For Bosnianthe of Despite the increasing pressure from intellectuals and the media, the presidency presidency and themedia, from of intellectuals pressure increasing the Despite 88 ü ’s dictionary alist’s dictionary of does detail While ofIsakovi publication the ÿ were enje (Sarajevo) under direct attack The open letter toIzetbegovi letter open The attack direct under ü , reaffirmed the stance of the government toward thegovernment stanceof the , reaffirmed , Dec. 13,1992. ü historical ’s may havedone much dictionary to th through 27 through injustices, notleavedoes it th , Bosnian Serb 62 ü CEU eTD Collection longer wanted Bosnia-Herzegovina tobethe sole Bosnia-Herzegovina “Serbo- name longer country using the wanted bosanski, srpski,hrvatski.” ijekavskog izgovora njenih konstitutivnih narodakoji seimenuje jednimod tri naziva: 90 jezik ijekavskogizgovora.” hrvatosrpski 89 Izetbegovi When many aboutthis, havein that asked speculated Bosnia-Herzegovina people rhetoric.nationalist due to theas a increasing of languagehadbeendiscredited tide single thatstandard of conceptualization the standardliterary remained, a common andthough outside of hadcollapsed institutional carriers of “Serbo-Croatian” Bosnia-Herzegovina, Izetbegovi Alija under presidency, the isthat possibility One ways. inseveral interpreted be may “Serbo-Croatian” name the of rejection This official language inBosnia-Herzegovina. The new ruling readsas follows: presidency hadreaffirmedgovernment anew gave the the stance, its ruling concerning the after ayear Half short-lived. was Serbo- the advocating position language.this However, as official sole survive the thelanguage Herzegovina did philological by classifications promoted only them,in the Republic of Bosnia- the and parties political nationalist rival of empowerment the to succumbed Yugoslavia former the throughout language official an as status Serbo-Croatian’s as Thus, “ “ U RepubliciBosnii Hercegovini uslužbenoj upotrebi jestandardni književni jezik U RepubliciBosniiHercegovini uslužbenoj upotrebijesrpskohrvatski odnosno (Službeni (Službeni list, 14.4.93) pronunciation. of Ijekavian the language, asCroato-Serbian, Croatian known otherwise Serbo- is the usage in official Herzegovina, and of Bosnia In the Republic (Službeni (Službeni list, 1.9.93) Croatian. nations, whichisnamed using oneof names:Bosnian,three Serbian,and its constitutive language literary of standard Ijekavian of pronunciation the is the usage in official Herzegovina, and Bosnia of Republic the In ü ’s Party of Democratic Action (SDA), or even or Izetbegovi Action (SDA), Democratic ’s of Party 90 89 ü , had come to accept that to , hadcome ü himself, simply no simply himself, 63 CEU eTD Collection 91 jezik would lead to the sociolinguistic justifying explanation notBosnian language ( by sociolinguistically terms. ifmaintained, analogous the However, argument, this on sociolinguistic grounds,“Bosnian language” stating is the explained ( Language andTongue Literature” from “Serbo-Croatian/Croato-Serbian Language and Literature”, also called “Mother issuedCulture andchange Sports toall aproclamation to schools school all documents Bosniakthe in intellectuals of December 1992. by sentletter open the of demands the meeting roughly thus names, variety of by a called is it though is in language, factasingle there the that states clearly proposal the reasons, interpretation isin line Halilovi with Croatian” as there was no reference to Bosnian Muslim, in the appellation (this nation. Thiswasagainchanges Isakovi ( “Bosniak” the as beknown to henceforth was which nation, Muslim the of appellation the changed officially that ratified was amendment A constitutional language. and nation the between relationship the of conceptualization the for repercussions the ‘Bosnian, Serbian, Croatian language.’” study unit “Today an educational educators: we will Croatian andfurther andLiterature”, providedLanguage the following example for Mønnesland, “Od zajedni ), but), rather Bosniak the language ( Within weeks of the constitutional change, the Ministry of Ministry Education, Science, of the change, of weeks Within constitutional the In 1993, there was a very important developmentIn important wasavery 1993, there wouldthat have key þ kog,” 486. kog,” Maternji jezik iknjiževnost ü ’s 1991 statement, quoted above).’s 1991 quoted statement, Whatever the bošnja ü had argued on