Moldovans and Romanians: one people or two different ones. Moldovan and Romanian languages Liberated, but not all
It’s easy for a lazy and incurious Moscow citizen to call a Moldovan builder who laid tiles poorly a “Romanian.” Ask him why he said that, and he will shrug his shoulders in bewilderment: “Well, what’s the difference?” Really, but in what way?
The question is actually far from idle. To begin with, let us recall that in Moldova, with EU money, a tough campaign has been waged for 25 years in favor of the absorption of this country by Romania. Serious money is being invested in unionist parties, public organizations and the media in Moldova. Annual quotas of several thousand people are created for Moldovan students in Romania. Almost everyone in Moldova is given Romanian passports. There are statements that Romanians and Moldovans have a “common” language, culture and destiny.
The goal of this campaign is to force Moldovans to change their self-name and internal identity. However, almost all Moldovans speak out against the renunciation of national statehood and “reunification” with the Romanians. This means there is something that prevents Moldovans from recognizing themselves as such. What exactly? First of all, history.
Released, but not everyone
The Principality of Moldova arose in 1359, when neither Romania nor the concept of “Romanians” existed. On the site of present-day Romania was the Principality of Wallachia, also created in the 14th century. Then they said so: Moldovans live in Moldova, Wallachians live in Wallachia.
Both principalities considered themselves related, which, however, did not prevent the rulers of Wallachia (together with the Turks who captured it in 1415) from fighting against their Moldavian brothers by blood and faith. For this, the Moldavian ruler Stefan cel Mare in 1473 betrayed Bucharest to fire and sword.
In 1812, after another Russian-Turkish war, the Moldovans and Wallachians turned to Russian Empire with a request to save them from the rule of the Ottomans. But before the clash with Napoleon, Russia was able to wrest from the hands of Turkey only part of Moldova - Bessarabia, between the Prut and Dniester rivers. Behind the Prut there remained a truncated Principality of Moldova with its capital in Iasi.
Peace reigned in Bessarabia for 106 years, and the “across the Prut” Moldavian principality, deprived of part of its territory and population, weakened. Therefore, when there was talk about the unification of Moldova and Wallachia, Bucharest began to play first fiddle, and Iasi - second.
In 1859 this unification took place. Romania and the definition of “Romanians” in relation to the people of the new state arose. At the same time, a significant part of the inhabitants of the former Moldavian principality continues to consider themselves Moldovans today. As for Bessarabia, no one was in a hurry to register as Romanians throughout the entire 19th and early 20th centuries. There was no talk about Transnistria in this context at all.
Word and letter
Are modern Moldavian and Romanian languages? Among scientists there are different opinions on this matter, but Moldavian has been spoken for several centuries, Romanian for a little over a century.
This is how the ruler of Moldova, Dmitry Cantemir, saw the relationship between the Moldovans and the Wallachians in the linguistic sphere (and not only): “The Wallachians use some words unknown to the Moldovans, which, however, are omitted in the letter, and in everything they follow in the footsteps of the Moldovans in terms of language and spelling and thereby admit that Moldavian language purer than them, although they are held back from openly declaring this by the ill will that exists between the Moldovans and the Wallachians.”
And here is what a group of Moldavian peasants from the Orhei district of Romanian-occupied Bessarabia wrote to the Romanian authorities in 1921: “What does the word “volumul” mean? We guess it’s some kind of brochure (book). If you guessed right, then please don’t bother sending it again, because there is no one to read it. We tell you again, if the book is useful for us, write it in Moldavian or Russian (don’t shy away from the Russian language like the devil from incense), and not in Romanian, because we have a weak understanding of the Romanian language, not that and understand it."
With writing everything is much simpler - it is different. Although this was not always the case: since the formation of the Moldavian Principality, the writing system of the Moldovans (not to be confused with the Vlachs) on both sides of the Prut was Cyrillic, and official language until the 17th century - Old Slavonic. The Latin alphabet replaced the Cyrillic alphabet west of the Prut, in Iasi, only after the creation of Romania in 1862.
As soon as Romania captured Moldovan lands in 1918 and 1941, it began to eradicate the Cyrillic alphabet under the slogans of a “united Romanian nation” and a “common Romanian language.” In 1944, the territories were liberated, but with the collapse of the USSR, politics resumed: the Cyrillic alphabet was replaced by the Latin alphabet, and the existence of the Moldovan nation was denied. This is a question of civilizational orientation: if the task is to reorient the former Soviet Moldova entirely towards the West, the clichés about the “single Romanian language” and the “original” Latin alphabet become very important.
