File talk:Serbo croatian language2005.png

One of references for this map is:
www.dzs.hr
This is version in English.
Croatia - Central Bureau of Statistics Population by mother tongue by towns/municipalities, census 2001
4,265,081 - Croatian language
     44,629 - Serbian language
       4,961 - "Serbian-Croatian language"
       2,054 - "Croatian-Serbian language"
Therefore, speakers of "Serbo-Croatian language" aren't the majority in Croatia. There's no part of Croatia in which the speakers of "Serbian-Croatian" are majority.
Therefore, the map's not correct at all. Kubura (talk) 02:06, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

This map does not represent census results, but census results + opinion of many linguists who are still claiming that Serbo-Croatian is one single language (or you deny that they are claiming that?). In such light, all Croatian citizens who in census declared Croatian, Serbian, Serbo-Croatian or Croato-Serbian are counted here as speakers of Serbo-Croatian. In reference list I quoted both: sources that are containing census results and sources that are containing opinions of some respectable linguists who claiming that Serbo-Croatian is one single language. I also uploaded another map named "Serbo croatian languages 2006", which is representing another opinion that Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, etc are separate languages. I do not see why there would be a problem that both files are existing here since both are representing opposite views about the subject. PANONIAN (talk) 17:00, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

By the way, among numerous sources that are claiming that Serbo-Croatian is one single language, I will show you this linguistic map from Encyclopaedia Britannica published in 2009 which show Serbo-Croatian as main language spoken in Croatia, Serbia, etc: http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/98/1998-050-9C81C4F4.gif - If you think that such view is wrong then you should speak with editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica and with many respectable linguists about this issue and if you convince them that their view is wrong then we can speak about accuracy of this map. At the present momment, this map only represent part of a common knowledge and widely accepted scientific views and as such it is accurate and useful for readers of Wikipedia. PANONIAN (talk) 17:08, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

"Widely accepted" "scientific views"?
Encyclopaedia Britannica doesn't represent the scientific view, but the official policy of United Kingdom, nothing more.
Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian and Montenegrin together under the roof of "Serbo-Croatian". On the other hand, they don't follow the same rule for other closely related languages: Bulgarian and Macedonian, Czech and Slovakian, Danish, Norwegian and Swedish. Are they more different? They didn't mention Serbian Torlakian and Bulgarian. They aren't under the same roof, as far as I see. Same goes with Serbian Torlakian and Macedonian.
What's their mapping of Urdu and Hindi?
On the other hand, if You cite Encyclopaedia Britannica, even that Encyclopaedia is not consistent within itself:
The article The emergence of the individual Slavic languages. See how many times "Serbo-Croatian" appears "together", and how many times "Croatian" appears solely. Are we missing something?
See this (in)consistency: "In all, some 20 million people use Serbo-Croatian (the present-day Croatian, Bosnian, or Serbian standard languages(plural!)".
"Suknja is ‘skirt’ in Serbo-Croatian, ‘coat’ in Slovene. The month listopad is October in Croatian, November in Polish and Czech."
See this funny part: " A third main group of Serbo-Croatian dialects, spoken in northwestern Croatia, uses kaj rather than što or ča and is therefore called Kajkavian". Kajkavian Serbs, would you believe that?
"The Central Macedonian dialect is closer to Bulgarian, while the Northern dialect shares some features with the Serbo-Croatian language." "The Western subgroup of South Slavic includes the dialects of Serbo-Croatian, among them those of the Prizren-Timok group, which are close to some North Macedonian and West Bulgarian dialects." And that way is Surdulica closer to Čakovec and Komiža than to Kriva Palanka and Ćustendil.
"The literary Serbo-Croatian language was formed in the first half of the 19th century on the basis of the Shtokavian dialects that extend..." Wrong. Croatian language had its own (evolutionary!) development path, Serbian language had its own development path, but with the revolutionary change with Vuk Stefanović Karadžić. These two languages came to some similar/same solutions via different paths. The Vienna Agreement was signed by few, not all, and the signers from both sides didn't follow the "agreed" parts. Not to mention non-signers.
"Several features are common to the Moravian and Bohemian varieties of the Old Church Slavonic language, to the Slovene (Pannonian) variant reflected in the Freising fragments (late 10th century), and to the Croatian Old Church Slavonic tradition that is attested from the 12th century, as well as to the Serbian tradition.".
"From these local variants of Old Church Slavonic ..., one should distinguish the later local Church Slavonic languages (note:plural!) (Russian, with its variants; Middle Bulgarian; Serbian, which in the 18th century was replaced in Serbia by the Russian variant; Croatian; and the Romanian variant of Church Slavonic...From the linguistic point of view, these later Church Slavonic literary languages(note: plural!) ".
"The only exception was the renaissance of Croatian Church Slavonic ...".
"In the 16th century in Dalmatia...a rich poetic literature in Croatian.".
There you see. Even Britannica speaks about separate Croatian language, before 1918 and 1991.
"Since the breakup of the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia, all the Slavic languages have acquired the status of the main language of an independent state." That was even before. Czechoslovakia had Czech and Slovak as official, USSR had Russian as federal official, other Republics had respective languages as official (see [1]) Socialist Yugoslavia had that since the decisions of AVNOJ ("decisions must be written in 4 languages: Croatian, Slovenian, Serbian and Macedonian"); Bosnian and Montenegrin were not recognised. Remember the banknotes ([2])? If you like it, even former Austria-Hungary distinguished Croatian language and Serbian language [3].
I'd like to hear the opinion of the Slavists about this one: "In approximately ad 1000 all Slavic languages were so similar to one another that such interaction was possible."
Though, this is the one of parts that are correct: "The Slavic languages are an unusually numerous yet close-knit subgroup".
About the pictures on Britannica: see the source of those pictures:
"Help Britannica illustrate this topic/article. View Submission Guidelines[4]. Submit an image. Submit a video." All those citings depend on the source. (Any article submitted to Britannica must be accompanied by a list of authoritative sources consulted during the writing of the article). And sources differ significantly. Kubura (talk) 03:38, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but what is your point? I am well aware of opinions of some Croatian linguists that Croatian and Serbian are so different, but they totally fail to explain how that can be that I, as speaker of Serbian, could have 100% understanding of Croatian. Scientific facts are clear - it is same language with 4 official names and that cannot be disputed by any serious scientific work. I listed references used for this map and it is made as a reflection of scientific facts, thus, this is certainly not a place where some personal frustrations of some nationalists should be healed. Anyway, I also created another map where opinion about "different" languages is illustrated as well, so I really do not understand what problem you have with existence of this one. This is not place for censorship and brainwashing and if something represent a valid scientific view (and this map certainly do) then it deserve to be here. That of course, does not deny that other maps which are representing other views should not exist. If people do not think like you, you cannot just force them to shut up. In another words, if you have problem with a view presented in this map then you should draw another map where Croatian language only will be presented and then you should propose to other users that your map should be used in articles about Croatian language. It is simple as that. PANONIAN (talk) 08:54, 3 October 2010 (UTC)