Are Romanians different from Moldovans? Moldovan and Romanian languages ​​Formation of the Romanian and Moldavian states

The question of the name of the language in Moldova is purely political, and therefore frankly, in my opinion, speculative. It just so happened that supporters of the country’s exclusively pro-Western course (who constitute the overwhelming majority in the ranks of the new government of Moldova) advocate the only correct identification of the language as Romanian, supporters of the neutrality of Moldova and supporters of strengthening ties with the East (where the PCRM is usually referred to) advocate identification of the language as Moldavian Neither side allows any concessions.

In expressing my opinion, I prefer to proceed from reasoned theses

I am not a linguist, not a historian. But as a person who speaks the state language to the extent that allows him to read fiction, communicate at the everyday and professional level, I want to say that the literary norm (standard) of the state language of Moldova (Moldovan) and the literary norm of the state language of Romania (Romanian) - which includes spelling, alphabet, syntax (endings and suffixes are identical in all cases) - are identical. This thesis is obvious and undeniable; it is confirmed by the legislative framework of Moldova, the conclusions of the Academy of Sciences, and textbooks approved by the Ministry of Education, from which children learn the language.

At the same time, the spoken form of the language, widespread in Moldova, differs from Romanian due to the peculiarities of pronunciation and intonation (piept-chept, verme-jerme, ce?-ci?, nisip-năsîp, etc.), the presence of a large number of borrowed Slavic regionalisms (interjections, toponymy, professionalism - since many Moldovans studied in Russian).

Let's think objectively, impartially and pragmatically - we have two questions before us. First, are these differences enough to consider Moldovan a separate language? And secondly, is it possible to unambiguously resolve this issue in favor of one of the parties, what conclusions and consequences can this bring?

So, is the separate existence of states that share dialects of the same language real? are there any precedents? Let's look at a group of examples. Most often they remember the German language - which is the official language in seven countries inhabited by different and not very different peoples. Usually they start with the Austro-German case - that's where we'll start. What are Austrians and what language do they speak?

After the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1918 and the formation of a separate Austrian state, the Austrians faced an acute problem of national identity. Until 1918, the German-speaking population of the empire considered themselves Germans and identified themselves with German culture and language. The future of the Austrian Republic was very vague. According to the ethnographer E. Solstein 1994 (http://www.photoglobe.info/ebooks/austria/cstudies_austria_0070.html), the reason for this was various factors, for example, the existence of strong provincial ethno-cultural characteristics - the Tyrolean Germans (Tirol - it is a province on the border of Austria and Italy), for example, identified themselves more with the Tyrol than with the Austrian state. The Austrian historian Friedrich Geer wrote "Who were these Austrians in 1918? Germans living in Austria, German-Austrians, Austro-Germans, Germans in the second German state or an Austrian nation?"

Another major issue was uncertainty about the economic and political viability of the small German-speaking state. As a consequence, throughout the interwar period, a very wide part of the public and political elite of Austria saw the solution to all problems in unification with Germany.

Oddly enough, the birth of the movement for the national identity of the Austrians happened precisely after the Anschluss of 1938 (annexation of Austria by Germany). The underground movement "O5" - a hidden abbreviation of the word Osterreich - Austria (more details here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_resistance) fought against the Nazi regime for the revival of Austria. After the restoration of Austrian independence in 1955, the Austrians abandoned the idea of ​​a single German nation in favor of the idea of ​​two German-speaking nations - German and Austrian, which was based on historical and cultural differences in traditions and language. Although in the political life of Austria there is always a right-wing radical wing that insists on the “Germanness” of Austrians, the ideas of national identity are strengthening among the population - according to statistics, in 1967 only 47% recognized themselves with the Austrian nation, in 1990 there were 67%. Today there are 80% of them. http://derstandard.at/?url=/?id=3261105

However, the language that is the official language of Austria is called German. Although not quite so, I will correct myself, it is called Austrian German (Osterreichisches Deutsch, Austrian German). Austrian German has its own literary standard for official texts and teaching in schools, which is regulated by the Austrian National Dictionary and the Austrian Ministry of Education. The specificity lies in some differences in pronunciation, spelling, grammar, as well as vocabulary (mainly in the field of administration and legislation), which have been made standard in Austria. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_German

Switzerland, another state where one of the official languages ​​is also German (65% of the population). A unique situation arose there. Standard Swiss German has official status - Swiss Standard German - which also has its own language standard, it is taught in schools and is the standard written language. However, in everyday speech, on radio and television, the so-called Swiss German - Schweizerdeutsch - is used. It differs significantly from literary German, moreover, it, in turn, is divided into many of its own dialects, characteristic of each canton of Switzerland. For standard German speakers, Schweizerdeutsch is often difficult to understand. Friedrich Dürrenmatt (1921-1990), an outstanding Swiss writer, even said: “I speak the Bernese dialect, and write in standard German. (...) I am constantly forced to reject in my mind the native language I speak and turn to a foreign one to me a language that I cannot speak. When I speak German, I pronounce words with a Bernese accent (...) There are critics who blame me for the fact that my German has a Bernese dialect. I hope it does. I write in the German that has formed into my native dialect, which has already been formed since childhood." (http://www.swissworld.org). The situation when Swiss Standard German is used in written speech, and in communication Schweizerdeutsch is even called linguistic diglossia by some linguists. http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diglossia

The situation with national identity in Switzerland is also special. German-speaking Swiss consider themselves to belong to German culture and the German world, but the unique experience of Switzerland allows us to speak of a formed civil nation, when every Swiss is first of all a Swiss and only then a German, French or Italian. By the way, it is well known that Switzerland did not participate in the World Wars, although after World War II it became known that Hitler had plans to attack Switzerland. Indeed, as an incident, the Third Reich united all the historical German lands under its rule, while Switzerland, with all its credit institutions, intelligence agencies and secret trade through the warring countries, remained untouched. The reason is simple - in the event of aggression, hundreds of thousands of Swiss Germans would be ready to shoot at Wehrmacht soldiers. Undoubtedly, the forces were unequal and the Nazis could have subjugated this mountainous country. But during the battles, it was not so much the Wehrmacht soldiers who would die, but the Nazi ideology. A war between Germans and Germans would destroy the myth of the unity of the Aryan nation and would not leave one stone unturned from the official Nazi ideology. Like this.

