Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Montenegrin 5

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
main page Request for a new language edition: Wikipedia Montenegrin 5
submitted verification final decision
Crystal Clear mimetype file temporary.png Discuss the creation of this language project on this page. Votes will be ignored when judging the proposal. Please provide arguments or reasons and be prepared to defend them (see the Language proposal policy).

The language committee needs to verify the language is eligible to be approved.

  • Check that the project does not already exist (see list).
  • Obtain an ISO 639 code
  • Ensure the requested language is sufficiently unique that it could not exist on a more general wiki.
  • Ensure that there are a sufficient number of native editors of that language to merit an edition in that language.

This proposal is on hold:

On hold. Code is now valid, but LangCom is still discussing eligibility of the project (see #Second discussion below]]).
That said, a sufficiently active and robust test project must be built in Incubator before any test in Montenegrin would approved for creation as an independent wiki. So please contribute to that test at incubator:Wp/cnr. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:55, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
  • The community needs to develop an active test project; it must remain active until approval (automated statistics, recent changes). It is generally considered active if the analysis lists at least three active, not-grayed-out editors listed in the sections for the previous few months.
  • The community needs to complete required MediaWiki interface translations in that language (about localization, translatewiki, check completion).
  • The community needs to discuss and complete the settings table below:
What Value Example / Explanation
Language code cnr (SILEthnologue) A valid ISO 639-1 or 639-3 language code, like "fr", "de", "nso", ...
Language name Montenegrin Language name in English
Language name Crnogorski Language name in your language. This will appear in the language list on Special:Preferences, in the interwiki sidebar on other wikis, ...
Language Wikidata item Q8821 - item has currently the following values:
  • en label = Montenegrin
  • native label (P1705) =
  • instance/subclass (P31/P279) = language / Serbo-Croatian
  • Wikimedia language code (P424) =
  • writing system (P282) = Montenegrin alphabet, Gaj's Latin alphabet
  • number of speakers (P1098) = 232,600

Item about the language at Wikidata. It would normally include the Wikimedia language code, name of the language, etc. Please complete at Wikidata if needed.
Community Ookuninusi (N), Pop Milo Jovovic (N), Ego and his own (N), Savić Rašović (P), Markus cg1 (N), Freemanmne (N), Rovoobob (P), Lujki (N)
You can optionally list your user name if you are an active contributor to the test wiki. Add "N" next to your name if you are a native speaker of this language.
Links Links to previous requests, or references to external websites or documents.
Project name Vikipedija "Wikipedia" in your language
Project namespace usually the same as the project name
Project talk namespace "Wikipedia talk" (the discussion namespace of the project namespace)
Enable uploads no Default is "no". Preferably, files should be uploaded to Commons.
If you want, you can enable local file uploading, either by any user ("yes") or by administrators only ("admin").
Notes: (1) This setting can be changed afterwards. The setting can only be "yes" or "admin" at approval if the test creates an Exemption Doctrine Policy (EDP) first. (2) Files on Commons can be used on all Wikis. (3) Uploading fair-use images is not allowed on Commons (more info). (4) Localisation to your language may be insufficient on Commons.
Optional settings
Project logo File:... 135x135 PNG derivative from a decent SVG image (instructions)
Default project timezone Europe/Podgorica "Continent/City", e.g. "Europe/Brussels" or "America/Mexico City" (see list of valid timezones)
Additional namespaces For example for a Wikisource which would need "Page", "Page talk", "Index", "Index talk"
Additional settings Anything else that should be set
submit phabricator task (includes everything automatically, except additional namespaces/settings)


The Montenegrin language is the official language of the independent nation of Montenegro. Yugoslavia has been dissolved and thus with the Serbo-Croatian language gone, all languages are now separate - Croatian for Croatia, Bosnian for Bosnia&Herzegovina, Serbian for Serbia. All of them have Wikipedias, and now so should Montenegrin as - Montenegrin = MONTENEGRO! Serbia and Montenegro are no longer a common state and Serbian domination has been removed from Crna Gora. Liberation has begun and in 2007 Montenegrin has been declared official language. In 2009 the first Montenegrin PRAVOPIS was adopted as a proposal. The people of Montenegro should get Wikipedia on your Montenegrin language, speaking and who is in official use since 2006 and Montenegrin language spoken by over 220,000 people

Second discussion

Introduction and rules for the discussion

I will carefully open a second discussion here. As things stand now, even assuming an ISO 639–3 code is approved, LangCom is leaning towards rejecting this request on the following grounds:

LangCom therefore feels that the Montenegrin community should be able to contribute to, and participate in, the community of the Serbian Wikipedia, the Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia, or both. It should not need a separate project.

This second discussion, therefore, is limited to a discussion of reasons the Montenegrin community does not feel that LangCom is correct about this. I am creating the following rules for the discussion:


The book of Adnan Čirgić Crnogorski jezik u prošlosti i sadašnjosti (Montenegrin language in the past and the present), interesting are pages 7-11, a lot about "different from Ijekavian Serbian" and Montenegrin dialectal basis and specific features. On pages 15-17 is the description of the work of the Commission for the standardization of the Montenegrin language, with the ortography and grammar listed. The Commission had two fundamental tasks, that Wikimedia's Language Committee required:

  • to prove the the existence of the Montenegrin language
  • to describe it as such and
  • to make ortography (made, Pravopis crnogorskoga jezika, 2.rev.ed., 2010. ISBN 9789940905293)
  • to make ortographical dictionary (made [1], Pravopis crnogorskoga jezika i rječnik crnogorskoga jezika, 2009.)
  • to make grammar (made, Čirgić/Silić/Pranjković: Gramatika crnogorskoga jezika, 2010., ISBN 9940905270, 9789940905279)

