Dvikalbystės klausimai etnografiniuose tyrinėjimuose

QUESTIONS OF LITHUANIAN LINGUISTICS, XXVIII (1989) RELATIONSHIPS AND INTERACTIONS BETWEEN LANGUAGES PETRAS KALNIUS QUESTIONS OF BILINGUALITY IN ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDIES Recently, bilingualism has become an increasingly interesting topic for ethnographers, who have conducted extensive research on this topic in other republics. Ethnographers of the Lithuanian SSR touched on these issues in some of their studies of the spiritual culture of the current inhabitants of the republic (by examining the ethnic orientations of family members in cultural life, etc.). Information about the prevalence of bilingualism and the functioning of languages was collected from 2731 residents of the republic (1415 urban and 1316 rural). A questionnaire survey of families was carried out in Elektrėnai, Vilnius and Kaunas as well as in Telšiai, Zarasai, Švenčionys, Varena, Jonava and Vilkaviškis districts. The collected data describes all social strata of the population of the republic. In 1976, in Elektrėnai, 276 workers and engineers responded to questions about language skills and use at home in a study of the daily life and culture of Lithuanian VRE employees. Vilnius and Kaunas industrial workers and civil servants, plant engineering workers were questioned in 1977—1978. Answers were received from 500 people of different nationalities (questions on mother tongue, language skills, language use at work and at home). Language matters were touched on more extensively in 1981—1982, when interviewing the families of non-manufacturing employees in Vilnius and Kaunas. They were interested in the knowledge of their mother tongue and other languages, asked what helped them to learn another language the most, as well as about the use of languages at home and in various spheres of social life, about language orientation, when looking for information through radio, television and the press. 336 cultural and educational workers of various nationalities were interviewed in Vilnius and 312 in Kaunas. In 1982, the N. Mikluh-Maklai Institute of the USSR MA together with the ethnographers of the Institute of History of the USSR MA interviewed 1316 rural inhabitants of various professions, ages and education in Jonava, Telšiai, Vilkaviškis, Varena, Švenčionys, Šakiai and Tauragė districts. The questionnaire questions about language were similar to those asked to the residents of Vilnius and Kaunas. In addition, other questions have been included (which language do you speak at meetings, etc.). In Elektrėnai, a large part of the respondents did not indicate how well they speak the second language of the USSR peoples, so we can only talk about it in a very general way. The Lithuanians knew Russian much better than the Lithuanians of other nationalities in the republic. 95.9% of Lithuanians were fluent or poorly fluent in Russian, and 70% of other nationalities were fluent in Lithuanian. The good second language skills were due to the fact that the absolute majority of the VRE employees living here at the time of the survey were middle and younger age, highly qualified, mostly with secondary and special education, and a considerable number — with higher education (thus, second languages were learned not only at work, in the living environment, but also at school). In addition, most of the non-native inhabitants of Elektrėnai came from other Lithuanian cities and districts. They already had some language skills when they arrived here. Among Lithuanians, a higher percentage read newspapers and books in two languages. Age was the most important factor for language proficiency. Lithuanians and persons of other nationalities with the lowest level of second language skills or no second language skills at all were elderly people. In this case, however, education did not have a noticeable effect on language skills. Even in mono-ethnic families newspapers were read, and in some cases, as the respondents indicated, two languages (Lithuanian-Polish, Lithuanian-Russian) were spoken at home. Among persons of Polish nationality and among some Lithuanians, Lithuanian-Polish-Russian trilingualism is clearly prevailing. The absolute majority of Polish-speaking persons came from 143 iš Trakų ir Peasants of Kaišiadorys district (Polish was very common there before). Vilniaus ir The survey of industrial workers in Kaunas showed that the mother tongue does not always coincide with the nationality of the respondents. The Lithuanian language as their native here stated 97,5 9, Lithuanian, Russian — 94,6 9, Russian, o Polish — 83,3 94 Polish. As we can see, most often mother tongue corresponds to nationality in Lithuanian answers, — least in Polish, where a relatively large (9,8 9) their native language was Russian, significair ntly less Lithuani- (1,6 95)! — an. Be to, 1,1 % Lithuanians indicated Russian as their native language. 0,3 % — Polish language; 3 94 Russians considered Lithuanian to be their mother tongue, 0,7 9% — Polish. Industrial workers of large cities of the republic pay quite well the second The language of the peoples of the USSR. However, mass bilingualism is only among Lithuanians. In terms of the second language, they far outperformed the population of all nationalities. If the Russian language is well moką In Vilnius stated 86,2 95, Kaune — 52,2 9%, Lithuanian, the Lithuanian language was well known respectively only 39,4 9 ir 42,1 %, Russian. The Vilnius Poles in this respect were distinguished by the fact that a jų very large (98 95) indicated good knowledge of Russian, but Lithuanian language iš jų well paid only 40 9%. There are significantly more Lithuanians who speak Russian well In Vilnius, while Russians, well versed in Lithuanian, slightly more It's a shame. Perhaps the greatest impact of the ethnic environment on the population is experiencir ed through the work collectives of ethnically mixed families, because ir the relationship between these phenomena and the second language proficiency is very close. Antai In Kaunas industrial enterprises, where the respondents worked, su with rare exceptions, only Lithuanians, but Russians, ne used Lithuanian at work. ir Meanwhile, in Vilnius factories Russian is used much more frequently. Iš of all Lithuanians surveyed here mostly spoke Lithuanian 47 9%, at work Russian — 5394, Russians — respectively 4,3 %, ir 95,7 94, Poles — 1094 ir 90 9%. For people of all nationalities, mixed marriage is of great importance in the learning of a second language. For example, in Vilnius, the second language is spoken several times more frequently among those who have 2—3 formed mixed families than among those su who are married to persons of their own nationality. In general, both are the most widely used (Lithuanian Russian) in the working ir environment ! of industry. ir (up to 100) percentage amount shows how many į people did not answer the question. 144 languages have strong positions ne only among Lithuaniir an Russians. They are often spoken at home by ir foreigners, as well as by unmarried ir Lithuanian su Russians. ir For example, in Vilnius ir In Kaunas, iš Lithuanian families made up 51,3 94, o only Lithuanian language was used 58,4 9, at home by all surveyed families. Russian families made up 14,1 94, o Russian alone in the family spoke all the 23,8 %, interviewed families. The Polish language, meanwhile, has a much smaller significance. For example, only 58 %, Polish families were spoken only Polish. More detailed investigations were carried out on Vilniaus ir Language of non-manufacturing employees of Kaunas. The data of the questionnaire showed that the attitudes of the intelligentsia in this area are į similar to those of the workers, although they have certain peculiarities. It has been found that the mother tongue of intelligents su coincides with nationality even more often than that of industrial workers. Antai In Vilnius, the language of their nationality was considered native 98,6 9, Lithuanian, 97 9, Russian, 98 9% Polish, in Kaunas — respective99,5 95, 97,6 %, ir 85,8 94. ly Significantly more ir nationality mother tongue discrepancies occur between Vilniaus ir Kaunas ethnic minorities — Belarusians, Ukrainians, Jews ir others. The uneven orientation of people of different nationalities į towards their national language as their mother tongue, apparently, leads to uneven ir proficiency in the second language, uneven t. y. degree of bilingualism of these nationalities. Survey of non-manufacturing employees in Vilnius ir In Kaunas, it was shown that non-Lithuanians speak Lithuanian much worse than Lithuanians speak Russian. Strangely ir enough, in this social group of urban inhabitants, which almost exclusively includes people with be higher secondary education, su there were ir relatively few fluent speakers of the second language. For example, in Vilnius only 34,8 A Lithuanian intelligentsia indicated that they speak Russian fluently, moderately — 26,5 94, in Kaunas, — respectively — 32,1 ir 22,1 944, (the rest indicated Russian language badly ordid not ba answer į the question). Lithuanian language is taught quite differently by different nationalities. In Vilnius fluent in Lithuanian stated 49 94 Polish, 40 94 Jewish, 30 944 Belarusian, 15 9%, Russian, 1,394 Ukrainian, in Kaunas — respectively — 42,8 94, 33,3%, 25,094, 16,8 9; 7.1 95. The smaller proportion of Russian, Belarusian, Ukrainian speakers of Lithuanian in this case could be because among the pedagogical staff, who also participated in the survey, a significant proportion of people į of these nationalities In Lithuania worked temporarily ir many lived in the republic relatively recently. Meanwhile, the Poles were mostly descendants of the native inhabitants of the republic, so ir su in Lithuanian language jų greatly had to meet since childhood. Be therefore, apparently, these indicators are higher among Polish nationality ir cultural education workers than among the same nationality workers kolkhozes ir (plg. 1979 m. census of the republic). The education of non-manufacturing employees ne also always determines the second language proficiency (only for Lithuanians it has a direct influence). A higher percentage of non-Lithuanians fluently speaking Lithuanian was among persons with special su secondary education than those su with higher education. Representatives of all nationalities who have lived in these cities for a long time speak their second language better į than those who have recently moved there. Net Lithuanians from Kaunas, who ir were born and raised here, speak Russian better than those iš from the districts that have recently moved here. Lithuanian cultural workers spoke Russian fluently 55,5 9, ir 46,0 % Lithuanian educational workers, while Lithuanian language in the respective- — ly mentioned 61,3 % ir only 10. 678 145 27,394 professions non-Lithuanian. Here it is important to note that ir the work collectives of cultural workers were more often mixed, and those of teachers more often monoethnic. — Be therefore, non-native educators were more mobile migrants than native cultural workers. tų To a certain extent, language proficiency is determined ir by the nature of the work: a teacher working in a school with Russian or Polish as the language of instruction can do without Lithuanian, a be cultural worker in o the republic cannot do without it. be in Vilnius ir The intelligentsia interviewed in Kaunas had a lower knowledge of the second language than the population of the republic in general. Antai 1979 m. according to the union census, fluently spoke Russian 52,2 %, Lithuanians living in Lithuania, o Lithuanian language — 35,29, Russian, 11,194 Polish, 12,794 Belarusian, 15 „294, Ukrainian, 31,29, Jewish. Higher rates of second language proficiency among residents of the republic mė were determined by urban residents working in productive branches of — the national economy in industry, construction, transport ir t. t. (the work collectives of these branches are often multi-ethnic, while the collectives of non-manufacturing employees are more mono-ethnic). That the Polish intelligentsia, living in Vilnius ir in Kaunas, speak Lithuanian better than the Poles living in the republic in general, apparently mainly due to the fact that a large jų Vilnius, Salcininkai and other eastern districts of the Republic, near Borders of Belarus, where the percentage of Lithuanian nationality is small (so in the home, at work, in public life they ir speak Lithuanian more often). be For ir Lithuanian Poles, school was the most important place to learn a second language, while for all other nationalities, the work — collectives were the most important. The family played a minor role here. These factors had different significance for different generations of people when learning a second language. The older the respondents, the higher the proportion of second jų language learned at work and the lower the proportion in school. ir — The younger generation, on the contrary, mostly learns at school. Children from ethnically mixed families are more likely than monolingual families to be bilingual in various situations and less ir likely to be — native speakers of their parents’ native language. Be unlike their parents, children from mixed families are more likely to behave as bilingual. Although the family in general does not play a significant role in the spread of bilingualism, ethnically mixed families are a more significant factor in the spread of bilingualism. ir jo factor of consumption than school, work collective, mass media. Among non-manufacturing employees, as ir among industrial workers, the most common form of bilingualism is Lithuanian — — Russian bilingualism. Other forms of bilingualism (Lithuanian — Polish, Russian— Polish) among non-manufacturing employees are much less common than among industrial workers. By analyzing the answers of the interviewed persons on the linguistic jų orientation when listening to radio, watching television, reading the press, it was observed that members of mono-ethnic families more often choose information locally. na (native) language, two languag- — es in mixed families. 