Slovene language policy in time and space:the trajectory of a language strategy from inception to implementation

The Resolution for a National Language Policy Programme 2014-2018 was adopted by the Slovene parliament in the summer of 2013, and was intended to set a common agenda in the area of state language policy. In this thesis, I investigate its trajectory from inception to (attempted) implementation. My study analyses policymaking practices during a time of political, social and economic instability in Slovenia, and investigates how the roles of various actors involved with the policy changed along with the political landscape. It focusses particularly on the traditional role of linguists as authorities on language in Slovenia. To analyse these processes, I develop a comprehensive theoretical framework for language policy analysis, drawing on social field theory, social action theory, state theory, interpretive policy analysis, critical discourse studies, and critical sociolinguistics. The framework analyses policy as a set of practices which occur across different social spaces, such as fields and nexuses of practice. It also takes into account the changeability of such spaces, particularly how transformations in the broader socio-political context open and close opportunities for agency. The thesis includes four case studies, each exploring a different aspect of the policy process, consisting of the media discourse about language policy in Slovenia, the drafting of the policy text, a parliamentary committee meeting about it, and its implementation. The studies draw on a broad data-set comprised of media texts, documentary data, correspondence, interview data and observation data. For my analysis, I combine the discourse historical approach in critical discourse analysis with mediated discourse analysis to develop a methodology which enables analysis of discourse from the perspective of text as well as social action. My analysis of the public discourse surrounding language policy in Slovenia finds an ongoing ideological debate between two groups of linguists. I find that members of both groups were successful in inserting their own ideology in the policy text, but that opportunities to do so occurred at different times. I find that linguists voicing the established language ideology were particularly successful in using their symbolic capital to exert influence on policymaking across different sites

(Im)possible change: criticality and constraints in the infrastructures of the academic knowledge economy

This article examines three sets of infrastructures that give shape to the academic knowledge economy, namely: institutional infrastructures (universities and conferences); gate-keeping infrastructures (journals and publishers); and validation infrastructures (competitive assessments of individuals and institutions). We analyse the tensed interplay between critical perspectives in applied linguistics and the influence of academic neoliberalism. We develop our argument in three parts: (1) Academic critique and its emancipatory epistemologies are intertwined with established systems and coexist with mechanisms that perpetuate inequalities. (2) Inequalities in knowledge production reverberate in knowledge dissemination, where the hegemonic role of English as the language of academic publishing reinforces the unequal position of different actors in their academic fields. (3) These inequalities (that originate in institutional and gate-keeping infrastructures) extend to the validation of knowledge, which is entrenched in the audit culture that pervades academia and further reinforces neoliberal competitive dynamics. We conclude by reflecting on the possibilities for change at these three levels

Analysing voice in language policy:plurality and conflict in Slovene government documents

Contemporary analyses of language policy often tend to presume ideological uniformity, rather than focus on the contrasts between various positions, and the power struggles that those differences bring about. In this paper, I present an approach that implements the notion of voice in language policy analysis to denote the ideological positions and interests of different social actors, in this case as reflected in government documents. I propose a method of analysis based on the discourse-historical approach in critical discourse analysis and demonstrate how this exposes different social actors behind policy documents by focussing on the traces of their participation in policymaking. I analyse two different texts produced by the Slovene government and intended to specify its language policy strategy for the 2007–2011 and 2012–2016 periods. I show that there are two hegemonic voices of linguists behind both texts, one based on values of national unity, and a second based on human rights and broad inclusion. Alongside these, there are various voices from other domains of Slovene society and EU policy, all recontextualised through the prisms of the two dominant voices

Critical discourse-ethnographic approaches to language policy

This chapter focuses on the synergy that researchers in language policy have developed by integrating two other subfields of sociolinguistics: critical discourse analysis and critical ethnography. The chapter begins by discussing the meanings of the three key concepts used in these approaches, albeit sometimes in significantly different ways: critique, ethnography, and discourse. It then examines how these concepts are relevant to contemporary analyses of language policy, focusing particularly on their potential to open new and innovative avenues of research. To demonstrate how an integrated critical discourse and ethnographic approach can be applied in concrete empirical research, the chapter presents an analysis of language policy and practice in the European Union before providing an overview of other relevant studies in the area

Critical discourse-ethnographic approaches to language policy

This chapter focuses on the synergy that researchers in language policy have developed by integrating two other subfields of sociolinguistics: critical discourse analysis and critical ethnography. The chapter begins by discussing the meanings of the three key concepts used in these approaches, albeit sometimes in significantly different ways: critique, ethnography, and discourse. It then examines how these concepts are relevant to contemporary analyses of language policy, focusing particularly on their potential to open new and innovative avenues of research. To demonstrate how an integrated critical discourse and ethnographic approach can be applied in concrete empirical research, the chapter presents an analysis of language policy and practice in the European Union before providing an overview of other relevant studies in the area