behalf hadarguedon language Bosnian the of 91 þ ki jezik from language,from our whichiscalled ). ), to “Bosnian, Serbian, “Bosnian, to ), bosanski bošnjak 64 ) CEU eTD Collection form of “language” (in which case the “correct” version would state that the official the that state would version “correct” casethe which “language” (in form of beingsuggested that the amendment singularcontained agrammatical error, use the of interpretations. Some possible suggested various who native speakers several consulted Bosnian and language”. is Croatian Thisambiguity not confinednon-native to speakers;I the“officialthat languages”“Bosnian aseither and language” the Croatian “the or definite articles are notused in the language(s), thus two possible translation are possible: by factthat isthe augmented This ambiguity “Bosnian”. missing from adjective the noun “language”noun ( While the constitution refers to “official languages” ( straightforward. so not is it that reveals reading a closer Croatian, and Bosnian called being languages, official intwo fact were there suggest that may While acasual reading Constitution of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina reads as follows: Concerningissue ofofficial languages the new in this political entity, 1994 the Ostali jezici se mogu koristiti kaosredstva komunikacije i nastave.” 92 the (namely Izetbegovi the between fighting in Agreement under ended of1994,whicheffectively created Washington the spring the entity apolitical andHerzegvonia, Bosnia of Federation created thenewly of control in areasunder the was created anewconstitution existstate, as afunctional ceased to theStandard of Pseudo-Separation and Federation The “ Službeni jezici Federacije su bosanskiihrvatski jezik. Službeno pismo jelatinica. (Službene novine Federacije BiH, 21.07.1994) be usedasmeans of communication and teaching. may languages Other alphabet. Latin isthe alphabet official The language. andthe Croatian Bosnian are of Federation the The officiallanguages Less than a year later, when the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina effectively when andHerzegovina later, Less than of Bosnia a year Republic the HVO jezik ) and abolished the separatist Croatian of Croatian Republic Herzeg-Bosnia. ) andabolishedtheseparatist ) is in the singular and follows the adjective “Croatian”, while it is it while “Croatian”, adjective the follows and singular in the is ) ü government and the Croat paramilitary paramilitary organizations Croat andthe government službeni jezici 92 ) in the plural, the 65 CEU eTD Collection Interestingly Interestingly enough, 1994also sawtherepublication 1890“Grammarthe of of the Vajzovi requirement havingslapdashbeen effort, publishedin tomeetin midstthe of order war the the of the governmentitwas a that admit Science, of Political Faculty Sarajevo’s of from University the Zvrko in Sarajevo (in fact, due to the wartime conditions, ( contemporary language “Grammar textbook, Bosnian Language” of Bosnian the see, this of sort semantic wrigglingin would constitutions. reappear post-war the view. Asweshall completely particular one to capitulating without ideological positions in the variousandappease subject to interpretations, thus to variousan attempt ambiguous, befashioned deliberately to but haphazardly,not rather issuewas explosive suspect forwording sure,I thatknow dealing with apotentially a keyamendmentsuch of Alija While betweenIzetbegovi only and Serbian. any Croatian the connection position of position Izetbegovi of formation of the Federation accompanies note importantthis is to status that changeinclassification and the of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and thus one must look at the 93 official the per se explicitly it Bosnian not as a“language”didCroatian recognize Serbian),though (and as recognizing“Bosnian” asoneof from being officialthe languages, split completely interpreted constitution the Others languages”). are“theBosnian languages and Croatian Gramatika bosanskog jezika Mønnesland, “Od zajedni . A thirdand when final interpretation suggested was “ItisI wastold, almost asif It should be noted that this same year saw the publication of the first of publication shouldsaw the the thisnoted that year same beIt ü and Zvrko were unable to meet one another while writing the grammar). whilewriting another the one meet were unableto and Zvrko languages are