Beyond the border: segni di passaggi attraverso i confini d’Europa

Looking at borders and border zones in relation to migration phenomena is a topical issue, from different disciplinary perspectives. In the last thirty years borders, not only in Europe, have increased and have been consolidated. Following the so-called “migration crises”, border control mechanisms, as well as their “spectacularisation”(De Genova 2017), have also been strengthened. This has had the effect of accentuating not only the “illegalization” process of people who –with no valid papers to show –have tried and are trying to cross borders but also the anxiogenic narrative around borders, for the use of metaphors evoking “invasions”, “assaults”, “clashes”. This hyper-visualization of conflict and threat at borders has also marginalized other possible conceptualizations and narratives of borders, such as the invisibility of “unspeakable” borders (for example, externalised borders) and on the other hand, the multiple human and social dynamics materializing at borders, and in border areas, starting from the (multi)linguistic ones. As a result of fieldwork that started in 2017 (and which is still in progress), this research is investigating –also through photography –the linguistic signs experienced and produced by the various social actors that interact and face each other at borders and in border zones across Europe. A methodological attempt was thus made to carry a sociolinguistic analysis of the borderscape: an analysis that shows its whole potential when confronted with the multi-layered complexity of the different codes at stake and their uses

Is Multilingualism the key competence?

Key-Co System has promoted targeted research, led by the University of Reading, on Multilingualism, that is deemed as a pivotal competence, especially with regard to Adult Migrant Learners (AMLs) and their educational needs. The result of this research work is “Is Multilingualism the key competence?”, a paper written by Cecilia Defilippi and Federico Faloppa, academics at the University of Reading, in cooperation with the five educational institutions from four European countries taking part in Key-Co System project. In the framework of the eight key competencies identified by the European Commission, multilingual competence is the one defining the ability to use different languages appropriately and effectively for communication. That is why AMLs can significantly benefit from the development of multilingualism: in fact, by facilitating and enhancing it, other key competencies can be fostered and fully developed. The paper focuses on this topic by addressing the following research questions: 1. To what extent are multilingualism and multilingual competence taken into account by the five partner institutions? 2. To what extent and how is the multilingual competence valued and valorized by/within the partner institutions? 3. To what extent should the perceptions of students and teachers on multilingualism be considered? 4. What kind of teaching strategies are performed in each partner institution to develop such a multilingual competence? This work aims to identify gaps and inconsistencies in the current European context, to provide readers with some common terminological and theoretical background, and provide national and transnational governing bodies with a set of questions and issues that may need to be tackled for them to meet the goals stated in the CoE’s 2018 Recommendation on key competences for lifelong learning

Beyond definitions. A call for action against hate speech in Albania. A comprehensive study November 2021

The aim of this study is to provide relevant stakeholders with an updated and comprehensive approach to hate speech as well as some representative and reliable data on the perception of hate speech in Albania. Moreover, it provides some recommendations for relevant stakeholders on how to approach the problem of hate speech. Chapter 1 provides a conceptual framework to hate speech. Although being a relatively new topic in Albania, hate speech has already attracted a lot of attention from the media as well as in the public debate. However, there is still a lack of consistency, and awareness, on the definition of the topic, its amplitude, and its implications for all the actors involved, beginning with the people that are affected by it and are expected to combat it. Without a clear frame of reference, a comprehensive approach to hate speech may look unrealistic, and actions to tackle hate speech phenomena may result in short-sighted and fragmented strategies. Chapter 1 aims therefore at presenting some key terminological and conceptual aspects when dealing with hate speech, to put this study in a wider context and provide the readership with an updated overview of current issues and challenges. In the light of this approach, Chapter 2 provides data on hate speech at the national level in Albania, in particular about people’s perceptions, experiences, and trust in the institutions that should deal with hate speech in the country. This data has been collected through a survey - based on a questionnaire purposely designed for this study - which has involved a sample of 1511 participants randomly selected, plus a boost sample of 301 participants. It shows growing concerns, particularly among vulnerable groups, about the spread of hate speech in Albania (ca. 58% of the respondents think that hate speech is a national issue, even more during and after the pandemic) and the role of the media in spreading it. As far as triggers of hate speech are concerned, poverty (54 %), social status, political opinion, and physical appearance (44 %) are perceived as the main grounds of discrimination. However, this perception changes when considering vulnerable groups - by which ethnicity (50%) and Race (44%) are believed to be the two top triggers - and more specific responses by LGBTI people, for which homo-bi-lesbo-transphobia is the most common motivation triggering hate speech (68 %). According to the respondents, hate speech propagates not only in Social media, but also in schools, universities, and workplaces, and about 46% of the respondents from vulnerable groups have personally experienced hate speech in their lives. Among the effects of hate speech - just to mention another section of the survey - anxiety, depression, and emotional pain are perceived as the main feelings a person who is a target of hate speech may experience. However, awareness about what to do to contrast hate speech and what the available resources - including legal frameworks - are to protect ‘victims’ of hate speech, seems to be relatively low, also among vulnerable groups. For the aforementioned reason, Chapter 3 provides a legal analysis of issues concerning hate speech. First, the study focuses on the international standards addressing hate speech - UN legal instruments are introduced and summarised and some additional relevant national laws against hate speech are examined. Then, the European Union legal framework in relation to hate speech is granted a special emphasis, as it includes some major documents signed by the EU Commission and the Council. An important part of the international legal standards to be taken into consideration concerning this subject is a thorough analysis of the standards laid down by the Council of Europe, especially through the European Convention on Human Rights and the decisions of the European Court of Justice. In the following section, this chapter focuses on the Albanian national approach to address issues concerning hate speech. Following the legal framework's hierarchy in Albania, this section first discusses relevant Constitutional principles and then other national laws dealing exclusively or in part with hate speech. An important element of this analysis is the assessment of the national courts' decisions concerning the use of hate speech in civil and proceedings. 1 By Federico Faloppa Page 6 BEYOND DEFINITIONS A CALL FOR ACTION AGAINST HATE SPEECH Finally, the discussion focuses on the decisions of the Albanian Commissioner for the Protection against Discrimination and their impact to combat hate speech. A fourth part of the study, recommendations are provided. They aim to conclude the study and strengthen the effectiveness of combatting hate speech in Albani

