Volodymyr Zelensky was born into a Russian-speaking family in the east of the country and learned Ukrainian late in life. However, he strives to use the latter language as often as possible, as its use has become one of the symbols of resistance to Vladimir Putin. To shed light on the linguistic issues of this conflict, L’Express interviewed Iryna Dmytrychyn, lecturer at the National Institute of Oriental Languages and Civilizations (Inalco), where she is responsible for Ukrainian studies.
The very spelling of his surname is an issue. When she arrived in France in 1993 to study at Sciences Po, it was transcribed in Russian: Irina Dmitrichina. We imagine it: she wants more than ever to be written to the Ukrainian, Iryna Dmytrychyn. A wish that L’Express obviously respected.
L’Express: What is the official language in Ukraine?
Iryna Dmytrychyn : Since 1991, only Ukrainian has this status.
And what language(s) are spoken in Ukraine?
Almost all Ukrainians are bilingual, but the situation varies from region to region. Most Ukrainian is spoken in western Ukraine, which was part of Austria-Hungary and then Poland. On the other hand, the more one advances towards the East and the South, which belonged for nearly three hundred years to the Russian Empire and for more than seventy years to the USSR, the more one speaks Russian.
When we speak Russian, are we pro-Russian?
No, this assertion is wrong and Putin is finding out the hard way. Language is not an exclusive marker of identity, because Ukraine has managed to build a national identity that transcends this divide. One can be a Russian speaker and a Ukrainian patriot. What is true is that Putin exploits the Russian language by claiming to come to the aid of Russian-speaking populations.
His problem is that it leads to the opposite result. A number of perfectly Russian-speaking citizens now only speak Ukrainian because they don’t want Putin to say they need to be “liberated”. We also see Russian speakers deciding to make their children Ukrainian speakers. In fact, with his propaganda, Putin is causing a historic Russian setback in Ukraine.
Russian and Ukrainian are two Slavic languages. When did they start to stand out?
Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian indeed belong to the eastern branch of the Slavic languages, which also have a southern branch with Serbo-Croatian, Bulgarian or Slovenian, and a western branch, where we find Polish and Czech. All these languages have a common base: Slavic. At the beginning, they were close – as were the Latin languages of the time of the Roman Empire – but they differentiated little by little.
The problem is that they have not benefited from the same status. With Ukraine’s loss of political independence in the 18th century, Ukrainian was relegated to the private sphere, while Russian was gradually imposed as the official language and the language of prestige. This disparity has hampered the development and use of the Ukrainian language.
“Ukrainian has been relegated to the private sphere”
Can we speak of a Ukrainian revival movement in the 19th century?
Absolutely. It is the time of the “spring of peoples” and Ukraine is going through the three phases of national revival described by the Czech historian Miroslav Hroch. Initially, the Ukrainians rediscovered their culture: the history, the songs, the clothes, the legends… It was at this time that Eneyida appeared, The Aeneid by Ivan Kotliarevsky, based on the epic of Virgil, considered the first Ukrainian literary work. In a second time, the intellectuals begin a work of theorization and define the Ukrainian identity. This awareness led to a third stage: political demands, which appeared at the end of the 19th century.
How does the Russian Empire react then?
Wrong. The tsars engage in a massive Russification movement. The Ukrainian language is banned in schools, hampered in newspapers and in literature. Despite everything, the people, often illiterate, remained faithful to their language. On the other hand, the elites betray it and have made caste solidarity take precedence over national solidarity; they opt for Russian in order to privilege their career. This is how we find some Ukrainians in the high hierarchy of the Russian Empire.
Did this movement of revival nevertheless favor the accession to independence of Ukraine in 1917?
It is certain, even if it will be short-lived, since Ukraine is integrated into the USSR in 1922.
Precisely, has the USSR always been hostile to the Ukrainian language?
No, at first, the USSR even led a policy favorable to the Ukrainian language because at that time, Lenin and Stalin wanted to go against the policy of the tsars. Their idea was to promote local cultures to encourage people to join the new regime, whether they were Ukrainian, German, Jewish, Greek minorities… This is how Stalin launched in 1923 the so-called “rooting” policy which will last about ten years.
“At first, Stalin pursued a policy favorable to the Ukrainian language”
Why do we observe a change in the 1930s?
Because Stalin now believes that, far from consolidating the membership of the Ukrainians in the Bolshevik State, the policy of entrenchment feeds Ukrainian irredentism and is at the origin of resistance to collectivization, for example. From then on, everything changes. At the time of the great famine, in December 1932, it passed to Russification and, from there, the Ukrainian was marginalized. It is almost excluded from education in favor of Russian while the defenders of the language are placed in the camps.
Little by little, Ukrainian is presented as a dialect of peasants, while Russian enjoys all the functions of prestige. This is the time when it is considered that an educated man can only speak Russian. This repressive policy was to be maintained, with nuances, until Gorbachev’s perestroika, to such an extent that at the time of independence in 1991, Russian was predominant in the big cities of the East and the South.
What is the policy carried out from the return to independence?
The protective measures that had been taken since 1989 have been reinforced. Ukrainian is the language of administration, regains its place in secondary and higher education, in the media and in publishing. But beware: contrary to what Putin says, there was no forced ukrainization! We simply bet on a gradual changeover over the years.
Why did this question become a political issue in the elections that followed?
By electoralism. Some, like former pro-Russian President Yanukovych, have promised to give Russian official language status in the hope of winning back votes in the east and south of the country. He relegated his promise to the background and took up Ukrainian once elected. In 2012, however, it diverted from its purpose the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages, intended for languages threatened with extinction, by making Russian benefit from it, even though almost all Ukrainians speak this language! This is the reason why this measure will be suspended from 2014.
With the Maidan revolution, the annexation of Crimea by Moscow and the war in Donbass, an awareness began. Ukrainians no longer see Russia as a neighbor, but as a potential enemy. Since then, speaking Ukrainian or Russian has become an issue.
“Speaking Ukrainian or Russian has become an issue”
An awareness that will lead to a law passed in 2019…
In effect. This text gives priority to Ukrainian in the media and all areas of public life. We now have the right to speak Ukrainian and to demand that we answer in Ukrainian when we go to a town hall or a tax office. But again, be careful: it is also possible to speak Russian and ask to be answered in Russian.
This did not prevent Putin from invoking the Russian language to justify his military intervention…
Yes. He and his media made believe that it would henceforth be forbidden to speak Russian. This explains the support he enjoys in part of the population of Crimea and Donbass.
In this context, what should the capital of Ukraine be called: Kiev, Russian style, or Kyiv, Ukrainian style?
If you want to respect the will of the Ukrainians, you have to say Kyiv. Its Russian form, Kiev, results from the colonial status of Ukraine under the Empire where the Russian language was the dominant language. This is also why this toponym entered the French language in this version – it is already found in Balzac.
All the countries emerging from colonial domination are familiar with this movement of reappropriation of toponymy. See Ceylon become Sri Lanka, Upper Volta renamed Burkina Faso. The Ukrainians’ request for Kyiv therefore seems legitimate to me, especially with regard to a language as influential as French. I also note that the French media use the Ukrainian form for lesser-known city names, such as Lviv, and not the Russian form, Lvov. It will probably take longer for Kiev, because of the habits that have been formed, but it will come, I hope. Failing that, it would be tantamount to saying to the Ukrainians: “Your culture is not worthy of consideration, unlike Russian culture”.
However, the French say London and not London, and the British are not offended…
Certainly, but the United Kingdom is not threatened in its existence by France.