Ethnocultural Processes in Buryatia, 2010s: Issues of Buryat Language Preservation (A Study of Mass Media Materials).

Introduction. The article newly examines regional mass media materials of the 2010s for current problems of Buryat language preservation, the latter being an important element of Buryatia’s ethnocultural processes. The term ‘ethnocultural processes’ is understood as a part of contemporary Buryat history, a true expression to denote the development of nation building ideas, including ones related to native language preservation. Materials. The paper considers a number of issues, namely: the need for universal language learning, activities by the Buddhist Traditional Sangha of Russia (BTSR), efficiency of application of federal budget subsidies, literary language and dialects, etc. The reliable media sources confirmed by field and literary materials attest to that ethnocultural processes in Buryatia pertaining to the preservation of the regional titular nation’s language remain relevant throughout the post-Soviet era. Results. The Government’s measures (often essentially formal), initiatives of public organizations (primarily those by BTSR) do contribute to the preservation of the language at a certain level, but yield no transformative results — the share of fluent speakers decreases, which is also caused by the succession of generations. The extremities of obliging all pupils to learn the language are not that harmless and can lead to an imbalance in interethnic relations in the region. Other alarming trends discussed are as follows: the use of the topic for speculative declarations by certain groups and as a background for manifestations of tribalistic attitudes, struggles for subsidies, etc. For the bulk of the population, including some Buryats, language preservation through compulsory schooling is undesirable for its low teaching efficiency and lack of usage prospects determined by insufficient demand in society. Conclusions. The discussion initiated by the mass media forced government agencies of the republic to continue the former at round tables with the participation of officials, scientists, and the public. That resulted in certain positive results, namely: efforts of BTSR were objectively assessed as efficient, and the need to study dialects and subdialects along with the literary language was recognized, the latter establishing a certain consensus between the parties, which shall possibly promote the ethnocultural processes to a new level