Pub Date : 2023-10-06DOI: 10.1163/24685623-20220134
Lorenzo Pubblici
{"title":"Between East and West. The Formation of the Moscow State, written by Marat Shaikhutdinov","authors":"Lorenzo Pubblici","doi":"10.1163/24685623-20220134","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24685623-20220134","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134945027","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-01DOI: 10.1177/18793665231189326
Dina Kucherbayeva, J. Smagulova
This paper is an initial attempt to evaluate the challenges of promoting a new national language as a medium of instruction (MOI) in a post-socialist higher education (HE) context. In the case of Kazakhstan, the choice of MOI is perceived as a key tool to strengthen national identity and resist domination of Russian; in higher education sector language policies are constructed to foster cultural independence which translates into establishing Kazakh as a full-fledged medium of academia. Drawing on the historical-structural approach (Tollefson, 1991, 2013), we analyze the ideologies and practices of university students studying in Kazakh. Findings from audio-recorded interviews suggest that implementing Kazakh-medium instruction policies face numerous pragmatic and ideological challenges, such as a dearth of teaching and learning resources in Kazakh and lack of Kazakh-speaking faculty. This study contributes to scholarship on language revitalization in the context of tertiary education.
{"title":"Language Revitalization: Challenges for Kazakh in Higher Education","authors":"Dina Kucherbayeva, J. Smagulova","doi":"10.1177/18793665231189326","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665231189326","url":null,"abstract":"This paper is an initial attempt to evaluate the challenges of promoting a new national language as a medium of instruction (MOI) in a post-socialist higher education (HE) context. In the case of Kazakhstan, the choice of MOI is perceived as a key tool to strengthen national identity and resist domination of Russian; in higher education sector language policies are constructed to foster cultural independence which translates into establishing Kazakh as a full-fledged medium of academia. Drawing on the historical-structural approach (Tollefson, 1991, 2013), we analyze the ideologies and practices of university students studying in Kazakh. Findings from audio-recorded interviews suggest that implementing Kazakh-medium instruction policies face numerous pragmatic and ideological challenges, such as a dearth of teaching and learning resources in Kazakh and lack of Kazakh-speaking faculty. This study contributes to scholarship on language revitalization in the context of tertiary education.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"178 1","pages":"166 - 178"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88033666","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-29DOI: 10.1177/18793665231188381
Irina Liskovets
The paper attempts to describe, discuss and analyse the situation of rapid and spontaneous transfer to practical usage of a language which speakers know only passively in the situation of stable closely related bilingualism. Such a transfer – from native Russian to Belarusian – has been taking place in the Republic of Belarus due to various reasons. Partly, this process was connected to the political situation in the country and around it; at the same time, a part of Russian-speaking intelligentsia (mostly residing in the country capital, Minsk) was in the process of reshaping of their national identity. The paper discusses in details both those reasons, as well as the peculiarities of the language situation promoting this process, its linguistic features and their difference from those of an interlanguage which arises in the situation of a foreign language acquisition and from those of trasyanka, the code in-between Russian and Belarusian. The phenomenon in the focus is also compared with the newest tendency of Russian-speaking Ukrainians to transit to using Ukrainian instead of Russian in their everyday communication and in social media. The paper is based on the data obtained in the course of longitude field study conducted in Minsk in 1999–2022 and the data derived from media and internet sources.