The Commission started from the neostructuralistic philosophic and linguistic model of the interpretation of the language. There is a lot of very useful explanation in the intro. Maybe someone can ask Montenegrin Ministry of Education or mr Čirgić to make a translation in English and publish it online?
Here [2] is also a comparatistic work Orthography in context – context in orthography: On the examples in the orthography books of Croatian and Montenegrin (in Croatian). Kubura (talk) 04:30, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Lets discuss on evidences, with reliable sources, of ways that standard Montenegrin is meaningfully different from Ijekavian Serbian. Here are few websites from Montenegro: ,,, (national broadcast service). and here is a website from Banja Luka, capital of Serbian part of Bosnia. I dare you to find me as many as you can different words. -- Bojan  Talk  04:41, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Montenegrin alphabet is distinct from Serbian: 'The most notable distinction, say Montenegrin linguists, is in two letters, "s" and "z" ["Ś" and "Ź", actually], each bearing what resembles a French acute accent, neither of which exist in Serbian. They were always present in the spoken language in Montenegro, but were only formally added to the Montenegrin alphabet last July [i.e. July 2010].'[3] While the inclusion and importance of these two letters are somewhat debatable (and describing them as the "most notable distinction" might be a self-refuting argument), it follows that Montenegrins can't use letters from their own official alphabet (alphabets, actually - that's both Latin and Cyrillic) while contributing to any of the South Slavic Wikipedias. GregorB (talk) 14:51, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't see any special reason or thing that would disallow and/or prevent Montenegrins in contributing to e.g. Serbocroatian wikis. But I may be wrong of course. --Biblbroks (talk) 15:20, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

As @StevenJ81 requested, here I am, confirming my points 3. and 4. I made in another discussion down below regarding this issue. As for the 3rd point, I've randomly chosen actors, artists, architects, writers and poets section of a list of pages every Wikipedia should have, as there are 1000 articles in total, of which 53 are in this artist section. Here are my findings: Ijekavian: Michelangelo Buonarotti * right here you have the proof of my 1. point as well, there are sentences is ijekavian Serbian not corresponding to the Montenegrin standard which would, if I were to write that way in Serbian either ekavian or ijekavian, be incorrect "...већи број његових скулптура нису завршене.” (Most of his sculptures are not finished). This, written in Montenegrin would be using ниjeсу as opposed to нису (нису being correct both in ekavian and ijekavian Serbian, not at all in Montenegrin). Francisco Goya Mixed (switching between ekavian and ijekavian against wiki guidelines): Henri Matisse intro in ijekavian, rest in ekavian Naguib Mahfouz same Ekavian: 49 other pages found within this section. Using this to make a conlcusion we see that by using a random collection of pages that every Wikipedia should have, the Serbian one uses Ekavian in approximately 92% of the case in the given sample, 4% ijekavian, and 4% randomly switching. 4th point conclusions I'll be writing soon. There is so much more proof for that one so gathering it takes some time. --Lujki (talk) 17:35, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Both dialects are equal in Serbian and nobody have a right to change it in favour one of them. All articles (or at last huge majority) about Montenegrin topics are written on ijekavian dialect. Some of the contributors here write about ekavian version of Njegoš's "Gorski vijenac" (The Mountain Wreath) what is one notorious foolishness cause there is only one and original Gorski vijenac. Than first translation of The Bible on Serbian is wrote on ijekavian dialect. Serbian speakers from Bosnia & Herzegovina (including Reublika Srpska), Croatia, southwestern and western Serbia use ijekavian speech (not only in Montenegro). So what was the point of this? --НиколаБ (talk) 18:18, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
The point is this: the argument that "Montenegrin is just like ijekavian Serbian" may be valid in theory, but in practice it is of no importance if the ekavian variant of the standard is the one which is vastly dominant both in official use in Serbia and in sr wiki. GregorB (talk) 21:04, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Majority articles on Portuguese Wikipedia are written on Brazilian variant of Portuguese, is that mean (according to your words) that Brazilian are vastly dominant over users from Portugal, so let's made new variants of Portuguese Wikipedia (one for Portugal, one for Brazil, one for Mozambique etc)? Huge majority of articles on Serbocroatian Wikipedia are written on standard Croatian and less than 5% articles is in the Cyrillic script. I still can't get a point? --ΝικόλαςΜπ (talk) 22:49, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

I see you haven't read the very first sentence that I have written. It was in response to a previous request in another discussion page, that's link is down below. I was asked to show approximately how many articles are in Ekavian standard vs Ijekavian. And you conveniently skipped the part where I mentioned examples of Montenegrin specific hyperiotated forms that have no alternative spelling, which are not a part of standardized ijekavian version of Serbian, which was also one of the requests.Lujki (talk) 18:29, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Gregor, Lujki, please, show me letters "Ś" and "Ź", show me hyperiotated forms in most visited web pages from Montenegro. I don't see any. -- Bojan  Talk  20:45, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
My remark about the letters "Ś" and "Ź" is a purely normative argument, so it was not my intention to provide examples or attempt to prove these letters are somehow vital to the language; I clearly stated their practical importance is debatable. GregorB (talk) 21:10, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm not surprised you don't as (allow me to guess and correct me if I am wrong) you are neither from Montenegro, nor a native speaker of Montenegrin language. You do not open these sites on a daily basis. I do. And I'd gladly do the thing you asked me to, but as I am busy with the request from Steven, and holidays in general, I think it would be much easier if you opened any one of the sites you mentioned in a comment up in the thread yourself, and scroll down to the comment section, and from ordinary people, like you and me, you can find all of the mentioned forms. Also, you will find that your point, and Nikola's, about people in Montenegro not using these letters to be false. A friendly suggestion is to also check Caffe del Montenegro,, Portal Analitika etc. on your quest. Good luck and I'm sure you won't be searching for long.--Lujki (talk) 21:20, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

