Ukrainization: Issues and Arguments
Last update: Jan. 16, 2010 (article totally reworked)
What is Ukrainization?
Today many visitors to Ukraine and foreigners living in Ukraine are aware of the Ukrainian government's efforts to establish, or reestablish, Ukrainian as the dominant language of Ukraine's civic and cultural life. These efforts -- referred to as "Ukrainization" -- are most striking in predominantly Russian speaking cities such as Kiev, Kharkov, Simferopol, etc. where all official signs and most external advertising are now in Ukrainian.
"Ukrainization" is the "policy of increasing the usage and
facilitating the development of the Ukrainian language and promoting
other elements of Ukrainian culture, in various spheres of public life
such as education, publishing, government and religion" [Wikipedia]. Ukrainian is the country's single official language and is the primary spoken language of half or slightly over half of Ukrainian citizens. The other major language, of course, is Russian, which was favored in public life across much of Ukraine over the long period of Russian and Soviet domination.
Examples of Ukrainization policies include greater support of Ukrainian speaking drama theaters, stimulus subsidies for certain literature in Ukrainian, requirements for university professors to lecture in Ukrainian, rules requiring school teachers to speak to children in Ukrainian, laws requiring the dubbing of all foreign films into Ukrainian, and regulations governing the use of Ukrainian on radio and television.
In general, Ukrainization policies are directed at public activities that fall under significant state control; language usage in commercial and private dealings is not affected. Thus, for instance, official government statements are issued in Ukrainian, but members of Parliament can be seen debating in Russian on TV. A conference with government officials present will probably use Ukrainian as its official language, but individual speakers may choose to speak in Russian. Street signs are in Ukrainian, but locals may use their Russian names. Professors lecture in Ukrainian but may speak with students in Russian during their office hours.
For a fuller perspective, this article should also contain a section on "Russification" and the many ways in which Russian language and culture were promoted in Ukraine under the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union.
Why Ukrainization is a heated issue
The "language issue," as it is often referred to, can be emotionally charged, as you will see from the comments ta the bottom of this article. People from the west of Ukraine generally view Russia's historical influence on Ukraine negatively. Russians, to many of them, have been invaders and oppressors, and the language that they brought with them was artificially placed in a dominant position as the language of government and civic life. Furthermore, Russian speaking people were repeatedly brought in from Russia to work and settle in eastern Ukraine. Ukrainization to them is about forging a national identity and correcting historical injustices.
On the other side of the debate are Ukrainian citizens who are native Russian speakers and, often but not always, ethnic Russians (in truth many Ukrainian citizens are a complex mixture of Slavic, Central European, and Central Asian blood; Ukrainian last names are common in Russia, and vice versa). They do not perceive themselves as newcomers to Ukraine, but identify strongly with the cities and rural areas they live in. Many of them feel that their language is being marginalized and squeezed out of civic life even in areas where nearly everyone is a native Russian speaker. Many feel perceive Ukrainization as the agenda of a minority of "dangerous" Ukrainian nationalists. Some note that Kiev was actually the birthplace of Russian culture and statehood. Quite large numbers of people in the east and south of Ukraine traditionally have supported the establishment of Russian as a second official language, but support for this position among the political elite is fairly weak.
In the middle, typically, are people who live in bilingual environments such as Kiev and larger towns of central Ukraine. Many of these people are Ukrainian russophones -- i.e. ethnic Ukrainians who grew up speaking Russian, but feel psychologically close to Ukrainian, too. These people generally perceive neither support of Ukrainian language and culture nor legitimizing public use of Russian language as critical issues. Obviously, a probable reason for this is that they themselves are fluent or nearly fluent in both, so shifting language politics do not threaten them with large and uncomfortable personal adjustments. Also in the moderate camp, intriguingly, are many residents of Transcarpathia -- Ukraine's far west, where self-identification with the modern Ukrainian state is low due to having been part of so many different countries in recent history and to speaking different regional dialects.
The "language issue" is often used as a rallying point by politicians and ideologues and contributes to an "us versus them" mindset among some Ukrainians.
Ukrainization strategy
Contemporary Ukrainization (the first was in the early years of the
Soviet Union, followed by a long period of Russification) is directed at achieving the following immediate goals:
- maximize the number of schools and institutes of higher education with instruction in Ukrainian
- maximize the use of Ukrainian in government bodies and official organizations
- maximize the use of Ukrainian in radio and TV broadcasting, the press, advertising, and movie dubbing
- promote the development and raise the status of Ukrainian culture (in comparison to Russian culture) within Ukraine
It is generally thought that Ukrainian Russophones (ethnic Ukrainians who grew up speaking Russian, who make up as much as 30% of the population) can be swayed to switch to Ukrainian fairly easily. In many or most cases these people do not have very strong psychological ties to the Russian language or Russian culture. Many are receptive to patriotic themes and to Ukrainian folk culture. Ukrainization strategists hope that with a bit of encouragement these Ukrainians can be prodded to adopt Ukrainian as their primary language.
I am not aware of any studies that look at to what degree this is actually taking place, but based on studies of ethnic self-identification in Ukraine I would estimate that perhaps 2-5% more Ukrainian citizens use Ukrainian as their primary language today than in 1991.
