Refine
Year of publication
- 2019 (16) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (8)
- Other (2)
- Postprint (2)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Master's Thesis (1)
- Review (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (16)
Keywords
- (dis)affiliation (2)
- (dis)agreement (2)
- Affiliation/Disaffiliation (2)
- Conversation Analysis (2)
- Konversationsanalyse (2)
- Meta-Kommunikation (2)
- Metasprache (2)
- Reparaturen (2)
- Tupaia (2)
- meta-talk (2)
Institute
- Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik (16) (remove)
Literary criticism, particularly ecocriticism, occupies an uneasy position with regard to activism: reading books (or plays, or poems) seems like a rather leisurely activity to be undertaking if our environment—our planet—is in crisis. And yet, critiquing the narratives that structure worlds and discourses is key to the activities of the (literary) critic in this time of crisis. If this crisis manifests as a ‘crisis of imagination’ (e.g. Ghosh), I argue that this not so much a crisis of the absence of texts that address the environmental disaster, but rather a failure to comprehend the presences of the Anthropocene in the present. To interpret (literary) texts in this framework must entail acknowledging and scrutinising the extent of the incapacity of the privileged reader to comprehend the crisis as presence and present rather than spatially or temporally remote. The readings of the novels Carpentaria (2006) and The Swan Book (2013) by Waanyi writer Alexis Wright (Australia) trace the uneven presences of Anthropocenes in the present by way of bringing future worlds (The Swan Book) to the contemporary (Carpentaria). In both novels, protagonists must forge survival amongst ruins of the present and future: the depicted worlds, in particular the representations of the disenfranchisement of indigenous inhabitants of the far north of the Australian continent, emerge as a critique of the intersections of capitalist and colonial projects that define modernity and its impact on the global climate.
The making of Tupaia’s map
(2019)
Tupaia’s Map is one of the most famous and enigmatic artefacts to emerge from the early encounters between Europeans and Pacific Islanders. It was drawn by Tupaia, an arioi priest, chiefly advisor and master navigator from Ra‘iātea in the Leeward Society Islands in collaboration with various members of the crew of James Cook’s Endeavour, in two distinct moments of mapmaking and three draft stages between August 1769 and February 1770. To this day, the identity of many islands on the chart, and the logic of their arrangement have posed a riddle to researchers. Drawing in part on archival material hitherto overlooked, in this long essay we propose a new understanding of the chart’s cartographic logic, offer a detailed reconstruction of its genesis, and thus for the first time present a comprehensive reading of Tupaia’s Map. The chart not only underscores the extent and mastery of Polynesian navigation, it is also a remarkable feat of translation between two very different wayfinding systems and their respective representational models.
La carte de Tupaia constitue l’un des artéfacts les plus célèbres et les plus énigmatiques à émerger des toutes premières rencontres entre Européens et îliens du Pacifique. Elle a été élaborée entre août 1769 et février 1770 par Tupaia, prêtre ’arioi, conseiller royal et maître de navigation originaire de Ra’iātea, aux Îles Sous-le-Vent de la Société. En collaboration avec divers membres d’équipage de l’Endeavour de James Cook, en deux temps distincts de cartographie et trois ébauches. L’identité de bien des îles qui y figurent et la logique de leur agencement demeuraient jusqu’à présent des énigmes. En se fiant en partie à des pièces d’archives restées ignorées, nous proposons, dans ce long essai, une nouvelle compréhension de sa logique cartographique, une reconstitution détaillée de sa genèse et donc, pour la toute première fois, une lecture exhaustive. La carte de Tupaia n’illustre pas seulement la magnitude et la maîtrise de la navigation polynésienne, elle réalise aussi une remarquable synthèse représentationnelle de deux systèmes d’orientation très différents.
