Septynioliktoji Jono Jablonskio konferencija

The 17th Conference of John Jablonski 351 SEPTEENTH JONO JABLONSKIO CONFERENCE On 9 October 2009, the Lithuanian Language Institute hosted the 17th conference of Jon Jablonskis “Language Variability and Linguistic Attitudes”. Eighteen papers were presented at the conference organized by the Lithuanian Language Institute and the Department of Lithuanian Language of Vilnius University. As in the previous years, considerable attention was paid to sociolinguistics issues, the latest results of research in this field of language science were presented and discussed. We are glad that there were also guests from abroad – four Latvian Scientists. The first part of the conference presented a joint Lithuanian-Latvian project “Baltic Sociolinguistics (BalSoc): Linguistic Self-Awareness of the Society in Lithuania and Latvia” (led by Loreta Vaicekauskienė), in which the attitudes of Lithuanian and Latvian journalists to public language, language quality and language policy were investigated using the method of detailed interviews. After analysing the attitude of Latvian media representatives to the competitive relations of languages and the selection of vocabulary in the language, it became clear that in many cases the theoretical beliefs of journalists are reflected in their speaking practice (Ina Druvietė, Language attitudes of television and radio journalists: theory and practice). It was also investigated how much the attitude to normative language depends on the respondents’ profession and individual characteristics. It is likely that most journalists are inclined to the moderate creator personality type, which can be attributed to such characteristics as language expressiveness, visuality and individuality, as opposed to the “constructor” type characterized by language standardization, regularity and uniformity. There is a tendency to believe that the professionalism of media representatives does not influence linguistic attitudes, unlike the nature of journalists’ work, the audience and type of programme (Loreta Vaicekauskienė, „Kūrėjai“ and „konstruktoriai“: asmenybės tipo įtaka lingvistinėms nuostatoms). The variability of speech is determined by the circumstances of communication and the communicational goals – in practice, public and private use of language are usually distinguished and applied to the addressee. In public, most people try to speak 352 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 82 more regularly, smoothly and aesthetically, privately communicating, language users allow themselves more – they speak more freely and harshly (Jurgita Girčienė, Journalists about the influence of the area of use and the addressee on language use). The opinion of respondents about possible threats to the Lithuanian language varies: some believe that there are no threats, others – that in the long term the Lithuanian language may turn into a mixture of languages, but no clear correlation between respondents’ support or disapproval of language supervision and the perceived threats to the language was observed (Laima Nevinskaitė, Threats to language and the need to regulate it: the view of journalists). Latvian research shows that the prestige of the common language in society is higher than that of the spoken language, which is considered to be a variant of language outside the common language. It has been observed that the distribution of the dialectal language code is marked territorially, and the stratification of social strata becomes evident when studying the peculiarities of slang usage (Linda Lauzė, Latvian language variants functions and usage spheres: the opinion of radio and television journalists). In general, the concept of prestigious language tends to be associated with the upper class and it is assumed that, for example, there is no prestigious Lithuanian language because there is no upper class, or that a common, normative language is considered prestigious. Public speakers – actors, politicians, TV hosts – are considered standards of language, but there are also opinions that language, as an expression of individuality, cannot be copied. Respondents also pointed to the tendency to imitate examples of poor language in public usage (Rasuolė Vladarskienė, Attitude of journalists to prestigious language and language standards). The second meeting focused on the 2007–2009 project “Language Use and National Identity in Lithuanian Cities” (Miestai ir kalba, headed by Meilutė Ramonienė). Its aim is to investigate the relationship between the languages spoken in large Lithuanian cities and national identity and to foresee the perspectives of preserving the national identity related to language. The data of the survey revealed that in the work environment most often communicate in Lithuanian. Interestingly, Poles usually choose Lithuanian or Russian, while Russians prefer Russian. The prevalence of English in the work environment is related to age, education and financial situation (Meilutė Ramonienė, Languages used at work in Vilnius, Kaunas and Klaipėda). In the Lithuanian Polish community, Russian is considered the most common language, Lithuanian – the most necessary, Polish – the most beautiful (as for other language communities their mother tongue), education is increasingly pursued in the state language Lithuanian. The influence of English in this linguistic community is not significant, English borrowings are used less than in the Polish common language (Kinga Geben, Vilnius Polish self-awareness and multilingualism). 