I still don't think that the logic of the anti-Russian language commentators adds up here. According to your way of viewing thing, French should not be an equal language in Canada. The French Canadians should adapt to the majority language. France for the record has some gruesome acts on its conscience from its' days as a colonial power in Africa and East Asia.
their bilingualism is a historical fact, history is made by the people and if people decide there should only be one official language in Ukraine, so will it be, and they already did decide once, i'm not aware of a law which summons to re-evaluate this decision every some yearsOriginally Posted by Hanna
again, there're legal procedures which allow such re-evaluation, their legality isn't conditioned by anyone's personal view on the subject, and if legally the re-evaluation succeeds i will respect that, i will only note that in modern day Ukraine legality of many decisions, processes and political initiatives is questionable
bilingualism in Ukraine is by far not a topical issue, it's only topical for the Party Of Regions on the eve of elections, a bone for their disillusioned voters
if French committed those crimes against the people of Canada (not talking about indigenous population), maybe their language doesn't deserve to have the official status IN Canada
You contradict yourself. The fact that this language issue resurfaces regularly and is important enough to the voters to be a proverbial carrot during elections proves that it is a "topical issue". After all you spent quite a lot of time arguing about it here, so it does matter.
I believe any arguments about "preserving" or "defending" Ukrainian language against Russian (as the main reason against Russian as a second official language) have no real weight. Those who speak Ukrainian will continue doing so either way, and with no forceful Ukrainisation Russian speakers won't feel the need to "defend" their right to speak Russian, and maybe will use Ukrainian more often. For now language wars cause tension, they certainly do not consolidate the nation and serve no real purpose except petty vengeance.
Erm... I lost you here. So their bilingualism is a historical fact, and bilingualism in Ukraine is not, even if it exists and formed historically over time? It looks like you are bending facts and arguments to fit your purpose.their bilingualism is a historical fact, history is made by the people
please be honest, there's no such animal as language wars in the daily routine of Ukraine, they only reappear every elections round and are confined by the walls of the Parliament and maybe some web forums
when people aren't comfortable with something they protest, nothing prevents Russian speaking population of Ukraine from starting grassroots campaign for Russian language just like they did in Latvia, the constitution and legislation which guarantee the right of the people to initiate a referendum is there
i affirmed that quite a few times and i'll do it one last time, i'm not against the official status of Russian as long as it's decided upon by the lawful means, again Latvia is a perfect example, on the other hand i have my personal opinion and i don't think anyone needs to or should try to dissuade me from it
gRomoZeka please respond to this lowly request of mine
I believe I'm treated as a second grade citizen every time I have no choice about what language to use, filling forms (almost all of them are Ukrainian only) or going to movies (no choice whatsoever, to watch a movie dubbed to Russian I have to go to Russia, it's nonsense, considering at least 15 millions of native Russian speakers in Ukraine). When Russian-speaking schools are turned into Ukrainian forcefully in purely Russian-speaking regions against wishes of teachers, parents and kids - usually without any way to oppose this decision since Russian officially has no more rights in situations like this than any other foreign language (and it concerns me personally because it affects my family, particularly two different schools attended by my niece and cousin).gRomoZeka please respond to this lowly request of mine
When a person I talked to two days ago says something like: "I hope Russians will leave Crimea soon, and real Ukrainians will move in", implying that people who leave there are not "real" to this state or have no right to be there despite the fact that they have been living there for generations and real Ukrainians did not. It was just a personal point of view, but the real problem is that this ridiculous differentiation is widespread and is made purely on language basis, since "haters" have a wonderful and unbeatable argument: "We live in Ukraine, the official language of Ukraine is Ukrainian, ergo Russian-speaking citizens have no right to complain, they are essentially outlaws".
I'm for bilingualism with both languages equally respected and supported by the state, with people always having a choice between two languages anywhere, in any setting. Right now the state looks another way in regards to Russian (i.e. "allows" people to use it when it can't be avoided or forbidden or controlled anyway), and insists it does us a great favor by doing so. I don't need this kind of unreliable favors, I want this right being supported officially and irrefutably by law. Though I doubt it ever happens.
don't you know Ukrainian? if so why?
why do i not feel this way? my mother tongue is Russian
did you read the Constitution? did you vote for it?
