Conclusion
After comparing the folklore of Ukrainians and Russians, an attempt was made to compare the same material with German and Spanish folklore. The results of this comparison give grounds to say that the chosen method is sufficiently effective. Statistical data on individual components of the national character, although they vary to a certain extent for different peoples, always remain within fairly narrow limits, which may indicate universal norms of correlation in the ethnopsychology of various peoples. We set ourselves the goal of finding out the difference in the national character of Ukrainians and Russians, so we will not draw conclusions about their difference from other peoples, especially since the volume of Spanish and German folklore taken for analysis is an order of magnitude lower than the volume of Dahl and Nomys collections. .
The value of the criterion χ 2 calculated by Mykola Zharkikh, equal to 598.91, allows us to assert that the probability of similarity between the collections of Dahl and Nomys is extremely small, and this gives reason to say that the folklore of Ukrainians and Russians differs so much that it could be created by completely different peoples. If we talk about specific differences, then we can assume that, according to the statistics of the first three classes, feelings play a noticeably greater role in the life of Russians than among Ukrainians (approximately 52% versus 48%). This conclusion contradicts the assessment of Kostomarov and Lipinsky and other ethnologists, who believed that among Ukrainians emotionality prevails over will. To prove his opinion, Lipinsky cited examples of the behavior of "our political leaders" who "sang and poetized more, shouted or cried." Obviously, he meant our political leaders who fought for the independence of Ukraine in 1917-1920. One can agree with this, but it should be taken into account that the national idea then, as well as later, primarily attracted emotional people, and not pragmatists. But even among the Ukrainian leaders, there were those who knew how to control their emotions – Pavlo Skoropadsky, Yevhen Konovalets, Stepan Bandera, Roman Shukhevych, and many others. In addition, among the major military leaders of various political camps, there were also Ukrainians, such as the Soviet marshals Voroshilov, Timoshenko, and, obviously, Budyonny, the anarchist Makhno, commander of the insurgent army of Ukraine, the lieutenant general of White movement Shkuro, the descent, major general Hryhorenko, and others who were not very emotional. For example, this is how a contemporary described Makhno: "Makhno is a man of will, impulse, passions that are very seething in him and which he tries to restrain with an iron effort under a cold and hard mask."
You can also pay attention to the heroes of the Second World War. Among the aces pilots of the Red Army, there were a lot of Ukrainians, such as the now forgotten first twice Heroes of the Soviet Union Grigory Kravchenko and Stepan Suprun, who died literally in the first days of the war, three times Hero of the Soviet Union Ivan Kozhedub (in just 120 sorties he shot down 62 German aircraft) , twice hero Dmitry Glinka (56 downed aircraft) and many others. And fighter pilots had to control their emotions, and remain prudent and cool-headed in air battles with the Germans, among whom were aces who had not dozens, but hundreds of downed aircraft in their accounts. Among the Russian pilots, only Pokryshkin became famous, and also a hero three times (59 downed aircraft). Thus, if you look closely, Ukrainians can control their emotions very well. And Lypynsky's words about the weakness of the "militant spirit" in Ukraine are also erroneous. Folklore data do not testify to this, nor the written under Moscow's control history speak of it.
Ukrainians are more rebellious than Russians. Only the list of names of the leaders of the peasant uprisings from Nalivaiko and Loboda to Karmelyuk and Dovbush far exceeds a similar series of names in the history of Russia. The examples of Pugachev and Razin are the exceptions that confirm the rebellious spirit of the Ukrainians, for both of these leaders of the Cossack-peasant uprisings were from the village of Zimoveyskaya on the Don, which was inhabited by Ukrainians.
