Changes

''Robert Greenberg, the foremost English-language scholar on South Slav languages, believes the root of the language polemic lies in the Vienna agreement of 1850, which “reversed several centuries of natural Abstand developments for the languages of Orthodox Southern Slavs and Catholic Southern Slavs.” (Greenberg 2004, 23) Croatians and Serbians came to the negotiating table with differing experiences. Serbian linguists were standardizing a single dialect of rural speech and breaking with the archaic Slaveno-Serbian heritage of the eighteenth century “Serbian enlightenment.” Early [[Croatia|Croat]] nationalists proposed a standard language based on a widely spoken dialect linked with the literature of the Croatian Renaissance. With an eye towards South Slav unity they also encouraged liberal borrowing from various dialects (Greenberg 2004, 24-26). This basic difference in approach created conflicts throughout the history of the South Slav movement and the Yugoslav state (Greenberg 2004, 48).'' }}</ref>. This is reflected in its later labeling of the language as Illyrian, Croatian, Croatian-Serbo and the Serbo-Croatian, BCS and etc. This was a fundamental mistake made when political extremist ideology influenced decision-making regarding language and culture. It was an attempt at imitating Western imperial empire building egotism (a super Southern Slav State), which failed. The idea was to merge elements of Croatian and Serbian language into one so a greater unified Super Southern Slavic state can have one language, of course this was at the detriment of other cultures. Old Croatian was rejected for this future super state (Old Croatian is now a nearly extinct and is referred to as a dialect, it's called Chakavian).  

''Robert Greenberg, the foremost English-language scholar on South Slav languages, believes the root of the language polemic lies in the Vienna agreement of 1850, which “reversed several centuries of natural Abstand developments for the languages of Orthodox Southern Slavs and Catholic Southern Slavs.” (Greenberg 2004, 23) Croatians and Serbians came to the negotiating table with differing experiences. Serbian linguists were standardizing a single dialect of rural speech and breaking with the archaic Slaveno-Serbian heritage of the eighteenth century “Serbian enlightenment.” Early [[Croatia|Croat]] nationalists proposed a standard language based on a widely spoken dialect linked with the literature of the Croatian Renaissance. With an eye towards South Slav unity they also encouraged liberal borrowing from various dialects (Greenberg 2004, 24-26). This basic difference in approach created conflicts throughout the history of the South Slav movement and the Yugoslav state (Greenberg 2004, 48).'' }}</ref>. This is reflected in its later labeling of the language as Illyrian, Croatian, Croatian-Serbo and the Serbo-Croatian, BCS and etc. This was a fundamental mistake made when political extremist ideology influenced decision-making regarding language and culture. It was an attempt at imitating Western imperial empire building egotism (a super Southern Slav State), which failed. The idea was to merge elements of Croatian and Serbian language into one so a greater unified Super Southern Slavic state can have one language, of course this was at the detriment of other cultures. Old Croatian was rejected for this future super state (Old Croatian is now a nearly extinct and is referred to as a dialect, it's called Chakavian).  

   

   

'''Cultural Assimilation of the Republic of Ragusa's History'''

*  '''Gianfrancesco Gondola''' (1589 -1638) a Ragusan Baroque poet from '''Republic of Ragusa''' -  '' now has become a ...........  ''  

One of these was the Slavic poem [http://books.google.com/books?id=J8coAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false Osman]. Interestingly, in a 1826 publication his name was written ''Giva Gundulichja'' and in 1967 his work was referred to as: {{quote|  

 

 

 

 

 

Ivan Gundulic (Gondola) wrote many works in Italian and Croatian (previously referred to as Slavic). One of these was the Slavic poem [http://books.google.com/books?id=J8coAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false Osman]. Interestingly, in a 1826 publication his name was written ''Giva Gundulichja'' and in 1967 his work was referred to as: {{quote|  

''"The works of the greatest poet of early Yugoslav literature, Ivan Gundulić"'' }} The quote is taken from the book ''Dubrovnik'' by Barisa Krekic.<ref> ''Dubrovnik'' by Bariša Krekić  ''"The works of the greatest poet of early Yugoslav literature, Ivan Gundulic, 1589 — 1638, are the best testimony to this. His epic "Osman" ranks among the greatest masterpieces of early Slavic literature, and also among the most ..."''</ref>

''"The works of the greatest poet of early Yugoslav literature, Ivan Gundulić"'' }} The quote is taken from the book ''Dubrovnik'' by Barisa Krekic.<ref> ''Dubrovnik'' by Bariša Krekić  ''"The works of the greatest poet of early Yugoslav literature, Ivan Gundulic, 1589 — 1638, are the best testimony to this. His epic "Osman" ranks among the greatest masterpieces of early Slavic literature, and also among the most ..."''</ref>

Additionally Italian and Serbian communities both try to claim Republic of Ragusa-Dubrovnik's cultural history.

The terms around the word 'Dubrovnik' was most probably started of as a reference to the first Slav citizens of City State of Ragusa who where Croatians (Dubrovnik is a Croatian word, it's etymology comes from 'oak'. Might have been a reference of them coming from the forest). Later it became the cities second name then the official modern name which was just after World War One.

== See also==

== See also==