Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Language and Politics
Vol. 17:1 (2018) ► pp.24–45

The roles of field and capital in negotiating language policy in the Slovene parliament

ORCID logo | Prince of Songkla University
The aim of this paper is to demonstrate the potential of integrating Bourdieu’s notions of field and capital in discursive analyses of language policy. The paper presents an analysis of a debate in a committee session of the Slovene parliament, where different actors negotiated about the contents of a language policy strategy. The study draws on nexus analysis by focussing on the situated nature of discursive actions in particular settings, and presents a historical ethnography which combines analysis of transcripts with interviews and a detailed examination of policy documents. The analysis uncovers the efforts of actors to legitimize their authority and achieve their goals with the support of capital accumulated in different fields, and focusses particularly on the dynamics involved in translating the value of sources of capital across the borders of different fields.
Keywords: language policy, parliamentary discourse, field, capital
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Policy as an intersection of social spaces
  • 3.Data and method
  • 4.Debating a language strategy in the Slovene parliament
    • 4.1The importance of capital from Linguistics
    • 4.2‘Experts’ and ‘politicians’
    • 4.3Capital in political decision-making
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 30 November 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.17013.sav
References (47)
References
Bakhtin, Mikhail M. 1981. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Barakos, Elizabeth, and Johann W. Unger, eds. 2016. Discursive Approaches to Language Policy. Basingstoke: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 1986. “The forms of capital.” In Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, edited by John G. Richardson, 241–258. New York: Greenwood.Google Scholar
. 1993. The Field of Cultural Production. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Craig, Geoffrey. 2013. “How Does a Prime Minister Speak? Kevin Rudd’s discourse, habitus, and negotiation of the journalistic and political fields.” Journal of Language and Politics 12 (4): 485–507. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 1994. “Conversationalization of public discourse and the authority of the consumer.” In The Authority of the Consumer, edited by Russell Keat, Nigel Whiteley, and Nicholas Abercrombie, 235–241. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Flowerdew, John. 2012. Critical Discourse Analysis in Historiography: The Case of Hong Kong’s Evolving Political Identity. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forchtner, Bernhard, and Christian Schneickert. 2016. “Collective learning in social fields: Bourdieu, Habermas and critical discourse studies.” Discourse and Society 27 (3): 293–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Galasinska, Aleksandra, and Michał Krzyżanowski, eds. 2009. Discourse and Transformation in Central and Eastern Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geiger, R. Stuart, and Ribes, David. 2011. “Trace Ethnography: Following Coordination through Documentary Practices.” In Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science, Koloa, Kauai, HI, 1–10. Retrieved from [URL]
Habermas, Jürgen. 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Heer, Hannes, Walter Manoschek, Alexander Pollak, and Ruth Wodak. 2008. The Discursive Construction of History: Remembering the Wehrmacht’s War of Annihilation. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hornberger, Nancy H. 2005. “Opening and filling up implementational and ideological spaces in heritage language education.” Modern Language Journal 89 (4): 605–609.Google Scholar
Hult, Francis M. 2010. “Analysis of language policy discourses across the scales of space and time.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 2021: 7–24.Google Scholar
2015. “Making Policy Connections across Scales Using Nexus Analysis.” In Research Methods in Language Policy and Planning, edited by Francis M. Hult, and David C. Johnson, 217–232. Maiden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Jenkins, Richard. 2007. “The meaning of policy/policy as meaning.” In Policy Reconsidered: Meanings, Politics and Practices, edited by Susan M. Hodgson, and Zoe Irving, 21–36. Bristol: The Policy Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jessop, Bob. 2014. “Repoliticising depoliticisation: theoretical preliminaries on some responses to the American fiscal and Eurozone debt crises.” Policy and Politics 42 (2): 207–223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnson, David C., and Eric J. Johnson. 2015. “Power and agency in language policy appropriation.” Language Policy 14 (3): 221–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnson, David C. 2011. “Critical discourse analysis and the ethnography of language policy.” Critical Discourse Studies 8 (4): 267–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013. Language Policy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Källkvist, Marie, and Francis M. Hult. 2016. “Discursive mechanisms and human agency in language policy formation: negotiating bilingualism and parallel language use at a Swedish university.” International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 191: 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koller, Veronika, and Peter Davidson. 2008. “Social exclusion as conceptual and grammatical metaphor: a cross-genre study of British policy-making.” Discourse and Society 19 (3): 307–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krzyżanowski, Michał, and Ruth Wodak. 