|تعداد مشاهده مقاله||103,754,157|
|تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله||81,511,088|
تغییر و جایگزینی الفبای نیاکان (فارسی) در تاجیکستان در دوران اتحاد شوروی و پس از آن
|مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی|
|مقاله 13، دوره 11، شماره 2، مهر 1397، صفحه 469-489 اصل مقاله (557.75 K)|
|نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی|
|شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jcep.2019.204730.449643|
|محمدرضا مجیدی1؛ غلامرضا خادمی 2|
|1دانشیار مطالعات منطقهای، دانشگاه تهران|
|2دانشجوی دکتری مطالعات منطقهای، دانشگاه تهران|
|از پیامدهای زیانبار حاکمیت هفتادسالۀ رژیم کمونیستی اتحاد شوروی در منطقۀ تاریخی آسیای مرکزی، پنج جمهوری قزاقستان، قرقیزستان، ازبکستان، ترکمنستان و تاجیکستان تغییر اجباری رسمالخط نوشتاری این کشورها به سیریلیک (روسی) بود. این وضعیت در جمهوری تاجیکستان بهعلت تفاوت زبانی با چهار جمهوری دیگر پیچیدگی خاصی داشت. در هر صورت پس از فروپاشی اتحاد شوروی انتظار میرفت با استقلال جمهوری تاجیکستان الفبای نیاکان (فارسی) جایگزین الفبای سیریلیک (روسی) شود. همانگونه که در سالهای ابتدایی سلطۀ رژیم کمونیستی الفبای تاجیکستان از الفبای نیاکان (فارسی) به سیریلیک (روسی) تغییر یافت؛ ولی چنین نشد. برای درک علت و چرایی موضوع در چارچوب نوشتار پیش رو در آغاز پیشینۀ تغییر الفبا و به بیان دیگر نابودی الفبای فارسی در تاجیکستانِ دوران اتحاد شوروی و علتهای آن توضیح داده میشود. سپس فرازوفرود جریان تغییر الفبا و به بیانی مسئلۀ زندهکردن الفبای نیاکان در تاجیکستان پس از دوران اتحاد شوروی در بیش از دو دهۀ اخیر شرح داده میشود. با شناخت این پیشینه از دو دورۀ تاریخی، درک علت و چرایی فرجام نیافتن جایگزینی الفبای نیاکان (فارسی) در جمهوری تاجیکستان پس از دوران اتحاد شوروی در قالب ارائۀ دلیلهای مخالفان و موافقان این جریان از روایی درخور توجهی برخوردار میشود. بدین ترتیب در این نوشتار ضمن بررسی هر دو دوره به این پرسش پاسخ داده میشود که چرا فرایند تغییر الفبای سیریلیک (روسی) به الفبای نیاکان (فارسی) تحقق نیافت. از اینرو فرض میشود با بیان اهمیت عوامل اقتصادی و سیاسی، نبود پذیرش نخبگانی عاملی تأثیرگذار بوده است.|
|الفبای سیریلیک؛ الفبای نیاکان (فارسی)؛ پذیرش نخبگانی؛ تاجیکستان؛ روسیسازی|
|عنوان مقاله [English]|
|Change and Replacement of the Alphabet of the Ancestors (Farsi) in and after the Soviet Era in Tajikistan|
|Mohammadreza Majidi1؛ Gholamreza Khademi2|
|1Associate Professor of Regional Studies, University of Tehran|
|2PhD Student of Regional Studies, University of Tehran|
|One of the disastrous consequences of the seventy-year-old governance of the Soviet Union's communist regime in the historical region of Central Asian consisting of five republics of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan was a compulsory change in the writing systems of these countries to Cyrillic (Russian). This situation was of particular complexity in Tajikistan due to the linguistic differences with four other countries. In any case, after the collapse of the former Soviet Union, with the independence of the Republic of Tajikistan, the alphabet of the ancestors (Farsi) was expected to replace the Cyrillic alphabet (Russian), as in the early years of the domination of the communist regime, the alphabet of Tajikistan changed from the alphabet Of ancestors (Persian) to Cyrillic (Russian), but it did not happen. Therefore, in order to understand the cause of the subject, first the history of alphabetical change and in other words extinction of the Persian alphabet in Tajikistan during the Soviet era will be explained in the context of this article. Then the upsides and downsides of the change stream of the alphabet, in other words, the subject of the revival of the ancestors' alphabet in Tajikistan after the Soviet era in more than two decades will be described. Recognizing this history from two historical periods, understanding the cause and the reason why the alphabet of the ancestors (Persian) did not replace in the post-Soviet period in the Republic of Tajikistan is significantly valid in terms of providing the reasons for the opponents and the aforementioned superiors. Thus, in this paper the question, i.e. why the process of changing the Cyrillic alphabet (Russian) ancestors’ alphabet (Persian) was not realized, will be answered while studying both periods. Therefore, it is assumed that not accepting the elitism has been an effective factor acknowledging of the importance of economic and political factors.|