{"title":"Challenges and Reasons of Using a Passively Known Language in Daily Practice: Cases of Belarusian and Ukrainian","authors":"Irina Liskovets","doi":"10.1177/18793665231188381","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665231188381","url":null,"abstract":"The paper attempts to describe, discuss and analyse the situation of rapid and spontaneous transfer to practical usage of a language which speakers know only passively in the situation of stable closely related bilingualism. Such a transfer – from native Russian to Belarusian – has been taking place in the Republic of Belarus due to various reasons. Partly, this process was connected to the political situation in the country and around it; at the same time, a part of Russian-speaking intelligentsia (mostly residing in the country capital, Minsk) was in the process of reshaping of their national identity. The paper discusses in details both those reasons, as well as the peculiarities of the language situation promoting this process, its linguistic features and their difference from those of an interlanguage which arises in the situation of a foreign language acquisition and from those of trasyanka, the code in-between Russian and Belarusian. The phenomenon in the focus is also compared with the newest tendency of Russian-speaking Ukrainians to transit to using Ukrainian instead of Russian in their everyday communication and in social media. The paper is based on the data obtained in the course of longitude field study conducted in Minsk in 1999–2022 and the data derived from media and internet sources.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"12 1","pages":"118 - 128"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90617484","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-25DOI: 10.1177/18793665231186636
Nam Hye Hyun, Fedorova Kapitolina
Russian Federation, being de jure and de facto linguistically diverse multilingual country, can be described, at the same time, as being under a strong influence of monolingual language ideology, with Russian totally domineering in most public spheres. Minority languages and especially languages of migrants lack official recognition and support, and their speakers often have to face prejudices and negative stereotypes. The paper aims at revealing language ideology prevailing in modern Russia through analysis of attitudes to languages other than Russian as they are expressed in discourse about language, i.e. metadiscourse. When approaching it, it is important to distinguish state discourse (manifestation of official language policy) and public discourse (collective attitudes towards certain sublanguages and their users expressed more or less directly). The analysis shows that over the past two decades, official language ideology in Russia has shifted from guaranteeing linguistic equality and diversity to having an emphasis on unity and purity and giving support to the Russian language. This reorientation is realized through status planning, corpus planning, and acquisition planning. At the level of public discourse, analysis of collective attitudes towards the languages used by non-native speakers demonstrates that a significant part of the Russian-speaking population express negative attitudes towards non-native speakers and their poor Russian language skills, which once again confirms that there is dominant monolingualism and purism in public discourse. However, language practices in Russia are gradually becoming more diverse which can become a challenge for monolingualism and purism in future.
{"title":"Treatment of and Attitudes Towards ‘Other’ Languages in Modern Russia: Evidence from Metalinguistic Discourse","authors":"Nam Hye Hyun, Fedorova Kapitolina","doi":"10.1177/18793665231186636","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665231186636","url":null,"abstract":"Russian Federation, being de jure and de facto linguistically diverse multilingual country, can be described, at the same time, as being under a strong influence of monolingual language ideology, with Russian totally domineering in most public spheres. Minority languages and especially languages of migrants lack official recognition and support, and their speakers often have to face prejudices and negative stereotypes. The paper aims at revealing language ideology prevailing in modern Russia through analysis of attitudes to languages other than Russian as they are expressed in discourse about language, i.e. metadiscourse. When approaching it, it is important to distinguish state discourse (manifestation of official language policy) and public discourse (collective attitudes towards certain sublanguages and their users expressed more or less directly). The analysis shows that over the past two decades, official language ideology in Russia has shifted from guaranteeing linguistic equality and diversity to having an emphasis on unity and purity and giving support to the Russian language. This reorientation is realized through status planning, corpus planning, and acquisition planning. At the level of public discourse, analysis of collective attitudes towards the languages used by non-native speakers demonstrates that a significant part of the Russian-speaking population express negative attitudes towards non-native speakers and their poor Russian language skills, which once again confirms that there is dominant monolingualism and purism in public discourse. However, language practices in Russia are gradually becoming more diverse which can become a challenge for monolingualism and purism in future.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"5 1","pages":"92 - 105"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77782093","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-17DOI: 10.1177/18793665231185795
S. Bahry, Tojiniso Olimnazarova
Tajikistan, at the heart of Central Eurasia, had a population of 7,563,687 in 2010, estimated recently to be almost 10,084,935. Named for its majority nationality, Tajikistan has many other nationalities, most with their own language. This article explores what is known about the historical, development and current status of multiple languages in Tajikistan’s linguistic tapestry. We provide a tentative overview of Tajikistan’s evolving language ecology from earliest times when a range of Eastern Iranian languages were dominant, to the reduced use of Eastern Iranian languages following the entry of Arabic and New Persian (a western Iranian language) into the ecology with the Arab conquest, and the subsequent entry of Turkic languages, and more recently the entry of Russian under the late Russian empire and its spread under the Soviet Union. Following independence in 1991, a shift in balance among domains of use of Tajik and Russian has been ongoing at the same time as international languages, especially English, have entered Tajikistan’s language ecology. We review the current state of knowledge about contemporary sociolinguistic dynamics, monolingualism and plurilingualism in society, where the titular language, Tajik/Persian, is in interaction with local, regional and global languages. Against the background of changing post-independence language and language-in-education policies, we discuss the prospects for monolingual, multilingual and plurilingual education in Tajikistan among efforts to promote the official language, Tajik, and to provide minority language education, while also developing proficiency in foreign languages in Tajikistan, through initiatives such as English-medium instruction.