However, I repeat, the vast majority of Moldovans still retain their identity. As for Transnistria, while rejecting in principle rapprochement with Romania and entry into the geopolitical space of the West, it has retained the Cyrillic script of the Moldovan language.
Where is the front
According to the results of the 2004 census, 94% of Moldovans said that they considered themselves Moldovans, and not Romanians. The leaders of the ruling Alliance for European Integration in Chisinau represent an “overwhelming minority”, behind which stands Bucharest (a situation very similar to the Ukrainian one). The unionists need “commonality” in order to, at the right moment, raise the question of “reunification” of all the lands where, in their opinion, Romanians live.
The Ambassador of Romania to the Republic of Moldova, Marius Lazurca, publicly declared himself a unionist, and the President of Romania, Traian Basescu, stated that sooner or later Romania and Moldova will unite anyway. The President also explained the ideological basis of the possible unification: “Romania and the Republic of Moldova are two independent and sovereign states, but mostly inhabited by Romanians. We are united by language, traditions, joys and misfortunes that Romanians have gone through over the past centuries.”
However, neither the Romanian occupiers in 1918-1940 and 1941-1944, nor their successors in Chisinau and Bucharest have yet proven that the Moldavian nation does not exist. The front of the fight against unionism runs not only along the Prut or the Dniester, but also in the hearts of the Moldovans themselves. The majority of Moldovans reject the Romanian name imposed on them. This largely disrupts plans to absorb Moldova, Transnistria, as well as Ukrainian Southern Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina by Romania.
Andrey Safonov
In Moldova, August 31 is an annual holiday, established in 1989 as National Language Day. Exhibitions, festivals, other cultural events and folk festivals are held throughout the country. This year Romania participates in the festival for the first time. What is the national language for Moldova, Moldovan or Romanian?
On the eve of the annual celebration of "Our Language Day" ( Limba noastra) in Moldova, a debate has flared up over whether the name of the holiday should include the term “Romanian language”. Under this name - “Romanian Language Day” - the holiday was established in the wake of national revival during the collapse of the Soviet Union, but after the communists returned to power, the word “Romanian” was removed. The language issue in Moldova has long been politically charged: recognition of the identity of the Moldovan and Romanian languages and the transition to the Latin script in the early 1990s became the reasons for the conflict on the Dniester. The current Moldovan government has tried to move away from extreme approaches and provide the opportunity for all citizens of the country to celebrate the day of their native language, no matter what they call it.
The recent call by the President of Romania for all Romanians living in other countries (including Moldovans, whom Traian Basescu also considers Romanians) to identify themselves during the next census as Romanians and their native language as Romanian could also serve as a reason for new disputes. One of the Moldovan parties responded to this with a proposal to enshrine Romanian in the Constitution as the state language. However, the government of Moldova is inclined to a more liberal approach - recognizing the need to build a civil nation based on the principle of citizenship that unites the country, and not on the dividing principle of ethnicity.
The problem is that part of the country’s population identifies itself as Romanians, while another part identifies itself as Moldovans. At the same time, no one has any doubts that the Moldovan language is identical to the Romanian language. Just as there is no doubt about the validity of using the Latin script for the Romance language. The Constitution of the Republic of Moldova states that the state language of the country is Moldovan, but most of the population perceives this as the political name of the language, one of the attributes of statehood.
Another division on the language issue lies along the Dniester. In Transnistria, for the Moldovan language it is still the same as in Soviet times, Cyrillic graphics are used. The paradox is this: those who use the Moldovan language in Transnistria use the Latin script, which is the reason for conflicts between schools teaching in the Moldovan language (they claim infringement of the right to use the Latin alphabet, which is natural for the Moldovan language) and local authorities protecting the Soviet tradition.
The creation of the proletarian Moldavian language, as opposed to the bourgeois Romanian language, began after the formation of the Moldavian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (within the borders of present-day Transnistria) within Ukraine in 1924. Historians point out: Soviet politicians hoped that the “proletarian Moldovan language,” as a mixture of local dialect and Russian, would contribute to a popular uprising both on the right bank of the Dniester (in the so-called Bessarabia, which was then part of Romania), and in Romania itself .