In this context, it is explained that the whispers of the first issue of the reformation of the Arabic alphabet and its replacement with the Latin alphabet in the stream of nationalism and the development of the Islamic countries were proposed by Malkam Khan and Mirza Fath Ali Akhundov and his counterpart in the second half of the nineteenth century, but his efforts had no tangible achievement.
Between 1927 and 1930, the alphabet of the five Central Asian republics changed to the Latin alphabet. Initially, changing Arabic alphabet to the Cyrillic alphabet instead of the Latin alphabet was suggested, but it was rejected. At that time, such a move was seen as the institutionalization of Russian superiority, which was strongly condemned by Lenin (Hiro, 2009: 46)
Although Central Asia was under the influence of Russia and the domination of communism during Soviet era, its encounter with new era was more or less like Iran, since in Iran there were whispers about alphabet change from some political and cultural elites at that time. In addition, Latinization relied on Iranian nationalism, because Latinization was a reflection of the Persian modernization and its ability to expand in line with time. In other words, Latinization was part of the movement for expressing the national existence.
The occurrence of the communist revolution of Russia and the founding of the Soviet Union and the political and social events which from it, made Tajiks face a great transformation in all its aspects, and the fate of the Persian language could not be kept free of these changes. By initiating the Soviet era, Persian language was placed in a new context in cultural terms. From this period on, two fundamental factors shaped the fate of Persian language.
In 1926, in the Turkology Congress of Baku, it was announced that the Latin alphabet would be used for all Soviet-Turkish languages. The prevalence of the Latin alphabet coincided with the elimination of illiteracy throughout the Soviet Union, including Tajikistan. The Qur'an and its interpretations, as well as the poems of Persian poets such as Ferdowsi, Saadi and Hafez were banned books.
The influence of the pan-Turkism movement on intellectuals or reformists had reached the point where many of those whose nationality was Takij and their mother tongue was Persian, were influenced by it and denied the basis and place of their national language and culture. In a way that in the first years of the new Soviet government, Persian speakers were fined for speaking Persian in Bukhara. Even so, the Tajiks had to defend their originality and independence at the same time with alphabetical change in framework of controlling negative pan-Turkism waves.
Although the process of Russianization of the various nations of the Russian empire dates back to Alexander III in the second half of the nineteenth century, but this process was accompanied by ups and downs in the Soviet era. At first it was condemned based on the theory of Pokrovsky titled as the absolute evil of all colonial forms of English, French or Tsarist Russian until mid-1930s. After a while, the leaders of Soviet Union supported a historical new theory called “Less Evil” during next decade between 1937 and the end of the 1940s.
Considering these developments, not only was there no sensitivity to the Tsarist Russia legacy, but also it was acknowledged and even praised. One of the reasons for promoting the Cyrillic alphabet instead of Latin and then compulsory language training in Central Asia, including Tajikistan, is understandable in this context.