2011. “Political strategies and language policies: the European Union Lisbon strategy and its implications for the EU’s language and multilingualism policy.” Language Policy 10 (2): 115–136. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krzyżanowski, Michał. 2013. “Policy, policy communication and discursive shifts: Analyzing EU policy discourses on climate change.” In Analysing Genres in Political Communication: Theory and Practice, edited by Piotr Cap, and Urszula Okulska, 101–134. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. “Values, imaginaries and templates of journalistic practice: A critical discourse analysis.” Social Semiotics 241: 345–365. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Bradley, Margaret Sutton, and Teresa Winstead. 2009. “Educational Policy as a Practice of Power: Theoretical Tool, Ethnographic Methods, Democratic Options.” Educational Policy 23 (6): 767–795. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lipsky, Michael. 2010. Street-level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services (30th anniversary expanded edition). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Hilgers, Mathieu, and Éric Mangez. 2014. “Introduction to Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of social fields.” In Field Theory: Concepts and Applications, edited by Mathieu Hilgers, and Éric Mangez, 1–36. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Maton, Karl. 2005. “A question of autonomy: Bourdieu’s field approach and higher education policy.” Journal of Education Policy 20 (6): 687–704. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reisigl, Martin, and Ruth Wodak. 2015. “The discourse-historical approach.” In Methods of Critical Discourse Studies, edited by Ruth Wodak, and Michael Meyer, 23–61. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Savski, Kristof. 2016. “Analysing voice in language policy: plurality and conflict in Slovene government documents.” Language Policy 15 (4): 505–524. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. “Language policy at times of instability and struggle: The impact of fluctuating will and competing agendas on a Slovene language strategy.” Current Issues in Language Planning 18 (3): 283–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. In press. “Monolingualism and prescriptivism: the ecology of Slovene in the 20th Century.” Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development.
Scollon, Ron, and Suzanne Scollon. 2004. Nexus Analysis: Discourse and the Emerging Internet. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scollon, Ron. 1998. Mediated Discourse as Social Interaction: A Study of News Discourse. London: Longman.Google Scholar
. 2001a. Mediated Discourse: The Nexus of Practice. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001b. “Action and text: towards an integrated understanding of the place of text in social (inter)action, mediated discourse analysis and the problem of social action.” In Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, edited by Ruth Wodak, and Michael Meyer, 139–183. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
. 2008. Analyzing Public Discourse: Discourse Analysis in the Making of Public Policy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Unger, Johann W. 2013. The Discursive Construction of the Scots Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Leeuwen, Theo. 1993. “Genre and field in critical discourse analysis: a synopsis.” Discourse and Society 4 (2): 193–223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vaughan, Diane. 2004. “Theorizing disaster: Analogy, historical ethnography and the Challenger accident.” Ethnography 5 (3): 315–347. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wodak, Ruth, and Michael Meyer. 2015. “Critical Discourse Analysis: History, Agenda, Theory and Methodology.” In Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, edited by Ruth Wodak, and Michael Meyer, 1–22. Los Angeles: SAGE.Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth. 2000. “From conflict to consensus? The co-construction of a policy paper.” In European Union Discourses on Un/employment: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Employment, Policy-making and Organizational Change, edited by Peter Muntigl, Gilbert Weiss, and Ruth Wodak, 73–114. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. The Discourse of Politics in Action: Politics as Usual. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. The Politics of Fear: What Right-Wing Populist Discourses Mean. London: SAGE. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wodak, Ruth, Rudolf de Cillia, Martin Reisigl, and Karin Liebhart. 2009. The Discursive Construction of National Identity (2nd edition). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Savski, Kristof
2020. Local problems and a global solution: examining the recontextualization of CEFR in Thai and Malaysian language policies. Language Policy 19:4 ► pp. 527 ff. DOI logo
Savski, Kristof
2020. Polyphony and polarization in public discourses: hegemony and dissent in a Slovene policy debate. Critical Discourse Studies 17:4 ► pp. 377 ff. DOI logo
Savski, Kristof
2021. Language policy and linguistic landscape. Linguistic Landscape. An international journal 7:2 ► pp. 128 ff. DOI logo
Savski, Kristof
2023. Negotiating hegemonies in language policy: ideological synergies in media recontextualizations of audit culture. Current Issues in Language Planning 24:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Savski, Kristof
2024. Language policy from textuality to (re)entextualization: expanding the toolkit for discursive analyses. Language Policy 23:1 ► pp. 53 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 november 2024. 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.