Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/17447143.2021.1941063
Magdalena Nowicka-Franczak
ABSTRACT In Polish social sciences, after 1989, the interest in ideology has been gradually replaced with research on discursive forms of power. The reception of Foucauldian governmentality studies has resulted in a shift from the Weberian concept of power to understanding power in terms of a practical technology of governing people through symbolic forces of discourse. However, after the 2015 victory of right-wing parties in presidential and parliamentary elections in Poland and the emergence of the second illiberal democracy in the European Union, we witness a revival of the question of ideology as a material-practical tool for shaping people’s sentiments. In recent years, the assessment of the Polish systemic transition which started thirty years ago has been the subject of heated ideological debates. The Polish transformation has been retold and its leadership and outcomes re-evaluated from different standpoints. The comparative analysis of public statements that give contradictory assessments of the Polish transition presented in this article examines the relationship between discursive and ideological practices, and the possible linkages between post-Foucauldian analysis and the critique of ideology.
{"title":"Between the right-wing and the left-wing: the retelling of the Polish systemic transition as a discursive and ideological practice","authors":"Magdalena Nowicka-Franczak","doi":"10.1080/17447143.2021.1941063","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2021.1941063","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In Polish social sciences, after 1989, the interest in ideology has been gradually replaced with research on discursive forms of power. The reception of Foucauldian governmentality studies has resulted in a shift from the Weberian concept of power to understanding power in terms of a practical technology of governing people through symbolic forces of discourse. However, after the 2015 victory of right-wing parties in presidential and parliamentary elections in Poland and the emergence of the second illiberal democracy in the European Union, we witness a revival of the question of ideology as a material-practical tool for shaping people’s sentiments. In recent years, the assessment of the Polish systemic transition which started thirty years ago has been the subject of heated ideological debates. The Polish transformation has been retold and its leadership and outcomes re-evaluated from different standpoints. The comparative analysis of public statements that give contradictory assessments of the Polish transition presented in this article examines the relationship between discursive and ideological practices, and the possible linkages between post-Foucauldian analysis and the critique of ideology.","PeriodicalId":45223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multicultural Discourses","volume":"16 1","pages":"171 - 187"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17447143.2021.1941063","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44237711","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/17447143.2021.1910276
T. Tóth
ABSTRACT In this paper, I propose a discursive account of ideology and a return to one of Marx’s central concepts of mystification. I argue, that to bring back the critical thrust of ideology criticism in discourse theories, one has to approach ideology as a discursive effect that sustains and reproduces domination. I try to elaborate a discursive account of ideology which refers to the mystification of domination through hegemonic articulatory practices, where the hegemonic struggle over meaning fixates and cements perpetually asymmetrical relations of power. And finally, I attempt to illustrate that in the context of postmodern global capitalism it is the proliferation of new antagonisms that often mystifies states of domination.
{"title":"On the discreet (c)harm of ideology – the mystification of domination in postmodern global capitalism","authors":"T. Tóth","doi":"10.1080/17447143.2021.1910276","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2021.1910276","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this paper, I propose a discursive account of ideology and a return to one of Marx’s central concepts of mystification. I argue, that to bring back the critical thrust of ideology criticism in discourse theories, one has to approach ideology as a discursive effect that sustains and reproduces domination. I try to elaborate a discursive account of ideology which refers to the mystification of domination through hegemonic articulatory practices, where the hegemonic struggle over meaning fixates and cements perpetually asymmetrical relations of power. And finally, I attempt to illustrate that in the context of postmodern global capitalism it is the proliferation of new antagonisms that often mystifies states of domination.","PeriodicalId":45223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multicultural Discourses","volume":"16 1","pages":"155 - 170"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17447143.2021.1910276","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46301561","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-28DOI: 10.1080/17447143.2021.1895179
J. Beetz
ABSTRACT The aim of this paper is to present a materialist approach to the concept of ideology which delineates the latter as discursive practice and structural limitation. The discursive practices of ideology are not reducible to sets of immaterial distorted ideas or simply false consciousness. While ideology misrepresents and naturalises the existing social reality, its representations are neither true nor false. As a material phenomenon that exists in semiotic practices, ideology is fundamentally discursive and constitutes subjects by interpellating individuals and providing subject positions from which the imaginary relations to real social relations can be practically and meaningfully represented. Rather than reflecting or expressing their conditions of production, ideological practices actively produce, reproduce, and transform the very material conditions they arise in. In a first step, the article presents and discusses different Marxian notions of ideology, namely ideology as false consciousness, as structural limitation, and as commodity fetishism. In a next step, aspects of a materialist theory of ideology, which describes the latter as a set of material discursive practices will be outlined. The contribution will propose nine fundamental characteristics of ideology developed throughout the paper.