Between Austria and Switzerland there is another state where German is the official language - this is dwarf Liechtenstein. Here the population (35,000) considers themselves ethnic Germans, and the language, to be more precise, is Alemannic German (Alemannisch), which also differs in pronunciation, spelling and vocabulary, although it does not have a standard like Austrian or Swiss.

Another example, which everyone obviously knows about, concerns the English language. From country to country it contains a huge number of differences regarding pronunciation, spelling, and vocabulary. Most have their own literary standards - American English (used by 66% of the entire English-speaking population), British English, Standard Scottish English, Australian English, Canadian English, South African English are known. English, the official language among many African countries, has its own unique characteristics. Nevertheless, it is considered English everywhere.

France, Belgium and Quebec have their own versions of the French language. Belgium and Quebec have their own standards, however, the French Academy does not recognize their existence.

And now for other examples. Are there cases in which spoken forms of the same language form the basis of a language standard, thus leading to the emergence of new languages ​​with their own names?

Consider the European state of Montenegro. During the time of the independent state of Montenegro (at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries), later, during the period when Montenegro was part of royal Yugoslavia, even later, during the time of socialist Yugoslavia, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the Federation of Serbia and Montenegro and later, according to the Constitution of the country, the state language of Montenegro was the Serbian language (more precisely, the Iekavian dialect of the Serbian language). Along with language, accordingly, the concepts of national identity of Montenegrins also cause some controversy. According to a survey conducted in 2003, 32% of the population consider themselves Serbs, but 63.5% of Montenegrin citizens named Serbian as their native language. Some people do not fully understand the difference between the Serbian and Montenegrin nations.

So, a small digression to clarify the confusing tangle of Balkan languages. Historically, a large group of South Slavic peoples living in the territory of the former Yugoslavia spoke the same language - let's call it Serbo-Croatian. Naturally, it cannot be said that the use of this language was identical throughout the entire territory of distribution; of course, over time, certain differences emerged due to the influence of neighboring cultures, religions, and the political situation. It is generally accepted, for example, that within the Serbo-Croatian language there are three dialects or dialects known: Chakavian, Kajkavian and Shtokavian (synonym - Jekavian). They are named after the way the pronoun “what” sounds in them - cha, kaј or shto. The Chakavian and Kajkavian dialects were spoken (and are spoken throughout Croatia, which is why today they are considered components of the Croatian language). Further differences lie in the use of the Latin or Cyrillic alphabet - in the territory where Catholicism spread (modern Croatia) the Latin alphabet (gajevica) was used, in turn, in the Orthodox lands (modern Serbia) the Cyrillic alphabet (vukovica) was used. So, throughout the 19th century - at that time the Balkans were divided between the Porte and Austria-Hungary, national liberation movements smoldered and sometimes flared up everywhere, which demanded cohesion and unity - no linguistic contradictions arose, moreover, efforts were made to develop a unified literary norms, the unification of all dialects. In 1850 on the so-called The Vienna Literary Agreement between intellectuals from Croatia (then under Austro-Hungarian rule) and Serbia (controlled by the Turks) decided to create a single Serbo-Croatian language.

Over the next hundred years, many changes took place, powerful empires fell into oblivion, and a single state of Yugoslavia was formed.

The first sign of linguistic discord was the attempt of the Croatian Ustasha to establish a separate Croatian language in 1940-1944. The Ustasha are a nationalist Croatian movement that collaborated with the regimes of Mussolini and Hitler, with the help of which a puppet state was founded in the territory of occupied Yugoslavia. After the formation of Socialist Yugoslavia, the issue seemed to calm down for some time; Josip Broch Tito himself, by the way, was a Croat. However, the centrifugal linguistic situation gradually intensified. At first, under pressure from the Croatian intelligentsia, it was announced that there were two forms of the Serbo-Croatian language - Croatian (in Gajevica) and Serbian (in Vukovica). Then, at the end of the 60s, representatives of the Croatian intelligentsia announced a complete break with Serbo-Croatian, from now on Croatian was declared a separate, equal language, a regional form, taking into account local literary traditions, was given a language standard, and a literary norm of the Croatian language was introduced. These events in the official history of Croatia are called the “Croatian Spring”. Despite the opposition of the authorities, this situation remained in the “status quo” until the collapse of the Yugoslav state: in Croatia the Croatian language was used under the name “Croatian or Serbian”, while in Serbia this language continued to be called “Serbo-Croatian”.

After the collapse of Yugoslavia, the tendency towards linguistic demarcation accelerated. In addition to the Croatian language, the Bosnian language, which was previously a dialect of Bosnian Muslims, has separated from the single Serbo-Croatian language. It contains many borrowings from Arabic, Turkic and Persian. The Bosnian language also had its own language standard. Today in Croatia and Bosnian Muslims only the Latin alphabet is used, in Serbia and Montenegro the Cyrillic and Latin alphabet are equal, but in Serbia the Cyrillic alphabet is used more in everyday life, and in Montenegro, as it “moves” further and further from Serbia, the Latin alphabet is intensively replacing the Cyrillic alphabet .

By the way, since we are back to Montenegro, quite recently, on July 10, 2009, the country’s literary council established the language standard of the Montenegrin language, which finally consolidated the formation (on paper at least) of the fourth language from a single Serbo-Croatian language.

Thus, the Serbo-Croatian language split into a number of very closely related successor languages: this is the situation from the point of view of the significant majority of its speakers, for whom (including in emigration) this issue is quite strongly politicized. Foreign linguists, however, even now often talk about a single Serbo-Croatian language, and appeal to new national variants in cases of fundamental politicization.
It is interesting to note that the difference between the literary norms of Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian languages ​​is much smaller than, for example, between the Kajkavian and Chakavian dialects of the Croatian language. All residents of the former Yugoslavia are able to understand each other without a dictionary, if they do not use specific local vocabulary.

I can prove my words in the most elementary way - by citing a passage of text in all the “derivatives” of Serbo-Croatian.

