The program of the Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe, formulated primarily by Otto Brunner, Werner Conze, and Reinhart Koselleck, calls for relating conceptual change to structural transformations of government, society, and economy in German-speaking Europe. J. G. A. Pocock, of Cambridge, identified the range of alternative and competing political discourses available to early modern writers, while Quentin Skinner, also of Cambridge, treated political theories in terms of those historical contexts and linguistic conventions which both facilitate and circumscribe legitimations of political (...) arrangements, and he described such theories as intentional speech acts. Despite the differences in the German and Anglophone modes of treating political language, however, there are no major obstacles in bringing them together. The GG could profit from Pocock's technique of analysis and comparison in identifying early modern political languages, and the issues raised by Skinner about political thought and theorizing as forms of linguistic action, as well as the effect of general linguistic conventions upon available modes of legitimating political arrangements. The Anglophone mode might profit from considering the GG's non-reductive use of social history in conjunction with that of concepts, and from the GG's systematic use of contemporary sources of language and linguistic definitions. (shrink)

본 논문은 신불해와 한비자의 관계를 기존의 ‘술(術)’이나 ‘형명(形名)’이라는 전통적 이론틀 에서 벗어나 정치, 언어, 마음이라는 포괄적이고 현대적인 관점에서 분석해보고자 하였다. 신불 해는 전기 법가로 평가되는 신도, 신불해, 상앙 중에서 ‘명(名)’의 중요성을 가장 강조한 철학자 이며, 정치는 언어에 의해 운용되는 행위임을 지적하였다. 한비자는 신불해의 관점을 적극적으 로 수용하며, 동시에 신불해가 언어의 기능을 과신했다고 비판한다. 한비자가 언어의 기능을 어 느 정도 불신하는 데에는 의사소통의 어려움 때문이다. 의사소통은 기본적으로 언어라는 기호로 이루어지며, 상대방을 설득할 때 주요한 수단으로 사용된다. 그런데 상대방을 설득할 때 중요한 것은 (...) 기호에 대한 나의 해석을 상대방에게 전달하는 것이 아니라 상대방의 해석을 알아맞히는 것이다. 그러나 상대방의 마음을 알아맞히는 것은 굉장히 힘든 일이다. 특히 첨예하게 이익이 대 립하는 군신 간의 관계에서 이루어지는 의사소통은 더욱 힘들기 마련이다. 그리고 한비자는 언어라는 기호로 이루어진 정치적 규칙이 규범성을 가지는 이유는 강제적 인 제재에서 기인한다고 보았다. 다시 말하면, 한비자는 ‘언어의 규약성’과 ‘규약적 기호의 규범 성’은 별개라고 생각했다. 『한비자』 「정법」에서 한비자의 신불해에 대한 비판은 이런 맥락에 서 이해될 수 있다. 한나라 소후는 신불해의 조언대로 신하들에게 ‘술’을 쓰고 있었지만, 신하들 사이에서 법이 제대로 기능하지 못하고 있었기 때문에 패자(覇者)가 될 수 없었다. 왜 냐하면 신하들은 신법과 구법 중에 자신의 이익에 부합한 규칙을 따르고 있었기 때문이다. 한 비자는 신하들의 자의적인 법해석을 막는 방법은 강제적인 제재밖에 없다고 생각했다. 한비자는 법이라는 사회적 구성물이 저절로 규범적 효과를 가지지 못한다는 것을 인식했기 때문에 상앙 의 상벌 이론을 끌어와 신불해의 이론을 보완하고자 하였다. (shrink)