{"title":"Bigger cages, longer signifying chains – ideology as structural limitation and discursive practice","authors":"J. Beetz","doi":"10.1080/17447143.2021.1895179","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2021.1895179","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The aim of this paper is to present a materialist approach to the concept of ideology which delineates the latter as discursive practice and structural limitation. The discursive practices of ideology are not reducible to sets of immaterial distorted ideas or simply false consciousness. While ideology misrepresents and naturalises the existing social reality, its representations are neither true nor false. As a material phenomenon that exists in semiotic practices, ideology is fundamentally discursive and constitutes subjects by interpellating individuals and providing subject positions from which the imaginary relations to real social relations can be practically and meaningfully represented. Rather than reflecting or expressing their conditions of production, ideological practices actively produce, reproduce, and transform the very material conditions they arise in. In a first step, the article presents and discusses different Marxian notions of ideology, namely ideology as false consciousness, as structural limitation, and as commodity fetishism. In a next step, aspects of a materialist theory of ideology, which describes the latter as a set of material discursive practices will be outlined. The contribution will propose nine fundamental characteristics of ideology developed throughout the paper.","PeriodicalId":45223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multicultural Discourses","volume":"16 1","pages":"140 - 154"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17447143.2021.1895179","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48691536","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-25DOI: 10.1080/17447143.2021.1891237
Benno Herzog
ABSTRACT Against common understanding of ideology as being a specific form of knowledge or cognition, lately there is a rediscovering of the notion of ideology as practice. In these approaches, ideology is understood as a practice that ultimately contravenes its own intentions or normative claims. This understanding is already mentioned in Marx’ famous dictum: ‘They do not know it, but they are doing it’. The aim of this article is to understand certain practices of discourse production that can produce discursive and material effects contradictory to the practice itself. Therefore, I will first explore a Marxist notion of ideology as it is lately rediscovered by diverse strands of critical theory and that understands ideology as a practice, although not disattending the cognitive aspects of ideologies. I will then show how this concept of ideology connects well with the idea of discourse as speech act and communicative practice. Some examples mainly from discourses on migration and racism will exemplify the fertility of this approach. The research can help to overcome the pitfalls of some discursive practices especially in public communications.
{"title":"Ideologies as false communicative practices","authors":"Benno Herzog","doi":"10.1080/17447143.2021.1891237","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2021.1891237","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Against common understanding of ideology as being a specific form of knowledge or cognition, lately there is a rediscovering of the notion of ideology as practice. In these approaches, ideology is understood as a practice that ultimately contravenes its own intentions or normative claims. This understanding is already mentioned in Marx’ famous dictum: ‘They do not know it, but they are doing it’. The aim of this article is to understand certain practices of discourse production that can produce discursive and material effects contradictory to the practice itself. Therefore, I will first explore a Marxist notion of ideology as it is lately rediscovered by diverse strands of critical theory and that understands ideology as a practice, although not disattending the cognitive aspects of ideologies. I will then show how this concept of ideology connects well with the idea of discourse as speech act and communicative practice. Some examples mainly from discourses on migration and racism will exemplify the fertility of this approach. The research can help to overcome the pitfalls of some discursive practices especially in public communications.","PeriodicalId":45223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multicultural Discourses","volume":"16 1","pages":"127 - 139"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17447143.2021.1891237","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44866151","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-28DOI: 10.1080/17447143.2021.1877294
Jens Maesse, G. C. Nicoletta
ABSTRACT Ideology analyses play an important role in Cultural Discourse Studies because they investigate complex meaning production within various political systems and power structures. The notion of ideology can be analysed in different dimensions. Whereas Marx and Engels proposed a negative as well as a positive conception of ideology, sociologists such as Mannheim understood ideologies as sets of ideas and general world views. Some scholars in Discourse Studies seem to follow a conception of ideology that is located in-between Mannheim’s conception and Marx’s negative idea of ‘false consciousness’. In this paper we define ideology as a political discourse practice devoted to exerting power and influence. Following Marx’s positive notion, ideology is seen as a modality that regulates the relationship between the subject and a specific system of knowledge related to political action. Here, ideology refers to discourses as knowledge/ power regimes where the political-power aspect is suppressed through the subjectivation process itself. Following Gramsci, Foucault and Lacan, our theoretical framework helps us to analyse ideological discourse practices as different modalities of subjectivation. We propose three types of ideological subjectivation: oppressive forms, normalizing forms and resisting forms. Finally, these forms are illustrated with examples from economic expert discourses from Italy and Germany.