Serbian-Vukovica:
The Republic of Moldova is a continental land near the source of Europe. Borders with Rumunia in the west and Ukraine at the source. The border with Rumunia is the Prut River and the Danube River. Glavni grad je Chisinau

Serbian-gajevica (Serbo-Croatian):

Croatian:
Republika Moldova je kontinentalna drzava u istocnoj Europi. Granici se sa Rumunijom na zapadu i Ukrajinom na istoku. Njena granica sa Rumunijom je reka Prut i donji tok reke Dunav. Home grad je Kisinjev

Bosnian:
Republika Moldova je kontinentalna drzava u istocnoj Europi. Granici se sa Rumunijom na zapadu i Ukrajinom na istoku. Njena granica sa Rumunijom je reka Prut i donji tok reke Dunav. Glavni grad je Kisnjev

and "fresh" - Montenegrin:
Republika Moldova je kontinentalna drzava u istocnoj Europi. Granici se sa Rumunijom na zapadu i Ukrajinom na istoku. Njena granica sa Rumunijom je reka Prut i donji tok reke Dunav. Home grad je Kisinjev

Well, how many differences did you count? However, it is a fact - Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, Montenegrin are POLITICALLY considered different languages. Although sensible linguists, albeit tactfully with caution, still talk about one Serbo-Croatian with several dialects, even the English section of Wikipedia says so. By the way, the most ardent supporters of the “foreignness” of these languages ​​are the Americans. Well - this is again a separate topic.

Another interesting example is the case of Bulgaria and Macedonia. The history of Macedonia as a state dates back only to 1945 (within Yugoslavia as a federal republic). It should be noted that the territory of the modern state of Macedonia was originally part of the Bulgarian kingdom and was transferred to Yugoslavia as a result of the Balkan wars at the beginning of the 20th century. Until that time, Macedonia had never existed as a state or public entity. The historical region of Macedonia, however, has been known since antiquity; Alexander the Great ruled here (and a little more throughout the world). The ancient Macedonians, however, have virtually no kinship, cultural or political connections with the modern Slavic Macedonian people, just as the ancient Egyptians have nothing in common with the modern Arab population of Egypt. In the middle of the first millennium, these lands were part of the Bulgarian Empire, later the Byzantine Empire, the Ottoman Empire, and as a result of the Balkan Wars they again went to Bulgaria, then Yugoslavia. Macedonia became independent in 1991; the first state in the world to recognize the independence of Macedonia was Bulgaria. It is believed that the Macedonian people as such also emerged only in the 20th century within the framework of Socialist Yugoslavia, at the same time the Macedonian language took shape, whose literary norm was consolidated in the second half of the 20th century after several language reforms. By the way, the official first printed document in the Macedonian language appeared on October 29, 1944. In Macedonia, there have traditionally been two political and linguistic currents. One was based on a Bulgarian identity, the other on a separate Macedonian identity based on many years of Byzantine influence. In Bulgaria - both linguists and public opinion are convinced that the Macedonian language is the same language as Bulgarian, or - at best - a dialect of Bulgarian. It’s easier to assess the degree of difference if you read the same text in Bulgarian and Macedonian.

Bulgarian:
The Republic of Moldova is a country in Iztochna Europe and borders Romania and Ukraine. Capital city Chisinau.
In ancient times, the territory of Moldova was inhabited by Dacians and other tribes.
The Moldovan Parliament has 101 members, and its members are elected through popular vote in four years.
Almost all Moldovans are strictly Orthodox.

Macedonian:
The Republic of Moldova is in Eastern Europe and borders with Romania and Ukraine. Head of the city of Chisinau.
In ancient times, the territory of Moldova was inhabited by Dacians and other tribes.
The Moldovan Parliament has 101 members, and the members of the Moldovan Parliament are elected through a popular vote for all four Godini.
Almost all Moldovans are Orthodox.

How many differences have you counted here? All the same, as you can see, there are enough of them for a separate language. In general, the most interesting thing in the Bulgarian-Macedonian dispute is that our Romanian-Moldovan question is also reflected in it. For example, I was simply shocked when I read in an article in the Macedonian language on Wikipedia: “Moldavian language is the official language in Moldova. That is the original Roman language. (Translation - Moldovan language is the official language in Moldova. It is a language of the Eastern Latin group. The most similar language to Moldovan is Romanian).

But in the article in Bulgarian it was written like this: “Moldovian ezik is officially named in Romanian ezik, it was used for political reasons by the government of the Republic of Moldova. (Translation - Moldavian language is official name Romanian language, used for political reasons by the government of the Republic of Moldova. The differences between Moldovan and Romanian are controversial and are defended by Moldovan linguists).

So what do you think? You see, each side sees things as they are closer to them. To complete the picture, I will still add that in the Bulgarian section of Wikipedia, in the article about the Macedonian language, it is said that this is not a language at all, but a literary form of Bulgarian...

By the way, there is no movement for the unification of Bulgaria and Macedonia at any official or everyday level.

Another example is the Galician language and the Portuguese language. Galicia is a small autonomous province in North-West Spain on the border with Portugal. The speech of Galicians and Portuguese is distinguished by a number of features in pronunciation and intonation, which formed the basis for the writing of the Galician language. The Galician Academy declared the Galician language to be separate from Portuguese.

And in the end there are some more very interesting examples - parallel texts in three languages:

Belorussian:
George W. Bush is in New Haven (Kanektykut), son of J.-G. Bush.
After completing his studies at Phillips Academy and completing his military service at Yale University, he was released from the reserves in 1973. In 1975, he graduated from Harvard Business School, where he began to pursue his strengths in politics and business. In 1977, Argentina launched the Arbusta oil and gas company, which financed the direct transfer of Saudi capital. In response to the energy crisis and financial problems, the campaign was created in 1979 by the Bush Operations company, which, in its own way, was sold to the Spectrum-7 company in 1984.

Russian:
George W. Bush was born in New Haven (Connecticut), the son of J.-G. Bush.
After attending Phillips Academy and graduating from Yale University, he served in the Air Force and was discharged in 1973. In 1975 he graduated from Harvard Business School, after which he began to try his hand at politics and business. In 1977 he organized the Arbusta oil and gas company, in which Saudi capital also took part in the financing. After the energy crisis and financial difficulties, the company was reorganized in 1979 into the Busch Exploitation company, which, in turn, was sold to Spectrum-7 in 1984.

Ukrainian:
George W. Bush was born in New Haven (Connecticut), son of J.-G. Bush.
After starting at the Phillips Academy and graduating from the University of Else, serving in the military forces, in 1973 he was released from the reserve. In 1975, he graduated from Harvard Business School, after which he began to try his hand at politics and business. In 1977, he organized the Arbusta naftagaz company, which also received Saudi capital. Due to the energy crisis and financial difficulties, the company was acquired in 1979 from the Bush Exploitation company, and in 1984 it was sold to the Spectrum-7 company.