{"title":"Towards Understanding Tajikistan’s Sociolinguistically Complex Language Ecology: Historical Development, Current Status, Issues, Research, Policy and Practice","authors":"S. Bahry, Tojiniso Olimnazarova","doi":"10.1177/18793665231185795","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665231185795","url":null,"abstract":"Tajikistan, at the heart of Central Eurasia, had a population of 7,563,687 in 2010, estimated recently to be almost 10,084,935. Named for its majority nationality, Tajikistan has many other nationalities, most with their own language. This article explores what is known about the historical, development and current status of multiple languages in Tajikistan’s linguistic tapestry. We provide a tentative overview of Tajikistan’s evolving language ecology from earliest times when a range of Eastern Iranian languages were dominant, to the reduced use of Eastern Iranian languages following the entry of Arabic and New Persian (a western Iranian language) into the ecology with the Arab conquest, and the subsequent entry of Turkic languages, and more recently the entry of Russian under the late Russian empire and its spread under the Soviet Union. Following independence in 1991, a shift in balance among domains of use of Tajik and Russian has been ongoing at the same time as international languages, especially English, have entered Tajikistan’s language ecology. We review the current state of knowledge about contemporary sociolinguistic dynamics, monolingualism and plurilingualism in society, where the titular language, Tajik/Persian, is in interaction with local, regional and global languages. Against the background of changing post-independence language and language-in-education policies, we discuss the prospects for monolingual, multilingual and plurilingual education in Tajikistan among efforts to promote the official language, Tajik, and to provide minority language education, while also developing proficiency in foreign languages in Tajikistan, through initiatives such as English-medium instruction.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":"151 - 165"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76832558","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-14DOI: 10.1177/18793665231188380
Youngjo Jung, Bora Kim
This study aims to specify the definitions of two terms, bigraphia and digraphia, and examine how these phenomena appear in post-socialist countries. It is currently a global phenomenon to use two or more writing systems in one country, due to the spread of English and the Internet. Bigraphia means when the function and prestige of two writing systems (or two varieties of one system) are equal. On the other hand, when there is a difference in the function and/or prestige between two writing systems, it is defined as digraphia. The paper examines the combination of writing systems in post-socialist countries such as Russia, Belarus, Serbia, and Uzbekistan. In-digraphia refers to a situation in which variations of one writing system coexist, and out-digraphia refers to a situation in which two different writing systems coexist. A narrower sense of digraphia is observed in Belarus today: Belarusian Cyrillic-Т(BC-T) is used to write Tarashkievitsa and Belarusian Cyrillic-N (BC-N) is used to write Narkamaŭka. Out-digraphia is observed in Serbia and Uzbekistan. In these countries, Cyrillic and Latin scripts are used to write Serbian and Uzbek. Out-digraphia is also confirmed in Russian texts: It is commonly thought that only Cyrillic letters are used to write Russian, but recently the use of the so-called “macaronic alphabet,” which is a mix of Cyrillic and Latin letters, has become common.
