In Ukraine, having arrived at a critical stage of its history, three areas can be highlighted at the level of legislation during the struggle for the way forward since the end of 2013: the language issue, the constitutional process, and the efforts to eliminate the Soviet legacy. The subject of our analysis is the four laws belonging to the 2015 legislative package on decommunization, with an outlook to the broader context, as well. The four laws in question decide about who are heroes and who are enemies in history; what Ukraine's relationship is with World War II, as well as with the Communist and Nazi regimes. The laws point out fi rmly and excluding any further debate the primacy of the country's independence over all else, and the protection of the ideal of independence by any means concerning both the past and the present. The laws prescribe impeachment as a sanction for denying their contents. This story-hot memory infl uenced by politics-will be summarized for the period of 2015-2016.

Ukraine is the best example of "nationalizing" nationalism. During its twenty-fi ve year old existence the language question-in addition to historical approach and ethnical identity-has belonged to the unclosed questions of personal and group identity, and represents one of the central themes of political struggle. Offi cial Ukrainian language policy permanently wants to promote the use of Ukrainian or Russian by overshadowing one or the other. Measures regulating language use have never been consequently applied, which fact in itself is enough to represent a permanent subject for political campaigns. Political powers unable to solve actual economic and social problems wanted to distract attention by this means. That is why the politicized language question could contribute to the political crisis and the outbreak of the armed confl ict at the end of 2013 and at the beginning of 2014 in a politically unstable country facing economic breakdown. The present paper examines the role of the language question in the Ukrainian crisis in the period of 2014-2016.

Based on the data of sociological research, the analysis of the linguistic landscapes of Transcarpathian cities, and quotations from travel guides, this paper illustrates that in Transcarpathia, a significant part of the population—regardless of ethnicity—live their lives not according to the official Kyiv time (eet), but according to the local time (cet). The difference between official centralized time and “local time” appeared in Transcarpathia when the region became annexed to the Soviet Union. Yet before the Second World War, each state in the region used Central European time. The Soviet regime introduced msk, which was two hours ahead. The distinction between “local time” and central time has been maintained since Transcarpathia became part of the newly independent Ukraine. The population of the region has been urged to use a different time zone for a relatively short time from a historical point of view. The persistence of “local time” is also strengthened by the fact that it contributes to the image of Transcarpathia as a particular, specific region of Ukraine. “Local time” in Transcarpathia has become part of the region’s tourism brand.

1884 року на Міжнародній конференції з проблем меридіана, що відбулась у Вашингтоні, було ухвалено резолюцію про запровадження часових поясів, тобто частин поверхні земної кулі, на кожній із яких діє один стандартний час. Зараз часові пояси відраховують від всесвітнього координованого часу (UTC), точкою відліку для якого є нульовий меридіан (довгота 0°), що пролягає через Гринвіч, неподалік від Лондона. З часом, установленим у межах часового поясу відносно всесвітнього координованого часу (UTC) та «обрізаним» державними кордонами, не завжди збігається місцевий час. Саме тому, що державні та адміністративні межі не збігаються з часовими поясами, накресленими за географічним принципом, між централізовано визначеним офіційним часом та місцевим часом, що (краще) гармонізується під рух Сонця, можуть бути більші-менші відхилення. Більша частина території України, понад 90 %, належить до східноєвропейського часового поясу (EET), який має розбіжність із всесвітнім часом (UTC) + 2 години. Прикордонні території України на сході та заході виходять за межі EET, але на практиці на цих територіях живуть за тим самим часом EET (UTC+2). Проте на західному прикордонні, а саме на Закарпатті, природне відчуття часу (біологічний час) та звичка з минулого сформували альтернативний варіант використання часу.

In this paper, based on the data of a sociological research and the analysis of the linguistic landscapes of six Transcarpathian cities, we have illustrated that in Transcarpathia a significant part of the population – regardless of ethnicity – live their lives not according to the official “Kyiv time” (EET; UTC+2) but according to the “local time” (CET; UTC+1). Even the names of the two times are distinguished in the local language use in Ukrainian, Hungarian, and Russian languages alike. The difference between official central time and “local time” appeared in Transcarpathia when the region became annexed to the Soviet Union. Yet, before the Second World War, each state in the region used CET. The Soviet power introduced Moscow time zone (MSK; UTC+3) of two hours ahead. The distinction between “local time” and central time was maintained when Transcarpathia became part of the newly independent Ukraine. The population in the region was urged to use a different time zone for a relatively short time from a historical point of view. The persistence of “local time” is also strengthened by the fact that it contributes to the image of Transcarpathia as a particular, specific region of Ukraine.