LANGUAGE STRATEGIES FOR UNDERSTANDING THE HOLODOMOR IN THE SUMY REGION (1932–1933) IN ORAL NARRATIVES OF EYEWITNESSES

Abstract

The article conducts a discursive analysis of oral narratives of eyewitnesses to the Holodomor of 1932–1933 in the Sumy region. The aim of the study is to identify and systematize linguistic strategies for representing traumatic historical experience recorded in the memories of the region’s peasants. The analysis found that oral testimonies form a specific type of traumatic discourse, which is characterized by strategies of silencing and euphemization, fragmentation of memory, and emotional intensification. It was found that avoiding direct nomination of the tragedy combines elements of psychological protection, the influence of political censorship, cultural norms of silence, and the peculiarities of collective memory; with the help of euphemisms, not only the fact of the historical catastrophe itself is conveyed, but also the inner world of a person who fought for survival. The nonlinear organization of the narrative and fragmentation are a sign of the authenticity of the testimony, reflecting the affective structure of traumatic memory. Repetitions, expressive forms and bodily metaphors verbalize the tragic experience, which goes beyond the limits of ordinary rational communication, becoming a natural way of reflecting extreme life trials. The analyzed oral testimonies of eyewitnesses to the Holodomor of 1932–1933 in the Sumy region demonstrate that the specific characteristics of the region, in particular its agrarian nature, local linguistic variation, and family traditions of memory transmission, have a significant impact on the ways traumatic experience is verbalized. The regional context allows for a more precise understanding of the variability of linguistic mechanisms for interpreting the tragedy. It has been proven that linguistic strategies act not only as a means of verbalizing the experienced, but also as a mechanism for cognitive and psychological organization of extreme experience. Oral narratives indicate that the memory of the tragedy is structured mainly affectively, rather than chronologically, which determines the features of its linguistic design