Now try to write down some Siberian dialect the way you hear it:

Georges Bush radials in America. After studying at the academy and graduating from Yelskovo University, this guy gave his heart to serving in the army. It is known that in 1977 a cartel was opened near Nivo, which is called “Arbusta”... etc.

Now, for a second, imagine that this way of writing will form the basis of spelling rules and standards, and even add a couple of dozen neologisms... And that’s it, the very next day some Soros will donate millions for the research and development of the original Siberian language, and the State Department will publish Talmuds with its centuries-old history. Funny? If only it weren't sad.

No wonder the sage said: “A language is a dialect with an army and navy” (Language is a dialect with an army and navy).

For complete disclosure, dear readers, I agree that my analogies and hints on the issue of the Ukrainian-Russian language will cause indignation among some of the representatives of our eastern neighbor. Nevertheless, I am a supporter of a unified approach in everything, I cannot take a dual position, and I have a similar opinion on the Russian-Ukrainian and Romanian-Moldovan issues. Ukrainian-Russian contradictions are a topic for a separate discussion.

Regarding our question:
From a linguistic-cultural point of view, Romanian and Moldovan are the same language, and the literary standard is absolutely 100% identical. This is undeniable, period. Any arguments and discussions on this topic are absurd. This is my opinion regarding the first question.

Is it acceptable to have two names for the same language? Absolutely yes - purely on political grounds - there are many examples of this. Should the use of one common language mean that Moldova does not have the opportunity to exist as a separate country and distinctive culture? - Definitely not - there are many examples of this.

Linguistic relations in Moldova will depend on the constructiveness and prudence of its politicians, because wherever dialects of the same language bear different political names, this is usually due to insurmountable contradictions and ambitions at the level of the elites of these countries. It would be great if the elite of Moldova could implement a language policy using the example of the German world. Is the idea of ​​the existence of two subethnic groups sharing one language and culture acceptable - yes, of course. Moldavian tradition and culture have absorbed a huge heritage of centuries-old contacts with the Slavic, subsequently Russian world; of course, Moldavian culture has specifics that distinguish it from the background of the general Romanian culture. However, the Romanian one, let’s be honest, is still closer to her.

So, does one part of society have the right to consider the language Romanian? It has full scientific, moral and cultural-ethnic rights, everything stated above is confirmation of this.

Do Moldovanists have the right to consider the language Moldovan? They have, but only from the point of view of the linguonym, and not from the linguistic point of view. There are also reasons for this - the existence of this linguonym for many years before the formation of the national Romanian state, the formation of the modern Romanian language starting from the middle of the 19th century, the rejection of the Cyrillic alphabet and the stage of linguistic anti-Slavic “purism” - when up to 40% of Slavicisms were removed as archaisms - yes, all this happened and all this cannot be denied. However, there is no point in speculating too much on the Moldovan idea - even if the linguonym Romanian appeared relatively recently, even if these changes took place in Romanian - nothing can be done, this is a fait accompli and an objective reality. Why do I think that the idea of ​​linguistic Moldovanism is heading towards collapse - because not a single effort was made by those who declare themselves to be passionate defenders and adherents of this idea. In the previous article I briefly mentioned this - if someone actually set the task of promoting a separate language, then. Following the example of Montenegro, Croatia, Macedonia, etc., it was necessary to introduce our own language standard, legitimize the spelling of all these chept, jerme, jin, nasop, and introduce our own neologisms. Now it will look comical and stupid, the idea will not find any understanding and has exhausted itself.

What options are there for resolving the existing contradictions?
In the current situation, if I were in power, I would generally give the issue of the name of the language the very last place - the leadership must somehow cope with the growing economic problems, and if now some politician focuses attention on the problem of the name of the language, the urgent need to join all sorts of nations, changes Constitution and so on and so forth - this only speaks of his excellent acting skills and knowledge of psychology and complete impotence as a manager.

As a last resort, if speculation on this topic becomes inevitable, I have already proposed adopting a law that would equate the terms “Romanian language” and “Moldovan language,” leaving the citizen the right to choose what to call it.

In the future, when the political, economic and social life of the country goes on a normal course, it was possible to consider a concept similar to the Austrian one, calling it Română Moldovenească, equating it with the version of the Romanian language, which has state status in Moldova - a kind of balance would be achieved, which would satisfy many - on the one hand, the identity with Romanian is recognized, on the other, it has a peculiarity, an important status. Further, as for the existence of the Moldovan language with a Krillic alphabet, the situation is confusing, but can be solved with a clear head and the desire to compromise. For some trial period, say ten years, we can indicate the existence of the Moldovan version of the language in two forms - in Latin and Cyrillic - as was done with Serbian. Of course, the aggressive part will take the Cyrillic alphabet with hostility, but firstly, this fact does not in any way oblige them to use the Cyrillic alphabet, and secondly, mutually exclusive positions are coal to maintain the fire of the conflict, and a compromise is a step towards and a signal for dialogue.

A small remark regarding the national flag - because due to the short-sightedness and ardor of many, provocations and speculation on this topic may arise. I thought about a solution that could satisfy everyone. Someone proposed introducing the state banner of Stephen the Great (golden bison on a red banner) and the national banner in the form of the Romanian tricolor. However, the proposal is unsuccessful - some are driven into a frenzy by the red color of the banner, while others are haunted by the tricolor, identical to the Romanian one. This is what came to my mind - Stefan’s banner is not entirely acceptable, since Republican Moldavia does not quite correspond to Princely Moldavia, then the best solution would be the flag of Moldavian Democratic Republic, which represents nothing more than the same tricolor, tilted horizontally with the image of a bison head (or without). So, my arguments - firstly, the tricolor - the pride and national colors of Moldovans - will remain relevant - the ribbons with which they decorate themselves on August 27 and 31, the ornament, ribbons on state awards, badges, etc. will still be relevant. secondly, the arrangement of the stripes distinguishes this flag from the Romanian tricolor, which will relieve tension from the other half of society, besides, the horizontal arrangement is typical for Eastern Orthodox peoples, it is the same as on the flag of the main national minorities - Ukrainians, Russians, Bulgarians. That is, how elementary and simple - all the hysteria, all the bacchanalia around the flag can be solved by turning the flag 90 degrees... Elementary
These are the thoughts, gentlemen.

