Volume 12 - Issue 64
/ April 2023
117
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.64.04.11
How to Cite:
Sikorska, V., Danylchuk, A., Biskub, I., Balla, E., & Horlachova, V. (2023). Languages coexistence models in the multicultural
environment of Ukraine and the EU. Amazonia Investiga, 12(64), 117-127. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.64.04.11
Languages coexistence models in the multicultural environment of
Ukraine and the EU
Моделі співіснування мов у полікультурному суспільстві України та ЄС
Received: April 3, 2023 Accepted: May 28, 2023
Written by:
Viktoriia Sikorska1
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7278-8464
Anna Danylchuk2
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8127-2953
Iryna Biskub3
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5844-7524
Evelina Balla4
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9460-331X
Viktoriia Horlachova5
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5046-9072
Abstract
The aim the article is to study the model of
coexistence of different languages in the
multicultural environment of Ukraine and EU
countries (the Czech Republic, Germany, Poland
and Italy). Methods. Testing was conducted using
the Communicative Attitudes Technique. The
degree of satisfaction with the environment was
studied. Statistical analysis was performed using t-
test, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, Pearson’s
correlation coefficient. Reliability analysis was
performed using Cronbach’s alpha. Results. The
adaptability of EU citizens was found to be
significantly higher than that of the residents of
Ukraine (t=13.24; p < 0.001). The indicators of EU
citizens are higher than those of
Ukrainians (p<0.001) on a number of qualitative
characteristics of adaptability: self-acceptance
(t=21.84), acceptance of others (t=4.01), emotional
comfort (t=4.49), internal control (t=33.74),
external control (t=8.12); consciousness (t=2.58 at
p<0.05). Conclusions. The obtained results give
grounds to state a high level of communicative
tolerance in the multicultural environment. This
indicates the existence of effective models of
1
PhD in Philology, Head of the Department, Department of Pre-University Training, Faculty of Foreign Students, Odesa National
Maritime Univesity, Odesa, Ukraine.
2
PhD in Philology, Associate Professor, Applied Linguistics Department, Institute of Foreign Philology, Lesya Ukrainka Volyn
National University, Lutsk, Ukraine.
3
Doctor of Philological Sciences, Head of the Department, Applied Linguistics Department, Faculty of Foreign Philology, Lesya
Ukrainka Volyn National University, Lutsk, Ukraine.
4
PhD in Philology, a) Associate Professor, Department of Ukrainian Literature, Uzhhorod National University, Uzhhorod, Ukraine;
b) Professor, Department of Ukrainian Language and Culture, University of Nyíregyháza, Nyíregyháza, Hungary.
5
PhD in Philology, Associate Professor, Department “Business Foreign Language Communication”, International Tourism and
Economics Faculty, National University "Zaporizhzhia Polytechnic", Zaporizhzhia, Ukraine.
118
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
multilingualism both in Ukraine and in the EU
countries. Prospects. Further research may focus on
identifying universal languages as communicative
tools both in Ukraine and in EU countries.
Keywords: multicultural environment, linguistic
tolerance, multilingualism, civil society, European
integration.
Introduction
Relevance of the research
The study is determined by the need to revise the
language coexistence model in a multicultural
environment in Ukraine and the EU. The reasons
are Ukraine’s EU candidate status and rapid
integration into the single European space. That
is why the issues of multicultural and
multilingual environments are becoming
especially important (Cummins, 2021).
In recent decades, language policy aimed at
creating a multilingual society in EU countries
has become one of the important aspects in the
work of international organizations. Its
development has become a requirement for the
interaction of all actors in the modern socio-
political process. The main trends, characteristic
features and peculiarities of language policy
were observed in the countries with different
linguistic situations: France, Spain, Ukraine and
the supranational institution – the European
Union (Shekhavtsova, 2022).
The development of democracy in the current
conditions requires the improvement of linguistic
relations, both within the state and in interstate
communication. Changes in directions, tools,
forms of implementation and legal provision of
language coexistence are determined by the
integration and globalization of the world
community in all areas of human life (Prus,
2021). This involves close communication
between people of different nationalities and
languages. The individuality inherent in national
— linguistic — minorities should be kept in mind
during this positive progressive process. This
necessitates the creation of a general
methodological framework for determining the
integration features of linguistic minorities
(Tarnopolskyi, 2019).