However, the acceptance of the replacement of the alphabet of the ancestors (Persian) was high at the beginning of the independence of Tajikistan, but with the outbreak of civil war in Tajikistan, and the Cyrillic alphabet advocates exploiting this undesirable situation on the one hand and hastiness of the advocates of the revival of the ancestral alphabets on the other hand, the necessity of principle of transformation in order to achieve cultural independence was influenced and postponed for an unknown period of time. In other words, ruling situation in Tajikistan showed that law enforcement was far more difficult than its resolution.
By splitting the elite community of Tajikistan to two poles, opposites and advocates of changing alphabet, the opposition contexts of opponents of alphabetical changes were more significant than the its advocates’ reasons, as the following:
1. The opposition contexts of Alphabetical change:
A. Cultural Context: Disconnecting from Tajiks in Bukhara and Samarkand, stating technical problem in Persian alphabet, claiming that learning Cyrillic Alphabet is easy.
B. Political Contexts: a feeling of dependence on Iran, Islamophobia, clerics gaining power.
C. Economic contexts: High risk of work, recovery costs, the factor of Russia.
2. Reasons of alphabetical change advocates:
A. Cultural reasons: The relative difficulty of writing, benefits of returning to self, relationship among three countries with the same language.
B. Political reasons: Tajik religious interests, elimination of Islamophobia, fear of dependence having no ground.
C. Economic reasons: Having shared facilities, Risk reduction, and gradual replacement.
Given these explanations, it is clear that intellectual-elite cooperation and synergy in order to move toward realizing expectations in the framework of achieving progress is far more effective in the process of cultural transformation than any other transformation. Thus, in Tajikistan, the contexts of accepting alphabet change must be established within the framework of the strategy of continuity and solidarity. Acceptance, of course, only takes place when preparing the contexts of elite acceptance facilitates the public acceptance which its reflection can be found in the framework of people yes votes in a referendum, as there was the acceptance of changing Persian Alphabet to Latin in Tajikistan in the early twentieth century.
|Alphabet of Ancestors, Cyrillic Alphabet, Elite Acceptance, Russianization, Tajikistan|
1. Allworth, Edward (1975), Central Asia, New York: Columbia University Press.
2. Atai, Farhad (2012), “Soviet Cultural Legacy in Tajikistan”, Iranian Studies, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 81-95.
3. Bakon, Eliizabet (1996), Central Asians under Russian Rule, Ithaca: Cornel University Press.
4. Bennigsen, A. (1958), “The Russification of the Tajik Language”, Central Asia Review, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 25-33.
5. Bergne Paule (2007), The Birth of Tajikistan, London: I. B. Tauric.
6. Dietrich, Ayşe Pamir (2005), “Language Policy and the Status of Russian in the Soviet Union and the Successor States Outside the Russian Federation”, ASEES, Vol. 19, Nos. 1-2, pp. 1-27.
7. Djalili, Mohammad Reza and Others (1998), Tajikistan, the Trails of Independence, London: Curzon.
8. Freeze, Gregory (2002), Russia: a History, New York: Oxford University Press.
9. Hambly, Gavin (1966), Central Asia, New York: Delacorte Press.
10. Hiro, Dilip (2009), Incide Central Asia, New York: Peter Mayer Publications.
11. Johnson, Juliet, Marietta Stepaniants and Benjamin Forest (2005), Religion and Identity in Modern Russia, Burlington: Ashgate
12. Kemper, Michael (2010), Islamic Education in the Soviet Union and its Successor States, London: Routledge.
13. Myer, Will (2002), Islam and Colonialism, London: Routledge.
14. Nickjoo, Mahvash (1979), “A Century of Struggle for the Reform of the Persian Script”, The Reading Teacher, Vol. 32, No. 8, pp. 926-929.