La carte de Tupaia constitue l’un des artéfacts les plus célèbres et les plus énigmatiques à émerger des toutes premières rencontres entre Européens et îliens du Pacifique. Elle a été élaborée entre août 1769 et février 1770 par Tupaia, prêtre ’arioi, conseiller royal et maître de navigation originaire de Ra’iātea, aux Îles Sous-le-Vent de la Société. En collaboration avec divers membres d’équipage de l’Endeavour de James Cook, en deux temps distincts de cartographie et trois ébauches. L’identité de bien des îles qui y figurent et la logique de leur agencement demeuraient jusqu’à présent des énigmes. En se fiant en partie à des pièces d’archives restées ignorées, nous proposons, dans ce long essai, une nouvelle compréhension de sa logique cartographique, une reconstitution détaillée de sa genèse et donc, pour la toute première fois, une lecture exhaustive. La carte de Tupaia n’illustre pas seulement la magnitude et la maîtrise de la navigation polynésienne, elle réalise aussi une remarquable synthèse représentationnelle de deux systèmes d’orientation très différents.
Towards Eurasia
(2019)
In order to heed the call in world literature studies to work against disciplinary Eurocentrism by refiguring both what constitutes world literature and how this is read, in this article I propose world literature as an archive of world-making practices and as an impulse for the articulation of alternative methodological approaches. This takes world literature from the postcolonial South as, following Pheng Cheah, instantiating a modality of world literature in which the need for imagining worlds with alternative centres to those determined by coloniality is particularly acute. A response to this is facilitated and illustrated by a reading of Bengali poet Rabindranath Tagore’s Letters from Russia (1930), and South African writer/activist Alex La Guma’s A Soviet Journey (1978). By drawing forward connections between the postcolonial South and the former Soviet Union, this complicates traditional colonial arrangements of the colonial ‘centre’ as cradle of civilisation and culture, as well as postcolonial scholarship’s cumulative fetishisation of ‘Europe’, by allowing a reshuffling of the co-ordinates determining ‘centres’ and ‘peripheries’ and a more nuanced grasp of ‘Europe’ simultaneously. These imaginative journeys destabilise ‘Europe’ as closed category and call forth Eurasia as a more appropriate categorical–cartographical framework for thinking this space and the connections and (hi)story-telling it stages and fosters.
This article offers an in-depth analysis of one particular type of meta-talk. It looks at how speakers use the meta-pragmatic claim to have previously communicated ('said' or 'meant') the same as, or the equivalent of, what their interlocutor just said. Through detailed sequential analyses, it is shown that this claim is frequently used as a practice for disarming disaffiliative responses and thus to manage (and often resolve) incipient disagreement. Besides unpacking the precise mechanisms underlying this practice, the paper also takes stock of the various (and partly variable) lexico-morpho-syntactic, prosodic and bodily-visual elements of conduct that recurrently enter into its composition. Since the practice essentially rests on the speaker’s insinuation of having been misunderstood by their co-participant, its relationship to the organization of repair will also be discussed. It is argued that the practice operates precisely at the intersection of stance-management (agreement/disagreement) and repair, and that it exhibits features which reflect this intersectional character. Data are in English.
This article offers an in-depth analysis of one particular type of meta-talk. It looks at how speakers use the meta-pragmatic claim to have previously communicated ('said' or 'meant') the same as, or the equivalent of, what their interlocutor just said. Through detailed sequential analyses, it is shown that this claim is frequently used as a practice for disarming disaffiliative responses and thus to manage (and often resolve) incipient disagreement. Besides unpacking the precise mechanisms underlying this practice, the paper also takes stock of the various (and partly variable) lexico-morpho-syntactic, prosodic and bodily-visual elements of conduct that recurrently enter into its composition. Since the practice essentially rests on the speaker’s insinuation of having been misunderstood by their co-participant, its relationship to the organization of repair will also be discussed. It is argued that the practice operates precisely at the intersection of stance-management (agreement/disagreement) and repair, and that it exhibits features which reflect this intersectional character. Data are in English.