Among Russian speaking ethnic Russians, getting people to switch to Ukrainian is understandably more difficult, particularly if such people form a majority in a given locale. Russian is part of their cultural heritage and identity, and Ukrainian is perceived as a foreign language of little personal relevance. It is thought that over time -- perhaps one generation -- these people can be taught Ukrainian in school to at least become comfortable with the language, and that they can learn to use it in official settings and when communicating with people from other regions of Ukraine.
In practice, however, implementation of Ukrainization policies in areas with a high concentration of ethnic Russians are probably not subtle and gentle enough to consistently elicit a positive response. Instead, there is a lot of backlash and resentment. Complicating the effort is Ukraine's short political history. The country does not yet have the sense of permanency that states such as Finland, Ireland, or the Czech Republic enjoy. There is still quite a bit of "longing" for the Soviet Union, as well as hope for closer ties with Russia. Many people question Ukraine's chances for long-term sovereignty. Many ethnic Russians and even some Ukrainians feel that they were severed from the rest of the Soviet Union against their will.
The ideology behind Ukraine's current Ukrainization policy
I don't believe this ideology is stated anywhere outright, but it can be pieced together. It seems to have two aspects:
- Pragmatic geopolitical aspect
By
achieving maximum linguistic (and thus informational) and cultural independence from Russia,
Ukraine will strengthen its own sovereignty, and the idea of reuniting with
Russia in any way or form will be abandoned forever. Ukrainian citizens
will be more loyal to the Ukrainian government and Ukrainian national
interests as opposed to Russian and Russophile political forces who
favor reintegration with Russia and other CIS states.
- Nationalistic aspect
First
imperial, then Soviet, and now post-Soviet Russia has been dominating Ukraine for centuries and suppressing Ukraine's culture as a result of promoting its own imperialistic aims. Russian language and
cultural dependence on Russia have been artificially implanted in
Ukraine and should be removed. Russian-speaking Ukrainians are a
"historical mistake" and should learn to use Ukrainian in their
everyday lives, while ethnic Russians in Ukraine should learn Ukrainian
and use it in their public dealings. Ukrainian should become the
default language of public use in all regions of Ukraine.
Is Kiev becoming a Ukrainian speaking city?
Kiev, the capital of Ukraine, has been a primarily Russian speaking city for many generations. Here perhaps more than anywhere else is Ukrainization felt, mostly due to the strong government presence.
In Soviet times, Ukrainian was used much less often in public, and Russian was the de facto language of public interaction. Today, recent surveys show that up to 30 or 40% of people in Kiev speaks Ukrainian at home —
quite a bit more than just two decades ago. However, during this time the city's
population has also swelled from an official 2.6 million to 4 million,
with the vast majority of new residents coming from Ukrainian speaking
towns and villages. In the Soviet Union it was much more difficult for
people from the countryside to change their place of residence, and now
people are flocking to big cities in search of work. Most of these
people are Ukrainian speakers, which is affecting the language balance in towns. However, during the economic crisis of 2008-2009 large numbers of migrant workers left Kiev after losing their jobs, and the relative prevalence of Ukrainian has once gain decreased slightly.
While more native Ukrainian speakers have flocked to cities like Kiev in search of opportunities, that does not necessarily mean that they bring their language with them. I have many people in Kiev from western Ukraine who switched to speaking Russian after moving to Kiev because everyone around them spoke Russian. Speaking the dominant language can become an issue of fitting in and not seeming like a "country bumpkin." In white-collar circles there is some stigma against "Surzhyk" -- a mixture of Ukrainian and Russian characteristic of less educated Ukrainians from rural provinces.
I would estimate that the number of business offices in Kiev that have a primarily Ukrainian speaking environment is more like 10%. Among government offices and NGOs the number could be as high as 40-50%. When a language enjoys a majority, it is self-perpetuating and becomes the default language of social interaction in a disproportionately high percentage of situations. It is only because so many people in Ukraine are bilingual that there is any choice of language at all.
Disinformation about the use of Ukrainian and Russian in Ukraine
Studies
consistently shows that Ukrainian and Russian are spoken in
approximately equal amounts across Ukraine as a whole, with a greater
concentration of Russian speakers (i.e. people who report that they
usually speak Russian in their daily life) in the east and south and in
metropolitan areas, and more Ukrainian speakers in central and western
areas and, in general, across most of Ukraine's rural areas. I have
attempted to give my own estimates of Russian and Ukrainian usage in
different cities of Ukraine here.
Despite
these studies which show consistent results year after year, foreign
readers interested in Ukraine and language use of Ukraine inevitably
encounter starkly contradicting statements on the
relative use of Russian and Ukrainian in the country. On one website
you may read that Russian is spoken more often, while another site will
state the exact opposite — such as the following:
"Imperial
Russia may not have been able to exterminate the Ukrainian language
from the land, but they did have a strong influence on the country.
Today Russian speakers make up the second largest language group in
Ukraine – though they occupy a relatively small percentage when
compared to those who speak Ukrainian." [source: www.ukraine.com]
What
is a "relatively small percentage," if virtually 50% of the inhabitants
of Ukraine speak Russian at home? This and similar texts spread blatant
falsehoods, promoting the authors' vision of the way things are supposed to be
in Ukraine instead of the way they actually are. Here is another
inaccurate representation of the language picture in Ukraine without
the emotional tone:
Ukrainian
is the official language and is the first language of about 67% of the
population. Russian is widely spoken by about 24% of people, and in
some eastern areas of the country it is the main language (The World Factbook). Other minority languages include Belarussian, Romanian, Bulgarian and Hungarian. [source: prospects.ac.uk]
These same statistics are repeated by the otherwise authoritative CIA guidebook:
Languages: Ukrainian (official) 67%, Russian 24%, small Romanian-, Polish-, and Hungarian-speaking minorities
Is
Ukrainian really the "first language of about 67% of the population?"
