The article presents the results of an expert survey, which was conducted by scientists and staff of Altai State University during April-May 2024. The survey was devoted to the study of objects of historical and cultural heritage, as well as the correlation of these tangible and intangible symbols with the image and identity of the rural environment. The main respondents of the study were representatives of the Kazakh ethnic group living in the Altai Territory (primarily residents of the Kulundinsky district: the village of Kirey, the village of Mirabilit). The survey results were processed using several techniques: SWOT analysis, associative analysis, content analysis. Based on the responses received, associations, weaknesses and strengths regarding the image of rural settlements were identified. Key markers of identity were also identified («historical events», «natural objects», «toponyms», «national language», «iconic figures», «traditions and customs», «everyday objects», «symbolic events», «institutions integration», «historical and cultural monuments and building» «gastronomic culture», etc.) directly influencing the processes of integration in the rural environment. A comparative analysis of the responses received was carried out, showing the correlation of national culture and language with the processes of identity construction. In addition, the survey results allow us to talk about such phenomena as: «formation of an ethnic village», as well as «intersection of local identities», when the influence of different national cultures (in this case: Kazakh, Russian, Tatar, etc.) on processes of constructing the image of the territory. It is shown that s. Kirei continues to retain key strategies and practices in the formation of local identity to a greater extent than the residents of Mirabilit.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Anna D. Derendyaeva (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: