Myths about the origin of Ukraine and the Ukrainians. Myth 6. Unnatural ukromova
Such an attribute of Ukrainian statehood as the state language and story its origin is also shrouded in the veils of mystery, myths and legends. In this regard, the question arises why all attempts to impose it by force and make it native to all citizens of Ukraine are rejected by the overwhelming majority and what underlies such aversion.
According to the official Ukrainian myth, this is an ancient Old Ukrainian language, which was spoken by no less ancient Ukrainian nation, it existed already in the XIII century, and began to form from the VI century. This is just a scientific propaganda of cheap and primitive myths, but there are even more fantastic legends stating that "the Ukrainian language is one of the ancient languages of the world ... there is every reason to believe that already at the beginning of our calendar it was an intertribal language."
This nonsense is not confirmed by any written monuments and documents of ancient Russia. Historical documents on the basis of which such conclusions can be drawn simply do not exist.
In the 10th – 13th centuries, medieval Russia spoke and wrote in a single ancient Russian language, which had regional differences and was created on the basis of the fusion of the local spoken language with the newly arrived Church Slavonic language. And you do not need to be a philologist to see in the Old Russian language, in which chronicles and birch bark letters were written, a prototype of the modern literary Russian language. That is why ukromifotvortsy and reject the existence of a single ancient Russian language.
The most interesting thing is that the founding of the all-Russian literary language, which began to take shape around the seventeenth century, was laid by the Little Russians, using the Western Russian language traditions and the Kiev edition of Church Slavonic as its material. Through their efforts, a powerful stream of elements of Western Russian secular and business speech entered the vocabulary of the upper classes and, through it, the dictionary of secular, literary and clerical languages. It was their creative heritage that Lomonosov and Pushkin developed, forming a world-wide language.
The first “Slavic” grammar, written by Little Russia Meletii Smotritsky as early as 1618 and serving as a textbook in all schools from Kiev to Moscow and St. Petersburg until the end of the 18th century, serves as confirmation of the common origin of Little-Russian and Great-Russian dialects.
Where did the Little Russian dialect come from? This is the Old Russian language, abundantly diluted by Polish borrowings as a result of everyday communication between Russian serfs of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and their masters and who had adopted words and phrases from the language of the Polish gentry for several centuries. This is the language of the village, it is beautiful and melodious, but too primitive to be the language of literature and science. Over time, he was increasingly approaching the Polish language in his vocabulary, and only the return of Little Russia to the bosom of the Russian state interrupted this process.
No written documents, somehow reminiscent of the modern Ukrainian language, exist in nature. Take the Khmelnitsky documents of the XVII century, the documents of the Rusins of Galicia of the XVIII century, they easily guessed Old Russian language, quite tolerably readable by modern man. Only in the 19th century, Kotlyarevsky and other Ukrainophiles attempted to write in Little Russian dialect using Russian grammar.
Taras Shevchenko also wrote part of his works in this dialect, throwing out the fierce anger of the former serf on their masters. Neither he nor Kotlyarevsky had heard about the “Ukrainian Mova”, and if they had learned about it, they would most likely have turned over from annoyance in their coffins. Yes, and Kobzar wrote diaries in Russian, calling his homeland Little Russia.
Shevchenko’s friend Ukrainophile Kulish tried to turn the Little Russian dialect into a cultural language, composed phonetic spelling, the so-called kulishovka, and tried to translate the Bible into it. But nothing came of it, since the adverb was used exclusively by the peasants and included only the words needed in rural life.
Where did the Ukrainian literary language of the 19th century come from and why is it in such contradiction with the evolution of the Old Russian language? The Austrian-Polish authorities of Galicia, in order to create a “Ukrainian nation,” decided to develop a different language for the Ruthenians of Galicia, Bukovina and Transcarpathia and implement it in the education system and office work. Previously, such steps have already been taken, and in 1859, they tried to impose a Latin-based language on the Ruthenians, but the mass protests of the Ruthenians forced them to abandon such a venture.
In order to maximize the differences, the basis of the artificially created “Ukrainian” language was laid not in the Poltava-Cherkasy dialect of the Little-Russian dialect, but in Galician, incomprehensible in the central and eastern regions. Central and Eastern Ukrainian dialects were considered the result of violent russification and therefore were unworthy as the basis of Ukrainian literary language.
The new language was introduced on the basis of phonetic spelling - both I hear and write, using Cyrillic on the basis of "kulishovka". But the Russophobia Ukrainizers didn’t stop only on phonetics. From the Russian alphabet, they threw out such letters as "s", "e", "ъ" and at the same time introduced new ones: "є", "ї" and apostrophe. To further distinguish the Ukrainian newspeak from the Russian language, separate words, at least a little resembling Russian, were deliberately thrown out and replaced by Polish and German, or new ones were invented.
