by Teimuraz Gvantseladze (Staatliche Ilia Tschawtschawadze Universität für Sprache und Kultur, Tbilissi)
There are about 50 languages in the Caucasus belonging to the families of Ibero-Caucasian, or Paleo-Caucasian, Indo-European, Uralo-Altaic and Semitic languages. These languages are the native languages of several millions of people (these are – Georgian, Armenian, Azerbaijanian and Russian); the second group of languages is made up by the languages spoken by 10 thousand to a million people (such as Abaza, Abkhazian, Agul, Adighe_Kabardian, i.e. Circassian, Andi, Assirian, Checheno-Ingush, Dargwa, Greek, karachai-Balkarian, Kumuk, Kurdian, Lak, Lezghian, Nogayan, Ossetian, Rutul, Tabassaranian, Tat, Tsakhur…); the third group is made up by the languages spoken by less than ten thousand people )these are Archib, Akhvakh; Budukh, Dido, i.e. Tsez, Kryz, Udi, etc.
Of all these languages only Georgian, Armenian and Russian had a centuries long literary tradition. The Azerbaijanian and the majority of languages mentioned above in the second group received their written language mainly in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries, while the languages of the third group did not have any written language.
Before the disintegration of the Soviet Union the languages spread in the Caucasus did not enjoy equal rights, although the ideologists of the Empire spoke much about the equality of peoples and languages. In reality, the only privileged language was Russian, whose use was not limited and which was obligatory for any citizen of the Soviet Union. The rights of other languages were determined by the number of people speaking them, the level of development of the corresponding ethnic group, the density of the population speaking the same language, the geostrategic significance of specific regions, the existence or non-existence of a written language, the degree of regional autonomy, the peaceful or strained nature of interethnic relationships, the strength or weakness of anti-imperial feeling and other non-linguistic factors.
For instance, there was not a special article in the constitutions of any of the autonomous republics and regions of the Soviet Union about the language status. Moreover, there was not such an article in the constitutions of the union republics, which were on a higher level of hierarchy (the Ukraine, Byelorussia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kirgizstan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan). In this respect, the constitution of the Abkhazian Autonomous Republic, a constituent part of Georgia, was an exception, for it contained an article dealing with the status of languages. According to this article, the Russian, Georgian and Abkhazian languages had the status of Abkhazia`s state languages. What caused this exception was the fact that Abkhazia, situated on the open Black Sea Coast is a most important region from the point of view of geo-strategy. Besides, by the fictitious increase of the rights of the Abkhazian language the Soviet Goverment (as a maneuver) made the relations of people in this polyethnic region tense (the Georgians represented 45% of the Abkhazian population, i.e. the majority, and the Abkhazians made up only 17%) and disposed the Abkhazian and the Russian-speaking population loyally towards itself. The latter were to oppose their Georgian neighbors, if they expressed a wish of leaving the Union. This scenario was successfully realized by Moscow first in 1989 when the national-liberation movement gained strength in Georgia, and later in 1992 when the legitimate power was overthrown with the help of the same Moscow and the so-called civil war began. It was Moscow´s financial, military and propagandistic participation that has determined the situation existing in Abkhazia today. Georgian jurisdiction has not been exercised in Abkhazia for the last ten years.
The Georgian, Azerbaijanian and Armenian languages occupied the second stage of hierarchy among the languages spoken in the Caucasus. These were the languages that were officially given the legal status of the state languages of the Georgian SSR, the Azerbaijanian SSR and the Armenian SSR. The same high status, as has been mentioned, was fictitiously given to the Abkhazian language as well. In reality the function of the Georgian, Azerbaijanian and Armenian languages was different than their official status. According to the Constitution, the above-mentioned languages were given priority in educational institutions at every level, in economics, science, art, the mass media and in official clerical work. However, in military units, big industrial enterprises and the regions populated by national minorities the Russian language was used almost exclusively. The limited nature of the Georgian, Azerbaijanian and Armenian languages was also seen in the fact that the Russian population did not even bother themselves about learning the state language of the republic in which they lived, because they felt quite at ease without knowing it. If any Russian-speaking person complained to the local authorities that he felt some discomfort in the language sphere, the authorities reacted at once, and the one who had created, the problem was severely punished. To be unbiased, we must also mention that the situation functioning in the sphere of the state language was better in Armenia than in Georgia and Azerbaijan. It could be explained by the fact that Armenia was almost a monoethnic country (Armenians made up 89.7% of the whole population in 1979) while in Georgia in the same year the Georgians made up 68.9% of the whole population of the Republic, and the Azerbaijanians in Azerbaijan were 78. 1%. In addition to this, besides three autonomous units, two large regions in Georgia (the lower Kartli and Meskhet-Javakheti) were densely populated and are still populated by Azebnaijanians, Armenians and Greeks whose majority did not know Georgian; as to Azerbaijan, the Azerbaijanian language hardly functioned in the autonomous region of Nagorni Karabakh, whose population mostly consisted of Armenians. Armenia did not have any such problems in any region.
