Языковые процесы в этнически смешанных семьях

LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI, XXVIII (1989) KALBŲ RYŠIAI IR SĄVEIKOS JAKOBAS TRIFONOVAS LANGUAGE PROCESSES IN ETHNICALLY MIXED FAMILIES One of the most important characteristics of Soviet society is its multinational composition. It characterizes a wide range of communities—from the largest, such as the population of an individual republic, territory, region, or city, to the smallest, such as a work collective, a student group, and so on. The constant intensification of demographic and ethnic processes in our country means that this characteristic increasingly affects even the smallest unit of human society—the family. This is determined by the continual strengthening and development of economic and cultural ties among the peoples of our country, which leads, on the one hand, to the internal consolidation of nations and ethnic groups and to interethnic integration, and, on the other (Vainshtein 1977, 122). A concrete manifestation of this “integration” is the growing number of interethnic marriages and, consequently, ethnically mixed families. Thus, according to the latest data, approximately one in six families in our country brings together people of different nationalities (Umansky, Shaboldin 1987, 290). In our republic, from 1970 to 1978 alone, the number of such families increased by almost 3%, and the number of children born into them amounted to 13.9% of all newborns (Gaučas 1981, 28). The bringing together in a single family of representatives of different nationalities and, as a rule, speakers of different languages creates specific conditions for the development of language processes. This is particularly significant for the formation of the language biographies of children in such families. A person’s nationality and native language are among their most important social characteristics. In our country, citizens’ national affiliation is legally recorded when they reach the age of 16, according to their own choice. However, an individual’s national self-awareness begins to form much earlier, and the language used for communication in the family plays a crucial role in this process; in the overwhelming majority of cases, it also becomes that individual’s native language. The aim of this article is to identify certain patterns that characterize how children from ethnically mixed families choose their native language and, subsequently, their nationality. A study of the language biographies of 59 informants—middle- and high-school-age children born and raised in mixed families, most of whom (about 80%) live in the city—revealed 149 a very complex picture, comprising an interweaving and interaction of various factors. The language used for communication in the family is determined mainly by the parents’ languages, which in turn generally correspond to their nationalities. The largest group among the ethnically mixed families studied consists of families comprising representatives of the indigenous (majority) nationality of the territory and Russians (50% of all mixed families). Russian-Ukrainian families rank second in number (about 17%), although in specialized studies such families are classified as the third-largest group, while the second group comprises families made up of representatives of the indigenous nationality and other nationalities (excluding Russian). However, the number of such families in the study sample is significantly smaller not only than the number in the third group but also than that in the fourth group, which usually includes families of Russians and representatives of other nationalities of the republic (other than those named in the first and third groups) (Gantskaya, Terentyeva 1977, 481); they account for only one tenth of all families. The fourth group ranked third in size (11.9%). A distinct group consists of families comprising Ukrainians and Belarusians, on the one hand, and representatives of other nationalities (excluding the indigenous and Russian nationalities), on the other; their number is the same as in the second group (see Table 1). The mother’s native language has the greatest influence on the choice of the language used for communication in the family and, consequently, on the children’s native language. In three of the five groups identified, the rate of correspondence between these indicators ranges from 60% to 100%. In the first group, this choice is also supported by the language of instruction; in the second group, even without such support, one third of the informants choose their mother’s language as their native language. The second most significant factor influencing the choice of the language used for communication in a mixed family is the linguistic environment. Thus, the overwhelming majority of informants in the first group, who have lived in Lithuania since birth, are predominantly surrounded by a Lithuanian-language environment. This is due to the very nature of families of this type: 73.3% of the families bring together Russian men, predominantly among the long-established Russian residents of Lithuania, and Lithuanian women. As a number of researchers have demonstrated (Nemchenko 1960; Mikhalchenko 1984; Sivitskene 1979, etc.), the long-established Russian population is characterized by a high degree of Russian-Lithuanian bilingualism, reaching 92–98% in certain speech communities (Trifonas, 1978, 221), and by the widespread use of Lithuanian in various spheres of communication—work, business, and culture. All this fosters a positive