Lietuvos urbanistiniai kalbiniai repertuarai ir XXI amžiaus sociolingvistinės perspektyvos

LTBaigiamajame monografijos "Miestai ir kalbos. 2" skyriuje "Išvados" išryškinami bendrieji nagrinėjami klausimai: miestiečių kalbiniai repertuarai, jų regioniniai, statuso ypatumai, kalbinės nuostatos, susijusios su dvikalbio ugdymo klausimu. Monografija pirmąkart lietuvių sociolingvistikoje pristato Lietuvos miestų kalbinį gyvenimą XXI amžiaus pirmaisiais dešimtmečiais. Remiantis kiekybinių ir kokybinių tyrimų metodologine prieiga, analizuojamas visų didesnių nei 3 tūkst. gyventojų turinčių miestų gyventojų kalbų ir tarmių deklaruojamas mokėjimas ir vartojimas įvairiose sferose bendraujant su skirtingais pašnekovais skirtingose situacijose, tiriamos kalbinės nuostatos, ieškoma sąsajų tarp kalbinio elgesio, nuostatų ir tapatybės. Atskiruose monografijos skyriuose išnagrinėti gimtųjų kalbų – lietuvių kaip valstybinės kalbos ir jos tarmių, didžiausių Lietuvos tautinių mažumų lenkų ir rusų – kalbų mokėjimas ir vartojimas, užsienio kalbų komunikacinė kompetencija, gebėjimai ir praktinių įgūdžių taikymas. Specialus dėmesys skirtas kalbinių nuostatų įvairių kalbų ir tarmių, daugiakalbystės atžvilgiu analizei, nagrinėjama įvairių socialinių veiksnių (amžiaus, išsilavinimo, socialinės padėties ir pan.), miestų dydžio įtaka kalbiniam elgesiui, atskirų regionų kalbiniai ypatumai. Nuodugnesnės minėtų aspektų išvados yra dėstomos kiekvieno monografijos skyriaus apibendrinimuose.Reikšminiai žodžiai: Daugiakalbystė; Kalbos miestuose; Tarmės miestuose; Sociolingvistika; Multilingualism; Languages in cities; Dialects in cities; Sociolinguistics.

ENThe final chapter of the monograph "Cities and Languages. 2" "Conclusions" highlights the general issues of the book. This monograph is the first attempt in Lithuanian sociolinguistics to shed light on the linguistic situation in Lithuanian cities and towns in the first decades of the 21st century. Quantitative and qualitative research methods have been used to investigate the knowledge and use of languages and dialects in all urban areas with over 3,000 inhabitants. More specifically, the research questions were focused on the use of languages across a variety of social domains and situations with different interlocutors; the study also looked into linguistic attitudes of urban residents and aimed to describe interrelation between the linguistic behaviour, attitudes, and identities. Our findings have revealed the evidence of language status and prestige and pointed out marked tendencies in the use of different languages. In all urban areas, the Lithuanian language enjoys a special position with a high status and prestige. The official domains, even those in multilingual and multicultural towns, have become fully Lithuanian, with all residents, both Lithuanian and non-Lithuanian, most often using the state language. In contrast, private domains involving communication with acquaintances or relatives tend to be rather multilingual in towns with multilingual populations. Only a very small proportion of respondents indicate that they do not know Lithuanian at all. Usually, this refers to elderly and the least socially active urban residents.The study also provides the evidence of the rapidly increasing prestige of English. Urban residents in all places, irrespectively of their proficiency in English, consider this lingua franca of the globalization era to be the most prestigious language (50.52%). The regional specificity of language knowledge, use and linguistic attitudes have been visually illustrated in maps based on the quantitative research data. The respondents’ choice of native language largely coincides with their declaration of ethnic identity. Individual regions of the country are not significantly different in terms of language knowledge and linguistic attitudes, the only exception being the knowledge of Polish. However, the linguistic behaviour and attitudes of urban residents correlate with the size of the area and, more generally, with its linguistic and economic environment. It has been established that large cities show the greatest linguistic diversity, a higher level of proficiency in all languages, those of ethnic minorities and foreign languages included, and a more intense use of different languages. The study has also revealed attitudes towards bilingual education. It appears that urban residents are in favour of bilingual education: over a half of all respondents (52.93%) in the large cities and 70% in smaller towns with 40,000–200,000 inhabitants support the idea of a bilingual school. The analysis of dialect use shows that over a half of Lithuanian urban residents can speak some dialect, even if they do not use it in their daily life; 16% of the respondents do not know any dialect. Dialects seem to have the strongest position in middle-sized towns with over 30,000 inhabitants. The knowledge and use of dialects as well as positive attitudes to dialects vary across the ethnographic regions of the country. Urban residents prefer to use and put value on the dialects used in the centres of ethnographic regions.Such centres are usually characterized by a strong local identity and ethnographic self-consciousness of the local residents, e.g., in Žemaitija or northern Aukštaitija. The least frequent use of the local dialect in towns has been established in Dzūkija (southern Lithuania). This study shows, however, that dialects still possess vitality and are strongly related with local identity, even if in certain regions (Dzūkija) they might have lost some prestige. The qualitative data suggests that in many cases the negative attitudes towards dialects could have been influenced by school which promotes the ideology of linguistic standardization and prioritizes the single standard language variety. The methodological model designed and implemented in the study will be instrumental in the future not only to monitor the changing linguistic situation and compare different periods, but also to carry out in-depth analyses of linguistic situation in individual urban areas. The methodological sociolinguistic map will provide a basis for a consistent further study of many complex linguistic phenomena and the role of language in contemporary world; it will also allow for an analysis of the causes of linguistic processes, their future development and relation to relevant social factors. However, to build up a comprehensive picture of the declared and the actual linguistic behaviour, sociolinguistic investigation should involve a variety of methodological approaches. [From the publication]