Multilingualism as a language situation involves
the coexistence and use of several languages in
linguistic consciousness. At the same time, the
development of international human
communication has reached a level at which
knowledge of not one, but several languages is
preferable for the citizens of almost any state.
This facilitates the free movement of citizens,
business cooperation, employment, adaptation,
etc. (García et al., 2021).
In the modern political process, multilingualism
has become a factor affecting the development of
civil society and public institutions and its
integral part. Multilingualism determines the
basis of mutual relations in civil society, and can
be both an obstacle to development and a clear
advantage. Citizens who are fluent in several
languages use them for employment,
communication and establishing contacts at the
international level (Flores, 2020).
In this respect, we can talk about multilingualism
as a socio-cultural phenomenon, as more than
half of the world’s population speaks two or
more languages to a certain extent. It is generally
known that about a quarter of the countries
officially recognize two languages on their
territory, and only a few countries have three or
more languages, although the actual number of
coexisting languages in many countries is
significantly higher (García & Otheguy, 2019).
In the current socio-political process, the
language policy is considered as a set of
arrangements aimed at changing or preserving
the existing functional distribution of language
institutions. The main objective of a multicultural
and multilingual society is to build an adequate
language policy. It should be aimed at preserving
the ethnic language and culture, while providing
for learning foreign languages for the adaptation
of society in modern realities (Chin, 2021).
Among other instruments, the European Charter
for Regional or Minority Languages provides a
single legal field for the EU countries and
Ukraine governing language coexistence. The
Charter was approved by the Committee of
Ministers and took the legal form of the
Convention, which was opened for signature on
November 5, 1992. The Charter has been ratified
Sikorska, V., Danylchuk, A., Biskub, I., Balla, E., Horlachova, V. / Volume 12 - Issue 64: 117-127 / April, 2023
Volume 12 - Issue 64
/ April 2023
119
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
or signed by most European countries. Ukraine
ratified it in May 2003 (Woehrling, 2005).
The main trends in the development of language
policy in a multilingual society can be identified
be considering the EU countries. Interaction
between EU member states, EU entities and
institutions, and international organizations plays
a major role in the planning and implementation
of language policy at the current stage. This
enables identifying a number of main trends in
the development of language policy for Ukraine
as well (Sulik, 2022).
Unexplored issues
Multilingualism as a phenomenon is widely
covered in the academic literature, but there are
still a number of issues to be clarified and
studied. The role of linguistic diversity in the
effectiveness of international organizations in
view of the constant integration and political
processes in the modern world remains
unexplored. The modernization of the world
community requires constant improvement of
strategies for the development and
implementation of language policy using the
regulatory framework which needs to be studies,
improved and integrated. There is a growing
need to study a complex of problems related to
the creation and functioning of the system of
preparing citizens for learning foreign languages
requires further studies, urged by the new wave
of global integration.
Aim
The aim of the article is to study the peculiarities
of multilingualism as a phenomenon of the
multicultural environment of Ukraine and the
EU.
Objectives/questions
1. Study the peculiarities of multilingualism in
Ukraine and the EU.
2. Determine language coexistence models in
the multicultural society of Ukraine and the
EU.
3. Identify the main trends of multilingualism
in Ukraine and the EU.
Literature Review
Such concepts as bilingualism, multilingualism,
polylingualism and plurolingualism are terms of
the conceptual level that are the basis for the
corresponding linguo- didactic terms. The
concepts of bilingualism and multilingualism are
considered similar, where bilingualism is
perceived as a particular case of multilingualism,
as Bartram and Jarochova (2022) stated.
Bilingualism previously meant fluency in two
languages. Lægaard (2021) deals with rethinking
of bilingualism in his study. The author notes that
the importance of the level of language
proficiency has levelled off over time. Only the
phenomenon of linguistic identity of the
individual remains. Both a speaker of two
languages and a person who has leant one foreign
language are bilingual.
Researchers distinguished several types of
bilingualism in modern academic literature. The
studies of Mesiæ (2022) and Mlinar and
Krammer (2021) are worth noting here. There are
two ways to implement the concept, for example,
a child can communicate in two languages at
home: mother’s native language and father’s
native language. Each language is used for its
own system of concepts, for example, a
Ukrainian-speaking person who works in Spain
in the company will use Spanish to communicate
at work. The study of a foreign language at
school is another type of bilingualism, where the
study of a second language is based on the first
— native — language. The term “diglossia” is
also used to denote natural bilingualism in a
situation where two languages coexist in the
same territory. Müller et al., (2021) discuss this
phenomenon in their work. The authors note that
this concept should be used when it comes to the
coexistence of two forms of the same
language (for example, the German language in
Germany and Austria).