treated as aretreated ü ’s government vis-à-vis that of ’s vis-à-vis thatof government Tu þ kog”, 487. kog”, ). The authors of of The authors this). grammar, Hanka Vajzovi a singlelanguage called ‘Bosnian and Croatian’.” It ÿ man inCroatia, which rejected ü and Husein ü may 66 93 CEU eTD Collection authentic.” The placement of the languages in English alphabetical order extinguishes order inEnglish alphabetical languages of the The placement authentic.” drafted in“Bosnian, Croatian, English, andSerbianlanguages, each beingtext equally therein. Importantly, Article and document the contained to everything recognition international) consequently XI of the General Framework AgreementChristopher. states that it was The signatories of the Dayton Accord thereby gave official (and Serbia (Slobodan Miloševi (Slobodan Serbia 94 Tu whichof by as Croatia signed Accord, (Franjoreferred to Dayton the president was the “Generalthe Agreement Framework for Peacein Bosnia and Herzegovina”,commonly inStatus Shifts and Planning Linguistic Post-Dayton policy). Thus, an antique is pulled from the attic, and dusted off for all to see. more accurately,(or inAustro-Hungarianbefore the administration’s the1907shift atleast Yugoslav language appellation) the restoration of usedbefore (or the period the a beitas seen could necessity, of out wartime created seen asa“newlanguage” an independent “Bosnian” language. Thus, than rather Bosnianthe language simply being conceptualization continuity isimparted the of onto of republication 1890 grammar, this historical Ibelieve document, isimportant it more focus to on its timing. Through the and Herzegovina.” source an for in day, the not Bosnia history (important) languagethe of standardization out, “A less-informedminority readersthoughtthatthisof was theBosnian standard of Bosnian Language”, publishedunderKállay’s AsMønnesland administration. points Ibid. ÿ man), the president of (Alija presidentof man),the Izetbegovi Bosnia-Herzegovina On December 14, 1995 the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina ended with 1995 thewarin signingof the ended with On 14, Bosnia-Herzegovina December 94 While Mønnesland is right to point out that it is an important an is it that out point to right is Mønnesland While ü ), as well as by United States Secretary of State Warren Secretary of State States as well as by ), United ü ), the presidentof the ), 67 CEU eTD Collection word “language” “Bosnian”: word after identical to 1994versionthe in regard tolanguage, with sole the exception of adding the was Federation of Thenewentities. the both constitution for weredrafted constitutions withinBosnia-Herzegovina. This the territory the new in1998when entire of changed inrecognition it had standardization 1995 andthe had begun, yettoreceive recognition though though historical suggestsevidence itwas once in use, portions of population,the aswell wordswheresome it had gradually disappear, identified as characteristic by Isakovi the inclusion of the phoneme /x/ (e.g. not yetwith other, one or the to identical nearly were in Others Serbian. standard the being other the and in Croatian, standard the being one variants, possible two had words Some yet differentfrom Serbian. Others were thesameas Serbian, yet differentfrom Croatian. Croatian, same as werethe words Some standard. Bosnian new of the apart considered following year.Importantly, orthographic manual this provided alist of words “Orthographic ( Manual Bosnian the Language” of nominated SenahidHalilovi language. committee The todiscussorder the publication an of orthographic “new” manualfor the Bosnian wasformedin ascholarly committee for thefirstafterwards, Shortly time. recognition and fullstatus language with Bosnian the conferred signatories the language. Thus, “Bosnian, documentthe asasingle notionthe recognizes Serbian” Croatian, that Ironically, while the Bosnian language had received formal international formal received had language Bosnian the while Ironically, ü was inserted in wasinserted in words itwhich was actuallyby istorija but historija sahat Pravopis bosanskog jezika , not ). This pronunciation trait, pronunciation This ). ü , who published his published , who sat (“hour”). ) the ) 68 CEU eTD Collection the singular, yet removed the adjective “Serbian”: yetremoved adjective the singular, the largely maintainedof constitution, thetext their “language” wartime