DOCSLIB.ORG

Slavic Sociolinguistics in North America

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Slavic Sociolinguistics in North America University of Kentucky UKnowledge Linguistics Faculty Publications Linguistics 2009 Slavic Sociolinguistics in North America: Lineage and Leading Edge Mark Richard Lauersdorf University of Kentucky, [email protected] Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits oy u. Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/lin_facpub Part of the Anthropological Linguistics and Sociolinguistics Commons, and the Slavic Languages and Societies Commons Repository Citation Lauersdorf, Mark Richard, "Slavic Sociolinguistics in North America: Lineage and Leading Edge" (2009). Linguistics Faculty Publications. 32. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/lin_facpub/32 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Linguistics at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Linguistics Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Slavic Sociolinguistics in North America: Lineage and Leading Edge This article is available at UKnowledge: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/lin_facpub/32 Slavic Sociolinguistics in North America: Lineage and Leading Edge* Mark Richard Lauersdorf ! ! ! !"#$%&'$"!#$%&!'()%*+,!-(./%0,&!'!1,2,('+!./,(/%,3!.4!5.()$!67,(%*'2!(,&,'(*$! %2!8+'/%*!&.*%.+%219%&)%*&!4(.7!)$,!:,1%22%21&!.4!)$,!4%,+0!')!)$,!&)'()!.4!)$,! ;<=>&!9-!).!)$,!-(,&,2)!0'?@!#$,!3.(A!.4!5.()$!67,(%*'2!&*$.+'(&!-9:+%&$,0! %2!'!&,+,*)%.2!.4!B.9(2'+&C! &,(%,&C!'20! &-,*%'+! *.++,*)%.2&C!'&! 3,++!'&!%2! 7.2.D 1('-$&!'20!0%&&,()')%.2&C!%&!(,/%,3,0!).!%++9&)('),!)$,!(,&,'(*$!)(,20&!'20!)$,! ./,('++!*./,('1,!.4!+'219'1,&!'20!&.*%.+%219%&)%*!&9:4%,+0&!'&!8+'/%*!&.*%.+%2D 19%&)%*&! 0,/,+.-,0!'20! 7')9(,0!%2!'!5.()$!67,(%*'2!*.2),E)@! #$%&! &)90?!%&! %2),20,0!).!&,(/,!'&!'!$%&).(%*'+!:'*A0(.-!4.(!)$,!2,3!(,&,'(*$!-(,&,2),0!%2! )$%&!/.+97,C!'20!%)!*+.&,&!3%)$!'!:(%,4!./,(/%,3!.4!)$,!&)90%,&!%2!)$%&!*.++,*)%.2! '20!)$,%(!*.2)(%:9)%.2!).!)$,!49()$,(!0,/,+.-7,2)!.4!)$,!4%,+0@! ! 1. Introduction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ournal of Slavic Linguistics 17(1–2): 3–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`'4%-'%/+'46+`"./&'.-&/+"4+_$,*$B+'46+`/<+\@+a'E-!"4,E"N>+b$&",+M@+ `'&"4>+'46+c"E.$&+_@+d"&=-4,E"N+'.+.)/+A4,.".-./+$1+T",*-&,"</+e-#.-&/+"4+`/4"4%&'6+"4+ .)/+89;H,+'46+89GH,+P,//+b&'46",.+;HHGR@+ ! SLAVIC SOCIOLINGUISTICS IN NORTH AMERICA 5 "#$%&'%! ()! *"&+#,! -(,#("#$'.#-/#,-! #$! 0(1/2! 34%1#,&5! )1(4! 62#,2! /2%! "%&7#$'!%7'%!()!,.11%$/!1%-%&1,25!&-!%8%49"#)#%7!#$!/2%!91%-%$/!,(""%,: /#($5!2&-!'1(6$!&$7!7%+%"(9%7;<! 2. Lineage 2.1. Slavic Sociolinguistics in Professional Journals and Series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
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Case of the Czech Language
    E-Leader Berlin 2012 Celebrating EUROMOSAIC vs. language policies: the case of the Czech language Božena Bedna říková Dept. of Czech Studies Faculty of Arts Palacký University Olomouc, Czech Republic and Universita degli Studi di Udine Dipartimento delle Lingue e Letterature Straniere Udine/I, Italy 1. The EU language policy and the European Commission Project EUROMOSAIC The EU has a positive policy towards regional and minority languages which is enshrined in Article 22 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights. It states that “The Union respects cultural, religious and linguistic diversity ”. The European Commision has been providing several projects supporting regional and minority languages, one of them being the NETWORK PROMOTING THE LANGUAGE DIVERSITY. It is a pan-European Network which covers regional, minority, indigenous, cross-border and smaller national languages with the task to promote linguistic diversity in Europe. The main focus is providing information about and easy access to a large network of organisations that can share ideas, information and best practice regarding the promotion of less widely used languages. In 1992, wishing to take stock of the situation of the various language communities in Europe, the Commission initiated a study on minority language groups in the European Union. The purpose of the study, entitled "EUROMOSAIC" (later EROMOSAIC I), was not only to support the regional and minority languages, but also to find out about the different regional and minority languages in existence and to establish their potential for expanding, i. e. for their production and reproduction, and to examine the difficulties, the barriers and the challenges they could encounter in doing so.
