НАУКОВІ ЗАПИСКИ - Острозька академія

4 Наукові записки. Серія “Філологічна”
The drawback of the monitoring surveys over 10-15 years is that they neither provide answers to the question of the
language choice over a longer period of time (including several decades in the history of the Ukrainian SSR) on the one
hand, nor reveal the dynamics of the language choice be it in the family or in the public sphere, on the other hand.
The generation method provides a more detailed analysis of the language choice dynamics. The All-Ukrainian May
2007 survey results analysis of the language choice, considering the present-day generations, reveal, that compared to
their parents, the number of people speaking only Ukrainian in their families decreased by 5. 2%, and the number of
people speaking mostly Ukrainian in their families decreased by 4. 9%. At the same time, across generations, there can
be observed that the number of people speaking a mixed Ukrainian-Russian language increased by 2. 4%, the number of
those speaking only Russian – by 1. 5%, and the number of those speaking mostly Russian by 4. 6% [2, p. 57].
Considering language changes from the previous to the present-day generations in the regional dimension [2, p. 56],
it is easy to observe that the number of families speaking only Ukrainian has mostly reduced in the South and South East
(by 7%), in Central Ukraine and in North-East (by 6. 2%), but not in the extreme, from the language choice point of view,
regions (Western Ukraine, on the one hand, and Donbas area and the Crimea, on the other hand). These regions also
registered the highest growth of the number of people speaking mostly Russian (by 6. 2% in the South and South East),
in Central Ukraine and North East (by 5. 3%). The number of people speaking only Russian compared with their parents
generation grew only in Donbas area and in the Crimea (by 3. 4%).
However, the generation method does not give a straightforward answer to the question when the language choice shift
from one generation to another took place. This shift could presumably take place either 50 years ago when the presentday
70 year old people were leaving their parents families, or 30 years ago when the present-day 50 year old people were
entering their adulthood, or during the last 15 years in independent Ukraine. That is the why the combination of generation
method with the age-period-cohort analysis acquires special significance. It suggests that the share of families speaking
only Ukrainian in the family reduced both in the older (over 55 years old), in the middle (30-54 years old), and in the
younger (18-29 years old) generations, but the pace of this decrease was the highest in the older generation, i. e. by 8. 6
%, while in the middle generation it was by 4. 3%, and in the young generation it was 2. 2%. Conversely, the growth rate
of mostly Russian speaking families reached its peak in the middle generation (7. 1%), compared to the young generation
(3. 2%) and the older generation (2. 0%).
Thus, it can be asserted that the tendency of the present-day Ukrainian speaking families compared to the previous
two generations (formed in the Soviet Union) to reduce in share persevered though it has slowed down, while the share of
Russian speaking families continues to grow at a lower rate (compare: in the middle generation, only or mostly Ukrainian
was spoken by 37. 4% of people, whereas now – 35. 9%, a mixed Russian/Ukrainian language – 18. 5% and 19. 3%
correspondingly, while only or mostly Russian – 43. 5% and 45. 4% correspondingly).
As to the language people think in their everyday life, the share of young people (18-29 years old) who think in
Ukrainian reduced by 8. 4% compared to middle generation (30-54 years old), whereas the share of young people who
think only or mostly in Russian increased by 4. 9% [2, p. 59].
In the area of public sphere communication the share of young people speaking only Ukrainian decreased by 5. 8%
compared to the middle generation, while the share of young people speaking only or mostly Russian increased by 7.
5% compared to the middle generation. It should be noted that the rate of these processes insignificantly slowed down
compared to the previous period [2, p. 57].
In the sphere of professional communication (in the office, in one’s studies, etc.) the share of young people who speak
only Ukrainian reduced by 7. 5% compared to the middle generation, while the share of those speaking mostly Ukrainian
increased by 3. 0%, the share of people speaking mixed Russian/Ukrainian increased by 1. 2%, and the share of mostly or
only Russian speakers increased by 2. 3%.
In this way, the results of the monitoring analysis allow us to conclude that in spite of all the efforts made to increase
the spread of the Ukrainian language in Ukraine after gaining independence, the balance between Ukrainian and Russian
speakers has not changed, instead the number of bilinguals has significantly decreased triggering a sharper differentiation
between Ukrainian and Russian speakers.
A combination of the generation method with the age-period-cohort analysis helps us to conclude, that referring to
the language of thinking, public sphere and professional communication in present-day Ukraine, the share of young
Ukrainian speakers decreased compared to the middle and older generations, while the share of young Russian speakers
increased. In fact, currently, in Ukraine, the share of young people (aged 18-29) who think only in Russian exceed the
share of young people who think only in Ukrainian by 18%. The number of young people speaking only Russian in public
sphere exceeds the number of young people who speak only Ukrainian by 17. 6%. In their professional communication
young Russian speakers exceed the Ukrainian youngsters by 13. 6%. In terms of possible further research, a promising
direction could be the study of efficiency and effects of language policies conducted in Ukraine over the last decades.
Literature:
1 Вишняк О. І. Соціокультурна динаміка політичних регіонів України. Соціологічний моніторинг: 1994-2006.
– К. : Інститут соціології НАН України, 2006. – 202 с.
2. Вишняк О. І. Мовна ситуація та статус мов в Україні: динаміка проблеми, перспективи (соціологічний аналіз).
– К. : Інститут соціології НАН України, 2009. – 176 с.
3. Головаха Є. І., Паніна Н. В. Зміни мовної ситуації в Україні // Українське суспільство: моніторинг – 2000. – 287 с.
4. Дністрянський М. С. Етнополітична географія України: проблеми теорії, методології, практики. – Львів :
Видавничий Центр ЛНУ ім. Івана Франка, 2006. – 490 с.
5. Українське суспільство 1992-2006. Соціологічний моніторинг / За ред. В. Ворони, М. Шульги. – К. : Інститут
соціології НАН України, 2007. – 578 c.