{"title":"Coexistence of Multiple Writing Systems: Classifying Digraphia in Post-Socialist Countries","authors":"Youngjo Jung, Bora Kim","doi":"10.1177/18793665231188380","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665231188380","url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to specify the definitions of two terms, bigraphia and digraphia, and examine how these phenomena appear in post-socialist countries. It is currently a global phenomenon to use two or more writing systems in one country, due to the spread of English and the Internet. Bigraphia means when the function and prestige of two writing systems (or two varieties of one system) are equal. On the other hand, when there is a difference in the function and/or prestige between two writing systems, it is defined as digraphia. The paper examines the combination of writing systems in post-socialist countries such as Russia, Belarus, Serbia, and Uzbekistan. In-digraphia refers to a situation in which variations of one writing system coexist, and out-digraphia refers to a situation in which two different writing systems coexist. A narrower sense of digraphia is observed in Belarus today: Belarusian Cyrillic-Т(BC-T) is used to write Tarashkievitsa and Belarusian Cyrillic-N (BC-N) is used to write Narkamaŭka. Out-digraphia is observed in Serbia and Uzbekistan. In these countries, Cyrillic and Latin scripts are used to write Serbian and Uzbek. Out-digraphia is also confirmed in Russian texts: It is commonly thought that only Cyrillic letters are used to write Russian, but recently the use of the so-called “macaronic alphabet,” which is a mix of Cyrillic and Latin letters, has become common.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"12 1","pages":"139 - 150"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82158617","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-10DOI: 10.1177/18793665231189322
K. Fedorova
Eurasia is vast, covering enormous territories with distinctly different landscapes, climates, and time zones. Throughout the centuries, the inhabitants of these territories have moved, encountered various challenges and threats, adapted to new living conditions, changed their accustomed ways of life, and consistently had to communicate with both fellow inhabitants and strangers. The languages spoken in this region have also undergone constant changes, adapting to the communicative needs of their speakers. Stretching from Eastern Europe to Central Asia and the Far East, Eurasia holds a unique position as a convergence point for diverse linguistic traditions. The languages spoken within this region belong to numerous language families, including IndoEuropean, Turkic, Finno-Ugric, Tungusic, Mongolic, and several others, forming a rich tapestry of histories, cultural interactions, and linguistic evolution. Furthermore, the socio-political developments have had a significant impact on the language situations in different regions. Some languages or language variants have gained prestige and influence, while others have fallen into disuse and disappeared. State authorities have actively promoted languages they deem strategically advantageous and have sometimes attempted to suppress those they perceive as threats to national unity or independence. Political, religious, and cultural activists have pursued their own agendas, contributing to the complex mosaic of efforts aimed at managing language situations. In recent years, the Eurasian region has undergone substantial socio-political and economic transformations, which have had far-reaching effects on linguistic diversity and language practices within the region. The dissolution of the Soviet Union, the emergence of independent nationstates, and the growing interconnectedness of the global community have all contributed to remarkable changes in the linguistic landscape. This special issue seeks to offer a comprehensive exploration of these shifts and their implications for language usage, identity, and intercultural communication within the Eurasian context. The primary focus is on the Eurasian region as a linguistically diverse, multiethnic, and multicultural setting, providing a lens through which to examine these phenomena. Multilingualism, language contacts, and socially loaded linguistic variation form an integral part of everyday life within diverse linguistic communities across the globe. The capacity to speak multiple languages or navigate various linguistic registers equips individuals with a wider array of communicative tools and facilitates intercultural comprehension and access to opportunities. People often adjust their language use to align with specific social contexts, adhering to linguistic norms or indicating their affiliation with particular groups. These linguistic variations can bear cultural significance and serve as markers of identity and belonging. This phenomenon is particularl
