Any language which acclaims the position of a state (regional) language should be able to function in all walks of life, including families, offices, schools etc. The Finno-Ugric languages of the Russian Federation do not fulfil these requirements at their present state of development. To use a simplified categorisation the levels of language functions are the family/every day level, the cultural-sociological level and the political/sociological level. The third level is a typical sphere badly in need of terminological innovation. In case of those Finno-Ugric languages of Russia which have a bigger community there is a chance to maintain the mother tongue if the instruction of all school subjects is re-introduced in the vernacular. If a language is the tool of education its prestige will definitely rise. Only the school can be able to save the language. To achieve this the institution of national schools should be re-introduced, meaning all school subjects should be taught in the given Finno-Ugric language. The Terminologia scholaris project of Collegium Fenno-Ugricum (Hungary) serves this very purpose. The terminology of ten subjects have been created in five Finno-Ugric languages with the greatest population: in the two official Mordovian languages (officially called Erza and Moksha), in Mari (Cheremis), Komi (Zyrjen) and Udmurt (Votjak) in co-operation with local specialists. 50 terminological mini-dictionaries have been published, the linguistic analysis of which is being carried on. The continuation of the project: 1) a total renewal of the Mordovian languages, 2) writing schoolbooks in the vernacular using the material of the terminological dictionaries.
Galinski, C. 2004, Bericht für die UNESCO (mskr.)
Galinski, C., de V. Cluver, A. D., Budin, G. 1999, Terminologieplanung und Sprachplanung. - Fachsprachen // Languages for Special Purposes, 2. Halbband // Volume 2, Berlin-New York, 2207-2215.
Grenoble, L. A. 2006, Endangered languages. - Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. 2nd edition. Vol. 10, Elsevier, 137-147.
Krauss, M. 1992, The World’s Languages in Crisis. - Language 68, 4-10.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/lan.1992.0075
Krauss, M. 1992, 1998, The Scope of the Language Endangerment Crisis and Recent Response to It. - Studies in Endangered Languages. ICHEL Linguistic Studies. Vol. 1, Tokyo, 101-113.
Leontiev, A. A. 1994, Linguistic Human Rights and Educational Policy in Russia. - Linguistic Human Rights. Overcoming Linguistic Discrimination, Berlin-New York (Contribution to the Sociology of Language 67), 63-70.
Pusztay J. 2002, Nyelvi tervezés a kis finnugor (uráli) népeknél. - Közép-Európa: egység és sokszínűség, Szombathely, 246-251.
Pusztay J. 2003, Közép-Európa: nyelvi konvergenciatáj. Fejezetek a nyelvi egységesülés vizsgálatához, Szombathely (Dissertationes Savarienses 30).
Pusztay J. 2006, Nyelvével hal a nemzet. Az oroszországi finnugor népek jelene és jövője 11 pontban. - A Magyarságkutatás könyvtára XXVIII. Teleki Alapítvány, Budapest, 317.
Pusztay, J. 2007, Linguistic Future of the Finno-Ugric and Samoyedic Nations West and East of the Ural Mountains in the Russian Federation. - Eurasian Studies Yearbook 79 (2007), Berlin-Bloomington-London-Paris-Toronto, 37-58.
Pusztay J. 2008, A terminológia mint a nyelv megmaradásának feltétele. - Magyar Terminológia I 2, Budapest, 205-216.
Pusztay J. 2009, Anyanyelv és kultúra Potemkin-falvai - Az oroszországi finnugor népek példáján. - Moldvai csángók és a változó világ, Budapest-Szombathely (A Magyarságkutatás könyvtára XXX), 11-18.
Pusztay J. 2013a, Анализ словарей школьной терминологии мокшанского языка, Badacsonytomaj (Terminologia scholaris. Analysis I).
Pusztay J. 2013b, Анализ словарей школьной терминологии эрзянского языка, Badacsonytomaj (Terminologia scholaris. Analysis II).
