The aim of this article is to revisit the work of the French philosopher Julia Kristeva and ask what place we might give her conceptual framework today. I will focus on one key aspect of Kristeva’s work, sexual difference, as that which ties most, if not all, aspects of Kristeva’s work. I am hoping to present a concise, yet wide-ranging view on Kristeva’s critical contribution to the fields of politics and ethics. My objective will be threefold. First, I will present the main lines of Kristeva’s theory on sexual difference; this presentation will also outline her political critique of equality and diversity in the domains of gender and sexuality. Kristeva believes that contemporary politics invested in suppressing inequality through the promotion of diversity will in the long term not only prove unsuccessful, but also create more exclusion. Secondly, I will point out the main objections raised against her theories and show how her critics come to their conclusions. Objectors to Kristeva’s sexual difference theory are mostly concerned with the manner in which she associates marginality and unintelligibility. They see little value in her theory, because, on the one hand, it relegates marginal groups to a world beyond social viability, and, on the other, because it effectively disables advancements in equality politics. Finally, I hope to provide the reader with a useful counter-critique to Kristeva’s detractors that will show why their views are partly founded on a misreading of her ethical (Freudian) framework and a desire to translate her work into a more pragmatic and user-friendly tool. I will argue that Kristeva’s work is best apprehended as a variant of psychoanalytic ethics and that to engage with its rhetoric is to capture the full weight of Kristeva’s contribution to politics and intellectual engagement.
This paper proposed a method for developing capacity for lifelong learning in open spaces, defined here as places without predefined learning structures or objectives, through the cultivation of aesthetic literacy. This discussion will be situated within fieldwork performed by the authors in Helsinki, Finland, and Tallinn, Estonia, in 2013. Based on the researchers’ experience in the field of teacher education and workshops they have conducted on mobile learning, the empirical context for this discussion focuses on data generated from the research methods of participatory observation (ethnography), autoethnography, reflective concept analysis and artistic subjectivity. These methods and the data generated as a result collect to produce insight into how aesthetic literacy sits within the cross-section of open space, mobile learning, and lifelong learning,
Aesthetic literacy, appropriated and broadened from its original focus as capacity for “reading” or making meaning from artistic material (discussed in Gale, 2005 as the “living of lyrical moments”), is positioned in this paper as a means of making meaning in open spaces through alignment and attunement. This paper presents pragmatic methods for pedagogically cultivating learning in open spaces through a focus on aesthetic literacy. The pedagogical advantages of such an approach and its applicability to lifelong learning, particularly lifelong learning activated through mobile technology (or mobile lifelong learning-mLLL), follows along with recommendations for further research. The applicability of such research is for teachers, learners, or researchers who are looking for methods for making use of open spaces for learning, or to cultivate learners who actively seek learning in the “rhythms of the everyday” (Lankshear & Knobel, 2011).
The aim of the article is to produce fresh insights into the academic discussion about the nature of open space, mobile learning and lifelong learning as seem from the point of view of aesthetic literacy, insights we believe have distinct pedagogical advantages for mLLL.
Focal Area: Informal arenas of learning – learning opportunities in daily life and the workplace; Learning process design, teaching methodologies
In reaction to the sharp deterioration of fiscal positions and a sovereign debt crisis in the majority of EU member states, EU leaders have been strengthening the EU economic governance framework, in particular for the eurozone member states. This has been reflected mainly through a reinforcement of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) within the so-called six-pack and through the recent adoption of the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union (TSCG).
The objective of this paper is to present the main decisions taken to address intensifying problems in the EU and assess them from the point of view of stability of the eurozone. The paper argues that the recent adoption of the six-pack and of the TSCG has created a legal basis for more effective governance structure that is much stronger than previously, and closer fscal coordination among EU member states in order to ensure public fnance sustainability. The practical results will depend, however, on the political willingness of countries to accept the new rules and rigorous enforcement of those rules.
