THE WAY UKRAINIANS LEARNT THE CZECH LANGUAGE IN CZECHOSLOVAKIA OR UKRAINIAN INTERWAR IMMIGRATION IN THE NEW LINGUISTIC FIELD (1918-1939)

The phenomenon of cross-linguistic homonymy is the result of closely related languages’ interaction, confusing the same or similar sounding words which have different meanings in different languages. The Ukrainian immigrant community in the interwar Czechoslovakia is no exception. The life of the people of Ukrainian origin in the interwar Czechoslovakia can be conditionally divided into four periods. The first one dates back to 1918-1921 when the detachments of Ukrainian Galicia Army entered the territory of the First Czechoslovak Republic: “Hirska Brygada”, “Stary Tabir”, “Hlyboka”, “Krukenychy”. This first period for the people of Ukrainian origin in the interwar First Czechoslovak Republic is characterized by the lack of interest in learning the Czech language in general as far as most of the campers, who had conversational fluency in German and Polish, were waiting for settling the status of Eastern Galicia, the fate of the Western Ukrainian People’s Republic and solving the conflict in Cieszyn Silesia. The second period dates back to 1921-1925 when the majority of antibolshevik immigration arrived in the interwar First Czechoslovak Republic. Especially this period is characterized by the active learning of the Czech language. The immigrants had two ways of mastering the language. The official way was acquiring the high education in the Czech and Ukrainian educational establishments. However, the most widespread way was the unofficial one, when the language was learnt in the shops, restaurants, bars or other working places where unskilled manual labour was required (for example, at Tomash Batia’s shoe factory, different plants and enterprises); right in the streets after all within different communication situations. The third period in the life of the people of Ukrainian origin on the territory of the interwar First Czechoslovak Republic took place in 1925-1929 and was called “povorontnytstvo”. During this period there was no way of speaking about mastering the Czech language and using cross-linguistic homonyms. In the 1930s due to the world economic crisis and shutting down the access to the Czechoslovak labour market for the people of Ukrainian origin the issue of learning the Czech language was not raised at all. The majority of the people of Ukrainian origin who stayed in Prague and its suburbs or moved to Transcarpathia had already mastered the Czech language by that time. Thus, on the one hand the provocative similarity created a number of obstacles, misunderstandings, it caused tragic and sometimes comic situations. On the other hand, it spiced up the everyday lives of the people of Ukrainian origin.

What’s That You Say? Communication Breakdowns and Their Repairs in Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing

Conversational fluency is important to form meaningful connections and relationships with the people around us but is understudied in children who are deaf or hard of hearing (D/HH). Communication breakdowns reduce conversational fluency. They occur when a speaker says something that interrupts the flow of conversation requiring a request for clarification or confirmation from their listener to repair the misunderstanding. Young children who are D/HH are at risk of more frequent communication breakdowns and fewer successful repairs than children with typical hearing (The missing link in language development of deaf and hard of hearing children: Pragmatic language development. Seminars in Speech and Language, 33 (04), 297–309). About 14 children who were D/HH aged 7–12 year and 15 children with typical hearing were matched on chronological age. Comparisons of the number and duration of communication breakdowns, requests for repair, and responses to requests used by children in a 10-min conversation with an adult were completed. Results showed that while children who were D/HH demonstrated some differences, they were more similar to their typically hearing peers in communication breakdowns and repairs than previously reported in the literature.

3. LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION

This chapter surveys developments in language revitalization, a movement that dates approximately from the 1990s and builds on prior work on language maintenance (see Fishman, 1991; 2001) and language death (Dorian, 1981; 1989). Focusing on indigenous languages, it discusses the role and nature of appropriate linguistic documentation, possibilities for bilingual education, and methods of promoting oral fluency and intergenerational transmission in affected languages. Various avenues for language revitalization, a proactive approach to the continued use of a particular language, are then described (see Hinton & Hale, 2001). In contrast to the smaller minority languages of Europe that have long literary traditions, many indigenous languages in the Americas and elsewhere are solely or primarily oral languages; thus, revitalization efforts aim to promote conversational fluency among speakers in a community. Related literature falls into four main categories: (a) theoretical and empirical works on language revitalization; (b) applied works on revitalization in practice; (c) pedagogical and reference publications; and (d) legal documents that support or impede revitalization of languages. Recent examples of current literature in each category are reviewed.

Screening Receptive Communication of Older Adults in Residential Care

Receptive communication of 341 older adults was evaluated in 9 nursing homes. The following assessments were conducted: case history, otoscopic examination, visual perception of facial movements, hearing aid function, sentence identification, and ratings of conversational fluency. The majority of clients reported hearing loss and low vision that interfered with their communication. Otoscopic examination revealed that nearly a third of the ears contained excessive cerumen. Visual perception results indicated that nearly all clients could see the clinician's head movements, but that some clients could not see mouth or eye movements. Fewer than half of the clients owned hearing aids, but not all owners used them. Common problems related to non-use of hearing aids included blocked earmolds and dead batteries. Sentence identification and conversational fluency were improved by the use of amplification, but positive results often depended on application of communication strategies by the partner. Recommendations are provided for training staff and caregivers to increase their awareness of client needs and to modify their own behavior for more effective communication with older people.