Note: * 35.2% of these speak Ukrainian as a native language

Note: * 35.2% of these speak Ukrainian as a native language

** 27.05% of these speak Ukrainian as a native language

Differences are also noticeable in the choices of acquired languages (see Table 15 below). Lithuanians living in Vilnius are more likely to have acquired Russian, Polish, English and German than their counterparts in the provinces. Regional differences within the Russian minority are not as pronounced, except that Russians living in Vilnius are more likely to have learned Polish. Poles in Vilnius are noticeably more likely to have learned Lithuanian and English than Poles in the rest of Lithuania. The Ukrainians and Belarussians in Vilnius are also more likely to have learned Polish, and less likely to have learned Russian or, in the case of Belarussians, Lithuanian. The smallest minorities in Vilnius show a far greater propensity to acquire knowledge of nearly all other languages, compared to other members of their ethnic groups elsewhere in Lithuania.

Ethnic group	Other language spoken
	Lithuanian	Russian	Polish	Belarus	English	German
	%	%	%	%	%	%
Lithuania (Excluding Vilnius)
Lithuanian	0.2	62.6	5.9	0.1	15.9	7.7
Russian	65.1	7.8	10.2	0.6	14.5	6.1
Poles	55.9	77.8	9.4	2.6	3.8	4.9
Belarussian	84.8	44.7	24.6	9.6	8.0	5.3
Ukrainian	59.4	44.4	9.1	0.8	14.1	6.0
Other	23.4	25.4	4.3	0.2	6.5	5.5
Vilnius Municipality
Lithuanian	1.2	76.1	23.0	0.4	35.2	16.3
Russian	67.1	2.4	21.9	0.8	18.3	6.1
Poles	68.8	75.7	12.8	3.7	10.7	6.9
Belarussian	54.7	36.3	37.6	11.2	7.9	4.6
Ukrainian	55.7	29.6	21.0	1.6	15.3	6.1
Other	53.7	38.5	20.8	1.1	23.9	10.9

Source: Lithuanian Statistics Department. Special tabulations

Combining the two measures of language proficiency – native and other languages – for each age-group provides and overall estimate of the groups linguistic repertoire. The figures are set out in Table 16 below.

The percentages for the youngest age-group show that some 21% and 13% of this pre-school group speak Russian and Polish respectively, which compares with 6% and 5% outside of Vilnius. Lithuanian is spoken as a first or second language by 73%, which is much lower than the comparable percentage elsewhere (88%). At this age, knowledge of English and German is practically non-existent in either area.

By the age at which schooling is completed (i.e. 15-19 years), Lithuanian is spoken by 95% and Russian by 83% of this age-group. The percentage for Lithuanian here is close to the average elsewhere (97%), but the percentage able to speak Russian is well above the provincial average (70%). In Vilnius, the increase in the percentage learning Polish as a second language during their school years is more limited – from 13% at age 0-4 to 28% at age 15-19 years. Nonetheless, both these percentages are considerably higher than those found elsewhere in Lithuania, i.e. 5% and 9% respectively. Percentages able to speak English and/or German show a big increase – 62% and 27% respectively, and the rate of increase is somewhat higher in Vilnius than elsewhere

Among older age-groups (e.g. 40-59 yrs.), proportions able to speak Russian (93%) and Polish (45%) remain higher than those elsewhere in Lithuania, while the figures for Lithuanian itself (86%) remain somewhat lower. Percentages for knowledge of English and German become closer to the overall average, and lower, with advancing age.

Finally, the linguistic division of labour is different in Vilnius. This is shown in Table 17 below, and may be compared with the national averages shown in Table 11 above.

In Vilnius, native Russian speakers appear to have achieved higher social status positions than their provincial counterparts. In Vilnius, over half (54%) of all Russian speakers in the capital’s labour force are found in the top three occupational categories, compared to 23% nationally. Whereas as a percentage of their number, native Lithuanian speakers nationally are more likely than Russians to achieve these positions (29% compared to 23%), in Vilnius the pattern is reversed. The proportion of native Russian speakers (54%) – as a proportion of all native Russian speakers living in Vilnius, is found in these occupations. This compares with 38% of native Lithuanian speakers. (These percentages relate to the social structure of each ethnic group. They do not, therefore, measure the ethnic composition of each occupational group. Lithuanians, of course, as the largest ethnic group in the city, also form the largest ethnic group in each occupational category).

Poles and Belarussians, by comparision with Lithuanians and Russians, have a social structure in the city that is more heavily weighted towards the lower status occupations. Only 25% and 16% respectively are in the three highest ranking occupations. This is about the national average for Belarussians, but for Poles the percentage nationally is only 15%. Thus, while lagging behind native Russian speakers, Poles in Vilnius seem to be doing better in terms of social mobility, than their fellow ethnics in the provinces.

Lastly, while Native Russian speakers nationally are the most likely to be unemployed, in Vilnius they are the least likely of all groups to be without employment. The unemployment rate for Russians here is 11%, while it is over 20% for all other minority groups.

Table17: Percentage in of native Speakers in each Socio-economic category, based on the total number of each native language group in the labour force at the time of the Census.

Occupation/ Socio-economic category	Native language /Mother tongue
	Lithuanian	Russian	Polish	Belarussian	Other
Legislators, senior officers, managers	9.8	14.0	6.2	4.3	2.7
Professionals	19.1	27.4	11.9	7.6	7.2
Technicians, associate professionals	9.4	12.6	6.9	5.7	4.9
Clerks	4.1	4.8	3.6	4.0	3.3
Service, shop, market	9.5	9.5	11.1	12.5	9.0
Skilled agricultural and fisheries workers	1.4	1.2	1.7	2.2	1.5
Craft and related trade workers	10.6	8.4	15.3	16.9	21.9
Plant and machinery operators	6.7	4.7	9.5	13.2	15.8
Elementary occupations	5.4	4.1	6.9	10.4	12.1
Armed forces	0.5	0.7	0.5	0.3	0.1
Not indicated (employed)	9.0	2.0	2.0	1.6	1.0
Unemployed	14.4	10.6	24.3	21.2	20.6
TOTAL	100	100	100	100	100