FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2145024274> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2145024274 endingPage "20" @default.
• W2145024274 startingPage "16" @default.
• W2145024274 abstract "16 From the Editors, Politics of Language and Politics of Meaning From the EDITORS As part of the intellectual project “New Imperial History,” the editors of Ab Imperio decided to address the problem of the conceptual apparatus that the empires’ contemporaries and historians of empire had at their disposal. We entitled this annual program “Languages of Self-Description in Empire and Multiethnic State.” Our “linguistic turn” is founded upon an increasing understanding that empires, while indeed pre-modern forms of political, social, and economic organization, were nevertheless engaged in the processes of modernization. Scholars of modern Europe have emphasized the concept of “nation” as a key block in the construction of political and social space. Modern humanities and social sciences, as we know today, emerged and matured within this normative framework. Empires, in contrast, left virtually no rationalizing and complex self-description that we can compare with the discourse of modern nationalism, that is, no self-description profoundly different from the “nationalizing” mode of modern social thought. In order to understand to what extent nation-centered historical analysis influences our perceptions of “empire,” we invited the contributors to this issue of Ab Imperio to reconstruct the possible languages of imperial selfdescription in scholarship, art, geopolitics, law, dynastic myth, religion, etc. We are also interested in the evolution of these languages under the impact of the encounter between pre-modern concepts (e.g., “dynasty” or “estate”) and modern ones (“state” or “class”). Among other directions POLITICS OF LANGUAGE AND POLITICS OF MEANING 17 Ab Imperio, 2/2005 in New Imperial History, our search is for signs of collusion between the autochthonous realities of empires and the ideas and practices borrowed from the modern nation-state. For this issue of Ab Imperio, we have decided to focus on the problem of political language and language policies in the multiethnic and culturally heterogeneous continental empires. Realpolitik, as a sequence of documented and rationally founded actions , is among the most obvious subjects for a narrative of imperial self-description. On the other hand, the internal dynamics of the imperial space are revealed through the functioning of languages of those ethnic and confessional groups that were incorporated into empires (that is, “language” in the direct sense of the word). In this case, scholars have focused either on the specific situation of language contacts in imperial settings or on the dominance of the “imperial nation” and regional cultural centers, while language policies in the empire have been viewed as the authentic language of self-description of empire as a polity. The main problem with the study of politics as an imperial metalanguage (of which language policies constitute a part) is stipulated by the fact that in the past decades research on the phenomenon of the political and of language developed along colliding trajectories. Such developments of the late 20th century as the anthropological and linguistic “turns,” postcolonial studies, and new political history ensured that “language” and “politics” came to be defined and studied interdependently and even tautologically: language contacts are ever more theorized in terms of political conflict, whereas political acts are analyzed in linguistic categories (such as “grammar” or “syntax”). The introduction of such a binary model as “language-politics” into imperial studies can lead to confusion due to the many subjects of politics and the polyglossy of imperial space. Hence we see the task of this issue as de-coupling the traditional formula “language-politics” and as searching for ways to overcome the tautological analyses of these two key phenomena. First, in our methodological section, we address the experience of nuanced studies of language and politics in imperial contexts. The rubric opens with an article by Andrew Thompson, who explores the semantics of “empire” in British political discourse at the turn of the 20th century. Despite widely held opinions about the fundamental difference between overseas-modern empires and continental-archaic ones, Thompson’s method of analysis and his conclusions appear extremely relevant to the study of the Russian Empire. Thompson demonstrates the heterogeneity 18 From the Editors, Politics of Language and Politics of Meaning and many meanings of British political language and shows that the interests and intellectual horizons of political actors defined it..." @default.
• W2145024274 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2145024274 creator A5044026577 @default.
• W2145024274 creator A5057128429 @default.
• W2145024274 creator A5061009462 @default.
• W2145024274 creator A5069622091 @default.
• W2145024274 creator A5084735760 @default.
• W2145024274 date "2005-01-01" @default.
• W2145024274 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2145024274 title "From the Editors: Politics of Language and Politics of Meaning" @default.
• W2145024274 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/imp.2005.0142" @default.
• W2145024274 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
• W2145024274 type Work @default.
• W2145024274 sameAs 2145024274 @default.
• W2145024274 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2145024274 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2145024274 hasAuthorship W2145024274A5044026577 @default.
• W2145024274 hasAuthorship W2145024274A5057128429 @default.
• W2145024274 hasAuthorship W2145024274A5061009462 @default.
• W2145024274 hasAuthorship W2145024274A5069622091 @default.
• W2145024274 hasAuthorship W2145024274A5084735760 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConcept C2778061430 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConcept C2778495208 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConcept C2780876879 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConcept C36289849 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConcept C521449643 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConceptScore W2145024274C107038049 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConceptScore W2145024274C111472728 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConceptScore W2145024274C138885662 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConceptScore W2145024274C144024400 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConceptScore W2145024274C17744445 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConceptScore W2145024274C199539241 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConceptScore W2145024274C2778061430 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConceptScore W2145024274C2778495208 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConceptScore W2145024274C2780876879 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConceptScore W2145024274C36289849 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConceptScore W2145024274C521449643 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConceptScore W2145024274C94625758 @default.
• W2145024274 hasConceptScore W2145024274C95457728 @default.
• W2145024274 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2145024274 hasLocation W21450242741 @default.
• W2145024274 hasOpenAccess W2145024274 @default.
• W2145024274 hasPrimaryLocation W21450242741 @default.
• W2145024274 hasRelatedWork W1813987867 @default.
• W2145024274 hasRelatedWork W2022024625 @default.
• W2145024274 hasRelatedWork W2044914025 @default.
• W2145024274 hasRelatedWork W2097888173 @default.
• W2145024274 hasRelatedWork W2151510659 @default.
• W2145024274 hasRelatedWork W2324707376 @default.
• W2145024274 hasRelatedWork W2353944447 @default.
• W2145024274 hasRelatedWork W2586518492 @default.
• W2145024274 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2145024274 hasRelatedWork W3134382238 @default.
• W2145024274 hasVolume "2005" @default.
• W2145024274 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2145024274 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2145024274 magId "2145024274" @default.
• W2145024274 workType "article" @default.