Language Education Policy Profile

1.8 Language Use in Society

Language	Lithuanian	Russian-speaking
	%	%
Lithuanian	98	0
Russian	0	70
Polish	0	14
Other	0	1
Mixed	1	15

In interpreting this table, it should be noted that the sub-sample ‘Russian-speaking’ was selected on linguistic, and not on ethnic grounds. It appears from the published data that the group includes 55% ethnic Russians, 25% Poles, 8% Belarussian, 4% Ukrainian and 7% others. By comparison with census figures, this sub-sample, therefore, clearly underestimates the size of non-Russian minorities. (e.g. a fully representative sample of the non-Lithuanian population would include at least as many Poles as Russians)

Despite this reservation, it is clear that in 2000, non-Lithuanian languages, especially Russian and Polish, are strongly maintained in the home, either in a unilingual or bilingual fashion. The ‘mixed’ response category may include some bilingual use of Lithuanian, but it is clear that the majority of pre-school children in the homes of minority parents are socialised through the language of the ethnic group. This survey finding is broadly supported by the 2001 census figures for the native languages of pre-school groups (0-4 yrs) (see Table 8 above)

Lithuanian is almost universally the language in the homes of ethnic Lithuanian homes.

The position of languages in the workplace is more complex.

Table 19: Languages usually spoken at respondent’s place of work 2000

If we combine monolingual and bilingual use, then it can be seen that only 11% of Lithuanians are required to use a language other than their own in the work situation. This compares with 80% of the Russian-speaking group. Nonetheless, the fact that only 35% of non-Lithuanians work in situations where only Lithuanian is spoken, indicates that minority languages are being maintained outside of the home domain. This feature can be related to the survey finding, cited earlier, that nearly half of Russian and Polish respondents (44—45%) in the survey of Kasatkina & Leoncikas (2003) work in ethnically homogeneous environments⁸⁰.

Finally, the survey conducted in 1997 by the Department of National Minorities and Lithuanians Living Abroad in South-eastern Lithuania is also of relevance here. This was a regional, or sub-national survey, conducted only in the districts of Svencionys, Salcininkai, Ignalina, Trakai and Vilnius districts and the city of Visaginas. The results cannot be generalised to the whole of Lithuania. Nonetheless, as a local study of an area where minorities are concentrated, it is useful.

Table 20: Reported use of native languages in public places in Eastern Lithuania⁸¹.

Native Language of Respondent	Language mostly spoken in Public Places
	Lithuanian	Polish	Russian	Other
	%	%	%	%
Lithuanian	95.2	1.4	3.4	--
Polish	35.4	48.3	15.3	1.0
Russian	38.2	5.3	55.6	1.0
Other	36.6	9.8	53.7	1.0