I already mentioned sites Cafe del Montenegrom ( and Portal Analitika ( And I've just visited Still, I don't see letters "Ś" and "Ź" in articles, I don't see any hyperiotated forms in articles, but I see there are 99,99999% words that I use too, though I'm not from Montenegro. If you want to point that comments are in Montenegrin, does it mean that articles on that web pages are in Serbian ijekavian? Note that some Serbs (both those who live in Montenegro and those who do not) also use hyperiotated forms (đe, đevojka, đed, đeca, neđelja, poćerati, međed) in colloquial speech. In fact, in past many more Serbs spoke like that (I would quote Serbian-German-Latin dictionary by w:Vuk Karadžić and w:Jernej Kopitar from 1818: [4] Ranilo, na Cvijeti (a đešto i na Blagovijest) urane đevojke prije sunca na ranilo na vodu, pa onđe uvaše kolo, te igraju i pjevaju različne pjesme...-- Bojan  Talk  22:14, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

As I originally understood, you were searching for anything written in the mentioned form. Now that you most likely have found it, there's that new request of it being in an article. You can see for yourself that Montenegrins use these letters, a point disputed by certain users here (I guess you as well, since you insisted so much on finding them), and isn't that the most important thing and the best proof on it's own? As far as đe, đed and so on goes, people in Montenegro who speak the language identical to Montenegrin but call it Serbian, they do not speak standard Serbian, as these words are not a part of the Serbian language, ekavian or ijekavian alike. That is also the reason why Montenegrin speakers can't use them if they were to write in Serbian Wikipedia, as these hyperiotated words are not a part of Serbian language, ekavian nor ijekavian. If the solution is to use noniotated forms like gdje, djed and so on, thus limiting the use of our language by packing it with another, that would be an unfair solution, but a solution indeed. Until we come to another point. You wanted to know, and @StevenJ81 should as well, how to recognize ijekavian Serbian from Montenegrin. There are certain hyperijekavizations used in Montenegrin language and that do not have alternative nonijekavized forms corresponding to ijekavian Serbian. Take nijesam for example. This is written and pronounced this way exclusively in standard Montenegrin, while Serbian (ekavian and ijekavian, Croatian and Bosnian all use nisam instead). This word (meaning I am not), especially in other forms (nijesu - they are not etc.) is almost ubiquitous in Wikipedia pages, meaning even if we were to write on Serbian Wikipedia in ijekavian (in which, as I've shown so little is written to begin with), we are on almost every step faced with a challenge. If in the concrete example we use nisam, it is not correct in Montenegrin; while if we use nijesam instead, it is not correct in official standard Serbian in neither ekavian nor ijekavian. As you see from the given example, Montenegrin and Serbian ijekavian are not only different in certain situations, but can also be mutually exclusive. --Lujki (talk) 23:52, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Did you ever read Petar Kočić or Branko Ćopić? Words like nijesam, đed, đevojka, međed, neđelja etc. are not Montenegrin uniqueness, they are widely used in Bosnia, Dalmatia, Herzegovina. --ΝικόλαςΜπ (talk) 11:35, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Did you read my comment? I never said that they do not use it, I said it is not a part of standardized Serbian language, it's non official, if you were to write in a formal manner you would not be allowed to use there words, while in Montenegrin you have no alternative but to use them.--Lujki (talk) 12:43, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Nikolas, I made that request myself, here. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:35, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
There is around 12M Serbian speaking people and about 8M use ekavian, so it's logical majority of articles on .sr wiki are on that dialect. But why everyone bypassing the fact that both dialects are equal in Serbian and every contributor on Serbian Wikipedia has a freedom to choose dialect whatever he wants. Same for latin or cyrillic script (we even have program for transliteration from one to another script). --НиколаБ (talk) 19:00, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Bojan, I found some ś in use:

@Rovoobob:. I gues you had hard time to find those letters cause, aside from not finding any articles with "Ź", 'cause Your google hits are from years 2014-2016. (in case of I shall demonstrate in case of website I didn't find any "ś" in articles from past two days (December 30 and December 31 2017).
My point: for every article that use "ś" I bet I can find 100x more articles that don't use it. A man would expect that those letter are more common, cause they are artificial and the most noticeably (and practically only) thing what makes "Montenegrin" standard different from Serbian Ijekavian standard. -- Bojan  Talk  05:24, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
Bojan, they use them both, ś and sj, its their choice, guess depends on the newsman and editor in chief. Ź, I couldn't find it on those portals. Thats probably because there are less words with letter Ź in them to choose from, than with Ś. Some other random sites through google search:
They use them in Montenegrin language and others in countries created by the dissolution of Yugoslavia don't use them in their languages.--Rovoobob Talk 10:04, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
No, You can't say that they use them. As I said, there is 100x, 1000x, 10000x more pages with "sj" and without "ś". -- Bojan  Talk  12:07, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

It seems that each and every time someone finds what you thought they won't you change your request. What is the problem here? It is obvious that Montenegrins use these letters. They wouldn't have been there if they didn't. In spoken form 10x more and you'd know it if you had ever spoken to a Montenegrin. But I bet you had and that you do know all of this. As for your comment that there is practically no difference between ijekavian Serbian and standard Montenegrin, I've shown that they are mutually exclusive. Words like nijesam, osjeka, kisjelina and so on are not a part of official, standardized ijekavian Serbian, nor were they a part of Serbo-Croatian language while it was still a thing in Yugoslavia. Let's even forget all the talk about iotation and all. Certain words in Montenegrin simply aren't the same like in any version of Serbian. Take the name of the European currency for example. In Montenegrin it's Euro, while in Serbian it's Evro (ekavian and ijekavian). All of the words derived from this word are different too (Eurozone etc.) You can either write them in Serbian or in Montenegrin, not in both, they are not the same nor is the other variant of the word allowed in each language. Again, they are mutually exclusive. You cannot write standard Montenegrin in Serbian Wikipedia if you want to fully adhere to Montenegrin standard. So the argument that Montenegrin could fully exist on Serbian Wikipedia falls in the water. I'll bring more arguments after the New Year. Happy holidays.--Lujki (talk) 13:57, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

According to this (page 133) currency is euro, but European Union is Evropska Unija, continent is Evropa, than Evropljanin, evropski. --ΝικόλαςΜπ (talk) 15:22, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
I said all the words derived from the name of the currency not continent. The name of the continent has Greek roots Ευρώπη so we, just like you took the V in those words. But as the currency in original has U in it we chose that while in Serbian language it is still a V to match the others. This was just an example to show that not all differences are just in iotation between these languages and that a single page cannot be written both in Montenegrin and Serbian simultaneously, therefore one Wikipedia can't be enough.--Lujki (talk) 16:28, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