15. Parker, John (2009), Persian Dreams, Washington: Potomac Books, Inc.
16. Perry, John (1996), “Tajik Literature: Seventy Years is Longer than the Millennium”, World Literature Today, Literatures of Central Asia, Vol. 70, No. 3, pp. 571-573.
17. Perry, John (1997), “Script and Scripture: the Three Alphabets of Tajik Persian, 1927-1997”, Journal of Central Asian Studies, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp.1-18.
18. Rakowska-Harmstone, Teresa (1970), Russia and Nationalism in Central Asia, Baltimore: the Johns Hopkins Press.
19. Roy, Oliver (2007), The New Central Asia, London: I. B. Tauris.
20. Rywkin, Michael (1963), Russia in Central Asia, New York: Collier Books.
21. Schiffman, Harold (2012), Language Policy and Language Conflict in Afghanistan and its Neighbors, Leiden: Brill.
22. Von Maltzahn, Nodia (2013), The Syria-Iran Axis, Cultural Diplomacy and International Relations in the Middle East, London: I. B. Tauris.
23. Wheeler, Geoffrey (1962), Racial Problems in Soviet Muslim Asia, London: Oxford University Press.
24. Yalcin, Resul (2002), The Rebirth Uzbekistan, Labanon: Ithaca Press.
1. Afshar, Mahmoud (1928), The New Tajik Alphabet, Samarkand: the New Tajik Alphabet Committee.
2. Afshar, Mahmoud (1945), “The Territory of Persian Language, Afghanistan, Iran, and Tajikistan”, Ayandeh, Vol. 2, No. 8, pp. 641-647.
3. Atai, Farhad (2008-2009), “The Heritage of the Soviet Union, and the Cultural and Art Management in Tajikistan”, Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 97-120.
4. Avtorkhanov, Abdurakhman (1992), The Problem of National Minorities in the Soviet Union, Translated by Fathollah Didehban, Tehran: Publication of the Education of the Islamic Revolution.
5. Badi’i Azandehi, Marjan and Atefeh Golafshan (2012), “The Role of Politics and Power in the Impact of Persian Language on Tajikistan’s National Identity”, Great Khorasan, Vol. 3, No. 6, pp. 9-26.
6. Borjian, Habib (1993), “The Experience of Changing Farsi Writing in Tajikistan”, Iranshenasi, No. 17, pp. 170-182.
7. Bondshahriari, Ali Asghar (2007), “Literary Relations between Iran and Tajikistan and their Impact on Tajikistan’s Modern Poetry”, Human Sciences Journal, No. 54, pp. 325-344.
8. Erfan, Mahmoud (1925), “Persian Language in Turkestan”, Ayandeh, No. 1, pp. 28-32.
9. Ettefaghfar, Fereshteh Sadat (2008), “The Origion of the Tajikistan Civil War and the Role of the I.R.Iran in Ending the Fighting”, Politic Quarterly, Vol. 38, No. 4, pp. 38-23.
10. Ghafurov, Babajan (1998), Tajiks, Dushanbe: Efran.
11. Ghayebov, Mohammad (1989), About the Enlightenment in Tajikistan and Afghanistan, Dushanbe: Efran.
12. Ghazveh, Alireza (2006), “There are Thousands of Khorasans in My Spirit”, Report of Fifth Association of Persian Language Teachers in Tajikistan, Sokhan-e Eshgh, No. 29, pp. 90-97.
13. Hosseinipour, Masoud and Azita Hamedani (2012), “First Relatives, Second Dervish, Bukhara”, Vol. 15, No. 88-89, pp. 82-100.
14. Hunter, Shirin, Jeffrey Thomas and Alexander Melikishvili (2011), Islam in Russia, Translated by Elaheh Koolaee, Seyyedeh Motahareh Hosseini and Asma Moini, Tehran: Ney.
