SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Selçuk Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2023 / Sayı: 60

Being a Young Speaker of the Gagauz Language in Post-Soviet Context

Sovyet Sonrası Bağlamında Genç Bir Gagauzca Konuşuru Olmak

Kayhan İnan(Amasya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Türkçe Eğitimi Bölümü ORCID: Amasya / TÜRKİYE)0000-0002-7438-0742
Gülin Dağdeviren Kırmızı(Başkent Üniversitesi İngilizce Öğretmenliği Programı ORCID: Ankara / TÜRKİYE)0000-0002-4675-1040
Pages
379–397
Publication Date
2023-12-20
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result, the strong identification with ethnic identity and perception of Gagauz identity does not help maintain the Gagauz language in Gagauzia.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The concept of identity assumes great importance in the context of endangered languages.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, the identity perceptions of Gagauz adolescents were investigated using Bucholtz and Hall's (2005) sociocultural linguistic approach.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, the strong identification with ethnic identity and perception of Gagauz identity does not help maintain the Gagauz language in Gagauzia.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2005 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Gagauzca · Rusça · Genç Konuşurlar

Abstract

The concept of identity assumes great importance in the context of endangered languages. In this study, the identity perceptions of Gagauz adolescents were investigated using Bucholtz and Hall's (2005) sociocultural linguistic approach. To this end, semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with three adolescent Gagauz speakers who had distinctive profiles in terms of Gagauz identity. Bucholtz and Hall's indexicality principle, specifically the use of WE- and THEY- references, was taken into consideration in the analysis of interviews held with young Gagauz speakers. In the semi-structured interviews, the participants responded to specific questions that probed self-identification, the relationship between the Gagauz language and ethnicity, the future of Gagauz people and Gagauz language, and perceived linguistic (in)security when speaking Gagauz and Russian languages, as well as language choice at school. The findings show that the participants have different profiles and use various indexical references and linguistic strategies regarding group membership. The influence of Russia and the Russian language on Gagauz identity is salient in social life, bureaucracy, and politics. As a result, the strong identification with ethnic identity and perception of Gagauz identity does not help maintain the Gagauz language in Gagauzia.

Özet

Kimlik kavramı, tehlike altındaki diller bağlamında büyük önem taşımaktadır. Bu çalışmada Gagauz gençlerin kimlik algıları Bucholtz and Hall (2005) tarafından geliştirilen sosyokültürel dil bilimsel yaklaşım kullanılarak araştırılmıştır. Bu amaçla, Gagauz kimliği açısından farklı profillere sahip üç Gagauz konuşuru genç ile yarı yapılandırılmış derinlemesine görüşme gerçekleştirilmiştir. Genç Gagavuz konuşmacılarla gerçekleştirilen görüşmeler, Bucholtz ve Hall'un dizinsellik ilkesi çerçevesinde özellikle BİZ ve ONLAR referanslarının kullanımı bakımından analiz edilmiştir. Yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme kapsamında katılımcılar, Gagauz dili ve etnik köken arasındaki ilişkiye, Gagauz halkının ve Gagauz dilinin geleceğine, okuldaki dil seçimlerinde Gagauz ve Rus dillerine yönelik dil bilimsel güven algılarını betimlemeye ilişkin soruları yanıtlamıştır. Elde edilen bulgular, katılımcıların konu ile ilgili farklı profiller çizdiği belirlenmiştir. Grup üyeliği ve kimlik bağlamında görüşmecilerin ilişkin çeşitli dizinsel referanslar ve dil bilimsel stratejiler kullandıkları görülmektedir. Rusya'nın ve Rus dilinin Gagauz kimliği üzerindeki etkisi sosyal hayatta, bürokraside ve siyasette belirgindir. Sonuçlar, Gagauz kimliğinin güçlü bir şekilde etnik kimlikle özdeşleştirilmesinin ve Gagauz kimliği algısının, Gagauz dilinin Gagauz Yeri’nde sürdürülmesine yardımcı olmadığını göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