{"title":"Language situation in dynamic Eurasian region: Introducing the special issue","authors":"K. Fedorova","doi":"10.1177/18793665231189322","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665231189322","url":null,"abstract":"Eurasia is vast, covering enormous territories with distinctly different landscapes, climates, and time zones. Throughout the centuries, the inhabitants of these territories have moved, encountered various challenges and threats, adapted to new living conditions, changed their accustomed ways of life, and consistently had to communicate with both fellow inhabitants and strangers. The languages spoken in this region have also undergone constant changes, adapting to the communicative needs of their speakers. Stretching from Eastern Europe to Central Asia and the Far East, Eurasia holds a unique position as a convergence point for diverse linguistic traditions. The languages spoken within this region belong to numerous language families, including IndoEuropean, Turkic, Finno-Ugric, Tungusic, Mongolic, and several others, forming a rich tapestry of histories, cultural interactions, and linguistic evolution. Furthermore, the socio-political developments have had a significant impact on the language situations in different regions. Some languages or language variants have gained prestige and influence, while others have fallen into disuse and disappeared. State authorities have actively promoted languages they deem strategically advantageous and have sometimes attempted to suppress those they perceive as threats to national unity or independence. Political, religious, and cultural activists have pursued their own agendas, contributing to the complex mosaic of efforts aimed at managing language situations. In recent years, the Eurasian region has undergone substantial socio-political and economic transformations, which have had far-reaching effects on linguistic diversity and language practices within the region. The dissolution of the Soviet Union, the emergence of independent nationstates, and the growing interconnectedness of the global community have all contributed to remarkable changes in the linguistic landscape. This special issue seeks to offer a comprehensive exploration of these shifts and their implications for language usage, identity, and intercultural communication within the Eurasian context. The primary focus is on the Eurasian region as a linguistically diverse, multiethnic, and multicultural setting, providing a lens through which to examine these phenomena. Multilingualism, language contacts, and socially loaded linguistic variation form an integral part of everyday life within diverse linguistic communities across the globe. The capacity to speak multiple languages or navigate various linguistic registers equips individuals with a wider array of communicative tools and facilitates intercultural comprehension and access to opportunities. People often adjust their language use to align with specific social contexts, adhering to linguistic norms or indicating their affiliation with particular groups. These linguistic variations can bear cultural significance and serve as markers of identity and belonging. This phenomenon is particularl","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"26 1","pages":"89 - 91"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82790665","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-08DOI: 10.1177/18793665231185792
Vlada V. Baranova
The paper discusses providing (or not) information about coronavirus during the pandemics of COVID-19 in minority languages in Russia. It explores different minority languages, indigenous, and migrant, in the announcements and doctor-patient communications. The study is based on the observation of the linguistic landscape in 4 Russian cities (N=150) and on materials from semi-structured interviews. According to the data, Russian has been the preferred language for communicating official information about COVID-19. Doctor-patient communication in the multilingual regions was also predominantly in Russian, but there is a tendency to use another, minority native language in communication with mid-level medical staff and with all other actors in the rural area. The paper discusses creation of a more trusting relationship between a doctor and a patient by using the native language.
