Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

If we talked about English, unless we specified that we were talking about Cornish, or Geordie, or Glaswegian, we would be talking about "standard", "Queen's" English; we're always talking about one dialect or another, because the "standard" form is just the dialect spoken by the most powerful people. I took courses in "Greek" in Cyprus from a Cretan, and I was still taught Athenian.

You were not taught Athenian. You were taught that "standard Greek". Similarly when I took a course of English I was taught the "standard English". This doesn't mean that the other dialects of English are not English, and that the people that speak those other dialects are not English.

Sorry, I don't know the difference between Athenian and standard Greek. I wasn't referring to the old Athenian that Trudgill speaks about, if that makes any difference.

But certainly, you can see that I did not say that other dialects of English were not English.

As for whether the English-dialect-speakers are English or not, it depends upon the person, and the dialect they're speaking. If you want to tell a Glaswegian Scot that they're English, please do. I shall avoid doing so - but I'm happy to watch you try. An English member of my family moved to Scotland and now speaks natural, thick, fluent Scots - but he's still English. And London Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots may not speak any Greek or Turkish; they may only speak standard English, but they are still Cypriot, not English.

I see you are trying to twist my words.

The point here is that speaking a dialect of English/Greek doesn't make the person speaking that dialect non English or non Greek. If he is not English/Greek, that is for other reasons, not due to his dialect.

Cypriot Greek is a Greek dialect, and the vast majority of the people who speak this dialect are and feel Greek and you can just ask them to confirm this.

De-hellenization of the island was and continues to be a foreign desire, because they want to isolate Cyprus, making in this way Cyprus weaker and easier to manipulate so it will be easier for them to keep their troops and their bases on our island.

A small minority of Greek Cypriots did, for this reason, recently deny their Greek identity, because they were convinced that we could change our ethnicities from Greek and Turkish to a "Cypriot Ethnicity" that would unite TCs and GCs. I am still waiting for an example of another ethnicity which is created by people who speak different languages and have different religions! Do you have any such example?

What I think is needed is the contrary. For everybody, including those foreigners, to finally show some respect to the identity of the people of this island, so we can have a munti-ethnic nation something which is possible, instead of trying to create some "Cypriot Ethnicity" which is impossible.

[samarkeolog]

If we talked about English, unless we specified that we were talking about Cornish, or Geordie, or Glaswegian, we would be talking about "standard", "Queen's" English; we're always talking about one dialect or another, because the "standard" form is just the dialect spoken by the most powerful people. I took courses in "Greek" in Cyprus from a Cretan, and I was still taught Athenian.

You were not taught Athenian. You were taught that "standard Greek". Similarly when I took a course of English I was taught the "standard English". This doesn't mean that the other dialects of English are not English, and that the people that speak those other dialects are not English.

Sorry, I don't know the difference between Athenian and standard Greek. I wasn't referring to the old Athenian that Trudgill speaks about, if that makes any difference.

But certainly, you can see that I did not say that other dialects of English were not English.

As for whether the English-dialect-speakers are English or not, it depends upon the person, and the dialect they're speaking. If you want to tell a Glaswegian Scot that they're English, please do. I shall avoid doing so - but I'm happy to watch you try. An English member of my family moved to Scotland and now speaks natural, thick, fluent Scots - but he's still English. And London Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots may not speak any Greek or Turkish; they may only speak standard English, but they are still Cypriot, not English.

I see you are trying to twist my words.

The point here is that speaking a dialect of English/Greek doesn't make the person speaking that dialect non English or non Greek. If he is not English/Greek, that is for other reasons, not due to his dialect.

I'm no trying to twist your words, and I didn't twist them. I didn't say that that speaking Greek dialect made the speaker non-English, or that speaking English dialect made the speaker non-English. I've already said that. You're trying to twist my words by saying otherwise. My only point was that language and ethnicity are not the same thing.

Cypriot Greek is a Greek dialect, and the vast majority of the people who speak this dialect are and feel Greek and you can just ask them to confirm this.

See? This is our disagreement; it's not about language. You think Greek Cypriots are Greeks in Cyprus; I think Greek Cypriots are Cypriots.

