Article published in:
Discourse analysis, policy analysis, and the borders of EU identityEdited by Caterina Carta and Ruth Wodak
[Journal of Language and Politics 14:1] 2015
► pp. 154–174
European parliament ‘doing’ Europe
Unravelling the right-wing culturalist discourse on Turkey’s accession to the EU
Senem Aydın-Düzgit | Istanbul Bilgi University
This article focuses on the discourses of the main centre-right political party group (EPP-ED, EPP) in the European Parliament on Turkey’s accession to the European Union. It utilises the analytical framework of the Discourse-Historical Approach in Critical Discourse Analysis to mainly concentrate on the articulations of ‘culture’ and ‘cultural identity’ in the discussions over Turkish accession in official parliamentary debates and in-depth personal interviews with the members of this group. It is argued that a relational theorising of identity allows for analysis of the ways in which a cultural ‘Europe’ is articulated through current discussions on Turkey in the mainstream right-wing European Parliament discourse and thus reveals the cultural borders that are enacted with reference to Turkish membership within this group.
Keywords: Turkey-EU relations, critical discourse analysis, discourse-historical approach, foreign policy, identity
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Theory And The Method
- 2.1Identity, culture and EU enlargement policy
- 2.2Critical discourse analysis
- 3.Analysis
- 3.1Culture, history and geography: An ‘ontopology’ of Europe
- 3.2‘Culturalisation’ of democracy, human rights and secularism
- 3.3‘Culturalisation’ of migration
- 4.Conclusions
- Notes
-
References
Published online: 26 May 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.14.1.08ayd
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.14.1.08ayd
References
Aksoy, Sevilay Z
Alonso, Ana M
Anderson, Benedict
Asad, Talal
Aydın-Düzgit, Senem
Bottici, Chiara, and Benoit Challand
Bowden, Brett
Butler, Judith
Campbell, David
Connolly, William E
Davison, Andrew
Erzan, Refik, Umut Kuzubaş, and Nilüfer Yıldız
European Council
1993 Presidency Conclusions, Copenhagen European Council 21–22 June 1993, SN 180/1/93.
2002 Presidency Conclusions, Copenhagen European Council 12–13 December 2002, SN 400/02.
2005 “Negotiating Framework for Turkey.” Luxembourg 3 October 2005, available at http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/st20002_en05_TR_framedoc.pdf#search= percent22 percent22negotiating percent20framework percent22 percent2C percent22turkey percent22 percent22
Fabian, Johannes
Giannakopoulos, Angelos, and Konstandinos Maras
2005 “Party Perspectives in the European Parliament on Turkey’s EU accession: An Empirical Study of Session Protocols of the European Parliament 1996–2004.” Occasional Paper No. 4/05 of the South East European Studies at Oxford (SEEOX), Oxford: European Studies Centre, St Antony’s College.
Hall, Stuart
Herzfeld, Michael
Huntington, Samuel
Huysseune, Michel
Krasner, Stephen D
Krzyzanowski, Michal
Krzyzanowski, Michal, Anna Triandafyllidou, and Ruth Wodak
Krzyzanowski, Michal, and Florian Oberhuber
Levin, Paul T
Lewis, Bernard
Negrine, Ralph, Beybin Kejanlioglu, Rabah Aissaoui, and Stelios Papathanassopoulos
Neumann, Iver
Pace, Michelle
Reisigl, Martin, and Ruth Wodak
Ruiz-Jimenez, Antonia, and Jose I. Torreblanca
2007 “European Public Opinion and Turkey’s Accession: Making Sense of Arguments For and Against.”
EPIN Working Paper, No. 16, Centre for European Policy Studies: Brussels.
Shakman Hurd, Elizabeth
Suvarierol, Semin, and Senem Aydın-Düzgit
Tekin, Beyza Ç
Titscher, Stefan, Michael Meyer, Ruth Wodak, and Eva Vetter
Tocci, Nathalie
Weldes, Jutta, Mark Laffey, Hugh Gusterson, and Raymond Duvall
White, Hayden
Wodak, Ruth
Wodak, Ruth, Rudolf de Cillia, Martin Reisigl, Karin Liebhart, Angelika Hirsch, and Richard Mitten
Yılmaz, Gözde
Cited by
Cited by 4 other publications
Buhari-Gulmez, Didem & Seckin Baris Gulmez
Gürkan, Seda
Türkeş-Kılıç, Selin
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.