Tatar Language Tendencies of Conservation and Development in Polyethnic Society

Home , Tatar language

Periódico do Núcleo de Estudos e Pesquisas sobre Gênero e Direito Centro de Ciências Jurídicas - Universidade Federal da Paraíba V. 8 - Nº 07 - Ano 2019 – Special Edition ISSN | 2179-7137 | http://periodicos.ufpb.br/ojs2/index.php/ged/index

81 TATAR LANGUAGE: TENDENCIES OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT IN POLYETHNIC SOCIETY (CASE STUDY OF RUSSIA AND KAZAKHSTAN) Dinara S. Sultan 1 Tatiana G. Bochina 2 Atirkul Ye. Agmanova 3 Yevgeniya A. Zhuravleva 4

Abstract: Conservation and identification, related issues of development of minority languages in conservation and using the native countries unique in the ethno-linguistic language and culture by representatives aspect, such as Russia and Kazakhstan, of various ethnic groups living in Russia are highly relevant. Wide linguistic and Kazakhstan, as well as the specifics diversity, on the one hand, and of their interaction and mutual influence dominance of the official Russian in under new geopolitical conditions as the Russia and the official Kazakh and object of the study. Russian languages in the socio- Keywords: ethnos, minority language, communicative system of society in language consciousness, conservation, Kazakhstan, on the other hand, Tatar language, multicultural society, determine the linguistic landscape and Russia, Kazakhstan peculiarities of multilingualism in these states. Research interest in linguistic Introduction contacts of a modern multiethnic society Development of a rational and has determined the choice of the appropriate language policy in a modern processes of linguistic and ethnic multicultural and multilingual

1 Kazan Federal University 2 Kazan Federal University 3 Pavlodar State Pedagogical University, Pavlodar, Kazakhstan

THE ARTISTIC EMBODIMENT OF THE IMAGE OF ENGLAND IN THE.docx 4 L.N.Gumilyov Eurasian National University, Nur-Sultan, Kazakhstan. e-mail: [email protected] , 89869028793

82 societyturns out to be a challenge. One of According to Federal State the main conditions for a successful Statistics Service of the Russian language policy is in-depth Federation, the total population of Russia consideration of two opposing trends: on as of January 1, 2019, is 146,781,095 the one hand, maintaining the official people [1]. As of the 2010 National language, and on the other hand, Census, the number of Tatars is supporting and developing others, 5,310,649 people that is 3.72% of the including languages ofminorities. Russian population. Kazakhstan and Russia are The Republic of Tatarstan is historically multiethnic, multilingual and one of the most multinational regions of multicultural states.The uniqueness of Russia. Its inhabitants are mainly Tatars their ethno-lingual environment is based (over 2 million or 53.2% of the total onwide linguistic diversity: dominance population of the Republic) followed by of the official Kazakh and Russian Russians (over 1.5 million or 39.7%) and languages in the social and Chuvashes (116.2 thousand or 3.1%) [2]. communicative system of Kazakh As of January 1, 2019, the society; dominance of the Russian population of Kazakhstan is 18,395,567 language on the territory of the Russian people, including the following ethnic Federation. groups: Kazakhs who make up the All aforementioned makes quite majority of the population - 12,505,251 obvious the relevance of the case study (67.98%), Russians – 3,553,232 of minority languages interaction in (19.32%), Uzbeks (3. 21%), Ukrainians multicultural societies (Kazakhstan and (1.47%), Uighurs (1.475), Tatars – Russia); identifying factors of language 201,492 (1.10%), etc. [3,13, 14]. conservation and features of functioning, According to the 2009 Census, as well as co-functioning with the 104.2 thousand Tatars (51.1%) indicated dominant languages (Kazakh and Tatar as their mother tongue, about 100 Russian) in social and communicative thousand (48.9%) mentioned other environment of these countries; languages [4,11,12]. These data correlate linguistic and ethnic identification in a with the results of two large-scale studies polyethnic language landscape. conducted under the supervision of Prof.

