Russian in the multilingual environment of three Asian countries

Abstract

This article provides a comparative analysis of the sociolinguistic situation in three Asian countries, India, Japan, and South Korea, which are relatively less known as countries where the Russian language is used. The aim of the study is to assess the significance of the Russian language in these countries Russian-speaking diasporas, business sphere, and education, as well as to define the characteristics of its teaching in the cultural contexts under discussion. In all these domains processes of language commodification are intensifying. The countries chosen for analysis differ in the history of language contacts, political relations with Russia, language policy, language attitudes, and as a result, residents motivation for maintaining and learning the Russian language. We discuss similarities and differences in the development of Russian speech communities. We also reflect upon linguistic and cultural hybridity, and in particular, its effect on the evolution of multilingual identities on the basis of interviews, fieldnotes, internet resources, and published data. The results show that in Japan and South Korea, the number of immigrants, students, businesspeople and mixed families using Russian is growing, and Russian language schools are popular; in India, the established relationship of peace, friendship and cooperation through various treaties continues to have its effect on the popularity of the Russian language in various spheres of life. In all the three countries Russian serves as a lingua franca for immigrants from different post-Soviet countries, which increases its value for the diasporans. The study argues that realities of diasporic life contribute to the pluricentric trends in the development of Russian.

Linguistic pluricentrism and the Russian language

“…Термин плюрицентризм/плюрицентричность применительно к РЯ является достаточно новым и встречает противодействие со стороны некоторых лингвистов, поскольку отклонения от централизованной нормы имеют тенденцию рассматриваться как контаминации и нарушения. Однако, принимая во внимание, что после распада Советского Союза русскоязычные общины распространились во всем мире, а независимые государства, возникшие на месте СССР, обрели свои законодательства, было бы неразумно занимать пуристскую позицию, игнорируя реалии уже существующих новых центров развития РЯ и не изучать реальный язык, который успешно действует на множестве территорий по своим законам и удовлетворяет потребности его носителей (Mustajoki et al 2020, Protassova et al 2021a. Языковая политика контроля и попытки навязать московский или петербургский стандарт в рассредоточенных языковых сообществах вряд ли будут продуктивными.…”