The third stage in the language hierarchy was occupied by the languages spoken in the North Caucasian autonomous republics, languages with newly created written languages: Abaza, Checheno-Ingush, Avarian, Kumuk, Lak, Dargwa, Lezghian, Tabassaranian and Nogayan, whose legal status was not determined by the constitution. These languages were generally used in mono-ethnic communication. Their function in the educational system was limited by their being taught as one of the subjects, but they were not used in the role of a teaching language. All subjects except the native language and literature, including history, geography, drawing, singing and physical training, were taught in the Russian language. Such was the situation in the so-called national schools. The use of this group of languages was limited in the mass media as well; usually one newspaper in these languages was published daily in these autonomous republics; only a few programs were broadcast on the radio and television, mostly of an informational nature. Due to the above-mentioned reasons, it was not prestigious for the speakers in the above-mentioned languages to know and learn their native language. Thus the young people preferred to learn Russian, which gave the denationalization process in the 1970s and 80s a mass character.
The languages that did not have a written form were in the most difficult situation. The number of those who spoke them diminished disastrously. This situation posed a serious threat to the existence of the group of languages, which occupied the bottom of the language hierarchy.
The language policy, practiced by the Soviet Union, aimed at russianizing the ethnic groups living in the Empire. Sociolinguistic factors were decisive in achieving this aim. It was much easier to Russianize the small ethnic groups who spoke the languages that lacked a written form than to denationilize the larger ethnic groups, though that aim was also achieveable. There were quite a few methods in the Empire`s arsenal. One of them was establishing more Russian schools than necessary in Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia. In every big city and village Russian schools were opened, even if no Russians lived there. The result was that the majority of students in Russian schools was not Russian. The Russian system of education spoiled the articulation basis of these students, distorted their national ideology, ethnopsychology and broke their link with the world of their native language. Linguists were not allowed to study such questions. It was strictly prohibited. For instance, a conference for young linguists was arranged in the Armenian city of Tsakhkadzor. Linguists from all three Transcaucasian republics, Russia, Ukraine and the Baltic republics participated in it. A young Armenian socio-linguist, A. Galstian, was to read a paper in which he described the national structure of the Russian schools in the Armenian capital and the negative results that the Armenian children´s study in Russian schools produced. The title of the paper aroused suspicions in the conference organizers. They demanded that Galstian should acquaint them with the contents of the paper beforehand. When the young scholar fulfilled their demand and read the text, the organizers forbade reading that paper at the conference, saying that it was anti-Soviet work. A. Galstian could only be grateful that he was not arrested then and there.
Provocative actions connected with language situations took place in the regions distinguished by special ethnic variety with the purpose of hastening the russification of the Caucasian peoples. Many regions in the Caucasus were characterized by ethnic diversity, e.g. Daghestan, Abkhazia and Karachai-Circassia.The representatives of non-Russian ethnic groups living in those regions did not usually know each other`s language, but as a rule they had a good knowledge of Russian and used it in the sphere of interethnic relations. What is more, a great part of non-Russian ethnic groups gradually forgot their native language and spoke the same Russian language. For instanse, in 1989 1.6% of Abkhazia had a fluent knowledge of Georgian, as a secons language; as for the Georgians their 0.3% knew Abkhazian well. While 81.5% of the same Abkhazians had a fluent knowledge of Russian, and 63.3% of Georgians knew Russian well. Another example: in 1979 99.1% of Rutuls, living in Daghestan, considered Rutul to be their native language, and their 52.0% knew Russian very well. The situation became much worse ten years later: in 1989 94.8% of the Rutuls thought Rutul to be their native language (4.3% reduction), while 63.1% had a fluent knowledge of Russian (11.1% increase).