L’article étudie comment les idées de la France des Lumières et de la France révolutionnaire ont contribué au changement de la langue sociopolitique russe, comment elles ont interféré avec le processus littéraire du romantisme en Russie et ont finalement contribué au changement du paradigme intellectuel en Russie dans la deuxième moitié du XIXe siècle. L’histoire des concepts de citoyen, de société, d’opposition politique est retracée de la deuxième moitié du XVIIIe siècle – à travers des documents officiels (Instructions, par Catherine (...) II), des textes littéraires (A. Radichtchev) – jusqu’au premier tiers du XIXe siècle – à travers les écrits politiques des décembristes. En conclusion, il est soutenu que l’échec du républicanisme des décembristes inspiré par la France des Lumières a orienté, dans la deuxième moitié du XIXe siècle, la pensée russe vers la problématique de la diversité humaine et de la nationalisation de l’Empire. Les principes universels du siècle des Lumières sont remplacés par l’intérêt porté à la diversité humaine de l’Empire russe, ce qui nécessitera, à son tour, l’élaboration d’un langage spécifique et de ses concepts. Cependant, ce tournant serait une conséquence du processus de réception des idées et des concepts de la France des Lumières et aurait été accéléré par la Révolution française. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Keigo in Modern Japan: Polite Language from Meiji to the PresentAnn WehmeyerKeigo in Modern Japan: Polite Language from Meiji to the Present. By Patricia J. Wetzel. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2004. Pp. 206.In Keigo in Modern Japan: Polite Language from Meiji to the Present, Patricia Wetzel delves deeply into social and analytical aspects of honorific and polite language from historical and contemporary perspectives. (...) It is a work unlike any other, with a rigorous analysis of "language intervention," the attempt to standardize keigo usage, over the last one hundred years. Wetzel envisions the audience for this book as the student of Japan in a broad sense, and there is much in this work to compel the attention of those in history, sociology, and anthropology, in addition to linguistics. Wetzel characterizes her work as a "search for vocabulary," a vocabulary that can account for keigo as a complex, commonsense system that native speakers feel less than secure in their use thereof.The first chapter, "Keigo in Linguistics," surveys analytic frameworks concerning the structure and syntax of honorifics within Western linguistics. Wetzel also proposes [End Page 191] one modification to theory, in arguing that it is the subject that should be regarded as the trigger for honorification in all instances, doing away with the notion of "object honorification." There is also discussion of issues that have been targeted in research on pragmatics and in research from sociolinguistic perspectives.In the second chapter, "Keigo in Kokugogaku," Wetzel locates the inception of Japanese-language studies of keigo in the Meiji period, under the influence of Latin-based Western methodologies, and the move toward universal education. Following Tsujimura's (1992) lead, she identifies three basic frameworks in the early history of the analysis of keigo, namely through "person," "meaning," and "target." Under person-oriented analyses, Wetzel discusses the work of Mitsuhashi, Tokieda, and Tsujimura; under meaning-oriented frameworks, the work of Yoshioka, Hashimoto, and Uchiyama; and under target-oriented approaches the work of Mitsuya and Matsushita. More recently, theoretical discussions have focused on just what is to be included in the analysis of keigo, and have reincorporated the concept of taigū "consideration," first introduced by Okada in 1900. The latter half of the chapter focuses on the recent work of Ō ishi, Minami, and Kikuchi and their debates on whether to incorporate socially meaningful aspects of deportment into the paradigm as well as the vulgar, demeaning, and haughty ranges of expressions.With chapter 3, "Inventing Keigo: Standardization," Wetzel turns to the ideological aspects of keigo, in an investigation of the history of language intervention in Japan. The late Meiji period witnessed the drive to unify the spoken and written idioms in the genbun-itchi movement. Keigo, like other aspects of spoken language, was part of what needed to be pinned down under the process of codifying a standard language for the nation. Wetzel chronicles the succession of official bodies created to address, first of all, standardization of language and, later, a variety of issues including orthographic reforms and keigo use. Among these official bodies are the Kokugo Chō sakai in 1899, Kokugo Chō sa Iinkai in 1902, Rinji Kokugo Chō sakai in 1921, Kokugo Shingikai in 1950, and Bunka Shingikai in 2001. Wetzel argues that keigo acquired "real salience" and "came of age" only in the postwar period. The Kokugo Shingikai issued two policy statements outlining an optimal system of keigo use: Kore kara no keigo (Keigo from now on) (1952) and Gendai ni okeru keii-hyōgen no arikata (Guidelines for respect expressions in the modern age) (1998), both of which Wetzel translates in their entirety and includes in the book's appendixes, along with the original Japanese.In chapter 4, "The Modernization of Keigo," Wetzel studies the social phenomenon of keigo anxiety, as reflected in the plethora of popular how-to manuals on keigo usage, and the occasional "manner poster" displayed in public venues. She applies Giddens' notion of "disembedding," Faircloth's notion of "technologization of discourse," and Bourdieu's concept of "linguistic capital" to help understand why it is that people feel the need to be instructed on the proper use of keigo. Wetzel herself attended several... (shrink)