keeping the word in The Bosnian languagedrafters ofthe 1998Constitution status. Republika Srpska of deny in change inthe this suchawayasto Constitution of Republika Srpska was worded Republika Withit thisinis Srpska. mind, no amendment surprisethe that the to applyincludingto all“Serbian”areas, and not the speaking Federation,to was within Agreement. Dayton the to applied retroactively thatthedecision stated specifically decision languagenation wouldbe of Bosniak“Bosniakthe the Furthermore, language”. the the name of Serbian, the proper in standard, ruled that Committee the nation, Bosniak in citing addition to the 1993legal changein the appellation nation Muslim the of the to language sameappellation, the nation hasa of each that arguments citing sociolinguistic ü 97 96 latinica. Ostalise jezici mogu koristiti kaosredstva komunikacijeinastave.” 95 Serbian Language ( look atus firsta decision by for Belgrade-based the Committee Standardization the of the irili “ Odbor zastandardazijajezika. srpskog Decision 1 (16.2.1998) “ U RepubliciSrpskojjeu službenoj upotrebi jezik ijekavskog iekavskog izgovorai Službeni su jeziciFederacije bosanskijezikihrvatski jezik.Službeno je pismo þ no pismo,alatini (1998 Constitution of 7) Republika Srpska,Art. manner bylaw. established Ekavian pronunciationIn Republika inSrpska, official usage is languageof the and Ijekavian and the Cyrillic script, and the Latin script in the Before looking constitutional atthe changefor theentity Republika letof Srpska, (1998 Constitution of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Art. I.6) used as a means of communication and teaching. Croatian language.is The script Latin Other languages official. may be The officiallanguages Federation Bosnianlanguage of the are the and 96 Thus, the official recognition of both Bosnians language,internationally Odbor za standardizaciju srpskoh jezika þ no pismona na 97 þ in odre ÿ en zakonom.” 95 ). On February ). OnFebruary 16, 1998, 69 CEU eTD Collection Analysis of More Recent Documents of the Council of Europe and UNESCO”. – Communities in Multi-national Practice and BetweenTheory Rights “Linguistic Lati includingrelationship betweenlanguageand the nation, as such papers Džemaludin the covered explicity papers several Inparticular perspectives. of variety a widefrom approached language the conference in this delivered whom Thepapers are Bosniaks). conference linguists included from the top every university inall the Federation (not of discuss the development symposiumtogether scholarsBosnia brought from throughout Herzegovinato and of the Bosnian Sports. and Culture, Education, Science, Ministry of Federal andbythe located), language. Importantly, the participants of this književnost ( for LanguageandLiterature Institute by Sarajevo-based the 2000). 99 za jezik uSarajevu,7. 1999), 98 ( Bosnian Language” Ijekavian). fit not“Bosnian”, itdoes base of dialectal as the language(i.e., strictly Bosnian the as understood “Serbian”“Serbo-Croatian”,beingit or butbe could conceived of as not Ijekavian and Ekavian maylanguagemay pronuncation. This notunnamed be or linguisticreasserted unitarity proclamation through the both languageof a single with Thus, constitution the removal the appellation, through the of Republika Srpska of Ibrahim Ibrahim ü ’s “How to Avoid Linguistic Nationalism” and Marina Katni Marina and Nationalism” AvoidLinguistic to “How ’s In September 1998,akeylinguistic planning conference, the “Symposium on the ý ý ), the government of the canton of Una-Sana (the canton in which Biha edi edi ü ü , ed, Simposium on the Bosnian Language, , ed.Simpozij jeziku:o bosanskom Zabornik radova Simpozij obosanskom jeziku ), was held in the city of Biha of city in the held was ), (Sarajevo: Institut za jezik, za Institut (Sarajevo: , (Sarajevo, Institut Institut za jezik i ü -Bakarši 99 ü , jointly , 98 This ü ü is 70 ’s CEU eTD Collection 100 included declaration the the following: newspapers,for publiclydeclaring the support Bosnian language. The seven of points invarious issued declaration, anddirectors) authors, published apublic poets, upon, more than leadingsixty intellectuals Bosniak (including leading linguists, Bosniak ultimatelyfactors led tothe amending both entities’ of constitutions onApril 19, 2002. ensure linguistic equality among thecitizens of all constituentthree nations. These in 2002stating constitutions that the ofboth beentities amended neededto to inorder Office issued of byWolfgang adeclaration High presided Petritsch,the Representative, both avoid discrimination.entitiesthroughout ethnic to in order have needed status thatall to official were unconstitutional grounds languages on the entities both of in constitutions the articles above-mentioned the that debate, protracted Change Status Constitutional 1998 the of Aftermath Ibid, 489 3. 