De-hellenization of the island was and continues to be a foreign desire, because they want to isolate Cyprus, making in this way Cyprus weaker and easier to manipulate so it will be easier for them to keep their troops and their bases on our island.

A small minority of Greek Cypriots did, for this reason, recently deny their Greek identity, because they were convinced that we could change our ethnicities from Greek and Turkish to a "Cypriot Ethnicity" that would unite TCs and GCs. I am still waiting for an example of another ethnicity which is created by people who speak different languages and have different religions! Do you have any such example?

The people you perceive as English are a mix of people-who-never-had-an-ethnic-identity (European hunter-gatherers and farmers who lived on or passed through in the distant past) and people-who-are-given-an-ethnic-identity (Romans, Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, Normans, et al). During the Roman period, communities from Africa and the Middle East were introduced into the mix. (There were probably individuals from lots of places before and after that, but we can only talk about the recorded ones we know arrived.) "The Vikings" - the Norse communities - were themselves mixed, as they lived and worked from North America to Asia. The Normans - the "North Men" - were Norse mixed with people-in-what-is-now-northern-France; and they became the even more mixed Anglo-Normans after they arrived on the Rainy Isles. The Anglo-Saxons' name is a mixture of two.

What I think is needed is the contrary. For everybody, including those foreigners, to finally show some respect to the identity of the people of this island, so we can have a munti-ethnic nation something which is possible, instead of trying to create some "Cypriot Ethnicity" which is impossible.

I think a lot of people don't care how you identify yourselves; they only wish you would all work together to stop British/American/NATO interference and to protect your communities and your country from environmental and economic destruction by tourism for Brits abroad.

[Piratis]

See? This is our disagreement; it's not about language. You think Greek Cypriots are Greeks in Cyprus; I think Greek Cypriots are Cypriots.

Yes, but you see, what you think on this issue doesn't count because you are not Cypriot. I am Cypriot and what I think counts. And the vast majority of Greek Cypriots are amazingly Greek Cypriots!! Its in the name. Greek for ethnicity, and Cypriot because we are native of Cyprus. If we were not Greek, then we wouldn't call ourselves Greek Cypriots right?

The people you perceive as English are a mix of people-who-never-had-an-ethnic-identity (European hunter-gatherers and farmers who lived on or passed through in the distant past) and people-who-are-given-an-ethnic-identity (Romans, Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, Normans, et al). During the Roman period, communities from Africa and the Middle East were introduced into the mix. (There were probably individuals from lots of places before and after that, but we can only talk about the recorded ones we know arrived.) "The Vikings" - the Norse communities - were themselves mixed, as they lived and worked from North America to Asia. The Normans - the "North Men" - were Norse mixed with people-in-what-is-now-northern-France; and they became the even more mixed Anglo-Normans after they arrived on the Rainy Isles. The Anglo-Saxons' name is a mixture of two.

It is your country, you decide. I have no problem. Be whatever you want to be and call your country whatever you want to call it.

I think a lot of people don't care how you identify yourselves; they only wish you would all work together to stop British/American/NATO interference and to protect your communities and your country from environmental and economic destruction by tourism for Brits abroad.

Trying to tell us what we are and what our island is, is a huge interference already. What we want is our freedom and self-determination and nobody else telling us what we should be and what we should do.

[CopperLine]

See? This is our disagreement; it's not about language. You think Greek Cypriots are Greeks in Cyprus; I think Greek Cypriots are Cypriots.

Yes, but you see, what you think on this issue doesn't count because you are not Cypriot. I am Cypriot and what I think counts. And the vast majority of Greek Cypriots are amazingly Greek Cypriots!! Its in the name. Greek for ethnicity, and Cypriot because we are native of Cyprus. If we were not Greek, then we wouldn't call ourselves Greek Cypriots right?

The people you perceive as English are a mix of people-who-never-had-an-ethnic-identity (European hunter-gatherers and farmers who lived on or passed through in the distant past) and people-who-are-given-an-ethnic-identity (Romans, Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, Normans, et al). During the Roman period, communities from Africa and the Middle East were introduced into the mix. (There were probably individuals from lots of places before and after that, but we can only talk about the recorded ones we know arrived.) "The Vikings" - the Norse communities - were themselves mixed, as they lived and worked from North America to Asia. The Normans - the "North Men" - were Norse mixed with people-in-what-is-now-northern-France; and they became the even more mixed Anglo-Normans after they arrived on the Rainy Isles. The Anglo-Saxons' name is a mixture of two.

