Talk:Bulgarian language

Number of speakers

The current version of the article gives the number of native speakers in the infobox as ranging between 8 and 9 million. The bigger number is followed by four sources. I've been able to see three of them, and they all mention this number in passing (from what I can see, the fourth source isn't going to be any different). Where has that number come from? It's miles away from anything you can see in recent censuses. The closest thing is the total population of Bulgaria in 1985 – 8.95 million. A substantial proportion of those were native speakers of other languages, but given the dominance of Bulgarian in education and the public sphere, it's reasonable to assume that this is also the number of people at the time who spoke Bulgarian, as either first or second language (the number of Bulgarian speakers abroad at that time I assume to have been negligible, apart from probably about 0.2m in Bessarabia and Banat). What proportion of them were native speakers? Definitely somewhere below 8m (in the 1992 census, the ethnic Bulgarians were 7.2m, so this is probably closest to the mark).

Given that for the 35 years since then the demographic trends have been steadily pulling down (with low birth rates, and high emigration, it appears unlikely that this number could have remained unchanged. Look at the latest census, of 2011. Only 5.66m people declared their language as Bulgarian. That's a lower bound though, as not all respondents answered the language question. If you include those who did not – then the number of native speakers in Bulgaria will be at most 6.4m (probably well below this number, as members of linguistic minorities are much more likely to refuse to provide an answer). Of course, the picture is more complicated now because of the substantial diaspora. Whatever their exact numbers, we can be certain that they will not help add up to to more than the numbers at the end of the 80s, and the totals are in fact going to be lower because of the negative growth in Bulgaria and the inevitable instances of language shift for those abroad. All in all, any number bigger than about 7m is most likely an overestimate.

We've seen then that the 9m figure for native speakers is bogus. How about the 8m cited to Ethnologue? Last year's edition [1] gives the exact number as 8,144,880. Unfortunately, it's not clear exactly how it has been arrived at. The same page gives the speakers in Bulgaria as 6,840,000, citing "European Commission 2012". Again, it's not clear what document this is, but I'd assume it's this Eurobarometer survey report. It was conducted at more or less the same time as the 2011 Census, but it reports about a million more speakers. Given that it's based on an inevitably small sample size, it can safely be discarded in favour of the census figure. Ethnologue also estimates the number of speakers in Turkey at 358,000. This is also dubious. This looks like a fair representation for the number of Bulgarian citizens in Turkey, but the overwhelming majority of them are ethnic Turks, and so only speak Bulgarian as L2, if at all. Such a high figure also clashes with the statistics I've come across for Turkey [2] where the relevant category is "Balkan languages" (so presumably including Bulgarian and others), and it only covers 0.23% of the country's 82 million people. All in all, the Ethnologue figure of 8.14m is also then an overestimate, probably around 1m off the mark.

Is there anything obvious I've missed above? Do we really have no sources here that are any good? – Uanfala (talk) 01:39, 22 October 2020 (UTC

I agree with you, the number is most likely lower but the issue is how low? We need reliable sources for the updated number. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 12:37, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

What I can add here is the number of the Pomaks in Turkey and Greece, which is ca. 500,000. Most of them have as a home language different Bulgarian dialects. Jingiby (talk) 04:04, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Native speaker is a term that's not related to ethnicity or country. A native speaker is someone who speaks the language since early childhood, so currently, there are about 7 mln people in Bulgaria that are native speakers of Bulgarian (the immigrants' number in Bulgaria is very low). In 2001 the population of Bulgaria was about 8 mln i.e. -1 million for 10 years - mostly due to emigration. These people remain native speakers of Bulgarian, even if they live abroad. I think that based on the sources and the facts we can assume that they are about 9 million. --StanProg (talk) 16:28, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Well, native speaker here usually means first-language speaker. A child brought up by Turkish-speaking parents in Bulgaria will count as a native speaker of Turkish, even though it may happen that they will predominantly use Bulgarian in their life and so have higher competence in it than it Turkish. Similarly for someone raised by Bulgarian parents in the US – they will likely be preferential users of English in most of their daily life, but they would still count as native speakers of Bulgarian, not English.
The problem with the 9 million figure is that it represents the total number of L1 + L2 speakers, and that it's accurate only as of the 1980s: it doesn't take into account the inevitable language loss since then. – Uanfala (talk) 17:24, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