Study on preventing and combating hate speech in times of crisis

Crises are testing grounds for societies and for their democratic institutions. They can either threaten or reinforce societal cohesion; weaken or consolidate the capacity of governments and elected bodies to respond to voters’ concerns; and suppress or stimulate the reaction of civil society organizations toward new needs and forms of marginalization. Regarding discrimination, crises can intensify hatred and hate speech targeting specific individuals or groups deemed responsible for the crisis, but they can also be aggravated by hate speech when a certain group has been singled out as a threat or an enemy. Hate speech in times of crisis may build on existing discriminatory or hate narratives, but also trigger, and evolve from, new narratives disseminated to respond to such crises. European countries have experienced several crises in the last few years, which have impacted the production, dissemination, and reception of hate speech. The COVID-19 pandemic (“a pandemic of hate” to quote the United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres) has globally boosted dynamics of social conflict, polarisation, and radicalization; saw a huge increase in hate speech against individuals and groups (such as Chinese and people of Asian descent, migrants and refugees, and national minorities); revamped antisemitism (via conspiracy theories); intertwined hateful narratives; and intersected grounds of discrimination. Roma and Travellers have also been particularly affected by hate speech in several European countries for both enduring systemic discrimination and for more contextual causes, such as forced marginalization and isolation during lockdowns, and for being singled out as potential plague-spreaders. The full-scale military aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine in February 2022 has fostered violent, dehumanizing rhetoric and hate speech both in the countries and – more generally – across Europe, opposing the Russian Federation and “The West” and disseminating hatred against Ukraine, Ukrainian nationals, and refugees from Ukraine through disinformation campaigns. Nationalistic hate speech has triggered and is fuelling the conflict and its circulation also represents a challenge to the media sector and to internet intermediaries, which are asked to disentangle hateful narratives and provide the public with objective information about the Russian Federation’s aggression. At the same time, the war of aggression against Ukraine has also had a negative impact on communities using Russian as their main language, including outside of Ukraine and the Russian Federation. The arrivals of migrants and refugees have been labeled in political discourse and by the media as "crises” in the last few years to create a consistent narrative that sees the rise of mixed migration movements to European countries as a cause of uncertainty, threat, and ongoing emergency to states and societies. This coupled with increasing anti-migrant hate speech since the arrival of a large number of refugees from Syria in 2015, together with the fear of contagion and border control during the pandemic has further consolidated a xenophobic discourse, and migrants and refugees remain one of the major targets of hate speech across the continent. Finally, terrorist attacks have fuelled xenophobic feelings, and terror attacks themselves are equally fuelled by intolerance: for example, the attack fomented by homophobia that occurred in the Slovak Republic in 2022. Hatred against Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI) persons – and in particular against transgender people – is on the rise all over Europe, which calls for effective institutional interventions to prevent and combat LGBTI-phobia at all levels. Due to such crises, new challenges have emerged for the different actors involved in monitoring, analyzing, preventing, and combating hate speech. From the very definition of hate speech which has confronted new complexities, the urgency of increasing public awareness of disinformation, which is particularly misleading and disruptive in times of crisis, to the need to better work with social media platforms (to get access to data, and foster collaboration with law enforcement) and to create inter-institutional cooperation involving those targeted by hate speech, stakeholders are expressing their concerns and setting their priorities, with the aim of making their approaches more comprehensive. Much has already been done – by various actors and at various levels – to address hate speech in times of crisis, and promising practices across the continent have been tested, such as the implementation of legal measures to combat hate speech, coordinated campaigns online and offline by law enforcement and networks of stakeholders, education and counter-speech initiatives and some actions in support of those targeted by hate speech. However, much still needs to be done, as this report shows, and comprehensive strategies still need to be designed, implemented, and assessed to better tackle hate speech in times of crisis. The recommendations to enhance the fight against hate speech in times of crisis include assessing and amending legal frameworks, as well as reinforcing law enforcement measures. Collaboration among stakeholders needs to be strengthened, including a focus on the role and competencies of specific actors such as media, national human rights institutions, and equality bodies. Making public awareness and information campaigns a priority and providing support to those targeted by hate speech also appear as crucial measures to prevent and combat hate speech in times of crisis. Importantly, it should be recognized that it can be difficult to amend legal frameworks or make substantial policy or practical changes quickly in times of crisis. Therefore, it is essential to take steps to prepare good conditions of social cohesion in ordinary times to ensure a greater level of resilience to discriminatory and hateful speech in times of crisis. In this respect, it is suggested that member states and stakeholders closely follow the recommendations presented in the Recommendation CM/Rec(2022)16 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on combating hate speech

Terminologie

Encyclopedia entry on "terminologies" and taxonomie

The Linquistic construction of otherness

EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

Nomi di parentela

Encyclopedia entry on "Kinship expressions and terms