Lietuvių kalba ir visuomenė : bendrasis ir terminologinis aspektai

Direct Link:
Collection:
Mokslo publikacijos / Scientific publications
Document Type:
Straipsnis / Article
Language:
Lietuvių kalba / Lithuanian
Title:
Lietuvių kalba ir visuomenė : bendrasis ir terminologinis aspektai
Alternative Title:
Lithuanian language and society : general and terminological aspects
In the Journal:
Terminologija . 2008, 15, p. 56-104
Notes:
LDB Open.
Keywords:
LT
visuomenė; terminologiniai aspektai; kalbų vartojimas; globalizacija; bilingvizmas; terminologas; lietuvių kalba ir visuomenė; bendrasis ir terminologinis aspektai; kalbų vartojimo klausimai; kalbų globalizacija; kalbų vartojimo globaliosios tendencijos; antiglobalizmas; kalbos raida.
EN
society; terminological aspects; usage of languages; globalization; bilingualism; terminologist; the Lithuanian language and society; general and terminological aspects; questions the usage of languages; globalisation of languages; global tendencies of the usage of languages; anti-globalism; the developement of the language.
Summary / Abstract:

LTStraipsnio objektas – globalizacijos įtaka lietuvių kalbotyrai ir visuomenei. Straipsnio autorius daro tokias išvadas. Pirma, globalizacija tik kalbų vartojimui yra gana tiesioginis grėsmingas veiksnys, o kalbos funkcionavimui, vartosenai – nepalankus fonas. Antra, blogio imperijos dezintegracija, Lietuvos nepriklausomybės atkūrimas ir lietuvių kalbos įvalstybinimas, tautinis atgimimas, visuomenės demokratizacija ir pilietinės visuomenės kūrimasis, Lietuvos europinė ir transatlantinė integracija, taip pat perdėta, nors neoficiali anglizacija, dar – kompiuterizacija ir internetizacija – dabar labai konkretūs veiksniai, kurių reikšmė tautos tapatybei ir savimonei, kultūrai ir kalbai jau žymi 20 metų ir ilgai bus lemiama, epochinė. Trečia, garantuota tik sena beveik visuotinė tvarka: saugi yra tik valstybinė tautinė kalba, arba: valstybė – tai savo kalba. Nors pasaulis dvikalbis (irgi daugiausia tik ta bendravimo funkcija), bet dvikalbyste būdinga ne didžiosioms, o mažosioms kalboms, ir ji – subordinacinė, taigi ne be pavojų. Ketvirta, lietuvių kalbotyros teorijoje bendravimo priemonės funkcija jau nelaikoma nei vienintele, nei net pagrindine. Lietuvių kalbininkai vis dėlto drįsta mesti iššūkius antikultūrinei globalizacijai ir kartais laimi. Terminologų kalbininkų pajėgos neproporcingai negausios.

ENQuestions of the usage of languages, their changes, their future and even their fate are often very directly linked with globalization. Concentration of everybody's full attention only on the impact of undefined globalization is wrong not only because of its one-sidedness, but also because other more important and specific factors are forgotten or hushed up and they are and were abundant. On the other side of the iron curtain the ugly phenomena of the 20th century were flourishing, directly impacting upon as well as causing a negative background for the functioning of language in general and small languages in particular. Such phenomena include consumer and mass society, disposable civilization, marketing, advertising, agitation, mass media and especially commercialisation of television, mass culture, three minute culture, fashion, creation of stars, Americanization of culture (pop music, Hollywood films, westerns, TV serials, soap operas, ...). In general terms a common denominator of these phenomena is their tendency to make a man and a life primitive, specifically the creation of a wooden language. These phenomena, strongly attacked by soviet anti-American propaganda and to some extent evaluated in Lithuanian philosophical discourse after the fall of the iron curtain swept into Lithuania, to the weary spirit of which everything coming from the West seemed to be good. At the same time fifty year old truths about our own life in the evil empire - new language, thought police, double think, enslavement of the mind - reached us from the West as well. These truths reached us, but did not have the right impact on us.Together with such things as the disintegration of the evil empire, restoration of the independence of Lithuania, status of the Lithuanian language as a state language, national rebirth, democratisation of the society and the creation of a civil society, European and transatlantic integration of Lithuania, came unofficial Anglization, computerization and internetization which are now very specific factors, the importance of which to national identity and selfawareness, culture and language has been considerable for twenty years and will remain crucial and epochal for a long time. Every language is ethnic or national - native. Our native language - Lithuanian — for a few centuries under the conditions of continuous subordinate bilingualism had very many contacts with the Polish language - the whole area of the Lithuanian language was flooded with it. Only a few consequences have been eliminated, and although contacts with Polish have for some time been almost broken, the majority of losses are, like loss of national territory, irreversible. For two centuries a similar destructive work in the Lithuanian language area was done by the Russian language. Now a new era of contacts with the English language has arrived - territory is not being lost, but a part of the Lithuanian language speakers are. Therefore it is useful to get acquainted with these imperial, colonial as well as international languages (and linguae francae) from inside — how they are perceived and judged by Russians and English themselves. It is important to remember that the essence of linguae francae is only the performance of the communicative function. This is not enough for the national language to live and survive - it could cause death. The Lithuanian language has a dead sister - the Prussian language.The area of the Lithuanian language has crumbled away in the west and in the southeast and it is not even continuous within the state borders. Speakers of a big language can have a theoretical discussion if the language is or is not an obligatory element of nationality and statehood.The area of the Lithuanian language has crumbled away in the west and in the southeast and it is not even continuous within the state borders. Speakers of a big language can have a theoretical discussion if the language is or is not an obligatory element of nationality and statehood. A Lithuanian can speak here only about lucky or unlucky (for himself!) exceptions. Only the old nearly universal order provides guarantees: only a national state language is safe or: a state is its own language. Although the world is bilingual (mostly in that communicative function), bilingualism is a characteristic not of big, but of small languages and it implies subordination, thus some dangers. In the theory of Lithuanian linguistics, the communicative function is considered to be neither the only, nor the main one. Simas Karaliūnas separates the ethnic function as well. Various journalists, specialists of culture and other provincials of the time (avant nous, le Deluge) are talking only about the means of communication, demanding unrestricted development of the language, declaring anticodification attitudes, rights and validity of jargon and similar good willed ignorance and demonising linguists. They defeat some linguists because of the lack of solidarity and culture of the latter. Lithuanian linguists dare to challenge anti-cultural globalization and sometimes win. The force of terminologists is small, but they publish the scientific (international from the 13t h issue) magazine Terminologija (Terminology). The principle of state protection of the Lithuanian language is being implemented although not consistently. [From the publication]

ISSN:
1392-267X
Related Publications:
Permalink:
https://www.lituanistika.lt/content/20183
Updated:
2013-04-28 19:18:15
Metrics:
Views: 5    Downloads: 4