The rebellious spirit of Ukrainians was confirmed by the revolution on the Maidan in the winter of 2013-2014. The dormant spirit of the Cossack freemen woke up in Ukrainians unexpectedly for many, but in many respects, the heat of popular indignation was facilitated by a sharp increase in solar activity, the effect of which on the behavior of the masses is explained in special work. However, the Sun did not affect the Russians, although the reasons for the indignation in Russia and Ukraine are approximately the same. The difference in the behavior of Russians and Ukrainians was noted by many political observers. Democratic Russian politicians especially complained about the political passivity of their compatriots, saying that Ukrainians give Russians a good example of the love of freedom and adherence to democratic values. At the same time, the disrespect for state institutions inherent in Ukrainians played a cruel joke on them. Having adopted the example of the seizure of administrative buildings as a method of revolutionary struggle, the separatists of the southeast have achieved the collapse of the state integrity of Ukraine. Obviously, the Ukrainians still have not developed a balanced scale of state values, which was largely facilitated by their stateless existence for many centuries. The skepticism and distrust of Ukrainians, clearly expressed in folklore, is manifested even in relation to their own emotions, which is confirmed by a proverb common among Russians:
Khokhol (that is, Ukrainian) will not believe until he feels:
Unfortunately, Nomys did not analyze his materials from this point of view and did not single out a special section that would reflect the tendency of Ukrainians to skepticism and irony, but leafing through the collection, one can easily see how strongly these features are reflected in Ukrainian folklore. S.K. Ivanov in the mentioned work quotes Gogol: "We all have a lot of ironies. It is visible in our proverbs and songs and, most surprisingly, often where the soul obviously suffers and is not in the mood for fun." Formally, Gogol said this about the Russians, but it is clear that his observations concerned the Ukrainians, whom he, being a Ukrainian, knew much better than the Russians.
The Russians also have one feature that is difficult to single out directly from Dahl's data unless the statistical analysis is done. As already noted, they have some kind of special xenophobia, or rather, the rejection of someone else with a keen sense of their own. This feature, together with the pronounced patriotism of the Soviet era, had the consequence that the Russians did not adapt to a foreign language, and other-cultural environment and did not lose their national identity. If the Russian community was small and did not have cultural centers, then the Russians did not assimilate among the majority of other nationalities, but were culturally degraded, which could be observed, for example, in Central Asia. Where Russians lived in large numbers, they did not lose their national identity, even, on the contrary, they contributed to the denationalization of the indigenous population. History has shown, and in Ukraine in particular, that M.Yu. Lermontov, when wrote: "I was involuntarily struck by the ability of a Russian person to adapt to the customs of the peoples among whom he has to live." This is an example of how people, even prominent ones, can be mistaken in assessing their own people.
Such features of Russians as patience, special humility, and obedience revealed as a result of our analysis is confirmed by the observations of foreigners:
The Western European tries to overcome suffering through activity, while the Russian has learned to submissively endure it. Violence from a distant and harsh power, a desperate struggle against epidemics and the forces of nature, and perhaps religion taught him that suffering is an inevitable element of his life (STRIK-STRIKFELDT WILFRID).
The fact that the Russians, by their nature, are well adapted to the administrative-command system on which the Soviet Union rested, was already discussed. Although in fairness it must be said that the Ukrainians have adapted to it no worse than the Russians, but thanks to a different feature, which is reflected in the saying "My hut is on the edge."
The total rational component in the ethnopsychology of Ukrainians is somewhat more pronounced than among Russians. but this is only a summary. There is a significant difference in the individual elements of this component. First of all, it is necessary to note the category of "practical reason" that distinguishes Ukrainians from Russians, who prefer theory. Obviously, this difference is caused by the complex phenomenon of Ukrainian individualism, about which there has always been a lot of talks, but its understanding was different. Statistical analysis data allows us to understand it more precisely. Apparently, Ukrainians are not inclined to limit themselves to their own interests and treat the interests of their neighbor with understanding. However, they try to pursue their own interests on their own and do not count on outside help. At the same time, they themselves are not very willing to help others when it is not about common interests. If the interests of the collective coincide with his own, here the Ukrainian understands the strength of the collective well. Such individualism is not a bad trait at all. Worse with another manifestation of individualism, can be seen in the excessive self-confidence of the Ukrainian. He not only believes that thanks to his energy, he can do without outside help but also without additional knowledge. Additionally, the large gap between Ukrainians and Russians in relation to discipline also indicates the extreme individualism of Ukrainians.
A closer look at the individual features of the rational component of the character of Ukrainians reveals one contradiction. Given sufficient tolerance, statistics show that Ukrainians are more prone to conflict than Russians. Examples of such contradictory behavior can be found both in our distant history and in modern times. The explanation for this feature of the national character can be as follows – Ukrainians are tolerant of other peoples, willingly recognize their right to cultural or religious isolation, but are uncompromising and stubborn in relations with each other. Obviously, such contradictory psychology was formed due to the fact that the closest neighbors – Poles and Russians have long been the dominant nations in Ukraine, therefore, due to circumstances, Ukrainians have developed a tolerant attitude towards strangers, while they are used to squabbling among themselves.