According to Kosovych (2022), the concept of
multilingualism is characterized by both greater
spread and greater blurring, which causes a lot of
controversy regarding its application. Sometimes
the term “multilingualism” is identical to the
term “polylingualism”, and means the use of
several languages in a certain social community.
This interpretation of the term is used to describe
the situation when more than two languages
function simultaneously in a certain territory.
According to Сummins (2017), the phenomenon
of multilingualism can be considered from two
perspectives: in relation to society in general —
national multilingualism, and in relation to an
individual — individual multilingualism.
The researchers Rusul (2022) and Shuibhne
(2021) use the term “multilingualism” and,
accordingly, the derived term “multilingual
education”. In fact, both European and Ukrainian
researchers use the term “multilingual education”
to describe and solve problems related to
120
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
teaching and learning several languages. The
term “polylingualism” is presented as a synonym
for the term “multilingualism” and is defined
through the latter. Public multilingualism refers
to the functioning of several languages in society.
Individual multilingualism means the use of
several languages by one person. Otheguy et al.,
(2019) note this feature in their work. The level
of development of language activities by
different speakers may be different: a person can
read in one foreign language and speak another.
There is no need to know languages at the same
level.
Methodology
Design
The study was conducted in several stages with a
purpose of analysing several variables. First, it
was necessary to identify the number of
respondents who speak more than one language
and use the second or more languages in
everyday life, work, business, travel, etc. Second,
it became necessary to identify the level of
respondents’ tolerance to a multicultural
environment. So, the preparatory stage provided
for choosing the research methodology,
determining variables (knowledge of more than
one language, tolerance to a multicultural
environment). The procedure for obtaining and
analysing data was defined. The method of
forming a sample from the general population
was chosen. The second stage involved the study
only among those respondents who declared their
knowledge of at least two languages. The
respondents’ communicative tolerance was
studied according to Boyko’s (2002) technique
(See Appendix A). The final stage of the research
provided for summarizing 1,800 questionnaires
received from citizens of Ukraine and 1,600
questionnaires from EU citizens. Figure 1
illustrates the general research design.
Figure 1. General research design
Source: prepared by the authors of the research.
Participants
The study involved citizens of Ukraine and the
EU countries (Czech Republic, Germany,
Poland, Italy) aged 16 to 65. The respondents
participated in the study voluntarily through an
invitation letter on Facebook. At the first stage of
the selection of respondents, 5,471 respondents
from Ukraine and EU countries agreed to
participate in the study. At the next stage,
respondents who speak only one language were
screened out and two groups were formed. The
Experimental Group consisted of 1,800 people,
citizens of Ukraine, distributed as follows: 800
people aged 16 to 25, 550 people aged 26 to 45,
and 450 people aged 46 to 65. The Control Group
included respondents from the EU countries, of
them 700 people aged 16 to 25, 500 people aged
26 to 45, and 400 people aged 46 to 65. There
were 473 respondents from the Czech Republic,
386 respondents from Germany, 340 respondents
from Poland, and 401 respondents from Italy.
Such a sample and age stratification enables to
objectively assess the attitude to multilingualism
in a multicultural environment.
Instruments
Respondents took part in the study through
remote testing, which was carried out using
Google Forms and Facebook. Data entry and
processing was carried out in Microsoft Excel
and SPSS Statistics 17.0. All data are given in
relative values.
Data collection
1. Boyko’s Communicative Attitudes
Technique enables revealing the level of
respondents’ communicative tolerance in a
multicultural environment. The reliability of
the scales was checked by the internal
consistency of the items included in them
using Cronbach’s alpha. Table 1 provides
the results of the analysis.
Step 1
Finding
respondents aged
16 to 65 by
analysing social
network profiles
in Ukraine and EU
countries (Czech
Republic,
Germany, Poland,
Italy)
Step 2
Invitation to
participate in the
survey and
conduct of the first
stage of the
selection of
respondents
Step 3
Conducting the
second stage of
testing in order to
identify
communicative
tolerance
Step 4
Analysis of the
obtained data and
their summary
Volume 12 - Issue 64
/ April 2023
121
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Table 1.
