Abstract:
У статті розглянуто проблему лінгвоциду (мововбивства) на тимчасово окупованих
територіях в Україні в 2021-2023 роках. Наголошується, що лінгвоцидна практика росії на
тимчасово захоплених територіях в Україні пов’язана з історично зафіксованою практикою
знищення, знецінення державотворчого значення української літературної мови як державної та
політикою антилегітимізації суверенності держави Україна і відсутності потреби у державних
символах. The article examines the problem of linguocide in the
temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine in 2021-2022.
It is emphasized that the linguocidal practice of russia in the temporarily occupied territories in
Ukraine is connected with the historically recorded practice of destruction, devaluation of the state-building
significance of the Ukrainian literary language and the policy of anti-legitimization of the sovereignty of the
state of Ukraine, the lack of need for state symbols, and therefore the state Ukrainian language
Formulation of the problem. For a long time, the problem of linguicide was not the subject of
research in domestic linguistics, as this was not facilitated by the historical realities in which Ukraine was from
the end of the 17th to the end of the 20th century [11]. I. Ohienko, M. Kostomarov, I. Franko, and
Yu. Shevelyov highlighted certain aspects of this issue in their scientific investigations. Already after the
declaration of independence of Ukraine published thorough publications by V. Ivanyshin, L. Masenko,
P. Movchan, O. Pavlova, N. Tumai, Y. Radevich-Vynnytskyi, E. Sverstyuk, V. Khristenok, Yu. Shapoval and
others researchers However, even today works of this nature remain relevant, because the harmful impact of
relapses of linguicide is still felt in modern Ukrainian society, which determines the acuteness of the language
issue.
The russia’s military aggression against Ukraine has been taking place since 2014. During this
eight-year period, the representatives of the fifth column of the aggressor country manifested themselves to the fullest extent at all levels of the social hierarchy – from ordinary citizens to representatives of
judicial and law enforcement bodies, local self-government bodies and the state legislature [22].
Criminalization of collaborationism in Ukraine is a relatively new legal phenomenon. However,
its criminal-legal, criminal-procedural and operative-search aspects have already been considered in the
works of such scientists as S. Albul, O. Kozachenko, V. Kuznetsov, O. Musychenko, E. Pysmenskyi, A.
Politova, E. Polyakov, M. Siyploki, T. Shurat, K. Yanishevska and others.
The article is devoted to the study of issues of criminalization of collaborationism in Ukraine
and the organizational and legal prerequisites of its documentation.
The language issue is part of state policy, therefore it is especially relevant for those peoples
who have been de-ethnicized for a long time, and now need not only the preservation and development of
the national language, but also the revival of its use throughout the state [12]. The conflict of the current
language problems Ukraine inherited from the colonial past. The russian language has supplanted
Ukrainian in a significant part of the eastern, southern and even some central regions of our country,
taking over the main function of the language – the communicative one [18]. Such language imbalance
blocks the implementation of the identification function of language, which is aimed at unifying the
ethnic community on the basis of language, which, therefore, weakens the national self-awareness of
Ukrainians, hindering the construction of a strong independent state. Long-term assimilation processes,
which eliminated the very concept of «native language», weakened the sense of national cohesion and
solidarity in Ukrainian society, which became an obstacle to national self-assertion. According to the
Ukrainian linguist Orest Tkachenko, in the hierarchy of factors that shape the ability of the national
community to resist linguistic and cultural assimilation by another state, it is the feeling of national
solidarity is one of the defining [21]. The historical process, as noted by Professor E. Pysmenskyi and
others, proved that a state whose territory becomes occupied is subject to the suppression of national
traits, the phenomena of collaborationism, and linguocide [15]. «In turn,» the scientist states, «as a result
of the linguistic self-assertion of the people, which presupposes the emergence of a national state, the
language becomes: national, that is, characteristic of all strata of the respective people, both in the village
and in the city; national, that is, used not only by its speakers, but also by all other ethnic groups or
national minorities of its state as a national language and as a means of international communication.