This essay explores the speech act of dogwhistling (sometimes referred to as ‘using coded language’). Dogwhistles may be overt or covert, and within each of these categories may be intentional or unintentional. Dogwhistles are a powerful form of political speech, allowing people to be manipulated in ways they would resist if the manipulation was carried outmore openly—often drawing on racist attitudes that are consciously rejected. If philosophers focus only on content expressed or otherwise consciously conveyed they may miss (...) what is most powerful and pernicious in the speech of political culture. This essay is a call to start paying attention to these more covert speech acts, and a first attempt at beginning to theorize them. It argues that dogwhistles present a complex and interesting case for the philosopher of language, and explores their implications for democratic politics. (shrink)

My intention is to explore the Hobbesian account of civil association in terms of his conception of the state of nature, especially as it relates to his view of language in politics. I start from the view that the achievement of a political philosopher must be to reveal some central presupposition of our thought and action, as the Greeks did in their exploration of justice, Rousseau with the general will, and Locke with the idea of property. Hobbes takes (...) the view that we cannot properly understand ideas such as sovereignty, government, law, obligation and so on without presupposing the kind of unstable conflict-ridden situation he called the condition of nature. (shrink)

Politics abounds with bad language: lying and bullshitting, grandstanding and virtue signaling, code words and dogwhistles, and more. But why is there so much bad language in politics? And what, if anything, can we do about it? In this paper I show how these two questions are connected. Politics is full of bad language because existing social and political institutions are structured in such a way that the production of bad language becomes rational. In principle, (...) by modifying these institutions we can reduce the prevalence of bad language. However, as I show, such practical efforts are fraught with difficulties. After first outlining an account of bad language (Section 1), I examine the rationality of three different types of bad language: inaccurate language, insincere language, and unclear language (Section 2). Next, I discuss the possibility of implementing institutional reforms to improve the quality of political discourse (Section 3). However, I then outline and discuss two serious complications for institutional reforms—namely, they create risk of abuse, and they could preclude instances of seemingly bad language that, in fact, are socially beneficial (Section 4). I conclude with some thoughts about how to pursue institutional reform in an appropriately circumspect manner (Section 5). (shrink)

This dissertation defends the place of representation in music. Music’s status as a representational art has been hotly debated since the War of the Romantics, which pitted the Weimar progressives (Liszt, Wagner, &co.) against the Leipzig conservatives (the Schumanns, Brahms, &co.) in an intellectual struggle for what each side took to be the very future of music as an art. I side with the progressives, and argue that music can be and often is a representational medium. Correspondence (or resemblance) theories (...) of representation, such as the one I offer, have been much maligned in philosophy since the 1960s. Most theories assimilate representation under “meaning,” which has usually been thought to belong primarily to language. As a result, representational content has been taken to be purely conventional in the way that sentential meaning is. People want to know what music “means,” and these theories interpret this as “what does it refer to?” or “what propositions does it express?” I argue that propositional communication is only one (small) part of the issue. Once we overcome the bias of conceiving of musical works as essentially linguistic items, speech acts (performed) or sentence tokens (written), we can begin to take music on its own terms to discover how it represents—one way in which it “means.” The first step is to “naturalize” music’s representational content. Influenced by recent discussions in the philosophies of mind and science, I argue in Chapter 1 that composers represent extra-musical objects, events, and states of affairs through their works by exploiting antecedent relations (such as similarities in pitch, timbre, and structure) in order to secure reference to them. In Chapter 2, I survey and respond to the main challenges that those skeptical of music’s representational possibilities would raise against my theory of musical representation. In Chapter 3, I explore a number of ways through which music has been claimed to represent in order to show how my theory accounts for these diverse phenomena better than its conventionalist rivals, both in terms of the metaphysics and the epistemology. Chapter 4 extends this discussion by offering an account of how we perceive, understand, appreciate, and interpret sophisticated musical representations. I conclude by teasing out some of my theory’s implications and suggesting areas for further research. (shrink)

