As far as I'm familiar with the Greek language the sound 'sh' is absent from the Greek phonology. It is usually simply replaced with 's'.

Anyway, exonymy doesn't apply on microtoponimy. Names of villages are usually given by the people founding and populating them.

As you said ussually, the particular case isn't among ussual cases

I haven't been to Kostur/Kastoria region. I can't speak of the situation there. I only know there were settled some 10.000 refugees from Anatolia in that prefecture in the '20s, but I haven't made any more detailed research.

yep, i know, but i happen to have native ancestry.

Also, I can tell you that almost every single individual in Republic of Macedonia (also in the diaspora) can trace some origin back to Aegean Macedonia. There is an ancestor in every family born somewhere there. This does not tells that much for a population migration, as it does for the contacts and the unity of the population in whole Macedonia.

so 1.500.000 bulgarian speakers have ancestry from kilkis or Florina.Sounds a little absurd so i would like to give me your sources.Moreover i dont think it tells anything about the unity of the population, as long as Macedonia was populated by almost 10 different nationalities, with all of them almost never mixed with each other, so Macedonians (northern Greeks) don't seem to have any connection with any slavic immigrant in fyrom.

moroever even if the things were different, most of them would have connection with the 2 most northern regions, which still makes your opinion sounding wrong

That's not logical.

You're implying that Greeks were forced to change their identity, so that you can justify your forceful assimilation as "back to the root" process.

Medieval states were not based on ethnic principles. The rulers didn't mind much for the language the peasants spoke as long as they were paying their taxes.

States created in modern age, however, are based on ethnicity turned into nationality; and it is important for the population to be homogeneous. This is why your theory about forceful assimilation of Greeks in the Middle Age is not plausible, in contrast to the forceful assimilation of the Macedonians in the Modern Age.

they did care, considering that Rome latinised almost the half of its empire (of course this happened during antiquity, but still there were not many differences with medieval times the same goes for Prussians, eastern germans (for example lubeck was built by slavs and as far as i know they were not replaced by german colonists) and many other cases.A peasant with different language has more possibilities to adopt a different identity and so to rebel.And yes many Greeks were forced to change their language (and sometimes their identity too) many times,In contrast to slavs of northern Greece who could not be asimilated as long as they were ruled by Ottomans, not by Greeks.