I'm essentially fluent in Ukrainian, but it's not my native language and never will be. At the same time I'm a citizen of Ukraine for as long as it exists, and I feel that I should have a right to use the language that is "native" to me and to this part of the country freely and officially. Especially since it's just legislation of something that already exists, and will require minimum effort from the state.
How could I know? Some people are ambivalent about this, and others are quite passionate (pro or contra). It depends on you personal views, your heritage, your family traditions and place of your residence.
You might feel ok with the current situation, but I'm bothered by it, and have been for a long time.
Nope. It was adopted and ratified by the Parliament in 1996 (with only 15 votes over minimum required). There was no referendum, afaik. How was I supposed to vote for it? =/
Now you got me intrigued. Why not?
Maybe "ever" was too strong of a word, but I have my doubts. )
Ukrainian politics is extremely divided, corrupted and slow-working. Even reforms that are potentially supported by 90% of population could be awaited for decades. Referendum results are easily ignored (that's already happened in 2000).
So amendments on such a controversial issue as the second official language will require a lot of work and a certain stubbornness, and I don't see anyone in our government willing to put an effort. The Party of Regions (which is relatively pro-Russian) promised something like it, but their position is precarious, and I doubt they'll take the risk. And those who'll come after them might well be from another political "camp". And so it goes...
All in all, it is something our politicians would like to postpone for as long as possible, if it suits their interests.
Sorry, what crimes did Russians commit in Ukraine? Maybe when Ukraine was part of the Russian Empire they treated it like subordinate, I don't know. But in the 20th century the Soviet Union actually reunited Ukrainian people - Eastern Galicia and Volhynia with its mostly Ukrainian population were taken from Poland and given to Ukraine (1939). Later Soviets gave Ukraine luxurious gift - the Crimea, a peninsula on the northern coast of the Black Sea and a part of Russia back then (1954). It is clear that Russians helped Ukraine to expand its territory and escape Polish and German (who were not so keen on preserving Ukrainian culture, religion and language) dominance. Thanks to these developments Ukraine emerged eventually as an independent state with one of the biggest areas in Europe. Russians lived in its eastern regions for centuries, and the Crimea was given to Ukraine with its mostly Russian population. How could it be that Russians in Ukraine do not deserve official recognition of their mother tongue after all that?
none if you discount the operations against population in Western Ukraine, they did commit them in the Baltic states though
either way i was answering a statement about Canada in particular
Based on this logic the decendants of Western Ukrainians should be stripped of all rights because their ancestors helped the Nazis to clear their region from Jews and Poles. Why the alleged crimes against Western Ukarinians and the Balts are more important than the crimes against Jews, Poles and Russians? I also note that there is nothing the history has recorded about anything happening to Western Ukrainians and Balts comparable to what they did to Jews and Poles in Western Ukraine, what the Latvian SS did to Belorussians in Belorussia and the locals to the Jews in the Baltics.
You see, if you want to draw the exact parallel, you should say that French Canadians should ban English from being a second official language.
The thing is that French Canadians arrived earlier than English settlers and, subsequently, French settlements should probably be considered Canadian and that way English actually conquered/occupied Canada. So, at the time of Confederation (=i.e. when Canada became a country) there were actually only two provinces which were interested: Quebec (mostly French speaking) and Ontario (mostly English speaking). The financial capital of Quebec was Montreal, but that city had the biggest English-speaking population in Quebec (think Riga). The official bilingualism united people in Canada, made it one country, so to speak. Allowed people to get past the wars of their ancestors.
The similar situation happened in some of the other countries with the official bilingualism. Another good example - South Africa. The Afrikaans and English were (and still are) the two official languages. That helped to unite the nation too.
I just fail to see why to re-invent the wheel and take the risk of unnecessary tension rather than using a peaceful solution that worked in the past and still works perfectly nowdays..
The other countries which used the 'boiling pot' language strategy (like the US and Israel) faced a totally different set of issues and were pressed to work out their aggressive language policies. But, I don't think that applies to Ukraine anyways.
PS.
you fail to see because you come from a flawed premise, there's no tension
for example no one ever demanded from this notorious Party Of Regions to raise this issue in the parliament and they haven't done so of their own accord since 2007 when they gained the majority in the parliament, they only raise it now because elections glimmer on the horizon
it's a cheap political stunt
sorry i feel i start recycling myself, my opinion i have already made clear
Posting Permissions
Russian Lessons | Russian Tests and Quizzes | Russian Vocabulary |
8Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
