Ancestry and language of Ukrainians in the United States: statistical analysis
by Oleh Wolowyna
The extent of assimilation of Ukrainians in the United States and its many implications have been debated in the Ukrainian community for many years. Unfortunately, as no reliable data have been available, the estimates of the extent of assimilation and conclusions about its implications have varied from the highly optimistic to extremely pessimistic, depending on the person's outlook in general and his biases in particular.
Also, a lifelong involvement in a relatively closed community tends to distort one's perception of reality, as our opinions and judgements are formed to a large extent by our surroundings. We are in the fortunate position that this should not be the case any longer. The 1970 and 1980 population censuses have provided us with a unique opportunity for assessing these issues more objectively.
About one-quarter of a million persons declared Ukrainian as their "mother tongue" (language usually spoken in the person's home when he was a child) in 1970. These data have been extensively analyzed by the author and collaborators (Wolowyna, n. d.), and have provided the first solid base for assessing the status of a subset of all the Ukrainians in the United States, namely, those whose parents spoke Ukrainian.
For the first time in modern U.S. history, we are able to assess the status of persons who identify with Ukrainian ancestry and those who speak Ukrainian at home, thanks to two new questions asked in the 1980 census: (1) "What is your ancestry?", and (2) "Do you speak a language other than English at home?" The first question asked respondents to identify with an ancestry no matter how many generations removed. Recognizing the high degree of intermarriage in American society, respondents were allowed to name more than one ancestry.
About 730,000 persons stated that Ukrainian is at least one of their ancestries. About 381,000 of them (or 52.2 percent) gave Ukrainian as their single ancestry, while the rest (47.8 percent) declared another ancestry in addition to Ukrainian. It is very likely that the total of 730,000, although, much larger than the 250,000 with Ukrainian mother tongue reported in 1970, does not encompass all persons of Ukrainian descent, as many persons of Ukrainian ancestry, for a variety of reasons, did not report this fact on their census questionnaires. Possible reasons are: did not know his ancestry; reported another ancestry such as Russian or Polish due to lack of national consciousness; considered another ancestry more important; was afraid to report Ukrainian ancestry; or consciously did not report it due to being completely assimilated.
The availability of this kind of data for the whole U.S. population will certainly motivate many studies to assess the ethnic composition of the country, measure the size and characteristics of foreign-language speakers, and estimate the degree of language assimilation for many ethnic groups.
The number of tabulations on Ukrainians and other relatively small ancestry groups to be published by the Bureau of the Census will be very limited, but the availability of sample data tapes produced by the bureau opens up tremendous possibilities for analysis. A person with demographic expertise and access to a computer can make a detailed study of the characteristics of Ukrainians and other ethnic groups, as done with the 1970 data (Wolowyna, n. d.).
The 1980 data allow one to make even more extensive analyses on topics such as: level of inter-marriage and characteristics of mixed and non-mixed marriages; education, occupation and financial status; home ownership and housing characteristics; social mobility and its relationship to the assimilation process; factors related to language retention; participation of women in the labor force; fertility patterns and family structure; and many more.
Here I provide an example of this potential. Data on the proportions of those reporting multiple vs. single ancestry are presented, which provide indirect evidence of the level of intermarriage among Ukrainians, as mixed ancestry is a consequence of inter-marriage. Figures on language retention provide insights on the language assimilation process. These results are compared with those of other ancestry groups. The data on ancestry is from the Supplementary Report on Ancestry (Bureau of the Census, 1983), while data on language was kindly provided by the Bureau of the Census.
In order to evaluate the position of Ukrainians in relation to other minorities in the United States, two categories of groups were chosen. The first category is composed of the six largest ancestry groups whose native language is not English: German, French, Italian, Dutch, Swedish and Portuguese. The second category is composed of East Europeans for which data on language spoken was available and who have a clearly identifiable language: Ukrainian, Czech, Hungarian, Lithuanian, Polish, Russian and Slovak. I also included the Armenians because their unique characteristics provide an interesting contrast with the other groups. The results for the Russians should be considered with caution, because this group also includes persons who gave the following ancestries: Great Russian, Rusyn and other related European and Asian groups.