İnan, K., Kırmızı, G. D. (2023). Being a Young Speaker of the Gagauz Language in Post-Soviet Context. Selçuk Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, Sayı: 60, 379–397. https://doi.org/10.21563/sutad.1405543

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (46)

  1. Bankston, C. L. & Henry, J. M. (1998). The silence of the gators: Cajun ethnicity and intergenerational transmission of Louisiana French. Journal of Multilingual and
  2. Multicultural Development, 19(1), 1-23. doi: 10.1080/01434639808666339
  3. Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse: A critical introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511610295
  4. Bodean-Vozian, O. & Soltan, A. (2014). Language policy dimensions for social cohesion in Moldova: The case of Gagauz autonomy. Sustainable Multilingualism, 4, 25-45. doi: 10.7220/2335-2027.4.2
  5. Bucholtz, M. & Hall, K. (2004a). Language and identity. (A. Duranti, ed.). A companion to linguistic anthropology (pp. 369-385). Malden: Basil Blackwell.
  6. Bucholtz, M. & Hall, K. (2004b). Theorizing identity in language and sexuality research. Language in Society, 33(4), 469-515. doi: 10.1017/S0047404504334020
  7. Bucholtz, M. & Hall, K. (2005). Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies, 7, 585-614. doi: 10.1177/1461445605054407
  8. Bucholtz, M. & Hall, K. (2010). Locating identity in language. (C. Llamas & D. Watt, ed.). Language and identities (pp. 18-28). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  9. Dağdeviren-Kırmızı, G. (2020). Emotional and functional speaker attitudes towards Gagauz as an endangered language. Bilig, 93, 203-222. doi: 10.12995/bilig.9309
  10. Demir, N. (2011). Saltık-nâme ve Selçuk-nâme ışığında Gagauz Türkleri. Zeitschrift für die Welt der Türken, 3(2), 5-19. https://dieweltdertuerken.org/index.php/ZfWT/article/view/244
  11. Doerfer, G. (1959). Das Gagausische. (J. Deny, K. Grønbech, & L. Bazin, ed.). Philologiae Turcicae fundamenta (pp. 260-271). Wiesbaden: Aquis Mattiacis Apud Franciscum Steiner.
  12. Dorian, N. (1999). Linguistic and ethnographic fieldwork. (J. Fishman, ed.). Handbook of language and ethnic identity (pp. 25-41). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  13. Ehala, M. (2015). Blurring of collective identities in the post-Soviet space. Sociolinguistic Studies, 9(2-3), 173-190. doi: 10.1558/sols.v9i2.26734
  14. Eren, E. (2021). Language and education policies based on national/plurilingual identity in autonomous republics: A case study of the Gagauzia autonomous region. Education Quarterly Reviews, 4(3), 192-199. doi: 10.31014/aior.1993.04.03.330
  15. Fishman, J. (1991). Reversing language shift: Theoretical and empirical foundations of assistance to threatened languages. Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.
  16. Foucault, M. (2002). The archaeology of knowledge. London: Routledge.
  17. Giles, H., Coupland, N., & Coupland, J. (1991). Accommodation theory: Communication, context, and consequence. (H. Giles, J. Coupland, & N. Coupland, ed.). Contexts of accommodation: Developments in applied sociolinguistics (pp. 1-68). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511663673.001
  18. Guboglo, M. N. (2018). Gagauzların etnik aidiyeti. (B. Hünerli, çev.). TÜRÜK Uluslararası Dil Edebiyat ve Halk Bilimi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(12), 67-78. (Original work published 1967) https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/turuk/issue/42737/517522
  19. Güngör, H. & Argunşah, M. (1991). Gagauz Türkleri. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları.
  20. Hall, S. & Du Gay, P. (1996). Questions of cultural identity. London: Sage. doi: 10.4135/9781446221907
  21. Johanson, L. (2020). Turkic language contacts. (R. Hickey, ed.). The handbook of language contact (pp. 652-672). Singapore: Wiley-Blackwel. doi: 10.1002/9781444318159
  22. Kennedy, M. (2002). Cultural formations of post-communism: emancipation, transition, nation, and war. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  23. Keough, L. (2006). Globalizing postsocialism: Mobile mothers and neoliberalism on the margins of Europe. Anthropological Quarterly, 79(3), 431-461. https://jstor.org/stable/4150873
