Language and identity policies in the 'glocal' age (review by Elisabet Vila-Borrellas) (original) (raw)
Related papers
Language and identity policies in the ‘glocal’ age: New processes, effects and principles of organization. Barcelona: IEA, Generalitat de Catalunya., 2012
Contact between culturally distinct human groups in the contemporary ‘glocal’ -global and local- world is much greater than at any point in history. The challenge we face is the identification of the most convenient ways to organise the coexistence of different human language groups in order that we might promote their solidarity as members of the same culturally developed biological species in the globalization era. Processes of economic and political integration currently in motion are seeing increasing numbers of people seeking to become polyglots. Thus, English is establishing itself as the usual world supra-language, although it coexists with other lingua francas that are widely used in certain parts of the globe. All this communicative reorganization of the human species may very well pose new problems and aggravate existing tensions as regards language and identity. It would seem that these processes comprise at least four major conceptual dimensions which must be taken into account above all else, as they are both widespread and, left unaddressed, may lead to significant social instability. These dimensions concern linguistic recognition, communicability, sustainability and integration. While accepting the utility of having an inter-national language, the keystone of the system is clearly that it must ensure the linguistic sustainability of each group. The basic principle is likely to be functional subsidiarity, i.e., whatever can be done by the local language should not be done by another one which is more global. As in the quote from Paracelsus --“the dose alone makes the poison”-- contact between languages is not ‘poisonous’ per se, but when the correct dose is exceeded it can prove harmful to the language whose position is weaker. A multilingual and communicated humanity is possible.
Contact between culturally distinct human groups in the contemporary ‘glocal’ -global and local- world is much greater than at any point in history. The challenge we face is the identification of the most convenient ways to organise the coexistence of different human language groups in order that we might promote their solidarity as members of the same culturally developed biological species. Processes of economic and political integration currently in motion are seeing increasing numbers of people seeking to become polyglots. Thus, English is establishing itself as the usual world supra-language, although it coexists with other lingua francas that are widely used in certain parts of the globe. All this communicative reorganization of the human species may very well pose new problems and aggravate existing tensions as regards language and identity. It would seem that these processes comprise at least four major conceptual dimensions which must be taken into account above all else, a...
Glocalization: a critical introduction
European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology, 2016
As Victor Roudometof immediately points out, glocalisation is an undertheorised concept: strictly speaking, there is no theory or school of theories on glocalisation, as such, in the literature. This is quite amazing, particularly given the popularity of the term and its large diffusion in different social, economic, and political spheres, as well as in academic discourse. Surprisingly, to date there is no book in circulation that specifically discusses this concept. Consequently, Glocalization: A critical introduction is a welcome novelty, which fills this gap. However, while there is no attempt to distinctly theorise glocalisation on its own terms, this does not mean that there are no relevant interpretations, whereby theorists have sought to creatively engage with it. Nevertheless, what is needed (and where the author greatly succeeds) is to add glocalisation to the social-scientific vocabulary, as an analytically autonomous concept, and not as a mere appendage to globalisation, cosmopolitanisation, or theories of global diffusion. One of the main strengths of Glocalization: A critical introduction is that it explores and clarifies the varied literature circulating around the term 'glocalisation', which has many different and contrasting, and (sometimes even) conflicting concepts or meanings. As a matter of fact, the author states that the trilogy of global, local, and glocal are in need of unambiguous sound definitions from theoretical and methodological perspectives. Roudometof's book is structured into two parts. The first is devoted to a history and critical assessment of the theoretical use of the term, glocalisation. It then offers an alternative perspective and a clear, effective, and applicable definition, explaining the limitations of the term globalisation and the value of defining glocalisation. The second part of the book illustrates how the concept of glocalisation can be used to broaden our understanding and analysis of a wide range of issues in world politics, including the twenty-first-century culture of consumption, transnationalism, cosmopolitanism, nationalism, and religious traditions. Roudometof usefully clarifies the different interpretations of the term 'glocalisation' and its development. In particular, he devotes special attention to the three authors who, more than any others, have devoted deep reflection on processes of glocalisation: Roland Robertson, George Ritzer, and Ulrich Beck. Robertson (1992) was the first person who introduced the concept of 'glocalisation' into social and scientific discourse. From that moment, he refined the idea in order to respond to those who criticised him (e.g. Radhakrishnan, 2010; Ritzer, 2003). While accepting some of their criticism, in his monist perspective, Robertson (2013) states that today, only the glocal exists (we are neither global nor local any more). The glocal is the outcome of the historically long struggle between the
Some Remarks Concerning the Concept of Glocalization
The present study is aimed to scan the explanatory relevance of the concept of glocalization in some seminal works of George Ritzer. In the first instance, we will try to relate the manner in which Ritzer understands glocalization to the uses of other authors or other related concepts of the cultural globalization theory (hybridization, creolization, scapes). On this occasion, we will reveal the (partially "hidden") cultural and philosophical assumptions, underlying Ritzer's use of this concept: the understanding of the individual, mainly seen as a rational agent, as well as the positive value attributed to the postmodern type of cultural mixture. We will further argue that, despite its intentions, the manner in which Ritzer defines glocalization is in fact very close to a homogenized conception of globalization. In addition, we will show that Ritzer eludes the explanatory dimension of glocalization (much less the critical one), in favor of a descriptive stance, excessively used. We will give also a critical analysis of the way in which Ritzer attempts to enrich the explanatory quality of glocalization by linking it with a new concept that he elaborated, the grobalization. In the end, we would like to connect Ritzer's concept of glocalization with a social/sociological model exposed by the French sociologist Alain Touraine, hoping to better clarify the mentioned problems.
Theorizing glocalization: Three interpretations 1
European Journal of Social Theory, 2016
This article presents three interpretations of glocalization in social-scientific literature as a means of reframing the terms of scholarly engagement with the concept. Although glocalization is relatively under-theorized, two key interpretations of the concept have been developed by Roland Robertson and George Ritzer. Through a critical and comparative overview, the article offers an assessment of the advances and weaknesses of each perspective. Both demonstrate awareness regarding the differences between globalization and glocalization, but this awareness is far from explicit. Both interpretations fail to draw a consistent analytical distinction between the two concepts and ultimately succumb to reductionism: either glocalization is subsumed under globalization or globalization is transformed into glocalization. Next, a third interpretation of glocalization as an analytically autonomous concept is presented. Working definitions of glocalization and of glocality as analytically autonomous from globalization and globality are developed and examples are offered. By addressing the key themes of power and temporality, this third interpretation transcends the limits of the other two interpretations.