A columnist for the Moldovan RS service talks about the differences between the Moldovan and Romanian languages Alexandru Eftode:
– I call the national language Romanian. In my opinion, this issue has already been resolved among linguists: everyone says that it is the Romanian language, and in any case, it is the same language. In Moldovan society there are politicians who say that this is the Moldovan language. There are also those who propose to change the Constitution, which says that official language– Moldavian. But changing the constitution requires many votes, and politically Moldova is divided almost in half. There is no way to get the votes to change the Constitution on this issue.
– The territory of modern Moldova was, to one degree or another, under Russian influence for two hundred years, and all this time the policy of Russification was pursued to a greater or lesser extent. Are there differences in pronunciation and vocabulary between the national language in Moldova and the Romanian language in Romania?
– There was an interval between the two world wars, when the current Republic of Moldova, Bessarabia, was part of Romania. On the left bank of the Dniester, Stalin created the Autonomous Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic, on whose territory they tried to create the Moldavian language. After the war, they tried to introduce this language into the newly created Moldavian USSR. There was even such a list - 100 mandatory “Moldavian” words had to be used in any text. Well, for example, in Romanian they call a tie cravată
, and they came up with a “neck collar” or something like that. Or, for example, they took Russian word and added the Moldavian ending. After Stalin's death, even the classics of Marxism-Leninism began to be published in this Moldavian fictitious language, so funny and stupid situations resulted. And this generally presented communism in a bad light. Such a prominent linguist, Vladimir Shishmarev, worked in Leningrad, and under his leadership, Romanian classics began to be published in Soviet Moldova. In Romanian, but only in Cyrillic.
– Are school standards for learning the native language different in Romania and Moldova?
– The standards are uniform. The two Academies of Sciences on different banks of the Prut have the same linguistic norms.
– Several million Russians live in Ukraine. They speak Russian, although with minimal peculiarities of the local use of some individual words. The difference with the Romanian and, relatively speaking, the Moldovan language is exactly that, right?
– If we mean literary language, then there is no difference. And in spoken language the difference is quite big. The language of today's Moldova and Transylvania, for example, is closer than the language of Chisinau and Bucharest. On the other hand, in the Republic of Moldova there is a very big influence provided Russian language. In tsarist times, the political elite - mainly Russians from Russia and local landowners - spoke Russian; the common people were not required to know Russian. During the Soviet period, the influence increased: even now it happens that Moldovans speak Romanian, but use Russian words, which they themselves have converted into the Moldovan way.
– Is the language problem in Moldova still as acute as it was twenty years ago, or is it being erased over time?
- Gradually wears off. If you log into the site Moldovan government, there is a choice - "rus", "eng" and "rom". It doesn’t say “Moldovan language” at all; at this level everything is decided. But this question is used by politicians, because these two decades Moldova faced either Moscow or the West. The situation develops as if in a spiral, every 4-5 years the issue of language becomes acute again.
– In this difficult situation, is there a need for a “National Language Day” in Moldova?
– I would probably cancel it, my native language is Romanian, but we must first agree that the country still celebrates. Having met such an uncertain holiday, Moldovans will not speak Romanian better, and Russians, Ukrainians or Gagauz will not be more willing to learn Romanian.
– Please read some quatrain in Romanian - what is primarily remembered from the school curriculum.
– I will read the first stanzas of the poem by Mihai Eminescu (as he was called in Soviet Moldova), or Mihai Eminescu, as he called himself, from his classic poem “The Morning Star”:
A fost odata ca-n povesti
A fost ca niciodata,
Din rude mari împaratesti,
O prea frumoasa fata.
Si era una la parinti
Si mândra-n toate cele,
Cum e Fecioara intre sfinti
Si luna intre stele…
It translates like this:
From ancient manuscripts we
You could read this
The ruling family has
Growing up was a holy child.
And in the world there has never been
Such a beautiful girl.
She shone hotly
To my dear ones as a clear star...
It’s easy for a lazy and incurious Moscow citizen to call a Moldovan builder who laid tiles poorly a “Romanian.” Ask him why he said that, and he will shrug his shoulders in bewilderment: “Well, what’s the difference?” Really, but in what way?
The question is actually far from idle. To begin with, let us recall that in Moldova, with EU money, a tough campaign has been waged for 25 years in favor of the absorption of this country by Romania. Serious money is being invested in unionist parties, public organizations and the media in Moldova. Annual quotas of several thousand people are created for Moldovan students in Romania. Almost everyone in Moldova is given Romanian passports. There are statements that Romanians and Moldovans have a “common” language, culture and destiny.