{"title":"Economics as ideological discourse practice: a Gramsci-Foucault-Lacan approach to analysing power/knowledge regimes of subjectivation","authors":"Jens Maesse, G. C. Nicoletta","doi":"10.1080/17447143.2021.1877294","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2021.1877294","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Ideology analyses play an important role in Cultural Discourse Studies because they investigate complex meaning production within various political systems and power structures. The notion of ideology can be analysed in different dimensions. Whereas Marx and Engels proposed a negative as well as a positive conception of ideology, sociologists such as Mannheim understood ideologies as sets of ideas and general world views. Some scholars in Discourse Studies seem to follow a conception of ideology that is located in-between Mannheim’s conception and Marx’s negative idea of ‘false consciousness’. In this paper we define ideology as a political discourse practice devoted to exerting power and influence. Following Marx’s positive notion, ideology is seen as a modality that regulates the relationship between the subject and a specific system of knowledge related to political action. Here, ideology refers to discourses as knowledge/ power regimes where the political-power aspect is suppressed through the subjectivation process itself. Following Gramsci, Foucault and Lacan, our theoretical framework helps us to analyse ideological discourse practices as different modalities of subjectivation. We propose three types of ideological subjectivation: oppressive forms, normalizing forms and resisting forms. Finally, these forms are illustrated with examples from economic expert discourses from Italy and Germany.","PeriodicalId":45223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multicultural Discourses","volume":"16 1","pages":"107 - 126"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17447143.2021.1877294","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45741138","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-20DOI: 10.1080/17447143.2021.1872584
K. Fretheim
Challenging the idea that ethical consideration and normative reflection are relatively recent in interculturality research, Dominic Busch begins with the assumption that ‘research on interculturality has always built on normative orientations’. To me, as an ethicist, this is neither provocative nor innovative. Yet, from this starting point, Busch is able not only to challenge established interpretations and widespread dichotomic discourses but also to tease out blurred distinctions and complex realities. The finding that there is another way of describing the field, distinct from the dominant positivism vs. poststructuralism debate, is constructive. It offers a new way of categorising different epochs and positions in the field, and, accordingly, reminds us of how such categorisations are rarely absolute and often pragmatic: they simplify complexity, provide analytical tools etc. In other words, Busch’s analysis takes us behind the established labels and under the discursive surface of interculturality research, providing a nuanced alternative to superficial simplicity. Busch’s study addresses ‘normative orientations in research on interculturality’ which he calls a ‘discourse of normativity’. Discourses are indeterminate and notoriously difficult to delimit, and this also applies to this discourse of normativity. While it is fair to give it this label, it also becomes clear from Busch’s article and other contributions in the field, that there are several discourses on normativity, ethics and the role of rights and values, in this field (Casmir 1997; Arnett and Roberts 2008; Cheney, May, and Munshi 2011). Busch distinguishes between positivist and poststructuralist approaches, while others prefer universalist and particularist, modern and postmodern etc. Busch is also not alone in suggesting an alternative. For example, Richard Evanoff has suggested a constructivist approach to intercultural ethics as an alternative to modern and postmodern approaches (Evanoff 2006). However, with good use of grounded theory Busch can identify four epochs with different discursive profiles: pragmatism, modesty, new hope and new explorations. In this way, Busch can claim not only the constant presence of normative orientations, but he also introduces an important issue: the different kinds of normativity. Busch focuses on the normative perspective or ethical compass scholars might be using – intentionally or not, explicitly or implicitly – when researching intercultural communication and developing the discipline. Consciously adopting this kind of ‘orientation’ allows us to discover, or to be reminded of, the normative dimensions of such endeavours. I will argue that such dimensions are abundant in interculturality research. Ethics is therefore not limited to a perspective on intercultural communication, but rather