In other words, did 67% of Ukraine's citizens grow up speaking mostly
Ukrainian in the home? Surveys in Ukraine place this number at around
50%, where it has hovered for decades. The phrase "Russian is widely
spoken by about 24%" seems to suggest that it is not even their native
language, just a language they "know well," much like English in
The Netherlands. In actuality, Russian is "well known" by about 90% of
the population. The phrase "in some eastern areas of the country" is
also deceptive, as Russian is the dominant spoken language of all the
cities of eastern Ukraine, many cities in central Ukraine (including
Kiev!), and most in southern Ukraine (including all of Crimea, Odessa,
Kherson, Nikolaev, Krivoy Rog, and Melitopol).
- a factual view of the language situation in Ukraine by Taras Kuzio, a frequent writer on Ukraine.
The nationalist agenda and the role of the Ukrainian diaspora
The majority of texts such as the excerpts cited above seem to be
written by 2nd and 3rd-generation Ukrainian nationalists living in
Canada and the U.S. Their immigrant ancestors experienced Soviet
repressions and anti-Ukrainian persecution and passed on a particular
view of things that has been idealized (simplified and amplified) by many members of the Ukrainian diaspora to
the point of being completely out of touch with the realities and attitudes of modern-day Ukraine.
Here is what is twisted over and over again in statements by foreign
Ukrainian nationalists. First of all, it is assumed that only ethnic
Russians (approx. 17% of the population by self-definition, according
to the most recent census) are "Russian speakers," ignoring the fact
that approximately 30% of Ukraine's population are people who consider
themselves ethnic Ukrainians yet speak Russian among themselves. Next,
authors with nationalist leanings often compare the number of ethnic Russians to "those
who speak Ukrainian," which includes Russian speaking Ukrainians and
ethnic Russians who also know Ukrainian. Such agenda-driven twisting of
the facts (or could it simply be ignorance?) is often maddening to those of
us who actually live in Ukraine and know the situation to be completely
different.
While the overwhelming majority of
reader feedback on this website has been positive, I have also gotten a
number of critical letters from disgruntled readers who didn't like
statements on this site such as "Russian is the dominant spoken
language in 10 of the 11 largest cities in Ukraine." One tried to tell
me to "come visit Ukraine yourself instead of believing what other
people told you about it" (!) and that "you don't hear much Russian in
Kiev these days anymore" (!!). First of all, I have lived in Kiev since
2000, and secondly, Russian is the preferred spoken language of
approximately 60-70% of Kiev residents (significantly down from the
Soviet era, when it was quite rare to hear Ukrainian at all in Kiev).
Here
is another letter to TryUkraine.com from a Ukrainian American that
shows the level of emotion that can surround the language issue. This
message was written in response to my page on opportunities to study Russian and Ukrainian in Ukraine:
You
Russian bastards. Ukrainian and Russian are both very unique
lanaguages. I certainly hope the language of the russian pigs leaves
independent ukraine. True ukrainians were forced to assimilate in
russification. But they should learn ukrainian...NOT RUSSIAN. It is the
nation of UKRAINE.
This
and many other letters and messages I have read from people living
outside of Ukraine suggest that aversion of Russia and the Russian language
is more prominent among Ukrainian descendents living in the USA
and Canada than among Ukrainians living in Ukraine. Such dislike can
sometimes be found in "Galicia" -- around the Lviv and Ivano-Frankivsk areas --
but is rare elsewhere. Surveys consistently show a high degree of
cultural acceptance between Ukrainians and Russians — much higher than
between, say, Ukrainians and Americans. (!)
Finally,
at some forums about travel in Ukraine, foreign visitors sometimes ask
questions like, "I am going to Odessa for a year. Which language should
I learn?" To these and similar questions nationalistically-minded forum
members often try to tell people to learn Ukrainian "because it is the
single official state language," despite the fact that almost no one speaks Ukrainian in Odessa!
Why learn a language that you will hardly be able to use? Some
nationalists seem to find it personally offensive that someone might
choose to learn and practice Russian in Ukraine. They cannot accept the
current state of affairs in Ukraine and insist on correcting
historical wrongs even if it is highly impractical for "innocent expats" to do so.
In short, many members of the pre-Soviet Ukrainian diaspora have preserved the attitudes of their immigrant and refugee ancestors, while modern-day citizens of Ukraine mostly express quite different attitudes that have been shaped by the realities of life in Soviet and post-Soviet Ukraine.
Speculations on the future of Ukrainian and Russian in Ukraine
The future of language usage in Ukraine seems to be closely related to its political future. I think the second will determine the first more than vice versa. If Ukraine is able to maintain its current borders and degree of sovereignty for a long period of time, it is likely that the Ukrainian language will continue to grow in importance. If, due to international conflict or economic reasons, Ukraine's status were to change, it might find itself in a position where Russian becomes more important again. I'm not a political scientist (and even if I were, these things are very hard to predict), but it seems reasonable to expect that Ukraine's political future will be a continuation of its past or at least heavily influenced thereby. That means that it will retain close ties to Russia and remain on the fringes of western European civilization, and that any wars on its territory are likely to rewrite its boundaries.
