PECULIARITIES OF LANGUAGE (NON) TRANSMISSION IN SIBERIAN SETO COMMUNITY
DOI: 10.23951/2307-6119-2021-3-9-18
The article deals with the descendants of the speakers of the Seto idiom who moved from the western part of the Russian Empire to Siberia during Stolypin's agrarian reform. Based on the materials of expeditions to settlements in the Krasnoyarsk territory, where the Setos still live compactly, the preservation of the idiom is investigated, conclusions are drawn about some of the reasons for the loss of the language. Positive aspects are stated, such as high language loyalty, amazing safety during long-term contacts not only with Russian, but also with the closely related Estonian language. Nontrivial features of language transmission are described, attention is paid to two factors that influenced the language (non) transmission. First, it is the “monopoly” of grandmothers on the transfer of the language to the younger generation. Traditionally, grandmothers are engaged in raising children in the Siberian Seto community, since, unlike their parents, they are no longer engaged in production. At the moment, those who were brought up by their grandmothers preserve the language best of all. It often happens that the younger siblings, who have not found their grandmothers, do not know the language, while the older ones have a good command of the language. In such cases, parents who once received the language from their grandmothers communicate with older children in Seto, and the younger ones cannot support the conversation, although they understand and answer in Russian. Another factor highlighted in the article is the concentration of speakers. Three cases identified during the author's sociolinguistic survey are shown, in which the variable of speakers concentration turned out to be relevant at a level lower than the local one, in terms of (Grenoble & Whaley 1998). It turned out that even within a very small settlement there may be a different concentration of native speakers of the idiom in different parts, which, in turn, entails differences in the acquisition of languages by children at preschool age. In a very small settlement, the appearance of a critical mass of non-Seto speakers caused the displacement of the idiom from the sphere of home communication and, as a result, its complete disappearance.
Keywords: Seto, migration to Siberia, language preservation, language contacts, language shift
References:
Agranat T. B. Jazyk, kultura i tradicii pechorskih seto [Language, culture and traditions of Pecora Setos] // Vestnik MGLU. Gumanitarnyje nauki, 2019, 4 (820). P. 219–226.
Agranat T. B., Gusev V. Ju., Orlov V. A. V efire set oi kamasincy (dokumentalnyje svidetelstva seto-kamasinskih kontaktov) [Texts about drinking ether as documentation of Seto-Kamassian contacts] // Rodnoy yazyk. Linguistic Journal, 2020, № 2. P. 202–229.
Buck V. Petseri eestlased. Tartu, 1909.
Chalvin A. La construction de l’identité des Setos (1920-1940) // Études finno-ougriennes, 2011, Tome 43, P. 119–144.
Chalvin A. Les Setos d’Estonie. Armeline, Crozon, 2015.
Edwards J. Sociopolitical aspects of language maintenance and loss: towards a typology of minority language situations // Maintenance and loss of minority languages / Edited by W. Fase, K. Jaspaert, and S. Kroon. Amsterdam and Phyladelphia: John Benjamins, 1992. P. 37–54.
Fase W., Jaspaert K., and Kroon S. (Eds.) Maintenance and loss of minority languages. Amsterdam and Phyladelphia: John Benjamins, 1992.
Fishman J. Reversing Language Shift: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations of Assistance to Threatened Languages. Avon: Multilingual Matters, 1991.
Fishman J. Conference summary // Maintenance and loss of minority languages / Edited by W. Fase, K. Jaspaert, and S. Kroon. Amsterdam and Phyladelphia: John Benjamins, 1992. P. 395–403.
Grenoble L. & Whaley L. Towards a typology of language endangerment // Endangered languages: language loss and community response / Edited by L. Grenoble and L. Whaley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. P. 23–54.
Hinton L., Huss L., Roche G. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Language Revitalization. New York: Routledge, 2018.
Kibrik A. E. Ocherki po obschim i prikladnym voprosam jazykoznanija (universalnyje, tipovyje i specifichnoje v jazyke) [Essays on general and applied issues of linguistics (universal, typical and specific in the language)]. Moscow: MGU, 1992. 336 p.
Nigol A. Eesti asundused ja asupaidag Wenemaal. Tartu, 1918.
Olko J. and Sallabank J. (eds.) Revitalizing Endangered Languages. A Practical Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021.
Pajusalu K. Estonian dialects // Erelt M. (ed.) Estonian Language. Linguistica Uralica, supplementary series, volume 1, 2003, P. 231–272.
Piho M. Siperian setukaiset // Koltat, karjalaiset ja setukaiset / T. Saarinen ja S. Suhonen toim. Kuopio: Snellman-Instituutti, 1995, S. 200–219.
UNESCO Vitalité et disparition des langues. Groupe d’experts spécial de l’UNESCO sur les langues en danger 2003 // http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/Language_vitality_and_endangerment_FR.pdf
Vahtin N. B. Uslovija jazykovogo sdviga (K opisaniju sovremennoj jazykovoj situacii na Krajnem Severe) [Conditions of the language shift (To the description of the modern language situation in the Far North)] // Vestnik molodyh uchenyh. Serija: Filologicheskije nauki. 2001, № 1. P. 11 –16.
( 711.12 kB ) 
( 652.63 kB )
Issue: 3, 2021
Series of issue: Issue 3
Rubric: LINGUISTICS
Pages: 9 — 18
Downloads: 595