Title
"Vous n'êtes pas un collègue flamand ?" Identiteitsvorming tijdens de Belgische Kamerdebatten over "talen in bestuurszaken" in 1932 "Vous n'êtes pas un collègue flamand ?" Identiteitsvorming tijdens de Belgische Kamerdebatten over "talen in bestuurszaken" in 1932
Parallel title
Forming identities during the chamber debates on "Language in administrative matters" in 1932
Author
Faculty/Department
Faculty of Arts. History
Publication type
article
Publication
Gent ,
Subject
History
Source (journal)
Belgisch tijdschrift voor nieuwste geschiedenis / Jan Dhondt Stichting. - Gent, 1969, currens
Belgisch tijdschrift voor nieuwste geschiedenis / Jan Dhondt Stichting. - Gent, 1969, currens
Volume/pages
44(2014) :1 , p. 10-43
ISSN
0035-0869
ISI
000344580400002
Carrier
E
Target language
Dutch (dut)
Affiliation
University of Antwerp
Abstract
Literature on Belgian language legislation frequently sets off from stable identities which are stably represented at parliament. This paper intends to shed a new light on the establishment of the law on "language in administrative matters" of 1932 through the integration of linguistic methods. The identification and "alterification" processes of several representatives are closely analyzed in the specific case study of the Chamber debates. By "alterification" we mean the negative representation of the "other". We dissected the different (linguistic) groups in which the Members of the Chamber categorized themselves or others during the debates, and searched for the features they explicitly or inexplicitly used to legitimate their arguments. We examined the different themes under discussion to see whether there was question of geographical identification (national, sub-national or regional), and whether this was reinforced or coupled to other forms of identification such as party political ties. This allows to establish the way in which the new law on language in administrative matters came about in 1932, and with which groups individual politicians identified in order to legitimize their position, and how this changed throughout the debates. In other words, the attention is shifted from the ultimate results towards the previous process, and thereby to the rather complex dynamics of inclusion and exclusion hiding behind the relatively univocal vote. It appears indeed that the tensions were much stronger than acknowledged by existing literature, namely within the francophone and the Brussels groups.
E-info
http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000344580400002&DestLinkType=RelatedRecords&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=ef845e08c439e550330acc77c7d2d848
http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000344580400002&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=ef845e08c439e550330acc77c7d2d848
Handle