Many political theorists believe that a state cannot be neutral when it comes to languages. Legislatures cannot avoid picking a language in which to conduct their business and teachers have to teach their pupils in a language. However, against that, some political liberals argue that liberal neutrality is consistent with the state endorsement of particular languages. Claims to the contrary, they say, are based on a misguided understanding of what neutrality is. I will argue that this (...) line of argument fails, for two reasons. First, the primary challenge to which political liberals should respond is not that of reconciling the promotion of languages with liberal neutrality but, rather, that of reconciling liberal neutrality with the fact that reasonable people disagree about the existence and nature of languages. Second, even if everyone accepted the existence of languages along essentialist lines, one should still doubt the possibility of state neutrality with respect to them, regardless of the conception of neutrality one prefers. The reason why is that human beings cannot care about or value languages so when a state promotes a particular language, it is not supporting the preferences of its citizens but, rather, acting on perfectionist or simply irrational grounds. (shrink)

This cumulative course on Johannes Heinrichs' philosophical works presents the essence of his previous publications: A rich, consistent, and novel monolithic system defying temptations by the zeitgeist. Starting with an emphasis on reflection as the basis of epistemology, Heinrichs also covers the mind-body dualism in an anthropology chapter, moves on to presenting summaries of his 'Theory of Democracy' as well as of his 'Philosophical Semiotics', followed by an outline of structural and integral ontology. An overview of ethical positions in the (...) final chapter proves the fertility of Heinrichs? theoretical-reflection methods. (shrink)

Real Language Series General Editors:Jennifer Coates, Jenny Cheshire, Euan Reid This is a sociolinguistics series about the relationships between language, society and social change. Books in the series draw on natural language data from a wide range of social contexts. The series takes a critical approach to the subject, challenging current orthodoxies, and dealing with familiar topics in new ways. Gender and Discourse offers a critical new approach to the study of language and gender studies. Women (...) moving into the public domains of power traditionally monopolised by men are creating new identities for themselves, and the language that is used by them and about them offers an insight into gender roles. Clare Walsh reviews the current dominance/difference debates, and proposes a new analytical framework which combines the insights of critical discourse and feminist perspectives on discourse to provide a new perspective on the role of women in public life. A superbly accessible book designed for students and researchers in the field, the book features: - topical case studies from the arenas of politics, religion and activism- a new analytical framework, also summarised in chart form so the reader can apply their own critical analyses of texts. - written and visual text types for the reader's own linguistic and semiotic analysis. 'This important book takes up a neglected question in the study of language and gender - what difference women make to the discourse of historically male-dominated institutions - and brings to bear on it both the insights of feminist scholarship and evidence from women's own testimony. Clare Walsh's analysis of the dilemmas women face is both subtle and incisive, taking us beyond popular 'Mars and Venus' stereotypes and posing some hard questions for fashionable theories of language, identity and performance. (shrink)

