Alphabet Shift

in the Caucasus:
Motivations and Implications

TERMINOLOGY
Language shift
Process whereby a speech community of
a language shifts to speaking another
language
Alphabet (Script) shift
Process of the replacement of one
writing system by another

Russian/Soviet Experience
Lenin favoured Roman script, and described Romanization as the great
revolution of the East." In the early 1920s he set up a commission to
investigate a possibility of a revised Roman alphabet for Russian. After the
revolution of 1917 efforts were made for about ten years to introduce Roman
alphabets for non-Russian languages spoken in the USSR. By 1933 it was
reported that that seventy-two previously unwritten languages were given
alphabets, sixty-four Roman-based, and new orthographies were replaced by
Cyrillic equivalents. Intensified nationalism under Stalin put an end to the
policy of Romanization and introduced undisguised Russification. Roman
alphabets were converted to Cyrillic with the new express aim of broadcasting
the influence of Russian culture in the USSR and accelerating the learning of
the Russian language. Certainly, the use of Roman alphabets often meant that
pupils were using different writing systems for their native languages and for
Russian. At the end of the 1930s almost all nationalities in the USSR had
adopted the Cyrillic alphabet, which made easier transition to the national
language (Stubbs 1980: 83)

Russian/Soviet Experience
The Soviet script reform of the late 1920s and early 1930s was applied
to all the available oriental languages, not just in Central Asia.
Altogether 70 languages were transferred to the Latin alphabet,
including Dungan, a form of Chinese. There were inevitably disputes
among scholars about the correct method of transcription, especially in
the case of vowels. Letters tended to appear and disappear
mysteriously during this period, and different letters often performed
identical functions in different Turkic languages. This naturally helped
to increase divergence between them, which may have been intentional.
Ordinary people often found the changes quite bewildering. Some of
those charged with implementing the policy themselves misunderstood
it. Hence the rather patronizing story told about the Kyrgyz schoolteacher who wrote to the Kyrgyz People's Commissariat for Education
in Frunze: "We have learned all the letters you sent us. Could you kindly
send us more?" (Fowkes 1997: 59)

SOUTH CAUCASIAN

Megrelian

Megrelian

NORTH-WEST CAUCASIAN

Abkhaz

1865-1926
Based on Cyrillic (P. Uslar)

1926-1928
Based on Latin (N. Marr)

1928-1937
Based on Latin (N. Yakovlev & E. Polivanov)

1937-1954
Based on Georgian (Committee)

1954-present day
Based on Cyrillic (P. Uslar)

NORTH-WEST CAUCASIAN

Circassian
1825
Based on Arabic
1829
Based on Cyrillic
1855
Based on Arabic
1906
Based on Cyrillic
1918-1927
Based on Arabic
1926-1937
Based on Latin
1937-present day
Based on Cyrillic

Adyghe alphabet

Kabardian alphabet

NORTH-EAST CAUCASIAN

Dagestanian languages
In 17th-18th cc., there were more or less
successful attempts to apply the Arabic
script to some Dagestanian languages:

Avar
Dargwa
Lak
Lezgian

NORTH-EAST CAUCASIAN

Dagestanian languages

1930-1937
Based on Latin

1937-present day
Based on Cyrillic

TURKIC

Azerbaijani
7th c.-1929

Based on Arabic (three different versions)

1929-1939
Based on Latin

1939-1991

Based on Cyrillic

1991-1992
Based on Latin

1992-present day

Based on Latin (revised version)

Concluding remarks (1)

Language building policy:
alphabet-making endeavours were interpreted as
"generous contributions to the prosperous future
of those nationalities by the Soviet state. The
process of "building" was accompanied by some
over-zealous activities.

Concluding remarks (2)

The newly compiled alphabets made

Communist ideas available in the peoples' native
languages and became an effective means of
indoctrination.

Concluding remarks (3)

Those alphabets had just come into being,

and, in most cases, "generous" intentions
surrounding their indigenization remained
on paper.

Concluding remarks (4)

The alphabet-making activities were a tool for

applying the principle of Divide et impera.

Concluding remarks (5)

One should necessarily distinguish between

super-imposed and self-imposed script reforms.

Thank you for your attention!