with Dr. William Fierman, Director, Inner Asian and Uralic National Resource Center, Department of Central Eurasian Studies, Indiana University, and Dr. Dan E. Davidson, President, American Councils for International Education; Professor of Russian and Second Language Acquisition, Bryn Mawr University.

Audio of this event is available at:
http://www.sais-jhu.edu/media/caci/January08/DirectionsInLanguagePolicy1-22-08.mp3

Event Summary:
A discussion hosted by the Central Asia Caucasus Institute (CACI) at SAIS on Tuesday, January 22, 2008, in Rome Auditorium.

The event featured Dr. William Fierman, Director, Inner Asian and Uralic National Resource Center, Department of Central Eurasian Studies, Indiana University and Dr. Dan E. Davidson, President, American Councils for International Education; Professor of Russian and Second Language Acquisition, Bryn Mawr University.

Mr. Grant Smith, Former Ambassador to Tajikistan and nonresident senior fellow at the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute introduced Dr. Fierman and Dr. Davidson to the audience.

The evening’s presentation discussed in general terms how the new nations of Central Asia and South Caucasus have gone about embracing local languages as symbols of independence and as tools of communication among citizens.  Further the two experts addressed the gaps between language policy and practice in the region.

Dr. Fierman began the evening with a short presentation by drawing the audience’s attention to the idea that language policy is closely related to national identity.  The complexity of identities in various countries lies in the fact that communities have many levels of identity which can be concentric, overlapping or independent.  Therefore, defining a language policy is an inherently difficult proposition for a national government.

While speaking only of formal communication (government, business, press) in Central Asian and South Caucasian countries Dr Fierman illustrated a number of different ways in which identities are represented and formed through use of titular languages instead of Russian.  His first example showed how the choice of script can reflect a country’s identity.  For example, in Uzbekistan the Uzbek language is now written using the Latin alphabet to show independence from Russian while Uzbek speakers in other Central Asian countries continue to write their language in Cyrillic.

Dr. Fierman also highlighted the ongoing debate surrounding the use of toponyms.  Specifically, renaming specific places such as cities, roads and geographical features using a country’s titular language is a highly contentious issue in many places and choices reflect the struggle for ownership.  For instance, there is an ongoing debate in Kazkhstan over whether or not to keep the Russian name for the city of Petropavlovsk or to give the city a Kazakh name. 

The second half of Dr. Fierman’s presentation offered six different factors that shape the status of national languages in particular countries.  These factors include the status of the titular language in the late Soviet era; the political orientation of a country’s leadership toward other countries; the mode of decision making within a country; the status of the nationalization project; the economic situation of a given country; and demographics.

Most interestingly, Dr. Fierman has found that demographics are an extremely powerful force behind the status of a national language in given country.  For instance, in Azerbaijan, where the native Azeris have represented an increasing percentage of the national population, there is strong use of the local language.  On the other hand, in Kazakhstan, where native Kazakhs have represented a lower percentage of the population in relation to Russians, Russian continues to be a common language while Kazakh is making slower strides.

Dr. Fierman’s presentation was followed by that of Dr. Dan E. Davidson, who sought to explain the status of national languages from the perspective of the language speakers.  Specifically, he sought to shed light on why people choose to learn one language over another.  He concluded that Russian proficiency is not decreasing.  Nor is proficiency in the titular languages increasing.  Rather, he asserted that Russian is retaining its popularity due in large part to powerful economic forces in the region.

One of the main reasons why people generally continue to speak Russian instead of a titular language is that Russian is widely seen as an essential tool for educational and economic success in the region.  Dr. Davidson made the interesting point that this choice is largely related to gender.  Specifically, in many countries, such as Kazakhstan, statistics show that many mothers insist that a child speak and learn Russian while the fathers predominantly favor the national language.  In the end the mother’s choice often wins out against the father’s because of the mother’s important role in the child’s early years of speech development.

The desire for Russian in the household, according to Dr. Davidson, is also reflected in the increased demand for Russian instruction in schools.  Surprisingly, Russian language is seeing increased demand not only in Central Asia and South Caucasus but in nearly all the former Soviet Republics.  The increased demand for Russian instruction, according to Dr. Davidson, is driven by migration and economic factors.  Specifically, countries that export labor to Russia are increasingly experiencing greater demand for Russian instruction in schools.  In short, Russian language is seen as a tool for economic advancement by large portions of the region’s population.

Migration and economic factors within countries are also affecting language status in many countries.  During the lecture it was mentioned that many natives as well as visitors to the region perceive a reduction in Russian proficiency and even a lack of proficiency in both Russian and the titular language.  Dr. Davidson remarked that while this seems plausible given the abysmal methodology for teaching national languages and decreased Russian in national curriculums this is, in fact, not the case.  Rather, increasing numbers of poorly educated people are migrating to the cities in order to find employment.  As these people who speak the titular language at a low level and who speak little or no Russian take over jobs that were once held by middle class Russian speakers there is an increasing perception of the decline in the proficiency of both languages.  At the same time, Russian speakers are finding work in other less visible areas.  Dr. Davidson concluded that Russian proficiency is not declining.  Rather, there are simply more non-Russian speaking people in the major population centers.

The Central Asia-Caucasus Institute was founded in 1996 and has grown to be the primary institution in the Washington area for the study of the Caucasus, Central Asia and the Caspian Region. The Institute forms part of a Joint Center with the Silk Road Studies Program at the Institute for Security and Development, Stockholm. The Institute sponsors impartial research on the region, acts as a forum for policymakers both in Washington and abroad, shares information concerning the region and provides access for its sponsors in business to relevant expertise on the region. Additional information about the Institute is available at www.silkroadstudies.org.