83 E.D. Suleymenova (INTAS project association experiment and interviewing "New language identity in transforming of various ethnic groups societies: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, representatives). The article presents the Tajikistan and Uzbekistan" (2005) and results of the survey conducted among the project of the Committee on Tatar respondents in the Russian Language Development and Socio- Federation (100 people; Moscow, Political Work of the Ministry of Culture Kazan, Nizhny Novgorod region, etc., and Sport of the Republic of Kazakhstan 2017-2018) and in Kazakhstan (100 “Ethno-Linguistic Landscape in the people; Astana, Almaty, Semey, Republic of Kazakhstan: the Present and Pavlodar, etc., 2016-2017). the Future” (2009)). As follows from the 200 people took part in the projects, comparison of the data obtained survey. Mathematical data processing within a five-year interval (2005 and was performed by SPSS Statistics 2009) demonstrate a correlation between program. the ethnic and linguistic identity of the The survey is aimed at studying Tatar respondents: an ethnic language – the processes of ethnic and linguistic 70% → 40%; the Kazakh language – identification, specific national features 13% → 40%; the Russian language – 9% of the world perception, interaction of → 0%; the ethnic language + Russian – minority languages with Kazakh, 1% → 20%; other languages – 5% → Russian and other languages, 0%. The revealed relation of linguistic engagement and mutual influence of the identity and linguistic competence also language consciousness of ethnic groups indicates the presence of a language shift in a multicultural and multilingual [5, p. 284]. Researchers from Kazan Russian and Kazakh societies. Federal University investigated the language situation in Tatar diasporas of Results and discussion different countries [6-10]. The following statements were used to evaluate passive language skills: Methods b) I understand speech but I cannot The study is based on communicate , c) I understand speech experimental setup (a survey, an and I can produce some basic phrases .

84 The statements to measure the level of option a) I do not have a command of the active proficiency were as follows : d) I language. understand speech, speak and read The obtained results on the fluently but I cannot write; e) I level of language competence of Tatar understand, speak, read and write respondents from Russia and fluently . It was possible to indicate the Kazakhstan are shown in Table 1. ignorance of the language through an

Table 1 −Language competence of respondents-Tatars (%)

Respondents – Respondents – Kazakhstan Levels of proficiency Russian Federation citizens citizens Tat R Tat Ka R ar language ussian ar language zakh ussian language language language I do not have a 12, – – 6 – command of the language 0 Can understand 14, 23, speech but cannot 2,0 – – 0 0 communicate Can understand 13, 1, 25, 33, 1 speech and can produce basic 0 3 0 0 ,0 phrases Can understand 16, 3, 24, 14, 3 speech; speak and read 0 7 0 0 ,0 fluently; cannot write Can understand 69, 9 25, 24, 9 speech; speak, read and write 0 3,0 0 0 6,0 fluently

In general, command of the phrases”): in Russia 99% respondents Tatar language among Tatar respondents have different levels of proficiency in the living in Russia is quite good: the index ethnic language and 96% are fluent in of active proficiency in the ethnic Russian; in Kazakhstan 74% language is 85%; 69% are fluent respondents are proficient in Tatar, 71% speakers. Moreover, the “zero” level respondents have different levels of (ignorance) of the ethnic language proficiency in the official Kazakh among the Tatars from Russia was not language, 93% are fluent in Russian. revealed. Tatar respondents from Distribution of the Tatar Kazakhstan have demonstrated lower language in public communication can results: active command of the ethnic be characterized by identifying the language is 49%; the level of fluency is qualitative level of social functions. 25%. 39% respondents indicated passive Findings on the use of Tatar, Russian and language skills. Ignorance of the ethnic Kazakh languages in various fields of language was also noted (12%). activity by respondents-Tatars living in The findings of the study Russia and Kazakhstan indicate emerge dominance of bilingual Tatars dominance of the Russian language in (as in the case with the threshold index “I almost all spheres of their life (Table 2). can understand speech and produce basic

Table 2 – The use of Tatar, Russian and Kazakh languages in various communication areas by respondents-Tatars (%)

Respondents – Russian Federation citizens Languages At work (for In the In the Mass academic purposes) family street media Tatar 28% 41% 11% 20% language Russian 72% 44% 96% 87% language

86 Respondents – Kazakhstan citizens Tatar 5% 34% 2% 17% language Russian 89% 87% 93% 86% language Kazakh 42,0 15,0 40,0 27,0 language

According to the results of the and at transport - 40%; mass media - survey, 25% Tatars from Russia use the 27%; in the family - 15%. language of their ethnic group in all Therefore, family relations are a communicative situations while Russian sphere where Tatar as a minority is used by 75% respondents. Tatar language is preserved to the utmost in language is used at work (for academic multicultural societies of Russia and purposes) by 28% although the majority Kazakhstan. of respondents study at academic In this regard, the results of the institutions with Tatar as a language of free association experiment on the family instruction. Russian is also dominant hearth stimulus conducted among Tatars when choosing the language for of Kazakhstan and Russia, divided into information sourcing (cf.: 87% - three age groups, are of great interest. Russian, 20% - Tatar). The concept of family hearth is one of Values of the active use the key culture concepts, a pillar of the (always, often ) of the Tatar language by national identity. The most important respondents from Kazakhstan are notions of the material and spiritual presented in descending order: in the world of the ethnos are concentrated in family - 34%, mass media - 17%; at vocabulary representing this concept. work, for academic purposes - 5.0%, in The conducted association the street and at transport – 2.0%. experiment highlights six significant Domains of active use of the official characteristics of the word-stimulus language are the following: at work (for family hearth : 1. housing; 2. fire; 3. academic purposes) - 42%; in the street