Reliability check of the scales of the Communicative Attitudes Technique for internal consistency
Communicative Attitudes Technique subscales
α
Adaptability
α = 0.79
Disadaptability
α = 0.74
Self-acceptance
α = 0.82
Self-rejection
α = 0.81
Acceptance of others
α = 0.71
Rejection of others
α = 0.78
Emotional comfort
α = 0.73
Emotional discomfort
α = 0.73
Internal control
α = 0.70
External control
α = 0.71
Dominance
α = 0.72
Consciousness
α = 0.70
Escapism (escape from problems)
α = 0.64
Source: calculated by the authors based on the survey results.
None of the items of each scale is “redundant”:
removing any of the items reduces the scale
reliability. The obtained results give grounds to
speak about the acceptable reliability of each of
the scales.
2. Study of the degree of satisfaction with the
environment. The method enables
identifying the respondents’ satisfaction
with their stay in a multicultural
environment and integrating into it.
Analysis of data
1. The analysis of the obtained data was carried
out using statistical correlation. Pearson’s
correlation coefficient was used to
determine the correlation coefficient (Ali &
Bhaskar, 2016):
 󰇛󰇘󰇜󰇛󰇗󰇜
󰇛󰇘󰇜󰇛󰇗󰇜 (1)
where хі – the value of variable X;
yi - the value of variable Y;
ẍ - arithmetic mean for the variable X;
ẏ - arithmetic mean for the variable Y.
2. Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient
characterizes the internal consistency of the
test items (Ali & Bhaskar, 2016).
Cronbach’s alpha is calculated by the
formula:
 󰇛


󰇜, (2)
where
– total test score variance;
– variance of the i element.
3. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test contributes
to the detection of possible quantitative
differences in level and structural
characteristics.
4. The indicators of respondents from different
groups were compared using the t-test.
Ethical criteria
The principles of academic integrity, non-
involvement, professionalism and respect for the
personality of each respondent were observed at
all stages of the research. The aim of the study
was to obtain academic data without trying to use
the obtained results for the purpose of
discriminating against any social group. The
respondents gave their informed consent for the
processing of personal data and the use of survey
results for the purpose of further publication in
academic papers. All tools and methods were
thoroughly checked for reliability and
compliance with the aim and objectives specified
in the study.
Results and discussion
To begin with, it is necessary to consider the level
of multilingual competence in Ukraine and EU
countries. The research data are presented in
Table 2.
122
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Table 2.
Statistics on people knowing more than one language in Ukraine and EU countries
Age of respondents
Place of
residence
Education level
Knowledge of
languages
16-25, %
26-45, %
46-55, %
City, %
Village, %
Secondary, %
Vocational, %
Higher, %
One, %
More than one, %
EU
43
31
26
78
22
29
44
32
11
89
Ukraine
44
27
29
68
32
30
45
25
23
77
Source: prepared by the authors based on the survey results.
As Table 2 shows, both in Ukraine and in the EU
countries the level of knowledge of more than
one language is quite high. This is due to the high
integration of Ukrainian society into the pan-
European language environment. It also shows
the high level of intercultural ties both in Ukraine
and in the EU countries. In EU countries, this is
determined by both strong interstate ties and
migration processes.
Next, the level of respondents’ communicative
tolerance was analysed with the help of the
Communicative Attitudes Technique. The
research data are presented in Table 3.
Table 3.
Checking the level of communicative competence of citizens of Ukraine and EU countries
Communicative Attitudes Technique
subscales
EU respondents, M±SD
Ukrainian respondents,
M±SD
Adaptability
156.63±18.89
116.11±18.34
Disadaptability
103.28±20.92
98.45±15.31
Self-acceptance
52.75±8.52
23.94±7.27
Self-rejection
18.12±6.35
14.32±9.62
Acceptance of others
27.35±4.71
23.44±6.67
Rejection of others
19.46±5.25
14.19±9.2
Emotional comfort
30.22±5.14
26.39±5.3
Emotional discomfort
21.47±5.26
13.9±9.22
Internal control
65.65±7.81
25±6.58
External control
27.24±7.72
16.42±8.71
Dominance
11.23±3.33
12.51±1.27
Consciousness
19.34±5.38
16.82±6.74
Escapism (escape from problems)
12.99±4.89
13.55±4.22
Source: calculated by the authors based on the survey results
It was found that the adaptability of EU citizens
is significantly higher than that of residents of
Ukraine (t=13.24; p<0.001). According to a
number of qualitative characteristics of
adaptability, the indicators of EU citizens are
higher than those of Ukrainians (p < 0.001): self-
acceptance (t=21.84), acceptance of others
(t=4.01), emotional comfort (t=4.49), internal
control (t=33.74), external control (t=8.12);
consciousness (t=2.58 at p < 0.05). However, the
indicators of EU residents are lower than those of
Ukrainian residents (t=-2.48; p<0.05) on a
dominance subscale.
