2/2005 Languages of Self-Description in Empire and Multinational State

Образы языков и политика идентичности и языка в Украине: груз прошлого и современный конфликт

Маргарет Совик, Ольга Филиппова

2/2005

Публикуется на английском (на английской части сайта).

SUMMARY:

Cтатья посвящена проблеме неоднозначной языковой ситуации, которая сложилась в независимой Украине в результате взаимодействия унаследованной от советских времен языковой политики с “непрямой” языковой политикой постсоветского времени. Авторы анализируют высказывания студентов о статусе украинского и русского языков в особом контексте города Харькова, города с “мифологическим” имперским прошлым, который сейчас находится в процессе переопределения собственной идентичности в независимой Украине. Далее в статье рассматривается вопрос о том, какая роль отводится языку в проекте украинской нации и независимого государства. Наконец, авторов интересуют драматические репрезентации “русских” и “украинцев” в их отношении к лингвистическим стереотипам.

Доступ

Оформите подписку, чтобы получить полный доступ к текстам

Оформить подписку

Read in English

Сноски

1.For background, see Ray Taras, Olga Filippova, Nelly Pobeda. Ukraine’s Transnationals, Far-away Locals and Xenophobes: The Prospects for Europeanness // Europe-Asia Studies. 2004. Vol. 56. No 6. Pp. 835-856.↩

2.Larysa Masenko. Mova i polityka. Kyiv, 1999.↩

3.The material examined in this study comes from two different stages of fieldwork carried out in Kharkiv. A total of six group interviews were conducted in the period 14 to 24 October 2003 with groups of students from different universities in Kharkiv. The students study at Kharkiv National University, the Kharkiv State Academy of Culture, Kharkiv National University of Pharmacy, Kharkiv State Technical University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, and Kharkiv State Academy of Municipal Economy. One interview was conducted by both authors, the others by M. Søvik. All the interviews were conducted in Russian, but the respondents were free to use Ukrainian if they wished. Based on what was said in the interviews, the respondents can be labeled predominantly Russian-speaking. In addition, we present some material from a questionnaire designed by both authors and administered by O. Filippova during March-September 2004. A total of 58 students participated in the group interviews, and 400 students took part in the questionnaire. The fieldwork for this study was financed by the Baltic Sea Foundation and the Swedish Institute through the Visby program. A note on transliteration: we use the Ukrainian name for Kharkiv throughout the text, but when our respondents refer to the city in Russian, we render it in its Russian form, Kharkov.↩

Примечания

[1]For background, see Ray Taras, Olga Filippova, Nelly Pobeda. Ukraine’s Transnationals, Far-away Locals and Xenophobes: The Prospects for Europeanness // Europe-Asia Studies. 2004. Vol. 56. No 6. Pp. 835-856.

[2]Larysa Masenko. Mova i polityka. Kyiv, 1999.

[3]The material examined in this study comes from two different stages of fieldwork carried out in Kharkiv. A total of six group interviews were conducted in the period 14 to 24 October 2003 with groups of students from different universities in Kharkiv. The students study at Kharkiv National University, the Kharkiv State Academy of Culture, Kharkiv National University of Pharmacy, Kharkiv State Technical University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, and Kharkiv State Academy of Municipal Economy. One interview was conducted by both authors, the others by M. Søvik. All the interviews were conducted in Russian, but the respondents were free to use Ukrainian if they wished. Based on what was said in the interviews, the respondents can be labeled predominantly Russian-speaking. In addition, we present some material from a questionnaire designed by both authors and administered by O. Filippova during March-September 2004. A total of 58 students participated in the group interviews, and 400 students took part in the questionnaire. The fieldwork for this study was financed by the Baltic Sea Foundation and the Swedish Institute through the Visby program. A note on transliteration: we use the Ukrainian name for Kharkiv throughout the text, but when our respondents refer to the city in Russian, we render it in its Russian form, Kharkov.

[4]John Edwards. Multilingualism. London, 1994. P. 11.

[5]Benedict Anderson. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. New York, 1983.

[6]According to Charles Ferguson, a language situation may be defined as “the total configuration of language use at a given time and place, including such data as how many and what kinds of languages are spoken in the area by how many people, under what circumstances, and what the attitudes and beliefs about languages held by the members of the community are.” Cited in David Laitin. Language Planning in Estonia. // Hans R. Dua (Ed.). Language Planning and Political Theory, International Journal of the Sociology of Language 118. Berlin, New York. 1996. Pp. 44-45. In this article we will focus on these last aspects: attitudes and beliefs about languages.

Ab Imperio

Ab Imperio

Образы языков и политика идентичности и языка в Украине: груз прошлого и современный конфликт

Примечания