Thus, instead of the popular word “hold”, “trimata” are introduced, instead of “wait” - “chekaty”, instead of “offered” - “proponuvaly”.
In confirmation, you can look at the so-called "Ukrainian" words of Polish origin.
ale - ale - but
amator - amator - amateur
wyazen - więzien - prisoner
dzob - dziob - beak
Lead - ledwie - barely
item - lament - howl
parasolka - parasolka - umbrella
Tsegla - cegla - brick
Zwintar - cwentarz - cemetery
szlachetny - noble
As a basis for the “Ukrainian language”, the founding fathers used commonplace peasant speech, adapted only to the description of peasant life, therefore, the Ukrainian language very much resembles a distorted Russian with too much “popular vocabulary” on the verge of decency.
In 1892, the Shevchenko Partnership submits a draft on the introduction of phonetic spelling in print and educational institutions, and in 1893, the Austro-Hungarian parliament approves the spelling of the “Ukrainian language” for its provinces inhabited by the Ruthenians.
So, by the decree of the Austro-Hungarian parliament at the end of the 19th century, an artificially invented Ukrainian language was born, which was never native to the Ukrainians, and it becomes clear why it does not take root in modern Ukraine.
A prominent Ukrainophile Nechuy-Levitsky, analyzing the invented language, was forced to come to the conclusion that it resembled a caricature of the national language, and this is some kind of “curved mirror” of the Ukrainian language. The abundance of “i” and “ї” in the Ukrainian texts, in his opinion, evokes associations in readership with glasses covered with flies. This is not the Ukrainian language, but “devilry under the supposedly Ukrainian sauce.” But in spite of everything, to write “in Ukrainian” has since meant not just to be creative, but to fulfill the national mission.
At the beginning of the 20th century, Austro-Polish philologists began to export the invented ukromova to Little Russia, they organized a periodical press on it in large cities and published books. But the Galician “mova” was perceived as an abracadabra, since cultured people who understood it simply did not exist. The local residents could not read the books and press printed on it, and all this ended in failure, publications in several issues ordered to live long.
At the time of the UNR, attempts to introduce ukromov also led to the collapse of this undertaking. The population did not want to speak in an artificial language and protested against the forced Ukrainization of the south-western region.
And only with the coming to power of the Bolsheviks, the Ukromova created in Galicia was implanted in all spheres of public life during the harsh Soviet Ukrainization carried out by the “iron” Lazar Kaganovich. He relied not on the people, but on the party-state apparatus and the 50-thousandth army of enlighteners invited from Galicia. In this regard, the head of the Ukrainian SSR Chubar said: "We need to bring the Ukrainian language closer to the understanding of the broad masses of the Ukrainian people."
Kaganovich took up the matter with his characteristic determination. All employees of enterprises and institutions, even cleaners and janitors, were ordered to switch to the Ukrainian language. Linguistic violence has created animosity of the population towards the “Ukrainian” language, and a lot of jokes have appeared that made the “Ukrainian” language laugh.
Administrative methods "Ukrainized" the press, publishing, radio, cinema and theaters. It was forbidden to duplicate in Russian, even signs and ads. The study of the Russian language was actually equivalent to the study of foreign languages. For the lack of knowledge of the Ridova Mova, anyone could lose a job, even a cleaning woman.
By the beginning of the 30's, the results were impressive. Over 80% of schools and 30% of universities conducted tuition at ukromov. On it native 90% of newspapers and 85% of magazines were printed. Ukrainized Stavropol and Krasnodar Territory. All this was unsuccessful and very much reminds of today's times the same attempt to make everyone not only speak, but also think in the ukromov.
The people did not want to ukrinizirovatsya and did not speak the Ukrainian language. The whole process, having met with the passive resistance of the people, gradually faded away, and the Soviet stage of promoting the secluded ones also ended in defeat. She was not loved and did not recognize her mother, but they were forced to teach.
As a result, we can say that even according to American studies, 83% of the population of Ukraine considers Russian as its native language. Despite the paper-state status of the ukromovs, she was never native to him, something like Esperanto. Having become a state, it is today the language of officials, politicians, part of the intelligentsia and the Ukrainian village obsessed with the "great Ukrainian nation". For the overwhelming majority of the population of Ukraine, their family has always been “great and mighty.” Hence the implacable craving for Russian culture, which cannot be broken by any dictates of the Ukrainian state.