The goal of this campaign is to force Moldovans to change their self-name and internal identity. Nevertheless, almost all Moldovans speak out against the renunciation of national statehood and “reunification” with the Romanians. This means there is something that prevents Moldovans from recognizing themselves as such. What exactly? First of all, history.
Released, but not everyone
The Principality of Moldova arose in 1359, when neither Romania nor the concept of “Romanians” existed. On the site of present-day Romania was the Principality of Wallachia, also created in the 14th century. Then they said so: Moldovans live in Moldova, Wallachians live in Wallachia.
Both principalities considered themselves related, which, however, did not prevent the rulers of Wallachia (together with the Turks who captured it in 1415) from fighting against their Moldavian brothers by blood and faith. For this, the Moldavian ruler Stefan cel Mare in 1473 betrayed Bucharest to fire and sword.
In 1812, after another Russian-Turkish war, the Moldovans and Wallachians turned to the Russian Empire with a request to save them from the rule of the Ottomans. But before the clash with Napoleon, Russia was able to wrest from the hands of Turkey only part of Moldova - Bessarabia, between the Prut and Dniester rivers. Behind the Prut there remained a truncated Principality of Moldova with its capital in Iasi.
Peace reigned in Bessarabia for 106 years, and the “across the Prut” Moldavian principality, deprived of part of its territory and population, weakened. Therefore, when there was talk about the unification of Moldova and Wallachia, Bucharest began to play first fiddle, and Iasi - second.
In 1859 this unification took place. Romania and the definition of “Romanians” in relation to the people of the new state arose. At the same time, a significant part of the inhabitants of the former Moldavian principality continues to consider themselves Moldovans today. As for Bessarabia, no one was in a hurry to register as Romanians throughout the entire 19th and early 20th centuries. There was no talk about Transnistria in this context at all.
Word and letter
Are modern Moldovan and Romanian languages identical? Among scientists there are different opinions on this matter, but Moldavian has been spoken for several centuries, Romanian for a little over a century.
This is how the ruler of Moldova, Dmitry Cantemir, saw the relationship between the Moldovans and the Wallachians in the linguistic sphere (and not only): “The Wallachians use some words unknown to the Moldovans, which, however, are omitted in the letter, and in everything they follow in the footsteps of the Moldovans in terms of language and spelling and by this they acknowledge that the Moldavian language is purer than theirs, although they are held back from openly declaring this by the ill will that exists between the Moldavians and the Vlachs.”
And here’s what a group of Moldavian peasants from the Orhei district of Romanian-occupied Bessarabia wrote to the Romanian authorities in 1921: “What does the word “volumul” mean? We guess, it’s some kind of brochure (book). If you guessed right, then please don’t bother sending it again, because there is no one to read it. We tell you again, if the book is useful for us, write it in Moldavian or Russian (don’t shy away from the Russian language like the devil from incense), and not in Romanian, because we have no idea about the Romanian language weak, not to mention even understanding it.”
With writing everything is much simpler - it is different. Although this was not always the case: from the moment of the formation of the Moldavian Principality, the written language of the Moldovans (not to be confused with the Vlachs) on both sides of the Prut was Cyrillic, and the official language until the 17th century was Old Church Slavonic. The Latin alphabet replaced the Cyrillic alphabet west of the Prut, in Iasi, only after the creation of Romania in 1862.
As soon as Romania captured Moldovan lands in 1918 and 1941, it began to eradicate the Cyrillic alphabet under the slogans of a “united Romanian nation” and a “common Romanian language.” In 1944, the territories were liberated, but with the collapse of the USSR, politics resumed: the Cyrillic alphabet was replaced by the Latin alphabet, and the existence of the Moldovan nation was denied. This is a question of civilizational orientation: if the task is to reorient the former Soviet Moldova entirely towards the West, the clichés about the “single Romanian language” and the “original” Latin alphabet become very important.
However, I repeat, the vast majority of Moldovans still retain their identity. As for Transnistria, while rejecting in principle rapprochement with Romania and entry into the geopolitical space of the West, it has retained the Cyrillic script of the Moldovan language.
Where is the front
According to the results of the 2004 census, 94% of Moldovans said that they considered themselves Moldovans, and not Romanians. The leaders of the ruling Alliance for European Integration in Chisinau represent an “overwhelming minority”, behind which stands Bucharest (a situation very similar to the Ukrainian one). The unionists need “commonality” so that at the right moment they can raise the question of “reunification” of all the lands where, in their opinion, Romanians live.
