{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026007738649164912, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007738649164911593, 'mean_word_length': 5.20985401459854, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
MULTICULTURALISM AS A CULTURAL AND LINGUISTIC PHENOMENON OF THE BRITISH SOCIETY

The article focuses on the analysis of multiculturalism as a multidimensional social and cultural phenomenon, which is actively developing in the context of European integration and globalization and has an impact on the development of multicultural society. The aim is to summarize the specifics of the emergence of multiculturalism as a cultural and linguistic phenomenon, as well as to highlight a number of issues related to the phenomenology of some of the reactions and interpretations that this phenomenon causes in contemporary British society. Multiculturalism, which is formed in the conditions of globalization in British society, is manifested through ethnic aspect (ethnocultural and linguistic identity).

The European Cultural Convention states that a multiplicity of cultures can characterize the societies in Europe which have witnessed some changes due to migration processes over the last decades. This process is irreversible and generally positive. Given this, the Council for Cultural Co-operation recommends that governments should focus on multiculturalism and mutual understanding between different communities to protect, enhance and promote human rights, fundamental freedoms, pluralistic democracy, European identity, as well as to find relevant solutions to common problems of concern to the world community [1].
As stated by many Ukrainian and international studies, numerous scholars analyze a wide range of theoretical and practical issues of multiculturalism, including British multiculturalism. Such scholars as V. Vynohradov and H. Razumovska cover some particular aspects of the initial experience of multicultural interaction. Some other researchers Despite numerous studies on multiculturalism, one should pay considerable attention to multiculturalism as a cultural and linguistic phenomenon of individual countries, in particular, the UK.
This paper aims to summarize the specifics of establishment and development of multiculturalism as a cultural and linguistic phenomenon, as well as to highlight specific issues related to the phenomenology of some reactions and interpretations this phenomenon continues to cause in contemporary British society.
The dialogic capabilities of culture largely reflect the state of historical consciousness in the world and region, especially its forms, which are dialogue-oriented. They include the post-colonial discourse, which has put an end to Eurocentrism and revealed some new features in non-European cultures [4]. In this regard, the authors intend to thoroughly study the history of immigration to post-colonial Britain, which has always adhered to strict immigration policy. Immigration to the UK has become the most visible consequence of colonialism. The transition from the feudal and dynastic principle of loyalty to the crown to the national principle of local citizenship was an urgent requirement of political modernization. Nevertheless, the new principle did not encompass much of the former loyal subjects. The division of post-war England into "us" and "them" was purely racist since the colonial centre was "white" and the periphery was considered to be "coloured" [10].
Such changes have caused widespread resonance in the UK. In 1955, Winston Churchill believed that the motto for the Conservative Party should be "Keep England White" [5]. One can still find this statement in B. Parekh's report "The Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain". The public has rejected the author's assumption that, by its very nature, the so-called "British identity" has always been a profoundly racist notion [9].
M. Sarkisiants notes that the idea of national socialism underlies the British national anthem written in 1740, "Rule, Britannia! Rule the waves: "Britons never will be slaves"". In 1929, V. Dibelius called this anthem "the most plebeian and aggressive of all ever written". It should be understood as a proclamation of Britain's dominion over those who live far beyond the seas, that is, over the "natives". Through their anthem, the British declared that they (and not the whole human race) would never be slaves; Britain intended to rule the oceans (and, therefore, the non-British); the status of a free man should become exclusively British privilege [2].
R. Kipling proudly claimed that only a fool would dare to question "our right to power" in the overseas territories subject to British naval forces. "When the Union Jack flag, streaming over so many alien lands, filled the hearts of the English with awe, under a thunder of (steadily walking) boots of the soldiers, under the volleys, the rich and the poor felt the excitement of them being subjected to one state, on whose lands the sun never sets" [6].
The transition from the imperial to ethnonational model, in which origin determined identity, was followed by gradual removal of the "colour" periphery from the sphere of English national interests. The British Nationality Act 1948 affirmed single citizenship for Britain and its former colonies with the right of resettlement and employment in the country. The absence of nationalism at the centre then contrasted its heyday on the periphery, that is in the post-colonial world.
Over some time, the UK focused on providing immigrants with equal opportunities like those people already living in the country as its indigenous population. Such a policy of equal opportunities has led to the fact that many immigrants in the second generation have already been able to reach a level of income exceeding the average income of indigenous people [3].
Nowadays, the situation in the country has changed. Indeed, H. Young, with high anxiety, draws the attention of the British to the fact that in the 1960s and 1970s there was a debate about how to provide accommodation, employment and education to the numerous immigrants from Jamaica, Pakistan and India and how to make them full citizens. It is becoming increasingly evident today that many immigrants do not want to become full citizens (The Guardian, 6.10.2001).
According to a 2001 census conducted by the UK Office for National Statistics, 7.9 % of people see themselves as belonging to ethnic minorities. The largest group involves citizens of Indian descent, followed by Pakistanis, people of mixed ethnicity, those with dark skin from the Caribbean and Africa and natives of Bangladesh. The highest concentration of ethnic minorities was reported in the capital since just over 50 % of Londoners stated during the census that they were "white Britons". A 1991 census was the first in the UK's history to start collecting information on citizens' faiths. This critical component of multiculturalism has Збірник наукових праць Уманського державного педагогічного університету