According to the official Ukrainian myth, this is an ancient Old Ukrainian language, which was spoken by no less ancient Ukrainian nation, it existed already in the XIII century, and began to form from the VI century. This is just a scientific propaganda of cheap and primitive myths, but there are even more fantastic legends stating that "the Ukrainian language is one of the ancient languages of the world ... there is every reason to believe that already at the beginning of our calendar it was an intertribal language."
This nonsense is not confirmed by any written monuments and documents of ancient Russia. Historical documents on the basis of which such conclusions can be drawn simply do not exist.
In the 10th – 13th centuries, medieval Russia spoke and wrote in a single ancient Russian language, which had regional differences and was created on the basis of the fusion of the local spoken language with the newly arrived Church Slavonic language. And you do not need to be a philologist to see in the Old Russian language, in which chronicles and birch bark letters were written, a prototype of the modern literary Russian language. That is why ukromifotvortsy and reject the existence of a single ancient Russian language.
The most interesting thing is that the founding of the all-Russian literary language, which began to take shape around the seventeenth century, was laid by the Little Russians, using the Western Russian language traditions and the Kiev edition of Church Slavonic as its material. Through their efforts, a powerful stream of elements of Western Russian secular and business speech entered the vocabulary of the upper classes and, through it, the dictionary of secular, literary and clerical languages. It was their creative heritage that Lomonosov and Pushkin developed, forming a world-wide language.
The first “Slavic” grammar, written by Little Russia Meletii Smotritsky as early as 1618 and serving as a textbook in all schools from Kiev to Moscow and St. Petersburg until the end of the 18th century, serves as confirmation of the common origin of Little-Russian and Great-Russian dialects.
Where did the Little Russian dialect come from? This is the Old Russian language, abundantly diluted by Polish borrowings as a result of everyday communication between Russian serfs of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and their masters and who had adopted words and phrases from the language of the Polish gentry for several centuries. This is the language of the village, it is beautiful and melodious, but too primitive to be the language of literature and science. Over time, he was increasingly approaching the Polish language in his vocabulary, and only the return of Little Russia to the bosom of the Russian state interrupted this process.
No written documents, somehow reminiscent of the modern Ukrainian language, exist in nature. Take the Khmelnitsky documents of the XVII century, the documents of the Rusins of Galicia of the XVIII century, they easily guessed Old Russian language, quite tolerably readable by modern man. Only in the 19th century, Kotlyarevsky and other Ukrainophiles attempted to write in Little Russian dialect using Russian grammar.
Taras Shevchenko also wrote part of his works in this dialect, throwing out the fierce anger of the former serf on their masters. Neither he nor Kotlyarevsky had heard about the “Ukrainian Mova”, and if they had learned about it, they would most likely have turned over from annoyance in their coffins. Yes, and Kobzar wrote diaries in Russian, calling his homeland Little Russia.
Shevchenko’s friend Ukrainophile Kulish tried to turn the Little Russian dialect into a cultural language, composed phonetic spelling, the so-called kulishovka, and tried to translate the Bible into it. But nothing came of it, since the adverb was used exclusively by the peasants and included only the words needed in rural life.
Where did the Ukrainian literary language of the 19th century come from and why is it in such contradiction with the evolution of the Old Russian language? The Austrian-Polish authorities of Galicia, in order to create a “Ukrainian nation,” decided to develop a different language for the Ruthenians of Galicia, Bukovina and Transcarpathia and implement it in the education system and office work. Previously, such steps have already been taken, and in 1859, they tried to impose a Latin-based language on the Ruthenians, but the mass protests of the Ruthenians forced them to abandon such a venture.
In order to maximize the differences, the basis of the artificially created “Ukrainian” language was laid not in the Poltava-Cherkasy dialect of the Little-Russian dialect, but in Galician, incomprehensible in the central and eastern regions. Central and Eastern Ukrainian dialects were considered the result of violent russification and therefore were unworthy as the basis of Ukrainian literary language.
The new language was introduced on the basis of phonetic spelling - both I hear and write, using Cyrillic on the basis of "kulishovka". But the Russophobia Ukrainizers didn’t stop only on phonetics. From the Russian alphabet, they threw out such letters as "s", "e", "ъ" and at the same time introduced new ones: "є", "ї" and apostrophe. To further distinguish the Ukrainian newspeak from the Russian language, separate words, at least a little resembling Russian, were deliberately thrown out and replaced by Polish and German, or new ones were invented.
Thus, instead of the popular word “hold”, “trimata” are introduced, instead of “wait” - “chekaty”, instead of “offered” - “proponuvaly”.