Today in Moldova there is an opinion among the people that they should unite with another country - Romania. About a third of the Moldovan population adheres to this idea.

In many Moldovan villages (there are approximately 140 of them), supporters of this opinion decided to raise the issue at the state level: a referendum was held in which the residents of Moldova voted for the idea of ​​joining Romania. This decision will be a good economic shift. For example, in Romania the pension is 6 times higher than in Moldova. Romanian citizens have the right to enter European countries.

In addition to economic issues, there is another very powerful argument: folk culture. The people of both countries speak almost the same language. The history of Moldova and Romania constantly intersects. This idea is actively supported and sponsored by the European Union. For example, if a Moldovan wants to get a Romanian passport, he can get it without much worries. Outside countries claim that the peoples of Moldova and Romania have virtually the same languages, culture and even destiny. But still, main question remains unanswered: are Romanians and Moldovans a single people or different, but with similarities? Perhaps the answer can be found if we turn to ancient history. Having understood it, you can come to some conclusion.

Formation of the Romanian and Moldavian states

Romania is a state that belongs to a group of relatively young countries. It emerged as an independent sovereign state only in the second half of the 19th century. Until this time, on the territory of future Romania and Moldova there existed ancient people- Vlachs. They are the ancestors of the Moldovans and Romanians, and themselves descended from the Roman Empire. In the medieval years, the Vlachs experienced strong pressure from the Bulgarian state. The Wallachian people borrowed Orthodox traditions, culture and the Cyrillic alphabet from the Bulgarians. However, Bulgaria loosened its grip around the middle of the 14th century, and at this very time two sovereign independent principalities were formed: Wallachia and Moldavia. Initially, the second state was much stronger than the first.

However, the situation changed at the beginning of the 15th century: a third party, the Turkish yoke, began to increase in power. They win over the people of Wallachia to their side, and they start a war with Moldavia, forgetting about kinship. For several centuries there were constant bloody wars in this territory. The Turkish yoke had a strong influence during this period of time. It existed for about 400 years and all this time poisoned the lives of the Moldavian and Romanian peoples.

Wallachia and Moldavia tried to fight him. Sometimes the attempts were successful. For example, in 1600, ruler Michael the Brave liberated Wallachia from the oppression of the Turks and created a union of three Wallachian states (one of them was Transylvania). However, it quickly fell apart. After a certain period of time, other parties enter the game - Russia and Austria. The Austrian Empire influences the Vlachs and Transylvanians, and the Russian Empire influences Moldavia. Ultimately, by 1861, Wallachia and Transylvania united into a single state - Romania.

Distance from related countries

Romania and Moldova have moved significantly away from each other. Each country followed its own path and developed its folk culture and linguistic characteristics. The Romanians continued to speak the Vlach language, while the Moldovans became noticeably closer to Ukraine and Russia, as a result of which their speech underwent significant changes. Linguistic misunderstandings have further intensified since Romania decided in 1918 to gather the remaining parts of the Wallachian people after the destruction of the Austrian and Russian empires. This historical fact brought the cultures of Romania and the Vlachs even closer together.

In the 20th century, language differences became so strong that Moldovans asked Romanian authorities to translate their books from Romanian to Moldovan or Russian. In Moldova they did not understand and did not want to learn the Romanian language. Here is one of the striking examples of the appeal of the Moldovan people to the Romanian authorities: “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."

Things weren't going smoothly in Romania either. There were large linguistic differences between high society and the peasantry. The intelligentsia honored Romanian traditions and language, while ordinary peasants underwent strong cultural changes. Various peoples were mixed in the provinces: Bulgarians, Germans, Serbs, Jews and Vlachs. The country's authorities wanted to unite all nations into a single people, since people who are united by common thoughts and worldviews are easier to control. However, this idea was not completed due to the outbreak of World War II.

At this very time, the northern part of Bessarabia became part of the Soviet Union. Before the outbreak of World War II, the people who inhabited these places formed a clear border between the Romanian people and the “Soviet Moldovans.” As we know from history, in 1940 the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was signed, according to which the USSR appropriated Bessarabia and northern Bukovina. Here the Moldavian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic is formed. As soon as the Second World War ends, the Moldovan people split into two parts: one was a supporter of Russian rule, and the second wanted to unite with the Romanian state.

When the USSR collapsed, Moldova became an independent state. Democratic romantics immediately began to express ideas about unification with Romania. However, the country faced much more important issues - poverty and privatization. A serious conflict also arose with Transnistria. In the 90s and 00s, the country rushed between supporters of European integration and communists. Today we can see that the choice fell on a pro-European force.

They strongly developed the idea of ​​unity between Moldova and Romania. Moldovan deputies began to deny the Moldovan people as a separate entity. Politicians have ensured that there are many more supporters of the idea of ​​unifying the two countries. Their number was 35% of the population, and initially only 2%. In modern times, a huge civilized schism forms the border between the two states. Moldova has still not decided who to join - Russia or Europe.

For Romania, such a choice did not exist at all. That is why the question of the unity of the Moldovan and Romanian peoples is at present and in the future. This problem originated in past centuries, but it affects these countries at the present time. It must be said that the unification of peoples will have an impact not only for Romania and Moldova. First of all, this applies to European countries. The reunification of the Moldovan and Romanian nations will greatly affect economic relations with European countries.

In any case, if Moldova and Romania decide to unite, this will lead to many changes, both within and outside the states.

Advokat-Romania offers you assistance in obtaining Romanian citizenship as soon as possible. We also provide assistance in taking the oath(oaths of allegiance) to Romania, obtaining a birth and marriage certificate, marking a divorce or death (as appropriate), obtaining a Romanian ID card, passport, obtaining child benefits, as well as obtaining a Romanian driving license. You can contact us by phone

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, the Moldovan language still uses the Cyrillic script, as in Soviet times. 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 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. There are politicians in Moldovan society who say that this is the Moldovan language. There are also those who propose to change the Constitution, which states that the state language is Moldovan. 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 the territory of which 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. But in spoken language the difference is quite large. 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 the Russian language had a very large influence. 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 go to the website of the Moldovan government, there is a choice - "rus", "eng" and "rom". It doesn’t say “Moldavian 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...

Graffiti in Chisinau.
Left: The word “Romanian” has been added under the phrase “Our language.”
Right: the inscription “I am Moldovan! I speak Moldovan!”

