Sociolinguistic construction of ethnical identity in Circassian diasporas (evidence from a predominantly turkish sample)

This article examines the sociolinguistic mechanisms underlying the construction of Circassian (Adyghe) identity within overseas diaspora communities in the context of host country language dominance. The study draws on data from an online survey of 827 respondents, predominantly residing in Turkey, alongside open-ended responses analyzed through thematic coding. Circassian language proficiency was assessed across four communicative domains: listening comprehension, speaking, reading, and writing. The results indicate that, despite strong ethnic self-identification, there is a noticeable shift toward the majority language in domestic communication. Circassian language proficiency exhibits a polarized and asymmetrical pattern: receptive skills (comprehension) are generally better preserved than productive skills (speaking), while reading and, particularly, writing prove to be the most vulnerable domains. Respondents identify Adyghe Khabze as the fundamental basis of group membership, while community organizations, endogamous ties, and media practices also play a significant role. While digital platforms sustain cultural engagement, they rarely facilitate the reintegration of the Circassian language into everyday domestic discourse. The study demonstrates that although notions of an "authentic" Circassian identity remain closely associated with the language, actual preservation strategies more frequently rely on rituals, music, and collective memory. When asked about the primary threats to the preservation of Circassian culture in the diaspora, respondents most frequently cited assimilation, intermarriage, urbanization, and a lack of educational infrastructure. In conclusion, the article outlines the conditions necessary to enhance intergenerational language transmission and foster literacy development.

1. ABAZOVA M.M. Rech' kabardino-cherkesskoy diaspory v Turtsii [The spoken language of the Kabardino-Circassian diasporas in Turkey]. – Nalchik: Publishing department of KBIHR, 2014. – 136 p. (In Russ.).

2. BELIKOV V.I., KRYSIN L.P. Sotsiolingvistika [Sociolinguistics]. – Moscow: RGGU / URSS, 2001. – 440 p. (In Russ.).

3. BIZHOEV B.Ch. Rech' kabardino-cherkesskoy diaspory v Sirii, Iordanii, Turtsii [The spoken language of the Kabardino-Circassian diaspora in Syria, Jordan, Turkey]. In: Adygskaya i karachaevo-balkarskaya zarubezhnaya diaspora: istoriya i kul'tura. Nalchik: El-Fa, 2000. – 272 p. (In Russ.).

4. VAKHTIN N.B., GOLOVKO E.V. Sotsiolingvistika i sotsiologiya yazyka [Sociolinguistics and sociology of language]. – Saint Petersburg: Izd-voSPbGU, 2004. – 336 p. (In Russ.).

5. DROBIZHEVA L.M. Etnichnost' v sotsial'no-politicheskom prostranstve Rossiyskoy Federatsii. Opyt 20 let [Ethnicity in the socio-political space of the Russian Federation. 20 years of experience]. – Moscow: Novyy khronograf: izdatel' Leonid Yanovich, 2013. – 332 p. (In Russ.).

6. LEBEDEVA N.M. Etnicheskaya identichnost' i blagopoluchie russkikh na postsovetskom prostranstve: rol' diaspory[Ethnic identity and well-being of Russians in the post-Soviet space: the role of diaspora]. In: Kul'turno-istoricheskaya psikhologiya. – 2021. – Vol. 17. – № 4. – Pp. 16-24. DOI:10.17759/chp.2021170402 (In Russ.).

7. POPKOV V.A. «Klassicheskie» diaspory: k voprosu o definitsii termina["Classical" diasporas: on the question of the definition of the term]. In: Diaspory. – 2002. – № 1. – Pp. 6-22. (In Russ.).

8. TISHKOV V.A. Rekviem po etnosu: Issledovaniya po sotsial'no-kul'turnoy antropologii [Requiem for an Ethnic Group: Studies in Socio-Cultural Anthropology]. – Moscow: Nauka, 2003. – 544 p. (In Russ.).

9. AL-MOMANI D.F., AL-MOMANI S.M. Language situation among Jordanian Circassians.In: Educational Research. – 2013. – Vol. 4. – № 8. – Pp. 612-617. DOI: 10.14303/er.2013.113 (In English).

10. ANDERSON B. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (Rev. ed.). – London; New York: Verso, 2006. – 256 p. (In English).

11. ANDROUTSOPOULOS J. Mediatization and sociolinguistic change. In: Sociolinguistics: Theoretical Debates / ed. by N. Coupland. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. – Pp. 236-263. (In English).

12. BRUBAKER R. The 'diaspora' diaspora.In: Ethnic and Racial Studies. – 2005. – Vol. 28. – № 1. – Pp. 1-19. DOI: 10.1080/0141987042000289997 (In English).

13. DWEIK B.S., OMAR R.M. Preserving the Circassian Cultural Heritage in America.In: International Journal of Language and Linguistics. – 2016. – Vol. 3. – № 2. – Pp. 140-148. (In Eng.).

14. FISHMAN J.A. Reversing Language Shift: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations of Assistance to Threatened Languages. – Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 1991. – 431 p. (In English).

15. KREINDLER I., BENSOUSSAN M., AVINOR E., BRAM C. Circassian Israelis: Multilingualism as a way of life.In: Language. Culture and Curriculum. – 1995. – Pp. 149-162. DOI:10.1080/07908319509525199 (In English).