353 It has been noted that the national identity of the younger inhabitants of Vilnius and Klaipeda is weaker than that of the older ones, young Lithuanians are more inclined to consider themselves European citizens and less often world citizens. The need to learn English became evident – a large part of respondents would like their children to study in bilingual Lithuanian-English schools, the latter language is generally considered the most prestigious. But learning foreign languages is still not popular, little is learned of other European Union languages (Laima Kalėdienė, Sociolinguistic portraits of Lithuanian city dwellers). Attention was also drawn to the fact that, with the changing geopolitical situation in both Lithuania and other countries, the concept of mother tongue in general should be refined, taking into account the contemporary situation of multilingualism (Ala Lichačiova, The concept of mother tongue as an object of research and reflection). In addition to the above-mentioned projects, the conference also addressed other topics of sociolinguistics. The guests of the conference presented the system of assessment of language competences in Latvia and related problems (Resija Zauere, Sociolinguistic possibilities of studying language skills), discussed correlations of addressing forms used in general educational institutions in Latvia and sociolinguistic factors (Anda Blūmane, Sociolinguistic analysis of addressing usage: correlation laws in general educational institutions in Latvia). A study of the evaluation of dialectal speech according to the methodology of perceptual dialectology was also presented, which showed that the evaluation of the correctness of the dialectal code is determined by the similarity to the code of the common language, therefore the Altai schnektos are considered more correct than the Žemaičių (Daiva Aliūkaitė, Erika Merkytė, The concept of correctness and dialectal codes: a study of the provisions). Attention was drawn to the differences in language awareness and language attitudes of hearing impaired and hearing people, which are determined by different language environments and different language experiences (Benita Sušinskaitė, Language attitudes of hearing and hearing impaired community members). Perhaps a little further away from the epicenter of the questions raised at the conference, we tried to discuss the face of the city of Kaunas emerging from the names of companies and other public records, which according to the speakers is acquiring more and more features of a domestic style (Lina Bačiūnaitė-Lužinienė, Ramunė Juodeikytė, Kaunas service companies names analysis). The expressions of the domestic style in public speech were discussed more. Professor Regina Koženiauskienė (The purpose of jargon vocabulary in the public discourse of the journalist) examined the hidden reasons for the use of the unprestige register in the political comments of the journalist Rimvydas Valatka. 354 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 82 creates multivocation in the phrases, which helps to more accurately describe the polemizing parties. In general, from the perspective of the processes of jargonization and conversationalization taking place in other European linguistic communities, jargons and expressive phrases or other elements of colloquial language are increasingly used in political discourse during political campaigns in order to attract the attention of voters, and in some cases to show political attitudes (Giedrius Tamaševičius, Why do ministers sometimes speak in youth jargon?). The conference was beautifully concluded by Rita Miliūnaitė (Internet commentators on feminine surnames), who presented the methodology of researching internet comments and drawing attention to the fact that they do not predominate factual (linguistic), but emotional and pragmatic, as well as value and socio-psychological argumentation. It is true that the course of the debate on non-prepositional female surnames, which is discussed in her report, has revealed a lack of dialogue between language norm-setters and users. The conference theses, prepared by the Language Culture Department of the Lithuanian Language Institute, are published on the website of the Lithuanian Language Institute*.1 Received 21 December 2009 SKAISTĖ ALEKSANDRAVIČIŪTĖ Institute of Lithuanian Language P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius, Lithuania [email protected] * See http://www.lki.lt/LKI_LT/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=469:jonojablonskio-konferencija1&catid=1:naujienos&Itemid=2