In confirmation, you can look at the so-called "Ukrainian" words of Polish origin.
ale - ale - but
amator - amator - amateur
wyazen - więzien - prisoner
dzob - dziob - beak
Lead - ledwie - barely
item - lament - howl
parasolka - parasolka - umbrella
Tsegla - cegla - brick
Zwintar - cwentarz - cemetery
szlachetny - noble
As a basis for the “Ukrainian language”, the founding fathers used commonplace peasant speech, adapted only to the description of peasant life, therefore, the Ukrainian language very much resembles a distorted Russian with too much “popular vocabulary” on the verge of decency.
In 1892, the Shevchenko Partnership submits a draft on the introduction of phonetic spelling in print and educational institutions, and in 1893, the Austro-Hungarian parliament approves the spelling of the “Ukrainian language” for its provinces inhabited by the Ruthenians.
So, by the decree of the Austro-Hungarian parliament at the end of the 19th century, an artificially invented Ukrainian language was born, which was never native to the Ukrainians, and it becomes clear why it does not take root in modern Ukraine.
A prominent Ukrainophile Nechuy-Levitsky, analyzing the invented language, was forced to come to the conclusion that it resembled a caricature of the national language, and this is some kind of “curved mirror” of the Ukrainian language. The abundance of “i” and “ї” in the Ukrainian texts, in his opinion, evokes associations in readership with glasses covered with flies. This is not the Ukrainian language, but “devilry under the supposedly Ukrainian sauce.” But in spite of everything, to write “in Ukrainian” has since meant not just to be creative, but to fulfill the national mission.
At the beginning of the 20th century, Austro-Polish philologists began to export the invented ukromova to Little Russia, they organized a periodical press on it in large cities and published books. But the Galician “mova” was perceived as an abracadabra, since cultured people who understood it simply did not exist. The local residents could not read the books and press printed on it, and all this ended in failure, publications in several issues ordered to live long.
At the time of the UNR, attempts to introduce ukromov also led to the collapse of this undertaking. The population did not want to speak in an artificial language and protested against the forced Ukrainization of the south-western region.
And only with the coming to power of the Bolsheviks, the Ukromova created in Galicia was implanted in all spheres of public life during the harsh Soviet Ukrainization carried out by the “iron” Lazar Kaganovich. He relied not on the people, but on the party-state apparatus and the 50-thousandth army of enlighteners invited from Galicia. In this regard, the head of the Ukrainian SSR Chubar said: "We need to bring the Ukrainian language closer to the understanding of the broad masses of the Ukrainian people."
Kaganovich took up the matter with his characteristic determination. All employees of enterprises and institutions, even cleaners and janitors, were ordered to switch to the Ukrainian language. Linguistic violence has created animosity of the population towards the “Ukrainian” language, and a lot of jokes have appeared that made the “Ukrainian” language laugh.
Administrative methods "Ukrainized" the press, publishing, radio, cinema and theaters. It was forbidden to duplicate in Russian, even signs and ads. The study of the Russian language was actually equivalent to the study of foreign languages. For the lack of knowledge of the Ridova Mova, anyone could lose a job, even a cleaning woman.
By the beginning of the 30's, the results were impressive. Over 80% of schools and 30% of universities conducted tuition at ukromov. On it native 90% of newspapers and 85% of magazines were printed. Ukrainized Stavropol and Krasnodar Territory. All this was unsuccessful and very much reminds of today's times the same attempt to make everyone not only speak, but also think in the ukromov.
The people did not want to ukrinizirovatsya and did not speak the Ukrainian language. The whole process, having met with the passive resistance of the people, gradually faded away, and the Soviet stage of promoting the secluded ones also ended in defeat. She was not loved and did not recognize her mother, but they were forced to teach.
As a result, we can say that even according to American studies, 83% of the population of Ukraine considers Russian as its native language. Despite the paper-state status of the ukromovs, she was never native to him, something like Esperanto. Having become a state, it is today the language of officials, politicians, part of the intelligentsia and the Ukrainian village obsessed with the "great Ukrainian nation". For the overwhelming majority of the population of Ukraine, their family has always been “great and mighty.” Hence the implacable craving for Russian culture, which cannot be broken by any dictates of the Ukrainian state.
- Yuri Apukhtin
- rusnation.org
- Myths about the origin of Ukraine and the Ukrainians. Myth 1. Ukraine is the successor of Kievan Rus
Myths about the origin of Ukraine and the Ukrainians. Myth 2. Polish name: Ukraine
Myths about the origin of Ukraine and the Ukrainians. Myth 3. Historically foreign flag of Ukraine
Myths about the origin of Ukraine and the Ukrainians. Myth 4. Instead of a hymn, a requiem
Myths about the origin of Ukraine and the Ukrainians. Myth 5. Brand instead of coat of arms
Information