多米尼克•布希对跨文化研究中相对新近出现的伦理考虑和规范性反思这一观点提出了挑战，他首先假设“跨文化研究总是建立在规范性取向的基础上”。对我来说，作为一个伦理学家，这既不是挑衅也不是创新。然而，从这个起点出发，布希不仅能够挑战既定的解释和广泛的二分论，而且能够梳理出模糊的区别和复杂的现实。发现有另一种描述该领域的方式，不同于占主导地位的实证主义与后结构主义之争，是建设性的。它提供了一种对不同时代和领域的位置进行分类的新方法，并且，相应地，提醒我们这种分类很少是绝对的，而且通常是实用的:它们简化了复杂性，提供了分析工具等。换句话说，Busch的分析将我们带到了既定标签的背后，在跨文化研究的话语表面之下，为肤浅的简单提供了一个微妙的选择。Busch的研究涉及“跨文化研究中的规范取向”，他称之为“规范性话语”。话语是不确定的，很难界定，这也适用于规范性的话语。虽然给它贴上这个标签是公平的，但从Busch的文章和该领域的其他贡献中也可以清楚地看出，在这个领域中有一些关于规范性、伦理和权利和价值观角色的话语(Casmir 1997;Arnett and Roberts 2008;Cheney, May, and Munshi 2011)。布希区分了实证主义和后结构主义的研究方法，而其他人则倾向于普遍主义和特殊主义、现代和后现代等。布什也不是唯一一个提出替代方案的人。例如，Richard Evanoff提出了一种建构主义的跨文化伦理方法，作为现代和后现代方法的替代方法(Evanoff 2006)。然而，布希善于运用扎根理论，确定了四个具有不同话语特征的时代:实用主义、谦虚、新希望和新探索。通过这种方式，Busch不仅可以宣称规范取向的持续存在，而且还引入了一个重要的问题:不同种类的规范性。Busch关注的是学者们在研究跨文化交际和发展这门学科时可能有意或无意、明确或含蓄地使用的规范性视角或伦理指南针。有意识地采用这种“取向”使我们能够发现或被提醒此类努力的规范维度。我认为这些维度在跨文化研究中是丰富的。因此，伦理学不局限于对跨文化交际的观点，而是
{"title":"Normativity in intercultural communication – what now?","authors":"K. Fretheim","doi":"10.1080/17447143.2021.1872584","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2021.1872584","url":null,"abstract":"Challenging the idea that ethical consideration and normative reflection are relatively recent in interculturality research, Dominic Busch begins with the assumption that ‘research on interculturality has always built on normative orientations’. To me, as an ethicist, this is neither provocative nor innovative. Yet, from this starting point, Busch is able not only to challenge established interpretations and widespread dichotomic discourses but also to tease out blurred distinctions and complex realities. The finding that there is another way of describing the field, distinct from the dominant positivism vs. poststructuralism debate, is constructive. It offers a new way of categorising different epochs and positions in the field, and, accordingly, reminds us of how such categorisations are rarely absolute and often pragmatic: they simplify complexity, provide analytical tools etc. In other words, Busch’s analysis takes us behind the established labels and under the discursive surface of interculturality research, providing a nuanced alternative to superficial simplicity. Busch’s study addresses ‘normative orientations in research on interculturality’ which he calls a ‘discourse of normativity’. Discourses are indeterminate and notoriously difficult to delimit, and this also applies to this discourse of normativity. While it is fair to give it this label, it also becomes clear from Busch’s article and other contributions in the field, that there are several discourses on normativity, ethics and the role of rights and values, in this field (Casmir 1997; Arnett and Roberts 2008; Cheney, May, and Munshi 2011). Busch distinguishes between positivist and poststructuralist approaches, while others prefer universalist and particularist, modern and postmodern etc. Busch is also not alone in suggesting an alternative. For example, Richard Evanoff has suggested a constructivist approach to intercultural ethics as an alternative to modern and postmodern approaches (Evanoff 2006). However, with good use of grounded theory Busch can identify four epochs with different discursive profiles: pragmatism, modesty, new hope and new explorations. In this way, Busch can claim not only the constant presence of normative orientations, but he also introduces an important issue: the different kinds of normativity. Busch focuses on the normative perspective or ethical compass scholars might be using – intentionally or not, explicitly or implicitly – when researching intercultural communication and developing the discipline. Consciously adopting this kind of ‘orientation’ allows us to discover, or to be reminded of, the normative dimensions of such endeavours. I will argue that such dimensions are abundant in interculturality research. Ethics is therefore not limited to a perspective on intercultural communication, but rather","PeriodicalId":45223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multicultural Discourses","volume":"16 1","pages":"203 - 209"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17447143.2021.1872584","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41400575","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17447143.2021.1912054
Márton Demeter
ABSTRACT In this paper we argue that the world-system of global knowledge production, that is, the field of transnational academia, could be conceived as a rather hegemonic and exclusivist social subsystem in which not just the members of the hegemon group, viz. the central agents of the field, but also the underprivileged agents operate in a way that maintains and even reinforces this uneven systemic run. According to our argumentation, the peripheral agents of the system tend to camouflage their identities as non-Western scholars to be acknowledged by the global community. Our subsequent analysis of the dynamics of former emancipatory movements will show that this is a detrimental strategy since assimilation results in homogenization and in losing authentic voices. As opposed to assimilation through camouflaging identity, we propose a systemic protagonism beside geopolitical equality in the world-system of knowledge production through the development of authentic and equal, other than Western, identities in transnational academia.