attitude toward the introduction of this language into the family sphere as well, a tendency further encouraged by a sharp increase in exposure to Lithuanian through the wife’s relatives, acquaintances, and colleagues. The choice of Russian as the language of family communication is determined by the influence of objective and subjective factors of bilingualism (Mikhalchenko 150 1984, 108). Thus, according to the most recent census, based on self-assessments, i.e., on the subjective factor of bilingualism, the Russian population in Šiauliai amounts to 11%, but in certain language communities Russian is functionally the first language, for example, in Russian-medium schools, railway organizations, and military units. In addition, Russian is often a means of access to all-Union and world culture, and a means of communication among people of different nationalities. These and other objective factors prove decisive in choosing the language of family communication in those groups of mixed families that include no representatives of the republic’s titular nationality, as well as in the second group of families, where Russian appears chiefly as a means of interethnic communication. The fact that Russian serves as the language of instruction is also highly significant in the choice of this language in these groups. The formation of children’s ethnic self-awareness in mixed families culminates in the choice of national affiliation. This process is conditioned by the influence of many factors, the most important of which are the degree of ethnocultural proximity, the duration of interethnic contacts between the nationalities to which the parents belong, the linguistic situation, traditions established in the family, and many others. As a result of these factors, the overwhelming majority of informants in the first group (90%) consider themselves Lithuanians. At the same time, there is a fairly high rate of correspondence between the children’s nationality and that of their mother (81.5%), confirming the same pattern in the choice of native language. Since these factors are considerably weaker in the second group (especially the second one), the slight predominance of one nationality is determined by more specific factors, such as place of birth or the parents’ wishes. In the third group, the choice of nationality fully conforms to tradition: outside the Ukrainian SSR, children from T a b l e 1. Correlation between informants’ native language and their parents’ language and language of instruction Family type Number of informants Informants’ native language % Including those whose language coincides with mother’s father’s Language of instruction Lithuanian-Russian 30 Lithuanian; Russian 83,3; 16,7 84; 40 16; 60 70; 30 Lithuanian-Ukrainian, Belarusian 6 Lithuanian; Ukrainian; Russian 16,7; 16,7; 66,6 100; 100; — —; —; — —; —; 100 Russian-Ukrainian 10 Russian; Ukrainian 100; — 60; — 40; — 100; — Russian–other nationalities 7 Russian; other nationalities 100; — 28,6; — 71,4; — 100; — Ukrainian, Belarusian–other nationalities 6 Russian 100 — — 100 151 Table 2. Correlation between informants’ nationality and their parents’ nationality Family type Number of informants Informants’ nationality % including those sharing the nationality of the mother the father Lithuanian-Russian 30 Lithuanians; Russians 90; 10 81,5; — 18,5; 100 Lithuanian-Ukrainian, Belarusian 6 Lithuanians; Ukrainians; Belarusians 33,3; 50; 16,7 50; —; 100 50; 100 Russian-Ukrainian 10 Russians; Ukrainians 80; 20 75; 100 25; — The tables were compiled on the basis of statistical processing of data collected by the author through a survey using a language sociology questionnaire prepared by the Russian Language Group at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language and Literature of the Academy of Sciences of the Lithuanian SSR in 1983. таких семей чаще избирают русскую национальность (Ганцкая, Терентьева 1977, 480). В четвертой группе также преобладает русская национальность, а в последней одинаково представлены все национальности, что, по-видимому, также обусловлено влиянием частных факторов. A synthesis of the analysis of the material studied makes it possible to suggest that the development of linguistic and interethnic processes in the surveyed area (in the city of Kuršėnai, Šiauliai, and Šiauliai District) is generally directed toward the rapprochement of representatives of Russian nationality with the indigenous population of the republic, and of representatives of other nationalities toward similar interaction with Russians. ЛИТЕРАТУРА Вайнштейн С. И. Социально-экономические предпосылки и факторы этнических процессов в СССР // Современные этнические процессы в СССР. 2-е изд. М., 1977. С. 105–122. Ганцкая О. А., Терентьева Л. Н. Межнациональные браки и их роль в этнических процессах // Современные этнические процессы в СССР. 2-е изд. М., 1977. С. 460–483. Gaičas P. Dabartiniai etniniai procesai Lietuvoje // Mokslas ir gyvenimas, 1981. Nr. 3. P. 27–28. Михальченко В. Ю. Проблемы функционирования и взаимодействия литовского и русского языков. Вильнюс, 1984. Немченко В. Н. Говор русских старожилов Йонавского района Литовской ССР: Дис.... канд. филол. наук. Вильнюс, 1960. Сивицкене М. К. О двуязычии сельского русского населения Литовской ССР // Socialinės lingvistikos problemos. V., 1979. P. 59–66. Трифонова Я. С. Функционирование и взаимодействие русского и литовского языков в Литовской ССР: Дис.... канд. филол. наук. М., 1978. Уманский Л. А., Шаболдин С. С. Годы труда и побед. 1917–1987. М., 1987. 152