Table 1 shows number of persons by ancestry, the percentage they represent of the total U.S. population, and the percentage who declared only one ancestry. Persons of German ancestry comprise more than one-quarter of the total U.S. population, which makes them the largest non-English-speaking ancestry group in the United States. Most of the other ancestry groups selected for this analysis comprise seven percent or less of the total U.S. population, with Ukrainians representing less than .5 percent.
The percentage declaring a single ancestry is strongly related to the immigration history of the group: the older the immigration the more time its members had to intermarry and assimilate, and thus the lower the percentage of persons with single ancestry. Thus, among ancestry groups with a relatively recent immigration to the United States, like the Portuguese, more than half reported single ancestry; while among groups who came to the country many years ago, like the Swedish, Dutch or French, less than one-third reported single ancestry.
For groups with similar immigration histories, a larger percentage with single ancestry is likely to be related to more cohesiveness and a stronger ethnic identity. Among the East European groups in Table 1 whose immigration history to the United States has been not too much different from that of Ukrainians, Ukrainians have a high percentage of persons with single ancestry more than 50 percent. This would seem to indicate a relatively high degree of cohesiveness and a somewhat stronger sense of ethnic identity among Ukrainians.
We have included the Armenians in the comparisons because they show the highest percent with single ancestry among all the groups in Table 1. Considering that their immigration history also is not too different from that of Ukrainians, and that they share with Ukrainians a similar history of dominance and persecution in the Soviet Union, this high degree of cohesiveness could serve as a model for Ukrainians, as well as for other ethnic groups.
Table 2 shows the number of persons speaking the respective language of selected ethnic groups, what percentage they constitute of all persons of each ancestry, as well as those who declared only one ancestry. Out of 730,000 Ukrainians, about 123,000 or 17.0 percent, spoke Ukrainian at home. Among those who declared Ukrainian as their only ancestry close to one-third spoke Ukrainian.
Language retention, similarly to percentage with single ancestry, can be partly related to the immigration history of ethnic groups. For example, most Germans, Swedes and Dutch, who have a long history of immigration to the United States, are almost totally assimilated linguistically; only 2 to 3 percent still speak their respective languages. A significant proportion of Portuguese, on the other hand, immigrated to the United States after World War II, and this is reflected in the relatively high percentage speaking the language 35.3.
Ukrainians have the highest level of language retention among the East Europeans. About 17 percent of Ukrainians with single or multiple ancestry speak Ukrainian at home, and the difference from other groups is quite large: about 7 percent higher than for Slovaks, Hungarians, Lithuanians and Poles, and more than 10 percent higher than for Russians and Czechs. Consistent with the extremely high percentage of persons with single ancestry, Armenians have the highest level of language retention among all the ancestry groups considered, with about half of them speaking the language.
When only persons with one ancestry are considered, the percentage speaking the language is understandably higher for all groups. The ranking of Ukrainians drops from third to fourth place, but they still have the highest percentage among 11 East European groups, and again the difference from the other groups is quite large.
The census data show, therefore, that Ukrainians are the least assimilated among selected East European groups in the United States in terms of ancestry and Ukrainian language retention. This is a surprising but gratifying result. In absolute terms, assimilation among Ukrainians is high, but in comparison with other East European groups Ukrainians fare quite well.
It is also interesting to compare the percent speaking the language among all members of the ethnic group, with the percent for those with single ancestry. In general we observe that for ancestry groups with a small percentage speaking the language (second column of Table 2), the respective percentage for those with single ancestry is relatively large. For groups with a large percentage in column 2, on the other hand, the respective percentage for persons with single ancestry had a relatively smaller increase. Thus for Germans, Dutch and Swedes, with about 2.0 to 3.0 percent speaking the language, the respective percentage for those with single ancestry is three to four times larger, while for the Portuguese and Armenians, who have the highest percentage of language retention, the respective percentages for the single ancestry subgroups are less than twice as large.
This relationship indicates that assimilation is a selective process, if we consider that persons of mixed ancestry are descendants of mixed marriages, which are likely to have a high probability of language loss. Ethnic groups with a low percentage of persons speaking the language also have a low percentage of persons with single ancestry. These persons are likely to be selected in terms of a stronger ethnic consciousness, which results in a high probability of marrying within the group and retaining the language.
Language assimilation and other types of assimilation are complex processes and require careful analysis before reliable conclusions can be made. The data in the 1970 and 1980 censuses allow us to make such an analysis on an objective basis and provide the necessary basic data for planning activities in schools, churches, youth organizations, credit unions and other organizations. Such an analysis takes time, resources and a realization that sound planning is only possible with estimates and analyses based on sound data.
