Tak kto mi evropeyci ili aziati?

[nargiza]

Ya jivu v Moskve i moi zdeshnie druz'ya chasto interesuytsya kakoy obraz misley i stil' povedeniya u molodeji Uzbekistana. Ya imeyu v vidu nash civil'niy sloy molodeji.
Tak ot kogo u nas v mislyah i povedenii bol'she? Ot evropeycev ili ot aziatov?

P.S. Ya ne darom razdelila misli i postupki - eto poroi raznie vechi...

[Freestyler]

A mi - razniye!

I potom, fraza "civilniy sloy molodyoji" chto znachit?

[Fritz (to all above)]

Mi evropeyci i aziati. Some of us came from Mo'go'llar Qabilasi, others came from Europe that is not clear to me which part of Europe from.

[kitaec]

na vopros kto mi ya dumayi skinheadi v moskve uje davno otvetili.
ne poteme izviniyus.

[Nancyy]

ya by skazala oriental people with western way of thinking.

[KrokoBAZUKA]

kiki a mojet ty kikimora? :)

[U.B]

my mongoly

[stud]

U.B (Apr 25, 2002 04:05):
my mongoly

privet mongolam v Uzbekistan online forum ! :)

[pax_americana]

Fritz (to all above) (Apr 24, 2002 16:10):
Mi evropeyci i aziati. Some of us came from Mo'go'llar Qabilasi, others came from Europe that is not clear to me which part of Europe from.

In general I agree. But not "some of us come from..."!!!
I think Uzbeks, like all nations (yeah, I mean there's no pure nation, actually), came from different nations taken in different proportions.

It is known that while the turkic tribes were living in the East, somewhere in Altay, the Central Asia was populated by Soghdians - the indo-european peoples.
So, we Uzbeks are a mixture of those Soghdians, Tohars, ancient Turks, Ephtalites and Mongols.

[qadriyat]

MI VSYO TAKI AZIYATI,PO MENTALITETU, A TAK BU MANI FIKRIM

[nados]

Mi nahodimsya v Asii, znachit asiati, esli bi nahodilis v evrope to bili bi evropeytsami, esli v amerike amerikantsami. No mi vse taki obichniye lyudi kak vse narodi na zemle.

[Freestyler]

Tut kto-to pravil'no zametil, chto ne nado putat' indoyevropeyskiy etnos s yevropeyskim.

V formirovanii uzbekskogo etnosa na samom dele igrali rol' neskol'ko indoyevropeyskiy narodnostey (naprimer takiye kak sogdiyci, saki i massageti - predki nineshnih tadjikov), no takje mnogo mongoloidov (tyurki naprimer).

V etnogragii, smes' indoyevropeyskoy nacii s mongoloidnoy naziveytsya "metis"om. Poetomu poluchayetsya, chto mi imeyem cherti lica kak yevropeycev (a tochneye indoyevropeycev) tak i aziatov.

A kasatel'no mishleniya, mi - razniye! Vsyo zavisit ot vospitaniya, obrazovaniya i mesta gde viros. Ya schitayu sebya kosmopolitom, no tol'ko v silu togo, chto ya poluchil ves'ma raznoobraznoye obrazovaniye. No dumayu v obshey masse v Uzbekistane do sih por prevliruyut tradicional'niye cennosti i moral'niye normi.

[kastryulka]

Bu mavzuga yaxshi fikrlar munozara etilibdiyu. Uylaymanki , hamma uziga xuloso qilgan holda uz fikrini yozgan, amerikalikka yoki evropalikka uzini uxshatib :) .
Paxta dalasida ketmon kutarib yurgan yosh yigitlarimiz soni sizlardan kupku azizlar. Ularni Mentaliteti qanday?
Ozroq umumiy fikrlash kerak.
Biz uzimizni uzimiz baholay olmaymiz, lekin chetdagilar fikricha biz kuproq sharqiy Evropadan ( Rossiya v.b)urin olamiz. Kelib chiqish jihatiga kelsak, Mix
( Mongol,turk,arab, Eron, yana Sak, massaget. v b.)

[nados]

Kastryulka pravilno govorit.

[____]

kastryulka (Apr 26, 2002 12:00):
Bu mavzuga yaxshi fikrlar munozara etilibdiyu. Uylaymanki , hamma uziga xuloso qilgan holda uz fikrini yozgan, amerikalikka yoki evropalikka uzini uxshatib :) .
Paxta dalasida ketmon kutarib yurgan yosh yigitlarimiz soni sizlardan kupku azizlar. Ularni Mentaliteti qanday?
Ozroq umumiy fikrlash kerak.
Biz uzimizni uzimiz baholay olmaymiz, lekin chetdagilar fikricha biz kuproq sharqiy Evropadan ( Rossiya v.b)urin olamiz. Kelib chiqish jihatiga kelsak, Mix
( Mongol,turk,arab, Eron, yana Sak, massaget. v b.)

hoz paxta dalasida ketmon ko'targanla kam, juda kam. ko'pchiligi toshkentda yoki rossiyani bir chekkasida eski haltasini ko'tarib yurishibdi. :( >(

[astick]

mi uzbeki i etim vse skazano, samaya bolshaya po chislu natsiya v sredney azii. u menya mama indianka, smuglinkaya a papa blondin s golubimi glazami po vneshnosti, a ya artefakt ih chistokrovniy uzbek, i ya gorjus etim.

[Pax]

nados (Apr 26, 2002 03:19):
Mi nahodimsya v Asii, znachit asiati, esli bi nahodilis v evrope to bili bi evropeytsami, esli v amerike amerikantsami.

Da???
A razve vam ne izvestno chto Evropa eto vsego lish otrog aziatskogo kontinenta, i chto razdelyayut Aziyu i Evropu ves'ma uslovno... i daje po jelaniyu!

Naprimer Izrail. Ihnye sportivnye kommandy igrayut v Evrolige, v to vremya kak tam i ne popahivayet Evropoy, v geogragraficheskom otnoshenii.

S drugoy storony Turciya, chast' territorii kotoroy nahoditsya v Evrope, i kotoraya vot uje skol'ko let sostoit v evropeyskom tamojennom soyuze (v ubytok sebe) v nadejde stat' polnopravnym chlenom EvroSoyuza.

No im vidimo bednye rodstvenniki, ili sosedi, ne nujny.
Da i potom na vopros kto my, Uzbeki, u razlichnyh nauchnyh disciplin mogut byt' razlichnye otvety.

1-Georgraficheski
2-Etnogenez
3-Yazyk
4- A chto chetvertoe-to? A ya i sam ne znayu :). Predlojeniya?

Does anybody want to expand my outline for analysis of the question?

[reader]

NOVAYA GAZETA, 22.04.2002

"...Какая же вы белая раса?.."

ПЕРЕПИСКА РУССКИХ И НЕМЕЦКИХ СКИНХЕДОВ

(Из интернета цитируется дословно)

«Здравствуйте, дорогие немецкие скинхеды. Пишут вам русские скинхеды. Мы тоже у себя в Москве мочим хачей, негров и жидов, потому что да здравствует великая белая раса».
Немецкие скинхеды ответили:
«Здравствуйте, дорогие русские скинхеды. Это очень хорошо, что вы мочите там у себя хачей, негров и жидов, только вот про великую белую расу вы не завирайтесь. Потому что какая же вы белая раса? Вы — славянское дерьмо. И мы, в свою очередь, как только перебьем у себя в Германии негров, хачей и жидов, станем бить вас, славянскую сволочь».

Материал Галины МУРСАЛИЕВОЙ
22.04.2002

[vatandosh]

from Brat'2, Danila Bodrov: "... menia v shkole tak uchili- v kitae jivut kitaycy, v izraile yevrei, v afike negry..."
- logicheskim prodoljeniyem etoy frazy kasatel'no etogo topica budet "a v uzbekistane UZBEKISTANCY" (a ne aziaty ili evropeycy, ili mongoly ili turki kak nekotorye utverjdayut)

;) :D :D :D :D :D :D :D ;)

[NoOffence]

Nados has a point.

Every human being is out of dust.

But in terms of thinking, awareness and sense of responsibilty uzbeks are more or less asians.

It does not matter where you are from, it really matters what you do and how well you do it.

Peace,

[kris]

DA?! AZIATI? EVROPECI? DETKA MI LYUDI ! PONYATNA A V MOSKOW MI CHUJIE DA I VEZDE MI CHUJIE! YA NE GOVORYU CHTO YA SEBYA CHUVSTVUYU CHUJOI V UZBEKISTANE NO MNOGIE MOI DRUZYA CHUSTVUYUT SEBYA TAK VOT TEBE PRIMER RUSKII ILI KAREEC JIVET V UZBEKISTANE CHUSTVUET SEBYA CHIJIM( NE VOVSEX SLUCHAYAX) ON EDIT V MOSKOV ILI KAREYU TAM ON TOJE BUDET CHUSTVOVAT CHUJIM! PONIMAESH O CHEM YA ?! VOT ESHE TEBE REALNII PRIMER MOI DRUG POEHAL V MOSKVU IZ TASH CHISTOKROVNII RUSKII DAJE FAMILIYA IVANOV I ZNAESH KAK EGO TAM NAZIVALI? CHERNOJOPIM( IZVENYAYUS) TAK CHTO NE ZACHEM ETOT VOPROS KTO MI MI LYUDI NO.. DLYA MOSKOW MI CHUJIE DAJE ESLI MI RUSKIE! PONYATNO!
P:memo: ya ne ruskaya

[Kolobok]

Mi Aziati!
Logika: Central'naya AZIYA!Naschet etogo voprosa daje nedoljno bit'!Asia Rocks! Future of the world is in our hands(Asia)
Kolobo4ek ;)

[Thunderstike]

European or Asian?

good question, but one should elaborate what's implied by "european" or "asian".


Geografically Uzbekistan is located in Central Asia, however geografical devision of Europe and Asia is very conditional. So, Central Asia is regarded sometimes as a region with european cultural values or eastern Europe. At the university, where I study, Uzbekistan is lited amoung countries of Eastern Europe.

Racially uzbeks are different, most being european, the rest mixture of different races(white+yellow).

Mentally most of uzbeks are conservative oriental peoples (e.g. like people in Turkey).

I can tell you smth. from own experience: here at the university they regard me as russian. From first impression many think I am italian, spainish, greek or someone from Medeterranian, then when I say: "I am uzbek", they often get surprised and ask: "what's uzbek?" :) after that one needs to explain, that it's a newly independent state, which some years ago was part of former Soviet Union...

[KinJalo]

marsiane mi, vot!

[Mirzabek]

Mda teem nifigovaya ya bil rad sho lyudi mogut obsujdat kak i otkuda keldi.Ha togri ozimizi nima bolganimizi va kayerdan kelganimiz i tepsiga nima kilishimizni esdan chikarmashiligimiz kerak.
Kechela ketmon chopib yurgan odamiz dostlar :D

umid bomaganda kopi uzb yoki rossiyada okib yurishsidi
rossiyada bolsa "Uryuki yoki chyorniye deb bizalrga" avtoritetimizi tushurar edik.
Ozbemiz ozbek bilib kolayli va Orta Osyoda tugulgan bolsak aziyat bilamiz shunaka bespantoviy sovllar soragan kizlarga boshiga bitta urub koyish kerak kim Nargiza mi? :x

Nargiza ti ne aziatka i vashe nikto TI MAMBETKA VO :D :D :D

Yahshi niyatlar bilan Mirzabek

[uahahhahaha]

woaahahahahhaha, Aziati mish hamen harip sala.

[BOBOY[]]

[quote="kris"]DA?! AZIATI? EVROPECI? DETKA MI LYUDI ! PONYATNA A V MOSKOW MI CHUJIE DA I VEZDE MI CHUJIE! YA NE GOVORYU CHTO YA SEBYA CHUVSTVUYU CHUJOI V UZBEKISTANE NO MNOGIE MOI DRUZYA CHUSTVUYUT SEBYA TAK VOT TEBE PRIMER RUSKII ILI KAREEC JIVET V UZBEKISTANE CHUSTVUET SEBYA CHIJIM( NE VOVSEX SLUCHAYAX) ON EDIT V MOSKOV ILI KAREYU TAM ON TOJE BUDET CHUSTVOVAT CHUJIM! PONIMAESH O CHEM YA ?! VOT ESHE TEBE REALNII PRIMER MOI DRUG POEHAL V MOSKVU IZ TASH CHISTOKROVNII RUSKII DAJE FAMILIYA IVANOV I ZNAESH KAK EGO TAM NAZIVALI? CHERNOJOPIM( IZVENYAYUS) TAK CHTO NE ZACHEM ETOT VOPROS KTO MI MI LYUDI NO.. DLYA MOSKOW MI CHUJIE DAJE ESLI MI RUSKIE! PONYATNO!
P:memo: ya ne ruskaya[/quote

TI CHUVSTVUESH SEBYA CHUJOY? NA SVOYOM RODINE? V UZBEKISTANE?
UZBEKISTANSKIYE RUSSKIYE ETO NASHI RUSSKIYE
MENTOLITET RUSSKIH JIVUSHIH V ROSSII DRUGOY CHEM JIVUSHIH V UZBEKISTANE.
RUSSKIY ,TATAR,KOREETS,TADJIK,PERSIAN WHATEVER MI UZBEKISTANTSI!!!
UNITED NATIONS OF UZBEKISTAN
UNITED WE STAND!