The irrational component, in itself, in the ethnopsychology of both peoples is small, but among Ukrainians, due to superstitions and signs, it is much more pronounced than among Russians. Here, again, we can talk about the skepticism of Ukrainians to the possibility of knowing the complex phenomena of nature and the human soul, to which the Ukrainians were more inclined to give a mystical character than to seek a scientific interpretation. Another explanation is possible if we recall Lypynsky's opinion about illusionism, the utopian daydreaming of Ukrainians. And once again, it is necessary to emphasize the greater religiosity of Ukrainians and higher morality, but this could already be left in the past.
The irrational component can include such human qualities as self-esteem and honor. In the folklore of both peoples, they are not clearly expressed, respectively, and rarely appear in behavior. Nikolai Berdyaev explained this by the fact that in Russian history there was no chivalry as a courageous beginning forging these qualities. In Ukraine, the Cossacks are considered to be knights, but with the disappearance of the Cossacks, role models also disappeared.
Now about the unexpectedly biggest difference between Ukrainians and Russians in the light of national paremia, which manifested itself in relation to conscience. One Ukrainian saying with the word "conscience" was found for 29 Russian ones. In order to check whether this really reflects the attitude of Ukrainians to such a human quality as conscience, an attempt was made to find objections to such a relationship in the dictionary of signs of Ukrainian ethnoculture (ZHAYVORONOK V.V. 2006). Under the sign of "conscience", as examples, two more are added to one proverb recorded by Nomis: He who does not have a conscience does not know the truth, He who has a clear conscience goes to sleep peacefully. This does not change much, because Russian ethnologists also write something about the meaning of conscience among Russians and can also add other Russian proverbs in addition to those 29.
The importance of conscience as a Divine moral law should be discussed separately, but here we will only note that, like any law, the moral law of conscience must also be proven, and the proof consists in the awareness of the growing importance of conscience for human behavior in the process of its spiritual development. However, in the middle of the 20th century, among the younger generation, there was a tendency to reduce the internal need to control one's behavior with moral obligations. A good illustration of this process is the "sexual revolution" that began in the 1960s. It already appeared with the practice of shameless kissing of French students in public. Such looseness in behavior as the ideas of existentialism-personalism spread with the absolutization of the priority of personal freedom over obligations to society leading to radical changes in its sexual sphere.
The fact that the Russians, by their nature, are well adapted to the administrative-command system on which the Soviet Union rested, was already discussed. Although in fairness it must be said that the Ukrainians have adapted to it no worse than the Russians, but thanks to a different feature, which is reflected in the saying "My hut is on the edge." The total rational component in the ethnopsychology of Ukrainians is somewhat more pronounced than among Russians. but this is only a summary. There is a significant difference in the individual elements of this component. First of all, it is necessary to note the category of "practical reason" that distinguishes Ukrainians from Russians, who prefer theory. Obviously, this difference is caused by the complex phenomenon of Ukrainian individualism, about which there has always been a lot of talks, but its understanding was different. Statistical analysis data allows us to understand it more precisely. Apparently, Ukrainians are not inclined to limit themselves to their own interests and treat the interests of their neighbor with understanding. However, they try to pursue their own interests on their own and do not count on outside help. At the same time, they themselves are not very willing to help others when it is not about common interests. If the interests of the collective coincide with his own, here the Ukrainian understands the strength of the collective well. Such individualism is not a bad trait at all. Worse with another manifestation of individualism, can be seen in the excessive self-confidence of the Ukrainian. He not only believes that thanks to his energy, he can do without outside help but also without additional knowledge. Additionally, the large gap between Ukrainians and Russians in relation to discipline also indicates the extreme individualism of Ukrainians. A closer look at the individual features of the rational component of the character of Ukrainians reveals one contradiction. Given sufficient tolerance, statistics show that Ukrainians are more prone to conflict than Russians. Examples of such contradictory behavior can be found both in our distant history and in modern times. The explanation for this feature of the national character can be as follows – Ukrainians are tolerant of other peoples, willingly recognize their right to cultural or religious isolation, but are uncompromising and stubborn in relations with each other. Obviously, such contradictory psychology was formed due to the fact that the closest neighbors – Poles and Russians have long been the dominant nations in Ukraine, therefore, due to circumstances, Ukrainians have developed a tolerant attitude towards strangers, while they are used to squabbling among themselves. The irrational component, in itself, in the ethnopsychology of both peoples is small, but among Ukrainians, due to superstitions and signs, it is much more pronounced than among Russians. Here, again, we can talk about the skepticism of Ukrainians to the possibility of knowing the complex phenomena of nature and the human soul, to which the Ukrainians were more inclined to give a mystical character than to seek a scientific interpretation. Another explanation is possible if we recall Lypynsky's opinion about illusionism, the utopian daydreaming of Ukrainians. And once again, it is necessary to emphasize the greater religiosity of Ukrainians and higher morality, but this could already be left in the past. The irrational component can include such human qualities as self-esteem and honor. In the folklore of both peoples, they are not clearly expressed, respectively, and rarely appear in behavior. Nikolai Berdyaev explained this by the fact that in Russian history there was no chivalry as a courageous beginning forging these qualities. In Ukraine, the Cossacks are considered to be knights, but with the disappearance of the Cossacks, role models also disappeared.