It is your country, you decide. I have no problem. Be whatever you want to be and call your country whatever you want to call it.

I think a lot of people don't care how you identify yourselves; they only wish you would all work together to stop British/American/NATO interference and to protect your communities and your country from environmental and economic destruction by tourism for Brits abroad.

Trying to tell us what we are and what our island is, is a huge interference already. What we want is our freedom and self-determination and nobody else telling us what we should be and what we should do.

Piratis,
Let's update the 'Thirteen Colonies' slogan "No taxation without representation" : Cyprus is part of the EU now, and is beneficiary of EU largesse. As such the rest of the EU will define what Cyprus is and who Cypriots are.

But actually we don't have to even refer to the EU to know that Cyprus, just like every other group of people, have always been defined as much by what others think of them and treat them as how they think of themselves. And if you doubt the truth of this then just look at virtually every page of this forum to find posters who are not Turkish pretending to define what Turks are, people who are not Brits trying to define what Brits are, etc,

It is axiomatic of identity - whether personal or collective - that others define us. If you think that Cyprus and Cypriots will one day exclusively define themselves, free from the definitions imposed by outsiders then you have an impossible dream. It is, to use the psychological term, delusional. (Just in case you misinterpret what I'm arguing : this 'problem' is not unique to Cyprus and Cypriots, it is characteristic of all human identities).

[Oracle]

It is the CopperLines of this world who think it is more important what others label you as (he is the master bigot after all), instead of allowing one, the Right and due respect, that as a Human being, he may just know himself better.

Of course, behaviour can be described collectively, according to codes of conduct; but have the good grace to allow others to feel kinship and leanings, to whomsoever and whatsoever they choose ....

The EU is most progressive in this capacity .... only CopperLine lags behind with his dim thinking (but then Turks are just not "ready" yet ).

[samarkeolog]

See? This is our disagreement; it's not about language. You think Greek Cypriots are Greeks in Cyprus; I think Greek Cypriots are Cypriots.

Yes, but you see, what you think on this issue doesn't count because you are not Cypriot. I am Cypriot and what I think counts. And the vast majority of Greek Cypriots are amazingly Greek Cypriots!! Its in the name. Greek for ethnicity, and Cypriot because we are native of Cyprus. If we were not Greek, then we wouldn't call ourselves Greek Cypriots right?

As I've said before (should I include the "as I've said before" again as well, because I've said this more than once?), I'm not telling you what to feel or what to be. You can believe you are whatever you want. I can tell you how I perceive things. Both things can happen.

The people you perceive as English are a mix of people-who-never-had-an-ethnic-identity (European hunter-gatherers and farmers who lived on or passed through in the distant past) and people-who-are-given-an-ethnic-identity (Romans, Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, Normans, et al). During the Roman period, communities from Africa and the Middle East were introduced into the mix. (There were probably individuals from lots of places before and after that, but we can only talk about the recorded ones we know arrived.) "The Vikings" - the Norse communities - were themselves mixed, as they lived and worked from North America to Asia. The Normans - the "North Men" - were Norse mixed with people-in-what-is-now-northern-France; and they became the even more mixed Anglo-Normans after they arrived on the Rainy Isles. The Anglo-Saxons' name is a mixture of two.

It is your country, you decide. I have no problem. Be whatever you want to be and call your country whatever you want to call it.

That wasn't the point. You said,

I am still waiting for an example of another ethnicity which is created by people who speak different languages and have different religions! Do you have any such example?

I had. I gave it. That was it.

I think a lot of people don't care how you identify yourselves; they only wish you would all work together to stop British/American/NATO interference and to protect your communities and your country from environmental and economic destruction by tourism for Brits abroad.

Trying to tell us what we are and what our island is, is a huge interference already. What we want is our freedom and self-determination and nobody else telling us what we should be and what we should do.