@StevenJ81: regarding the comment that Montenegrin language is not authentic, but a jekavian variant of Serbian language, I am hereby sending you the arguments which prove it is not correct. After the decay of SFRY the agreed artificial so called Serbo-Croatian or Croatian-Serbian language officially ceased to exist, so the logical consequence was for the following separate socio-linguistic languages of Shtokavian origin to evolve as independent: Bosnian, Montenegrin, Croatian and Serbian. Naturally, within these languages certain structural specificities developed. Such specificities are not negligible and cannot be annihilated by a thesis that if there are no communication obstacles, we cannot speak about different languages. Montenegrins created their language in the process of their own development in the capacity of an authentic and self-grown nation in specific natural and historical conditions. As such, it has three layers: 1. first part are general Shtokavian language features (common in Bosnian, Montenegrin, Croatian and Serbian languages); 2. second part are the features from general Montenegrin language layer (macro-structure); and 3. third layer comprises features of local speech patterns pertaining to Montenegrin dialects (micro-structures). Basic structural difference between these languages, among others, is their phonemic composition. “Surplus” Montenegrin phonemes are ś and ź. In Montenegro, they are commonly acknowledged, which is why they have been included in the Montenegrin standards. Confirmation of their phonemic nature are numerous: Śoga : šoga, śenka : Senka, Źagore : zagore, Źagora : Zagora, 3avala : zavala, śetni : ćetni, śenica : šenica, śutra : jutra, śenka : ženka; źenica : ženica, źato : zato, Źale : Zale. Numerous authors have pointed out to the general presence of voices ś and ź in Montenegrin dialects, as well as to the custom of the voice з in these speeches (even though the last one often alternated with z under the influence of Serbian language which is still officially in use in Montenegro, and because it was impossible to write it). Based on the Montenegrin onomastic substance, the omnipresence of voices ś and ź in Montenegrin language is irrefutably evident. Contrary to the mentioned phonological system of Montenegrin language, Serbian standard language has 30 phonemes. Montenegrin specific phonemes mentioned above appear very rarely in Serbian speeches, and thus pertain to the dialectical layer of that language. Serbian standard language does not know voices ś and ź as products of jekavian iotation. There, it is always: sjekira, sjesti, sjetiti, brezje, klasje, osje, kozji, pasji, zjenica, izjesti etc. Instead of these forms, in Montenegrin language the following forms are standard and omnipresent: śekira, śenica, śesti, śetiti, śutra, klaśe, ośe, paśi, iźesti, iźelica, koźi, źenica, źenični etc. As such, these forms have a dialectical, or mostly local status. In Serbian language, they are very solitary part of the dialect, thus not being part of its standard. These forms entered Serbian language mostly from the territory of Montenegro by mass migrations starting from the 15th century. In Montenegrin language, these voices are its unavoidable and distinguished part. In view of the creation and development of consonants ś and ź, they cannot always be replaced with sj and zj, because they did not appear only as a product of jekavian iotation. The following examples can prove it: Śoga, Śota, Daśko, pośljednji, źatiti, groźđe (in Montenegrin speeches), iźđeljati etc. Voices ś and ź did not appear in Montenegrin language only as a product of jekavian iotation, but its appearance is widely confirmed in hypocoristics: hypocoristicity is certainly the grounds on which (…) voices ś and ź developed. And subsequently, as it is the case with other hypocoristics, it was possible for the generalization process to appear and for the hypocoristics to grow into non-hypocoristics, which is what actually did happen. Due to the lack of adequate graphemes in the standard alphabet and Cyrillic script, Montenegrin writers have noted these voices in different (inadequate) manners. Along with the most frequent use of groups sj and zj instead of typical ś and ź, they often used šj and žj, or even š and ž as substitutes. Once it was formed, one way or the other, as a formant, the consonant ś could act and spread completely independently, without any connection with the voice j. Phonemes ś and ź were formed by the so-called new or jekavian iotation and alignment to the place of creation: śever, śutra, śen, śenopadina, uśečenije, Śekloća (surname), in nouns expressing dearnes (hypocoristics): Śata, Paśo, Śaka and in toponyms and hydronyms: Paśeglav, Śenica, Śerava, Preśeka, Śenokos(i), Koźe pogledalo, Koźevići, Glavica koźa, Koźi brijeg, Koźa, iźelica, iźesti, źđeljati, Źaga, Źajo. The importance of these phonemes as substantially recognizable features of Montenegrin language, a renown Croatian professor of general linguistics and sociolinguistics Dubravko Škiljan indicates as follows: The closest to the option of detaching as a separate language is not Croatian, but Montenegrin language – the moment they introduce in their standard language soft forms of š and ž as special phonemes (…), they will make a more resolute move than any other alterations made here for the purpose of the language separation. For, that is something that firmly defines the language structure, number or phonemes system. Apart from the said differences, as an outstanding feature of Montenegrin standard language and its recognizable difference in comparison with Serbian language, there are voices ć and đ, which appeared by jekavian iotation. In Serbian standard language, the only ones acknowledged as normative are the results of jekavian iotation of consonants lj and nj (ljeto, ljepota, voljeti, njegovati, snježan etc), whereas all other are qualified as dialectical. In Serbian literary speech of jekavian pronunciation only sonants l and n are aligned: ljeto (for ekavian leto), ljepota (for ekavian lepota), njegovati (for ekavian negovati), nježan (for ekavian nežan), while consonants (s, z, d, t) remail unaltered: djevojka, vidjeti, tjerati, sjekira, izjesti etc. Such forms without iotation are absolutely unknown in all the Montenegrin language territory. All the linguistic research of Montenegrin speeches so far has shown that voices ć and đ as products of jekavian iotation of consonants t, d and c are omnipresent in all the terrain. It is a common thing t, d, c + je (đe was an old grapheme of jat) > će, đe: ćerati, lećeti, ćešiti (but also tješiti), vrćeti; đe, đed, neđelja, đegođ and in onomatics: Ćetko, Ćetna, Ćetković, ćetalj, Ćetanski pod, Ćedilo, Ćeklići, Šćepan, Šćepo, Šćepanović, Šćepan polje, Šćepandan, Neđeljko, Međeđe, Međedović. Consonants d and t in Montenegrin standard language are not subject to iotation only in rare cases: a) in complex verbs, when their prefix ends in d and the other part starts with j: nadjačati, odjuriti, odjeziditi, podjarmiti, odjednom, odjedanput, podjariti etc; b) in foreign complex words: adjektiv, adjunkt; d) in lexemes: tjeme, tjelesni, tjelesina. Considering such a use of phonemes đ and ć in Montenegrin language, they had to become part of its standard (exactly as the voices ś, ź mentioned earlier), since they represent imposing characteristics of that language. The analysis of phonetic-phonological features of Montenegrin and Serbian languages lead to a conclusion that the basic differences among them are as follows: the rank and status of phonemes ś, ź, ć i đ, namely the presence/absence of phonemes ś, ź in their standards and phonemes ć and đ created as the result of jekavian iotation. These features can be associated with jekavian script, because ekavian script is a recognizable Serbian language feature, and it can be assumed that the status of jekavian script in that language will be rather marginal in the near future. And so forth. The truth is that during the times of Yugoslavia, the education was mostly carried out in Serbo-Croatian language, because the Montenegrins were attached to the idea of the common state. Yugoslavia fell apart not due to Montenegrins and all the nations returned to their languages, which they used before. I would like to note that the state of Serbia officially introduced Montenegrin language as official language of the Montenegrin minority in Serbia, and that it is financing publications, school education and manifestations in Montenegrin language from the state budget, which is prescribed by the laws of the state of Serbia. Freemanmne (talk) 13:52 30. December 2017 (UTC)