Вип. 2, ч. 2, 2020
ISSN 2307-4906 not been recorded on a nation-wide scale before. For the first time, the questionnaires included the category of "mixed" origin, which implies that a citizen has parents of different races or/and from ethnic groups. It must be acknowledged that Indians, mostly the Hindus, have managed to achieve economic prosperity and get along with the indigenous people of Britain under their cultural characteristics. Despite their cultural and religious estrangement from Europe, these people have fitted into British society quite well. However, the Hindus do not seek to abandon their traditions since many of them maintain loyalty to the caste system.
An example of preserving national traditions of immigrants is the fact that the British police plan to have new headwear. In Southampton, some police personnel have already received some sort of bandana. A headscarf tied like a turban is a traditional turban of Sikhs, many of whom live in England. The police need it to attend the Indian temples without scandal on a need-to-know basis. According to G. Palmer and P. Kenway, Hindu immigrants enjoy economic prosperity, being the richest among the non-indigenous population.
At the same time, there is another way of understanding the problem of immigrants, which D. Cameron described in 2007 as the need to adapt the UK's indigenous population to a fundamentally new vision of the world. "Many British Asians see a society that hardly inspires them to integrate. Indeed, they see aspects of modern Britain which are a threat to the values they hold dear. Not the first time, I found myself thinking that it is mainstream Britain which needs to integrate more with the British Asian way of life, not the other way around" (The Guardian, 13.5.2007).
In this regard, one can see that immigrants tend to integrate into national society based on collective membership rights and, therefore, seek to "modify" the laws of the host society, which, in their view, should respond more fully to their specific civic and ethnocultural needs [8, р. 11].
Previously, the potential threat posed by immigrants was seen only in the fact that they deprived the indigenous population of jobs. Today, immigrant multiculturalism threatens the liberal values of Western democracies (The Guardian, 6.10.2001).
As a result of these processes, the issues of multiculturalism, race and ethnicity have become a central leitmotif of many right-wing politicians. W. Hague has actively warned voters against voting for Tony Blair, saying that after the second term of Tony Blair, Britain will turn into a foreign land (The Guardian, 5.4.2001). At the same time, international cultural communities have long become part of multicultural Britain.
In 2005, after the London attacks, the Tony Blair government tightened the rules of entrance and employment for non-residents, even mentioning the possibility of the UK leaving the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention.
P. Buchanan believes that by 2050 Europe and the United States will have been entirely dominated by Islam-Arab-African culture, and there will be no more than 10 % of people of European descent who have rejected their traditional Judeo-Christian morality. As a result, Europe and the US will face a gradual extinction and ethnic collapse in the 21st century [7].
The most critical functions include not only ensuring cultural identity, enhancing the mobilization potential of immigrants but also preserving the habitual way of life and morality introduced into the society of a new country of residence from their home country. In this case, the communicative discourse with "the other" under the conditions of intercultural

Вип. 2, ч. 2, 2020
borderline can take many forms: from the removal of national barriers and religious integration under the principle "we are all Muslims", or "we are all Buddhists", or "we are all Christians", to the complete estrangement from socio-cultural environment of the host country and limitations of a narrow culture of the diaspora [7]. It must be acknowledged that there is an increasing concern in primary British society about the racial and migration issues that people face in their country. Indeed, more and more people are becoming wary of migrants and people of different religions.
The development of British multiculturalism and the constant reassessment of values of such a strategy have led to conflicting results. Some researchers' thoughts about whether to accept multiculturalism as a state social policy have changed radically, "our multicultural programmes, which focus on monitoring ethnic minorities and providing additional services to those with dark skin and Asian people, are out of place, causing differences and strife between ethnic representatives. Thus, multiculturalism contrasts one existing ethnic community with another" (Daily Telegraph, 23.5.2000).
In our time, multiculturalism is seen by many experts as something necessary for ethnic minorities and absolutely useless and even detrimental to the white population of Britain. Y. Alibhai-Brown notes: "White citizens see no sense in multiculturalism; on the contrary, they think it is just something specifically designed for coloured people in the UK. The British are annoyed that their ethnicity is not considered, it is virtually ignored, while Welsh, Scots, Hindi and others are welcomed and develop" (Daily Telegraph 23.5.2000).
However, multiculturalism may have been the basis for the right of any person to be unique, different from others. At the same time, it has failed to offer any incentives for interaction between different ethnic groups, their collaboration and mutual understanding in society. "Exotic multiculturalism", being often referred to as "the gift multiculturalism" in academic literature [6, р. 69] and implying the ability to enjoy Indian cuisine in one of London's finest restaurants or Latin American elements in trendy clothing, is not genuine multiculturalism but only one of its most significant aspects. Also, those citizens who are part of the British multicultural society nowadays face some difficulties in living together. In this regard, it is essential to define such concepts as "society" and "national linguistic and cultural community".
These terms include a distinctive feature, in particular, the factor of grouping people by one or more features. Society can unite based on one feature (faith, profession, belonging to one kind of activity, generation, interests), whereas national linguistic and cultural community always unites based on a set of features (language, religion, shared history, shared traditions, lifestyle). There are other fundamentally different points of view, which consider the term "society" more broadly, that is, society is a community of people united by cultural and linguistic characteristics, a shared history, a single state, shared values.
Particularly noteworthy is the fact that many immigrants from the former colonies try to remain on the periphery of British society as supporters of their ancestry. They form a mini ghetto in British cities, treating the British as an ethnic minority. At the same time, the changes that have taken place in the country due to multiculturalism have enabled millions of former immigrants from the former colonies to become citizens of British society, while preserving their cultural heritage, and have taught them to respect British values that once made the UK one of the most democratic and liberal countries in the world. However, the so-

Вип. 2, ч. 2, 2020
ISSN 2307-4906 called "much more active, muscular liberalism" [7] and the criticism that British society is stuck in so-called "passive tolerance" can become a catalyst for a rapprochement of societies. It will allow many British to overcome the cultural divide in a country so that civic integration will not supplant traditional cultures but complement them within liberal traditions. Dictionaries define society as "a collective of people, characterized by a community of social, economic and cultural life" and present a more detailed description: "1) human community of a certain type (e.g. tribe, nation); 2) a term meaning a particular type of real processes; it emphasizes the qualitative difference of social processes from any other processes and highlights their intrinsic characteristics" [8].
When one considers society as a community of people united by cultural and linguistic features, a shared history, a single state, shared values, it becomes apparent that Britain will have to realize that second-and third-generation immigrants who have British citizenship are not in the host country but at home, along with other European countries which are ideologists of Eurocentrism and deal with the legacy of the recent colonial past. All this contributes not only to strengthening cultural and religious identity of members of the immigration community (or communities) but also the very idea of national identity.
Civic culture will continue to evolve not instead of national cultures but with them. It will allow even more British to consider Britain their home. Thus, one can conclude that in most multicultural countries, there is a clear understanding that one can ensure national security without abandoning the humanistic basis of this policy. On the contrary, adding to this concept the need to integrate both groups and every individual immigrant into the host community, one can avoid the automation of cultural communities, expressed both ideologically and physically, in their compact residence.
The conducted analysis can also help to offset the gradual erosion of national identity in the immigrant environment, where it is now being replaced by religious and ethnic identity as a result of poor social integration and unwillingness of new citizens to learn the host language. Learning the language of the host country can lead to overcoming ethnical separatization and promote interethnic integration.
There are two groups of factors, namely, cultural boundary and psychological limits, which determine and reflect the level of integration or differentiation of non-indigenous people. The cultural limit is recorded in the census documents regarding what language people of other nationalities who came to the country speak at home. The approval of the host country's language as the main one that is the home language and the very recognition of it as mother tongue are also recorded in these documents and can serve as an indicator of the qualitative transformation of migrants in the new environment. These results are a significant sign of their specific acculturation or, more correctly, cultural identification and expansion of one's cultural arsenal through the involvement in the host country's culture.
The psychological limit also concerns the issues of mother tongue. In one's environment, ethnos is approved and modernized according to the norms and requirements of self-preservation and logic of one's ethnocultural revolution. In a foreign environment, ethnic communities can be transformed entirely according to the specifics of a different cultural space if they are adapted to it.
Thus, multiculturalism developed in the context of globalization in British society is manifested through an ethnic aspect (ethnocultural and linguistic identity). It is a Вип. 2, ч. 2, 2020 multidimensional process that influences the relationship between realities and ethnicities, traditional and contemporary values, different cultural orientations, lifestyles and tastes. Multiculturalism as a social and universal phenomenon of civilization is characterized by the following: in the spiritual spherereligious mosaic beyond geographical affiliation; in the ethnic spherecosmopolitanism and diversity beyond geographical affiliation; in the economic sphereconsumption of template and self-produced products; in the field of information and communicationglobal dissemination of ideas and information.
In the context of multiculturalism, it is fruitful to use cultural citizenship supported by a system of mass communication on a national scale. This support lies in an attitude towards cultural cosmopolitanism; the specifics of regulation in the TV and film industry; the features of civil society. On the one hand, culture ceases to be attached to a particular place. On the other hand, it ceases to be a certain integrity in each particular place. Culture has become fragmented, being divided into the cultures of individual communities. Therefore, globalists strive to find ways how to support the integrity of the pluralistic cultural sphere, both locally and globally. Cultural citizenship in a multicultural British society is characterized as follows: globalization in Western society gives rise to more and more cosmopolitan cultures; an adequate cosmopolitan culture can only be developed if national cultures have been reformed; today, it is vital to search for the components of collective and individual identity; a mature identity can emerge only based on a meaningful attitude towards history, nature, people, other phenomena and events.
Further research should aim to clarify the features of multiculturalism as a sociophilosophical category; to reveal the reflections of multiculturalism in different paradigms of culture; to specify the processes of multicultural identity emerging in the context of global civil society; to justify the importance of developing a programme for multicultural education as one of the effective means of overcoming the spiritual crisis in modern European society.