My prediction is that the language balance will not change drastically in spite of government attempts to influence the situation one way or the other. I accept that I could be wrong. In fact, I'll begin by stating the main long-term factor favoring the success of the Ukrainian language: the fact that Ukrainian nationalists are more passionate about the issue and are more unified and self-assured than their opponents. They have a clear vision for the country, whereas their opponents' vision, if any, lacks an inspirational quality. This is what Ukrainization has going for it. In this section I will bring up some points that support my prediction (which is not by any means a value judgment) of limited success for Ukrainization.
First of all, Ukraine does not enjoy a strong national identity as a country based on a single dominant ethnic-cultural-linguistic group (such as Poland, Slovakia, or Russia), as a conglomeration of ethnic groups enjoying equal status (such as Switzerland), or as a melting pot of immigrants (such as the United States). This lack of a clear national identity seems to me to be a weak point that will undermine attempts to stimulate a national revival, including the establishment of Ukrainian as the dominant language.
Part of the identity "problem" seems to stem from the fact that different parts of Ukraine were parts of different empires for extended periods of time. The longer Ukraine stays together and the more economically, politically, and administratively interdependent its regions become, the greater the likelihood that a national identity will emerge. I suppose that Ukrainization could eventually be successful in the absence of a national identity simply by people making incremental choices in their personal self-interest, but it seems to me that national identity was a key factor in the success of other countries who embarked on ambitious crusades to reestablish their native languages and were successful.
I'm not saying that such a Ukrainian cultural revival cannot occur in the future; it just does not seem to be occurring right now over a large enough part of the country. There was a partial revival in the early 90s which culminated in Ukraine achieving its independence, however, it was soon overshadowed by the post-Soviet economic collapse. At the moment, there just does not seem to be a ton of excitement over Ukrainization, but maybe I'm missing something? A lot of Russian speakers in the east, south, and even center feel antagonized. "Let them feel what it's like" -- some nationalists may insinuate, but is that a formula for a cultural revival?
Another factor that will surely influence the language situation in Ukraine is the economic and political power of surrounding countries and of Ukraine itself. The better the opportunities in Russia compared to Ukraine, the more incentive there will be for Ukrainians to maintain proficiency in Russian. If western Ukraine were to emerge as a new economic powerhouse and a major draw for immigrants, it would probably be a lot easier to "ukrainianize" the country.
Furthermore, there is a great disequality between the two languages in terms of cultural development and number of speakers. The Russian language vortex with its 300 million speakers (native and non-native) and prestigious cultural heritage will always be beckoning. Learn Russian and you can experience a diversity of cultures and locations across half of the Eurasian continent, as well as read classics that are household names around the world. Speak just Ukrainian and you can experience the plains and river valleys of Ukraine and tell foreigners about authors they have never heard of.
The languages also enjoy unequal prestige within Ukraine itself. Russian is spoken in large cities, Ukrainian in the countryside and provinces (a slight overgeneralization). Ukrainian really only shows itself to be a metropolitan language in the city of Lviv. However, Lviv's cultural attractiveness is arguably matched or exceeded by Kiev (mostly Russian speaking) and Odessa (Russian speaking). It is particularly difficult to imagine a Ukrainian speaking Odessa.
A very basic factor is simply linguistic inertia. People don't choose their native language; it is given to them by their childhood reference group -- family and peers -- who speak among themselves the language that, on average, they know best. That is how children of immigrants to the U.S. grow up native English speakers and how ethnic Ukrainians born to Ukrainian speaking parents in Kiev grow up native Russian speakers. Furthermore, very few people learn new languages as adults to the point that they change their language of everyday use.
The linguistic makeup of a region tends to change slowly from generation to generation in the absence of remarkable circumstances such as foreign invasion, forced population movements, or massive cultural revival. Totalitarian rulers and empire builders of the past such as Stalin, the Khmer Rouge, and the Inkas recognized this inertia and forcibly moved people around in order to homogenize culture. One of the most effective, but ethically unacceptable ways to ukrainianize Ukraine would be to expel all self-identified ethnic Russians, thereby homogenizing the population enough to make further Ukrainization inevitable.
Finally, I do not think that the political leaders who support Ukrainization actually have in mind a total switch to Ukrainian in all areas of life. While this is certainly a wish of some Ukrainian nationalists, including those in the Ukrainian diaspora, the powerful elite are mostly realists and are probably focused more on reversing Soviet-era Russification and making sure all Ukrainians learn the state language than on getting everyone to speak only Ukrainian. To take Ukrainization beyond a certain reasonable level would require a degree of authoritarianism that few people are interested in.
In spite of the long-term obstacles I mention here, Ukrainization is currently enjoying some success. It has plenty of opponents, but they have not been able to resist the regulations being implemented. How successful these measures will turn out to be several generations from now remains to be seen.
As you will read below, some
readers have disagreed with my views — especially some of the
conclusions I have drawn. I have given them some 'air' below. I have
also written a rant that may be of interest to readers who read the correspondence below and are intrigued by the issues raised.
