Українська мова, 2021-2022 роки. Лінгвоцид на тимчасово окупованих територіях держави Україна

Abstract

У статті розглянуто проблему лінгвоциду (мововбивства) на тимчасово окупованих територіях в Україні в 2021-2023 роках. Наголошується, що лінгвоцидна практика росії на тимчасово захоплених територіях в Україні пов’язана з історично зафіксованою практикою знищення, знецінення державотворчого значення української літературної мови як державної та політикою антилегітимізації суверенності держави Україна і відсутності потреби у державних символах. The article examines the problem of linguocide in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine in 2021-2022. It is emphasized that the linguocidal practice of russia in the temporarily occupied territories in Ukraine is connected with the historically recorded practice of destruction, devaluation of the state-building significance of the Ukrainian literary language and the policy of anti-legitimization of the sovereignty of the state of Ukraine, the lack of need for state symbols, and therefore the state Ukrainian language Formulation of the problem. For a long time, the problem of linguicide was not the subject of research in domestic linguistics, as this was not facilitated by the historical realities in which Ukraine was from the end of the 17th to the end of the 20th century [11]. I. Ohienko, M. Kostomarov, I. Franko, and Yu. Shevelyov highlighted certain aspects of this issue in their scientific investigations. Already after the declaration of independence of Ukraine published thorough publications by V. Ivanyshin, L. Masenko, P. Movchan, O. Pavlova, N. Tumai, Y. Radevich-Vynnytskyi, E. Sverstyuk, V. Khristenok, Yu. Shapoval and others researchers However, even today works of this nature remain relevant, because the harmful impact of relapses of linguicide is still felt in modern Ukrainian society, which determines the acuteness of the language issue. The russia’s military aggression against Ukraine has been taking place since 2014. During this eight-year period, the representatives of the fifth column of the aggressor country manifested themselves to the fullest extent at all levels of the social hierarchy – from ordinary citizens to representatives of judicial and law enforcement bodies, local self-government bodies and the state legislature [22]. Criminalization of collaborationism in Ukraine is a relatively new legal phenomenon. However, its criminal-legal, criminal-procedural and operative-search aspects have already been considered in the works of such scientists as S. Albul, O. Kozachenko, V. Kuznetsov, O. Musychenko, E. Pysmenskyi, A. Politova, E. Polyakov, M. Siyploki, T. Shurat, K. Yanishevska and others. The article is devoted to the study of issues of criminalization of collaborationism in Ukraine and the organizational and legal prerequisites of its documentation. The language issue is part of state policy, therefore it is especially relevant for those peoples who have been de-ethnicized for a long time, and now need not only the preservation and development of the national language, but also the revival of its use throughout the state [12]. The conflict of the current language problems Ukraine inherited from the colonial past. The russian language has supplanted Ukrainian in a significant part of the eastern, southern and even some central regions of our country, taking over the main function of the language – the communicative one [18]. Such language imbalance blocks the implementation of the identification function of language, which is aimed at unifying the ethnic community on the basis of language, which, therefore, weakens the national self-awareness of Ukrainians, hindering the construction of a strong independent state. Long-term assimilation processes, which eliminated the very concept of «native language», weakened the sense of national cohesion and solidarity in Ukrainian society, which became an obstacle to national self-assertion. According to the Ukrainian linguist Orest Tkachenko, in the hierarchy of factors that shape the ability of the national community to resist linguistic and cultural assimilation by another state, it is the feeling of national solidarity is one of the defining [21]. The historical process, as noted by Professor E. Pysmenskyi and others, proved that a state whose territory becomes occupied is subject to the suppression of national traits, the phenomena of collaborationism, and linguocide [15]. «In turn,» the scientist states, «as a result of the linguistic self-assertion of the people, which presupposes the emergence of a national state, the language becomes: national, that is, characteristic of all strata of the respective people, both in the village and in the city; national, that is, used not only by its speakers, but also by all other ethnic groups or national minorities of its state as a national language and as a means of international communication.