Volume 12 - Issue 64
/ April 2023
123
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Table 4.
Checking the level of communicative competence of residents of Ukraine by gender
Communicative Attitudes
Technique subscales
Women, M±SD
Men, M±SD
t
p-level
Adaptability
157.75±19.72
152.81±15.51
-1.056
>0.05
Disadaptability
104.89±21.41
97.76±18.58
-1.380
Self-acceptance
52.89±8.71
52.29±8.03
-0.284
Self-rejection
17.96±6.24
18.67±6.81
0.448
Acceptance of others
27.44±4.90
27.05±4.08
-0.338
Rejection of others
18.99±5.29
21.1±4.92
1.663
Emotional comfort
30±5.34
30.95±4.4
0.745
Source: calculated by the authors based on the survey results
Table 5.
Identification of the level of communicative competence of EU residents by gender
Communicative Attitudes
Technique subscales
Women, M±SD
Men, M±SD
t
p-level
Adaptability
154.66±19.29
157.88±17.42
0.985
>0.05
Disadaptability
103.97±19.86
97.78±22.3
-1.654
Self-acceptance
51.94±9.07
53.8±8.72
1.175
Self-rejection
18.22±5.36
17.43±6.91
-0.724
Acceptance of others
26.67±4.73
28.1±4.14
1.818
Rejection of others
19.18±4.51
19.78±5.88
0.653
Emotional comfort
29.94±5.29
30.72±4.77
0.865
Source: calculated by the authors based on the survey results
Indicators of women and men differ according to
the same factors, both in Ukraine and in EU
countries: women have higher “external control”
(p<0.044), and “dominance” is more pronounced
in men (p<0.000). So, it can be argued that the
identified gender specifics, regardless of the
socio-cultural environment, demonstrates the
role tendencies of modern civilization.
As “intolerance” shall be determined by the
technique, it is necessary to take into account a
relatively lower quantitative indicator as a
manifestation of tolerance in the interpretation of
the results. The comparison of indicators gives
reason to believe that the degree of
communicative tolerance of EU residents is
higher than that of Ukrainians (48.34±11.64 and
52.58±11.33, respectively; t= 0.5). It is
noteworthy that there are no significant
differences in the group of respondents from the
EU with the indicators of Ukrainians
(49.84±12.51). The obtained results for the
expressiveness of communicative tolerance
showed that people who have greater adaptability
have the higher attitude to tolerance.
A comparison of indicators that reflect the degree
of communicative tolerance of respondents from
Ukraine and EU countries gave grounds to state
that there are no differences in this personal
characteristic between representatives of
different socio-cultures. The established level of
tolerance corresponds to the statistical average
for actors in a multicultural environment.
The obtained information make it possible to say
that the respondents from Ukraine have a
personality characteristic that reflects
compliance with the principles of tolerant
interaction, which is declared as established, that
is, they consider themselves more tolerant in
their communications, compared to respondents
from EU countries. In turn, the indicators
obtained in the study of the group of EU
respondents give grounds to judge about their
greater criticality to what their tolerance is.
Based on the indicators of communicative
competence, a division was made into subgroups
with high, conditionally medium and low
tolerance (intolerance). There is no doubts that
the intolerant subgroup is of interest. When
comparing indicators on diagnostic scales, it was
found that the number of respondents with
intolerant attitudes is greater on two scales:
intolerance was found both in the control and in
the experimental group on “Trying to adapt other
participants of communication to oneself”. A
more significant intolerance of EU respondents
compared to Ukrainian respondents was revealed
on “Inability to forgive another people’s
mistakes, inconvenience, unintentionally caused
124
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
trouble”. The relative majority of both groups of
respondents are not tolerant to “Strictness or
conservatism in people’s assessments”. So, it can
be stated that some respondents need
psychological help to develop tolerant
relationships.
The fact that the numerical indicators are similar
in the compared groups indicates that about 10%
of the respondents, regardless of the socio-
cultural environment, are guided by intolerant
principles in their interpersonal relations. Their
attitudes contain a potential proneness to conflict.
