Search
Warning: Undefined array key "7177//" in /web/zanos/classes/Edit/EditForm_class.php on line 263
Warning: Undefined array key "7177//" in /web/zanos/classes/Player/SearchArticle_class.php on line 261
Warning: Undefined array key "7177//" in /web/zanos/classes/Player/SearchArticle_class.php on line 261
# | Search | Downloads | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | The main purpose of the article is to uncover and analyze language ideologies underpinning multilingual practices of non-Russian first-generation migrants from the former Soviet Union from a translanguaging perspective. The article uses data collected by the authors during a 3-month ethnographically-oriented field study in Western European countries (in-depth semi-structured interviews and participant observation) supplemented by sociolinguistic analysis of informal online communication. It was found that fluid, translingual practices are generally not characteristic for the majority of well-educated post-Soviet migrants, despite the presence of ethnic languages (L1), Russian (L2) and foreign languages (L3-n) in their linguistic repertoire. Instead, we observe predominantly Russian normative speech, lack of desire to cross language boundaries and create hybrid linguistic forms, at least between L1 and L2. The authors see the reasons for this in the Soviet language policy, which products the immigrants from the USSR are “exporting” the relationship between Russian and ethnic languages formed in their home country. The article examines some of the language ideologies and habits that serve as a barrier to translanguaging, namely the ideology of language purism and (Russian) monolingualism, as well as adherence to the “standard language culture”. The level of education is also associated with “pure” speaking in Russian — the more prestigious and more familiar language in which the respondents have the greatest linguistic competence. In general, the authors come to the conclusion that the speech behavior of this polyethnic and multilingual group of migrants described in the article is a consequence of a habitus — deeply hidden, unconscious, “imprinted” linguistic and cultural habits inherited from the Soviet experience and reproduced in life practices abroad. Keywords: translanguaging, code switching, language ideologies, multilingual post-Soviet migrants, linguistic purism, monolingual ideology, standard language culture | 630 | ||||
2 | The main idea and purpose of this article is to test the hypothesis that the results of the 2020 All-Russian census compared to the 2010 census show a statistically significant increase in the emotivity coefficient, i.e., the number of people who claim an ethnic language as their mother tongue but do not actually know it. Buryat was named among the languages that, on the contrary, showed low emotivity coefficient, which might indicate a decrease in its symbolic value between 2010 and 2020. To test the hypothesis regarding the Buryat language, the authors of the article compared the data from the ‘big’ statistics (censuses) with the ‘small’ statistics – materials from regional studies on the Republic of Buryatia. The comparison revealed several differences between them. The 2020 census showed that the number of people who know the Buryat language, use it in everyday life, and consider it their mother tongue has increased. The 2020 regional survey, on the other hand, showed a sharp decline in the number of people who consider Buryat to be their mother tongue and an equally sharp increase in the number of people with a dual ethnolinguistic identity. According to the authors, this difference can be attributed to the lack of information on two or more mother tongues in the final 2020 census data. However, this information indicates new trends, hybrid ethnonyms, and an increased number of people who have not declared their ethnicity. The analysis of regional statistics also showed the similarity of today’s Buryat linguistic competence with that at the end of the Soviet era and the mechanism of language shift. This mechanism consists of the redistribution of language skills within the concept of language competence itself: the gradual increase in passive skills, the decrease in active skills, and the variation in literacy skills depending on the vector of language policy in education. The research confirmed the decreased emotivity coefficient of the Buryat language; on the contrary, during the post-Soviet period, the "language-ethnicity" link is gradually being torn apart in everyday consciousness reflecting the Buryats' self-assessment of their real linguistic competence in the ethnic language. Keywords: language, ethnic identity, symbolic value of language, emotivity coefficient, mother tongue, Buryat language, linguistic competence, censuses, regional statistics | 82 |