The expressions "good conscience" and "clear conscience" are key in the text of the Holy Scriptures. They are also dominant in Ukrainian folklore. Such phraseological units of the Ukrainian language as "to clear the conscience", "with a clear conscience", "good conscience" correlate with the text of the Bible [YESHCHENKO T.A. 2011: 161].
The conclusion about the dominance of the theme of "conscience" in Ukrainian folklore should be left to the conscience of the author. It is true that national dignity sometimes prevented me from being objective, but shortcomings in the national character are also reflected in the history of any nation. In this regard, it is especially necessary to single out such a typical Ukrainian trait as envy.
The difference in the attitude of conscience between Russians and Ukrainians is reflected not only in folk art but also in literature. In Russian literature, the topic of conscience is presented very widely. This is well known in the world and, in particular, Dostoevsky's works make a great impression precisely because of his multifaceted consideration of the phenomenon of conscience. In Ukrainian literature, the topic of conscience is presented sparingly. Taras Shevchenko never used the word conscience at all, although it is simply asked for in the plots of his works. On the contrary, the theme of conscience is central шт Gogol's work. Close attention to the problems of conscience is present in Russian religious philosophy, in particular, in the works of V.S. Solovyeva, E.M. Trubetsky, L.M. Tolstoy, I.A. Ilyina, M.A. Berdyaev, B.N. Vysheslavtseva, S.A. Levitsky In a person's worldview, there are always hereditary traits from parents and traits acquired in the process of upbringing and education. Obviously, the conscious control of a person's behavior by the voice of conscience is a sign of his general culture. Cultures are different, and their attitude to conscience can also be different, and it is not clear how much this affects their development since the very understanding of conscience is very diverse.
Finishing this analysis, we will try to define the psychological core of the national character of Ukrainians, which distinguishes them from Russians and is the source of motivation for all behavior and activity, as a kind of internal imperative. On the whole, Ukrainians are more interested in humans as such than Russians, although the difference seems to be small in accordance with the "Human" section (2.82% of proverbs versus 2.41% for Russians). But speaking specifically about health, youth, old age, and diseases, these issues are of much more interest to Ukrainians (2.28% > 1.61%). With this in mind, let's single out those features of Ukrainians that distinguish them from Russians most of all. These are:
Reaction to positive emotions – 4,64% >> 0,97%
Identical – unequal – 2,28% >> 0,73%
Propensity to conflict – 3,46% >> 1,85%
Count – calculation – money – 1,40% > 0,53%
Energy, mobility – 2,26% > 0,97%
Courage – Daring – 1,24% > 0,84%
Praise – Boasting – 1,01% > 0,79%
Looking for an internal connection between these features, we can say that Ukrainians value the joy of life much more than Russians, and at the same time, they are very inclined to compare with others, which expresses their desire to be better. This gives rise to conflict, in which Ukrainians show their energy and perseverance. The fact that Ukrainians are prone to boasting can be explained by the fact that they wishful thinking. In general, all this speaks of the high agonal spirit of the people, reflecting their readiness and ability to be in a warlike state for a long period. Agonality is scientifically defined as "the striving of entity to be" (YAROVOY A.V. 2010.) In this regard, the agonality of Ukrainians should be considered a positive quality. The reader can determine the shortcomings of the Ukrainians independently according to other data of the analysis.
References
BARANOV A.N. 1989. Aksiologicheskiye strategii v strukture yazyka. Voprosy yazykoznaniya. №3. – (In Russian) – Axiological strategies in the structure of language. Questions of linguistics. No. 3.
FISCHER-FABIAN S. 1993. Die ersten Deutschen – (In German) – The First Germans. Berlin. 1993.
FRROMM ERICH. Haben oder sein – (In German) – To have or To be. Stuttgart. 1986.
HOLLISTER C. WARREN. 1991. Roots of the Western Tradition. A Short History of the Ancient World. New York. 1991.
KELLER MECHTHILD unter Mitarbeit mit Ursula Dettbarn und Karl-Heinz Korn. 1985. Russians and Russia from a German Perspective. 9-17 century – (In German) – Munich.