The book is based on the proceedings of the conference on 'Philosophy, Language and the Political - Reevaluating Poststructuralism' held at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, on the 10th, 11th and 12th December 2014. Several scholars from India and abroad participated in it. The book comprises 17 papers that were presented at the event, besides three additional papers, plus a Preface by Marc Crepon, as well as a description of the conference and a thematic introduction, both by Franson (...) Manjali. -/- The contributiors discuss diverse aspects of the poststructuralist and related philosophical ideas and practices, in the works of Jacques Derrida, Michael Foucault, Gilles Deleuze, Helene Cixous, Jurgen Habermas, Jean-Luc Nancy, Georgio Agambed, Maurice Blanchot, Emmanuel Levinas, Martin Heideggar, Jean-Paul Sartre, Friedrich Nietzche, Baruch Spinoza, and several other philosophers. The questions of language, literature, culture, art, the political, feminism, self and the other death, theology, violence, shame, the animal, psychoanalysis, Marxism, etc, receive scholarly attention of the contributors. (shrink)

The Declaration of Independence states that all men are created equal in the United States, but that statement does not hold true for words. Some words carry more weight than others--they seem to work harder, get more done, and demand more respect. Political Keywords: Using Language that Uses Us looks at eight dominant words that are crucial to American political discourse, and how they have been employed during the last fifty years. Based on an analysis of eleven (...) separate studies of political language, Political Keywords helps readers to understand what these terms mean and how they are used. For example, the book tracks what politics now means to modern commentators, how schoolteacher impress certain values upon the nation's children by invoking the office of the president, and why an innocent word like government sometimes makes people so upset. It details how the people are referenced in political talk and how the media portray themselves. The book also considers the work done by political parties, political promises, and political consultants because, together, they shed special light on modern elections. Combining social science with subtle forms of cultural interpretation, Political Keywords: Using Language that Uses Us provides a fresh look at both American politics and American language. It is an ideal text for undergraduate and graduate courses in political communication, political language, political campaigns, media and politics, political psychology, public opinion, rhetorical criticism, contemporary public address, and presidential rhetoric. (shrink)

Noam Chomsky has made major contributions to three fields: political history and analysis, linguistics, and the philosophies of mind, language, and human nature. In this thoroughly revised and updated volume, James McGilvray provides a critical introduction to Chomsky's work in these three key areas and assesses their continuing importance and relevance for today. In an incisive and comprehensive analysis, McGilvray argues that Chomsky’s work can be seen as a unified intellectual project. He shows how Chomsky adapts the tools (...) of natural science to the study of mind and of language in particular and explains why Chomsky's "rationalist" approach to the mind continues to be opposed by the majority of contemporary cognitive scientists. The book also discusses some of Chomsky’s central political themes in depth, examining how Chomsky's view of the good life and the ideal form of social organization is related to and in part dependent on his biologically based account of human nature and the place of language within it. As in the first edition, McGilvray emphasizes the distinction between common sense and science and the difference between rationalist and empiricist approaches to the mind, making clear the importance of these themes for understanding Chomsky's work and showing that they are based on elementary observations that are accessible to everyone. This edition has been extensively re-written to emphasize Chomsky's recent work, which increasingly 'biologizes' the study of language and mind and - by implication - the study of human nature. This book will be of interest to students and scholars of philosophy, linguistics, and politics, as well as to all those keen to develop a critical understanding of one of the most controversial and important thinkers writing today. (shrink)

This volume provides an up-to-date overview of the emerging debates over the role of language rights and linguistic diversity within political theory. Thirteen chapters, written by many of the leading theorists in the field, identify the challenges and opportunities that linguistic diversity raises for contemporary societies.

Eva Erman and Niklas Möller have recently criticised a range of political theorists for committing a pragmatistic fallacy, illicitly drawing normative conclusions from politically neutral ideas abo...

