Alfabetizzazione interculturale e decolonizzazione della “democrazia inclusiva”

F. Monceri
{"title":"Alfabetizzazione interculturale e decolonizzazione della “democrazia inclusiva”","authors":"F. Monceri","doi":"10.1285/I22390359V41P67","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Literacy has been, and still is, a very relevant political tool in the process of nation-building, as well as for the education of the “democratic citizen”. However, since the 1980s it has been complexified by considering the role that not only (verbal) language, but the whole of “culture” plays for its achievement. In time, a number of more specific notions such as “cultural literacy”, “critical literacy”, and so on, have been developed with the aim of  making “literacy” a viable tool to allow for more and further “inclusion”, by means of “eradicating illiteracy” all over the world. In this context, I try to show that in order to reach that goal, very improbable if not impossible to achieve, it would be worthwhile taking into  proper account the multicultural composition of contemporary complex societies. Therefore, I firstly give a brief overview of literacy’s development, and secondly, I discuss the notions of multicultural and intercultural literacy. My overall aim, however, is to show that the discourse linking the idea of a more and more inclusive democracy to the notion(s) of literacy has not yet focused on its own culturally biased origins. To argue this point, I briefly refer to decolonial thinking, understood as a theoretical approach that implies the need, and indeed the urgency, to renegotiate also the speaking, the writing and the teaching practices and theories, still modeled according to the culturally biased presuppositions originated from the so-called “western modernity” and particularly from its way of thinking and shaping “knowledge” – that is to say “modern science”. My conclusion is that the absence of such a decolonizing renegotiation implies an inability to come to terms with the limits and exclusions that western-style democracy opposes to the very possibility of building truly interculturally shaped political communities.","PeriodicalId":30935,"journal":{"name":"Lingue e Linguaggi","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lingue e Linguaggi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1285/I22390359V41P67","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Literacy has been, and still is, a very relevant political tool in the process of nation-building, as well as for the education of the “democratic citizen”. However, since the 1980s it has been complexified by considering the role that not only (verbal) language, but the whole of “culture” plays for its achievement. In time, a number of more specific notions such as “cultural literacy”, “critical literacy”, and so on, have been developed with the aim of  making “literacy” a viable tool to allow for more and further “inclusion”, by means of “eradicating illiteracy” all over the world. In this context, I try to show that in order to reach that goal, very improbable if not impossible to achieve, it would be worthwhile taking into  proper account the multicultural composition of contemporary complex societies. Therefore, I firstly give a brief overview of literacy’s development, and secondly, I discuss the notions of multicultural and intercultural literacy. My overall aim, however, is to show that the discourse linking the idea of a more and more inclusive democracy to the notion(s) of literacy has not yet focused on its own culturally biased origins. To argue this point, I briefly refer to decolonial thinking, understood as a theoretical approach that implies the need, and indeed the urgency, to renegotiate also the speaking, the writing and the teaching practices and theories, still modeled according to the culturally biased presuppositions originated from the so-called “western modernity” and particularly from its way of thinking and shaping “knowledge” – that is to say “modern science”. My conclusion is that the absence of such a decolonizing renegotiation implies an inability to come to terms with the limits and exclusions that western-style democracy opposes to the very possibility of building truly interculturally shaped political communities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
跨文化识字与“包容性民主”非殖民化
扫盲一直是,并且仍然是国家建设过程中非常重要的政治工具,也是对“民主公民”的教育。然而,自20世纪80年代以来,由于考虑到不仅(口头)语言,而且整个“文化”在其成就中所起的作用,它变得复杂起来。随着时间的推移,一些更具体的概念,如“文化素养”、“批判素养”等,已经发展起来,目的是使“素养”成为一种可行的工具,通过在全世界“消灭文盲”,允许更多和进一步的“包容”。在这方面,我试图表明,为了达到这一目标——即使不是不可能实现,也是极不可能实现的目标——适当考虑到当代复杂社会的多元文化构成是值得的。因此,我首先简要概述了识字的发展,其次,我讨论了多元文化和跨文化识字的概念。然而,我的总体目标是表明,将越来越包容的民主理念与扫盲概念联系起来的话语尚未关注其自身的文化偏见起源。为了论证这一点,我简要地提到了去殖民思维,它被理解为一种理论方法,它意味着需要,而且确实是迫切需要,重新协商说话、写作和教学实践和理论,这些实践和理论仍然是根据所谓的“西方现代性”,特别是它的思维方式和塑造“知识”的方式,即“现代科学”所产生的文化偏见的前提来建模的。我的结论是,缺乏这种非殖民化的重新谈判,意味着无法接受西方式民主反对建立真正跨文化塑造的政治社区的可能性的限制和排斥。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Quali analogie tra scrittura e video in lingua dei segni? Esperienze di traduzione nell’accessibilità museale dell’Istituto Statale per Sordi Tradurre la comunità sorda, non solo una questione linguistica Rappresentatività e variazione linguistica nella traduzione audiovisiva L’interprete di lingua dei segni italiana. Una figura professionale in evoluzione CINEDEAF SCUOLE. Laboratorio permanente di diffusione della conoscenza sulla sordità
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1