87 family relationships; 4. home; 5. sense of responsibility towards the homeland; 6. mode of life. family in the series of their associations. Let us consider the responses to Family hearth implies that the family hearth stimulus given by an responsibilities are already assigned to ethno-cultural group of Tatars from each member of the social group. The Kazakhstan. The associations are answers also show generic relations divided into groups of common, (parents, father, mother, wife, children) significant associations for all three age since the family hearth is, first of all, a groups and specific ones that have generic bond that is held together with occurred due to various cultural and common blood and a common surname social reasons (Table 3). (in this case, the Sitdinovs ). The lexeme Family hearth is associated dastarkhan (from Kazakh meals, treat ) is primarily with family, home, parents and of particular importance. It characterizes comfort. In addition, respondents from the attitude towards the state the the second age group demonstrate a respondent lives in.

Table 3 − Associations of Tatar respondents living in Kazakhstan on the word stimulus family hearth

1st age group 2nd age group 3rd age group family (7), home comfort (5), family (6), (5), comfort (5), mother family (4), mother (3), comfort (4), love (2), (3), abi ( grandmother in home (3), warmth (2), wife mother, children, home, Tatar ) (2), parents (2), (2), children (2), love, the table, welfare, roof over warmth (2), fireplace, fire, Sitdinovs, parents, circle, the warm corner, food, happy family, babay kept by a woman, joy, happiness, wife, (grandfather in Tatar ), fireplace, responsibilities, togetherness, corner, Homeland, father. evenness. mutual understanding, dastarkhan ( meals and treats in Kazakh ).

88 The observed association of Tatar), babay (grandfather in Tatar). homeland can be connected with both the They further emphasize ethnic identity new homeland (Kazakhstan) and the and the desire for preserving the native historical homeland (Tatarstan) by a language. It is important to note that complex system of relations, which leads native speakers of the Tatar language in to the conceptualization of concepts. Kazakhstan today are mostly the older Homeland for the respondent begins generation. Representatives of the first with a family hearth, kinship and and second age groups practically do not comfort. Proximity to the historical have a command of Tatar. The answers homeland and to the native language is of the Tatar respondents, citizens of the also manifested through associations in Russian Federation are different (Table the Tatar language, although they are of 4). a single character: abi (grandmother in

Table 4 − Associations of Tatar respondents living in Russia on the word stimulus family hearth

1st age group 2nd age group 3rd age group Abi Abi ( grandmother Warmth (4), (grandmother in Tatar ) in Tatar ) (14), family (6), respect (3), mutual (11), home comfort (6), warmth (5), support (2), understanding (3), stove loyalty (4), warmth (4), comfort (2), happiness (2), (3), care (2), comfort (2), nearest and dearest (3), fidelity, mutual parents, kinship, home, coziness (3), children (2), understanding; it unites the love, children, a large happiness (2), fireplace, family; harmony. family. parents, love, mother, sadness, marriage, tea, get-togethers around the fireplace.

89 In general, responses to the as the capacity of the near peripheral word-stimulus are represented by the zones. same categories as the responses of Kazakhstan respondents. Particularly, Summary they are family relationships and home Indexes of language atmosphere. As a matter of interest, the competence on active and passive reaction mother was not presented, but language skills were identified based on its Tatar equivalent abi had a high a comparative analysis of experimental frequency. Particularly significant findings on the level of proficiency in associations are mutual understanding, Kazakh, Russian and ethnic languages love, family unity, a large family, etc. – among the Tatars living in Kazakhstan notably, the values that characterize the and Russia. First of all, the high level of traditions and mentality of the ethnic Russian language competence and group. We also observe a specific dominance of the Russian language in response fire which waspresented not as almost all areas of activity of Tatars the flame but indirectly - the stove, the should be noted: the level of fluency in fireplace, get-togethers around the Russian among Tatar respondents from fireplace . This appears to witness the Russia is 96%, from Kazakhstan - 93%. state of comfort. 38% of the interviewed Tatars in The study showed that the Kazakhstan indicated an active stereotypical nature of the analyzed command of the official Kazakh stimulus word family hearth in language. Kazakhstan is more vividly expressed The level of proficiency in the than in Russia. Our conclusions are ethnic language by respondents from based on the number of core signs of the Russia - citizens of the Republic of concepts, their brightness index as well Tatarstan is higher than among respondents from Kazakhstan, which can be adequately explained. The index of active command of the Tatar language among Tatar respondents from Russia is 85%, including 69% fluent speakers. The