Only and only reason why alphabet that Serbs (and Croats and Bosniaks) use has 30 phonemes is language reform from beginning of 19th century by Vuk Karadžić and Đuro Daničić and their Croatian and Slovenian associates. Prior to this date those rare literate Serbs use alphabet that looks like pre-October-Revolution Russian with phonemes like ё, щ, ы, ю, я and famous ѣ (yat) and hard (Ъ) and soft sign (Ь). Serbs dropped unnecessary Cyrillic phonemes, Russians dropped unnecessary Cyrillic phonemes and probably Bulgarians, Ukrainians and Belorussians, too. They concluded that 30 phonemes are enough and that there is no need for dropped phonemes. -- Bojan  Talk  06:06, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

While differences do not seem to be crucial and exist only in very small number of marginal cases (where editor choose to use a different version instead of the same one by using two 2009 standard letters which Assembly of Montenegro removed from any type of governmental documentation in February 2017), is there any evidence that users of Montenegrin standard were prevented in using Montenegrin standard at the Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia? In 2010 article "Digitalizirano prosvjetiteljstvo" Croatian ophthalmologist Karmen Lončarek writes "Srpskohrvatska wikipedija je i najležernija u pogledu jezika i pisma, pa dozvoljava da se piše bilo kojim od tri jezika (sr, hr, bs) i dva pisma, iako preferira latinicu." ("The Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia is also the most relaxed in terms of language and script, allowing its users to writte in any of the three languages ​​(sr, hr, bs) and two alphabets although it prefers the latin one") (Montenegrin Grammar was adopted on 21 June 2010). Is there any evidence that out of 4 standardized varieties editors can not use only the Montenegrin one? If yes, was there ever any proposal to include new Montenegrin standard and what was the reaction from Wikipedia community?--MirkoS18 (talk) 16:41, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