Reader comments
Marko
Slovenia |
I find your article "Ukrainization: Issues and Arguments" well balanced
in description of the current situation. However, I find your
conclusion about what should be done in the future completely
wrong. [Author's note: my views have matured significantly, and the article and my editorial comments have been heavily revised since I received this note] From mainstream European continental perspective we like
to see as much diversity as possible. I do not think that it is a
good idea that eventually everybody in the world would speak only four
to five languages (let's say, english, spanish, russian and
chinese). (Do you??) Diversity makes life more worthy of
living! And only support of national languages helped that
numerous small european nations and cultures (Basque, Norwegians,
Slovenians, Latvians, etc) survived to this days. Language was so
important that it became medium of identification and helped nations
not to become immersed into larger ethnic groups (Castillians, Danes,
Germans, Russians, etc.) Is that something wrong? In
European continental perspective this is correct thing to do. And
therefore it is a good idea to support, promote and even positively
discriminate small languages and cultures versus large languages and
cultures. Now which is which when you have in mind Russian and
Ukrainian? Of course, way of supporting smaller languages should
be democratic and as little invasive as possible; the most usual
approach is to start teaching youngsters Ukrainian, while letting old
folks to continue to speak Russian! And it should be also noted,
that this is completely opposite process to the one, that was going on
for last 60 years, when youngsters were forced to learn Russian and
Ukrainian was barely tolerated if not even persecuted by Soviet
authorities. So there is also some little bit of historical right
to do this thing. |
Rick
TryUkraine.com author |
Marko, thank you for your comments.
I have a couple additional questions for you:
- What language policy should be pursued in traditionally
Russian-speaking areas of Ukraine, i.e. Odessa, eastern Ukraine, and
Crimea? Should the same Ukrainization policy be implemented there as in
the rest of the country?
- Do you support "forced" Ukrainization in areas of Ukraine where it is not popularly supported? |
Marko
Slovenia |
Tough questions, tough questions. In principle any Ukrainization means
forcing people to some extend to use and learn Ukrainian. By natural
process large languages always swallow small languages, so you have to
apply force to stop or even reverse that to happen. (This is what all
European governments do, from France to Slovenia!) And dissappearance
of languages already happened too many times in European history (and
for example, it is happening to Breton language in France and Gaelic
language in Scotland right now, so Ukraine is unfortunatelly far from
being the only endangered case). I agree that strategy in Russophone
areas of Ukraine should be different. In my opinion government (at
least in this phase) should tend to create bilingual society and not
monolingual Ukrainian society; that is it would have to concentrate in
1. gradual increase of the use of Ukrainian as a language of
instruction (not automatic replacement of Russian schools with
Ukrainian schools).
2. insisting that Ukrainian is used along with Russian (not neccessarily replacing it)
3. creating and supporting appealing projects in Ukrainian
But
then, I admit I am not familiar with language policy of Ukrainian
government (and there are only scarce data on that topic on Internet).
Of
course Crimea is a different case, and I think in Crimea Russian is
legally and legitimely coofficial with Ukrainian. (I miss Tatar
language as a third official language, though!) |
Rick
TryUkraine.com author |
I
think I agree with you in principle. Ukrainian needs to become
well-known across the entire country, but people should be allowed to
speak their mother tongue and choose whether they would like their
children to study Russian in school as well as Ukrainian (in my
opinion).
Regarding Russophones, it
needs to be acknowledged that there are huge numbers of them all across
Ukraine, not just in the east and extreme south. Kiev is mostly
russophone, and so are large numbers of city dwellers in central and
even western Ukraine.
Don't worry,
the Tatar language will continue to grow in influence in Crimea
regardless of government efforts (or the lack thereof) to promote its
usage. The Tatar community is tightly-knit, nationalistic, and has a
high birth rate. |
Marko
Slovenia |
Well may I add the following: European continental model goes as
follows: If you are a member of recognised minority nationality B
living in country with dominant nationality A, you do have right to
enroll your child in a school where language of instruction is B, still
within the curriculum at least learning language A is obligatory. I
think this should be acceptable for Russophone community! Another thing
that is normal in continental Europe, but that it is not applicable to
Ukrainian situation is that only language A (which is official) can be
used in official correspondence. I think that (in the moment and at
least next few decades) Ukrainian population should be able to use
Russian in official correspondence regardless of the fact it is not
official. |
Rick
TryUkraine.com author |
Well, I agree with you on both of those points, so I think we've come to a consensus.
|
|
Ross
Canada |
To the owner of this site: first, do not forget that the right name for
the capital of Ukraine is Kyiv and not Kiev; second, Ukrainian is the
language of the ethnic community of Ukraine, Russian is the language of
invaders, of the neighbouring chauvinistic and highly intolerent to
minorities state, called Russia; third, in Ukraine Russian is not
endangered, whereas Ukrainian - is; fourth, looks like your friends'
comfort as well as yours is more important for you than respecting the
people in the country where you live. |
Rick
TryUkraine.com author |
Dear Ross,
I am familiar with the objections you raise and recommend my article on Ukrainization: http://www.tryukraine.com/society/ukrainization.shtml
My
site has no political affiliation nor political stance, but is designed
for convenience and accuracy. Hence the use of "Kiev" rather than
"Kyiv" in most of the newer articles. As soon as Kyiv becomes the
popularly recognized spelling and pronunciation of the capital, I will
switch it.
Is speaking Ukrainian in
Odessa respectful of the locals? How about in Donetsk? The point of my
website is to present accurate information and useful solutions, and
not a Ukrainian nationalist agenda (or its opposite).