  24. King, C. (1997). Minorities policy in the post-Soviet republics: The case of the Gagauzia. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 20(4), 738-756. doi: 1080/01419870.1997.9993987
  25. King, C. (2000). The Moldovans: Romania, Russian, and the politics of culture. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press.
  26. Küçükler, H. & Curdoglo, A. (2001). Perspectives of teaching in English in Gagauzia in Moldova. Balkanlarda Türk Dili ve Edebiyatı Araştırmaları, 3(1), 25-38. doi: 10.47139/balted.799025
  27. Landry, R., & Allard, R., & Deveau, K. (2010). Schooling and cultural autonomy: A Canada-wide study in Francophone minority schools. Canada: Canadian Heritage. https://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.568292/publication.html
  28. Le Page, R. & Tabouret-Keller, A. (1985). Acts of identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  29. Menz, A. (2003). Endangered Turkic languages: The case of Gagauz. (M. Janse & S. Tol, ed.). Language death and language maintenance (pp. 143-155). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/cilt.240.09men
  30. Menz, A. (2006). On complex sentences in Gagauz. (H. Boeschoten & L. Johanson, ed.). Turkish Languages in Contact (pp. 139-151). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Werlag.
  31. Menz, A. (2007). The Gagauz between Christianity and Turkishness. In F. Kıral et. Al (Eds.), Cultural changes in the Turkic world (pp. 123-130). Baden Baden: Ergon Verlag.
  32. Menz, A. (2013). Tehlikedeki Türk dilleri: Gagauzca örneği. Tehlikedeki Diller Dergisi, 2(2), 145-156. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/tdd/issue/29412/314978
  33. Moseley, C. (20 June 2020). Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger. http://unesco.org/culture/en/endangeredlanguages/atlas
  34. National Bureau of Statistics of the Republic of Moldova. (20 June 2020). Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of Moldova. https://statistica.gov.md/pageview.php? l=en&id=2193&idc=263
  35. Oakes, P. & Haslam, S. A. (1994). Stereotyping and social reality. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  36. Ochs, E. (1992). Indexing gender. (A. Duranti & C. Goodwin, ed.). Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 335-358). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  37. Özkan, N. (2016). Gagavuz Türkçesi grameri. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
  38. Phillips, A. (2010). What’s wrong with essentialism? Distinktion: Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory, 11(1), 47-60. doi: 10.1080/1600910X.2010.9672755
  39. Sağlam, N. A. & Adıgüzel, Y. (2021). Gagauz identity in the post-Soviet period. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 63, 279-296. doi: 10.26650/JECS2020-0112
  40. Sallabank, J. (2013). Attitudes to endangered languages: Identities and policies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139344166
  41. Silverstein, M. (1995). Linguistic categories, and cultural description. (B. Blount, ed.). Language, culture, and society: A book of readings (pp. 187-221). Illinois: Waveland Press.
  42. Stets, J. E. (2006). Identity theory. (P. J. Burke, ed.). Contemporary social psychological theories (pp. 88-110). Standford: Stanford University Press.
  43. Suny, R. G. (2012). The contradictions of identity: Being Soviet and national in the USSR and after. (M. Bassin & C. Kelly, ed.). Soviet and post-Soviet identities (pp. 23-66). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  44. Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories: Studies in social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  45. Tishkov V. A. (1997). Ethnic conflicts in the post-Soviet space. New York: SAGE Publications.
  46. Vogt, H. (2005). Between utopia and disillusionment: A narrative of the political transformation in Eastern Europe. New York: Berghahn Books. doi: 10.3167/9781571818959