[BOBOY[]]

"][quote="kris"]DA?! AZIATI? EVROPECI? DETKA MI LYUDI ! PONYATNA A V MOSKOW MI CHUJIE DA I VEZDE MI CHUJIE! YA NE GOVORYU CHTO YA SEBYA CHUVSTVUYU CHUJOI V UZBEKISTANE NO MNOGIE MOI DRUZYA CHUSTVUYUT SEBYA TAK VOT TEBE PRIMER RUSKII ILI KAREEC JIVET V UZBEKISTANE CHUSTVUET SEBYA CHIJIM( NE VOVSEX SLUCHAYAX) ON EDIT V MOSKOV ILI KAREYU TAM ON TOJE BUDET CHUSTVOVAT CHUJIM! PONIMAESH O CHEM YA ?! VOT ESHE TEBE REALNII PRIMER MOI DRUG POEHAL V MOSKVU IZ TASH CHISTOKROVNII RUSKII DAJE FAMILIYA IVANOV I ZNAESH KAK EGO TAM NAZIVALI? CHERNOJOPIM( IZVENYAYUS) TAK CHTO NE ZACHEM ETOT VOPROS KTO MI MI LYUDI NO.. DLYA MOSKOW MI CHUJIE DAJE ESLI MI RUSKIE! PONYATNO!
P:memo: ya ne ruskaya[/quote

TI CHUVSTVUESH SEBYA CHUJOY? NA SVOYOM RODINE? V
UZBEKISTANE?
UZBEKISTANSKIYE RUSSKIYE ETO NASHI RUSSKIYE
MENTOLITET RUSSKIH JIVUSHIH V ROSSII DRUGOY CHEM JIVUSHIH V UZBEKISTANE.
RUSSKIY ,TATAR,KOREETS,TADJIK,PERSIAN WHATEVER MI UZBEKISTANTSI!!!
UNITED NATIONS OF UZBEKISTAN
UNITED WE STAND!



SORRY YA NEVNEMATELNO PROCHITAL . NASCHYOT ETOGOI " YA NE GOVORYU CHTO YA SEBYA CHUVSTVUYU CHUJOI V UZBEKISTANE "

[paradigm]

u better say back to russians: "get out more". Nado vopros pokonkretnee zadavat.

[NeZnayka]

hi guys,
I think the question sounds really judging, but I'm NOT going to do so, instead I want to ezplain why many people try to create the image of Europeans, that's beacuse of our menthality.
Here's article from another session, but maybe it fits this one as well:

biz globalshuv jarayoniga qarshi chiqa olmaymiz chunki bu tarraqiyotning davomidir.Lekin garblashtirish bu alohida masala. O'zbekiston jahon hamjamiyatiga qo'shilishi bilan birga o'z urf-otad va madaniyatini saqlab qolishi mumkin va bu buzning maqsadimiz bo'lishi kerak

Anonymous, menimcha globallashuv qullab quvvatlangani holda, uzimizning urf odatlarimizni saqlab qolishga "urinish", bu usha globallashuvga chegara quyish bilan aynan bir narsa. Masalan, US da uqiyotgan bola, u yerda bilim olish birga, usha bilim bilan associyaciyada bulgan fikrlash principi, madaniyatni ham uzlashtirishi mumkin. Aynan G'arb madaniyatining hozirgi kundagi metropolit harakteri uning muvaffaqiyatini ta'minlab turgan eng muhim omil hisoblanadi. Bundan tashqari G'arb madaniyatida har "shahs" qadrlanadi, Uzbekistonda, yoki boshqa sharq davlatlarida bulganidek "ayrm", "hudo bandalariga marhamat etgan" shahslar emas.
Kim uzini shahs deb tan oladigan jamiyatdan voz kechishni yoki ushanday jamiyatda YASHAMASLIKNI hohlaydi, menimcha hech kim.
Madaniyat bu halq mentalitetining rivojlanganlik darajasini kursatuvchi bir belgi. Halq ma'lum bir dogmatik qarashlar va odatlar, ramkalar chegarasida qolib ketadigan bulsa bu uning tashqi dunyo yutuqlariga nisbatan KOMPLEKS lik tuyghusini yuzaga keltirib chiqaradi.
Aynan mana shu narsa navbatdagi diktatorlar, Faraonlarning kelib chiqishiga sabab buladi
Thanks for your attention

[NeZnayka]

hi guys,
I think the question sounds really judging, but I'm NOT going to do so, instead I want to ezplain why many people try to create the image of Europeans, that's beacuse of our menthality.
Here's article from another session, but maybe it fits this one as well:

biz globalshuv jarayoniga qarshi chiqa olmaymiz chunki bu tarraqiyotning davomidir.Lekin garblashtirish bu alohida masala. O'zbekiston jahon hamjamiyatiga qo'shilishi bilan birga o'z urf-otad va madaniyatini saqlab qolishi mumkin va bu buzning maqsadimiz bo'lishi kerak

Anonymous, menimcha globallashuv qullab quvvatlangani holda, uzimizning urf odatlarimizni saqlab qolishga "urinish", bu usha globallashuvga chegara quyish bilan aynan bir narsa. Masalan, US da uqiyotgan bola, u yerda bilim olish birga, usha bilim bilan associyaciyada bulgan fikrlash principi, madaniyatni ham uzlashtirishi mumkin. Aynan G'arb madaniyatining hozirgi kundagi metropolit harakteri uning muvaffaqiyatini ta'minlab turgan eng muhim omil hisoblanadi. Bundan tashqari G'arb madaniyatida har "shahs" qadrlanadi, Uzbekistonda, yoki boshqa sharq davlatlarida bulganidek "ayrm", "hudo bandalariga marhamat etgan" shahslar emas.
Kim uzini shahs deb tan oladigan jamiyatdan voz kechishni yoki ushanday jamiyatda YASHAMASLIKNI hohlaydi, menimcha hech kim.
Madaniyat bu halq mentalitetining rivojlanganlik darajasini kursatuvchi bir belgi. Halq ma'lum bir dogmatik qarashlar va odatlar, ramkalar chegarasida qolib ketadigan bulsa bu uning tashqi dunyo yutuqlariga nisbatan KOMPLEKS lik tuyghusini yuzaga keltirib chiqaradi.
Aynan mana shu narsa navbatdagi diktatorlar, Faraonlarning kelib chiqishiga sabab buladi
Thanks for your attention

[Tank]

woahahahha, Aziati s Evropeskim mishleniem. Kazahi te vashe shas seba EvroAziatami nazivayt, mol polavina Kazahstana okazivaetsa v Europ. Dlya ne dagonov mi Central Asian!

[Reader]

pax_americana wrote:

It is known that while the turkic tribes were living in the East, somewhere in Altay, the Central Asia was populated by Soghdians - the indo-european peoples.
So, we Uzbeks are a mixture of those Soghdians, Tohars, ancient Turks, Ephtalites and Mongols.

Your description seems to be closer to a logical one. But why don't you want to be precise on Soghdians? "Indo-europeans" is a very wide notion, it consists of hundreds nations and tribes. But it has got some sub-divisions like "Slavs", "Indians", "Germans", "Iranians"... Soghdians belong to the Iranian category of Indo-European people. By the way, Soghdiana is a province in the contemporary Tajikistan and that region used to be in the heart of the ancient Soghdiana. You can even hear two alive Soghdian dialects in nowadays Tajikistan.

People who dislikes Tajikistan, don't get angry, plz. No way. Reality is reality.

Take care ;)

[thunderstrike]

pax_americana wrote:

It is known that while the turkic tribes were living in the East, somewhere in Altay, the Central Asia was populated by Soghdians - the indo-european peoples.
So, we Uzbeks are a mixture of those Soghdians, Tohars, ancient Turks, Ephtalites and Mongols.

Your description seems to be closer to a logical one. But why don't you want to be precise on Soghdians? "Indo-europeans" is a very wide notion, it consists of hundreds nations and tribes. But it has got some sub-divisions like "Slavs", "Indians", "Germans", "Iranians"... Soghdians belong to the Iranian category of Indo-European people. By the way, Soghdiana is a province in the contemporary Tajikistan and that region used to be in the heart of the ancient Soghdiana. You can even hear two alive Soghdian dialects in nowadays Tajikistan.

People who dislikes Tajikistan, don't get angry, plz. No way. Reality is reality.

Take care ;)

It's correct, that sogdian language belonged to indo-european language group. To be more precise sogdian language belongs to Indo-european group -> Indo-iranian sub-family -> iranian groupe -> eastern iranian sub-groupe of languages (this subgroupe includes Baluchi, Khwarazmian, Ossetic, Pamir dialects, Pushtu (Afghan), Saka (Khotanese), Sogdian, Yaghnobi languages). Tajik as well as persian belong to another subgroup - western iranian languages (like Kurdish, Pahlavi, Parthian). Alive dialect of sogdian dialect (Pamiri) differs from tajiki, so that tajiks cannot understand it.

With arab occupation of 8th century sogdians were pushed to Ferghana valley, where they later got assimilated by karluki turks(which make present day uzbeks of the valley). The rest of sogdians survived in high mountains of Pamir.

It's correct, that a province of Tajikistan is called "Sogd", which is mainly uzbek populated (tajiks of northern Tajikistan differ a lot from tajiks of the south, notherns are closely related to uzbeks of Ferghana valley). Territories of present Tajikistan were historically part of turkic and uzbek dynasties, later part of Uzbek SSR. Only due to anti-turkic politics of soviets Tajik SSR was created in 1929 (on expense of Uzbekistan), and territories like Hodjent and Badashkhan were bestowned to newly-created artificial state with the argument "new republic needs more surface" (the same happened with Osh-Jalalabad - territories given to Kyrgyz republic). However during soviets Tajikistan was mainly ruled by notherns tajiks(uzbeks) and badashkhanis, since both of them had a good reputation being smart and well-educated, maybe due to sogdian blood in veins ;)

[Reader]

Thunderstrike wrote:

Alive dialect of sogdian dialect (Pamiri) differs from tajiki, so that tajiks cannot understand it.

Your knowledge of languages seems fake especially looking at the sentence above. Pamiri dialetcs are not Soghdian at all and they are far more than just 2 alive dialects. We have Shoghni, Rushani, Ishkashimi, Yazgulami... dialects in Badakhshan. When I was talking ion 2 alive Soghdian dialects, I meant two Yaghnabi dialects and they are the only Soghdian dialects survived. Therefore Yaghnab is considered as the core of Soghdiana and it is in nowadays Tajikistan.

Badakhshan is another province of Tajikistan with highly-mountainous Tajiks and their dialects belong to eastern Iranian sub-group. But they are very close to Persian (Tajiki). For example, the word for night in Pamiri (Badakhshi) dialects is "khab" (in Persian "shab), and all Persian "sh"-s in Pamiri dialects sound as "kh" (khanda - shindow etc.) The word for "eye" is "cem" as "cheshm" in Persian... The expression for "how are you?" is "carang?" in Persian "che rang?" So, it is very funny to scrutinize these dialects and languages far away from each other.

Pamiri people belong to ansient Takharians, by the way, not to ancient Soghdians. Nowadays they are Tajiks (Iranians).

Thunderstrike wrote:

It's correct, that a province of Tajikistan is called "Sogd", which is mainly uzbek populated (tajiks of northern Tajikistan differ a lot from tajiks of the south, notherns are closely related to uzbeks of Ferghana valley).

It is another desperate attack of an Uzbek chauvenist, but again - in vain. Certainly, Soghd province (Soghdiana) is not mainly uzbek-populated at all. Tajikistan has not got any Uzbek-dominant province or region, unlike Uzbekistan with Persian-dominated Samarqand, Bukhara, Ferghana, Surkhandarya etc.

Thunderstrike wrote:

Only due to anti-turkic politics of soviets Tajik SSR was created in 1929 (on expense of Uzbekistan), and territories like Hodjent and Badashkhan were bestowned to newly-created artificial state with the argument "new republic needs more surface" (the same happened with Osh-Jalalabad - territories given to Kyrgyz republic).

Uzbekistan itself has been created by Soviet panturkists. Uzbek chauvenists have to build up huge golden monuments of Stalin and Lenin and to pray for them. If they wouldn't happen to seize the power in Russia, there woudn't be any country called Uzbekistan with an "Uzbek" language as its official language. Bukhara, Khorezm, Samarqand, Khojand and etc. spoke in Persian. Do you call it anti-turkic politics of Soviets? Tajiks were only Iranians among Slavo-Turks in the Soviet time. Therefore there could not be any pan-Iranistic tendency in Soviet Union. There could be just Slavophils and panturkists. Khojand was and is a Persian-populated Persian-speaking city as well as Bukhara and Samarqand. (Your remark on Kyrgyzstan shows your chauvenistic approach better than never).

Thunderstrike wrote:

However during soviets Tajikistan was mainly ruled by notherns tajiks(uzbeks) and badashkhanis, since both of them had a good reputation being smart and well-educated, maybe due to sogdian blood in veins


We do not have such complex, unlike you. We do not think that we had been ruled by non-Tajiks or Uzbeks, unlike you (most of you think that the present ruler of Uzbekistan is a Tajik, Sharaf Rashidov was a Tajik, Nishanov was a Tajik, F. Khajaev was a Tajik (I'm talking just about rulers, not others). You are right that most of our Soviet leaders were from the north, but all of them were Tajiks. By the way, nobody from Badakhshan had reached the highest point of the power in Tajikistan during the Soviet time. Afther the collapse, there was just one. And they are really as smart and well-educated as most of Tajiks with Soghdian, Tokharian, Khorezmian... generally, Iranian blood in veins. Hamza Hakimzada Niyazi originally was from Rasht (eastern Tajikistan), but created Uzbek Soviet literature or Kamil Yarmatov went from Dushanbe to Tashkent and built up the Uzbek film industry... Do you want me to continue this list?

By the way, do you know the word for "thunder" in the modern Persian? It is "tundar", which indicates the real origins of Persian and Persiams.

Don't get angry, plz! I'm your friend ;)

[thunderstrike]

Thunderstrike wrote:

Alive dialect of sogdian dialect (Pamiri) differs from tajiki, so that tajiks cannot understand it.

Your knowledge of languages seems fake especially looking at the sentence above. Pamiri dialetcs are not Soghdian at all and they are far more than just 2 alive dialects. We have Shoghni, Rushani, Ishkashimi, Yazgulami... dialects in Badakhshan. When I was talking ion 2 alive Soghdian dialects, I meant two Yaghnabi dialects and they are the only Soghdian dialects survived.

well reader, I meant under pamiri languages languages spoken in pamir, which differ from tajiki. You right that pamiri dialects are not sogdian, but closely related to it, as both of them belong to the same sub-group of eastern iranian languages of indo-iranic subfamily of indo-european languages. Yaghnobi is a dialect of sogdian language, which is distinct from tajiki. It's believed sogdian was spoken in Kashkadarya, Zeravshan and Ferghana valleys till middle ages, then assimilated to uzbek.

Badakhshan is another province of Tajikistan with highly-mountainous Tajiks and their dialects belong to eastern Iranian sub-group. But they are very close to Persian (Tajiki).

Pamiris differ from tajiks both linguistically and anthropologically. Tajiks themselved do not call pamiris tajiks, but "Pomiri" or the "Shughni". A term used to pamiris "mountain tajiks" is nor scientific or serious. Pamiri languages are different from persian to the extend, that both cannot understand each-other.

they are very close to Persian (Tajiki). For example, the word for night in Pamiri (Badakhshi) dialects is "khab" (in Persian "shab), and all Persian "sh"-s in Pamiri dialects sound as "kh" (khanda - shindow etc.) The word for "eye" is "cem" as "cheshm" in Persian... The expression for "how are you?" is "carang?" in Persian "che rang?" So, it is very funny to scrutinize these dialects and languages far away from each other.

it's correct, that some words sound similar, but it does not make them the same language. For example there are lots of similarities between persian and urdu, still both are different languages.

Pamiri people belong to ansient Takharians, by the way, not to ancient Soghdians. Nowadays they are Tajiks (Iranians).
It's correct, after Russians bestowned Badashkhan to newly created state Tajik Soviet Republic pamiris began persihing gradually being assimilated by tajiks. But still many pamiris maintained their own language, many women being monolingual (they do not care about tajiki).
And AFAIK Tajikistan is not part of Iran and tajiks are not "iranians".


Thunderstrike wrote:
It's correct, that a province of Tajikistan is called "Sogd", which is mainly uzbek populated (tajiks of northern Tajikistan differ a lot from tajiks of the south, notherns are closely related to uzbeks of Ferghana valley).

It is another desperate attack of an Uzbek chauvenist, but again - in vain. Certainly, Soghd province (Soghdiana) is not mainly uzbek-populated at all. Tajikistan has not got any Uzbek-dominant province or region, unlike Uzbekistan with Persian-dominated Samarqand, Bukhara, Ferghana, Surkhandarya etc.

That's wrong. Sogd province of Tajikistan with its regional center Hodjent is mainly uzbek populated. I am from Ferghana andwas many times in Hodjent - I know what I am talking about, believe me. In fact according official data ethnic uzbeks constitute 26% of the population of Tajikistan, in reality much more (according to some data 40% of Tajikistan's population are ethnic uzbeks). Persian in Uzbekistan is spoken only in historical cities as a matter of tradition - persian used to be language of culture and education, so that many became persian speking, without necessarily being persian.
It's hard to get, why you start crying "Uzbek chauvenist". Maybe you have some complexes against uzbeks, that every time you here something about uzbeks you get so emotional.


Uzbekistan itself has been created by Soviet panturkists. Uzbek chauvenists have to build up huge golden monuments of Stalin and Lenin and to pray for them.

Again you are totally wrong. Uzbekistan was created by anti-turk soviet communists with the aim to devide Turkistan and rule it. Soviets hated turks, because they performed swift resistanse against communits, even Turks from Turkey helped Turks from Turkistan fighting soviets - you might know about Enver Pasha.

In fact, it's tajiks of Tajikistan who prayed for Lenin and Stalin. When Hodjent was bestowned to newly created Tajik SSR in 1929 tajiks renamed the ancient uzbek city Hodjent to "Leninabad"(1936); Dushanbe, which was headquater of great uzbek freedom-fighter Ibrahim Bek was renamed by tajiks ater Stalin to Stalinabad (1929). As you see it was tajiks from tajikistan who, as you said, build up huge monuments of Stalin and Lenin and prayed for them. Be a "mard" and face the truth.


If they wouldn't happen to seize the power in Russia, there woudn't be any country called Uzbekistan with an "Uzbek" language as its official language. Bukhara, Khorezm, Samarqand, Khojand and etc. spoke in Persian. Do you call it anti-turkic politics of Soviets? Tajiks were only Iranians among Slavo-Turks in the Soviet time. Therefore there could not be any pan-Iranistic tendency in Soviet Union. There could be just Slavophils and panturkists. Khojand was and is a Persian-populated Persian-speaking city as well as Bukhara and Samarqand. (Your remark on Kyrgyzstan shows your chauvenistic approach better than never).

excuse me, but that's nonsense what you wrote. Uzbeks ruled much of present Central Asia well before russians - that's historical fact. Uzbeks are the biggest victim of soviet rule in central Asia, uzbeks having 50% of the whole population of the region were given proportionally the least territorium, the lands uzbeks ruled for thousand years were bestowned for others. You have wrong imagination about persians in Central Asia. So before russians occupied uzbek khanats, persians (do not confuse them with tajiks) were mainly kept by rich uzbek families as slaves (turkmens used to kidnapp persians and sell them as slaves), no persian ruled the region when russians came here.


Thunderstrike wrote:
However during soviets Tajikistan was mainly ruled by notherns tajiks(uzbeks) and badashkhanis, since both of them had a good reputation being smart and well-educated, maybe due to sogdian blood in veins


We do not have such complex, unlike you. We do not think that we had been ruled by non-Tajiks or Uzbeks, unlike you (most of you think that the present ruler of Uzbekistan is a Tajik, Sharaf Rashidov was a Tajik, Nishanov was a Tajik, F. Khajaev was a Tajik (I'm talking just about rulers, not others). You are right that most of our Soviet leaders were from the north, but all of them were Tajiks. By the way, nobody from Badakhshan had reached the highest point of the power in Tajikistan during the Soviet time. Afther the collapse, there was just one. And they are really as smart and well-educated as most of Tajiks with Soghdian, Tokharian, Khorezmian... generally, Iranian blood in veins. Hamza Hakimzada Niyazi originally was from Rasht (eastern Tajikistan), but created Uzbek Soviet literature or Kamil Yarmatov went from Dushanbe to Tashkent and built up the Uzbek film industry... Do you want me to continue this list?

You will be right if you say "We do have such complex, unlike you", since you really have complexes. Or else you would not speak on behalf of all tajiks and would use "I" instead of "we". It's likely, that the truth hurted you too much. Want it or not, many famous people of Tajikistan originate from north (Hodjent) and are ethnic uzbeks. They had been ruling Tajik SSR since its creation very successfully. Everybody knows what happened when kulyabis took over the power in Tajikistan - tajik killed tajik for no reason. Only Khodjent escaped violences of civil war. There are speculations, that Hodjent even wanted to join Uzbekistan, but unfortunately uzbek government didn't want collaps of Tajikistan in hard times and rejected wish of khodjendis.

As for persons you listed, almost all of them are uzbeks, with exception of Nishanov: Fayzulla Ubaydullaevich Hodjaev - true uzbek, from welthy family of Bukhara, contributed to state-building of Uzbekistan, was executed by soviets in 1938 on charges of organising nationlistic conspiracy against soviet rule. Hamza Hakimzadeh Niyaziy - called himself uzbek, wrote his poems in uzbek, was killed in Ferghana (Shahimardan) for his pro-communist ideas. Sharaf Rashidov - bright personality of uzbek nation; Kamil Yarmatov - uzbek, just he went from Dushanbe to Tashkent does not make him "tajik". In fact there quiete a lot of uzbeks in Dushanbe (or as tajiks used to call "Stalinabad").
Nishanov Rafik - ethnic tajik, who claimed to be "uzbek" (maybe didn't want to be associuated with tajiks??); was appointed as a first secretary of Uzbek SSR by Gorbatchev, because bouth studied together in 50-s.; had little to do with Uzbekistan and was regerded by many as "stupid leader".

P.S. actually this topic is about whether uzbeks should be called europeans or asians, you might want to write your comments in another topic, no need to bring "persian issue" in every topic ;)

regards

[Reader]

Hahahhahah, Thunderstrike,

You seem as a real thunderstrike from anger. Sorry to cause that, but whatever you read was just true and nothing else. I'll be back shortly to explain them better.

By the way, it is you who has changed the topic over here.

See you soon ;)

[Reader]

Hi again,

Thunderstrike, I'm absolutely aware that it is almost useless to reply to your bare and baseless allegations. You probably consider that even Abu Ali Sina, Biruni, Rumi etc.... were Uzbek too? Let alone Hamza Niazi, Kamil Yarmatov and other contemporary figures. Let me start from the beginning of your comic essay.

Thunderstrike wrote:

I meant under pamiri languages languages spoken in pamir, which differ from tajiki. You right that pamiri dialects are not sogdian, but closely related to it, as both of them belong to the same sub-group of eastern iranian languages of indo-iranic subfamily of indo-european languages. Yaghnobi is a dialect of sogdian language, which is distinct from tajiki. It's believed sogdian was spoken in Kashkadarya, Zeravshan and Ferghana valleys till middle ages, then assimilated to uzbek.

It means that you didn't know any single thing about these dialects and just wanted to stir the air with empty words. There are a lot of other languages and dialects in eastern sub-group too as Baluchi, Ossetic, Pashto etc. Can you tell that "I mean Baluchi when I talk about Ossetian"? Of course, no. They are different Iranian languages and it shows the wealth of the Iranian culture and its vast area.
There is no "tajiki" language and this word is a creation of anti-Persians and anti-Iranians to devide the single Persian language into three. Tajiki is the same Persian and there are a lot of Soghdian words in Persian language up to now. Soghdian is an Iranian language and has got nothing common with Turkic Uzbek. There are a lot of Persian or Soghdian borrowings in Uzbek, but this fact doesn't change the Turkic nature of Uzbek language: it belongs to Altai family of languages, not European one, unlike Persian. Therefore you can't tell that "Soghdian lang. had assimilated into Uzbek".


Thunderstrike wrote:

Pamiris differ from tajiks both linguistically and anthropologically. Tajiks themselved do not call pamiris tajiks, but "Pomiri" or the "Shughni". A term used to pamiris "mountain tajiks" is nor scientific or serious. Pamiri languages are different from persian to the extend, that both cannot understand each-other.

Pamiri dialects are within Iranian gropu of languages as well as Persian and I've given some examples before. They are not borrowings like Persian words for "dil" or "dilbar" or "ostona" or....... in Uzbek, but they came from the same roots with difference in pronunciation and spelling: "ca" - "chi", "cem" - "cheshm", "cakhma" - "chashma", "xab" - "shab". Like Russian word for "ax" (topor). "Ax" in Persian is "tabar". Neither Persians nor Russians can allege that one of them has borrowed this word from the other. "Tabar" and "topor" have got the same European stem. There are a lot of other examples which I can list right here for you. But I'm afraid it'll be too hard to digest for you.

Knowing these differences, I - a Persian can understand Pamiris. And as a Persian I consider that Pamiris are Tajiks and Iranians too. You as an Uzbek can talk only about your own identity, though I doubt you know it good enough.


Thunderstrike wrote:

it's correct, that some words sound similar, but it does not make them the same language. For example there are lots of similarities between persian and urdu, still both are different languages.

Refer to the previous answer. By the way, what you consider as similarities between Persian and Urdu, mainly are Persian or Arabic borrowings in Urdu. Certainly, Urdu as an Indo-European language has got similiarities with Persian too, but I'm sure, you didn't mean them, considering your linguistical understanding (do you distinguish "borrowings" from "linguistical similarities"?)

Thunderstrike wrote:

It's correct, after Russians bestowned Badashkhan to newly created state Tajik Soviet Republic pamiris began persihing gradually being assimilated by tajiks. But still many pamiris maintained their own language, many women being monolingual (they do not care about tajiki).
And AFAIK Tajikistan is not part of Iran and tajiks are not "iranians".

I'm sorry, but you are not right. Badakhshan was not bestowned to Tajikistan. It used to be a part of Persian empires from the beginning of history to now. Pamiris were not assimilated with Tajiks, they were and they are Tajiks. ..."many women"? What does it mean? Irrelevant. And finally, Central Asia (not only Tajikistan) was a huge part of Iran and more than that the cradle of Iranian culture and civilization.

Thunderstrike wrote:

That's wrong. Sogd province of Tajikistan with its regional center Hodjent is mainly uzbek populated. I am from Ferghana andwas many times in Hodjent - I know what I am talking about, believe me. In fact according official data ethnic uzbeks constitute 26% of the population of Tajikistan, in reality much more (according to some data 40% of Tajikistan's population are ethnic uzbeks). Persian in Uzbekistan is spoken only in historical cities as a matter of tradition - persian used to be language of culture and education, so that many became persian speking, without necessarily being persian.
It's hard to get, why you start crying "Uzbek chauvenist". Maybe you have some complexes against uzbeks, that every time you here something about uzbeks you get so emotional.

You are trying to convince me on what is my own affair. It seems very ridiculous. If you are claiming that you've been there, I let you know that Soghd is my native land and certainly, I know it much better than someone else from somewhere. Khojand is a Persian-populated city, as well as Samarqand, Bukhara, Ferghana,... And you don't reckon that it sounds very chauvenistic when you say "40% of Tajikistan's population is Uzbek"? Officially their number in the whole country is about 24 %, and even this number consists of not only Uzbeks, but Laqays, Uyghurs, Barlases and other Mogol tribes. Uzbeks themselves in Tajikistan constitute a very unconsiderable figure.

Thunderstrike wrote:

excuse me, but that's nonsense what you wrote. Uzbeks ruled much of present Central Asia well before russians - that's historical fact. Uzbeks are the biggest victim of soviet rule in central Asia, uzbeks having 50% of the whole population of the region were given proportionally the least territorium, the lands uzbeks ruled for thousand years were bestowned for others. You have wrong imagination about persians in Central Asia. So before russians occupied uzbek khanats, persians (do not confuse them with tajiks) were mainly kept by rich uzbek families as slaves (turkmens used to kidnapp persians and sell them as slaves), no persian ruled the region when russians came here.

Sorry, but I'm sure, Uzbeks've never ruled the region. You are too arrogant, my friend. You are talking about facts without any facts. What is "Uzbek" at all? Has it got any scientifically proved notion? Even Uzbeks are not certain on their own identity. Manghits? They were not Uzbeks, they were another Mogol tribe, like Uzbeks. But was it their language or culture or knowledge or literature or... ruling over a part of region? Of course not. It was the Persian language, culture, civilization, knowledge, literature and whatever ruling. So, your allegations sound aufully funny.

Thunderstrike wrote:

They had been ruling Tajik SSR since its creation very successfully. Everybody knows what happened when kulyabis took over the power in Tajikistan - tajik killed tajik for no reason. Only Khodjent escaped violences of civil war.

The war was caused not by Kulyabis or Khojandis. It was caused by the Uzbek government. It is a historic fact nowadays and everybody knows it. But in present Uzbekistan we can see the same. Uzbeks are killing Uzbeks allegedly fundamentalists. It is a sort of hidden civil war underway in Uzbekistan. Beware and try to avoid an open civil war by solving your problems logically, not fanatically and chauvenistically.

Thunderstrike wrote:

P.S. actually this topic is about whether uzbeks should be called europeans or asians, you might want to write your comments in another topic, no need to bring "persian issue" in every topic

On the topic? Of course they are Asians, no doubt. ;) There are more European-minded Asian people in the world like "5 Asian Tigers" or others, even they are considered as Asians, let alone Uzbekistan with its dictatorship and the third world problems.

Have a nice day and don't get angry again, ortoqim. ;)

Hahahhahah, Thunderstrike,


typical exapmple of laugh of anger :D

[thunderstrike]

Hi again,

Thunderstrike, I'm absolutely aware that it is almost useless to reply to your bare and baseless allegations. You probably consider that even Abu Ali Sina, Biruni, Rumi etc.... were Uzbek too? Let alone Hamza Niazi, Kamil Yarmatov and other contemporary figures. Let me start from the beginning of your comic essay.

Hi reader,

excuse me, but it's you who make bare and baseless allegations. Read your previous message - you claimed famous uzbek personalities to be "tajik" or "persian" without any base. Now you got answers for them, that you started bringing other names here. Well i'll explain:

Abu Ali ibn Sina and Abu Rayhan Beruni never called themselves "tajik", they claimed to be a moslem, for them the ethnic origin was not of great importance. Both of them were born in current territory of Uzbekistan. Abu Rayhan Beruniy served in the court of the great turkic warrior Mahmud Ghazanaviy and devoted his books to the king Mahmud.



It means that you didn't know any single thing about these dialects and just wanted to stir the air with empty words. There are a lot of other languages and dialects in eastern sub-group too as Baluchi, Ossetic, Pashto etc. Can you tell that "I mean Baluchi when I talk about Ossetian"? Of course, no. They are different Iranian languages and it shows the wealth of the Iranian culture and its vast area.

Again you wrong, your claims are beseless. Re-read previous post more attentively, you seem not have gotten the message, reader.


There is no "tajiki" language and this word is a creation of anti-Persians and anti-Iranians to devide the single Persian language into three. Tajiki is the same Persian and there are a lot of Soghdian words in Persian language up to now. You cannot call pamiri language "mountain tajiki", they are different.

Well, ne can speculate a lot, whether "tajiki" is a dialect of persian or the same language. But it's true that both (tajiki+persian) are very similar and belong to western iranian sub-group of the indo-iranic languages and was not spoken in Pamir or Central Asia. Tajiki (persian] is not native to the region, it is a languge imposed by muslims (arabs) in 8-10th centuries on sogdians, turks - indeginious people of the region.

[thunderstrike]

Hi again,

Thunderstrike, I'm absolutely aware that it is almost useless to reply to your bare and baseless allegations. You probably consider that even Abu Ali Sina, Biruni, Rumi etc.... were Uzbek too? Let alone Hamza Niazi, Kamil Yarmatov and other contemporary figures. Let me start from the Soghdian is an Iranian language and has got nothing common with Turkic Uzbek. There are a lot of Persian or Soghdian borrowings in Uzbek, but this fact doesn't change the Turkic nature of Uzbek language: it belongs to Altai family of languages, not European one, unlike Persian. Therefore you can't tell that "Soghdian lang. had assimilated into Uzbek".

Reader, you really read messages very unattentively. It was said that sogdians (sogdian population) was assimilated by karluki Turks in Ferghana. As to uzbek, is a turkic language; persian is an indoeuropean language.


Thunderstrike wrote:

[quote]Pamiris differ from tajiks both linguistically and anthropologically. Tajiks themselved do not call pamiris tajiks, but "Pomiri" or the "Shughni". A term used to pamiris "mountain tajiks" is nor scientific or serious. Pamiri languages are different from persian to the extend, that both cannot understand each-other.

Pamiri dialects are within Iranian gropu of languages as well as Persian and I've given some examples before. They are not borrowings like Persian words for "dil" or "dilbar" or "ostona" or.......

Well I'll repeat again, so that you can get the messge well - pamiri dialects along with Baluchi, Khwarazmian, Ossetic, Pamir dialects, Pushtu, Saka (Khotanese), Sogdian, Yaghnobi belong to eastern iranian sub-group of indo-iranic languages, while kurdish, pahlavi, parthian, persian Tajiki are western iranian languages. There are significant differences between western and eastern brach of languages, so that both do not understand each-other. On the time russians occupied lands of uzbek(mang'it) Emirat of Bukhara - Pamir, majority of pamiris did not speak tajiki, the rate of analfabetic was highest among pamiris, since they had to use tajiki to get education. Only few pamiris spoke tajiki, women were monolinguial and had never spoken tajiki.

After anti-turk, anti-uzbek soviet communists created the Tajik SSR on expense of Uzbekistan in 1929 and called Dushanbe after Stalin and uzbek Hodjent after Lenin (Stalinabad, Leninabad) tadzhiks conducted a policy of assimilation of pamiris under motto of communism. You should better study the fate of pamiri dialects in the last century.

Knowing these differences, I - a Persian can understand Pamiris. And as a Persian I consider that Pamiris are Tajiks and Iranians too. You as an Uzbek can talk only about your own identity, though I doubt you know it good enough.

maybe you understand pamiri, reader; but majoriti of tajiks do not understand pamiri, moreover they do not call pamiris "tajiks", but "pomiri" or "Shughni".
Before questioning identity of others, you'd better make clear what's your own identity. Be honest and tell who you are - "fars", "tadzhek" or muslim "tay" ;)


Thunderstrike wrote:

it's correct, that some words sound similar, but it does not make them the same language. For example there are lots of similarities between persian and urdu, still both are different languages.

Refer to the previous answer. By the way, what you consider as similarities between Persian and Urdu, mainly are Persian or Arabic borrowings in Urdu. Certainly, Urdu as an Indo-European language has got similiarities with Persian too, but I'm sure, you didn't mean them, considering your linguistical understanding (do you distinguish "borrowings" from "linguistical similarities"?)

You pretend not to get the message or you really have comprehention problems, don't you :) urdu also belong to the same indo-iranian group of languages and they do have many similar words & experssions, since they both belong to the same language group with common origin. But they are still different, the exapmple was brought to show that instead of similarities in languages tajiki is differents from pamiri.


Thunderstrike wrote:

It's correct, after Russians bestowned Badashkhan to newly created state Tajik Soviet Republic pamiris began persihing gradually being assimilated by tajiks. But still many pamiris maintained their own language, many women being monolingual (they do not care about tajiki).
And AFAIK Tajikistan is not part of Iran and tajiks are not "iranians".

I'm sorry, but you are not right. Badakhshan was not bestowned to Tajikistan. It used to be a part of Persian empires from the beginning of history to now. Pamiris were not assimilated with Tajiks, they were and they are Tajiks. ..."many women"? What does it mean? Irrelevant. And finally, Central Asia (not only Tajikistan) was a huge part of Iran and more than that the cradle of Iranian culture and civilization.

yes, according you Badashkhan is a part of Iran :D. Be a good reader and read the hisotory of at least last 500 years and you will find answers for your baseless claims.


Thunderstrike wrote:

That's wrong. Sogd province of Tajikistan with its regional center Hodjent is mainly uzbek populated. I am from Ferghana andwas many times in Hodjent - I know what I am talking about, believe me. In fact according official data ethnic uzbeks constitute 26% of the population of Tajikistan, in reality much more (according to some data 40% of Tajikistan's population are ethnic uzbeks).

You are trying to convince me on what is my own affair. It seems very ridiculous. If you are claiming that you've been there, I let you know that Soghd is my native land and certainly, I know it much better than someone else from somewhere. Khojand is a Persian-populated city, as well as Samarqand, Bukhara, Ferghana,... And you don't reckon that it sounds very chauvenistic when you say "40% of Tajikistan's population is Uzbek"? Officially their number in the whole country is about 24 %, and even this number consists of not only Uzbeks, but Laqays, Uyghurs, Barlases and other Mogol tribes. Uzbeks themselves in Tajikistan constitute a very unconsiderable figure.

One more time you misunderstand. Noone is trying to convince you, you are free to have your own believes - for me it's not important if you consider tajiks persians or Badashkhan as part of Iran, it's your problem. I am just telling you facts. Khodjent is uzbek populated city and that's fact. Interestingly, tazhdiks from the south call nothern tadzhiks 8hodjandis) "uzbek" due to differences in mentality (nothern tajiks are very similar with uzbeks of Ferghana and have a good reputain of being well educated and talanted).

I advise you to tre-read previous reply to your allegations.


Thunderstrike wrote:

excuse me, but that's nonsense what you wrote. Uzbeks ruled much of present Central Asia well before russians - that's historical fact. Uzbeks are the biggest victim of soviet rule in central Asia, uzbeks having 50% of the whole population of the region were given proportionally the least territorium, the lands uzbeks ruled for thousand years were bestowned for others. You have wrong imagination about persians in Central Asia. So before russians occupied uzbek khanats, persians (do not confuse them with tajiks) were mainly kept by rich uzbek families as slaves (turkmens used to kidnapp persians and sell them as slaves), no persian ruled the region when russians came here.

Sorry, but I'm sure, Uzbeks've never ruled the region. You are too arrogant, my friend. You are talking about facts without any facts. What is "Uzbek" at all? Has it got any scientifically proved notion? Even Uzbeks are not certain on their own identity. Manghits? They were not Uzbeks, they were another Mogol tribe, like Uzbeks. But was it their language or culture or knowledge or literature or... ruling over a part of region? Of course not. It was the Persian language, culture, civilization, knowledge, literature and whatever ruling. So, your allegations sound aufully funny.

sorry reader, but I have to tell you - you are absolutely a joke here :) You'd better get any history books and read about the region. You will find there, for the last 1500 years the region was turkic and called Turkistan. Uzbeks have been ruleing Turkistan for the last 6 centuries.

About "persian speakings" - speaking persian does not make a person persian, as speaking english does not make you english. Yes, there are persian speakings (gypsies, jews) in the region but they are not necessarily persian. In fact many of persian speakers belong to the same nation as uzbeks.


Thunderstrike wrote:

They had been ruling Tajik SSR since its creation very successfully. Everybody knows what happened when kulyabis took over the power in Tajikistan - tajik killed tajik for no reason. Only Khodjent escaped violences of civil war.

The war was caused not by Kulyabis or Khojandis. It was caused by the Uzbek government. It is a historic fact nowadays and everybody knows it. But in present Uzbekistan we can see the same. Uzbeks are killing Uzbeks allegedly fundamentalists. It is a sort of hidden civil war underway in Uzbekistan. Beware and try to avoid an open civil war by solving your problems logically, not fanatically and chauvenistically.

there is saying "looser blaims others for his own mistakes", that exactly applies to you.

[thunderstrike]

Thunderstrike wrote:

P.S. actually this topic is about whether uzbeks should be called europeans or asians, you might want to write your comments in another topic, no need to bring "persian issue" in every topic

On the topic? Of course they are Asians, no doubt. ;) There are more European-minded Asian people in the world like "5 Asian Tigers" or others, even they are considered as Asians, let alone Uzbekistan with its dictatorship and the third world problems.

good job, reader! that's actually the disscussion point.

Write what you think on the issue with facts and arguments, so you can contribute to the disscussion. I guess Uzbekistan is the most progressive country in central asia with rich culture and traditions for other neighbouring countries try to imitate Uzbekistan. Uzbekistan is a country where european and oriental-islamic values melt - a good example of coexistence of different cultures.

[Reader]

Hi, Thunderstrike,

You can't imagine how ridiculous your weird obsession with Uzbek hegemonism seems. You are fuming from anger, that is obvious from numerous outragous messages bombarded on this board, long and absolutely baseless. I can summarize all your endless essays in four words: "Uzbeks are the best!" But reality should be very bitter for you, my friend. It shows an absolutely different picture. I know that if I would tell you, "the cucember is green", you would tell me "Sorry, the cucember is red". It shows your dangerous fanatisim and again chauvenism. I can't help myself but repeat the same word which you don't like, but observe its principles.

Therefore I'm not surprised even when you claim that Zarathushtra was an Uzbek and his Gatha (Avesta) was in Uzbek, and probably in Latin script. Let see your allegations one by one, I'll tell what I haven't told yet, otherwise I've replied to your bare words many times, just go back and see.

Thunderstrike wrote:

Abu Ali ibn Sina and Abu Rayhan Beruni never called themselves "tajik", they claimed to be a moslem, for them the ethnic origin was not of great importance. Both of them were born in current territory of Uzbekistan. Abu Rayhan Beruniy served in the court of the great turkic warrior Mahmud Ghazanaviy and devoted his books to the king Mahmud.

Sina and Biruni never identified themselves with "tajiks" officially indeed. Because there was not such synonym for Persians yet. "Tajik" was an invention of Turks. They called Muslom Persians (Iranians, including Soghdians) "Tazik" which means "arabized" in Persian. (Tazi - in modern Persian means Arab). So, Uzbeks called Iranians "Arabs", because of their new religion. But it was institutionalized many decades later. You can see in Britannica Encyclopaedia (1886 edition) the decription for "Iranians": Tajiks, Kurds and Baluchs, no words about Persians, because they were synonyms of the same notion: Persian.

Sina was born from a Balkhi father (Persian-Tajik) and a Persian Bukharai mother (Sitara, not Yulduz) in Persian-populated city of Bukhara (there was no "Uzbekistan" at all, did you know that before?) in a Persian village Afshana (no meanings for this word in Uzbek as well). He was the first Persian scholar who wrote a scientific work (Danish-name) in modern Persian in time of Arabic dominance. He tried to use purely Persian words in his masterpiece. He wrote beautiful Persian rubais, which survived to our days.

Aburayhan Biruni was a Khorezmian scholar, and again there was not Uzbekistan then and he couldn't be an Uzbek citizen, and there was no passport to change his nationality from Iranian to Uzbek or Turkic. He was a real Khorezmian who could speak Khorezmian language (an Iranian one). He wrote in his "Asar-ul-baqia" how Arabs destroyed and burnt Khorezmian literature and he wrote there that he belongs to Iranians (Khorezmians). He didn't write anything about Turkic calender or something Turkic. But his great book contains everything on Iranian culture, rituals, calendar, lifestyle, history etc.
So, decide now: who were they?

Your knowledge on Iranian dialects is very sporadic and surface. You admitted that in some cases regarding Soghdian and Tokharian languages. But even now you don't know that "pahlavi" is the same "parthian" and "tajiki" is the same "Persian". You are stuck on your pan-turkistic ideology to distingush Persian from Tajik. But "pahlavi" was your blunder. And "Urdu" belongs to Indian family of languages with plenty of Persian words.

The funniest joke of yours was a myth on 1500-year-long dominance of Turks in Great Iran, which you call "Turkestan". Turkestan is your invention too, there was no "Turkestan" as a political notion at all.

I'm not gonna repeat my words on Petrsian-speakers and their origin. As for Jews and Gypsies, they used to speak in the language of the dominant culture of any region and in Central Asia it was Persian - the language of its native inhabitants.

See you soon ;)

[Thunderstrike]

Hi, Thunderstrike,

You can't imagine how ridiculous your weird obsession with Uzbek hegemonism seems. You are fuming from anger, that is obvious from numerous outragous messages bombarded on this board, long and absolutely baseless. I can summarize all your endless essays in four words: "Uzbeks are the best!" But reality should be very bitter for you, my friend. It shows an absolutely different picture. I know that if I would tell you, "the cucember is green", you would tell me "Sorry, the cucember is red". It shows your dangerous fanatisim and again chauvenism. I can't help myself but repeat the same word which you don't like, but observe its principles.

Hi Reader,

a nice reply of you, better could not be :D well, seriously, it's you who brings "persian" issue everywhere and has complexes against uzbeks, the very your off-topic posts are example of this. Everyone can see that you are obsessed with your "persianity" and your limitless love to the "great Iran".

Previous replies of mine were detailed comments on your baseless allegations, not uzbek hegemonism. You are so afraid of the truth, that you are not able to admit historical facts. What's wrong if uzbek dynasties had ruled the region before russians came? from historical perspective it's russians who destroyed uzbek rule in Turkistan and bestowned their territories to artificial national republics. That's our past, history and we should know that. At the same time that should not be considered as a
claim on territories of current national republics, but just as a history of the nation.

Therefore I'm not surprised even when you claim that Zarathushtra was an Uzbek and his Gatha (Avesta) was in Uzbek, and probably in Latin script. Let see your allegations one by one, I'll tell what I haven't told yet, otherwise I've replied to your bare words many times, just go back and see.

Again you are starting with your baseless speculations, since that was not said by anyone here.

Zaroaster or Zaratustra(camel handler?) is believed to have been born in in Azerbaidjan and at the age of 30 got some revelations. He was rejected for his religion at home and fled to Khorezmia, where he recieved support from king Vistashpa. Soon Zaroastrianism spread over Khorezmia. The language of Zaoaster's revelations ghatas' was old in a language similar to Vedic Sanskrit.

Remains of Zaroastrianism can be seen in traditions and customs of today uzbeks (burial rituals - 7, 20, 40, dansing around fire during weddings etc.). Uzbeks can be proud their long history - Zaratustra grounded his religion in terrirories of presnt Uzbekistan.


Sina and Biruni never identified themselves with "tajiks" officially indeed.

good, that you learned that ;)

Because there was not such synonym for Persians yet. "Tajik" was an invention of Turks.

unfortunately you are wrong, dear reader.
You do not know your own history. "Tajik" is actually persian word to describe arabs. King of Persia Yazdegerd III wrote a letter to Omar ben Khattab and called him "king of tazis". Tazi was a deregotory term applied to arabs, derived from the name of arabic tribe "tay" which inhabited the area of persian gulf. In persain suffix "-iy", "-ik" takes the form "-zi", "-zik" when the noun ends with "Y". In example: Ray -> Razi, Tay -> Tazi. In central Asia Tazi became "Tazhik" probably because of influence of sogdian.

They called Muslom Persians (Iranians, including Soghdians) "Tazik" which means "arabized" in Persian. (Tazi - in modern Persian means Arab).

partly correct, local inhabitants - sogdians and turks called invadors from the south - muslims "tazhik". First tazhiks were mainly arabs and muslim persians.

So, Uzbeks called Iranians "Arabs", because of their new religion. But it was institutionalized many decades later.

here you are close to the truth, turks+sogdians are main ancestors of current uzbeks, they called all muslims tazhik.

You can see in Britannica Encyclopaedia (1886 edition) the decription for "Iranians": Tajiks, Kurds and Baluchs, no words about Persians, because they were synonyms of the same notion: Persian.

yes, that's correct. You can consult the encyclopedia again to find out that persian language was brought and imposed to the region by arabs in 8-9th centuries, before local population under Turk Khakanat spoke mainly sogdian. Sogdians were in alliance with Turks, who garanteed sogdians security from Iran and other potential enemies.

Sina was born from a Balkhi father (Persian-Tajik) and a Persian Bukharai mother (Sitara, not Yulduz) in Persian-populated city of Bukhara (there was no "Uzbekistan" at all, did you know that before?) in a Persian village Afshana (no meanings for this word in Uzbek as well).

unfortunately not everything is so clear with ethnicy of Ibn Sina as you write here. Ibn Sina never recognised himself as "persian" or "tajiki". Afshana was actually settlement of Arabs in Bukhara.
The fact is Ibn Sina was born in present Uzbekistan :)

He was the first ... scholar who wrote a scientific work (Danish-name) in modern Persian in time of Arabic dominance. He tried to use purely Persian words in his masterpiece. He wrote beautiful Persian rubais, which survived to our days.

Ibn Sina wrote most of his books in arabic. Given this fact you might claim with your logic, that he was arabic ;) He wrote some books in persian too, his philosofical book Donishnoma is in persian, as well as his rubais. Persian is a language of poems, it's easier to write poems in farsi then in arabic. Also there was a rich literature tradition in persian, maybe that's why Sina wrote some of his books in persian.

Aburayhan Biruni was a Khorezmian scholar, and again there was not Uzbekistan then and he couldn't be an Uzbek citizen, and there was no passport to change his nationality from Iranian to Uzbek or Turkic. He was a real Khorezmian who could speak Khorezmian language (an Iranian one).


Beruni was khorezmian, - ancestor of today khorezmian uzbeks. Iranians may claim on Omar Khayyam (even of arabic origin) or Ghazali, but noway on Biruni and Khorezm.

He wrote in his "Asar-ul-baqia" how Arabs destroyed and burnt Khorezmian literature and he wrote there that he belongs to Iranians (Khorezmians).

just change "iranian" to khorezmian and everything will be oK. Tazhiks (arabs and muslim persians) really destroyed and burned Khorazm. Khorezm was part of Turkic Khakanat at the time.

He didn't write anything about Turkic calender or something Turkic. But his great book contains everything on Iranian culture, rituals, calendar, lifestyle, history etc.
So, decide now: who were they?

you are really funny reader, if someone write about turkic caledar he becomes turkic ? :D btw, Biruni wrote a lot about India, so according to your logic he was indian??

In fact Biruni was a court scholar of Mahmud Ghaznaviy, famous turkic warlord. He devoted all his books to the sultan and was proud of that. he ecrtainly wrote about Turks, for example he names the city of Samarkand as "Semizkent", which in turkish means "rich city" - you might find out about that in his book "Tarikh-ul- athaar-l-baaqiya".

Your knowledge on Iranian dialects is very sporadic and surface. You admitted that in some cases regarding Soghdian and Tokharian languages. But even now you don't know that "pahlavi" is the same "parthian" and "tajiki" is the same "Persian". You are stuck on your pan-turkistic ideology to distingush Persian from Tajik. But "pahlavi" was your blunder. And "Urdu" belongs to Indian family of languages with plenty of Persian words.

before accusing on sporadic knowledge, re-read previous messages well. All you try to say here is persian-persian-persian; I quoted encyclopedia entries on western iranian languages of indo-iranian sub-family, you might consult some refernce books to fresh your surface memory of languages.

The funniest joke of yours was a myth on 1500-year-long dominance of Turks in Great Iran, which you call "Turkestan". Turkestan is your invention too, there was no "Turkestan" as a political notion at all.


"Great Iran" is articficial term of yours. Iran as a state was fully destroyed by bedouin arabs in 7the century. In middle ages Iran was just a geografical term. So son of the great Timur Shahrukh ruled Iran. State "Iran", that emerged in middle ages was not persian at all, but Turkic(Sefavids, Qajars etc.).

you know nothing about Turkistan or pretend not to know. It is a historical geografical term, more on that you can read under the topic "Turkistan".