15. Irani, Nasser (1992), “Iran and Independent Tajikistan”, Nashr-e Danesh, No. 71, pp. 216-219.
16. Koolaee, Elaheh (2012), Politics and Government in Central Eurasia, Tehran: Samt.
17. Kramsch, Claire (2011), Languages and Culture, Translated by Fariba Ghazanfari, Raheleh Ghasemi and Pedram Lalbakhsh, Tehran: Amir Kabir.
18. Mojtahed Shabestari, Ali Ashraf (1992), “Rudaki’s Land was Renewed”, Kelk, No. 31, pp. 53-55.
19. Mollajan, Seifollah (2011) (a), The Comparative Study of Cultural Presence of Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia, the European Union and the United States in Central Asia, with Emphasis on Tajikistan, Tajikistan: the Cultural Consultation of the Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
20. Mollajan, Seifallah (2011) (b), The Reviewing of Obstacles and Estimating the Material and Spiritual Value Conversion of Cyrillic Alphabet into Persian Alphabet in Tajikistan, Tajikistan: the Cultural Consultation of the Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
21. Natel Khanlari, Parviz (1982), Linguistics and Persian Language, Tehran: Toos.
22. Numanov, M. Q. and L. P. Kandinov (1975), The Tajik Civilization during Fifty Years of Soviet Rule, Dushanbe: Erfan.
23. Nur, Shams Alhaq (1995), Islam and Islamic Movement in Tajikistan, Tehran: Hozeh Honari.
24. Pahlavan, Changiz (1994), “The Significance of Current Events in Our Civilization, Afghanistan and Tajikistan”, Kelk, Nos. 51-52, pp. 42-58.
25. Rahimi, Mohsen (2015), “The Challenges of Writing Style in Persian and Cyrillic Typewriter Machine”, Bahar-e Adab, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 493-514.
26. Ravaghi, Ali and Shakiba Sayyad (2004), The Tajiki Persian, Tehran: Hermes.
27. Rywkin, Michael (1987), The Moscow Government and Problems of the Muslims of Central Asia in USSR, Translated by Mohmoud Ramezanzadeh, Mashhad: Islamic Studies Foundation.
28. Safar, Abdullah (1993), “The Connection between Writing and Language”, Keyhan-e Farhangi, Vol. 10, No. 8, pp. 51-53.
29. Samad, Vali (2006), Mehrnameh; Celebrating the 80th Birthday of Professor Mohammad Jan Shakouri, Dushanbe: the Cultural Consultation of the Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Tajikistan.
30. Sanai, Mehdi (1997), “Tajiks and the Language of Ancestors”, Keyhan-e Farhangi, Vol. 14, No. 139, pp. 24-25.
31. Seyyedi, Mehdi (1992), Half from Turkestan and Half from Ferghana, Mashhad: Ketabestan.
32. Shakurov, Mohammad Jan (1996), “The Spiritual Emptiness in Tajikistan and the Historical Mission of Iran”, Central Asia and the Caucasus Studies, Vol. 5, No. 16, pp. 31-40.
33. Shakouri, Mohammad Jan (1998), “The Word Choice in Tajikistan and Some of its Problems”, Farhangestan, No. 13, pp. 73-83.
34. Shakouri Bukharai, Mohammad Jan (2003), Essays on Tajikistan Language, Literature and Culture, by Masoud Mirshahi, Tehran: Asatir.
35. Sherdoost, Ali Asghar (2011), The History of Tajikistan’s Modern Literature, Tehran: Elmi Farhangi Publishing Co.
36. Smith, Graham (1996), Soviet Nations, Translated by the Group of Translators, Tehran: Elmi Farhangi Publishing Co.
37. Sultan, Mirza Hassan (2006), The Problems of the Language Science, Dushanbe: the Cultural Consultation of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Tajikistan.
38. Walter, Colonel (2003), The History of Russia from the Beginning to 1945, Translated by Najafgholi Mo’ezzi, Tehran: Donyaye Ketab.
39. Yektai, Majid (1968), “Dari, Farsi or Tajik”, Vahid, Vol. 5, No. 8, pp. 740-735.
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 707
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 274