Note: This article is a translation of my Russian-language piece «Согласно правилам русского языка» (“According to the Rules of the Russian Language”), originally written on December 19, 2025. I postponed translating it because it relies heavily on Russian-specific linguistic nuances, semantic layers, and wordplay that are difficult to render naturally in English. This version attempts to preserve not only the meaning of the original text, but also its underlying linguistic logic.

Context for English Readers

For many English speakers, the dispute over Russian prepositions may initially seem obscure or overly technical. In reality, it concerns something quite familiar: whether Ukraine is treated linguistically as a sovereign country or as a subordinate region.

Historically, Russian used two competing forms: na Ukraine (“on Ukraine”) and v Ukraine (“in Ukraine”). After Ukraine regained independence in 1991, the Ukrainian government and many Russian speakers increasingly preferred v Ukraine, reflecting the status of Ukraine as a sovereign state rather than a geographic borderland.

Interestingly, Russia itself briefly moved in this direction during the 1990s, but under Vladimir Putin the official preference shifted back toward na Ukraine.

English went through a remarkably similar change. For much of the twentieth century, English speakers commonly said “the Ukraine,” treating the country linguistically as a region rather than a fully distinct political entity — much like expressions such as “the Northwest Territories” or “the Yukon.” After Ukrainian independence, English usage largely abandoned “the Ukraine” in favor of simply “Ukraine,” and this change became widely accepted.

Imagine, however, if English-speaking governments had refused to adapt and continued insisting:

According to the rules of the English language, one should say the Ukraine.

According to the rules of the English language, one should say the Ukraine.

That is, in essence, what the Russian government is doing today.

Language as a Litmus Test

The phrase “according to the rules of the Russian language” sounds like an appeal to neutral truth. As if somewhere there exists a supra-political codebook, and all we are required to do is obey it. In reality, this expression increasingly serves as rhetorical cover — a way to present a position as grammar, and a choice as an obligation.

This article is about who actually establishes linguistic rules, why appeals to them are so convenient today, and where the boundary lies between linguistics and politics. The central example is Ukraine — more precisely, the use of the prepositions na Ukraine (“on Ukraine”) and v Ukraine (“in Ukraine”). This example is revealing because here language has ceased to be background and has become a signal.

Who Establishes the Rules of a Language

No language is governed by decrees. Linguistic norms are not imposed but recorded: in dictionaries, grammars, and reference books. Linguists describe the stable practices of educated native speakers — they do not invent the language or vote on its forms.

Therefore, the formula “according to the rules of the Russian language, one should…” is valid only in one case: when........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)