I'm not gonna repeat my words on Petrsian-speakers and their origin. As for Jews and Gypsies, they used to speak in the language of the dominant culture of any region and in Central Asia it was Persian - the language of its native inhabitants.


As it was written before persian is an imposed language in the region (by arabs and muslim persians in 8-9th centuries) and no persian can be regarded as "native inhabitant".

As for Jews and Persians - they spoke the language, that was the easiest to learn and usefull for their needs - lingua franca of middle ages in east - persian. Not every persian speaking in Central Asia is persian, but persianised turks+sogdians in Uzbekistan & Tajikistan (tajiks), persianised mongols in Afghanistan (Khazaras) etc.

see you ;)

"Tajik" was an invention of Turks. They called Muslom Persians (Iranians, including Soghdians) "Tazik" which means "arabized" in Persian. (Tazi - in modern Persian means Arab).

If "Tajik" means "arabized" in Persian, then it is an invention of Persians, not Turks. I thought "Tajik" means "Taj" - crown, not Arab :!: :?:

[Predictor]

Dear Thunderstrike,

It seems whatever my friend reader told about your linguatic and historical knowledge is qite precise and you feel a sort of lack of knowledge on certain issues. Perhaps becuase those issues have nothing to do with you and your history.

Thunderstrike wrote:


Zaroaster or Zaratustra(camel handler?) is believed to have been born in in Azerbaidjan and at the age of 30 got some revelations. He was rejected for his religion at home and fled to Khorezmia, where he recieved support from king Vistashpa. Soon Zaroastrianism spread over Khorezmia. The language of Zaoaster's revelations ghatas' was old in a language similar to Vedic Sanskrit.

Zoroaster or Zarathushtra (the original spelling of the Prophet's name, which mean "Golden Star" or "Holder of the Golden Camal") was born about 4000 years ago in a very cold area of Arienam Vaejah (Eranvej < Eran < Iran) with severe conditions. There are many guesses on his place of birth which consists of a vast area from the Pamirs in Tajikistan to Azerbaijan in modern Iran. Daeta Lake mentioned in Avesta is identified with Urumiye in Iran's Azerbayjan. In scientific circles there is no doubt that Zoroaster was an Iranian. He was chosen as Prophet at age of 40 after 30 years of meditation and religious thoughts.The first Mazdayasnan believer was Midyamath, his cousin. He was not accepted as a prophet in his own tribe and had to flee to Baktria (Balkh -nowadays Afghanistan). The King of Balkh - Vishtaspa (Gushtasp) accepted him and he himself converted into the new religion with Jamaspa and Frashushtra (his viziers). His language was an old Iranian language, very close to Sanscrit. Different texts of Avesta written in different times show perfectly how that particular language developed and became Pahlavi or Middle Persian (Sassanid Persian). Zarathushtra wrote his first mantras in the time, when Iranians were not very far away from there other Indo-European reletives. Words used in Avesta indicate the common roots of Persian with other European languages.By the way, did you know that the word for "God" in Avesta as well as in old Persian was "Baga" and in Pahlavi "Bagha"? And did you know that "Bagdad" (Baghdad) the capital of Iraq is a Persian word which means "given by God"?

And of course,you know that by that time Azeris were not "turkisized" yet. They are Turkic-speaking Iranians today, not then.

Thunderstrike wrote:

Remains of Zaroastrianism can be seen in traditions and customs of today uzbeks (burial rituals - 7, 20, 40, dansing around fire during weddings etc.). Uzbeks can be proud their long history - Zaratustra grounded his religion in terrirories of presnt Uzbekistan.

That's quite obvious and coherant. You are living in the land of eatern Iranians and they've got some survived Mazdayasnan (Zoroastrian) believes and traditions. The same scenes you can observe in Tajikistan and other parts of Great Iran.

Thunderstrike wrote:

You do not know your own history. "Tajik" is actually persian word to describe arabs. King of Persia Yazdegerd III wrote a letter to Omar ben Khattab and called him "king of tazis". Tazi was a deregotory term applied to arabs, derived from the name of arabic tribe "tay" which inhabited the area of persian gulf. In persain suffix "-iy", "-ik" takes the form "-zi", "-zik" when the noun ends with "Y". In example: Ray -> Razi, Tay -> Tazi. In central Asia Tazi became "Tazhik" probably because of influence of sogdian.

I don't think that reader does not know his people's history. He showed his good knowledge perfectly here and on other topics. And even you are repeating his very words. You say: "Tajik" is actually Persian word". And reader had written:

"Tajik" was an invention of Turks. They called Muslom Persians (Iranians, including Soghdians) "Tazik" which means "arabized" in Persian. (Tazi - in modern Persian means Arab).

It means Turks called Persians and only Persians, not Arabs "Tajik", becauseof their new religion, which Turks accepted later and became hot defenders of it. There isno suffix "-iy" in Persian at all. "-iy" is an "uzbekized" Persianadjective-forming suffix "-i"("-ee"). But in Pahlavi (Sassanids' Persian) it used tobe "-ig" or "ik" as well as in Soghdian. As for Soghdians, they themselves had been calledTajiks by Turks

[Predictor]

to be continued

[Predictor]

Hi, Thunderstrike, I'm back.

You wrote:

partly correct, local inhabitants - sogdians and turks called invadors from the south - muslims "tazhik". First tazhiks were mainly arabs and muslim persians.

You cannot talk on behalf of two different races. You are either a Turk(Altai race) or a Soghdian (Iranian). And as you hopefully understood, "tajik" did not mean "Arab" for Turks, they were "muslim Persians" for them. When Ibn Qutayba, an arab warlord, entered Bukhara, he was notcalled a "tajik" by the local people, he was "an Arab invador"and Bukharians struggled against him heroicly. Arabs wanted to attract Iranians of Bukhara to Islam and in 733 azan was read in Persian. Arabs wanted the local people to understand the meaning og koranic verses and they read it in Persian.

Thunderstrike wrote:

here you are close to the truth, turks+sogdians are main ancestors of current uzbeks, they called all muslims tazhik.

Again, "turks+soghdians" seems a very odd combination. Soghdians are Iranians and some of them have saved their dialects up to our days. Some people still speak in Soghdian dialects in Tajikistan. They have nothing to do with Turks. Their language and race are Iranian. And ancestors of Uzbeks called only Iranians as "Tajik", not "Arabs" definitely. "Arab" was a common word by that time in all languages.

Thunderstrike wrote:

yes, that's correct. You can consult the encyclopedia again to find out that persian language was brought and imposed to the region by arabs in 8-9th centuries, before local population under Turk Khakanat spoke mainly sogdian. Sogdians were in alliance with Turks, who garanteed sogdians security from Iran and other potential enemies.

Arabs were the greatest enemies of Persian, because they wanted to replace Persian with their native language in allparts of Great Iran. How could it come that Arabs imposed Persian on you? Modern Persian is a mixture of Iranian languages like Pahlavi (Sassanid), Soghdian,Baktrian, Tokharian with foreign borrowings, like in all other alive languages. If you have discovered something new in linguistics, let us know, please and offer it to the Institute of Oriental Studies.

Asforyour historical knowledge, Soghdians were a part of the Iranian empire and they didn't need anyone to protect them from their own people and state. Soghdians (particularly Devashtij from Panjakat) asked Turks to struggle together with them gainst Arabs, telling that "if Soghdians will be defeated, you'll be next". Turks didn'tmanage to do that and betrayed Soghdians.

Thunderstrike wrote:

unfortunately not everything is so clear with ethnicy of Ibn Sina as you write here. Ibn Sina never recognised himself as "persian" or "tajiki". Afshana was actually settlement of Arabs in Bukhara.
The fact is Ibn Sina was born in present Uzbekistan

Fortunately, everything is clear about Avicenna's nationality and among unbiased scholars there is no doubt that both parents of him were Iranians (Tajiks). If he was born today, he could be identified as "an ethnic Tajik born in Uzbekistan". But it happened ages before he even could hear the word of "Uzbek". Because of this simple reason, you cannot claim that he was an Uzbek. Reader explained you very good this question, but you didn't get apparently. Afshana was a settlement of "tajiks" for Turks, as we told, Turks called Persians (Iranians) Tajik. Your misunderstanding comes from this point.

Thunderstrike wrote:

Ibn Sina wrote most of his books in arabic. Given this fact you might claim with your logic, that he was arabic He wrote some books in persian too, his philosofical book Donishnoma is in persian, as well as his rubais. Persian is a language of poems, it's easier to write poems in farsi then in arabic. Also there was a rich literature tradition in persian, maybe that's why Sina wrote some of his books in persian.

Here you contradicting yourself. As you read somewhere, "Donishnoma" was a philosophical work, not apoem. How can you claim that only poems were written in this language? How can you claim that Arabic was not comfortable for poem-writing? Arabic is considered as one of the most comfortable languages for poems, as well as Persian. Donishnoma was the first philosophical book written in Persian. this fact indicates how much Avicenna was interested in revival of his native language, attacked and undermined by Arabic. The words he used in Donishnoma shows his tendency towards purification of Persian from Arabic terms,for example he uses the rare verb of "andar-yaftan" (to understand) instead of "fahmidan" with an Arabic stem. A Turkor an arab couldn't have such nationalistic passion as he had.

Thunderstrike wrote:

Beruni was khorezmian, - ancestor of today khorezmian uzbeks. Iranians may claim on Omar Khayyam (even of arabic origin) or Ghazali, but noway on Biruni and Khorezm.

Yes, Beruni wasa khorezmian and khorezmians were Iranians before they turned into Uzbeks. Just open a history book. When Beruni was born in Khorezm his parenys and your "ancestors" were not Uzbek, but Iranian. Can you get this simple reason?
As for Khayyam, you are terrific in your anti-Iranian feelings. :D You are ignoring whatever was written and said about him and others all around the world.

[Predictor]

Hi, Thunderstrike, I'm back.

You wrote:

partly correct, local inhabitants - sogdians and turks called invadors from the south - muslims "tazhik". First tazhiks were mainly arabs and muslim persians.

You cannot talk on behalf of two different races. You are either a Turk(Altai race) or a Soghdian (Iranian). And as you hopefully understood, "tajik" did not mean "Arab" for Turks, they were "muslim Persians" for them. When Ibn Qutayba, an arab warlord, entered Bukhara, he was notcalled a "tajik" by the local people, he was "an Arab invador"and Bukharians struggled against him heroicly. Arabs wanted to attract Iranians of Bukhara to Islam and in 733 azan was read in Persian. Arabs wanted the local people to understand the meaning og koranic verses and they read it in Persian.

Thunderstrike wrote:

here you are close to the truth, turks+sogdians are main ancestors of current uzbeks, they called all muslims tazhik.

Again, "turks+soghdians" seems a very odd combination. Soghdians are Iranians and some of them have saved their dialects up to our days. Some people still speak in Soghdian dialects in Tajikistan. They have nothing to do with Turks. Their language and race are Iranian. And ancestors of Uzbeks called only Iranians as "Tajik", not "Arabs" definitely. "Arab" was a common word by that time in all languages.

Thunderstrike wrote:

yes, that's correct. You can consult the encyclopedia again to find out that persian language was brought and imposed to the region by arabs in 8-9th centuries, before local population under Turk Khakanat spoke mainly sogdian. Sogdians were in alliance with Turks, who garanteed sogdians security from Iran and other potential enemies.

Arabs were the greatest enemies of Persian, because they wanted to replace Persian with their native language in allparts of Great Iran. How could it come that Arabs imposed Persian on you? Modern Persian is a mixture of Iranian languages like Pahlavi (Sassanid), Soghdian,Baktrian, Tokharian with foreign borrowings, like in all other alive languages. If you have discovered something new in linguistics, let us know, please and offer it to the Institute of Oriental Studies.

Asforyour historical knowledge, Soghdians were a part of the Iranian empire and they didn't need anyone to protect them from their own people and state. Soghdians (particularly Devashtij from Panjakat) asked Turks to struggle together with them gainst Arabs, telling that "if Soghdians will be defeated, you'll be next". Turks didn'tmanage to do that and betrayed Soghdians.

Thunderstrike wrote:

unfortunately not everything is so clear with ethnicy of Ibn Sina as you write here. Ibn Sina never recognised himself as "persian" or "tajiki". Afshana was actually settlement of Arabs in Bukhara.
The fact is Ibn Sina was born in present Uzbekistan

Fortunately, everything is clear about Avicenna's nationality and among unbiased scholars there is no doubt that both parents of him were Iranians (Tajiks). If he was born today, he could be identified as "an ethnic Tajik born in Uzbekistan". But it happened ages before he even could hear the word of "Uzbek". Because of this simple reason, you cannot claim that he was an Uzbek. Reader explained you very good this question, but you didn't get apparently. Afshana was a settlement of "tajiks" for Turks, as we told, Turks called Persians (Iranians) Tajik. Your misunderstanding comes from this point.

Thunderstrike wrote:

Ibn Sina wrote most of his books in arabic. Given this fact you might claim with your logic, that he was arabic He wrote some books in persian too, his philosofical book Donishnoma is in persian, as well as his rubais. Persian is a language of poems, it's easier to write poems in farsi then in arabic. Also there was a rich literature tradition in persian, maybe that's why Sina wrote some of his books in persian.