{"title":"Taking off camouflage identities: why peripheral scholars strive to look like their Western peers in order to being recognized?","authors":"Márton Demeter","doi":"10.1080/17447143.2021.1912054","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2021.1912054","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this paper we argue that the world-system of global knowledge production, that is, the field of transnational academia, could be conceived as a rather hegemonic and exclusivist social subsystem in which not just the members of the hegemon group, viz. the central agents of the field, but also the underprivileged agents operate in a way that maintains and even reinforces this uneven systemic run. According to our argumentation, the peripheral agents of the system tend to camouflage their identities as non-Western scholars to be acknowledged by the global community. Our subsequent analysis of the dynamics of former emancipatory movements will show that this is a detrimental strategy since assimilation results in homogenization and in losing authentic voices. As opposed to assimilation through camouflaging identity, we propose a systemic protagonism beside geopolitical equality in the world-system of knowledge production through the development of authentic and equal, other than Western, identities in transnational academia.","PeriodicalId":45223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multicultural Discourses","volume":"16 1","pages":"53 - 68"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17447143.2021.1912054","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41453548","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17447143.2021.1880693
{"title":"A Tribute to Jan Blommaert","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/17447143.2021.1880693","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2021.1880693","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multicultural Discourses","volume":"16 1","pages":"93 - 102"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17447143.2021.1880693","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44247929","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17447143.2021.1913174
Åsa Wedin
ABSTRACT This article explores how recently arrived students are positioned and position themselves in the Language Introduction Programme in upper secondary school in Sweden using a combination of position theory with nexus analysis. The material used consists of official national documents and local school documents, observations, interviews and photographs. Circulating discourses are analysed through discourses in place, historical bodies and interaction order. The analysis revealed ambiguous and conflicting discourses at the school, where students in the Language Introduction Programme are positioned both as having rights and as being deficient, lacking what is here termed Swedishness. While principals place the responsibility on students themselves to use Swedish in social situations, official documents emphasise the duty of the principals to ensure that education is relevant. Students’ voices do not appear to be important, and their agency is mainly restricted to their own learning. The identities that were made possible relied on their mastery of Swedish. Conflicting discourses circulate regarding the rights of students and their weaknesses and responsibilities. The combination of these two factors may mean that students run the risk of being positioned as having few opportunities to be successful at school.