{"title":"Linguistic In/Exclusion in Medicine: Multilingual COVID-19 Communication in Russia","authors":"Vlada V. Baranova","doi":"10.1177/18793665231185792","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665231185792","url":null,"abstract":"The paper discusses providing (or not) information about coronavirus during the pandemics of COVID-19 in minority languages in Russia. It explores different minority languages, indigenous, and migrant, in the announcements and doctor-patient communications. The study is based on the observation of the linguistic landscape in 4 Russian cities (N=150) and on materials from semi-structured interviews. According to the data, Russian has been the preferred language for communicating official information about COVID-19. Doctor-patient communication in the multilingual regions was also predominantly in Russian, but there is a tendency to use another, minority native language in communication with mid-level medical staff and with all other actors in the rural area. The paper discusses creation of a more trusting relationship between a doctor and a patient by using the native language.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81768848","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-26DOI: 10.1177/18793665231185794
O. Palinska
The paper based on quantitative and qualitative analysis on data on language attitudes and geopolitical orientations obtained in Central and Southern Ukraine shows significant differences between two regions. The assessment of linguistic changes occurred after the collapse of the USSR in both regions is unequivocal: most participants in open interviews noted a positive trend for the Ukrainian language, including the expansion of functional spheres of its use (on television, in politics, in education) and its higher prestige in society. Post-Soviet changes toward the expansion of the use of the Ukrainian language were viewed positively even by predominantly Russian-speaking respondents, who opposed “Ukrainization” in other aspects. Based on the answers to the questions in the “Geopolitics” and “Identity” blocks of questionnaire, two types of respondents were identified using cluster analysis: (1) “pro-European” and (2) “pro-Russian.” The language preferences of respondents belonging to different clusters differed in the regions studied: while more Ukrainian speakers, both in the Center and in the South, mainly belonged to the first cluster, and more Russian speakers (to a somewhat lesser extent) to the second, speakers who used a mixed idiom known as Surzhik in the Center, were more “pro-Russian,” and in the South, more “pro-European” oriented. That can signal of differences in language attitudes and labeling regarding Surzhik in those regions of Ukraine.
{"title":"East vs West: Geopolitical Orientations and Language Practices of Residents of Central and Southern Ukraine","authors":"O. Palinska","doi":"10.1177/18793665231185794","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665231185794","url":null,"abstract":"The paper based on quantitative and qualitative analysis on data on language attitudes and geopolitical orientations obtained in Central and Southern Ukraine shows significant differences between two regions. The assessment of linguistic changes occurred after the collapse of the USSR in both regions is unequivocal: most participants in open interviews noted a positive trend for the Ukrainian language, including the expansion of functional spheres of its use (on television, in politics, in education) and its higher prestige in society. Post-Soviet changes toward the expansion of the use of the Ukrainian language were viewed positively even by predominantly Russian-speaking respondents, who opposed “Ukrainization” in other aspects. Based on the answers to the questions in the “Geopolitics” and “Identity” blocks of questionnaire, two types of respondents were identified using cluster analysis: (1) “pro-European” and (2) “pro-Russian.” The language preferences of respondents belonging to different clusters differed in the regions studied: while more Ukrainian speakers, both in the Center and in the South, mainly belonged to the first cluster, and more Russian speakers (to a somewhat lesser extent) to the second, speakers who used a mixed idiom known as Surzhik in the Center, were more “pro-Russian,” and in the South, more “pro-European” oriented. That can signal of differences in language attitudes and labeling regarding Surzhik in those regions of Ukraine.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"33 1","pages":"129 - 138"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80109533","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-12DOI: 10.1177/18793665231183980
A. Abhijeet
