Vilniaus ir Klaipėdos rusų ir rusakalbių tapatybės savivokos ypatumai

Mokslo publikacijos / Scientific publications
Document Type:
Knygos dalis / Part of the book
Lietuvių kalba / Lithuanian
Vilniaus ir Klaipėdos rusų ir rusakalbių tapatybės savivokos ypatumai
Alternative Title:
Self-identification of the Russian and Russian-speaking population of Vilnius and Klaipėda
Daugiakalbystė; Kalbos miestuose; Tarmės miestuose; Sociolingvistika.
Multilingualism; Languages in cities; Dialects in cities; Sociolinguistics.
Summary / Abstract:

LTTautinė tapatybė, arba tautinis identitetas, nacionalinis identitetas, tautinis tapatumas, etninė tapatybė (žr. terminų vartojimą - Kuznecovienė 2009; Taljūnaitė 2006; Vasiliauskaitė 2006) - tai kognityviojo emocinio proceso rezultatas, kuris lemia individo įsisąmoninimą, kad jis priklauso tam tikrai etninei bendruomenei, atskirdamas save nuo kitų etninių bendruomenių (Belinskaja, Stefanenko 2003). Ši kategorija yra psichologinė ir grindžiama subjektyviai. Objektyviais požymiais pagrįsta kita, sociologinė kategorija - etniškumas. Etniškumą lemia tokie parametrai kaip tėvų tautybė, gimimo vieta, šeimos kalba, mokyklos kalba ir kt. (ten pat). „Tai socialinė tapatybė, charakterizuojama giminystės metafora arba netikra giminyste" (Kokšarov 20021; apie siauresnį etniškumo supratimą kaip kultūrinę tapatybę - žr. Kuznecovienė 2007). Etniškumo (angį. ethnicity, rus. этничность) kategorijos santykinį objektyvumą rodo tai, kad ji prilyginama tautybės (nationality, национальность) sąvokai (žr. White 2006; Kokšarov 2002), o anglakalbėse šalyse gali būti ir pilietybės (citizenship) sinonimas (White 2006; priešingai, apie tautybę kaip subjektyvią kategoriją, kaip žmogaus „tapatybės išvystymą ar suvokimą bei bendro priklausymo jausmą" ir apie pilietybę kaip objektyvią kategoriją be „kultūrinės priklausomybės" komponento - žr. Kuznecovienė 2007). Šiame skyriuje svarbu ne išanalizuoti interpretacijų skirtumus, bet pabrėžti tai, kad asmenybės saviidentifikacijos procesas bei rezultatas turi subjektyvių ir objektyvių veiksnių. [Iš straipsnio, p. 125]

ENThis chapter is devoted to the issue of the self-identification of the Russian and Russianspeaking populations of the cities of Lithuania. Two cities - Vilnius and Klaipėda - have been chosen for analysis as their ethnic structure is the most diverse and they have always had the biggest Russian-speaking populations. The process and result of self-identification is affected by both subjective and objective factors. To understand why individuals choose a specific identity, one should study possible combinations of these factors. First, the notions of Russians and Russian-speaking inhabitants are defined since one of the aims of the study is to analyze how the members of different non- Lithuanian ethnic groups understand the importance of their mother tongue and identity and how their linguistic behaviour defines their ethnic identity. Then, eleven sociolinguistic portraits of Russians and Russian-speaking individuals are presented. The interview data are summarized in the tables "Components of Ethnicity and Self-Identification of the Russian and Russian-Speaking Inhabitants of Vilnius and Klaipėda". Finally, the sociolinguistic data of the interviews are analyzed and conclusions are drawn. An attempt is made to determine the differences between the way the Russian and Russian-speaking inhabitants understand their identity. It has been found that the respondents tend to describe themselves in one of two ways, either by choosing specific ethnic factors and their combinations as descriptors, or by using vague descriptors. Ethno-genealogical parameters (such as ethnic origin and place of birth) are not sufficient for unambiguous self-identification; the interviews show that the most important factor in the development of the Lithuanian half of the identity of Russian and Russian-speaking respondents is whether they grew up in Lithuania, regardless of their place of birth.The respondents also believe that language is a key factor in one's identification with a certain ethnicity. High competence in ones mother tongue identifies the person with the relevant ethno-linguistic group. Most adults regard their childhood language as their mother tongue or one of their mother tongues. On the other hand, Lithuanian (the state language and the language of instruction) increasingly becomes the second mother tongue to the younger generation of Russians. In the opinion of Russian-speaking parents, their children's professional future depends on their competence in the state language and therefore their children should attend a Lithuanian school. However, there are families who believe that sending their children to Lithuanian schools does not only imply a shift in the dominant native language (from Russian to Lithuanian), but also the creation of a different identity and formation of a different cultural memory. Because they are against the general cultural loss caused by the closure of Russian schools, young parents look for means of providing their children with access to the Russian language, literature and culture. It has been noted that the respondents' level of competence in Lithuanian as the state language correlates with the degree of their self-identification with the Lithuanian (titular) nation (full, partial or zero identification).The chapter draws the conclusion that the two groups - the ethnic Russian population and the Russian-speaking population - have a different understanding of identity. Russians usually declare a double identity, claiming that they feel a strong connection with Lithuania even if they were born elsewhere. They say that their Lithuanian is good, even though their native or dominant language is Russian and that they relate to Russian culture more that to Lithuanian culture. In spite of this, they are certain that they are not 'very typical' representatives of their nation.The sociolinguistic portraits show that the respondents consider themselves to be different not only from the Russians of Russia but also from ethnic Lithuanians. They positively assess their twofold identity as the most convenient for the individual because it allows them to use experience gained in one ethnic group in order to integrate to another group. Lithuania's Russian-speaking citizens choose a multiple identity model. They speak Lithuanian, but their native language or one of their native languages is Russian. They are critical about their poor knowledge of their own ethnic language and culture (which is necessary in order to identify oneself with a certain ethnicity), but they are sensitive about their real (non- Russian and non-Lithuanian) identity and construct it from separate fragments of their life stories. We can see from the in-depth interviews that for the Russian and Russian-speaking ethnic groups multiple identification is only convenient when it is voluntary. It does not require the refusal of their native ethnic language or their ethnic cultural values and it receives support from the Lithuanian state, which can therefore be called their motherland. The process of selfidentification of the Russian and Russian-speaking citizens is an important sociolinguistic aspect of contemporary Lithuania. As the liberal discourse of a persons right to choose is becoming stronger, individuals of different ethnic origin residing in Lithuania have more opportunities to create a common civic identity. Lithuania's Russian-speaking citizens are aware of the many ways of self-identification and value the right to decide who they can or want to be. [From the publication]

Related Publications:
2021-01-11 21:26:46
Views: 55