    [Show full text]
  • 109. Formation of the Standard Language: Macedonian
    1470 XVIII. Slavische Standardsprachen 109. Formation of the Standard Language: Macedonian 1. The Beginnings of Local Schreibsprachen 2. Attempts at Codifying a Literary Language on a Dialectal Basis 3. Formation of a Macedonian Standard Language as Part of “Nation-Building” 4. Recent Developments since Independence in 1991 5. Codification and Use of Macedonian in the Diaspora 6. Literature (selected) Abstract In the 19 th century a number of churchmen in Macedonia wrote sermons and primers in a form of Slavonic that was close to vernacular speech. These can be seen as the first texts of written Macedonian, although their authors did not intend to create a new literary language. The first document of explicit Macedonian linguistic and political separatism is Rečnik od tri jezika (1875). In his book Za makedonckite raboti Krste P. Misirkov (1874Ϫ1926) advocated a literary language based on the Prilep-Bitola dialect, but the book was never distributed. After the partition of Macedonia (1913) Macedonian literary activity was tolerated in Bulgaria and Yugoslavia as “dialect literature”. There were thriv- ing theatre groups in Skopje and Sofia and Kočo Racin from Veles wrote poetry that has retained its literary value. The communist partisans used the local dialects in their pamphlets in Vardar Macedonia during the Axis occupation and in 1944 they declared that Macedonian would be the official language of the new Macedonian republic. The decisive codificational steps were Koneski’s grammar (1952Ϫ1954) and the ‘academy dictionary’ (1961Ϫ1966). Independence has terminated the Serbian/Macedonian diglos- sia that was characteristic of Vardar Macedonia in the 20 th century. There have been various attempts to codify Macedonian in the diaspora.
    [Show full text]
  • Czech Language Programs and Czech As a Heritage Language in the United States
    Czech Language Programs and Czech as a Heritage Language in the United States Simone J. Hrouda, Portland State University, Oregon Introduction Czech language schools and Czech classes exist across the United States because of the efforts of Czech heritage language speakers to preserve the language spoken by their ancestors. These programs provide heritage speakers with the opportunity to further develop and maintain their Czech oral and written skills. Even though the language and culture are vital to the identity of individuals in states such as Nebraska, Texas, and Wisconsin, the importance of sustaining the language is not recognized on a national level. Czech is not considered a critical foreign language, and limited opportunities are available for language courses and scholarship programs. It is up to Czech heritage societies to keep Czech classes alive. Czech is a less commonly taught language (LCTL) in the United States, and locating Czech classes is difficult. However, these challenges and many others do not hinder Czech speakers from learning the Czech language. Though small, there is a Czech-speaking population made up of heritage, non-heritage, and native speakers who are making efforts to keep the Czech language alive. History of the Czech Language in the United States The largest immigration of Czechs to the United States took place between the years 1848 and 1914, when over 350,000 Czechs fled their homeland and established Czech communities across the United States (Thernstorm, 1981). Over time, language attrition and acculturation have led to loss of the Czech language within these communities (Dutkova-Cope, 2006; Eckert, 1987; Hannan, 2003; Vasek, 1996).