The analysis presented above suggests two important conclusions. First, the degree of language retention among Ukrainians is quite low in absolute terms: 17.0 percent for all persons who consider themselves of Ukrainian descent, and about 32.0 percent for those with a single Ukrainian ancestry. Considering that these percentages are averages for all ages, and that for children and young adults they are significantly lower, the practical implications for the future may be rather negative.
Second, compared to other ancestry groups, especially East Europeans with similar immigration histories to the United States, Ukrainians fare very well. They have the highest level of language retention among selected East European groups, and this is quite an achievement.
Oleh Wolowyna is a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, where he is affiliated with the Center for Demography and Ecology.
| Ancestry | Number | Percent of U.S. population |
Single ancestry | |
| Percent | Rank | |||
| Total U.S. | 188,302,438 | 100 | - | - |
| Selected West European groups: | ||||
| German | 49,224,146 | 26.1 | 36.5 | 11 |
| French | 12,892,246 | 6.9 | 23.8 | 13 |
| Italian | 12,183,692 | 6.5 | 56.5 | 3 |
| Dutch | 6,304,499 | 3.4 | 22.3 | 14 |
| Swedish | 4,345,392 | 2.3 | 29.6 | 12 |
| Portuguese | 1,024,351 | 0.5 | 60.2 | 2 |
| Selected East European groups: | ||||
| Ukrainian | 730,056 | 0.4 | 52.2 | 4 |
| Czech | 1,892,456 | 1.0 | 41.7 | 9 |
| Hungarian | 1,776,902 | 0.9 | 40.9 | 10 |
| Lithuanian | 742,776 | 0.4 | 45.7 | 8 |
| Polish | 8,228,037 | 4.4 | 46.3 | 7 |
| Russian (a) | 2,781,432 | 1.5 | 49.6 | 5 |
| Slovak | 776,806 | 0.4 | 46.5 | 6 |
| Armenian (b) | 212,621 | 0.1 | 73.2 | 1 |
(a) Includes "Russian," "Great Russian," "Rusyn," "Georgian" and other related European and Asian groups.
(b) Although not East European, included because of the group's special characteristics (see text)
Sources: "Ancestry of the Population by State: 1980, "Supplementary Report PC80-S1-10, Washington: U.S. Bureau of the Census.
| Ancestry | Number of persons |
Multiple and single ancestry | Group rank |
Single ancestry |
Group rank |
| Selected West European groups: | |||||
| German | 1,610,269 | 3.4 | 12 | 9 | 13 |
| French | 1,574,454 | 12.3 | 5 | 51.4 | 3 |
| Italian | 1,634,858 | 13.4 | 4 | 23.8 | 7 |
| Dutch | 150,721 | 2.4 | 13 | 10.7 | 12 |
| Swedish | 101,129 | 2.3 | 14 | 7.8 | 14 |
| Portuguese | 361,430 | 35.3 | 2 | 58.6 | 2 |
| Selected East European groups: | |||||
| Ukrainian | 123,548 | 16.9 | 3 | 32.4 | 4 |
| Czech | 123,228 | 6.5 | 10 | 15.6 | 10 |
| Hungarian | 180,083 | 10.1 | 7 | 24.8 | 5 |
| Lithuanian | 73,234 | 9.9 | 9 | 21.6 | 9 |
| Polish | 826,150 | 10 | 8 | 21.7 | 8 |
| Russian (a) | 175,965 | 6.3 | 11 | 12.8 | 11 |
| Slovak | 87,941 | 11.3 | 6 | 24.3 | 6 |
| Armenian (a) | 102,387 | 48.2 | 1 | 65.8 | 1 |
Source: 1980 Census unpublished tabulation, U.S. Bureau of Census.
References:
Wolowyna, Oleh (ed.) n.d., "Ethnicity and National Identity: Demographic and Socio-Economic Characteristics of Ukrainian Americans." Unpublished manuscript.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1981, "Ancestry of the Population by States: 1980." Supplementary Report PC80-S1-1. Washington: Bureau of the Census.
Copyright © The Ukrainian Weekly, December 25, 1983, No. 52, Vol. LI
| Home Page |