W/Na UkrainieIt seemed carved in stone: when I was learning Polish, there was
only one correct way to say "in Ukraine":
"na Ukrainie". Unlike in the Russian language, Poles use this preposition with names of many other modern countries, some of which never were part of Poland (e.g.
"na Węgrzech"). When denoting destination, only one of those countries could be used with variable prepositions—both
"na Słowację" and
"do Słowacji" were correct; all the rest had to be used with
"na".The atrocious war of 2014 didn't change the situation much. But the war of 2022, it seems, finally shook the foundations and effed the ineffable. All the respected Polish language pundits now
say in one voice: both
"na" and
"w/do" have sufficient historical backgrounds, and both can be used in modern Polish—and, in their personal opinion, using
"w/do" makes much more sense now. (If you want to hear the same in a woman's voice,
here you go).
Socially responsible media, such as
Radio 357, are now consistently using
"w Ukrainie / do Ukrainy" in their communication (needless to say, this same radio supports pro-Ukrainian charities, and covers events in Ukraine with due effort and diligence, mindfully and compassionately).
In Russian, Ukraine seems to be the only non-island country used with
"na," which is inconsistent at the least. Back in 1990s, they made some decent effort to switch to from
"na" to
"w" (even their current dictator used to say
"w Ukrainie"), but then quickly backslid to
"na" again.
What's their current situation? The choice pretty much depends on whether the speaker supports or condemns the war. Let's quote one of the Russian language pundits:
Предлоги окончательно поляризовались, и даже с разными обозначениями происходящего на територии Украины используются разные предлоги. Со словом "спецоперация" используется предлог "на", то есть, мы читаем новости российских СМИ о "спецоперации на Украине"; a с другим словом используется предлог "в", и я не видел использования предлога "на" в сочетании с этим словом — там только "в Украине". You've guessed right: the mysterious
"other word" he is referring to is
"WAR", and the pundit himself chooses to silently condone it. According to him,
"не стоит придавать предлогам тех смыслов, которых в них нет, и грамматический вопрос превращать в военно-политический". Unsurprisingly, some of his previous soft-power activity was funded through Russia's presidential grants, and was conducted not only in the Crimea, but also in the self-proclaimed republics in the East of Ukraine—years before Putin "recognized" them. Indeed,
once Persil—always Persil.