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of the Illyrian Movement on the Croatian Lexicon
    Slavistische Beiträge ∙ Band 223 (eBook - Digi20-Retro) George Thomas The Impact of the Illyrian Movement on the Croatian Lexicon Verlag Otto Sagner München ∙ Berlin ∙ Washington D.C. Digitalisiert im Rahmen der Kooperation mit dem DFG-Projekt „Digi20“ der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek, München. OCR-Bearbeitung und Erstellung des eBooks durch den Verlag Otto Sagner: http://verlag.kubon-sagner.de © bei Verlag Otto Sagner. Eine Verwertung oder Weitergabe der Texte und Abbildungen, insbesondere durch Vervielfältigung, ist ohne vorherige schriftliche Genehmigung des Verlages unzulässig. «Verlag Otto Sagner» ist ein Imprint der Kubon & Sagner GmbH. George Thomas - 9783954792177 Downloaded from PubFactory at 01/10/2019 04:08:27AM via free access 00050383 S lavistische B e it r ä g e BEGRÜNDET VON ALOIS SCHMAUS HERAUSGEGEBEN VON HEINRICH KUNSTMANN PETER REHDER • JOSEF SCHRENK REDAKTION PETER REHDER Band 223 VERLAG OTTO SAGNER MÜNCHEN George Thomas - 9783954792177 Downloaded from PubFactory at 01/10/2019 04:08:27AM via free access 00050383 GEORGE THOMAS THE IMPACT OF THEJLLYRIAN MOVEMENT ON THE CROATIAN LEXICON VERLAG OTTO SAGNER • MÜNCHEN 1988 George Thomas - 9783954792177 Downloaded from PubFactory at 01/10/2019 04:08:27AM via free access ( B*y«ftecne I Staatsbibliothek l Mönchen ISBN 3-87690-392-0 © Verlag Otto Sagner, München 1988 Abteilung der Firma Kubon & Sagner, GeorgeMünchen Thomas - 9783954792177 Downloaded from PubFactory at 01/10/2019 04:08:27AM via free access 00050383 FOR MARGARET George Thomas - 9783954792177 Downloaded from PubFactory at 01/10/2019 04:08:27AM via free access .11 ж ־ י* rs*!! № ri. ur George Thomas - 9783954792177 Downloaded from PubFactory at 01/10/2019 04:08:27AM via free access 00050383 Preface My original intention was to write a book on caiques in Serbo-Croatian.
    [Show full text]
  • MOTHER LANGUAGE DAY 1. What Is Your Mother Language / Native Language / First Language? 2. When Is Slovenian Mother Language
    MOTHER LANGUAGE DAY 1. What is your mother language / native language / first language? 2. When is Slovenian Mother Language Day held? 3. What other kinds of languages do you know? 4. What is lingua franca? 5. How important is your mother language for you? 6. Why is it important to you? 7. Where do you use your mother language? 8. Which is the most commonly spoken foreign language? 9. When do we start learning a language ? 10. What can you express through a language? 11. Why are mother languages important? 12. Why is it important to know as many languages as possible? 13. Do you think it is important for you to know many languages? 14. Do you think that the Slovenian language is going to die out? Why / why not? 15. How many people speak Slovenian in Slovenia? And how many people throughout the world? 16. What other languages are spoken in Slovenia? 17. What kinds of languages are there? International Mother Language Day Friday, February 19, 2010, Special release At the 2002 population census, Slovene was spoken as the mother tongue by 87.8% of people living in Slovenia, while the languages of national minorities – Hungarian and Italian – were spoken by 0.2% of the population, the same as Romany. Multilingualism is a precondition for cultural diversity In 1999, UNESCO proclaimed 21 February the International Mother Language Day in memory of the protest and death of Bengalese students who 47 years before demanded equality for their language. In this way UNESCO wanted to draw attention to the need to preserve cultural and linguistic diversity of individual areas in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Dialect Contact and Convergence in Contemporary Hutsulshchyna By