The literary Moldavian language began to take shape in the 16th-17th centuries, but was finally formed by the second half of the 19th century. Linguistic differences between the Romanian and Moldovan languages ​​began to emerge in the 19th century, when the Romania the period of correction of the Romanian language began, from which they were actively withdrawing Slavic lexemes. In the 19th-20th centuries, a significant number of scientific concepts were introduced into the vocabulary of the Romanian language. Latinisms. The linguistic construction of a norm of literary Moldavian language, different from literary Romanian, lasted from 1924 to 1932, and from 1938 to 1940 in USSR. Since the 1950s, there has been a reverse process of convergence between the Moldovan and Romanian language norms, and by the end of the 1980s they became practically indistinguishable.

One of official languages(along with Russian and Ukrainian) unrecognized Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic is a Moldovan based language Cyrillic graphics

Story

Early history

Romanesque elements appeared on the territory of Moldavia no earlier than the 12th century. The first Daco-Roman monuments in Cyrillic have been known since the 17th century. The written language in the Principality of Moldova was not a local dialect, but a supra-dialectal Koine, common to the Danube principalities and Transylvania [ ] .

Parent languages:

Becoming

The Moldavian language has ancient literary traditions; literature in the Moldavian language includes the ballad “Mioritsa”, created in the 13th century. The Moldavian vocabulary fund, recorded in charters issued by the office of the Moldavian Principality, amounts to more than 1000 lexical units of the Moldavian vocabulary, recording the existence of the Moldavian written language, which has been certified since 1392.

The first official document in the Moldovan language has been known since 1571. In 1581, the first Moldavian lexicon (dictionary) was compiled - the Katastikh of the Galata Monastery.

In 1628, a book by a German scientist was published I. Alshteda"Treasures of Chronology" ( lat. Thesaurus chronologiae), where the Moldavian language is also mentioned in the table of languages ​​and dialects of the 24 parts of the Earth - lingua Moldavorum [ ] .

The Moldovan language was used in bilingual Principality of Moldova.

Monuments in Moldovan language ( Cyrillic) have been known in the Principality of Moldova since the 17th century (before that, in the language of administration, church and literature in Principality of Moldova And Wallachia was Church Slavonic language, and from the construction of the phrase it is noticeable that it was not native to the scribes. A.I. Yatsimirsky speaks about the Russian basis of the language of Slavic-Moldavian letters). The grammar of this language was significantly different from the modern one. In the middle of the 17th century. through the efforts of Metropolitan Varlaam in Yassakh was founded first in Moldova printing house for which the Metropolitan Dosoftey(Dosifey) ordered the necessary supplies from Moscow.

The first studies were written about the Moldavian language in the 17th century: “Despre limba noastre Moldovenasca” Gr. Ureke(1635), “Despre limba moldovenyaske” by Miron Kostin (1677), “Despre limba moldovenilor” and “Despre bukile moldovenilor” D. Cantemira (1716) .

Dmitry Cantemir in his classic “ Descriptions of Moldova"(1714-1716) devoted a separate chapter of the book to the Moldavian language.

He also notes the common language of the inhabitants of the Danube principalities and points out the difference in regional dialects:

Cantemir calls it the “Moldovan language” ( lat. lingua moldavica) and "the language of the Moldovans" ( lat. lingua moldavorum) and directly indicates its connection with Latin:

We, Moldavians, also call ourselves Romans, and our language is not Dacian, not Moldavian, but “Romanian,” and so, if we want to ask a stranger if he knows our language, we do not ask: “Do you know Moldavian?”, but we ask: “Do you know Romanian?”, that is (in Latin): “Do you know Roman ?»

In Bessarabia

In 1814, the “Russian-Moldavian primer” was developed and published in Chisinau, in 1819 - “A short Russian grammar with translation into the Moldavian language”, which was subsequently republished in Kishinevskaya diocesan printing house. In 1840 in St. Petersburg“Inscription of the rules of the Wallachian-Moldavian grammar” and “Collected works and translations in the Wallachian-Moldavian language” by Y. Ginkulov (Hinku) were published. Ginkulov proposed using the terms “Valachian-Moldavian language” or “Romanian language” as generalizing ones for the entire Daco-Romanian language space.

Starting from the 1830-1840s, there was a tendency to oust the Moldavian language from office work and the sphere of education and replace it Russians. In 1828, the mandatory conduct of office work in the Moldavian language was abolished. In 1842, the seven-year period expired, during which it was possible to submit complaints and petitions in the Moldavian language. In 1866, a ban was imposed on the teaching of the Moldavian language at the Chisinau gymnasium. The formal reason for the ban was that “according to the new gymnasium charter... there are no special teachers assigned to teach special local dialects in our gymnasiums at all.” Five years after the exclusion of the Moldavian language from the course of the Chisinau gymnasium, a decree was issued banning the teaching of the Moldavian language in district schools of the Bessarabia region. Since the second half of the 19th century, the Moldovan language has been ousted from church services. Under the bishop Pavle (Lebedev) According to various estimates, from 340 to 417 churches were closed due to the fact that it was impossible to organize services in them in Russian. Under him, the Moldovan version of the Chisinau Diocesan Gazette ceased to be printed. Thus, in the last third of the 19th century, the Moldovan language in Bessarabia remained exclusively the spoken language of the peasant population.

The return of the Moldovan language to the public sphere, the education system and Orthodox worship was associated with the events revolutions of 1905-1907. During this period, the teaching of the Moldavian language and church Moldavian singing began at the Chisinau Theological Seminary and others educational institutions Chisinau diocese, a number of newspapers and magazines are published (See article Press in Moldova). In liturgical and near-religious literature, the old Moldavian literary norm and traditional Cyrillic alphabet. There was no literary norm for secular texts. Grammar and vocabulary could vary from the modern Romanian norm to imitations of local dialects. There was also no single alphabet. Most often, either the Russian alphabet or a significantly simplified version of the Moldovan Cyrillic alphabet was used, differing from the Russified version by writing “ъ” instead of “e” and “й” instead of “ь” at the end of words. Writing using the Church-Moldavian alphabet, but in a civil script, was less common practice.

IN Russian Empire the terms “Moldovan” and “Romanian language” were used as synonyms by both Russian and Moldavian authors. The choice of one or another language name was determined in most cases by the context or target audience to which a particular text was addressed.

