In the XX century, the Russian language entered as the language of a great, internationally recognized verbal and artistic culture, as the language of the works of Pushkin and Gogol, Turgenev and Tolstoy, Dostoevsky and Leskov, Saltykov-Shchedrin and Belinsky, Nekrasov and Tyutchev, Chekhov and Gorky. The core of this culture was the moral improvement of a person, the education of a sense of beauty, social justice, responsiveness, decency, and humanism in him.

And in the XX century, naturally developing along the path of a thousand-year ascent, predetermined by historical fate, the Russian language reached its functional peak as a unique and universal means of communication between peoples in the vast Eurasian space (the USSR) and as one of the world languages.

He met the XXI century not only cautiously, but also not without losses. The Eurasian space, which it has served for centuries, consolidating and elevating it, has ceased to be unified and common. Moreover, in some parts of it, the Russian language is declared undesirable, alien and harmful.

page 48

Literature created in Russian, recognized by UNESCO as one of the three greatest achievements of mankind along with Antiquity and the Renaissance, has been relegated to the periphery of social and cultural needs due to the historical circumstances of the last decade and a half.

Thus, literature, in which the Russian language most fully realized its expressive capabilities, moral potential, beauty and power, ceased to be a support for it. For literature remains literature only as long as it is read, as long as it surprises, enriches, develops the reader as a person, as long as it serves as a model of worthy speech culture, speech behavior, and artistic taste.

Translations into Russian from other languages of the Russian Federation and Eurasia have been reduced several times, thereby weakening its traditionally binding, unifying function in cross-cultural communication between the peoples of the Eurasian space.

Ideological cliches generated by people and introduced by them into official speech practice, often simply alien to the structure of the Russian language and culture, were thoughtlessly and callously translated into the language. Then they declared it the language of totalitarianism, thus sowing the seeds of distrust and suspicion towards it, although the language itself does not bear any responsibility for how it is spoken. Language, for all that it is a type of culture, perception of the world, behavior, etc., is a tool. It can be used in many different ways.

First of all, due to our internal economic and political reasons, its position on a global scale has been noticeably shaken. The number of countries where it is studied in schools and universities as one of the main foreign languages is not comparable to what it was, for example, 15-20 years ago.

Historically, the period of functional weakening of the Russian language coincided with the period of active promotion of globalization processes. However, there is no definition of globalization, no clear answer to the question of how it relates to the development of national cultures, with the preservation of their originality. Everyone uses the word-concept blindly, without trying to predict the possible results of the implementation of its undisclosed meaning for different territories, which, together with the peoples living there, are usually called countries.

As far as one can guess at the current stage, globalization means the spread of certain one-sided unified standards of representations, abstracted from national cultures and traditions and technically based on the Internet. To understand the one-sidedness of these representations, it is enough

page 49

take a thoughtful look at events, for example, in the Russian North Caucasus. The main actors of these events are not only and not so much "persons of Caucasian nationality", but rather persons whose national interests extend to the Caspian Sea. This is always clearly seen in their varying assessments of Russia's actions in Chechnya, depending on the degree of Russian compliance. On this basis, in particular, it can be argued that globalization is the absolutization of the interests and claims of a single country, but not of a community of countries.

Thus, one of the most important strategic issues that arise in connection with globalization is, in particular, the question of languages, the fate of national cultures and the content of education.

For the Russian Federation, this is primarily the fate of the Russian language, its role and influence both in Russia and abroad. The signal for this kind of concern is the clearly marked tendency to reduce, reduce the functional space of the Russian language, and use it too freely. Sometimes this liberty reaches the point of utter indifference, disregard, and nihilism.

Some in Russia itself, like the character Sukhovo-Kobylin, who "ran ahead of progress", suggest, for example, translating the Russian language into Latin graphics, thereby demonstrating their readiness to cross out the thousand-year-old Russian culture, which is inseparable from its own written tradition.

Others are in favor of using English as the official language in Russia. So, when I was at a conference in Saratov last November, I was surprised to hear that 30 percent of students at Saratov University are not against English being the official language in Russia (!). This is the mindset of some, even if insignificant, part of the students. But this is the future intelligentsia, the pillar of national culture! Why such a strange idea? What did she grow up on? After all, Russia has never been a zone of functioning of the English language. Is it not the first sign of the effectiveness of the ideas of globalization? No matter how strange such ideas may seem, it is reckless not to take them into account. Because they indicate the loss or erosion of national and cultural immunity.

