Preservation of the Chuvash Ethnic Culture in the Conditions of the Moscow Region Diaspora Group

Research Article
EDN: FHSWUA DOI: 10.31483/r-64078
Open Access
International academic journal «Ethnic Culture»
Creative commons logo
Published in:
International academic journal «Ethnic Culture»
Author:
Marina V. Kutsaeva 1
Work direction:
Problems of Ethnic Cultures Preservation
Pages:
27-39
Received: 17 December 2019

Rating:
Article accesses:
5220
Published in:
doaj РИНЦ
1 Institute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences
For citation:
Kutsaeva M. V. (2019). Preservation of the Chuvash Ethnic Culture in the Conditions of the Moscow Region Diaspora Group. Ethnic Culture, 27-39. EDN: FHSWUA. https://doi.org/10.31483/r-64078
UDC 394.21

Abstract

The article deals with the problem of preservation of Chuvash ethnic culture in the conditions of diaspora. The purpose of the article is to determine the prospects of preserving the ethnic culture of the members of the Chuvash diaspora in the framework of integration processes in the multicultural environment of the Moscow region. Methods. The author of the article conducted a sociolinguistic survey in the Chuvash diaspora of the Moscow region; the selective sampling included 100 respondents (85 respondents belong to the first generation of the Chuvash diaspora, 15 – to the second). One of the aspects of the survey was to study the respondents’ language loyalty, which indirectly manifests itself in in the knowledge and observance of ethnic traditions and customs. The respondents were asked questions concerning the criteria of their belonging to the Chuvash ethnic group, observance of national traditions and customs, features of the Chuvash ethnic culture, intergenerational transmission of ethnic culture. Based on their answers, tables on age cohorts for representatives of both generations were compiled. Results. More than half of the respondents in the sampling in the first generation (55%) observe Chuvash traditions and holidays, especially representatives of younger and middle cohorts; in the second generation, ethnic culture is somewhat fading (27%). More than half of the respondents in the first generation (58.6%) intend to transmit knowledge about their ethnic culture to children. Women in the sampling rather tend to transmit material culture, while men spiritual one. The author concludes that, despite the fact that living far from the small homeland affects the preservation of ethnic culture, however, at present, in the conditions of polycultural urban environment, the diaspora is the most demanded form of social adaptation, especially among the younger generation, among whom many demonstrate an active life position and involvement in the process of preserving Chuvash ethnic culture in the Moscow region.

References

  1. 1. Vakhtin, N. B., & Golovko, E. V. (2004). Sotsiolingvistika i sotsiologiia iazyka., 388. M.: Gumanitarnaia akademiia.
  2. 2. Viner, B. A. (1998). Mezhpokolennaia peredacha etnicheskoi identichnosti u etnodispersnykh men'shinstv (na primere sovremennogo Peterburga)., 190. SPb.
  3. 3. Vovina, O. P. (2001). Traditsii i simvoly v osvoenii sakral'nogo prostranstva: chuvashskaia "kiremet'" v proshlom i nastoiashchem. Chuvashskoe naselenie Rossii. Konsolidatsiia. Diasporizatsiia. Integratsiia. T. 2. Strategiia vozrozhdeniia i etnicheskaia mobilizatsiia, sost. P.M. Alekseev / otv. red. M.N. Guboglo, 34-74. M.: Izd-vo TsIMO.
  4. 4. Vserossiiskaia perepis' naseleniia 2010 goda. Retrieved from https://www.gks.ru/free_doc/new_site/perepis2010/croc/perepis_itogi1612.htm
  5. 5. Kozlov, V. I. (1978). Etnicheskaia obshchnost'. Bol'shaia Sovetskaia Entsiklopediia. V 30 t. T. 30, 3, , 298. M.: Sovetskaia entsiklopediia.
  6. 6. Kutsaeva, M. V. (2018). Problema sokhraneniia chuvashskogo iazyka v usloviiakh diaspory moskovskogo regiona. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana. Trudy Instituta lingvisticheskikh issledovanii RAN, 180-198. Mazurova;; SPb.: Izd-vo ILI RAN.
  7. 7. Kutsaeva, M. V. (2017). Loial'nost' k chuvashskomu iazyku v diaspornoi gruppe moskovskogo regiona. Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov, 1, 54-77.
  8. 8. Matveev, G. B. (2009). Pominoveniia ezhegodnye traditsionnye. Chuvashskaia entsiklopediia, 466. Cheboksary: Chuvashskoe knizhnoe izd-vo.
  9. 9. Mikhal'chenko, V. Iu. (2006). Slovar' sotsiolingvisticheskikh terminov., 312. M.: Izd-vo Institut iazykoznaniia RAN.
  10. 10. Smolich, E. (2012). Iazyki men'shinstv kak tsentral'nye tsennosti etnicheskikh kul'tur. Sotsiolingvistika i sotsiologiia iazyka. Khrestomatiia, SPb.: Izd, , 402-432. Sankt-Peterburge.
  11. 11. Suleimenova, E. D., & Shaimerdenova, N. Zh. (2002). Slovar' sotsiolingvisticheskikh terminov., 170. Almaty: Izd-vo Kazak universitet.
  12. 12. Tishkov, V. A. (2001). Etnologiia i politika. Nauchnaia publitsistika., 240. M.: Nauka.
  13. 13. Fokanov, Iu. V. (2008). Diaspora: k voprosu o kontseptualizatsii poniatiia v usloviiakh globalizatsii. Izvestiia Rossiiskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. A.I. Gertsena, 60, 284-289.
  14. 14. Fokin, P. P. (2009). Pomoch' (nime). Chuvashskaia entsiklopediia, 467. Cheboksary: Chuvashskoe knizhnoe izd-vo.
  15. 15. Fokin, P. P. (2011). Troitsa. Chuvashskaia entsiklopediia, 265. Cheboksary: Chuvashskoe knizhnoe izd-vo.
  16. 16. Fomin, E. V. (2016). Chuvashskii iazyk. Iazyk i obshchestvo. Entsiklopediia, 556-565. M.: Azbukovnik.
  17. 17. Fomin, E. V. (2016). Iazykovaia situatsiia v Chuvashii. Iazyk i obshchestvo. Entsiklopediia, 824-833. M.: Azbukovnik.
  18. 18. Chuvashskii Akatui otmetili na moskovskoi zemle. Retrieved from http://gov.cap.ru/Info.aspx?type=news&id=3610827&gov_id=100
  19. 19. Prazdnik "Savarni". Retrieved from http://gov.cap.ru/photo.aspx?gov_id=100&id=45901&page=24
  20. 20. V Moskve s razmakhom otmetili chuvashskii natsional'nyi prazdnik "Surkhuri". Retrieved from http://gov.cap.ru/print.aspx?gov_id=49&id=3192337
  21. 21. Ker sari 2016. Retrieved from http://gov.cap.ru/photo.aspx?gov_id=100&id=180972&page=2

Comments(0)

When adding a comment stipulate:
  • the relevance of the published material;
  • general estimation (originality and relevance of the topic, completeness, depth, comprehensiveness of topic disclosure, consistency, coherence, evidence, structural ordering, nature and the accuracy of the examples, illustrative material, the credibility of the conclusions;
  • disadvantages, shortcomings;
  • questions and wishes to author.