@MirkoS18: "very small number of marginal cases...", "letters which Assembly of Montenegro removed from any type of governmental documentation in February 2017"--Before answering your question I'd like to point out that in the very first sentence there is some bias visible towards this project. It is true that the differences are small indeed between all standard variants of the Serbo-Croatian macrolanguage, however I find this to be underestimation of them. They do exist. And I don't see how is the decision of Montenegrin Assembly relevant to this discussion if the reasons are not linguistic but rather technical. Same why they opted for latin script rather than cyrillic.
Now regarding your request, sadly I am not able to do such a thing because after an extensive search I was not able to find a single article on Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia written in the Montenegrin standard to begin with. Perhaps this is the best evidence on it's own. I also couldn't find a sizable Montenegrin community participating in this Wikipedia, and even those sporadic cases where they edited articles (mostly regarding Montenegro) it was in either Serbian or Croatian standard in which the articles were written. Perhaps the reason for such small contribution of Montenegrin editors is because they are the only ones without their own native Wikipedia, which are forced to conform to other languages' standards such as Serbian, Croatian, or in this only case where I could find a Montenegrin editor on SC Wiki, Croatian standard. Are we even free to use our words such as those listed above a thousand times, or our own letters? In my hands I'm holding orthography and wordbook of the Serbo-Croatian language, written by orthographic commission of 11 people of which 7 have a PhD. My edition was printed by "Beogradski grafički zavod" in 1960., so from Yugoslav times where SC lived as a single language. Here it does not mention the famous 2 Montenegrin letters, nor any of the word forms that Montenegrins use in their standard language, meaning they were never a part of it. Writing like this would not be correct in "Serbo-Croatian" language (used mostly as an unitaristic tool during the Yugoslav times, and never used at all after YU fell). Even in Novi Sad agreement where SC as a language was created, Montenegrin way of speaking was disregarded. If we were to write on Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia using Montenegrin (and not Serbo-Croatian) letters who can guarantee that it will be saved if we are then writing outside of Serbo-Croatian standard? Presuming we are talking about SC as a single language. Even ISO defines it as a macrolanguage, not a single one, and in that case if we presume it includes all of Montenegrin, then I, as I said cannot answer your question as I was not able to find a single page written in Montenegrin to begin with. To conclude, I'd like to add the fact that many people in Serbian community resent SC Wiki and view it as a copypasta of their work. Croats refuse to even say the words "Serbo-Croatian (macro)language", calling it "Srednjojužnoslavenski dijasustav" instead. I don't want to repeat the fact that Montenegrin is the only standard language that's a part of this macrolanguage without it's individual Wiki, even tough it has a fully valid language code. Langcom usually denied it as a political problem, but aren't they getting more political (and in a hand discriminatory) by denying us our right to write in our own language and packing Montenegrin alongside other languages and/or failed communist political projects?--Lujki (talk) 21:39, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
Dear @Lujki: thank you for your time and effort to answer. You are right, I do have opinion and I do not think the new project is good idea. I was thinking that my "bias" towards the existence of only one Serbo-Croatian project is visible to everyone already from my previous contribution. I am sorry if it was not transparent and there was any need to clarify it. I do not deny certain differences in modern day Montenegrin standard (I think none need to do this), I just think that they can easily be embraced within already existing Serbo-Croatian project. There are already examples on other Wikipedias how it can be done, and I really don't think you may have big issues with such ideas on Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia. For example, there is practice on English language Wikipedia where certain number of articles are clearly marked as being written in British English on talk page while this should not be changed without broad consensus. Was something like this ever proposed on Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia in relation to the new Montenegrin standard and if yes was there any negative reaction from Wikipedia community? The fact that there is not many editors writing in Montenegrin does not mean that it is not possible to try to do this on Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia. Hypothesis that lack of separate project is discouraging editors from Montenegro shall be founded on strong arguments. On the other side, I guess (also without any strong evidence) that joint project may encourage editors since it is already common practice in Montenegro that all standardized varieties of Serbo-Croatian are in daily and in official use in the country. I am also concerned that users of less diverse version of Montenegrin standard will actually be the ones who are discouraged from using the new project. Montenegrin standard itself is flexible and often offer more than one option how to write. With all this big talk about differences administrators on this new project may be biased towards the usage of the form that is different from the other Serbo-Croatian varieties instead of those that are the same. This may be just a natural way to justify separate project and it is something already seen on Croatian and probably other project that pushed some local users back to more flexible Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia. As for the perception of Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia within some nationalist groups, well I think we can only bear it as a badge of honor but this is not the point here :) . In short, I just don't see how Montenegrin variety is the only one out of 4 that can not be used on Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia. Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia do not use only the old standards from Yugoslavia or Austria-Hungary since it is also open for Bosnian standard that is formalized after the 1990s. As for your statement that Serbo-Croatian is nothing more than a "failed communist political projects" (ignoring its developments since the XIX century and fact that standardized language is by its nature always a creation/project) I will leave it to others to evaluate how users from Serbo-Croatian project will be welcomed to the new Montenegrin one (if you are successful I hope you will welcome speakers of failed communist language to contribute :D ). I completely understand some dissatisfaction with the fact that there are already other projects, but this is not the point in this discussion as well. I highly appreciate your commitment and energy and wish you all the best.--MirkoS18 (talk) 23:59, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

There is absolutely no difference between standard Serbian and "standard" Montenegrin except in orthography. Root of standards for all 5 inceptions of these so-called langauges (Serbo-Croatian, Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian/k, Montenegrin) is based in work of Vuk Karadžić, who being from that region defined standard Serbian as Ijekavian Eastern-Herzegovinian, which he regarded as most proper form of South-Slavic dialectical continuum. Additional standard for Serbian in its ekavian form is Šumadija-Vojvodina dialect, which had very major amount of its specific characteristics made obsolete by Eastern-Herzegovinian, and due to this most Serbs now speak language which is mixture of these two dialects in either ijekavian or ekavian form, with EH. having primate over the other. Reason why existance of Bosnian and Croatian wikipedia is partially justified even though both languages use Serbian dialect as standard is because they both have other dialects with their own characteristics, even though Croatian Wikipedia is based on Shtokavian narečje, Kajkavian and Chakavian exist. Bosnian, as well as Croatian uses grammatical forms that are rarely met in Serbian (such as [5]).

In case of Montenegrin language almost all mentioned linguists that defended its status are using non-standard Zeta-Raška dialect and are even reaching out for Raška variaties (which is spoken in territory of Republic of Serbia) of the said dialect to find as many characteristics that diverge from standard Eastern Herzegovinian as possible. In they comparison they use Ekavian Serbian with universally accepted ortography while in same time using forms of so-called Montenegrin that are phonetically exactly the same or with minor variations to further their political agenda. Example: standard Eastern Herzegovinian Ijekavian Serbian - гдје (gdje), possible future standard of Montenegrin - ђе (đe). To non-native speaker of Serbo-Croatian this might seem as a difference, but in reality almost all speakers of Eastern Herzegovinian, especially in Herzegovina itself (which also covers part of Montenegro called Old Herzegovina) use exactly the same word - đe (where?). Karadžićists tried to model SC. after phonetic ortography, and this is the logic Montenegrin nationalists are trying to push, however in multiple spheres of our language some forms are etymological. That is how gdje remains proper form, čovek remains proper form (while Montenegrin langauge would standardize čo'ek by accepting Zeta-Raška dialect, even though that form is used by EH. speakers as well). Those "hundreds of differences" between standard variants are simply found by nationalist tricks and are fueled by politics.