This is probably due to the general personal
immaturity of a part of the respondents and the
inadequately developed qualities defined as
social intelligence.
Discussion
The results of the study confirmed the relevance
and a promising nature of the problem. The
respondents’ answers were used to determine the
state of multilingualism in the multicultural
environments of the EU countries and Ukraine.
In connection with the specifics of our study,
both groups of respondents were selected based
on the criterion of knowledge of more than one
native language. This is why it was not possible
to measure multilingual competence in the
specified asymmetric configuration before the
beginning of the second stage of the experiment.
A number of contradictions between the global
attitude to the interaction of cultures and the lack
of interconnected existence of several languages
in society were found in the course of the
research. As Brooks (2021) and Flores and
Chaparro (2018) stated in their works, the
potential of multilingualism is the global trend
towards globalization. At the same time, there is
still insufficient study of the process of
organizing the multilingual environment of
modern democratic countries. This, in particular,
is stated in the studies of Kużelewska (2021) and
García and Sung (2018). The studies note the
existence of a social order of academic and
professional communities for graduates who
have multilingual competence. At the same time,
as Li (2018) points out, the structure and changes
of this competence remain poorly studied in the
academic literature in relation to modern
specialists of various fields. Modern democratic
society is characterized by a growing need for
specialists who have multilingual competence in
the language of professional culture and the
language of functional communication. The
authors Malović and Vujica (2021) and
Marginson (2018) note the lack of a scientifically
grounded and experimentally confirmed
methodology for building multilingual
competence in this configuration. These
contradictions in modern scientific discourse
necessitated the study of the methodological
foundations of building multilingual competence
in a multicultural environment.
The concept of “multilingual competence” is
defined in the study as the ability and willingness
to carry out communicative activity using a
language repertoire, where the level of
knowledge of each language is determined by the
scope of its application. Such an understanding
of this concept can be found in the works of
Vertehel and Khrebtova (2021) and Shkarlet
(2021). The authors also identified the structural
components of multilingual competence,
namely: general speech competence (second
foreign language “from scratch”),
professionally-oriented language competence
(first foreign language) and integrative
competence. The complex system of
interrelationships between these three
components testifies to the unity of their
manifestation in the multilingual competence of
a modern person. On the other hand, studies by
Mlinar and Krammer (2021) and Modood (2021)
express some scepticism about the possibility of
creating a competitive multilingual environment.
According to the authors, there will be a language
that will eventually dominate and displace other
languages.
The theoretical significance of the research is the
actualization of the concept of multilingualism in
a multicultural environment. The practical
significance is the methodology for studying a
multicultural, multilingual environment by
analysing tolerance for the use of more than one
language. The study had a number of limitations
despite the completeness and reliability of the
methods. From the perspective of the
organization of the sample, there were
difficulties in separating a valid cluster of
respondents that would reflect the actual state of
the problem from the general population. From a
methodological perspective, the problem was the
lack of modern research methods that would
cover all aspects of a multicultural environment.
Conclusions
The relevance the study is determined, on the one
hand, by Ukraine’s path towards EU membership
and the need to unify approaches to creating a
favourable environment. On the other hand, it is
determined by the global processes of creating a
multilingual multicultural environment in
Volume 12 - Issue 64
/ April 2023
125
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Ukraine and EU countries and the need to find
ways to adapt to new world trends. Research
findings. The obtained results indicate a high
level of multilingual tolerance in a multicultural
environment of the EU countries and Ukraine.
Such similarity in the language policy of Ukraine
and the EU indicates a high degree of integration
of Ukrainian and European society. This is a
signal that Ukraine has always mentally
belonged to the European family and its
European integration intentions are quite natural.
Applications. The results of the study will be of
interest, first of all, to specialists in sociological
research and language policy. The data can be
used in the formation of a multicultural mass
media discourse in order to promote European
integration narratives in society. Prospects for
further research. Future research should cover
the issues of the dominance of one or another
language of international communication in
various areas of social life.
Bibliographic references
Ali, Z., & Bhaskar, S. B. (2016). Basic statistical
tools in research and data analysis. Indian
Journal of Anaesthesia, 60(9), 662-669.
https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.190623
Bartram, D., & Jarochova, E. (2022). A
longitudinal investigation of
integration/multiculturalism policies and
attitudes towards immigrants in European
countries. Journal of Ethnic and Migration
Studies, 48(1), 153-172.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2021.192
2273
Boyko, V. (2002). Communication tolerance
diagnosis. In N. Fetiskin, V. Kozlov, & G.
