Why does Russia need a language national policy
[ad_1]
“I am a Lak, I am a Dagestani, I am a Chechen, an Ingush, a Russian, a Tatar, a Jew, a Mordvinian, an Ossetian…” Few people understand how important the languages of the peoples of the country are for our country today. It is especially important to remember this now, in the face of ongoing external pressure. Multinationality and multiculturalism have always been the pride of Russia. This is based on the unique combination of different customs and traditions that are transmitted through different languages. They allow you to fully reveal the dignity of each nation, those subtle facets and nuances of culture that cannot be conveyed without knowing your native languages.
In the modern world, the process of dying off of languages is acquiring threatening forms. By the end of this century, only 10% of the languages that exist today may survive. Without exaggeration, such a phenomenon is the death of a separate, unique and original world. In Russia, out of 156 indigenous languages that existed in the 19th century, seven have become extinct, and dozens face the same fate.
In the USSR, in accordance with the famous article by V. Lenin “Is there a need for a mandatory state language?” In 1914, the official position of the Soviet authorities was to support the country’s linguistic diversity. Many efforts were made to develop national languages: for example, more than 70 alphabets based on Latin were created, which served as the beginning of writing. On the one hand, the introduction of compulsory general education and its unified standards led to uniformity, including in the language used – Russian became it. On the other hand, the use of the native language, guaranteed by the 1977 Constitution of the USSR, and the active development of mass media in the republics left opportunities for preserving the diversity of languages. Since the Constitution of the RSFSR of 1918, the Soviet leadership has abandoned the definition of “state language”. The approach changed only towards the end of the existence of the Soviet Union, when in the 1990 law “On the languages of the peoples of the USSR” the Russian language was first called “official”. But even there there was an indication to prevent infringement of the right of citizens to use their native language in various spheres of state and public life.
After the collapse of the USSR, language policy faded into the background, drowned out by social and economic problems. The rejection of ideology, including in the language sphere, seemed at that time the most correct decision. However, now we are dealing with its negative consequences, not only in relation to national languages, but also in relation to Russian. Twenty years ago, children from national regions spoke a mixture of Russian and national languages. Now, learning a foreign language is considered preferable, and English words predominate in the speech of modern children, since most of the content they consume is of Western origin.
The choice of using one or another language is connected with the satisfaction of two needs. The first is the need for identity, attributing oneself to any community. She serves her native language. With its help, the emotions and aspirations of a person, the aspirations of his soul, the way he thinks and feels are better expressed. If I were a multilingual polyglot a thousand times over, nothing could replace the language of my ancestors. If in a conversation it is necessary to emphasize the importance and solemnity, sincerity or sincerity of the moment, I sometimes switch to my native language. The purposeful preservation of their own language by native speakers indicates the high importance for them of defining their own identity.
At the same time, it is becoming more and more difficult to preserve native languages. This happens for a number of reasons, including the optimization of the school system, the lack of modern textbooks and teaching kits in the native language, the lack of specialist teachers, due to demographic factors, etc. A fundamental change in the situation in the field of native languages is possible only with the support of federal authorities. Thus, by Decree of President Vladimir Putin, the Foundation for the Preservation and Study of the Native Languages of the Peoples of the Russian Federation was created, on the basis of which multifaceted work is carried out: providing textbooks and manuals, training personnel, modern methods, using electronic means for learning, and much more. And the regions, for their part, are developing “road maps” that guarantee the right of every child to choose to study their native language.
The interest of young people in national languages is also being revived. For example, this year at the university we held the first International Dictation, unique in its kind, in the languages of the peoples of Karachay-Cherkessia. More than four thousand people wrote dictations in the Karachai, Circassian, Abaza and Nogai languages. The geography of the participants was quite wide – Russia, Turkey, Abkhazia. But these individual events and indicators, even though encouraging in many respects, cannot be considered manifestations of positive dynamics in general. To ensure an integrated approach to the preservation of the linguistic heritage and the creation of conditions for the development of native languages, it is necessary to develop and adopt state programs for the preservation and development of native languages both in the national republics at the level of subjects and at the federal level.
By the way, there are cases when an endangered language was revived. An example of this is the Welsh language, which was revived in the 1920s and 1930s. Oddly enough, its revival was attended by the central British authorities, who for many years pursued a policy of unifying the language.
Restrictions on the use of Welsh, Scottish, Irish languages were enshrined at the legislative level. However, in the 21st century, the kingdom faced the need to unite all peoples against the backdrop of ideological confrontation with the European Union. The increasing involvement of the EU in British affairs created a sense of loss of national identity, which was especially pronounced in the 1990s. Then in Great Britain they thought about its restoration, and it became obvious that the concept of “Englishness”, which included exclusively representatives of one nation, did not fit. It was necessary to turn to a broader concept of “Britishness”, which would unite all the inhabitants of the islands. More inclusive, it allowed for multiculturalism and linguistic diversity to be combined with a clear definition of oneself as British. The creation of such an identity satisfies another need underlying the use of the most common language: the need for mutual understanding. Thanks to this, it is possible to maintain a compromise between the desire of each people to preserve their language and traditions and their unification into one state on the basis of a general agreement. The satisfaction of both needs – identity and mutual understanding – is the practice of bilingualism in different countries or regions. In a situation where neither the destruction nor the assimilation of someone else’s identity is possible, such a strategy turns out to be the most advantageous. It was to her that the British authorities turned, who tried to “revise the conditions” for the consolidation of various peoples under the flag of the United Kingdom before the challenges of the new century.
Despite all the difficulties, both Brexit and the 2014 Scottish independence referendum were indicators of the success of this policy. British society has shown that it is aware of itself as a whole.
A similar function in Russia is performed by the Russian language – its possession allows us to recognize ourselves as citizens of one country. And the native languages of every people of Russia reveal its merits to the fullest, help the speakers to preserve their originality, those subtle facets and nuances that cannot be conveyed without owning them. Therefore, their support is so important for the preservation of natural cultural diversity, which has always been our civilizational advantage over the rest of the world.
Newspaper headline:
Multilingualism in the shadow of the Russian language
[ad_2]
Source link