Your
views towards Russia are quite a bit more radical than those of the
average Ukrainian. Do you believe you are accurately representing their
views? Come here to Kiev/Kyiv for several years and then you can tell
me about "respecting the people."
|
Ross
Canada |
Rick,
I sent you my comment, but I would still like to tell you this. You
said, you can hardly speak Ukrainian. That means, you have access to
Russophile information only, that is why your conclusions are biased,
pro-Russian, you give only one side of the coin. For instance, you do
not explain why many Ukrainian-speaking persons get very emotional on
the language issue. You also say that East and South of Ukraine is
'traditionally Russian-speaking', but that is absolutely wrong, as even
Kuban and Slobozhanshchyna were mostly Ukrainian-speaking before the
genocide against Ukrainians in 1932-1933 (Holodomor). Check Kaganovich
and Stalin in the literature. I am sorry, but your reasoning is
superficial and maybe attractive to those who do not know much on the
subject, in my opinion. Besides, I have lived in a number of countries
and speak many languages fluently: this helped me understand the
cultures I lived in and respect them more. But you live in Ukraine and
do not speak the main language?!! Sorry to say, you still have a lot to
learn. It is premature for you to make conclusions, as they tend to be
very onesided and tainted with 'pro-Russian internationalism' which is
a subtle form of Russian imperialistic ideology.
Please, do not feel offended. |
Rick
TryUkraine.com author |
Ross,
I
actually do speak Ukrainian quite fluently and read fluently, and I
frequently do translations from Ukrainian to English. I often read
Ukrainian news sources, specifically Ukrainska Pravda. And I was
strongly pro-Yuschenko during and after the Orange Revolution. I speak
6 languages and am natively fluent in two (Eng. and Rus.).
Even
if I did not speak Ukrainian, your criticism of non-Ukrainian speaking
foreigners in Ukraine is not quite appropriate, since many Ukrainians
also do not speak Ukrainian, or speak it poorly. Just as foreigners can
visit Holland or Denmark and get by speaking English with no problems,
they can visit much or most of Ukraine and get by with Russian.
What
I object to is the view that we, foreigners in Ukraine, should
sacrifice our personal convenience and effectiveness in the country to
promote Ukrainian national interests as understood by ideologues living
outside of Ukraine. This is absurd.
I
will research your comments about southern and eastern Ukraine
previously being Ukrainian speaking. I read some about this at some
point, and don't deny that it might be true. However, this does not
affect my advice to travelers, who are dealing with the present, not
the past.
At the recent election a
third of Ukrainian voters voted for the Party of Regions. I am sure my
pro-Russian bias, if any, is less than that of these voters, who
constitute a considerable part of the country. |
Ross
Canada |
Rick,
Thank for your quick answer.
I felt that some part of you is Russian.
As a matter of fact, I have lived in different parts of Ukraine longer than you have.
Kyiv
is the correct transliteration. Other analogies: Belarus instead of
Belorussia, Moldova instead of Moldavia, etc. Kiev is transliteration
from Russian. Linguists agree on that kind of things.
You are a layman as I can see, so your opinion is not of any value, as it is based on ignorance.
I
have seen and felt much discrimination toward Ukrainian speakers for
years. True, the situation has slightly changed in the last years.
You are not saying anything about my comments on the endagerment of Ukrainian compared to Russian.
I
do not agree with your idea of cutting the present from the past, as
many Ukrainians have this bitter feeling of never being respected in
their own land. And you with your ideas are contributing to it.
So, I strongly recommend you let Ukrainians solve their own problems and mind your own business.
Remember
the Ukrainian genius Shevchenko once said about people who tend to
think like you: 'Jakby vy vchylys tak jak treba, to j mudrist' by bula
svoja'.
Also, it is of no importance
to me whom you were supporting in the elections, I am neutral in that.
And I support those, who are honest-hearted, and respect other
peaople's feelings.
And I do not mean to convince you of anything. As people like you use to eat Ukrainian bread and spit on those who produce it.
Sorry, but that is how I feel about your 'ideas'. |
Rick
TryUkraine.com author |
Ross,
Your
viewpoint has a place, and I will put our correspondence on my page on
Ukrainization. Most of your criticism of me is simply incorrect --
regarding my supposed lack of Ukrainian knowledge, lack of awareness
that Kyiv is the correct spelling, and such comments as:
>> I felt that some part of you is Russian.
OK,
what's wrong with that?? :) Some part of me is Ukrainian, some part is
American, etc. I don't believe that one nation is inherently any better
or worse than others, and there is nothing shameful about having
personal ties to different cultures.
I
think it is useful for visitors to Ukraine to understand views such as
your own and their historical basis, even as they follow my practical
advice for language study and usage.
>> As people like you use to eat Ukrainian bread and spit on those who produce it.
I
think this is rhetoric and totally irrelevant to my situation. Other
Ukrainians write me thank you letters for reminding them of home and
treating their country in such a fair-handed way. |
Ross
Canada |
Rick,
Again:
it would be nice of you to pay attention to how Ukrainian-speaking
Ukrainians feel about the language issue in their country, how you feel
about that is not relevant.
Whether I am right or wrong is not up to you to dicide.
As
to Ukrainisation versus Russification, I am not going to discuss with
you anything anymore, as your biased position is clear to me.
You might consider moving to Russia, there is more room there and more people who share your Russophile-fascist views.
Ukraine, unlike Russia, belongs to Europe, and maybe it is not a place for persons like you, who abuse its democracy.
Good luck with your Russification! |
Rick
TryUkraine.com author |
Ross,
Likewise, I wish you a safe move to Canada. Wait... you're already there.
|
|
Gregory Levonian
Canada |
Hi Rick,
A friend of mine sent me a link to your site and in particular your article on Ukraniazation (http://www.tryukraine.com/society/ukrainization.shtml).