A provocative case for the inherently political nature of language In The Politics of Language, David Beaver and Jason Stanley present a radical new approach to the theory of meaning, offering an account of communication in which political and social identity, affect, and shared practices play as important a role as information. This new view of language, they argue, has dramatic consequences for free speech, democracy, and a range of other areas in which speech plays (...) a central role. Drawing on a wealth of disciplines, The Politics of Language argues that the function of speech—whether in dialogue, larger group interactions, or mass communication—is to attune people to something, be it a shared reality, emotion, or identity. Reconceptualizing the central ideas of pragmatics and semantics, Beaver and Stanley apply their account to a range of phenomena that defy standard frameworks in linguistics and philosophy of language—from dog whistles and covert persuasion to echo chambers and genocidal speech. The authors use their framework to show that speech is inevitably political because all communication is imbued with the resonances of particular ideologies and their normative perspectives on reality. At a time when democracy is under attack, authoritarianism is on the rise, and diversity and equality are being demanded, The Politics of Language offers a powerful new vision of the language of politics, ideology, and protest. (shrink)

(2000). Language Matters: the politics of teaching immigrant adolescents school English in the secondary school. Educational Philosophy and Theory: Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 61-71.

This paper ties some less well-known names to the bigger categories of embedded male-bias in names (see other papers) that patriarchy made in its development of language, making the masses believe in phallic-based fantasy, the male as superior and mind of the species.

Language and tradition have long been relegated to the sidelines as scholars have considered the role of politics, science, technology and economics in the making of the modern world. This reading of over two centuries of philosophy, political theory, anthropology, folklore and history argues that new ways of imagining language and representing supposedly premodern people - the poor, labourers, country folk, non-europeans and women - made political and scientific revolutions possible. The connections between language ideologies, (...) privileged linguistic codes, and political concepts and practices shape the diverse ways we perceive ourselves and others. This 2003 book demonstrates that contemporary efforts to make schemes of social inequality based on race, gender, class and nationality seem compelling and legitimate, rely on deeply-rooted ideas about language and tradition. Showing how critics of modernity unwittingly reproduce these foundational fictions, it suggests strategies for challenging the undemocratic influence of these voices of modernity. (shrink)

Introduction: The language of power, by H. D. Lasswell. Style in the language of politics, by H. D. Lasswell. Why be quantitative? By H. D. Lasswell.--Technique: The problem of validating content analysis, by I. L. Janis. The reliability of content analysis categories, by Abraham Kaplan and J. M. Goldsen. Recording and context units, four ways of coding editorial content, by Alan Grey, David Kaplan and H. D. Lasswell. The feasibility of the use of samples in content analysis, by (...) Alexander Mintz. The coefficient of imbalance, by I. L. Janis and Raymond Fadner.--Applications: Detection; propaganda detection and the courts, by H. D. Lasswell. Trend; May Day slogans in Soviet Russia, 1918-1943, by Sergius Yakobson and H. D. Lasswell. Interaction; the Third International on its change of policy, by Nathan Leites. Interaction; the response of communist propaganda to frustration, by Nathan Leites and I. de Sola Pool. (shrink)

Philosophers of language have tended to focus on examples that are not politically significant in any way. We spend a lot of time analyzing natural kind terms: We think hard about “water” and “pain” and “arthritis.” But we don’t think much about the far more politically significant kind terms (natural or social—it's a matter for dispute) like “race,” “sex,” “gender,” “woman,” “man,” “gay,” and “straight.” In this essay, I will try to show, using the example of “woman,” that it's (...) worth thinking about terms like these, for at least three reasons: (1) There are some interesting puzzles. (2) Politically significant terms matter to people's lives— and it's worth spending at least some of our energy thinking about things that matter in this way. (3) Most importantly, interesting methodological issues emerge at the intersection of philosophy of language and politics. (shrink)