Here you contradicting yourself. As you read somewhere, "Donishnoma" was a philosophical work, not apoem. How can you claim that only poems were written in this language? How can you claim that Arabic was not comfortable for poem-writing? Arabic is considered as one of the most comfortable languages for poems, as well as Persian. Donishnoma was the first philosophical book written in Persian. this fact indicates how much Avicenna was interested in revival of his native language, attacked and undermined by Arabic. The words he used in Donishnoma shows his tendency towards purification of Persian from Arabic terms,for example he uses the rare verb of "andar-yaftan" (to understand) instead of "fahmidan" with an Arabic stem. A Turkor an arab couldn't have such nationalistic passion as he had.

Thunderstrike wrote:

Beruni was khorezmian, - ancestor of today khorezmian uzbeks. Iranians may claim on Omar Khayyam (even of arabic origin) or Ghazali, but noway on Biruni and Khorezm.

Yes, Beruni wasa khorezmian and khorezmians were Iranians before they turned into Uzbeks. Just open a history book. When Beruni was born in Khorezm his parenys and your "ancestors" were not Uzbek, but Iranian. Can you get this simple reason?
As for Khayyam, you are terrific in your anti-Iranian feelings. :D You are ignoring whatever was written and said about him and others all around the world.

to be continued

[Predictor]

Dear thunderstrike, I hope you are not tired of this massive information flowing into your mind, but I'm just trying to reply to your misunderstandings and/or biased remarks.

You wrote:

just change "iranian" to khorezmian and everything will be oK. Tazhiks (arabs and muslim persians) really destroyed and burned Khorazm. Khorezm was part of Turkic Khakanat at the time.

Khoreamian books were destroyed by Arab invaders of Great Iran as books written in a non-koranic language. But Khorezmian civilization and language was vanished under the hamper of Turkic attacks and incursion. If they would speak arabic, we could argue that Arabs have done that, but as we see, nowadays Khorezmians speak a sort of Uzbek (Turkic), which indicates the source of agression.

Thunderstrike wrote:

In fact Biruni was a court scholar of Mahmud Ghaznaviy, famous turkic warlord. He devoted all his books to the sultan and was proud of that. he ecrtainly wrote about Turks, for example he names the city of Samarkand as "Semizkent", which in turkish means "rich city" - you might find out about that in his book "Tarikh-ul- athaar-l-baaqiya".

All poets and scholars and viziers of Mahmud Ghaznavid were Iranian, not only Beruni. Turks were the slaves-warriors, as one of our friends from your side admitted in a topic, they were not men of pen and paper. And the masterpiece of Beruni called "asar-ul-baqia"I didn't find what you quoted from him,maybe it was another trick of Uzbek authorities to form an "Uzbek identity". ;)

Thunderstrike wrote:

before accusing on sporadic knowledge, re-read previous messages well. All you try to say here is persian-persian-persian; I quoted encyclopedia entries on western iranian languages of indo-iranian sub-family, you might consult some refernce books to fresh your surface memory of languages.

If you rely only on encyclopeadias,not realizing issues personally, you can be accused in having a sporadic knowledge. But concerning "parthian" and "pahlavi" I have to tell that it appears to be a lapse of dear reader. "Parthian" is Iranian language of Arshakids (Ashkanids) and "Pahlavi" - Persian of Sassanids. Maybe this mistake occuredbecause of the same root of these 2 words: "Parthia" and "Pahlav". "Pahlavi considered itself as the descendant of Parthian.

Thunderstrike wrote:

"Great Iran" is articficial term of yours. Iran as a state was fully destroyed by bedouin arabs in 7the century. In middle ages Iran was just a geografical term. So son of the great Timur Shahrukh ruled Iran. State "Iran", that emerged in middle ages was not persian at all, but Turkic(Sefavids, Qajars etc.).

you know nothing about Turkistan or pretend not to know. It is a historical geografical term, more on that you can read under the topic "Turkistan".

Of course, great Iran is NOT an artificial term, unlike "Turkestan". Great Iran existed from the time of Medians. It was never destroyed by anyone, Nobody could destroy it, despite their strong desire to do that. Everybody who ruled in Iran, were proud of ruling Great Iran, not a Turkestan. They belong to Iranians. Safavids, Qajars etc. were not Turks, they were Azeris - Turkic-speaking Iranians.

But "Turkestan" didn't and doesn't exist indeed. No proof.


Thunderstrike wrote:

As for Jews and Persians - they spoke the language, that was the easiest to learn and usefull for their needs - lingua franca of middle ages in east - persian. Not every persian speaking in Central Asia is persian, but persianised turks+sogdians in Uzbekistan & Tajikistan (tajiks), persianised mongols in Afghanistan (Khazaras) etc.

I liked Reader's reply on this question: Jews and Gypsies speak in the languageof the dominant culture and people of a region. Actually, Ithink, he was quoting Marx who was a German Jew himself. It is another implication in favour of this idea: Iranians are the native population ofthe region. We welcome you to our land, but don't forget that you are just a guest.


Take care ;)

PS: Thank you for dragging us even to this topic.
I think, you'd better not confuse the topics and come to our own topic "Samarqand & Bukhara" - the capitals of Great Iran ;) again

[thuderSTRUCK]

gordishsya? nu, nu

[Reader]

Dear Predictor,

You really must "gordit'sya" with your precious knowledge on the region.

[Chitatel]

Good job Thunderstrike!
No ti zrya tratish vremya na etih balobolov. Esli ti escho ne zametil ih tut vse ignoriruyut. Tak chto ne meshay im prazdnovat ocherednuyu slovesnuyu "pobedu." S psihami ne sporyat, ih lechat.

Cheers

[FREEMAN]

my byli , my est aziaty!!! never europe!!!

[Reader]

Chitatel wrote:

Good job Thunderstrike!
No ti zrya tratish vremya na etih balobolov. Esli ti escho ne zametil ih tut vse ignoriruyut. Tak chto ne meshay im prazdnovat ocherednuyu slovesnuyu "pobedu." S psihami ne sporyat, ih lechat.

You did a good job too, Chitatel. Firstly, you showed your certain loyality to the Reader by identifying yourself with his nick. Secondly, you demonstrated that almost nobody ignores our discussions, even you. Otherwise you wouldn't appear and wouldn't express your lovely ideas over here. & that is not just a verbal victory. That is virtual victory over your backward ideas.

Take care ;)

[Xe-xe]

U menia voobshe prikol:

evropeytsi dumayut, chto ya aziat. A sami aziati dumayut, chto ya evropeyets, ili prosto Eastern European :laughing:
Ne vol'no poluchaetsia kak v sovetskom multike pro letuchuyu mish: ne ptica, i ne zver'... :biggrin: :eek3d:

[Xe-xe]

U menia voobshe prikol:

evropeytsi dumayut, chto ya aziat. A sami aziati dumayut, chto ya evropeyets, ili prosto Eastern European :laughing:
Ne vol'no poluchaetsia kak v sovetskom multike pro letuchuyu mish: ne ptica, i ne zver'... :biggrin: :eek3d:

[tokiec]

ya by tozhe hotel pokazat' svoyo istinnoe lico!

good job Thunderstrike! don't waste your time, they're takin each opportunity to hail Iran.

predictor and reader, what are your intentions, to seed war in central asia?
stop bullshitting

take care

tokiec

[Predictor]

Tokiec wrote:

ya by tozhe hotel pokazat' svoyo istinnoe lico!

good job Thunderstrike! don't waste your time, they're takin each opportunity to hail Iran.

predictor and reader, what are your intentions, to seed war in central asia?
stop bullshitting

take care

tokiec

Dear Tokiec,

That's very kind of you that you are consoling a friend of yours (Thunderstrike) who failed to defend his and your ideas and positions. You should do that, otherwise your friend cannot stand on his feet again.

Replying to your question on our intentions I would tell that we are just trying to face you with realities. Nobody wants another war to unleash in Central Asia among us. But you are deteriorating the situation by hiding the realities. Persians in Uzbekistan should live under better conditions with equal rights to prosper their culture, to teach their children in Persian, to speak in their native language without a fear... That's our only message, my friend. If you'll keep pretending that "we are so happy!", you are virtually worsening the situation.

That's enough to digest for now.

Bye

[Baht]

[Baht]

hey kim bor

[Royal]

Bir hayotdan misol:

Ozbek bolasi tugilganda: chaqalogni orqa umurtqasini eng pastida (ozbekchada : qiymichi) va ikki dumbasini qarasangiz u erlari kom kok boladi teri ichidan va bu korinish-belgi 4-5 oyni ichida yoqolib ketadi.

Bu sariq tanli osiyoliklarimizga bolgan tabiyiy bir tamga.

[Delta]

Ya jivu v Moskve i moi zdeshnie druz'ya chasto interesuytsya kakoy obraz misley i stil' povedeniya u molodeji Uzbekistana. Ya imeyu v vidu nash civil'niy sloy molodeji.
Tak ot kogo u nas v mislyah i povedenii bol'she? Ot evropeycev ili ot aziatov?

P.S. Ya ne darom razdelila misli i postupki - eto poroi raznie vechi...
What is the difference? I would tell them, everyone is different...that is the beauty of uzbekistan.
Sometimes it's not the truth that is important, but what they need to know.

mmmm,
Worldwide we are not considered Asians, that is for sure. In many places we are listed as europeans.
When it comes to our life style...We live similar way as Mexicans but with some so called cultural differences. If you know how mexicans live(Not from Movie! but from real Life) you will understand me.

i personlly don't like mexican life style... at least we don't eat up stinky Porky like they do...which is the biggest difference i saw.

grrrrrrrr mornings ....

I do not know about others, but I think we ARE Asians. This is fact and out of any discussion.

[Yamtar]

Ne Asyalıyız ne Avrupalı. Ben biliyorum ki hepimiz yalnız ve ancak T&rkistan'lı.

Ne Asyadan ne Avropadanız. Men bilirem ki hepimiz T&rkistan'lıyız.

We aren't Asian or Europan, We ARE only Turk, we are from Turkistan.

[Royal]

Choh gozal

[ZiZu]

Ne poymu Chto sporit Po proishojdeniyu my smes mnogh nacii kak vyshe pisali , myshlenie yaby skazal ne Aziatskoe a, Vostochnoe!!!

[SMILIK_off]

:) po geograficheskomu sloyu mi Aziati...Vostocnie tozhe aziati :) toko ne poymu, nargizochka, chto znachit mirovozrenie Aziata i Evropeyca????? :) smeshno odnako. Bez obid no poluchayetsa na Aziatsoy strane znachit chto tam toko retarted people zhivut i na Evropeyskoy storone toko intellektuli?

A ptichem tut Turki vobshe? :) oni sami ne mogut do sih por opredelitsya, evropa ili Azia. Eto vobsheto kontinenti a ne naciya ilizhe proishozhdenie

BEST

[bir qiz]

Menimcha tarihga nazar solish kerak:

Alexsandr Makedonskiy (Iskandar) = evropalashish
Ibn Qutayba Muslim = arablashish
Chingizhon = mo'g'il yoki hitoylashish
Ruslar (Tzar? yoki Lenin?) = ruslashish

Hozir menimcha Amerikalashish ketayapti shekilli?

Tarihda Amir Temur davridan tashqari bizni erimiz har doim bosib olingan...

[Royal]

Menimcha tarihga nazar solish kerak:

Alexsandr Makedonskiy (Iskandar) = evropalashish
Ibn Qutayba Muslim = arablashish
Chingizhon = mo'g'il yoki hitoylashish
Ruslar (Tzar? yoki Lenin?) = ruslashish
Hozir menimcha Amerikalashish ketayapti shekilli?
Tarihda Amir Temur davridan tashqari bizni erimiz har doim bosib olingan...

Kechirasiz, savol evropalikmizmi yoki osiylikmi ?

Yana, kimiz har doim bosvolishgan ?

[bir qiz]

"tuprog'imiz" demoqchi edim, hurmatli Royal.

Ushani uchun o'zbeklar har hil, birinchidan,

Ohirgi marta ruslar bosib olgani uchun sharqiy evropaga qoshib qo'yilgan,
BO'LMASA ASLIDA OSIYOdadir. Ya'ni Garb emas Sharqda. Rossiyaning o'zi yarmisi Osiyoda turibdi. Javobimdan ma'no chiqarib olarsiz deb o'ylagandim.

Hurmat bilan,

Menimcha tarihga nazar solish kerak:

Alexsandr Makedonskiy (Iskandar) = evropalashish
Ibn Qutayba Muslim = arablashish
Chingizhon = mo'g'il yoki hitoylashish
Ruslar (Tzar? yoki Lenin?) = ruslashish

Hozir menimcha Amerikalashish ketayapti shekilli?

Tarihda Amir Temur davridan tashqari bizni erimiz har doim bosib olingan...
Bilamiz yahshi qizsiz, hattoki juda yahshi qizsiz. Ammo qaytib borib, TARIHni yana bir karra oqing! YAHSHILAB oqing! Har-hil manbalar, har-hil mualliflardan oqing! Songra boshqa halqlarni tarihidan ham oqing! Ana undan, keyin haddingiz sigsa, yuqoridagi gapni gapring.
Omon bo'ling.

