The paper addresses the question of puristic tendencies in Contemporary Ukrainian in the broader general context of democratization (or as the other researchers prefer to call it 'liberalization') of the language. The main focus of the paper is the period of independence though the changes during this period are presented against the background of the previous development of the Ukrainian language.
With perestroika (Ukrainian
Source data is taken from the Ukrainian periodical press, magazines, books and contrasted when necessary against Russian examples.
The aim of the paper is to prove that:
(a) The process of democratization of the Ukrainian language is unfolding with an unprecedented speed (contrary to Alexander Krouglov's statement (1999: 40) about the slow acceptance of linguistic democratization in Ukrainian).
(b) The process of democratization in the Ukrainian language prevails over purist or archaizing tendencies (often puristic processes do not conflict with democratization; when they do so, the process of democratization prevails over them). This is contrary to the same author's statement about a purist or archaizing tendency prevailing over democratization in Ukrainian (1999: 40).
Applying Ryazanova–Clarke & Wade's (1999) approach to the analysis of the lexicon of this post–totalitarian society, I show that by utilization of neologisms, the reorientation of meanings, motivated by social and ideological transformation, the passive and active usage of lexemes and the deideologization of the lexicon, the Ukrainian language is undergoing a rapid process of democratization.
Considering in detail the views of the
My paper endeavors to prove that Alexander Krouglov (1999: 45) was wrong regarding the tendencies towards democratization being kept in the background in Contemporary Ukrainian. The puristic tendency in Ukrainian is very important from the point of view of showing alternatives to borrowings for language replenishment.