The idea of Eurasia is reemerging as the main focus in contemporary politics, and certainly, Bruno Macaeas has become one of the first writers to predict it in recent times. He also shows how both China and Russia are seeing and engaging with Eurasia with the Belt and Road Initiative and Eurasian Economic Union respectively. On the other hand, he says that the EU’s idea towards Eurasia as many of the threats the union is facing today has been indirectly the result of breaking up of the firm border of Asia and Europe. The book explores the idea of an emergent Eurasia. Bruno Macaeas believes that the Eurasian region will re-emerge as the most important factor leaving the American and the Asians in the 21 century. He also exerts on the interplay among China, Russia, and the European Union. This according to him is a simple return to the history; he mentions that “Eurasia happens to be the largest landmass on earth, the place where most of the great civilizations of human history were developed.” He says that “As Europe disappears, Eurasia coheres” (Pg 9). The author gives an example of the spectacular rise of Singapore and Hong Kong. In the book, the author uses the termEurasia to denotemuchmore than the geographical entity. The book is divided into two parts. In the first part, “The Map,” the author explains the origins of the divide between Europe and Asia and what are the factors that are helping to collapse that divide. This part puts forward how a new world order, Eurasian, is taking shape on the ruins of the old order. The second part of the book, “The Journey,” is the travelogue of the author. The part introduces the readers with minute and lesserknown details about the region. He mentions his observations while traveling in the Xinjiang region of China that, “it is difficult to see how China will be able to solve the contradiction between the desire to facilitate trade and movement while closing borders and subjecting everyone to permanent surveillance.” The first part has three chapters. The first chapter of the book tries to explain how the borders of the two continents, Asia and Europe, were defined historically. The authors say that now it is easier to trace the border as it is getting diminished. The chapter concludes an attempt of finding Eurasia in history. While the second chapter explains the present events which often show contradictory views on an issue, the third chapter looks the new Eurasian continent using three players, where the author sees Russia oscillating between Asia and Europe. The second part which has six chapters provides support to author’s argument in the previous part by the help of his travel accounts. The author started his journey from theCaucasus, then traveled to Armenia and Iran, and covered the parts of Central Asia, China, and Russia. The fourth chapter of the book starts the travel details of author. The travel starts with Azerbaijan. In the chapter, the author uses the conversation to show what people t
{"title":"Book Review: The Dawn of Eurasia: On the trail of the new world order, by Bruno Macaeas","authors":"A. Abhijeet","doi":"10.1177/18793665231183980","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665231183980","url":null,"abstract":"The idea of Eurasia is reemerging as the main focus in contemporary politics, and certainly, Bruno Macaeas has become one of the first writers to predict it in recent times. He also shows how both China and Russia are seeing and engaging with Eurasia with the Belt and Road Initiative and Eurasian Economic Union respectively. On the other hand, he says that the EU’s idea towards Eurasia as many of the threats the union is facing today has been indirectly the result of breaking up of the firm border of Asia and Europe. The book explores the idea of an emergent Eurasia. Bruno Macaeas believes that the Eurasian region will re-emerge as the most important factor leaving the American and the Asians in the 21 century. He also exerts on the interplay among China, Russia, and the European Union. This according to him is a simple return to the history; he mentions that “Eurasia happens to be the largest landmass on earth, the place where most of the great civilizations of human history were developed.” He says that “As Europe disappears, Eurasia coheres” (Pg 9). The author gives an example of the spectacular rise of Singapore and Hong Kong. In the book, the author uses the termEurasia to denotemuchmore than the geographical entity. The book is divided into two parts. In the first part, “The Map,” the author explains the origins of the divide between Europe and Asia and what are the factors that are helping to collapse that divide. This part puts forward how a new world order, Eurasian, is taking shape on the ruins of the old order. The second part of the book, “The Journey,” is the travelogue of the author. The part introduces the readers with minute and lesserknown details about the region. He mentions his observations while traveling in the Xinjiang region of China that, “it is difficult to see how China will be able to solve the contradiction between the desire to facilitate trade and movement while closing borders and subjecting everyone to permanent surveillance.” The first part has three chapters. The first chapter of the book tries to explain how the borders of the two continents, Asia and Europe, were defined historically. The authors say that now it is easier to trace the border as it is getting diminished. The chapter concludes an attempt of finding Eurasia in history. While the second chapter explains the present events which often show contradictory views on an issue, the third chapter looks the new Eurasian continent using three players, where the author sees Russia oscillating between Asia and Europe. The second part which has six chapters provides support to author’s argument in the previous part by the help of his travel accounts. The author started his journey from theCaucasus, then traveled to Armenia and Iran, and covered the parts of Central Asia, China, and Russia. The fourth chapter of the book starts the travel details of author. The travel starts with Azerbaijan. In the chapter, the author uses the conversation to show what people t","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"205 - 205"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90348506","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：