@StanProg and Uanfala: Outside Bulgaria, Ethn. gives "389,000 in Germany (2020 census), based on nationality", "131,000 in Ukraine (2001 census)", "117,000 in Spain (2020 census), based on nationality", and "395,000 in Turkey (2019). 98% Pomak (Leclerc 2014c)." As of today (I don't know how often he updates), Leclerc lists among the languages of Turkey "Pomaques - 351 000 - 0,4 % - bulgare (pomaque) - langue slave - islam sunnite." It's not clear if that's the ethnic or speaker population. He gives 7.15M "population locale" for Bulgarian, which I assume means in Bulgaria since the figure is in the section is on languages official in a single state. Given that he has 7.2M for the pop of the country, that would indeed seem to be L1 + L2, unless perhaps nearly everyone is at least natively bilingual these days and so counts as L1. Under Bulgaria itself, he has the pop "7,1 millions (2016)", with "Groupe majoritaire: bulgare (84,3 %)." That sounds like ethnicity, and minorities could've switched, but lower down he says "Bien que plus de 84 % des Bulgares parlent la langue officielle ou l'une de ses variétés," which makes it sound like the speaker population.

But Leclerc also states in his intro that he based his figures on Ethn. 16, and the figures in E16 are pretty close to the above. (You can see it here. It sounds like he may take the %ages from E16 and then apply them to the population figures in more recent censuses. So we could be going in circles -- wouldn't be the first time Ethn. cited someone who based their figures on an older edition of Ethn. E16, for those who don't want to look it up, has a pop of 9M total, including 8M in Bulgaria dated to 1986. — kwami (talk) 06:25, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

I asked Ethnologue the question: https://www.ethnologue.com/contribution/704971#comment-13516

They mention 6,840,000 speakers in Bulgaria (almost 100% of the population). But that's L1+L2. And the global estimate of 8,280,790 is for "Total users". So again L1+L2.

All estimates seem correct. With the exception of Turkey (395,000 L1+L2 speakers) that may be too high. That being said, even 8,280,790-395,000 = 7,885,790 speakers. That's still 8 million.

So I would suggest adding speakers_label=Speakers to make clear that the estimate of 8 million speakers isn't for native speakers only but for all users.

What do you think @Uanfala? a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 12:56, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Actually the number for Turkey probably includes L2 ethnic Turks from Bulgaria (including those still alive among the 360k expelled in 1989) and L1 ethnic Bulgarian (including Pomak). So 395k L1+L2 is probably not that exaggerated. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 13:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

According to Forced Migrants or Voluntary Exiles: Ethnic Turks of Bulgaria in Turkey (2014): "It is estimated that each year 30,000 Bulgarian Turks emigrated to Turkey during 1990–1997 period (Dimitrova 1998)." => 360k + 240k ethnic Turks from Bulgaria who moved to Turkey between 1989 and 1997. (30–40% moved back to Bulgaria or elsewhere as well, especially after Bulgaria joined the EU, see Elchinova and Kutlay 2017) a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 13:12, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the figures for the Pomak (who are L1 Bulgarian speakers) should be very low. The vast majority of those 360k + 240k people are L1 speakers of Turkish who would have picked up Bulgarian at school while in Bulgaria but who would have probably had little reason to continue using the language in the three decades since they left the country. – Uanfala (talk) 11:49, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

I agree. That still gives us 8 million total speakers (L1+L2). a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 11:57, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Speakers

Hi @Uanfala, I don't understand your revert: the version of Ethnologue was undated, the figure was undated, and there's "dubious" without explanation even though it's sourced. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 12:36, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

The dubious tag has a discuss link pointing to a thread on the talk page. Being unsourced is a different problem than being sourced but dubious. I don't see a need for updating the Ethnologue ref either: both versions give the figure of 8 million, and the other digits are not significant. – Uanfala (talk) 12:41, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Ah sorry I didn't see the link to the discussion. I formatted the ref though. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 12:44, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

The dates are still relevant, and updating shows the reader that the problem isn't that the figure hasn't been updated.

The figure of 6.84M for Bulgaria is from the European Commission (2012). Do we have any reason to think that figure is inaccurate?

If we discount the figures in other countries that are based on ethnicity, we get 7.63M. Round up and we still get 8M. And we would want to round up, since many of those people do presumably speak Bulgarian.