So now you react when I agree that British/American/NATO interference is wrong, and suggest that it might be easier to stop if all Cypriots worked together? Foreign imperialists wished to split the island to make it manageable. Local nationalists made their dream come true. Local nationalists are their own worst enemy. But that is just my own opinion. You can believe the nationalists have made Cyprus a paradise if you want. That's your choice.

[samarkeolog]

It is the CopperLines of this world who think it is more important what others label you as (he is the master bigot after all), instead of allowing one, the Right and due respect, that as a Human being, he may just know himself better.

Does that mean you accept I'm English? Actually, I don't like to identify myself by any ethnic label, but if I have to be categorised something by someone else, it should be something accurate.

[Piratis]

See? This is our disagreement; it's not about language. You think Greek Cypriots are Greeks in Cyprus; I think Greek Cypriots are Cypriots.

Yes, but you see, what you think on this issue doesn't count because you are not Cypriot. I am Cypriot and what I think counts. And the vast majority of Greek Cypriots are amazingly Greek Cypriots!! Its in the name. Greek for ethnicity, and Cypriot because we are native of Cyprus. If we were not Greek, then we wouldn't call ourselves Greek Cypriots right?

As I've said before (should I include the "as I've said before" again as well, because I've said this more than once?), I'm not telling you what to feel or what to be. You can believe you are whatever you want. I can tell you how I perceive things. Both things can happen.

Exactly. Isn't this why we started this discussion. Because of some preconceived notions that you have? So continue if you want. Disregard all the historical and scientific evidence, and choose some baseless politically motivated claims to base your views.

The people you perceive as English are a mix of people-who-never-had-an-ethnic-identity (European hunter-gatherers and farmers who lived on or passed through in the distant past) and people-who-are-given-an-ethnic-identity (Romans, Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, Normans, et al). During the Roman period, communities from Africa and the Middle East were introduced into the mix. (There were probably individuals from lots of places before and after that, but we can only talk about the recorded ones we know arrived.) "The Vikings" - the Norse communities - were themselves mixed, as they lived and worked from North America to Asia. The Normans - the "North Men" - were Norse mixed with people-in-what-is-now-northern-France; and they became the even more mixed Anglo-Normans after they arrived on the Rainy Isles. The Anglo-Saxons' name is a mixture of two.

It is your country, you decide. I have no problem. Be whatever you want to be and call your country whatever you want to call it.

That wasn't the point. You said,

I am still waiting for an example of another ethnicity which is created by people who speak different languages and have different religions! Do you have any such example?

I had. I gave it. That was it.

I didn't realize you were answering that question. The vast majority of English are Christian and speak English. Those who don't are consider as parts of ethnic minorities. You know your own country better of course (as I know mine better), but I don't think I am wrong in this, am I? So I don't know how your answer was related to my question. What happened in England was a long process of natural assimilation and evolution. It happened to Cyprus many times in the past and if that same process was allowed with the TCs without foreign intervention then soon the TC minority would have been assimilated with the rest of Cypriots. Until 1960, and even 1974, almost all TCs spoke Greek and some of them even had Greek as their first language.

I think a lot of people don't care how you identify yourselves; they only wish you would all work together to stop British/American/NATO interference and to protect your communities and your country from environmental and economic destruction by tourism for Brits abroad.

Trying to tell us what we are and what our island is, is a huge interference already. What we want is our freedom and self-determination and nobody else telling us what we should be and what we should do.

So now you react when I agree that British/American/NATO interference is wrong, and suggest that it might be easier to stop if all Cypriots worked together? Foreign imperialists wished to split the island to make it manageable. Local nationalists made their dream come true. Local nationalists are their own worst enemy. But that is just my own opinion. You can believe the nationalists have made Cyprus a paradise if you want. That's your choice.

The imperialists armed and gave incentives to the TC minority in order to turn them against the majority. If there was no foreign imperialism then there would be no problem at all. The Cypriots would gain their freedom and self-determination and they would peacefully and democratically decide the destiny of their own island, choosing among legitimate options, one of which is " integration into an independent State" as defined by the UN resolution about decolonization.
http://www.un.org/Depts/dpi/decolonizat ... ration.htm

If you are such an anti-nationalist then start by splitting up your own nation into weak little pieces that can not defend themselves. England, Scotland, and North Ireland have much less reasons to be united in one country, than mainland Greece along with the Greek islands (which includes Cyprus).