Варитесь в собственном соку...Спорите сами с собой. Большинство, смотрю, молодые, рассуждения наивные. ребята, мы азиаты. Мы не европейцы. Я поняла это не так давно и поняла на простом примере. Мне довелось поехать одной в РУз, в смысле без сопровождения мужа, который решал все проблемы. Так вот, если бы я была в РФ, то измотала бы себе все нервы. Я, находясь и живя постоянно в России, не могу переехать спокойно из , допустим, Чебоксар в Казань. То не желают отвечать на вопросы, то начинаются какие-то идиотские намеки, то эта показная "американизированная" вежливость... Дома же, в РУЗ, я переехала из Таша в Бухару, из Бухары в Наманган, из Намангана в Андижан, далее снова в Ташкент (при этом, заметьте, я не знаю языка, я русская) и никакого напряга, никакой нервотрепки. Поймите, наш менталитет, наше воспитанеи не европейское, не деловито-равнодушное. Мы никогда не станем европейцами! И вовсе не в связи с географическим положением. Европа это -мой дом-моя крепость, это ты мне-я тебе, это улыбка от Бленд-а- мед и девочки от пива Тинькофф. А Узбекистан это открытость, это радушие, это мой дом-твой дом...да, ну блин, только душу растравила...

[Royal]

"tuprog'imiz" demoqchi edim, hurmatli Royal.
Ushani uchun o'zbeklar har hil, birinchidan,
Ohirgi marta ruslar bosib olgani uchun sharqiy evropaga qoshib qo'yilgan,
BO'LMASA ASLIDA OSIYOdadir. Ya'ni Garb emas Sharqda. Rossiyaning o'zi yarmisi Osiyoda turibdi. Javobimdan ma'no chiqarib olarsiz deb o'ylagandim.
Hurmat bilan,

bir_qiz,

Iltimos, ozizni gulgiga solmang uyat boladi.

Bir narsa bir davrlar Angliya, Portugaliy va Ispaniy davlatlari dunyoni bosib olishgan (qisman), shulardan Braziliya, Meksioko yoki Hong Kong, Hindoston, Makao lar Evropa davlatlari bolib sanalmaydi va asosiy savol biz Europalikmi yoki Osiylikmi degan, chunki kop Internet ahboratlarida shu informatsiya notogri berilgan chunki "ogzini sorasa burnini korsatadiganlar" eski nomdagi NIS (New Independent States) deyishganda hammani evropa davlatlari deb yozishgan ham.

Hafagarchiliksiz , hursandchilik tilab

[bir qiz]

Royal,

New Independent States qaerdan kelgan?

Beshta o'rta osiyo respublikasi qachon tashkil topgan? Va qanday qilib? Nimaga?
Nimaga beshta?

Hech qanaqa hafagarchilik yuq.
poka.

[Royal1]

bir qiz: 0dc8456f,

NISda 16ta respublika boriydi, eee, chozvordiyz oziyam

mundoq qolizga qarang bshta barmogiz bormi , oshanga

kimmidir hapa qip qoyibman shekilli, sizzimasmi ishqilib

Hammaga hursandchilik tilab

Royal

[ZiZu]

Guest: c400b02a, :D Guest Pravilno govorit,delo ne v tom kakie po proishogdeniyu, my vospitany po drugomu seychas ya nahodyas za rubejom ponimayu kak otlichno my provodili vremya s druzyami ,otnoshenie drug ,drugu bylo sovsem drugoe! Zdes nahodyas v Evrope zametil chto chelovek kak by ne oficialno obyazan znat neskolko feshey 1) Ulybayas(hochesh ne hochesh) naigranno priveetstvovat,prosit prosheniya ,postoyanno izvenyatsya,ili lyuboe drugoe obrashenie k 3 licu obyazatelno soprovojdaetsya iskustvennym naigryshom!Hotya za vsem etim stoit holodnoost i bolshoe bezrazlichie drug drugu!2) Zdes nikto ni kem ne interesuetsya vsem pofigu drug na druga ne trogay ti ne tronut tebya! 3) Jivya kajdyi v svoey kak by skorlupe interesnye lyudi zdes!
Skaju vam tochno jivya s evropeycami my ne oni !!

[Delta]

WE ARE F-ING CHUKCHAS!!
what is your problem people :)

[bir qiz]

Royal1: 2760655f,

birinchidan hech qachon 16 ta bo'lmagan, ikkichidan men o'rta osiyoni gapirgan edim 5ta deb.
cho'zmaslik uchun boshqa yozmayman. Take care.

[Royal]

mana yana bittasi hafa boldi, hazillashib ham bomiydi, man sizga lagmon chozvossiz didimmi ? ja oziyam oborasizde

[Smilik_off]

ZiZu kak vsegda prav(a) Guest tozhe ochen' krasivo vse obyasnila :) bravo..

[numk]

Lyudi a mojno skazat chto mi inoplanityani hahahahahah
Nasamom deli.

[Born in Africa]

Naverno Afrikanci toje sebe zadaut voprost kto oni Aziati ili Evropeici (uahahaha).

Mne kajetsa chto mi Indusi (uahahahhaha)
...Mirajopa Hindustani, men uraman afvaltani (uahahha)

[The Dark Side Of The Moon]

The reality is in our souls actually.
No matter what kind of society are you living in.
If you are not "you" then you will at last lose.

Koroche, ne imeyet znacheniya gde ty i kak ty jivyosh.
Vsyo zavisit ot sebya samogo.

Bud ty belym yesli ty budesh sebye vnushat shto ty negr ty im vskorem vremeni i vstanesh.

Tak chto dorogaya pereday svoim rusakam pust oni o svoyey "---"e luchshe bespokoyatsya.

ne hvatalo nam yeshyo papochek takih 8)

[ZiZu]

:D Bez komentareyev.............

[karekeng]

my evropizirovannye aziaty...

Turkey vot pod voprosom, toli Aziya, toli Evropa...

my evropizirovannye aziaty...

Turkey vot pod voprosom, toli Aziya, toli Evropa...
Very interesting word combination: "evropizirovannie Aziati" :):):):):):):)
How about Japan, China, Korea...??? Don't you think they are europeanized???:):):):):):)
We are Turks!!!

[haha]

Naverno Afrikanci toje sebe zadaut voprost kto oni Aziati ili Evropeici (uahahaha).

Mne kajetsa chto mi Indusi (uahahahhaha)
...Mirajopa Hindustani, men uraman afvaltani (uahahha)


Opa opa America Evropa, Aziya Evraziya chto za bezabrazie. Mne kajetsa mi i est' to samoe chto ne naest' bezobrazie . Ne tyda ne syda.

[MUHLIS]

Ya jivu v Moskve i moi zdeshnie druz'ya chasto interesuytsya kakoy obraz misley i stil' povedeniya u molodeji Uzbekistana. Ya imeyu v vidu nash civil'niy sloy molodeji.
Tak ot kogo u nas v mislyah i povedenii bol'she? Ot evropeycev ili ot aziatov?

P.S. Ya ne darom razdelila misli i postupki - eto poroi raznie vechi...
U vas ochen neponyatniy i kakoyta sovershenna nesformulirovanniy vapros.
Yesli vi jivyote v Moskve, navernyaka vashi "druzya" eta russkie.
Mne bilo ochen interesna chto "obraz misley", "stil povedeniya" kakova u maladyoji Maskvi. Vsem izvestno chto russkie atlichayutsa ot Evropysev, no v to je vremya ani ne Aziati. Tak kto ani sami? Na moy vzglyad, uje kak to mojna obobshat i skazat chto Kitayskie, Koreyskie, Yaponskie Tailandskie i drugih maladej ( ili je lyudey) chto ani kak to imeyut chto ta obshuyu. Indoneziya, Malayziya, Phillipines tozhe mojna obobshat i skazat chto maladyoj etoy goegraficheskoy chasti shoji i imeyut chto ta obshee. Eshe mojna skazat chto lyudi v Indii i Bangladeshe imeyut obshie cherta. Arabskie strani i Iran, Pakistan, Afganistane maladyoj mojna toje kak to obobshat. Tak mojna dalshe gruppirovat hotya vse eti strani nahodyatsya v Azii!!! Uzbek toje Aziat, Pers Toje Aziat, Tajik Toje Aziat, Indus toje Aziat, Kazah toje Aziat, Kitaes toje Aziat, Arab toje Aziat, Afganes toje Aziat no, no!!!, v mishlenii i v "Stile" ( kak vi eta gavarite) maladyoje etih lyudey est ochen-ochen bolshaya raznitsa.
Nemets Evropees, Anglishanin toje Evropees, Venger toje Evropees, Russkiy toje....no sredi nih toje est agromnaya raznitsa. Ya lichna ne viju nichevo obshevo sredi Russkava i Portugalskogo maladyoji...hotya ani vse atnosyatsa v odnom Continente.
Esli vi na vashem vaprose imeli vvidu geograficheskoe mestonahojdenie Uzbekistana, to tut ne mojet bit nikakih vaprosov, mi V SREDNEY AZII. No "stil" mishleniya.....izvenite menya....ya perviy raz at vas slishu chto sushestvuet "evropeyskiy", "afrikanskiy", "amerikanskiy", "aziatskiy" "stil" mishleniya..... :D
Po etomu i mnogim drugim prichinam katorie ne stal zdes perechislyat, ya schitayu vash vapros sovershenna nekorrektnim.

[karekeng]

my evropizirovannye aziaty...

Turkey vot pod voprosom, toli Aziya, toli Evropa...
Very interesting word combination: "evropizirovannie Aziati" :):):):):):):)
How about Japan, China, Korea...??? Don't you think they are europeanized???:):):):):):)
We are Turks!!!

net, ne dumayu, tak kak Yaponiya eto Yaponiya, China eto China...u nih sil'naya naciya i sil'naya ekonomika, chto mogut bez postoronnego vliyaniya, no s ih pomosh'yu razvivat'sya, t.e. razvivalis' do sih por i razvivayutsya dalee. my eshe molodye i na nas bol'she vliyaet Evropa, chem Aziya, prosto my rodilis' aziatami =)))

[Royal]

Muhlis

....v SREDNEY AZII....

karekeng
....Evropa vliyaet i mi rodilis v Azii....

Tak, demak ortada,
Tak, demak ortada bu degani:
"na u yoqlikmas, na buyoqlikmas", demak bu deganimi ?
Tak bu degani: "AROSATDA" degani boladimi ?

"Ni myaso - Ni riba" degani shu bosa kerakde, lekin "Ni riba" degani notogri dostlar

kakie Evropeysi?

MONGOLi 100%!
FOrgot about the Mongol conquering?

[MUHLIS]

kakie Evropeysi?

MONGOLi 100%!
FOrgot about the Mongol conquering?
Ne Mongoli a Mongoloidi, pojalusta! Spasibo :D

[Royal]

ha endi "anu' bomasa unda "osha" boladide

Ha endi, unisi yokmasa bunisi bunisi yokmasa unisi da.

Ya jivu v Moskve i moi zdeshnie druz'ya chasto interesuytsya kakoy obraz misley i stil' povedeniya u molodeji Uzbekistana. Ya imeyu v vidu nash civil'niy sloy molodeji.
Tak ot kogo u nas v mislyah i povedenii bol'she? Ot evropeycev ili ot aziatov?

P.S. Ya ne darom razdelila misli i postupki - eto poroi raznie vechi...

N E G R I

[MUHLIS]

Ya jivu v Moskve i moi zdeshnie druz'ya chasto interesuytsya kakoy obraz misley i stil' povedeniya u molodeji Uzbekistana. Ya imeyu v vidu nash civil'niy sloy molodeji.
Tak ot kogo u nas v mislyah i povedenii bol'she? Ot evropeycev ili ot aziatov?

P.S. Ya ne darom razdelila misli i postupki - eto poroi raznie vechi...

N E G R I
:shock:

[Royal]

Ya jivu v Moskve i moi zdeshnie druz'ya chasto interesuytsya kakoy obraz misley i stil' povedeniya u molodeji Uzbekistana. Ya imeyu v vidu nash civil'niy sloy molodeji.
Tak ot kogo u nas v mislyah i povedenii bol'she? Ot evropeycev ili ot aziatov?
P.S. Ya ne darom razdelila misli i postupki - eto poroi raznie vechi...

N E G R I

Hahaha,

Welcome to club.

[spoon]

The future map (http://img64.exs.cx/img64/8420/uusieurooppa.gif) of the European Union.

* Black line indicates the Eastern boarder of the EU

[JoJ]

....kakoy obraz misley i stil' povedeniya u molodeji Uzbekistana. Tak ot kogo u nas v mislyah i povedenii bol'she? Ot evropeycev ili ot aziatov?

jivem mi po evropeyski, mislim po aziatski
hotia, u vseh po raznomu;)

[elDoraDo]

shit

vse my asiaty

i ne nado tut vypendrivatsya i pritvoryatsya tem bolee

vy kogda nit v jivuyu sravnivali sebya s evropeycem (sorry for this question of absurd)
damn - vy doljny byt' ochen typim chelovekom chtob dumat - chto my v kakom to smysle evropiZirovanni ili esho tuppe - evropeycy


european doesnt mean to be modern, however