러시아의 문자개혁 정책과 소수 민족어의 문제 - 문자개혁 정책의 역사적 흐름과 그 길항에 대하여 -

Abstract

The purpose of this thesis is to outline the history of Russian language policy developed before and after the Russian Revolution in October 1917, and to examine the characteristic flow and direction of Russian writing reform in the historical context. In addition, We wanted to examine how the change of Russian text reform was related to the problem of ethnic languages ​​at the time. First of all, this paper dealt with the problem of simplification of Cyrillic script for Russian modernization. The writing reform of Peter the Great was the introduction of secular writing along with the simplification of the Cyrillic script. Through this, Russia as a country in Europe provided an opportunity to promote its modern advancement. Russia, where language communication was inefficient, pursued the efficiency of writing on the road to modernization. Second, we looked at the Sovietization policy based on Latin scripts in the 1920s. After the Russian Revolution, the language policy of the Soviet Union led by Lenin was to strengthen national autonomy and to improve the status of ethnic languages ​​as part of the policy of inculturation. It was a measure of respect for all members of the Soviet Union and the first attempt at internationalism of language. As part of the communist policy toward Western Europe, there was a concrete linguistic practice called the conversion of the Latin script of the writing system in Russia during the Lenin era. Third, the monolingual policy and Cyrillic script policy of the 1930s were examined. With the advent of Stalin, from the mid-1930s, the policy of single-state language was strengthened by the policy of Sovietization, that is, Russianization. The Latin script of the previous period was abandoned and the Russian Cyrillic script was forcibly converted in a short period of time. Unlike the ideals of the early Soviets, Stalin's national language policy was a policy that thoroughly divided Russia in the center and Russia in the periphery on the basis of pan-Russianism. This policy did not take into account minorities and their national languages. Finally, the relationship between Stalin's language policy and the problem of ethnic languages ​​was examined. Minorities without writing had no choice but to assimilate into the Stalinist Cyrillic policy. However, because the Russian-Korean(고려인) were a minority ethnic group with the ‘Hangeul’ script, there was room to protect their language rights to some extent despite the pressure of the Russian-centered Cyrillic policy. In the end, the language policy of the Soviet Union for about 70 years was a coexistence of the national language and the bilingualism of Russian, contrary to the intention of the federal central government to make Russian the only national language. And in such a macro-flow, there was a change in the writing policy. What is clear is that although the Soviet language policy had a compulsory intention, it was a language policy with a certain degree of flexibility when viewed from a historical context. it was unique and unprecedented in world history.