ХУДОЖЕСТВЕННЫЙ БИЛИНГВИЗМ: ПРОБЛЕМЫ ТЕОРЕТИЧЕСКОГО АНАЛИЗА И ТВОРЧЕСКОЙ ПРАКТИКИ - Literary Bilingualism: Problems of Theory and Creative Practice

The problem of translation as perevod avtora both in the Soviet and post-Soviet period can find an adequate explanation in the dynamic of Russian language policy and sociolinguistic processes developing inside the national republics from 1920s up to now. In this paper I shed light on the so-called “literary bilingualism” in the Soviet Union, an area, where social bilingualism was a historic reality and vertical diglossic relations were established between languages and literatures. National languages were used as local “low” varieties, while Russian language was the official “high” variety of the Union. Ajtmatov represents the typical Soviet writer, symbol of the fusion (slijanie) of the national and Russian literary spirit, derived from “one-way bilingualism” (odnostoronnee dvujazychie), the most widespread form of language contact in the USSR. As Guseinov pointed out, there are several forms of bilingual writing in the Soviet and post-Soviet space. Grutman’s theory of vertical or horizontal linguistic relations in self-translation can help to explain this particular context. After Perestrojka we note a visible change in relations between Russian and national titular languages, leading to an upsetting of the above-mentioned vertical hierarchy and the recovery of official status for the national languages and literatures. National contemporary writers of the post-Soviet area, trying to operate in a profoundly changed literary and publishing reality, must adapt to a new linguistic dominance configuration, including the change of linguistic repertoire and interests of the readers.