1982 m. Lietuvos The survey of rural inhabitants of the USSR allows to form a more detailed picture only about persons of Lithuanian nationality, since the data on mixed families processed by the USSR MA Computing Center and submitted to the History Institute of the USSR MA are not yet differentiated according to the nationality of the respondents. Therefore, we provide data only about Lithuanian language preferences of rural inhabitants. The relationship between the native language and nationality of rural Lithuanians is even closer than that of urban residents. In the answers of Lithuanian respondents 146 of almost all professions, these signs coincide, only among unskilled manual workers there is one ir ar du persons of Lithuanian nationality whose mother tongue is not Lithuanian. Since a significant proportion of the respondents belong to ethnically mixed districts, it is to be assumed that the persons in question are descendants of nationally mixed families. Lithuanians living in the countryside are significantly less proficient in the Russian language than urban residents and generally less proficient than all residents of the republic (5% of men and 15.9% of women indicated that they do not speak Russian, and respectively 11 and 25.9%, speak with difficulty, 33 and 34.9%, with difficulty, fairly fluent — 32 and 14.94%, completely fluent — 19.9% and 11.94%). As we can see, men speak Russian much better than women. They learned it better, of course, thanks to their service in the Soviet Army. The worst Russian proficiency is found among those working in unskilled manual work (mostly elderly people), the best — not among agricultural specialists, but among those working in skilled manual work. Even in ethnically mixed districts, the absolute majority of Lithuanians speak Lithuanian at work. However, a small number of them speak Russian, Polish, or two languages – their mother tongue and Polish or Russian. Lithuanian women speak Russian and Polish at work less often than men. In meetings, women speak or would speak (if necessary) in Lithuanian more often (97%) than men (95 94). For Lithuanians living in the countryside, Lithuanian is the most important language of communication. Women are more attached to their mother tongue than men. Thus, during the ethnographic researches, collecting material about the daily life and culture of the urban and rural families of the modern Lithuanian SSR, it was established that in general, Lithuanians are better at Russian than the inhabitants of non-native nationalities — Lithuanian. This is typical for representatives of all social strata. However, in the case of non-native citizens, social affiliation has a different meaning: among industrial workers, Russians speak Lithuanian slightly better than Poles, while among non-manufacturing city employees, Poles speak better than Russians. In all cases, Poles outperform Lithuanians in their proficiency in Russian. An important factor that prevented people of other nationalities from learning Lithuanian better was their increased migration. School and work collectives play a greater role in the acquisition of a second language, and the family plays a lesser role. In the case of mixed ethnicity families, they are mostly bilingual and multilingual. BOITPOCHI /ĮBV 5i351UHS1 B OTHOIPAOUYHECKHUX HMCCJIE//OBAHHSAX ar Pe3iome B npouecce HCCJIejJOBAHHA ĮKYXOBHONH KYJILTYDBI CEJIbCKOTO H TODpOJICKOTO HKHaceJIeHHA pecrry6JIAKH, TIpOBejieHHOTO STHOrpadaMn Mucturyra KocTopunu AH Jintosckoit CCP B 1976—1982 rr., a TaKkKe HAYYHBIMH COTDpYJIHHKAMH HHCTHTYTa STHOrpadux wm. H. H. Muxnyxo-Maxnas AH CCCP coBMeCTHO ¢ JIMTOBCKHMH 3THOrpadamu B 1982 r., BLISBJIEHbI HEKOTOPLIC 3AKOHOMEPHOCTH pacnpocTpaHeHHA ABYA3BIYMAS, 3HAHHS JIATOBCKOIO H PYCCKOrO S3bIKOB NPEACTABHTE/IAME pa3jinhų4HBIX HALIMOHAJIbHOCTEH pecnyOjinKH. 3 grandmothers 2731 anchors. Ha OCHOBe JaHHBIX ONMPOCa YCTAHOBJICHO, 4TO JIMTOBULI PYCCKHH S3BIK B LE/IOM 3HAIOT 3aMETHO JIy4lle, YeM [MpPEACTABHTE/IH HEKOPEHHBIX HALMOHANBHOCTEH —JIATOBCKHĖŪ A3bIK. ITO Ouran 3aKOHOMEPHOCTH UI BCEX COLMAIIbHBIX CJIOCB I'm gonna do it. + 147