Authors

Discussion

The situation of Ukrainian language against the backdrop of the Russo-Ukrainian war was studied and discussed by Azhnyuk (2024), Kulyk (2024), Shumytska & Kruglov (2025). Sociolinguists and political scientists have extensively explored matters pertaining to linguistic culture, language policy, and the construction of national identity. The role of Ukrainian in shaping and safeguarding not only Ukrainian identity but Ukraine as an independent state is addressed in numerous scholarly contributions.

Given the situation of the Ukrainian language, it is crucial to underscore the concept of linguistic security. Typically, this concept is defined in relation to national security, information security, language policy, etc. Linguistic security refers to the legal safeguarding of the state language. This protection ensures preservation of its integrity, national and cultural originality, and capacity for self-development and improvement.

As noted by Sytko (2020), linguistic security involves implementing measures that promote and sustain linguistic development within the nation. Investigation into the relationship between language and identity extends beyond a mere correlation with the ethnic and linguistic composition of a particular population. Language serves various purposes that together shape the linguistic consciousness of its speakers. In this light, language plays a significant role in providing mental and ideological guidance (Matskiv, 2017). Given the above, language exerts as a cohesive influence that defines the person’s identity and allows one to distinguish between the self and others, people tend to view those who communicate in unfamiliar dialects as “other“, resulting in predominantly negative interactions.

When considering language in relation to ethno-national factors, it is important to recognize the present state of linguistic awareness, notions that are associated with concepts regarding the historical path of Ukrainians as an ethnic group. Language plays a crucial role in what was called the ”social construction of reality” (Resta, 1998).

That being said, despite being a dominant factor for defining national identity, Ukrainian is not always the primary means of daily communication among Ukrainians. Drawing upon the approaches to neo-Surzhyk as Ukrainian-Russian (contrasted to Surzhyk as Russian-Ukrainian) mixed or bilingual speech as a means of Ukrainian linguistic decolonisation (Maxwell et al, 2024), our study aims to explore the linguistic consciousness of the speakers in Ukraine, addressing and re-evaluating the role of Surzhyk after sociopolitical ruptures of 2014 and 2022 in the current language situation as well as changing language identities of the Ukrainian citizens at home and abroad.