Nationality in Ukraine: Some Rules of Engagement

Language policy and post-Soviet identities in Tatarstan

“…On the other hand after having seen that a large number of Russian respondents did not complete the reading and writing task, it can be concluded that this was due to an indifferent attitude toward languages, particularly Tatar. One reason why they chose not to answer the question may have been a demonstration of resistance to top-down identity technologies of the Tatar government (Shevel 2002). This attitude and resistance to the linguistic policies in Tatarstan by many of the Russian population seem to stem from the fact that Tatarstan is situated within the political framework of the Russian Federation and they feel that they should not have to learn the titular language because they already speak the official language of the Russian Federation.…”

“…Furthermore, another reason for carrying out this type of test was that if Russians say they do not use Tatar or English, then it is necessary to know whether this is because they have no functional knowledge of Tatar or English (in other words, the ability to Nationalities Papers understand and compose texts) or whether they have this knowledge, but simply do not exercise it for various other reasons. Shevel (2002), for example, suggests that people's belief about their own language use could be seen as either a declaration of political support or resistance. Therefore if the respondents do not attempt to answer the question, this may be due to their resistance of compulsory Tatar language learning or resistance against the Tatar government who brought in the 1997 education law.…”

“…Furthermore, the widening of Tatar language use in all educational sectors was brought into force with the implementation of the "State Programme of the Republic of Tatarstan for the Preservation, Study and Development of the State Languages of the Republic of Tatarstan and Other Languages of the Republic of Tatarstan 2004-2013" under article 3.4. The acceptance and support of this language policy and education law by both Russian and Tatar citizens would suggest the "acceptance of rules of engagement set by the state" (Shevel 2002) and therefore would show that these top-down identity technologies are reflected from the bottom-up aspect.…”

“…This could also be regarded as a sign of resistance to Tatar government policies (as per Shevel 2002). On the other hand, people who scored 1 were therefore analyzed differently.…”

“…Some recent studies have challenged the topdown perspective by demonstrating that policies implemented from a top-down perspective are negotiated and contested at the citizen level (Kuzio 2001;Polese 2011;Polese and Wylegala 2008;Rodgers 2007;Shevel 2002). This paper contributes to the bottom-up perspective by examining how citizens in the Republic of Tatarstan have adapted to these topdown identity technologies, what their attitudes are toward them by examining proficiency levels of Tatar written language compared to Russian and English levels of proficiency, and the roles these languages play in contemporary Tatar society.…”