    Coming Down From the Mountain: Dialect Contact and Convergence in Contemporary Hutsulshchyna By Erin Victoria Coyne A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Slavic Languages and Literatures in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Johanna Nichols, Chair Professor Alan Timberlake Professor Lev Michael Spring 2014 Abstract Coming Down From the Mountain: Dialect Contact and Convergence in Contemporary Hutsulshchyna by Erin Victoria Coyne Doctor of Philosophy in Slavic Languages and Literatures University of California, Berkeley Professor Johanna Nichols, Chair Despite the recent increased interest in Hutsul life and culture, little attention has been paid to the role of dialect in Hutsul identity and cultural revival. The primary focus of the present dissertation is the current state of the Hutsul dialect, both in terms of social perception and the structural changes resulting from the dominance of the standard language in media and education. Currently very little is known about the contemporary grammatical structure of Hutsul. The present dissertation is the first long-term research project designed to define both key elements of synchronic Hutsul grammar, as well as diachronic change, with focus on variation and convergence in an environment of increasing close sustained contact with standard Ukrainian resulting from both a historically-based sense of ethnic identification, as well as modern economic realities facing the once isolated and self-sufficient Hutsuls. In addition, I will examine the sociolinguistic network lines which allow and impede linguistic assimilation, specifically in the situation of a minority population of high cultural valuation facing external linguistic assimilation pressures stemming from socio-political expediency.
    [Show full text]
  • Knjižica Sažetaka
    Knjižica sažetaka Slavofraz 2018. “Frazeologija, učenje i poučavanje” 19. – 21. travnja Filozofski fakultet Sveučilišta u Rijeci 0 Slavofraz 2018. Organizacijski odbor Željka Macan (Rijeka), predsjednica ([email protected]) Sandra Jukić (Rijeka) Mihaela Matešić (Rijeka) Kristian Novak (Rijeka) Marija Turk (Rijeka) Sanja Zubčić (Rijeka) Programski odbor: Marija Turk (Rijeka), predsjednica ([email protected]) Branka Barčot (Zagreb) Dejan Durić (Rijeka) Željka Fink (Zagreb) Mateja Jemec Tomazin (Ljubljana) Vida Jesenšek (Maribor) Erika Kržišnik (Ljubljana) Željka Macan (Rijeka) Valerij Mokienko (Sankt-Peterburg) Heinrich Pfandl (Graz) Katerina Veljanovska (Skoplje) Ivana Vidović Bolt (Zagreb) Karol Visinko (Rijeka) Irena Vodopija Krstanović (Rijeka) Sanja Zubčić (Rijeka) Tajnica Skupa: Sandra Jukić ([email protected]) Idejno i grafičko rješenje: Luka Medak Konferenciju su podržali: Filozofski fakultet u Rijeci, Odsjek za kroatistiku, Riječka kroatistička škola, Turistička zajednica grada Rijeke, „Šta da?“ Kazalo Melita Aleksa Varga, Hrisztalina Hrisztova-Gotthardt Towards a Croatian Paremiological Minimum / Optimum: A Work in Progress 1 Marinela Aleksovski Kako se pretvoriti u uho? 2 Branka Barčot, Tanja Milčić Arijadnina nit u ovladavanju frazemima na nastavi jezika 3 Agnieszka Będkowska-Kopczyk Phraseological units containing the lexical false friend frajer in Slavic languages: a lexico-semantic analysis with a pedagogical application 4 Jasminka Delova-Siljanova Фраземите во наставата: македонско-чешки паралели 5 Wolfgang Eismann Construction
