Abstract

Introduction. The author analyzes the revisionist concepts of the history of the Eastern Slavic languages. It is assumed that historical Eastern Slavic philology became the victim of numerous ideological and political manipulations. Methods. The author uses the methods of intellectual history, the archeology of ideas and the history of ideas. It is assumed that the methods proposed in nationalisms studies, including the concept of invented traditions, are also applicable for the analysis of this problem. Results. Analyzing the problems of the intellectual history of Eastern Slavic languages studies, the author believes that some historians proposed a revisionist explanation of the history of the old-Novgorod dialect. Some authors believe that the concept of "Eastern Slavic languages" is an invented ideological tradition because supporters of the revisionist approach exclude the Novgorod dialect from the eastern Slavic area, localizing it among the "northern" Slavic languages – a separate group that they distinguish, although other authors deny its existence. Supporters of the revisionist approach determined the old-Novgorod dialect and Lechite languages, defined as Western Slavic languages, as North Slavic languages. Discussion. In general, the author believes that discussions and debates about the number of Slavic language groups and the affiliation of its dialects are mainly a political problem, actualizing the dependence of historical Slavic philology on the ideological situation. Analyzing the history of intellectual discussions, the author presumes that conservative stability is the main factor that determines the vectors and development paths of the academic community, eliminating the possibility of revising the dominant concepts.

Highlights

  • The author analyzes the revisionist concepts of the history of the Eastern Slavic languages

  • Academic "compromise" canon A compromise concept inherited from the Soviet period dominates in modern Russian historiography and philology

  • Summing up the ideas and assumptions of these scholars it is logical to formulate several ideas that form the hardcore of the revisionist paradigm in history writing of East Slavic languages

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The author analyzes the revisionist concepts of the history of the Eastern Slavic languages. Analyzing the problems of the intellectual history of Eastern Slavic languages studies, the author believes that some historians proposed a revisionist explanation of the history of the old-Novgorod dialect. Russian pre-revolutionary historians believed in the existence of a single Russian language, insisting that Ukrainian and Belarusian did not have independent status but there were its dialects (Fenghi, 2020; Kolstø & Blakkisrud, 2016; Laruelle, 2018; Plokhy, 2017; Stickland, 2020) Soviet linguists changed this scheme slightly; on the one hand, they recognized the independent status of the Ukrainian and Belarusian languages, proposing an ideological and academic compromise, assuming that the historical ancestors of Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians formed drevnerusskaia narodnost’ or Old-Russian nationality. Some intellectuals proposed a revisionist viewpoint, based on a revision of the concept of the history of the Old Russian language and collective belief in the existence of the Old Russian nationality and East Slavic languages as its historical heirs

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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