2. 1. Croatian and Bosniaks Bosnian. Bosniaks and Croatian called Croats speaking of Serbian, languageSerbs havealways the Slavic Central Slavic Diasystem South majority– whichforms the South the of linguisticspecific withinlanguages standardized the originated on grounds the of the Regardless community languages. – weof takesimilar literature andwritten published inliterature in Slavonic and other it that publicspeeches,Bosniak and documents, oral andlegal governance or alldifferenthas, oninnumerable beenconfirmed occasions, filesof within various national in existence medieval the of andthe which Bosnia times Herzegovina, and currentsof opinionstheir language, the continuity of which can be traced all the way back to By way of usage of the term Bosnian language, Bosniaks trace the identity are about as ittheirs.take appellation, that with the common is languageall The Bosnian language andthose who, Bosniaks of of the or the be decided wereto entities two the for constitutions before the amonth Less than 2000, theConstitutionalOn August of 19, court ruled,Bosnia-Herzegovina a after 100 Furthermore, the 71 CEU eTD Collection 101 read: was to officially Federation changed chooses, and the right to not have an appellation imposed on it. it appellation the of thenation use the is right the outlined “appellation”. Specifically “language” between“nation”, relationship each the arguments, regarding one linguistic and sociolinguistic complex of acombination declaration in this see We srpski jezik.” “ 7. 6. 5. 4. Službeni jezici Federacije Bosne i Hercergovine su:bosanskijezik,hrvatskijeziki BosneiHercergovine Službeni jeziciFederacije better understandingbetter andmutual respect. enable will which intercessions cultural and research linguistic welcome and abroad, and Herzegovina and Bosnia in nations other of rights equal Bosniaksthe name, encourage ‘rooted’ nation, historical, the among and its by language their call to right legitimate the emphasizing While hasn’t prevailed, as has the denial the Bosniak national identity. consequence of Serbian andwhich Croatian has survivedpaternalism, but term language,of Bosnian the is representpoliticizing, which the of instead Bosniaks, historically the andin confirmed accepted practice impose languageupon the theBosniakappellation on The tothe attempts Herzegovina. in unitarization and theunification areaof the Bosnia or tendency toward context, that using the namethe Bosnian language doesnotinclude In any them. to belong doesn’t that something adopt they do nor anybody, of Bosniaks inBosnia andHerzegovina donotjeopardize andabroad rights By onthe persisting usage of historicalthe nameof theirlanguage, the context. national/folk in the Bosniaks the among term usage the of the of authenticity the challenge not do context regional the within the name inwhich was thecaseincertainperiodsalong manipulating with past, of the BosniakManipulations of term the Bosnianthe language for political purposes – nation – as well as the usage of the syntagm (AmendmentXXIX, April 19, 2002) Bosnian language, the Croatian language and the Serbian language. The languages of official of Bosnia-Herzegovina Federation the are:the When the constitutions were amended weeks later, the constitution of the 101 and 72 CEU eTD Collection Rije is in foundstandard intheweeklies and appellation, manual. both Croatian, weeklies 103 jezik hrvatskog naroda.” Haworth Press,Haworth 2000),41-82. Yugoslavia's Successor States 102 various orthographic rules. notadhering,newspapers asadhering, identifies or usedinvarious thestandards to correspond. Inherof assessment inBosnia publishing Crayne Janet and Herzegovina, standards ideological andthe leanings, demonstrate clearly newspapers Various levels of education (most important for this study) require more elaboration. highest the particularly while others, straightforward, them arerather of Some language. Carriers ofInstitutional Review demands made by Bosniakthe