Most of the new solutions continue the previous approach: stricter preventive and punishing rules, and their more rigorous application. TSCG has adopted a new element: parallel to EU rules, there should be enhanced national rules (possibly in the form of constitutional commitments) and national institutions responsible for fscal discipline. This approach implies that international rules are not strong enough for sovereign countries, which agree to be subject to democratically elected national authorities but do not want to follow decisions by “outside” institutions. In addition, reverse voting in the Council encourages for more pragmatic, economically justifed use of the modifed SGP. In view of a lack of political will to move forward into a political union, this seems the only realistic approach to ensure fscal stabilization and keep the eurozone alive in the short and medium run.
Two main research methods have been applied:
(a)Statistical analysis of data on changes of the public fnances in the EU member states (budgetary defcit and public debt),
(b)comparative analysis of successive EU documents on strengthening economic governance and identifcation of strong and weak aspects of the new documents from the point of view of stability of the eurozone.
The main conclusion is that in a situation of a lack of political will to move forward into a political union, the only realistic approach to ensure fscal stabilization and keep the eurozone alive in the short and medium term seems to be to enforce rigorously the recently adopted new commitments aiming at better fscal control of euro area members.
Siege. South Hadley, MA, Bergin and Garvey.
Gunson, D. & Collins, C. (1997) From the I to the We: Discourse ethics, identity, and the pragmatics of partnership in the West of Scotland. Communication Theory , 7(4), 277-299.
Heidegger, M. (1998) Plato's teaching on truth, in McNeill, W. (ed.) Patharks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 167.
Habermas, J. (1971) Knowledge and Human Interest. Boston: Beacon.
Israel, J. (1971) Alienation: From Marx to Modern
. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alonso Almeida, Francisco & Heather Adams. 2012. Sentential evidentials in English and Spanish medical research papers. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 7. 9-21. DOI: 10.4995/rlyla.2012.1119
Beeching, Kate. 2012. Semantic change. Evidence from false friends. In Peter Lauwers, Gudrun Vanderbauwhede & Stijn Verleyen (eds.), Pragmatic markers and pragmaticalization. Lessons from false friends, 11-36. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/lic.10.2.03bee
. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5, 22- 49.
Björkman, Beyza. 2008. “So where we are?” Spoken lingua franca English at a technical university in Sweden. English Today, 24(2), 35–41. doi:10.1017/S0266078408000187
Björkman, Beyza. 2011. The pragmatics of English as a lingua franca in the international university: Introduction. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(4), 923–925. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2010.08.015
Brown, Kara. 2010. Teachers as Language‐Policy Actors: Contending with the Erasure of Lesser-Used Languages in Schools
psycholinguistic perspectives . Zs. Lengyel and J. Navracsics (Eds.). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 117-129.
Doró, Katalin. 2008. The written assessment of the vocabulary knowledge and use of English majors in Hungary . University of Szeged. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Harwood, Nigel. 2005. “‘Nowhere has anyone attempted ... In this article I aim to do just that’: A corpus-based study of self-promotional I and we in academic writing across four disciplines.” Journal of Pragmatics 37(8): 1207-1231.
, the foundational work for American pragmatic thought. James identified his aim in formulating a pragmatic method when he concluded that much of modern philosophy accomplishes nothing of practical use or importance. Id . at 18-22. In the place of such thought, James outlined the pragmatic method as a sort of tool for getting to the practical truth that is in contention within any substantial dispute regarding ideas. The method begins by asking a simple question, which James repeated throughout Pragmatism : “What difference would it practically make to anyone if
Berman, R. A. & Slobin, D. I. (1994). Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Berman, R. A. & Verhoeven, L. (2002). Developing text production abilities in speech and writing: Aims and methodology. Written Languages and Literacy, 5, 1-44.
Blau, J. (1966). Essentials of syntax. Jerusalem: Israel Institute for Writing Education [in Hebrew].
Bloom, L., Tackeff, J., & Lahey, M. (1984). Learning to in complement constructions. Journal of