Structural Narratology In Romanian Sign Language Personal Experience Narratives

The primary focus of this paper is to examine how personal experience narratives in Romanian Sign Language (LSR) compare to previous research in structural narratology in spoken languages and in American Sign Language (ASL). One main area of comparison is the differences and similarities in the type of information found in structural narrative categories as described by Labov and Waletsky (1967), Labov (1972), Brewer (1984), Dooley and Levinsohn (2001) and Mulrooney (2009). The second main area of comparison is the grammatical devices that correlate to certain categories, in particular, using Liddell’s (2003) concepts of surrogate, depicting verb and token blends. The methodology of this study uses a combination of pause data (Gee & Kegl 1983, Wilson 1996, Mulrooney 2009) and information type within clauses to divide the text up into smaller sections and identify narrative categories. The analysis further identifies the locations of surrogate, depicting verb and token blends in relation to those narrative categories. The findings of this analysis show that LSR narratives reflect the Labovian structural narrative categories of abstract, orientation, complicating action, evaluation, resolution, and coda. The only significant exceptions are the lack of an evaluation category and the climax in the resolution instead of the complicating action category. In terms of grammatical devices, LSR narratives reflect ASL narratives in that most blends occur in the complicating action section. In general, LSR narratives do not include blends in the abstract or the coda, only non-action blends in the orientation, action blends in the event and evaluation lines in the complicating action, and mainly surrogate blends in the event lines in the resolution

The role of language attitudes and practices in the emergence of European identity

During the past century, Europe has experienced significant political, social and economic changes. The European countries have successfully joined together to form a union aimed at prosperity and peace across the continent. In 2012, the European Union received the Nobel Peace Prize for human rights advancements. The 28 current members are united under common European symbols and institutions, whilst they maintain their national character. It has been posited that national identity is built around language and geographical borders. Yet, the EU’s borders change continually with the accession of new members and the EU recognises all official languages of its members as official languages of the union itself. # In this dissertation I explore the function of positive attitudes and practices of multilingualism as a catalyst for European identity, while investigating the components of European identity and its relationship with national identity. A mixed methodology of questionnaires and interviews is used across three contexts: Romania, Belgium and the United Kingdom. Romania joined the EU in 2007; it presents a novel context for investigating European identity. Belgium, home of the EU, is one of the oldest members. It is symbolically divided by the French-Dutch linguistic border. Finally, the UK – where English, a global lingua franca, is an official language – has traditionally had a reserved stance towards the EU. These studies show that Europeans perceive their national and European identities as compatible, sometimes forming a hybrid identity. I find support for the notion that European identity has two components: civic and cultural – and that positive attitudes towards multilingualism are intrinsically related to and predict European identity. These results vary subtly across contexts and the interviews provide in-depth insights into these differences. I conclude by highlighting the role that European multilingualism can have in the development of a stronger union