I just wanted to send you a little note to thank you for your honest
attempt to explain this issue to a readership that might not be so
aware of it. I might have stressed the plight of Russian speakers in
the Ukraine (just like elsewhere in the former USSR) a bit more than
you, but this is really niggling on my part.
I can hardly call myself an expert on the Ukraine, but I have traveled
there, and was even an Election monitor there (near Lutsk). I too, like
you am a non-native Russian speaker (in my case Canadian born).
I wanted to add two personal comments.
First, my background is Armenian, and I was born and grew up in the
Armenian diaspora here in Canada. It was a refreshing and profound
experience for me to discover that the all the follies of the Armenian
Diaspora are in fact not unique to us, but are at least shared with
Ukrainians (now I believe Diasporas have common characteristics). I
don't want to bore you with the minute comparisons, but the same
language, relationship with Russification, relationship and
interpretation of history, self victimization, and so on is present. It
was just plain weird seeing this all in Ukrainians!
Second, one small comment about the (to me quite tiresome) language
issue of Kyiv vs. Kiev, etc. When people make a issue out of my use of
Kiev I usually ask them if the call Munich München or Moscow Moskva (or
the multitude of other city and country names which are changed) when
they speak English. If these city names are acceptable in their
non-native forms, how come Kyiv is such a big issue?
If this fails to give them pause, I ask them how the word "German"
sounds like in Ukrainian. As you undoubtedly know, it's root is
connected with the adjective "dumb" or unable to speak Ukrainian (or
whatever the precursor to Ukrainian was called when the word was
adopted). If this is OK, how come we can't say Kiev?
I would find this Ukranization of Engish a lot easier to accept if it
was honestly portrayed as part of a national revival, rather than an
attempt to correct the speaker who has presumably made a mistake.
Sorry for the long email.
GL – GL@Mimino.Org, GL.Mimino.Org |
Rick
TryUkraine.com author |
Dear Gregory,
Thank
you for your very letter with a fresh perspective. It was interesting
to realize that similar issues may face diasporas from other former
Soviet republics.
I agree on the
issue of "Moskva" vs. "Moscow" (Polish derivative?) and how many other
world cities are not pronounced locally the way they are historically
spelled and pronounced in English and other languages. Often the
inertia of history cannot be changed, and I believe "Kyiv" is one of
those cases.
There's another issue
in relation to "Kyiv": English speakers have no idea how to say it. The
best they can do is "Keeve" with a long "E", but the sound of that is
actually just as close or closer to "Kiev" (Russian pronounciation)
than to "Kyiv" (Ukrainian Pronunciation). In many cases they simply
read "Kyiv" out loud the same way they would "Kiev."
We
should keep in mind that it is not only English that needs to adopt the
new name, but also most European languages as well. Are Ukrainization
campaigns being led there as well?
A
poor imitation of the funky "ИЇ" vowel combination will simply not
catch on in English, Spanish, or other European languages that I know
of, since these languages use only sounds present in their own
language. So basically, in spoken English the issue boils down to
"Keeve" versus "Kee-yev". The Ukrainian name of the city cannot be
pronounced correctly by English speakers anyway. This is part of the
reason why it is much easier to get foreigners to say "Lviv" (instead
of "Lvov") than "Kyiv" instead of "Kiev."
If
it is any consolation to Ukrainians living abroad, the English
pronunciation of Odessa/Odesa is much closer to the Ukrainian variant
than to the Russian, even though the city is overwhelmingly Russian
speaking. |
|
Aleksandr
Melitopol, Ukraine |
(Letter translated from Russian)
Sorry
for writing in Russian (I do basically understanding English, but
"understanding" and "making myself understood" are two different
things, and the second takes a lot of time and energy). In your
article on Ukrainization you explained very well the language problem
in Ukraine. Maybe you wrote this and I didn't notice, but there's
something I feel is missing: when natives of Russian and Ukrainian
meet, unless they are hostile towards each others' languages, usually
each speaks his own language, and n one switches to the language of the
other. For example: "Привіт! -О, привет! -Як справи? -Классно! А у
тебя? -Теж файно, хіба ж може бути інакше?.." (brief conversation using
both languages), etc. In other words, for the vast majority of
Ukrainians the problem doesn't exist outside of the Supreme Circus
(i.e. Parliament)... Likewise, two Russian speakers may easily inject
Ukrainian into their speech to express a thought that doesn't sound so
pretty in Russian -- just to make their speech more colorful :) You are
probably well aware of all this. p.s. I found your article by searching for "melitopol" in Google |
|
Mark D. Bej
Cleveland, Ohio, USA |
It is unfortunate that topics cannot be discussed, or even debated, calmly.
Your site squares with my own experience in Ukraine. However, one must recall that, unlike Americans on the whole, Europeans on the whole have a much longer historical memory. Sometimes too long, it seems, though I suspect the situation is not as bad on this account as, say, in the Middle East.