When the world will change and there will be no nations and no borders then come and we will talk again. Until then don't accuse as of "nationalism" just because we want our nation to be united and more able to defend itself from other bigger imperialist nations such as yours.

[Oracle]

It is the CopperLines of this world who think it is more important what others label you as (he is the master bigot after all), instead of allowing one, the Right and due respect, that as a Human being, he may just know himself better.

Does that mean you accept I'm English? Actually, I don't like to identify myself by any ethnic label, but if I have to be categorised something by someone else, it should be something accurate.

Whatever! The only issue I had with you was regarding your honesty in not admitting you were looking at the CyProb from a pro-Turkish point of view. Which is fine; but unacceptable if one is either too blind to see, or not honest enough to admit, which camp they rest in.

As far as your Anglo-Saxon comments to Piratis .... All those previous invaders of Britain (last ones nearly a thousand years ago), still remaining, speak English, are historically "Church of England", most likely have English surnames etc. ... they have integrated (unlike the TCs) and identify themselves as English. The exceptions are some Cornish folk, Welsh, Scots, Irish who have a different historical religion and their own language too (Gaelic), should they choose to perpetuate it. Those are the main (older) ethnicities of Britain, and they are connected by their Nationality of being British.

Why are you so insistent that being Cypriot (to the exclusion of being Greek) is an ethnicity, and not just a Nationality?

[samarkeolog]

See? This is our disagreement; it's not about language. You think Greek Cypriots are Greeks in Cyprus; I think Greek Cypriots are Cypriots.

Yes, but you see, what you think on this issue doesn't count because you are not Cypriot. I am Cypriot and what I think counts. And the vast majority of Greek Cypriots are amazingly Greek Cypriots!! Its in the name. Greek for ethnicity, and Cypriot because we are native of Cyprus. If we were not Greek, then we wouldn't call ourselves Greek Cypriots right?

As I've said before (should I include the "as I've said before" again as well, because I've said this more than once?), I'm not telling you what to feel or what to be. You can believe you are whatever you want. I can tell you how I perceive things. Both things can happen.

Exactly. Isn't this why we started this discussion. Because of some preconceived notions that you have? So continue if you want. Disregard all the historical and scientific evidence, and choose some baseless politically motivated claims to base your views.

Do I need to provide you with the definitions of perception and preconception? Assuming that you're not doing this deliberately, I do.

Perception: 'the ability to see, hear, or become aware of something through the senses.... ORIGIN Latin, from percipere 'seize, understand''.

Conception: 'ability to imagine or understand'.

Preconception: 'a preconceived idea or prejudice', where prejudice is 'preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or experience'.

The people you perceive as English are a mix of people-who-never-had-an-ethnic-identity (European hunter-gatherers and farmers who lived on or passed through in the distant past) and people-who-are-given-an-ethnic-identity (Romans, Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, Normans, et al). During the Roman period, communities from Africa and the Middle East were introduced into the mix. (There were probably individuals from lots of places before and after that, but we can only talk about the recorded ones we know arrived.) "The Vikings" - the Norse communities - were themselves mixed, as they lived and worked from North America to Asia. The Normans - the "North Men" - were Norse mixed with people-in-what-is-now-northern-France; and they became the even more mixed Anglo-Normans after they arrived on the Rainy Isles. The Anglo-Saxons' name is a mixture of two.

It is your country, you decide. I have no problem. Be whatever you want to be and call your country whatever you want to call it.

That wasn't the point. You said,

I am still waiting for an example of another ethnicity which is created by people who speak different languages and have different religions! Do you have any such example?

I had. I gave it. That was it.

I didn't realize you were answering that question. The vast majority of English are Christian and speak English. Those who don't are consider as parts of ethnic minorities. You know your own country better of course (as I know mine better), but I don't think I am wrong in this, am I?

You're not wrong, but it's more complicated.