Manuilov (Eds.), Social-psychological
diagnosis of personality and small groups
development, (pp. 107-109). Moscow:
Publishing House of the Institute of
Psychotherapy. Retrieved from
http://weblib.pp.ua/322-diagnostika-
kommunikativnoy-tolerantnosti-22440.html
Brooks, R. (2021). The construction of higher
education students within national policy: A
cross-European comparison. Compare: A
Journal of Comparative and International
Education, 51(2), 161-180.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2019.1604
118
Chin, R. (2021). Illiberalism and the
Multicultural Backlash. Routledge Handbook
of Illiberalism (pp. 280-298). Routledge.
Retrieved from http://surl.li/dzrha
Сummins, J. (2017). Teaching minoritized
students: Are additive approaches legitimate?
Harvard Educational Review, 87(3),
404–425. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-
5045-87.3.404
Cummins, J. (2021). Translanguaging: A Critical
Analysis of Theoretical Claims. In P. Juvonen
& M. Källkvist (Eds.), Pedagogical
Translanguaging: Theoretical,
Methodological and Empirical Perspectives
(pp. 7-36). Bristol, Blue Ridge Summit:
Multilingual Matters.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788927383-
004
Flores, N. (2020). From Academic language to
language architecture: Challenging
raciolinguistic ideologies in research and
practice. Theory into Practice, 59(1), 22-31.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2019.1665
411
Flores, N., & Chaparro, S. (2018). What counts
as language education policy? Developing a
materialist anti-racist approach to language
activism. Language Policy, 17(3), 365–384.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-017-9433-7
García, O., & Otheguy, R. (2019).
Plurilingualism and translanguaging:
Commonalities and divergences.
International Journal of Bilingual Education
and Bilingualism, 23(1), 17–35.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2019.1598
932
García, O., & Sung, K. K.-F. (2018). Critically
assessing the 1968 bilingual education Act at
50 years: Taming tongues and Latinx
communities. The Bilingual Review Journal,
4(4), 318–333.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2018.1529
642
García, O., Flores, N., Seltzer, K., Wei, L.,
Otheguy, R., & Rosa, J. (2021). Rejecting
abyssal thinking in the language and
education of racialized bilinguals: A
manifesto. Critical Inquiry in Language
Studies, 18(3), 203-228.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15427587.2021.1935
957
Kosovych, О. V. (2022). Language policy of the
leading states of the European Union and
prospects for its development. Scientific
Works Collection, spec., 56-61.
https://doi.org/10.32782/2710-
4656/2022.spec/09
Kużelewska, E. (2021). Quo vadis English? The
post-brexit position of English as a working
language of the EU. International Journal for
the Semiotics of Law-Revue internationale de
Sémiotique Juridique, 34(5), 1417-1432.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09782-x
Lægaard, S. (2021). Contextualist political
theory about multiculturalism in a post-
multiculturalist context. Ethnicities, 21(4),
126
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
615-637.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468796820964304
Li, W. (2018). Translanguaging as a practical
theory of language. Applied Linguistics,
39(1), 9–30.
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amx039
Malović, N., & Vujica, K. (2021). Multicultural
Society as a Challenge for Coexistence in
Europe. Religions, 12(8), 615.
https://doi.org/10.3390/rel12080615
Marginson, S. (2018). The new geo-politics of
higher education. Global cooperation,
national competition and social inequality in
the World-Class University (WCU) sector.
Working paper no. 34. University of Oxford,
UK: Centre for Global Higher Education.
Retrieved from http://surl.li/dzqyl
Mesiæ, M. (2022). Minorities in Croatia and
challenges of multiculturalism. Perspectives
of Multiculturalism-Western and Transitional
Countries, 273. FF Press. Retrieved from
http://surl.li/dzris
Mlinar, K., & Krammer, G. (2021). Multicultural
attitudes of prospective teachers: The
influence of multicultural ideology and
national pride. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 84, 107-118.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2021.07.008
Modood, T. (2021). Can interculturalism
complement multiculturalism? Multicultural
Education Review, 13(4), 275-284.
https://doi.org/10.1080/2005615X.2021.200
6115
Müller, P., Pomorska, K., & Tonra, B. (2021).