As another reader wrote to you, what is today eastern Ukraine was Ukrainian-speaking (as closely as these tings can be figured) until rather recently. Russification began as a force under Peter I, strengthened under Catherine, and came to its fullest expression in the 19th century with the ukaze of Valuev and Ems. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valuyevsky_Ukaz and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ems_Ukaz provide a summary. Then, under Stalin, came the forced resettlement of Ukrainians to non-Ukrainian regions of the USSR, and non-Ukrainians, but especially Russians, into Ukraine, for no other reason than to dilute and eventually eliminate the language and ethnicity. ("Ethnic cleansing" is a new phrase but not a new concept. And BTW, not only Ukrainians were affected, but many non-Russian ethnic groups, including the Crimean Tatars. Check out some of their web sites.) Moreover, anyone wishing any degree of advancement (beyond living in some small farming village, that is): an education, better jobs, city life - was forced to a greater or lesser degree to use Russian, if not to russify him/herself culturally as well.
The only parts of Ukraine that were relatively spared were those still under Poland, basically Ternopil's'ka oblast' and west, which only came under Soviet rule in 1944 (OK, briefly in 1939-40), and thus were spared a longer existence under Stalin. Were it not for that, Ukrainian may not exist today outside the diaspora. So if Ukrainians, diaspora or not, get hot under the collar about this issue, it is with some good reason. To provide a western European analogy - would anyone much complain if the Irish decided that, beginning with the 2010-2011 school year, all education will be exclusively in Gaelic, and English will have no official status, though it might be tolerated? Sure, the Brits might complain, but would we not allow them this degree of self-determination, especially given their history of cultural, political, and linguistic domination by England? Ireland exists for the Irish, after all, does it not?
Making a language _official_ has all kinds of overtones. First off, it's expensive. Street signs, government documents, etc. would all have to be done in 2 languages. Second, one would give political sanction for everyone to use whichever language they choose, and by sheet inertia, Russian will win, not just its inertia in Ukraine, but because of its sheer size in the region as a whole. The population proportions are not that far off from the proportions of French vs. English in Canada (with the "vs." intentionally implying some degree of adversity). However, even if English were theoretically to wipe out French in Canada, there remain other bastions of French, in Polynesia, in Africa, and of course, in France itself. The difference in Ukraine is exactly this: there is no other bastion, no other "reserve supply" of Ukrainian in the world. Wipe it out in Ukraine, and it will join the ranks of Etruscan, Hittite, and Latin. Does _that_ help to explain why Ukrainians, Armenians, Slovenes, Czechs, Basques, Greeks, Kurds, Copts, etc. are so protective of their languages and cultures? Native speakers of English (and Russian) have a nearly impossible time understanding this because they speak "majority" languages that are in no danger of disappearing, and their histories have not been written for them (with all of the bias this implies) by others through the ages.
|
|
Kate
Prague, Czech Republic |
Dear maker of this site,
I agree with on many of your opinions, for I have lived in Kiev (Kyiv) for three years. I think the person living in Canada was really extreme and he was just getting rid of his anger on you, which is really immature... I, too, am fluent in many languages, so I believe I do understand the issue a bit (I understand, read, and speak in both Ukrainian and Russian). My Ukrainian-Russian friends in Kiev are not so concerned about the issue as the situation looks to be... Kiev is the crossroad to many ideas and opinions - Russian and Ukrainian Orthodox Churches, Russian vs. Ukraine, political views... I've seen two Ukrainians playing a game - who knows more words in Ukrainian - they said a word in Russian and the other one had to say it in Ukrainian - well, even though they were both Ukrainians, they sucked in that game terribly :D . I think it is stupid to forcobly Ukranize teh country - when Ukrainians themselves don't want that!
I have been to Crimea, Odessa, and Lviv and no one I asked in there really cared about that issue - they are mad at the past, but they do not dwell in it... which is what I like about them!
Secondly, I'd like to respond to the last comment of the Ukrainian living in Canada - "where the hell did you get that Ukraine is democratic???" - no offense, I really liked living in Ukraine, but there is no democracy in there - just look at its politics...there is no nation in Europe as corrupt as Ukraine...which is really a pity...
Secondly, Russia may have more of its territory in Asia, but most of its population is concentrated in the European part. And I am not pro-Russian - my background could suggest that, for I am a Czech citizen, and we are not really fond of Russian because they have done some really awful things to our small nation. BUT I have no prejudice against them - they have done what they have and that fact is not going to change - but would I feel hostile towards all Russians just because of the past? Sorry to tell you this, but even though I am only 17, I am not so immature!
Thanks again for your great article!
|
|
Steven Michailiuk
Montreal, Quebec, Canada |
Really appreciated your view on the ukranization and especially your exchange with the ''diaspora'' I was born in Montreal, Quebec (that is why my english is so poor:)) and come from a ukrainian heritage. Went to school and summer camp in ukrainian and always heard about the bad russian this and that. So i asked question about it. And the same thing always... but one factor repetely came up, the language, how russian was force upon people. If you wanted to have good position you needed to speak russian... and i asked, a little like we do here, we don't learn french but english because it is the dominante language no? (i was very young then) They prettty much told me shut up. I didn't like the nationalistic view, the hate and all. I had familly and friends who came in late to Canada and they didn't have this hate. Maybe Kundera sayd it best, when a groupe leave for another place, they have tendancy to recreat and freeze the moment they left and sometime, looking at some people in ukrainian festival swearing very stupid words about russians, germans and all, well it hurt what make me so pround to be of ukranian origine. Maybe ukraine diaspora are a little like the french about the english language in quebec versus the russian language in ukraine. It is a little like esperento: practical. That all.
Hope i don't get a hate letter from Ross.
Voile. sorry for the bad english
Dyakuju
|
|
|