Also, to add - two separate letters added in supposed standard Montenegrin are made by fusion of letters "s" and "j" and "z" and "j" in ijekavian. Concept of those two letters was made by people having no knowledge of original Slavic letter ѣ (jat) which has its own reflexes in SC. to sort out differences between ijekavian, ekavian and ikavian forms while in same time making language remain phonetic linguists have in past 2 centuries allowed for letter jat to have triple form (je, e, i) (with additional я in Bulgarian), not even government of Montenegro takes this attempt seriously. ([6] - Assembly of Montenegro using standard Serbian, [7] - Government of Montenegro using standard Serbian, [8] website of President of Montenegro using standard Serbian) --ApcehCraft (talk) 11:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Montegrians have the right to have their own Wikipedia. And I am big supporter of it. But now standards of the language are only developing. And until the complete agreement about using certain grammatical features (like ś/sj and ź/zj) will be made within linguistical community in the country there are not much chances that Montegrin Wikipedia will be working well. As I know from my native language Wikipedia (Ukrainian) lack of standartization makes it very hard to work with it. However, appearance of Montenegrin Wikipedia is inevitable. It will just take time. 5-10 years will be enough if everything goes right. Firstly, there is a need for standarization (the best example is again ź and ś. When they will be broadly used in this form (in my opininon they are the only correct forms for such language) as well as other features which dsttinguish the language there will be big possibilities for Montenegrin to be a strong language language). Then this standartized variant must be taught in all schools, used by government officials and on TV and Internet. And the important thing is making dictionaries and grammar books for ordinary people (not for students, not for linguists) as well as rising national identity so that Montenegrin people would know that they are Montenegrin, speak the language of Montenegro and support traditions of Montenegrian cultural identity. The one important thing is carefully mapping all the dialects and working on classification of different grammar mistakes in everyday talks (for example, using some words of non-Montenegrin origin). And a serious piece of literature in the language is also very important. The more books published in Montenegrin, the more chances for it to become a strong language. After all these criteria are met at least at 60% each, Montenegrin Wikipedia will be a serious project which will grow rapidly. And to ensure that enough people are interested in developing this Wikipedia I suggest you to work on SC for now and to talk with all the main contributors of it about recognising Montenegrin variant. If it works, you will be able to work there and make an impact on language developing (and just to ensure there are enough contributors. Because it is a really serious issue. Ukrainian Wikipedia really suffers because there are only a few people who develop regularly. And I personally would not like if this thing happens with another Wikipedia). If they will not allow you, then it is an additional argument about starting your own Wikipedia. RMN120501 (talk) 20:34, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

As far as ApcehCraft's comments go I won't be wasting much of my time responding to a comment of which 90% are utter lies such as official Montenegrin sites being in Serbian when they are clearly offered in Montenegrin, as can be seen when selecting languages (English is offered too), how in the world could they be written in a language other than the official language of the country? Does this person know that Zeta-South Sanjak dialect is the most widely spoken one in Montenegro, no wonder it would affect the language, and how come Eastern Herzegovinian a Serbian dialect when it is a common ground for all of these languages, what specific elements did he find to conclude it's exclusively Serbian? And it's obvious he's not a native Montenegrin speaker since he does not seem to know that Montenegrin standard already exists and it is absolutely correct saying Đe and everything else that is a result of jekavian iotation. It's not provincialism, nor the work of Montenegrin "nationalists" but the way of speaking of Montenegrins. Nor does he seem to have read previous examples of how standard Montenegrin (which he writes under "" for some reason) and Ijekavian Serbian are mutually exclusive. It's obvious that these comments are here just to cast a bad shadow on our project and the big effort we all put in.
Dear RMN120501, thanks for your support and kind words. While you are most probably absolutely correct about the things you said, I disagree with you on the SC project. Montenegrin community (the largest part of) is obviously not interested in working on SC Wikipedia, there are 0 articles in total (that I could find, and trust me I spent a lot of time searching) written in the Montenegrin standard. We want to write our articles completely independent of other Wikis, not to create a copypasta. It can be seen from our Incubator project, which is the most active one in there. Of course we'd like to later on help and work on SC Wiki, why wouldn't we, but only after we finish working on our own. Hey, we aren't asking for anything all the others don't already have, right?--Lujki (talk) 23:09, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
"Montenegrin community (the largest part of) is obviously not interested in working on SC Wikipedia, there are 0 articles in total (that I could find, and trust me I spent a lot of time searching) written in the Montenegrin standard." This is perhaps the crux of the matter. Let me rephrase here what I've already said in the talk page: while in theory a) "not being able to work on" and b) "not being interested in working on" are two different things, and the framework for this discussion recognizes only a) as a valid argument in favor of creating the mne wiki, in practice a) and b) have exactly the same outcome (i.e. virtually no editors and no articles). Ironically, a) would still be fixable (if true), while b) isn't fixable, realistically speaking. I believe the language committee should also consider the outcome of their decision, rather than merely its theoretical validity. GregorB (talk) 12:58, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
I am not expert on Wikipedia policies but this logic seem to me to be open for two interpretations. One is that users unconsciously avoid to participate in Serbo-Croatian project due to the lack of awareness of this eventual option. The second one is that users consciously and actively refuse to participate in Serbo-Croatian project where it may look like political decision. In the first case interested users should be encouraged to explore that possibility. In the second case it looks a bit like a blackmail similar to "user [who] may make an impotent threat to leave the project in the hope of blackmailing the threatening people into caving into his demands". This is "not one of Wikipedia policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community" but there is idea that it is not appropriate behavior in community and may not be appropriate behavior towards the language committee.--MirkoS18 (talk) 16:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
I don't agree. It's not like we've ever been a part of the SH project for reasons as explained above, there is no conditioning from our side at all, I was merely stating the fact that most Montenegrin editors are not interested in participating in this project. We have nothing to leave here nor anything to blackmail with. There is no inappropriate behavior from our side towards LangCom because as we see it we are the only ones here being conditioned by being forced to participate in other projects if we even want to do anything on Wikipedia instead of letting us have our own which all the others already do.--Lujki (talk) 17:25, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Please, would you translate this short announcement from website of President of Montenegro from "Montenegrin" to "Serbian Ijekavian".
"Montenegrin" "Serbian Ijekavian"/Serbocroatian
Predsjednik Crne Gore Filip Vujanović uputio je čestitku povodom božićnih praznika svim pripadnicima pravoslavne vjeroispovijesti. „Povodom Božića, svim pravoslavnim vjernicima i vjernicama u Crnoj Gori upućujem najsrdačnije čestitke i želje da u miru, dobrom zdravlju i sreći njeguju bliskost i slogu, u duhu vječnih poruka koje sadrži najradosniji hrišćanski praznik. Istrajmo u poštovanju univerzalnih vrijednosti dijaloga, razumijevanja i iskrenog zajedništva koji su uslov opšteg napretka. Slijedimo taj put kao trajnu vrijednost Crne Gore i siguran smjer u srećnu budućnost svih njenih građana. U to ime još jednom čestitam Božić, veliki hrišćanski praznik.“" awaiting "translation"

