Paul
Goble
Staunton, January 6 – Something that
Muscovites may consider an unacceptable violation of “literary norms” in the
use of a given word or phrase is often the only correct one “in other countries
and regions, where other Russians who speak other Russian languages live,”
according to Dmitry Vitushkin.
Debates about whether one should say
“v Ukraine or na Ukraine” or “Belorussiya
or Belarus” are endless but
ultimately foolish, the Russian regionalist says, because “the Russian language
like any other language spoken over a broad area cannot be represented by only
one version” (afterempire.info/2017/01/06/russian-languages/).
Many of the regional
variations that the great Russian lexicographer Vladimir Dal assembled have
been wiped out by the work of state educational programs and the electronic
media, he acknowledges, but “from year to year, the Russian-language space is exploding
with new differences.”
This past year saw
a debate break out in St. Petersburg when one United Russian deputy proposed
officially banning the word “shaurma” (an Arabic culinary delight) and keeping
as legal only the Ingermanland term “shaverma” (which means the same thing).
Later he said he was joking but “thousands who supported him on social networks
were absolutely serious.”
Russia’s enormous size as well as
the various Russian diasporas have made the increase in diversity within the
Russian language world ever greater. Indeed, even when Dal compiled his
dictionary, it was less a guide to one language than a translation aid for
those who knew one kind of Russian but not another.
Unfortunately, Vitushkin says, “the
contemporary Russian for some reason thinks that he has certain Exclusive
Rights to Russian and from the position of the vaunted ‘elder brother,’ he
tries to dictate that one must write ‘Moldavia and not ‘Moldova,’ ‘Pribaltika’
and not ‘countries of the Baltic,’ ‘Belorussiya’ and not ‘Belarus.’”
But in doing so, he continues, this
Russian forgets that “the Kremlin did not have, does not have and cannot have
any copyright over the Russian language.”
Emigres after 1917 kept the old
script alive, something that meant there were “at a minimum two Russian
languages” at that time. And since 1991,
millions of Russians have either found themselves in new countries or left
Russia to go elsewhere, all of whom increasingly speak a language different
than what the Moscow gatekeepers prefer.
Such diversity is typical of many
languages regardless of whether they are in one state or don’t have a state,
existed in antiquity or are very much alive now. “Russians here are no
exception.”
“The absence of a single standard of
Russian is already true in practice and it remains only to fix this at an
academic level. And “this is the task of the many-million-strong Russian
diaspora outside the Russian Federation and also the authorities of Ukraine,
Belarus, Kazakhstan and other post-Soviet states.”
No one should be surprised or
frightened by this. After all, Russian is increasingly diverse across the
Russian Federation, even though the Kremlin actively opposes this just as it
opposes “any independent activity.” It has tried to suppress the Siberian
language and has even managed to block the Siberian language Wikipedia page.
Worse, the Russian security services
have hounded Pomor activist Ivan Moseyev for putting out a collection of
stories in the Pomor dialect. His activities were described by Moscow as “espionage.” And Ingermanland activists, “who have been
working on a contemporary Russian version of the Latin script for Ingria,” have
experienced similar persecutions.
Nevertheless, Moscow can’t put this
genie back in the bottle. Russians in various parts of the world and in various
parts of Russia are speaking different languages and in many cases think of
themselves as members of different Russian nations. Moscow’s word for many of
them is no longer law. What remains to be done is to support rather than
suppress this very human trend.
No comments:
Post a Comment