Maur
Banned
Disclaimer: I don't think it's actually important. Linguistics are just that - what matters is actual identities, and i have no doubts that there were strong common 'eastern slavic' identity, which coexisted with more local identities, be it Muscovite, "Lithuanian", Zaporozhian, etc. It was by no means sure how will they evolve, whether Russia will absorb today's Belarus and Ukraine or if they stay separate (much easier if you have them not subjugated by Poland, obviously), or even if Grand Duchy will absorb today's Russia. (even if the last is a bit ASBish, it's because of geopolitics, not culture)
And it (the one word for all) actually works both ways. It can be seen with today's, umm, 'heated', arguments about who's the real descendants of Kievan Rus, Ukrainians or Russians (oh, the wiki talk pages are so enlightening sometimes...
)
That said, i am genuinely curious. Let me say what i think, and hopefully you'll be able to correct me.
I should made clear it was about today's languages (which is irrelevant to the topic, so, yeah). And i'm not even sure, but i think that in Russian, the word for "russians" and for "east slavs" is the same 'russkiye', while in Belarusian and Ukrainian languages there are two different words for naming both concepts. Or rather that's what i though, because trying to check it now left me very thoroughly confused
(seriously, wikipedia is fun. Article about one word in one language hyperlinks to another article in another language, which apparently describes totally different thing. And it links back to yet another article in the previous language. Good job wiki! And i thought that at least the names won't be controversial much. Seriously: Start at Ruthenians, link to Ukrainian, link to Polish, link to Russian, link to Ukrainian, link to Polish, link to English and you are in totally different place
)
Obviously, every language has another words for naming inhabitants of Ukraine and Belarus.
I am a bit less clear what was the case in the past. I think that it was just one word (the "Rus" in its various declinations) that was used at all in the beginning, then the Rossiya emerged some time around the end of middle ages. Which means we actually agree. Dunno why i wrote all that, then.
Ok, i give up. I don't have idea about the whole naming clusterfuck, and i'm tired. Just tell me what you think.
On a side note, it's funny that each group of Slavs ended up divided in three major groups. Eastern - Russians, Ukrainians, Belorusians, Western, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Southern - Bulgarians, Slovenes and Serbo-Croats

And it (the one word for all) actually works both ways. It can be seen with today's, umm, 'heated', arguments about who's the real descendants of Kievan Rus, Ukrainians or Russians (oh, the wiki talk pages are so enlightening sometimes...
That said, i am genuinely curious. Let me say what i think, and hopefully you'll be able to correct me.
I should made clear it was about today's languages (which is irrelevant to the topic, so, yeah). And i'm not even sure, but i think that in Russian, the word for "russians" and for "east slavs" is the same 'russkiye', while in Belarusian and Ukrainian languages there are two different words for naming both concepts. Or rather that's what i though, because trying to check it now left me very thoroughly confused
Obviously, every language has another words for naming inhabitants of Ukraine and Belarus.
I am a bit less clear what was the case in the past. I think that it was just one word (the "Rus" in its various declinations) that was used at all in the beginning, then the Rossiya emerged some time around the end of middle ages. Which means we actually agree. Dunno why i wrote all that, then.
Ok, i give up. I don't have idea about the whole naming clusterfuck, and i'm tired. Just tell me what you think.
On a side note, it's funny that each group of Slavs ended up divided in three major groups. Eastern - Russians, Ukrainians, Belorusians, Western, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Southern - Bulgarians, Slovenes and Serbo-Croats