-- Bojan  Talk  05:02, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Ok, so here we have a random bit of text from the President's website where we don't have words that are written and spoken differently in Ijekavian Serbian and Montenegrin such as previous examples. If we were to rewrite it in any Serbo-Croatian Ijekavian variants it would still be the same except for Croatian using Kršćanstvo, Sretno and Opće instead of Hrišćanstvo, Srećno and Opšte. Serbian Wikipedia uses Ekavian standard in basically 90% of the case, so this is not applicable. Also, Bosnian variant would also prefer these Croatian words, while allowing the alternatives used in the text as well, just like Montenegrin prefers using Predśednik instead of Predsjednik but allows it as well. The difference is, we cannot use that in Serbian Wikipedia in which Ijekavian is almost not present to begin with. Do you want the text to be translated to the Serbian Ekavian variant which your government uses and which is vastly dominant on your Wikipedia as well? Better yet, can you give official Serbian government's text to be translated to Montenegrin, since we are showing the differences here? Again, this is not my main point we know that all the variants are intelligible (I cannot prove otherwise besides a couple of hundred of Montenegrin words I am sure you've never heard about), but so is SC and Macedonian, Macedonian and Bulgarian and yet, they all have Wikipedias. On the other hand Montenegrin editors which can significantly contribute to Wikipedia should not be forced to comply to others' standards and be unable to use their own way of speaking. Nobody else is forced to do this. Nor are they forced to use SC variant as said above a few times now. Most MN editors are simply not interested in contributing while not being allowed these things. Someone from LangCom said that this is like having American, Australian and British English, now wanting Irish as well. No, this is like having all of them, every single one, including variants spoken in Africa, Latin America and all those islands over there, while saying the Irish, hey you can't have your own, use British one instead. ISO code has been approved, this is playing politics right now... There are enough linguistic differences and orthographic ones for us to be granted our own project even if we disregard the plans for writing original articles, not merely copying them. And the last thing, saying that Ś and Ź can always be replaced with SJ and ZJ is not true. There are cases when they aren't there because of iotation. Such as in names/nicknames. How am I supposed to write a name Śoka in Serbo-Croatian or Serbian? Or anything not a product of iotation where Ś,Ź are used?--Lujki (talk) 15:27, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
I didn't ask You for variants spoken by Croats or Bosniaks. I follow StevenJ81's guideline. Evidence, with reliable sources, of ways that standard Montenegrin is meaningfully different from Ijekavian Serbian would also be welcome. Clearly, something convinced the Library of Congress to make the first change to ISO 639–2 in over five years. If anyone has access to that evidence, please share it here. You may choose any text from website with domain .me. I chose site owned by Presidency of Montenegro. Those localisms, and loanwords Serbs from Montenegro use too, so what is you point? Articles on Monenegro, Croatia or Bosnia and Herzegovina are/should be in Ijekavian variant. Majority, almost all articles on cities in Germany are in ijekavian variant. Only reason why we have this here are politics. -- Bojan  Talk  04:24, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Dear Mr Amir, regarding your comment on LangCom mailing list, there aren't half a million people of Montenegrin in total (nor Montenegrins for that matter) so I just wanted to clear up that first, you can see the number of speakers in the table at the beginning of the page. Ś,Ź are taught in schools, this way of spelling is totally accepted there, teachers themselves nowadays speak this way while giving lectures, no matter the subject. I personally can confirm this as I attend them myself. We especially use them in colloquial, everyday speach as they are an integral part of our language. Older people did have a tendency to avoid them in official communication because they (in times of Yugoslavia, while there was no standardized Montenegrin) were taught that this way of speaking was not correct by the Serbo-Croatian standard. Exactly this is the reason why we cannot use them on any other Wikipedia. They are not a part of Serbian language, nor Serbo-Croatian language while it was considered to be a single language, writing that way would be no more correct in these languages than it would be in English. Again, they are much more used in spoken language, especially by younger people who are taught that this way of speaking is correct. So yes, they are used in search engines such as Google, and no, you cannot get results from Wikipedia except in Polish where they are also present. They are especially used in communication by younger people for the mentioned reason especially in Viber, WhatsApp as you asked. So I don't think it's possible to "convince" people on srwiki to let us use all of this since it is not a part of their language, it's not fair to them either, why would they? And as displayed in previous examples you can see that lots of them are not inclined to accept the idea of Montenegrins themselves (just check the article about Montenegrins in Serbian Wiki) let alone the language (check that article as well). To conclude, you wanted to know if the "new" way of spelling is used by general Montenegrin public. Not only it is used (again, especially in spoken form), it has managed to survive almost a century of suppression and marginalization (hence I said "new") it has now managed to be allowed to be used in standard language. I think this is the best proof about it's usage, a point many here try to refute, and unsuccessfully so. And finally, no, not in any case are we just a few dozens of people, this is all used by basically most of Montenegrins, I can't find you a reliable source for this as no specific survey has been done yet, but I live here and speak with other people, so the best proof that I am able to provide is a random Montenegrin-it's basically guaranteed that he speaks this way, don't take my word for it, if you know anyone of them, ask them yourself. Best regards!--Lujki (talk) 21:33, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

@Lujki: who is Amir? I mean whom was meant this message to be delivered? I think it would be better to ping that person. I personally don't understand what's this disscussion's connection to your message if it was intended for some other person to read it. Best regards, --Biblbroks (talk) 10:13, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
@Biblbroks: "Amir" is a member of the Language Committee, and Lujki was responding to a comment he made on the Language Committee's email listserv. I have informed Amir of this comment already. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:10, 16 January 2018 (UTC)