Group work of

Baden Dana

Zhaikbayeva Sabira

Kuttubayeva Aigerim

Rakhymbayeva Laura

1.Whose point of view does Pavlenko seem to speak more from –Pro-Russian ,
pro-titular language, or something else?

In Language rights versus speakers’ rights on the applicability of Western language

rights approaches in Eastern European contexts, Pavlenko analysed the difficulties
of transitioning from bilingual Post-Soviet Latvia and Ukraine to monolingual
states and the following conflict that has been raised among Russian speakers in
those countries.
Pavlenko disagrees with a common belief of non-experts that the education
policy of the Soviet Union was in fact a mechanism toward russification of non-
Russian children. She stated that USSR had always pursued a dual course
supporting the spread of Russian and the maintenance of titular and some minority
languages. Pavlenko in the paper does not adhere to nor support solutions made by
Post-Soviet State. She remained neutral and has written the paper in concise
manner.

2. What is Pavlenko’s main argument about the relationship between language

and rights and speakers’ rights?

Pavlenko’s main argument about the relationship between language rights and
speakers’ rights reveals that these terms are articulated in Latvia and Ukraine
differently. Claiming that the Russian language does not need protection sounds
more complaisant rather than claiming that about the speakers of that language
(p.53). According to Pavlenko, speakers’ rights protect their rights to use their
mother tongue while language rights ( interests of language) control the behavior
of others. These interests necessitate Russian speakers to speak the titular
languages of the countries they are residing in.

3. Do you agree in principle?

As a group we think that A.Pavlenko’s position is rational; otherwise, “excessive

democracy” (Bowring 2009: 79) and “a politics of chantage” (Ozolins 2003: 233.)
will lead to tension among ethnic groups. (Pavlenko, A. (2011). Language rights
versus speakers’ rights: On the applicability of Western language rights approaches
in Eastern European contexts, pp.44-45)
4. Do you think her arguments and concerns are applicable to Kazakhstan? Why
or why not?

As Kazakhstan pursues the aims of building internal stability and developing

multi-ethnic society which ensure legal guarantees and respectful attitude to the
languages used throughout territory of Kazakhstan and citizens, we agree on the
aspects of maintaining the rights of titular language versus speakers based on
principals encompassed worldwide and by Western European organizations ,
giving considerable prominence to concepts of justice, freedom, equality and
human rights. (Pavlenko, A. (2011). Language rights versus speakers’ rights:
On the applicability of Western language rights approaches in
Eastern European contexts, p.45).