Abstract

Since Armenia’s independence in 1991, thousands of diasporans have made the decision to return and settle in the ancestral homeland. The returnees, who speak Western Armenian, one of the two standardised forms of modern Armenian, are switching to the use of Eastern Armenian, the official variant of the homeland. Using two determinants of language perception—standardisation and vitality—this paper analyses the reactions received by thirty returnees who emigrated from nine countries, when speaking Western Armenian to an Eastern Armenian-speaking society. The vitality of the language shows signs of increasing through an encouragement by locals aware of the language’s historical significance, and an admiration of its ‘beauty’ and terminology. A heightened vitality has led returnees to feel confident about its use during social interactions and the possibility of the standard being incorporated into the nation’s linguistic narrative. However, confusion and ridicule due to a differing pronunciation, vocabulary, terminology, and the inability to be understood by some in Armenian society, has led to discomfort by returnees who are shifting to the usage of Eastern Armenian. At present, the use of Western Armenian in the homeland remains within the confines of family, friends and returnee circles. Despite the changing status of Western Armenian through a notable welcoming of the language into the linguistic narrative of the country, some segments of Armenian society do not perceive Western Armenian as an acceptable standard for broader use in Armenian society and national institutions. The homeland’s inconsistent, and at times questionable, acceptance of the language perpetuates the status quo that Western Armenian remains an unacceptable standard within the homeland and for use only in the diaspora.

Highlights

  • THE MODERN ARMENIAN LANGUAGE: A BRIEF OVERVIEWThe standardisation of the Modern Armenian language can be chronologically placed from the 18th century onwards, following Classical Armenian (5th–12th century) and Middle Armenian (12th–early 18th century) (Clyne 1992: 326)

  • Using two determinants of language perception—standardisation and vitality—this paper analyses the reactions received by thirty returnees who emigrated from nine countries, when speaking Western Armenian to an Eastern Armenian-speaking society

  • The findings of this paper reveal the attitudes in Armenian society toward a ‘standard’ variant of Armenian, not considered official in the Republic of Armenia

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The standardisation of the Modern Armenian language can be chronologically placed from the 18th century onwards, following Classical Armenian (5th–12th century) and Middle Armenian (12th–early 18th century) (Clyne 1992: 326). The two branches of the modern Armenian language, Eastern and Western, present a story of competing empires and the linguistic division of their respective Armenian communities. The origins of modern Armenian stem from two dialectical branches of Armenian (Clyne 1992: 326), each representing the vernacular that was codified and spread throughout Armenian communities within their respective empires (Dum-Tragut 2009: 3). The spread of literature in one of the two standardised forms of modern Armenian, and the general lack of interaction between these communities or their respective literatures, further divided the Armenian people. Western Armenian would be used by the Armenian communities of the Middle East, Europe, and other parts of the diaspora (with the exception of Iran8); Eastern Armenian would be the language of Soviet Armenia and the Armenian communities of the Soviet Union (Clyne 1992: 325)

Objectives
Methods
Discussion
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.