Only 57% of Britons consider themselves Christian, which is more than 50%, and so a majority, but that includes the more religious populations of Scotland and Northern Ireland, as well as all of the people who consider themselves "culturally Christian". I know an English priest who is atheist! And even most of the practising Christians wouldn't say it was an essential part of Englishness. So, Christianity isn't really part of the definition of Englishness.

Not speaking English would be an obvious sign that someone was an ethnic minority, but effectively all minority Britons can speak English, too; so speaking English isn't part of the definition of Englishness either. Englishness is basically "not being not English". It is a negative identity. Of course, English nationalists would insist that England was a white, Christian nation, but they're the kind of people who go clubbing in Agia Napa for a holiday.

So I don't know how your answer was related to my question. What happened in England was a long process of natural assimilation and evolution. It happened to Cyprus many times in the past and if that same process was allowed with the TCs without foreign intervention then soon the TC minority would have been assimilated with the rest of Cypriots. Until 1960, and even 1974, almost all TCs spoke Greek and some of them even had Greek as their first language.

But when you say "assimilated with the rest of Cypriots", you think "the rest of Cypriots" are Greeks, so, you're saying that without foreign intervention, the Turkish Cypriots would have been assimilated by the Greeks?

I agree that foreign intervention has caused a lot of problems in Cyprus, but EOKA weren't foreign, TMT weren't foreign. Without foreign intervention, and without local nationalist intervention, anything could have happened. Why assume that the Turkish Cypriots would have disappeared? Why not assume that they would have remained, and no-one would have cared, because it isn't important which language you speak, or which religion you practise (if any). Why not assume that nothing would have happened, and the different communities would have continued to live in peace, because it was only local nationalists and foreign imperialists who wanted something to happen?

I think a lot of people don't care how you identify yourselves; they only wish you would all work together to stop British/American/NATO interference and to protect your communities and your country from environmental and economic destruction by tourism for Brits abroad.

Trying to tell us what we are and what our island is, is a huge interference already. What we want is our freedom and self-determination and nobody else telling us what we should be and what we should do.

So now you react when I agree that British/American/NATO interference is wrong, and suggest that it might be easier to stop if all Cypriots worked together? Foreign imperialists wished to split the island to make it manageable. Local nationalists made their dream come true. Local nationalists are their own worst enemy. But that is just my own opinion. You can believe the nationalists have made Cyprus a paradise if you want. That's your choice.

The imperialists armed and gave incentives to the TC minority in order to turn them against the majority. If there was no foreign imperialism then there would be no problem at all.

... because the Greek Cypriot majority would have been armed and the people they were pointing the guns at defenceless? EOKA turned the Turkish Cypriots against the Greek Cypriots. EOKA forced them to arm themselves. Don't blame the British for Greek Cypriot nationalist extremists' murder of Turkish Cypriots. Blame the British for a lot of crimes, but blame them for their own, not for EOKA's.

the The Cypriots would gain their freedom and self-determination and they would peacefully and democratically decide the destiny of their own island, choosing among legitimate options, one of which is " integration into an independent State" as defined by the UN resolution about decolonization.
http://www.un.org/Depts/dpi/decolonizat ... ration.htm

If you are such an anti-nationalist then start by splitting up your own nation into weak little pieces that can not defend themselves. England, Scotland, and North Ireland have much less reasons to be united in one country, than mainland Greece along with the Greek islands (which includes Cyprus).

I couldn't care less whether Britain splits up or not. Most English people don't care. Some Scots and Welsh want independence (but not that many, and only when their economy is doing well; when the crisis started, they got a lot quieter... So much for it being a matter of principle!). I'm not trying to split anything up, or to keep anything together. I simply don't care. I care that people in a country can go to school, see a doctor, make a life for themselves; I don't care in which country they do those things, or, indeed, in which country they do not do those things.

When the world will change and there will be no nations and no borders then come and we will talk again. Until then don't accuse as of "nationalism" just because we want our nation to be united and more able to defend itself from other bigger imperialist nations such as yours.

The Republic of Cyprus was overthrown in a coup by Greek Cypriot nationalist extremists and Greek imperialists. Their coup caused the Turkish invasion. The British crime was not intervening to end the coup, not protecting the Cypriots' from their own nationalists and from other foreign imperialists...