90 corresponding index among Tatar the use of vocabulary that presents respondents from Kazakhstan is 49%, special basic concepts of Kazakh culture. with only 25% of the fluent speakers. Changes in the language Functional capabilities of the consciousness of the Tatar respondents ethnic language are demonstrated by the in Russia are also associated with the data on its use in significant areas of influence of macro-ethnos (Russians) on communication. Despite the relatively the minority (Tatars), since the high level of ethnic linguistic respondents scarcely used associations competence of Tatar respondents from typical for Tatar culture. Their reactions Russia, the Tatar language is most included categories similar in meaning to frequently used in the family (41%). The the ones of Russian language results of the survey of Tatars from consciousness. Few reactions of the Kazakhstan indicate that the sphere of bilingual worldview from the most frequent use of the Tatar representatives of the Tatar nationality language is also the family (34%). living in Russia were associations of the The findings on command and genetic and mental level: abi, babay . use of the official Kazakh language These changes are reflected only in the demonstrate an increase in the Kazakh peripheral zones of the concept structure, language competence of Tatar the core components remain intact. respondents (in the street, at transport - 40%; at work, for academic purposes - Conclusions 42%; mass media - 27%). The study findingsconfirm that, As shown by the results of the despite the emerging trends of the survey, conceptualization and language shift, the respondents stereotyping of concepts are influenced demonstrate a desire fordefining their by historical and cultural characteristics own ethnicity and the role of the native of ethnic groups. Macro-ethnos language as the most important symbol (Kazakhs) has significant influence on of an ethnos. The state provides all- the content of the concept sphere of round support for it. Kazakhstan citizens. It is manifested in The study of the processes of ethnic and language identification in the

91 context of the new language policy is http://stat.gov.kz/getImg?id=ESTAT306 highly relevant, since it provides an 055 opportunity to identify a range of problematic issues caused both by National Census of the Republic of previous periods in the country's history Kazakhstan as of 2009. Summary. – and by the socio-political and economic Astana, 2010. – 110 p. challenges of our time. The solution of Suleymenova E.D. these problems is crucial for sustainable Macrosociolinguistics. – Almaty: development of countries, further Kazakh University, 2011. – 404 p. implementation of peaceful coexistence of minorities living in Russia and Kasemu Sh., Yusupova A. Sh., Kazakhstan, conservation and Denmukhametova E.N., Mugtasimova development of their languages. G.R. Traditions of compiling bilingual dictionaries for turkic Acknowledgements peoples//Amazonia investiga.– 2018. – The work is performed Vol.7, Is.13. – P.156-161. according to the Russian Government Program of Competitive Growth of Nabiullina G.A., Yusupova A.Sh. On the Kazan Federal University. Linguistic Situation of the Tatar Diaspora in the USA //Mediterranean BIbliography Journal of Social Sciences MCSER Estimated population as of January 01, Publishing, Rome-Italy. –2015. – Vol. 6. 2019 and on average in 2018 // – No 5.-Рр . 298-302. http://www.statdata.ru/ Official Tatarstan // Nabiullina G.A., YusupovaA.Sh. Tatar- http://tatarstan.ru/about/population.htm Chinese language interactions (based on Chinese loanwords in the speech of the Population of the Republic of Tatar diaspora living in modern China) Kazakhstan by ethnic groups as of the //Journal of Language and Literature. – beginning of 2019 // 2014. – № 5(3). – Рр . 241-245.

92 Yuisufuva Z., YusupovaA.Sh., Fauskanger, J., & Bjuland, R. (2018). Mugtasimova G.R., Hong Z. The role of Deep Learning as Constructed in language in cultural transmission Mathematics Teachers’ Written between the generations of the Tatars Discourses. International Electronic living in China // Astra Salvensis. – Journal of Mathematics Education, 2017. – № 10, – Рр . 109-115. 13(3), 149-160. https://doi.org/10.12973/iejme/2705 Yusupova A.Sh., Denmukhametova I.N., Nabiullina G.A. Features of the Taubaye, Z., Rivers, W., Mussabekova, U., & Alimbayeva, A. (2018). Peculiarities and language of tatars living in problems of eponyms (on the material of China//Middle East Journal of Scientific Kazakhstani periodicals). Opción, 34(85-2), Research. – 2013. – Vol.17, Is. 2. – 221-236 Pр.168-172.

Rasooli, M., & Abedini, M. (2017). The Relationship between Organizational Support and Job Satisfaction of Experts and Managers of Islamic Azad University of Qeshm and Subsidiaries (International Units, Medical, Sama, Hormuz and Khamir). Dutch Journal of Finance and Management, 1(2), 42. https://doi.org/10.29333/djfm/5818 Sebaa, A., Chikh, F., Nouicer, A., & Tari, A. (2017). Research in Big Data Warehousing using Hadoop. Journal of Information Systems Engineering & Management, 2(2), 10. https://doi.org/10.20897/jisem.201710