Contemporary discussions of race and racism devote considerable effort to giving conceptual analyses of these notions. Much of the work is concerned to investigate a priori what we mean by the terms ‘ race ’ and ‘racism’ ; more recent work has started to employ empirical methods to determine the content of our “folk concepts,” or “folk theory” of race and racism. In contrast to both of these projects, I have argued elsewhere that in considering what we mean by these (...) terms we should treat them on the model of kind terms whose reference is fixed by ordinary uses, but whose content is discovered empirically using social theory; I have also argued that it is not only important to determine what we actually mean by these terms, but what we should mean, i.e., what type, if any, we should be tracking. My own discussion of these issues, however, has been confused and confusing. In giving an account of race or gender, is the goal to provide a conceptual analysis? Or to investigate the kinds we are referring to? To draw attention to different kinds? To stipulate new meanings? Jennifer Saul has raised a series of powerful objections to my accounts of gender and race, suggesting that they are neither semantically nor politically useful, regardless of whether we treat them as revisionary proposals, or as elucidations of our concepts. Joshua Glasgow has also offered a critique of my externalist approach to race as an effort to capture “our concept”. I agree with much of what they say, but I also believe that there is something I was trying to capture that. (shrink)

David Bleich sees the human body, its affective life, social life, and political functions as belonging to the study of language. In The Materiality of Language, Bleich addresses the need to end centuries of limiting access to language and its many contexts of use. To recognize language as material and treat it as such, argues Bleich, is to remove restrictions to language access due to historic patterns of academic censorship and unfair gender practices. (...) class='Hi'>Language is understood as a key path in the formation of all social and political relations, and becomes available for study by all speakers, who may regulate it, change it, and make it flexible like other material things. (shrink)

Schmid analyzes the historical and recent controversies over language in the U.S., comparing it to two official multilingual societies: Canada and Switzerland. She also examines how people of different language communities co-exist in, or are divided by, a political community.

Various studies have been made on different aspects of the Turkish and Japanese languages, but comparative studies between the two languages are still limited. The aim of this study is to describe the politeness strategy of these two languages from a cultural perspective within the paradigm of cognitive linguistics. Both Turkish and Japanese are agglutinative languages, and speakers of both languages prefer the subjective construal. So, if the typology of a language might be related to its perception, the conceptualization (...) of ‘polite’ and the perception of politeness in that language may be alike. (shrink)

Various studies have been made on different aspects of the Turkish and Japanese languages, but comparative studies between the two languages are still limited. The aim of this study is to describe the politeness strategy of these two languages from a cultural perspective within the paradigm of cognitive linguistics. Both Turkish and Japanese are agglutinative languages, and speakers of both languages prefer the subjective construal. So, if the typology of a language might be related to its perception, the conceptualization (...) of ‘polite’ and the perception of politeness in that language may be alike. (shrink)

Various studies have been made on different aspects of the Turkish and Japanese languages, but comparative studies between the two languages are still limited. The aim of this study is to describe the politeness strategy of these two languages from a cultural perspective within the paradigm of cognitive linguistics. Both Turkish and Japanese are agglutinative languages, and speakers of both languages prefer the subjective construal. So, if the typology of a language might be related to its perception, the conceptualization (...) of ‘polite’ and the perception of politeness in that language may be alike. (shrink)

Various studies have been made on different aspects of the Turkish and Japanese languages, but comparative studies between the two languages are still limited. The aim of this study is to describe the politeness strategy of these two languages from a cultural perspective within the paradigm of cognitive linguistics. Both Turkish and Japanese are agglutinative languages, and speakers of both languages prefer the subjective construal. So, if the typology of a language might be related to its perception, the conceptualization (...) of ‘polite’ and the perception of politeness in that language may be alike. (shrink)

Since Xi Jinping has taken office in 2012, China’s political repression has only but intensified so that the regime is definitively turning away from the 1990s legal reforms and the many expectations that followed in terms of rule of law and other rights fostering. In replacing these recent developments in a larger perspective including that of a “socialist harmonious society”, which had already shaded a particular light on Chinese reforms, this article proposes to envisage contemporary Chinese legal culture in (...) an evolutionary and theoretical framework. In doing so, it stresses the tensions between a language of rights now fully integrated by the Chinese citizens and the politics of law used, in a last legal ditch struggle, by the Chinese Communist Party as a tool for social stability in disciplining the people by all means including by the threat of its very legal creations. It then concludes in reflecting upon the legal culture emerging out of this great divide between the people and the State. (shrink)