Ciubotă, Viorel - Nicolescu, Gheorge - Ţucă, Cornel (szerk.): Jurnal de operaţiuni al Comandamentului Trupelor din Transilvania (1918-1921) 2. (Satu Mare, 1998)
Istorie şi Geografie Istorică / Geschichte und Landeskunde / Történelem és országismeret - Regiuni de frontieră şi zone de contact / Grenzreionen und Kontakträume / Határvidékek és kapcsolódási területek
The Carpatho-Rusyn Particularity As A Model Of Borderland 291 Rusyns came again on the scene with the question of their own national orientation after the fall of the Wall and the Velvet Revolution. The quest for the status of national minority has been advanced in more or less all the countries where they live, with different reactions: in Poland, after a period of doubts, the government seems to be on the way to the acknowledgment, as well as it already happened in Hungary, where the minority is so small and harmless. In Slovakia the government of Meéiar and of his followers, already known for their politics against the Hungarian minority, acknowledged the Rusyns almost at once, perhaps in order to avoid the problems of an Ukrainian minority within the boundaries of the new State rather than for sympathy or comprehension of the Rusyn quest. The reactions to this acknowledgment are anyhow harder among the different orientations of the Rusyns, divided in Rusyn-Ukrainians and Carpatho- Rusyns than against the government (HARAKSIM 1992; MAGOCSI 1993; RUSÍNI 1994). It is anyhow in §evéenko’s homeland that the Rusyn movement met the fiercest opposition: all the Rusyn activists have been accused of betrayal against Ukraine or, as usual, of working for a new Russian - or Hungarian - aggression against the new-born Ukrainian State. The problem is that now, having already made the Ukraine, Kiev is trying to make the Ukrainians, but, instead of understanding the value and the richness of a multiethnic State, despite the Constitution, they are repeating against the Rusyns, an ethnic group that in other circumstances would identify itself with no problems with the Ukrainian State, the same errors and vexations made by Russian and Soviet Empires against the Ukrainians up to now (CALVI 1993, 1997a, 1998a, 1998b, 1999b). Repetita iuvant, but not always... It is difficult to say something about the Rusyn question in Romania: there should be much more to say about Romanians in Ukraine, but we must point out that we still receive messages from Rusyns living in Romania in which we can read about the difficulties and the probleme of the Rusyn in being accepted by the authorities. In Slovakia, Hungary, Poland and Ukraine, anyhow, we can assist to the flourishing of attempts to create new grammars of the different redactions of the Carpathian dialects spoken by the Rusyns, in order to create a perhaps future koiné for all the Rusyns (DULICENKO 1981; §TEC’ 1996; CALVI 1997c; MAGOCSI 1996; UDVARI 1996), looking at the successful experience of Backa Rusyns in former Yugoslavia (WITKOWSKI 1984), an action about which we already expressed our doubts, because, if it is true that every dialect can be a language, it is also true that the different redactions of Rusyns are worth while preserving their own local particularity: creating a new language for people that already have mutual intercomprehension without a specific statal or administrative need can be no more than a sterile attempt made by linguists and sociolinguists. Anyhow, we agree with the definition, given for the Rusyn by Dulicenko, of “literary microlanguage”, and with his considerations:
