Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a297f704d9614bba

Jump to content

Talk:Novi Sad Agreement

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 11 years ago by GregorB

The line, "Ironically the agreement also stated that the future language should develop naturally, although it was being forged by the force of political will and pressure from both dialects." I fear this is original research, or commentary from the original editor. All languages change with time and no "forging by force" ever stopped French or Spanish changing yet their academies have been around centuries. Whether you have a language like English, demotic, or French, with an academy for an authority, nobody can prevent changes but concerning Serbo-Croatian, the mixed distribution of all the nations covered by that term meant that as one region changes its dialect, it takes with it all that speak it locally regardless of ethnicity and all this independently of one's own nationals hundreds of kilometres away. The idea that Serbian and Croatian could move away from each other when both within a Serbo-Croat scope can only have been admitting that internal scholars with influence over their nation held linguistic power and if so, no attempts to standardize a centralized tongue would have emerged, ie. no Serbo-Croat. Staro Gusle (talk) 04:14, 30 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Agree with the thrust of your remark: at any rate, the quoted line has to have a source. GregorB (talk) 11:53, 22 December 2014 (UTC)Reply