HORSEY JEROME. 1907. Puteshestviye v Moskoviyu – (In Russian) – Journey to Muscovy.
GRUSHIN B.A. 1987. А. Massovoye soznaniye – (In Russian) – Mass Consciousness. Moscow. 1987.
DAHL V. 1862. Poslovitsy russkogo naroda – (In Russian) – Proverbs of the Russian People. Moscow.
DONTSOV DMYTRO. 1966. Natsionalizm – (In Ukrainian) – Nationalism. London.
ZHAYVORONOK V.V. 2006. Znaky ukrayinsʹkoyi etnokulʹtury: Slovnyk-dovidnyk – (In Ukrainian) — Signs of Ukrainian ethnoculture: Dictionary-reference. Kyiv. Dovira.
ZHARKIKH MYKOLA 1988. Ya ne roblyu zhodnoho vydkryttya – (In Ukrainian) – I am not Making any Revelations. Almanac "Yevshan-zilla".
IVANOV S.K. 1988. O vozmozhnom podkhode k izucheniyu russkogo natsional'nogo kharaktera – (In Russian) – On a Possible Approach to the Study of the Russian National Character. Soviet Ethnography. №2.
KOSTOMAROV N. 1861. Dvie ruskiya narodnosti – (In Russian) – Two Russian Nationalities. Osnova.
KOSTOMAROV N.I. 1890. Svtobiografiya. In: Literaturnoye naslediye – (In Russian) – Autobiography. In: Literary Heritage.St. Petersburg.
KRUSHYNSKA OLENA. 2004. Pomarancheva revolyutsiya: zryv shablonu – (In Ukrainian) – The Orange Revolution: Breaking the Pattern. Internet Publication "Maidan". 2004.
KULCHYTSKYI O. 1992. Svitovidchuttya ukrayintsiv//Ukrayinsʹka dusha – (In Ukrainian) – The worldview of Ukrainians//Ukrainian soul. Kyiv.
LE GOFF JACQUES. 2005. Tsivilizatsiya srednevekovogo Zapada – (In Russian) – Civilization of the Medieval West. Ekaterinburg. U-Factoria.
LYPA YURIY. 1992. Pryznachennya Ukrayiny – (In Ukrainian) – Destination of Ukraine. Lviv.
LYPYNSKYI VIACHESLAV. 1919-1920. Lysty do brativ-khliborobiv – (In Ukrainian) – Letters to the Bread-making Brothers.
NOMYS M. 1864. Ukrayinsʹki prykazky, pryslivya i take inshe Харків. 1928.
ONATSKYI Ye/ 1992. Ukrayinsʹka emotsiynistʹ//Ukrayinsʹka dusha – (In Ukrainian) – Ukrainian emotionality//Ukrainian soul. Kyiv.
STETSYUK VALENTYN. 2000. Doslidzhennya peredistorichnikh etnogenetichnikh procesiv u Skhidniy Yevropi. Druga kniga. L’viv – K. – (In Ukrainian) – Research into Prehistoric Ethnogenetic Processes in Eastern Europe, Volume 2. Lviv-K.
TSYMBALISTYI B. 1992. Rodyna i dusha narodu//Ukrayinsʹka dusha – (In Ukrainian) – Family and Soul of the Peopley//Ukrainian soul. Kyiv.
VASMER M. 1964-1973. Etimologicheskiy slovar’ russkogo yazyka – (In Russian) – Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language. M.
SHLEMKEVYCH M. 1992. Dusha i pisnya//Ukrayinsʹka dusha – (In Ukrainian) – Soul and Song.//Ukrainian soul. Kyiv.
STRIK-STRIKFELDT WILFRID. 1999. Russkiy chelovek – (In Russian) – Russian Human. Germany.ru.
YANIV VOLODYMYR. 1992. Narysy do istoriyi ukrayinsʹkoyi etnopsykholohiyi – (In Ukrainian) – Essays on the history of Ukrainian ethnopsychology. Munich.
YAROVOY A.V. 2010. Agonal'nost' kak stremleniye bytiya byt' – (In Russian) – Agonality as striving of entity to be// Historical and Social Educational Ideas. № 4(6). Krasnodar.
YESHCHENKO T.A. 2011. Kontsept "sumlinnya/sovistʹ" v etnokohnityvnomu ta bibliynomu aspektakh – (In Ukrainian) – The concept of "conscience" in ethnocognitive and biblical aspects. "Science. Religion. Society" № 2.