{"title":"Positioning of the recently arrived student: a discourse analysis of Sweden’s Language Introduction Programme","authors":"Åsa Wedin","doi":"10.1080/17447143.2021.1913174","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2021.1913174","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article explores how recently arrived students are positioned and position themselves in the Language Introduction Programme in upper secondary school in Sweden using a combination of position theory with nexus analysis. The material used consists of official national documents and local school documents, observations, interviews and photographs. Circulating discourses are analysed through discourses in place, historical bodies and interaction order. The analysis revealed ambiguous and conflicting discourses at the school, where students in the Language Introduction Programme are positioned both as having rights and as being deficient, lacking what is here termed Swedishness. While principals place the responsibility on students themselves to use Swedish in social situations, official documents emphasise the duty of the principals to ensure that education is relevant. Students’ voices do not appear to be important, and their agency is mainly restricted to their own learning. The identities that were made possible relied on their mastery of Swedish. Conflicting discourses circulate regarding the rights of students and their weaknesses and responsibilities. The combination of these two factors may mean that students run the risk of being positioned as having few opportunities to be successful at school.","PeriodicalId":45223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multicultural Discourses","volume":"16 1","pages":"69 - 86"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17447143.2021.1913174","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46630115","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17447143.2021.1884253
C. Gallois, Shuang Liu
The Covid-19 pandemic has overturned health, economic, and social systems everywhere in the world. As happens in a crisis, particularly one of this magnitude, this one has shown the best and the worst in individuals, groups, and larger entities like nations. Social identity has loomed large in the way people look at the world, as borders close and people start to fear each other. In this paper, we approach the Covid-19 pandemic from the perspective of communication and social psychology. Mowlana (this Issue) calls for more consideration of soft forms of power, and we support this call. We also note some of the risks involved with neglecting other sources of power, and in particular the interactions between various types of power. Finally, we make some suggestions for applying this approach to social-science research on Covid-19 and its consequences. All ten sources of tangible or hard power that Mowlana (this Issue) notes have loomed large in public policy and thinking, as well as in individual discussions. Many have argued that Covid-19 is both a health and an economic crisis. In this climate, it is easy to forget less tangible or soft power – the power between people and groups that stems from identity, religion, ideology, and communication (among other sources). This is what Mowlana exhorts us not to do. As one of the leaders in the thinking around soft power, he notes the potential for both influence and understanding coming from the analysis of soft power. In a macro-level discussion of power around the world, he gives a broad introduction to culture, and the ways in which culture conveys power and thence soft power. He articulates the sources of both hard and soft power, and discusses the strong connections and interactions between them. He argues for the great increase in understanding that comes from considering all sources of power, not only the obvious ones. In the case of the Covid19 pandemic, obvious sources include especially the economy, health, and the balance between them. This call for more complexity in analyses of the Covid-19 pandemic is both necessary and important. While many governments have based their policies and rules in the crisis around finding the balance between containing the epidemic and salvaging their economies, it is clear that the situation is more complicated. Very recently, the head of the World Health Organisation called on richer nations to distribute the new anti Covid-19 vaccines equitably, rather than simply putting their own nations first. He did not
{"title":"Power and the pandemic: a perspective from communication and social psychology","authors":"C. Gallois, Shuang Liu","doi":"10.1080/17447143.2021.1884253","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2021.1884253","url":null,"abstract":"The Covid-19 pandemic has overturned health, economic, and social systems everywhere in the world. As happens in a crisis, particularly one of this magnitude, this one has shown the best and the worst in individuals, groups, and larger entities like nations. Social identity has loomed large in the way people look at the world, as borders close and people start to fear each other. In this paper, we approach the Covid-19 pandemic from the perspective of communication and social psychology. Mowlana (this Issue) calls for more consideration of soft forms of power, and we support this call. We also note some of the risks involved with neglecting other sources of power, and in particular the interactions between various types of power. Finally, we make some suggestions for applying this approach to social-science research on Covid-19 and its consequences. All ten sources of tangible or hard power that Mowlana (this Issue) notes have loomed large in public policy and thinking, as well as in individual discussions. Many have argued that Covid-19 is both a health and an economic crisis. In this climate, it is easy to forget less tangible or soft power – the power between people and groups that stems from identity, religion, ideology, and communication (among other sources). This is what Mowlana exhorts us not to do. As one of the leaders in the thinking around soft power, he notes the potential for both influence and understanding coming from the analysis of soft power. In a macro-level discussion of power around the world, he gives a broad introduction to culture, and the ways in which culture conveys power and thence soft power. He articulates the sources of both hard and soft power, and discusses the strong connections and interactions between them. He argues for the great increase in understanding that comes from considering all sources of power, not only the obvious ones. In the case of the Covid19 pandemic, obvious sources include especially the economy, health, and the balance between them. This call for more complexity in analyses of the Covid-19 pandemic is both necessary and important. While many governments have based their policies and rules in the crisis around finding the balance between containing the epidemic and salvaging their economies, it is clear that the situation is more complicated. Very recently, the head of the World Health Organisation called on richer nations to distribute the new anti Covid-19 vaccines equitably, rather than simply putting their own nations first. He did not","PeriodicalId":45223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multicultural Discourses","volume":"16 1","pages":"20 - 26"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17447143.2021.1884253","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43545637","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：