The soviet power paid great attention to controlling interethnic relations or, to be more precise, to retaining tension among different ethnic groups. „Historic-toponymic wars“ were instigated between neighboring ethnic groups with this purpose, the unjust revision and change of administrative borders was exercised. The ethnic groups who had settled down in specific regions in a later period were assured by falsifying history that the given territory was their historic motherland. This caused the discontent of the autochtonous ethnic group and the tension increased. For instance, the historic motherland of the Abkhazians was in Northern Caucasus and the Abkhazians settled down in the North-Western part of Georgia in the 16th to 18th centuries. Falsifying history, Abkhazian linguists and historians, who were inclined to separatism, assured the Abkhazian people that today’s Abkhazia was their historic motherland and that the Georgians were the linguistic conquerors of this land; the Georgian linguists and historians were not allowed to write the truth. When the Georgian scholar, P. Ingorokva, published his work in 1954, asserting that the Georgians were the autochtonous population on the territory of contemporary Abkhazia, it was followed by mass actions of protest on the part of the Abkhazian population and the book was condemned. The trial was conducted by Moscow, as can be proved by the fact that none of the organizers of the Abkhazians‘ mass protest actions was punished, and this at the time when nobody who dared to express protest openly on any subject in the Soviet Union went unpunished. The same kind of „historic-toponymic wars“ went on in the Tskhinvali Region (Georgia), in Karabakh (Azerbaijan) and in Osset-Ingush disputable territory. These wars were later followed by blood-shedding military-political conflicts and the tragedies of thousands of people. All of these disasters were organized by the Kremlin.
After the disintegration of the Soviet Union (December, 1991), the language situation in the whole of the Caucasus underwent considerable changes; the changes were positive in some respects and negative in others. Viz.:
a). In all three states of South Caucasus (Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan) the Russian language has lost its dominating, privileged character and has turned into a second-rate foreign language, whose study is not considered to be prestigious any longer, since these countries have regained their national independence. It is true that the study of this language is still compulsory in the state schools and higher educational institutions of all the three states, but the students are not interested in studying it any longer.
The majority of the Russian population living in these three states did not know Georgian, Azerbaiganian or Armenian (for instance, only 22.5% of the Russian population knew Georgian in Georgia in 1989). After the disintegration of the Soviet Union a large number of Russians went to live in Russia. Of the Russians who remained in Southern Caucasus, the majority began to show an interest in learning the Georgian, Azerbaijanian and Armenian languages.
The Georgian, Azerbaijanian and Armenian languages are state languages in the republics of the Southern Caucasus. Their status is legalized by the Constitution; the prestige of these languages has increased and the area of their use has widened. In spite of this, all three states have serious socio-linguistic problems needing to be solved. One of the problems is the necessity of limiting the great number of English words in the vocabulary of the mass media, in advertising and of the youth and intellectuals. Another problem is finding the finances necessary for teaching the state languages, organizing mass publication of the necessary literature (textbooks, dictionaries, conversation books) as well as opening courses to prepare teachers and for those who want to learn the state languages. An acute problem for Azerbaijan is the reunification with Nagori-Karabakh, which is occupied by Armenia, returning the Azerbaigani population to the region and reestablishing the Azerbaijanian language there. The most acute problem for Georgia is returning the territories of Abkhazia and the Tskinvali Region, which is to all intents and purposes occupied by Russia, returning the Georgian population to both regions and restoring the rights of the Georgian language there.
b) The situation has not improved for the languages spoken in the Northen Caucasus compared to those spoken in the Southern Caucasus. Only one thing has changed, namely, if in the Soviet period the languages with a written form did not enjoy legal status, since December 1991 the Abaza, the Adighe-Kabardian, the Avarian, the Checheno-Ingush, Karachay-Baikarian, Lak, Lezghian, Kumuk, Nogoyan, Ossetian, Tabassaranian, as well as Aghul and Rutul have been declared state languages. In practice, however, only one thing has changed: the time allotted to teaching these languages and their respective literatures in national schools has been increased. Other subjects in those schools are still taught in Russian, and the teaching language at universities is again Russian. It is not obligatory for the Russian population to know the state language of the republic in which they live, and official clerical work is done only in Russian. The survival of the Chechen people and their language, facing the actual danger of being exterminated, is an acute problem not only for the Northem Caucasus but for the whole world. Therefore it is absolutely necessary to stop the war in the territory of Chechnya.