Wanting to emphasize the differences between the folk language of Bessarabian peasants and Romanian innovations, A. Mateevich, speaking at the First Congress of Teachers of Bessarabia in 1917, stated: “we will teach Moldavian, the church language, and not the language of Bucharest newspapers, of which we do not understand anything, as if it were Tatar.”

• Maps of the distribution of the Romanian language at the beginning of the 20th century, made by Gustav Weigand :

Between First And Second world wars

Promoters of the Romanian language in Bessarabia recognized that the speech of Bessarabian Moldovans was noticeably different from the Bucharest norm, and were forced to take this into account in their activities - even to the point of publishing some issues of their newspapers in Cyrillic, which was prohibited in Bessarabia from January 1, 1919.

The Moldovan language received official status in 1924 when it was created on the left bank Dniester Moldavian ASSR as part of Ukraine; this was accompanied by fierce discussions between “originalists” who defended the idea of ​​a literary language based on dialects Transnistria, and “Romanizers”, who were guided by Romanian literary norms.

At the initial stage of language construction in the Moldavian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, for a number of local political figures (for example, Pavel Kior), the creation of a separate Moldavian language was dictated not so much by ethnopolitical as class considerations. It was planned to create on the basis of folk dialects"proletarian" Moldavian language as an antipode " bourgeois» Romanian language. In the future, this “national language” was planned to be used to incite a revolution not only in Bessarabia, but also in Romania. However, the first grammar and dictionary compiled in the MASSR by Gavriil Buciuccanu in 1925 and 1926, with the exception of the Cyrillic alphabet, differed little from most Romanian ones grammarian that time . In July 1927, the Moldavian Scientific Committee published rules spelling, based on the “Moldavian Grammar” (“Moldavian Grammar”), developed by Leonid Madan. These rules were based on local dialects and represented the most radical attempt to create an independent Moldovan language, completely different from Romanian. In addition to reproducing the folk dialect, it was planned to introduce a huge amount of neologisms, composed of Moldavian or Russian roots.

An example of the text in Moldovan in the recording at that time:

Eun sektsyya istorichaski, Komitetu shtiintsynik sh'o pus zedaci sy altetuaski history Marxists a narodului moldovinesque. Yntiyu lukru shtiintsynik yn partea "vetseriy norodului moldovinesque a isy'n time di mai aproapi.

Eun sektsyya di "nvetsarya cerii: Din lukru "nsemnat dupe programs pen chi-s strynsy shi tiperiti "n cherts osegiti kyntichi shi zyketoari norodnichi moldovinesti. vetsar cerii.

According to the resolution of the Bureau of the Moldavian Regional Party Committee dated February 2, 1932, it was prescribed to switch to the Latin alphabet by the end of the year. Along with the transition to the Latin alphabet, the norms and rules of the Romanian language were adapted. In May 1938, the romanization campaign was stopped and the Cyrillic script was returned to the Moldovan language. The new norm of the Moldovan language remained quite close to the Romanian one.

In the Moldavian SSR

On August 31, 1989, the new government of the Moldavian SSR (at the request of participants in a demonstration organized by the nationalist Popular Front of Moldova) abolished the Cyrillic alphabet on its territory and introduced Romanian spelling in Latin for the Moldovan language. In the territory PMR The Cyrillic alphabet was preserved and is still used today.

Spelling and alphabet

The main difference between the two Latin spellings (the use of letters â And î to indicate sound s ) was canceled by the publication of the "Spelling Dictionary of the Romanian Language" (developed by the Academy of Sciences of Moldova and recommended for use since November 15, 2000). Previously, in Moldovan Romanian it was recommended to use î wherever sound is made s , while standard Romanian used both characters according to etymological principle. However, many publications in Romanian in the Republic of Moldova have previously used â (“Flux”, “Accente”, “Ziarul de Garda”, “Timpul”, etc.), Also in Romania there are publications that use the old spelling, without â (Academia Caţavencu and others). The fact that the official spelling, operating in Moldova, required exclusive use î , is explained by the fact that at the moment when the Academy of Sciences of Moldova adopted Latin alphabet(after Soviet period when used Cyrillic), Romanian Academy haven't returned the symbol yet â (the â was completely abolished in 1953).

The Moldovan language in Transnistria is not considered identical to Romanian and continues to use the Cyrillic alphabet.

Numerals

Similarities with the Romance (Latin) group of languages:

Slavicisms

A characteristic feature of the Moldavian language is the presence of a significant Slavic layer in its composition. Of the 710 words related to agriculture, terms of Latin origin - 5.4%; words that originated among the Moldovan population - 53.3%; words of Slavic origin - 30.3%. Words of Slavic origin include: “plough” ( rus. plow), "borane" ( rus. harrow), "koase" ( rus. braid), "brazde" ( rus. furrow), "sheaf" ( rus. sheaf), "stack" ( rus. haystack, stack), "kepitse" ( rus. kopna), etc. In terminology related to the production of fabrics, about 200 terms are used in the dialects of the Moldovan language. Of these: words of Latin origin - 12.5%, East Slavic - 39% and South Slavic - 23%.

Linguistic ties between Moldovans and Eastern Slavs through everyday communication are established during the period of Moldovans’ settlement across Bukovina And Moldova, and then by Bessarabia probably from the XIV-XV centuries. There is a pronounced East Slavic influence in the Moldavian language: over 2,000 East Slavic borrowings in the main stock of the modern Moldavian language. Many Russianisms from the Moldavian language before 1812 entered into Wallachian language.

Current situation

Some Moldovan officials at the rank of ministers have repeatedly stated that “Moldovan and Romanian are the same language.” According to official data from the 2004 population census, in Moldova, 78.4% of Moldovans called Moldovan their native language, and 18.8% called Romanian their native language (in cities - 30.9%, in villages - 13.0%), but in response to the question about nationality, they considered themselves to be Moldovans; in these data M. N. Guboglo sees an indication of “the beginning of an internal split in Moldavian ethnopsychological life.” Discussion of the issue of naming the state language of Moldova “Moldavian” or “Romanian” currently always has a political connotation.

In schools and universities of modern Moldova there is no subject “Moldavian language”. The subject is being studied " Romanian language". This is also the name of the main language of instruction in educational institutions in Moldova. Subject “Moldavian language” (in Cyrillic) is taught only in universities and secondary educational institutions Transnistria optional, starting from first grade, along with Ukrainian language.