This study explores the theoretical and political potentials of Édouard Glissant’s philosophy of relation and its approach to the issues of borders, migration, and the setup of political communities as proposed by his pensée nouvelle de la frontière (new border thought), against the background of the German migration crisis of 2015. The main argument of this article is that Glissant’s work offers an alternative epistemological and normative framework through which the contemporary political issues arising around the phenomenon of repressive border regimes can be studied. To demonstrate this point, this article works with Glissant’s border thought as an analytical lens and proposes a pathway for studying the contemporary German border regime. Particular emphasis is placed on the identification of potential areas where a Glissantian politics of relation could intervene with the goal of transforming borders from impermeable walls into points of passage. By exploring the political implications of his border thought, as well as the larger philosophical context from which it emerges, while using a transdisciplinary approach that borrows from literary and political studies, this work contributes to ongoing debates in postcolonial studies on borders and borderlessness, as well as Glissant’s political legacy in the twenty-first century.
Melancholia
(2019)
Pedagogy of integrity
(2019)
The master thesis “Pedagogy of Integrity: an Analysis of the Conceptualization and Implementation of the MA Program Anglophone Modernities in Literature and Culture” deals with colonial patterns in higher education practices. It provides a theoretical framework for decolonization of academic teaching-learning practices on the micro- and meso-didactic levels and suggests concrete solutions for the decolonized education practices, especially for degree programs, which content focuses on post-colonial issues. Besides, through the exemplary analysis of the conceptualization and implementation of the MA Program Anglophone Modernities in Literature and Culture the work explores patterns of colonial heritage as well as will to decolonise these. The main thesis claims that (higher) education should be liberated from colonial patterns, so that real participation for all students in the collective knowledge production becomes possible.
In the theoretical elaborations different concepts of critical and radical pedagogy, e.g. the ones of Paulo Freire and bell hooks, in combination with concepts about modalities of adult learning (e.g. transformative learning) and approaches to education, seeking to combine learning and social justice (e.g. Social Justice Learning) are systematised and explored for their substance and potential to contribute to a criteria catalogue for decolonised educational practises. Besides, attention is paid on higher education research results, which reveal, that students, who belong to underrepresented groups at university (non-traditional students) in their societies of origin, face more difficulties and discrimination as international students at Western universities, than ‘traditional’ international students do. Based on the theoretical elaborations, the work claims that:
(1) the homogeneity-preserving dynamics, found in Western colleges, are an inheritance of colonial time and mindsets, which continue to function in education and multiply social inequality in the context of internationalization, migration, and participation;
(2) all, but especially those higher educational programs, dealing explicitly with inequality phenomena, social and cultural diversity, power relations and issues of domination, as well as with postcolonial criticism, should establish premises of equity and provide de-facto equal opportunities for participation through embodiment of social justice as a way to remain credible;
(3) decolonization of the educational space can be enabled through appropriate didactic action both on the meso- (institution) and micro-didactical (teaching-learning arrangements) agency levels with sufficient will and willingness of responsible professionals at.
By examining representative documents, published by the MA Program Anglophone Modernities in Literature and Culture, using the 'close reading' methodology, as well as through the exemplary analysis of the concept of a teaching-learning program’s event and a student survey, the work seeks to examine wo what extent the Master's Degree Program represents a space of decolonised higher education. The results of the analysis indicate the need for stronger normative value-positioning of the Study program, while many practices that show commitment to participation, social justice and diversity, have been identified.
In the last chapter, the results of the theoretical elaboration and the program’s analysis are synthesized in the concept of an integrity-based pedagogy conceptualisation, called Pedagogy of Integrity, and suggestions are formulated for the teaching practice in the study program, which are meant to help overcome the discrepancy between will and practice towards decolonised educational space.
Tim McNamara’s work has had a fundamental impact on language testing. This volume brings together over 20 leading scholars in language assessment whose work has been influenced by Tim McNamara. Their papers cover issues of the social impact of language tests, such as fairness and justice of test use and language testing in the context of migration. They also address testing of interaction, and teachers’ and students’ views of language tests. The volume concludes with papers discussing the future of language testing in the face of contested concepts of validity, the rise of social media, and lingua franca language use.