The domestic challenge to EU foreign policy-
making: From Europeanisation to de-
Europeanisation? Journal of European
integration, 43(5), 519-534.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2021.1927
015
Otheguy, R., García, O., & Reid, W. (2019). A
Translanguaging view of the linguistic
system of bilinguals. Applied Linguistics
Review, 10(4), 625–651
https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2018-0020
Prus, N. (2021). The role of a foreign language
teacher in the process of forming students’
multicultural competence. Pedagogy of
Formation of Creative Personality in Higher
and Secondary Schools, 75(2), 165-168.
https://doi.org/10.32840/1992-
5786.2021.75-2.31
Rusul, O. (2022). Multicultural crisis and
migration problem in European states.
Visnyk Natsionalnoho aviatsiinoho
universytetu. Seriia: Filosofiia.
Kulturolohiia, 33(1), 135-139. Retrieved
from
https://jrnl.nau.edu.ua/index.php/VisnikPK/a
rticle/view/15659
Shekhavtsova, S. (2022). Intercultural
communication in education ass an
imperative for democratic development of the
society. Professionalism of the Teacher:
Theoretical and Methodological Aspects,
2(17), 174-184.
https://doi.org/10.31865/2414-
9292.17.2022.260021
Shkarlet, V. (2021). Development of polycultural
competence of future teachers by means of
foreign languages. Young scientist, 3(91),
220-224. https://doi.org/10.32839/2304-
5809/2021-3-91-47
Shuibhne, N. N. (2021). EC law and minority
language policy: Culture, citizenship and
fundamental rights. BRILL. Retrieved from
http://surl.li/dzqxg
Sulik, О. (2022). Correlation of the process of
bilingual personality formation in
educational institutions with the modern
paradigm of foreign language learning.
InterConf, (99), 252-263.
https://doi.org/10.51582/interconf.19-
20.02.2022.030
Tarnopolsky, O. (2019). Three principal
paradigms in teaching foreign languages in
the 21st century: prolegomena to the creation
of a single approach to their learning. Foreign
languages, 2, 3-9. Retrieved from
http://surl.li/dzqxi
Vertehel, V. L., & Khrebtova, V. V. (2021).
Theoretical aspect of the birth and
development of multicultural education.
Publishing House “Baltija Publishing”,
53-69. https://doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-
26-023-0-4
Woehrling, J. M. (2005). The European charter
for regional or minority languages: A critical
commentary. Council of Europe. Retrieved
from http://surl.li/dzwuu
Volume 12 - Issue 64
/ April 2023
127
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Appendix A
Boyko’s Communicative Attiturdes Technique
It is necessary to read each of the following statements and answer “yes” or “no”, expressing agreement or
disagreement. We recommend using a sheet of paper on which the question number and your answer are
recorded; then, in the course of our further explanations, refer to your record. Be attentive and sincere:
1. My principle in relations with people: trust, but check you must.
2. It is better to think bad of a person and be wrong than vice versa (think well and be wrong).
3. As a rule, senior officials are clever and cunning.
4. Modern youth have lost an art of feeling a deep sense of love.
5. Over the years, I became more withdrawn because I often had to pay for my credulity.
6. There is envy or intrigue in almost any team.
7. Most people lack a sense of compassion for others.
8. Most workers at enterprises and institutions try to secure a grip on everything that is easily accessible
and would be easy to appropriate.
9. Most teenagers today are brought up worse than ever.
10. I often met cynical people in my life.
11. It happens like this: you do good to people, and then you regret it, because they pay with ingratitude.
12. Good should be able to defend itself.
13. It is possible to build a happy society in the near future with our people.
14. You see stupid people around you more often than smart people.
15. Most of the people with whom one has to have business relations pretend to be decent, but in fact they
are different.
16. I am a very credulous person.
17. Are those who believe that you need to be more afraid of people, not animals, right?
18. Mercy in our society will remain an illusion in the near future.
19. Our reality makes a person standard and faceless.
20. Good manners in my environment at work is a rare quality.
21. I almost always stop to give a payphone token in exchange for money at the request of a passer-by.
22. Most people will commit immoral acts for the sake of personal interests.
23. As a rule, people lack initiative at work.
24. Elderly people mostly show their exasperation to everyone.
25. Most people at work like to gossip about each other.
So, you have read the questions and recorded your answers. Now we proceed to data processing and
interpretation of results.