intellectuals not toimpose an appellation. Interestingly enough,it is the constitution of Republika Srpska that is accordance with the asfollows: reads amendment crafted skillfully The appellations. withhold of recognition language,of status the Bosnian the onceagainbyskirting the to continuing simultaneously while nations constituent three all of citizens all to equality ensure in to linguistic In suchaway as Srpska,the constitution wasamended Republika “ Janet Crayne, “Publishing in Bosnia and Hercegovina,” in in Janet Crayne, Publishing “Publishing inBosnia andHercegovina,” þ Službeni jezici RepublikeSrpske su: naroda,jezikbošnja jeziksrpskog and Concerning mass media, the standards and appellations are fairly straightforward, arefairly Concerning andappellations media, mass the standards the of carriers institutional key several over go briefly will I section, next this In April(AmendmentLXXI, 19, 2002) nation. language languageof nation, nation Croat the Bosniak the the and of the The officiallanguages are:the of Republika Srpska Serb languagethe of Dani Horizont 102 , Liljan, , . Serbian, following the Evakian standard and Cyrillic script, is found Azra 103 , and , Concerning Bosnian, dailynewspaper the , eds. Michael Biggins and(NewYork: Crayne Janet , eds.MichaelBiggins Bošnjak adhere closely to Halilovi closelyto adhere ü Dnevni Avaz Dnevni ’s orthographic þ kog narodai Hrvatska and 73 CEU eTD Collection itself being standardthe Croatian ( word Srpska’s University Banja of Luka ( Republika bythesamename. offeringa degree Literature”, “Bosnian Languageand same. The University of Mostar ( ofMostar University The same. with itsof “Serbian Department again andLanguage Literature”, offering adegreeinthe Tuzlafascinating The University ( of results. dominant label. mixeda inschools andstudents languages, under are often town forhas all three schools choice of orthographic manuals and grammars is left up to the cantons. Clearly,notevery effect of thisThe language. own its in education have has to allowed nation each largely with cantons individual been the segregationby levels, the lowest the they are organized at education the day Concerning Cyrillic. of the schools alongstation “ethnic alternates lines”. scripts Republic the script, Latin uses Federation station only while the as a However, whole. The daily, so one day the script as for station theRepublic does the “inter-variant”, in pre-war the broadcasts Federation are solely Latin andRepublika in Srpskabroadcasts Serbian, usingEkavian pronunciation. Theforthe station the following for the Thestation divisions. based political the along are primary three the but Croatian,various Serbian”.Concerning independent television, and local channels exist, “Bosnian, of “BHS”, abbreviation an appellation the linguistic using tolerance”, variant any “inter-adhere manual, following pre-war the to orthographic essentially particular Oslobo indaily the ÿ A survey of higher the educational institutions of yields Bosnia-Herzegovina enje and Glas Srpske Glas Ve þ ernje Novine and the weekly Sveu , which are aimed at the population as a whole, do not do asawhole, population the at areaimed , which Universitet uBanjojLuci þ ilišta uMostaru Sveu þ Reporter Universitet u Tuzli ilišta , not . The “non-nationalist” papers “non-nationalist” The . ), with the name of the university Universitet ) is equally straightforward, ) has a Department of ) clearly follows the follows clearly ) 74 CEU eTD Collection dealing with phonetics and phonology, morphology, syntax, and semantics, and further and semantics, and syntax, morphology, phonology, and phonetics with dealing Croatian, Serbian Language” ( Language” Croatian, Serbian departmentoffers, its according to list, course four levels “Contemporary of Bosnian, Herzegovina” ( Herzegovina” of Nation(s) the Literature Languageand Croatian, Serbian Serbian Serbian Language” ( Croatian, “Bosnian, of aDepartment has Philosophy of Faculty interesting. The most the ( Literature” and “BHS Language have a Faculty of Philosophy, though the Faculty of Pedagogy does have a Department of 106 translations. both provided have I “nation”, Bosnian-Herzegovinian a common concept of the orsubvert endorse to as not plural, and thus translating the word as “nation” or “nations” depends on the context. So ( further,itgone elevating toafell-fledged under science name the “Croatology” Yugoslav, Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, Muslim,Franciscan, and Jewish. well Ottoman,as Hapsburg,and Yugoslav including identifiederas, literature as from modern era as the both literature Bosnia-Herzegovinian covering courses, literature grammars and orthographicmodern manuals (no Serbian included),grammars are and Serbo-Croatian Croatian, Bosnian, and various covering courses, language include Sarajevo, Odsjek za bosanski,hrvatski, srpskijezik,(2004), 4. 