    [Show full text]
  • The Relative Order of Foci and Polarity Complementizers
    1 2 3 4 The Relative Order of Foci and Polarity Complementizers: 5 1 6 A Slavic Perspective 7 8 9 Abstract 10 11 According to Rizzi & Bocci’s (2017) suggested hierarchy of the left 12 periphery, fronted foci (FOC) may never precede polarity 13 14 complementizers (POL); yet languages like Bulgarian and Macedonian, 15 where POL may also follow FOC, seem to provide a counterargument to 16 17 such generalization. On the basis of a cross-linguistic comparison of ten 18 Slavic languages, I argue that in the Slavic subgroup the possibility of 19 20 having a focus precede POL is dependent on the morphological properties 21 of the complementizer itself: in languages where the order FOC < POL 22 23 is acceptable, POL is a complex morpheme derived through the 24 incorporation of a lower functional head with a higher one. The order 25 26 FOC < POL is then derived by giving overt spell-out to the intermediate 27 copy of the polarity complementizer rather than to the highest one. 28 29 30 Keywords : Left Periphery, Fronted Foci, Polarity Questions, 31 Complementizers, Bulgarian, Macedonian, Word Order. 32 33 34 I. Introduction 35 36 37 In this article, I will be concerned with accounting for cross-linguistic variation in the 38 relative distribution of two types of left-peripheral elements. The first are polarity 39 40 complementizers (POL), namely complementizers whose function is that of introducing 41 embedded polarity questions; the second are fronted types of constituents in narrow focus. 42 43 I provide an example of a configuration containing both elements in (1), from Italian; in 44 (1), the polarity complementizer “se” (=if) is marked in bold, whereas the fronted focus -in 45 this case, a PP- is in capitals.
    [Show full text]
  • The Shared Lexicon of Baltic, Slavic and Germanic
    THE SHARED LEXICON OF BALTIC, SLAVIC AND GERMANIC VINCENT F. VAN DER HEIJDEN ******** Thesis for the Master Comparative Indo-European Linguistics under supervision of prof.dr. A.M. Lubotsky Universiteit Leiden, 2018 Table of contents 1. Introduction 2 2. Background topics 3 2.1. Non-lexical similarities between Baltic, Slavic and Germanic 3 2.2. The Prehistory of Balto-Slavic and Germanic 3 2.2.1. Northwestern Indo-European 3 2.2.2. The Origins of Baltic, Slavic and Germanic 4 2.3. Possible substrates in Balto-Slavic and Germanic 6 2.3.1. Hunter-gatherer languages 6 2.3.2. Neolithic languages 7 2.3.3. The Corded Ware culture 7 2.3.4. Temematic 7 2.3.5. Uralic 9 2.4. Recapitulation 9 3. The shared lexicon of Baltic, Slavic and Germanic 11 3.1. Forms that belong to the shared lexicon 11 3.1.1. Baltic-Slavic-Germanic forms 11 3.1.2. Baltic-Germanic forms 19 3.1.3. Slavic-Germanic forms 24 3.2. Forms that do not belong to the shared lexicon 27 3.2.1. Indo-European forms 27 3.2.2. Forms restricted to Europe 32 3.2.3. Possible Germanic borrowings into Baltic and Slavic 40 3.2.4. Uncertain forms and invalid comparisons 42 4. Analysis 48 4.1. Morphology of the forms 49 4.2. Semantics of the forms 49 4.2.1. Natural terms 49 4.2.2. Cultural terms 50 4.3. Origin of the forms 52 5. Conclusion 54 Abbreviations 56 Bibliography 57 1 1.
    [Show full text]
  • (Ruthenian Or Rusyn) Language in Poland Lemkos
    The 17th Meeting of the Baltic Division of the United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names Warszawa, 29 June – 01 July 2015 Maciej Zych Commission on Standardization of Geographical Names Outside the Republic of Poland Romanization rules for the Lemko (Ruthenian or Rusyn) language in Poland Lemkos (Ruthenians or Rusyns) is an ethnic minority which has been recognized in Poland on the basis of the Act of 6th January 2005 on national and ethnic minorities and on the regional languages. The act mentions, in addition to the Lemkos, 9 national minorities: Belorussian, Czech, Lithuanian, German, Armenian, Russian, Slovak, Ukrainian, and Jewish; 3 ethnic minorities – Karait, Roma, and Tartar; as well as one regional language – the Kashubian language. The Act lays down, among others, that traditional names in a minority language for localities, physiographic objects and streets may be used as “additional names” alongside geographic names established in the Polish language. To date (as of 1st June 2015), additional names have been introduced in 1204 localities and parts of them located in 57 communes. There were introduced: 27 Belarusian names, 359 German names, 779 Kashubian names, 9 Lemko names, and 30 Lithuanian names. Additional names in minority languages appear on road signs, they are also used on some maps. Pursuant to the Regulation of the Minister of Administration and Digitization of 14th February 2012 on the national register of geographical names, the Surveyor General of Poland shall maintain the database of the National Register of Geographical Names. In the Register, among others, officially adopted names in minority languages shall be listed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Production of Lexical Tone in Croatian
    The production of lexical tone in Croatian Inauguraldissertation zur Erlangung des Grades eines Doktors der Philosophie im Fachbereich Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaften der Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität zu Frankfurt am Main vorgelegt von Jevgenij Zintchenko Jurlina aus Kiew 2018 (Einreichungsjahr) 2019 (Erscheinungsjahr) 1. Gutacher: Prof. Dr. Henning Reetz 2. Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Sven Grawunder Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 01.11.2018 ABSTRACT Jevgenij Zintchenko Jurlina: The production of lexical tone in Croatian (Under the direction of Prof. Dr. Henning Reetz and Prof. Dr. Sven Grawunder) This dissertation is an investigation of pitch accent, or lexical tone, in standard Croatian. The first chapter presents an in-depth overview of the history of the Croatian language, its relationship to Serbo-Croatian, its dialect groups and pronunciation variants, and general phonology. The second chapter explains the difference between various types of prosodic prominence and describes systems of pitch accent in various languages from different parts of the world: Yucatec Maya, Lithuanian and Limburgian. Following is a detailed account of the history of tone in Serbo-Croatian and Croatian, the specifics of its tonal system, intonational phonology and finally, a review of the most prominent phonetic investigations of tone in that language. The focal point of this dissertation is a production experiment, in which ten native speakers of Croatian from the region of Slavonia were recorded. The material recorded included a diverse selection of monosyllabic, bisyllabic, trisyllabic and quadrisyllabic words, containing all four accents of standard Croatian: short falling, long falling, short rising and long rising. Each target word was spoken in initial, medial and final positions of natural Croatian sentences.
    [Show full text]
  • Ukrainian, Russian, English: Language Use and Attitudes of Students at a Ukraninan University
    Working Papers in Educational Linguistics (WPEL) Volume 25 Number 1 Spring 2010 Article 5 Spring 2010 Ukrainian, Russian, English: Language Use and Attitudes of Students at a Ukraninan University Bridget A. Goodman University of Pennsylvania Nina A. Lyulkun Khmel'nyts'kyi National University Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/wpel Part of the Education Commons, and the Linguistics Commons Recommended Citation Goodman, B. A., & Lyulkun, N. A. (2010). Ukrainian, Russian, English: Language Use and Attitudes of Students at a Ukraninan University. 25 (1), Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/wpel/vol25/iss1/5 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/wpel/vol25/iss1/5 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Ukrainian, Russian, English: Language Use and Attitudes of Students at a Ukraninan University This article is available in Working Papers in Educational Linguistics (WPEL): https://repository.upenn.edu/wpel/ vol25/iss1/5 Ukrainian, Russian, English: Language Use and Attitudes of Students at a Ukrainian University1 Bridget A. Goodman University of Pennsylvania Nina A. Lyulkun Khmel’nyts’kyi National University This article presents results of an exploratory survey conducted at a central- western Ukrainian university of students’ current usage of and attitudes towards Ukrainian, Russian, and English. Before 1989, Soviet language policy positioned Russian over Ukrainian as the language of power and as the sole language of higher education. The effectiveness of national policies in post-Soviet Ukraine aimed at affirmative action for the Ukrainian language has been debatable and constrained by geographical factors of language use and language policy. The po- litical and economic status of English has the potential to impact the position of both Ukrainian and Russian in Ukraine.
    [Show full text]