The collective work “Moldavians” published in 2010 by Moldovan and Russian scientists in the series “Peoples and Cultures” includes Chapter 3 “Moldavian Language”, written mainly by Vasile Stati, which in 2003 published its own Moldovan-Romanian dictionary (English) Russian. In 2011, the expanded second edition of the dictionary was printed at the printing house of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Moldova. To justify the difference between Moldavian and Romanian, Stati cites the following arguments: the presence in Moldavian of significant Slavic borrowings, some of which are absent in Romanian; presence in the Romanian series gypsy borrowings; specificity of the Moldovan dialects of the Left Bank of the Dniester; earlier commit glottonym"Moldovan" compared to the glottonym "Romanian". “Moldovan-Romanian Dictionary” by Vasile Stati caused both critical and positive reviews among Moldovan and Romanian linguists.

Although initially the Moldovan language was assigned codes ISO 639: “mo” and “mol”, they were abolished in the 2000s and now the Moldovan language does not have a separate ISO code. Also known as a reference book on the languages ​​of the world - “ Ethnologue: Languages ​​of the World", which contains information on more than 7,000 living languages ​​of the world - does not mention Moldavian as a separate language, but as an alternative name for Romanian.

The country's population uses both names. While the majority of rural residents indicated Moldovan as their mother tongue during the last census, the majority of Chisinau and, according to surveys, people with higher education tend to call their language Romanian. The highest propensity to use the name “Romanian language” is observed among young people, people with higher education, urban residents and people with high incomes. The name “Moldavian language” is most often used by those residents of Moldova for whom this language is not their native language.

There is a movement on the territory of Moldova Moldovenists who believe that the name “Moldavian language” should be used for the official language of Moldova, in particular because it is older than linguonym"Romanian language" . According to a survey conducted in 2012, 65% of citizens support this opinion.

Romania is putting pressure on Moldova to change the state language: in 2012, it was reported that Romania would block Moldova’s accession to the European Union “if Chisinau does not abandon the historical name of its language - the Moldovan language - and does not recognize it as “Romanian””.

see also

Notes

1. unrecognized state
2. Article 12 of the Constitution of the PMR
3. “Popov: No bilingualism in Kyiv”, Kyiv Post September 19, 2012
4. Lukht L. I., Narumov B. P. Romanian language // Languages ​​of the world. Romance languages. - M., Academia, Institute of Linguistics RAS, 2001 - P. 575
5. eNews: “The Moldovan language is older than Romanian” - Interview with historian, author of the first Moldovan-Romanian dictionary Vasile Stati Archived copy dated July 21, 2015 at Wayback Machine, December 5, 2013
6. "Romanian language" in the Encyclopedia Britannica; Lukht L. I., Narumov B. P. Romanian language // Romance languages. M., 2001. P. 577.
7. Problems of language in a global world. Monograph // Ed. Ganina E.V., Chumakova A.N. - 2015
8. Toporov V. Research on etymology and semantics. Volume 2. Indo-European languages ​​and Indo-European studies. Book 1 - 2006
9. Chervinsky P., Nadel-Chervinskaya M. Explanatory and etymological dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language - Ternopil: Krok, 2012 - pp. 478-479
10. Neroznak V. P. Balkan Studies // Great Russian Encyclopedia
11. Corleteanu N. G. Moldavian language // TSB. - 1969-1978
12. , With. 241.
13. King, Charles. Forging a Soviet Moldovan Nation// The Moldovans: Romania, Russia, and the Politics of Culture. - Hoover Press, 2000. - P. 107-108. - 303 p. - ISBN 9780817997922.
14. Art. 13 of the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova
15. Law No. 3465 of 09/01/1989 on the functioning of languages ​​on the territory of the Moldavian SSR: “Enshrined in the Constitution (Basic Law) Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic status of the Moldovan language as the state language is intended to contribute to the achievement of completeness sovereignty republic and the creation of the necessary guarantees for its full and comprehensive implementation in all spheres of political, economic, social and cultural life. The Moldavian SSR supports the acquisition of education and satisfaction of their cultural needs in their native language by Moldovans living outside the republic, and taking into account reality of Moldovan-Romanian linguistic identity- and Romanians living on the territory of the USSR.”
16. Lukht, Narumov, p. 575.
17. The Constitutional Court of Moldova decided that the state language of the Republic of Moldova is Romanian, News Agency “Novosti-Moldova” (December 5, 2013). Archived from the original on December 7, 2013. Retrieved December 19, 2013.
18. Romanian has been recognized as the official language of Moldova. Lenta.ru(December 5, 2013). Retrieved December 19, 2013.
19. Dissenting opinion of Judge Aurel Baiesu, stated on the basis of Article 27 part (5) of the Law on the Constitutional Court and Article 67 of the Code of Constitutional Jurisdiction (undefined) .
20. Russian Foreign Ministry: “According to the current Constitution of the Republic of Moldova, the state language is Moldovan”
21. , With. 152.
22. Repina T. A. Historical chronicles XVII - early. XVIII century// History of the Romanian language: textbook. - St. Petersburg. : St. Petersburg University Publishing House, 2002. - P. 64. - ISBN 5-288-02915-6.
23. Tagliavini C. Una nuova lingua literaria. Il moldavo?//Communicazione letta al VIII Congresso di studii romanzi. Firenze, 3 - 8 April 1956//Foreign authors about the Moldavian language. - Chisinau, 1970.
24. Stati V. Moldovans. eno-linguistic features. - Odessa. 2016. - p. 33
25. Stati V. Moldovans. linguistic features. - Odessa. 2016. - p. 41
26. Johann Heinrich Alsted Thesaurus chronologiae
27. Paskar Evgeniy. History of the names of the Moldovan language.
28. Shornikov P. Linguistic dualism in the Moldavian principality of the XIV-XVII centuries. // Rusin, 2010, No. 2 (20) - Chisinau, 2010 - ISSN 1857-2685 - P. 68, 71, 72
29. , With. 243.
30. Slavic-Moldavian chronicles of the XV-XVI centuries. Comp. F. A. Grekul; Rep. ed. V. A. Buganov. - M.: Nauka, 1976.
31. History of the Moldavian SSR. In two volumes T. I. Ed. 2nd. Rep. ed. L. V. Cherepnin. P. 272.
32. Stati V. Moldovans are not Romanians, - 2013. P. 215