105 ( seem extreme, it is important to bear in mind that Zagreb’s School of 104 of “Croatistics” ( literature within Department the andlanguage onCroatian offeringsame pattern, courses kroatologija Hrvatski Studiji The word While elevating the study of Croatian language and literature to a field of its own may Nastavni planiprogram: škola2004/2005 The curricula at the University of Sarajevo ( ). naroda bosanski, hrvatski, srpski jezik i književnostbosanski, srpskijezik narodaBiH hrvatski, ), founded by fiat under war-time Croatian president Franjo Tu kroatistika could is the genitive of “nation” ( Bosanski, Hrvatski, Srpski Jezik Srpski Hrvatski, Bosanski, ). 104 The of University Zenica ( Savremeni bosanski, hrvatski, srpski jezik srpski hrvatski, bosanski, Savremeni BHS JezikiKnjiževnost , Universtitet u Sarajevu, Filozoski Fakultet Universitet uSarajevu narod ), offering adegreein ), “Bosnian, Universitet uZenici ), in offerings whichcourse ), ) in both the singular and the and singular the in both ) 105 of Bosnia and ), ) are perhaps respectively ÿ ) does not does ) ). man, has 106 The 75 CEU eTD Collection winningIvo Andri author atheist). an and aSerb be both to himself declared family, being a Croat of Muslim faith) Muslim of Croat a being Included among these ‘Bosniaks’ areSafvet-beg Bašagi includes literature from Middlethe Agesin works by addition to Bosniak authors. (štokavski) jezik). (štokavski) ( language” ‘Bosnian’ (Štokavian) Bosnian Franciscans, as well as studying “Bartol Kaši by from those and Croatia aretostudy works Literature” “Croatian in course the enrolled ( Literature” ( Literature” “Bosniak underthenames sections of course) cases,a single separate into (or,in literature courses, separate courses they Concerning the are divided some are simply named “Contemporary ( are simply namedLanguage” Bosnian “Contemporary descriptions foundthemselves, in same the levelpublication, third the and fourth courses (Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern UP, 1998), xiii. 113 112 111 110 109 108 107 ( in courses offers Language” “Standardthe of Bosnian,Croatian, Culture the Serbian and Bošnja Norma ikulturabosanskog, hrvatskog, srpskog jezika Meša Selimovi Banac, 365. Ibid, 46. Ibid, 50. Ibid, 2. Ibid,75. 58, Ibid, 2-4. þ ka književnost Srpska književnost ü 110 , Death and the Dervish The course description for “Bosniak Literature” reveals that it revealsthat “Bosniak Literature” for description The course ), “” ( Literature” “Croatian ), ü (who was (who born in Bosnia andbaptized asa Roman Catholic, ). 112 109 and Meša Selimovi Alook at the course descriptions reveals that students Bartol Kaši , trans. Bogdan Raki ü injegovooduševljenljeza ‘bosanski’ Hrvatska Književnost ü (who, though born to a Muslim ü ). 113 ü and his and enthusiasm for the savremeni bosanski jezik 107 (who identified himself as The works of Nobel Prize However, in course the However, ü and Stephan M. Dickey, ), and“Serbian ). 111 108 76 CEU eTD Collection replied: three-person rotatingKomši three-person presidency. interview with Željko Komši Željko interview with performing 115 114 isnations, pressureto tremendous there these of one with, identified is or with, identifies one when Thus, nation. particular language asits (aswell standardassociated lexicon)isconceptually linked and a with each Importantly, and standards. classification due divergingto the official engagement ahighdegreeof involves reflexive lexicon, aboveall,appellation, choice perhaps of in inCurrently, the former Bosnia Yugoslav particularly countries, the and Herzegovina, Going? Still Project Is the Conclusion writers) greatest Serbia’s and dialectandnonetheless is Štokavian-Ekavian adopted the thushailedas of one to use Chicago style citation on a note left on the refrigerator. In fact, I would feel pressure likewords “reflexive inengagement” a conversationprivate mymother,with norwould I use lexic