Paul
Goble
Staunton, November 30 – For almost a
century, Moscow has wanted the Russian language to be a common state language
for all the peoples of Russia and a native language for ethnic Russians, Ayrat
Fayzrakhmanov says. But now, it is demanding that Russian not be “non-native”
for non-Russians “as if it were a foreign language.”
Putin advisor Vladimir Tolstoy made
that clear at the Yekaterinburg meeting of the Council on Russian language, the
Tatar historian says, when he declared that “for citizens of Russia, Russian
cannot and must not be non-native as if it were a foreign language” (business-gazeta.ru/article/447855).
Tolstoy’s statement means that “the
goal of the language policy being carried out consists not simply in the support
of Russian as the state language or as a means of interethnic communication but
in an effort to make it the native language of every resident of the country,” something
that would be achieved at the expense of the non-Russian languages.
Not only is such an effort certain
to spark resentment among the speakers of non-Russian languages like Tatar but
it will make it far harder to promote Russian abroad given that most languages
with an international reach are far more tolerant to those who speak other
tongues lest they provoke a reaction, the Tatar historian continues.
In addition to this threat,
Fayzrakhmanov says, the Tatar nation faces at least 19 more, all of which
should be addressed if the nation and its language are to have a future:
1.
Depopulation
2.
Loss
of a Sense of Greater Tatarstan
3.
Super-Centralization
and Defederalization of the Russian Federation
4.
Inability
to Defend Tatar Culture through the Legal System
5.
Low
Social and Economic Prestige of the Tatar Langauge
6.
Rapid
Assimilation
7.
Loss of a National Educational System
8.
Weakening of Historical Consciousness and Memory
9.
Islamophobia
10.
Increasing Inter-Ethnic Marriages
11.
Depopulation of the Mono-Ethnic Tatar
Countryside
12.
Lack of National Resources
13.
Russian-Language Globalization
14.
Loss of Ethnic Identity among Urban Residents
15.
Archaic Nature of Most Definitions of Tatar
Identity
16.
State Monopoly on Articulation of Tatar Identity
and Culture
17.
Dispersal of Tatars and Growing Divide between “Tatarstan
Tatars” and the Others
18.
Lack of United Organizations
19.
Weakening of Tatar Intellectual and Ideological
Centers
No comments:
Post a Comment