The Ambassador of Romania to the Republic of Moldova, Marius Lazurca, publicly declared himself a unionist, and the President of Romania, Traian Basescu, stated that sooner or later Romania and Moldova will unite anyway. The president also explained the ideological basis of the possible unification: “Romania and the Republic of Moldova are two independent and sovereign states, but mostly inhabited by Romanians. We are united by language, traditions, joys and misfortunes that Romanians have gone through over the past centuries.”
However, neither the Romanian occupiers in 1918-1940 and 1941-1944, nor their successors in Chisinau and Bucharest have yet proven that the Moldavian nation does not exist. The front of the fight against unionism runs not only along the Prut or the Dniester, but also in the hearts of the Moldovans themselves. The majority of Moldovans reject the Romanian name imposed on them. This largely disrupts plans to absorb Moldova, Transnistria, as well as Ukrainian Southern Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina by Romania.
The question of why the Moldovan language is similar to Italian can be answered succinctly like this. It belongs to the Romance group of languages, more precisely the Balkan-Romance subgroup.
Roman province
During the rule of the ancient Romans, the territory of modern Moldavia and Romania was called Dacia Romana. This happened before our era in 101-106 under the Roman emperor Trojan. The Roman province ceases to exist in 271. For more than three centuries, the Dacian and Roman languages were mixed. Agree that during this period Romanization occurred local population. It is quite natural that the Romanian language eventually grew on this basis. Of course, not without the influence of the Slavic language of the neighbors. However, the Romanian language still developed on the basis of the spoken Latin common at that time.
Moreover, many veterans of the military service of the Roman state remained to live on the lands of Romania (Moldova). Some became close to representatives of the Dacian people. Thus, over time, an imperceptible Latinization of the population occurred.
As you know, the Italian language was also formed on the basis of Ancient Romanesque.
Similar words in Moldovan (Romanian) and Italian
Moldovan and Romanian languages
Modern scientific linguists have come to the conclusion that “Romanian” and “Moldavian” are different names for the same language. The languages of the neighboring countries are virtually identical. It’s just that in “Romanian” there are a little more words borrowed from Western countries, and in “Moldavian” the main borrowings come from the Russian language. At one time, even in Romania they intensively fought against Slavic borrowings in their vocabulary and tried to replace them with their own. Therefore, in Moldova there are several more “Russianisms”.
This is why the Moldovan language is similar to Italian. This helps Moldovans and Romanians to quickly master spoken Italian. Naturally, they will not be able to understand Italians right away, but it will take time to master Italian language immigrants from Romania and Moldova will spend significantly less.
Is there a fundamental difference between Romanian and Moldovan languages? This question seems very difficult for the average person interested.
It is interesting that the language that today officially functions on the territory of the Republic of Moldova bears the name limba moldovenească, although it is almost identical to the literary Romanian language, which is used in neighboring Romania. At the same time, in the territory of neighboring Transnistria they use the same language, but write it in Cyrillic and, accordingly, the local language is called “Transnistrian Moldavian” - Limba Moldovenaske. Romanian philologists insist that the Moldovan language is not an independent language at all, but a dialect of the Romanian language, like Olten or Transylvanian. In their favor, they argue that this dialect is also spoken in the Romanian historical region of Moldova, centered in Suceava, Bacau and Iasi.
The question of what to call the linguistic continuum - a language or a dialect - is still more political than philological. However, the very fact that some very high-ranking officials in the government of Moldova allow themselves to say that Moldovan is Romanian in pure form, says a lot.
The Moldovan language “begins to develop” after Moldova entered the family of socialist nations on the basis of distancing the language spoken on the territory of Moldova from the Romanian models proper. This situation is painfully reminiscent of the Balkan version, when Yugoslav leader Josip Broz Tito blessed the Macedonian language with the stroke of his pen. Today, no one questions the viability of this Balkan language. Perhaps only the Greeks allow themselves to make impartial statements. And even then, not so much about the language, but about the state of Macedonia as a whole. Let us recall that the Greeks are confident in the illegality of using this name by anyone other than the Greeks themselves and refuse to accept such a name for this ex-Yugoslav people, state and language.
Communist leaders, in pursuit of a new social community, seem to have given rise to another linguistic conflict in Europe, of which there are already enough.
In practice, let’s allow the Moldovans to decide for themselves about the existence of a language or dialect, and until then, each of us will remain with our own opinion. And the most interesting thing is that everyone will be right! However, this question may become another antinomy - in logic, this is a situation when opposing judgments have equal logical justification, such an antinomy of the Moldavian language.