I disagree with definition of "native" claimed above. People can be natively bilingual. One common situation is where the language of school or the neighborhood differs from the language of the home. When children pick up a language at c. 6yo and continue with it for life, it counts as a native language. — kwami (talk) 04:22, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

As mentioned above, the 2012 European Commission figure is an estimate based on a small survey, it is much higher than the L1 figures from the census at about the same time, and it probably reflects the L1 + L2 speakers in the country. – Uanfala (talk) 12:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

I agree. However, our source doesn't say that there are 8 million native speakers but 8 million total speakers (L1+L2). So I suggest the following:

|speakers={{sigfig|5.66|1}} million native speakers in Bulgaria

|date=2011 census

|ref=<ref name="2011Census"/>

|speakers2={{sigfig|8.280790|1}} million native and second-language speakers globally (2012–2020)<ref>{{e25|bul}}</ref>

|speakers_label=Speakers

a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 10:57, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Maybe wait until we hear back on your question from Ethnologue? In particular, I'm interested in seeing more about how they've arrived at the L1+L2 speakers abroad. That number seems to include the almost half a million L2 speakers in Turkey, most of whom probably haven't used the language in decades. And I don't think it accounts for the fact that a substantial portion of the Bulgarian L1 speakers estimated to live in Western Europe are likely temporary migrant workers who probably still get counted in the Bulgarian census. As for the 5.66 million in Bulgaria according to the census: that's lower than the actual number as the language question was optional and 0.7 million people refused to answer it. – Uanfala (talk) 12:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

"how they've arrived at the L1+L2 speakers abroad": do you have access to Ethnologue? If not I can copy/paste the numbers for each country. Yes, they include "395,000 in Turkey (2019)".

I don't think temporary workers are counted twice given the (low-ish) numbers in Western Europe and their sources:

• 0 in France,
• 7,170 in Sweden (2020 census), based on nationality.
• "38,500 in United Kingdom (2011 census)" (temporary migrant workers don't answer the UK census),
• "117,000 in Spain (2020 census), based on nationality.",
• "389,000 in Germany (2020 census), based on nationality."

5.66 million in Bulgaria: yes that's lower, but we round it to 6m anyway.

Of course we can wait for their answer, but I think we could change |speakers_label=Speakers right now because we know for sure that 8m is for L1+L2 speakers, not L1 only. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 12:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Please find here, Ethnologue's answer. tl;dr: 8m = L1+L2 and number in Turkey is unclear. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 18:04, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Should I implement the suggested changes @Uanfala? a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 16:43, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

I wouldn't cite Ethnologue here, and I wouldn't use numbers with wildly false accuracy (even if hidden behind {{sigfig}}). We can have the infobox say there are 6 million L1 speakers in Bulgaria (that's discussed and sourced in the article text; preferring "L1" over "native" per kwami's point). A figure of something like "c. 8 million" is probably plausible for the L1+l2 speakers worldwide, but I'd rather we didn't follow Ethnologue here either: their count includes 0.4 million in Turkey (which rests on the twin assumptions that most Bulgarian immigrants there are Pomak and that they still speak Bulgarian: both seem dubious), and also high numbers for countries like Spain and Germany, which are based on nationality and so are overestimates. – Uanfala (talk) 11:35, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

So which RS should we use? Ethnologue is RS so I don't see any reason not to use it if their estimate is "probably plausible". Also, I don't see any reason to consider that estimates based on nationality are "overestimates", unless you have a reliable source claiming so in the case of Bulgarian in Spain and Germany? It seems plausible to me that the vast majority of Bulgarian nationals in these two countries speak the Bulgarian language (as an L1 or an L2). a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 11:44, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Also, the tag says "dubious", even though as you said the 8m estimate is "probably plausible". So there's nothing dubious here. We have a census giving 6m L1 speakers in Bulgaria and we have Ethnologue, a reliable source, giving 8m L1+L2 speakers worldwide. Unless we have other reliable sources contradicting these two figures we should add them to the infobox and remove that "dubious" tag. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 11:46, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Name

This article badly needs a section about the name of this language. When this name appeared. --95.24.69.178 (talk) 18:22, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

There is a sentence: The first mention of the language as the "Bulgarian language" instead of the "Slavonic language" comes in the work of the Greek clergy of the Archbishopric of Ohrid in the 11th century, for example in the Greek hagiography of Clement of Ohrid by Theophylact of Ohrid (late 11th century). Jingiby (talk) 19:49, 10 February 2024 (UTC)