Or another example: When asked by a TV correspondent what the main meaning of the current school education in Russia is, Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov, counting on his fingers, outlined these points in the following order:: 1) English, 2) computerization, 3) twelve-year-old. However, it is difficult to agree that education reform can be reduced to these three points. Knowledge of the English language can not indicate at all that

page 50

education of a person: in the same English-speaking America, there are many people who are completely uneducated. The paradox, in my opinion, is that all three points together are absolutely unsuitable for certifying the degree of education of a school graduate.

Not a word about the Russian language, the real language of education of the peoples of Russia!

Meanwhile, in modern Russia and the Russian Federation, the Russian language appears as almost the only factor in the cohesion of society and peoples. There is no other idea comparable to it. From this point of view, the strategic tasks aimed at protecting the functional space of the Russian language in the interests of the peoples of the Russian state and spreading globalist standards are essentially opposite. This conclusion clearly follows from the analysis of the cultural and historical situation.

The main language of globalization is English. At the same time, the Russian language, assuming the role of the main pillar, the most important factor in uniting the peoples and cultures of historical Russia, cannot but be an obstacle to such a trend. Their interests collide. Propaganda works in the language that is better equipped with material and financial resources. In this respect, the Russian language is definitely losing out. Therefore, everyone considers himself entitled to treat him at his own discretion.

Inattention to the Russian language and its thoughtless slandering can further divide the Eurasian cultural and historical phenomenon that has developed through its mediation.

This fact was perfectly understood by the greatest figure of Eurasian culture, N. S. Trubetskoy, who wrote in his Paris publication back in 1927: "In the Eurasian... these peoples are connected with each other not by one or another one-sided series of signs, but by the commonality of their historical destinies (highlighted by the author. - З. Т.). Eurasia is a geographical, economic and historical whole. The destinies of the Eurasian peoples are intertwined with each other, firmly linked in one huge tangle, which can no longer be dissolved, so that the rejection of one people from this unity can only be made by artificial violence against nature and must lead to suffering. Nothing like this can be said about the groups of peoples that underlie the concepts of pan-Slavism, pan-Turanism, or pan-Islamism; none of these groups is united to such an extent by the unity of the historical fate of its constituent peoples. Therefore, none of these" panisms " is as pragmatically valuable as pan-Eurasian nationalism. This nationalism is not only pragmatically valuable, but even directly vital: after all, we have already seen that only the awakening of the self-consciousness of unity, a multi-ethnic Eurasian nation is possible.-

page 51

It is able to give Russia-Eurasia the ethnic substratum of statehood, without which it will sooner or later begin to break up into parts, to the greatest misfortune and suffering of all its parts" (Trubetskoy N. S. Pan-Eurasian Nationalism // Trubetskoy N. S. History. Culture. Language. 1995. pp. 425-426).

The destruction of the USSR and its consequences fully confirmed the scientist's foresight. And if we do not support and strengthen the unifying and creative capabilities of the Russian language as a common link between the peoples of historical Russia, the processes of disunion and disunion of the Russian peoples can become even more disastrous.

Protecting the Russian language, increasing its role and authority in the education system at all levels, in the mass media, and in all spheres of public and State life without exception is an urgent need for the peoples and State security of the Russian Federation.

Awareness of this necessity begins to make its way. This is evidenced, in particular, by the re-establishment of the Russian Language Council under the Government of the Russian Federation under the chairmanship of Deputy Prime Minister V. I. Matvienko (in the last two years it has been working regularly and productively), the granting of Russian as the second state language in Kyrgyzstan, the readiness of the Moldovan authorities to make the same decision, the preparation of State Duma of the Russian Federation, etc.

The sooner everyone realizes this, the better for all of us, all the peoples of Russia and Eurasia. It is inexcusable to neglect one of the world's languages, which is accessible to all our peoples, and which almost everyone knows to some extent. The status of other languages cannot and should not be a hindrance here.

Petrozavodsk, Republic of Karelia

Permanent link to this publication: