The language of political science: should it be english?

European Political Science, 2018

English's role as political science's lingua franca should inspire reflection but not alarm. Greater multilingualism would undercut academic exchange and provide only a mirage of linguistic equality. The profession should nonetheless recognize and work to mitigate advantages held by native speakers. T he questions posed by André Blais at the ECPR symposium, regarding whether English should be the dominant language of political science, provoke needed debate on the predominance of a single language-and the choice of English as that language-in our discipline. In practice, these are decided questions: English is the dominant language of political science. Nonetheless , it remains valuable to consider the impact of the dominance of English on the profession. The use of a single language, and English as that language, shapes key tasks in our discipline from teaching to research and publication. Even as the US struggles with many challenges , English has continued to grow steadily in strength, partly due to the continued attractiveness of higher education and research opportunities at English-language universities. This growth in power and influence has rendered English more than merely the leading language , with fluency in English moving from being an asset to a requirement. Increasingly , English bestrides the scholarly world like a colossus in ways that virtually demand reflection.

Language Problems and Language Planning

The article explores evidence of public policy ignoring scholarly recommendations, and describes instances of this in the field of language policy at both supranational and national levels. One significant contemporary influence is that university autonomy and academic freedom are being constrained by neoliberal pressures. Evidence of this in the United Kingdom and Denmark is described. These trends are connected to the wider context of the transition from the practices and ideology of terra nullius to legitimate colonisation and global Europeanisation, and the concomitant dispossession of the territories of others, to global Americanisation processes, the universalization of a cultura nullius in commerce, the media, academia, and domestic life. This dovetails with the promotion and establishment of English as a lingua nullius, a language that should be learned by all worldwide, as if it serves the interests of all inhabitants of the globe, and is disconnected from the causal factor...

Multilingualism and Politics, 2020

The link between language and politics has been studied extensively since ancient times. 1 In her study of the importance of translation in deliberative practices, political scientist Patrizia Nanz gives a critical overview of language philosophy from Humboldt to Habermas to Putnam and Bakhtin, with an emphasis on Bakhtin's heteroglossia (Nanz 2006). Subdisciplines such as Political Linguistics (Blommaert), Political Discourse Analysis (Van Dijk) and Critical Discourse Analysis (Fairclough, Van Dijk, Wodak) have existed since the 1990s, and indeed there has never been a lack of interest or scholarship in the language of politics from 1 For a thorough account of such studies, from Socrates and Plato to contemporary scholars, see Xenos (1988).

just published entry for Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Political Thought

Journal of English for Research Publication Purposes , 2022

We aim to challenge assumptions made about the use of English as a “lingua franca” in scientific-academic contexts, identify the impact of such assumptions on trajectories of knowledge production and uptake, and legitimize the use of multiple languages for transnational scholarly exchange. We set out ten principles: Using English as a scientific-academic “lingua franca” does not always promote inclusion; A language positioned as a scientificacademic “lingua franca” can act as a language of domination; Positioning English as the “lingua franca” policy may discourage translations and exclude participation; Policies which position English as being the contemporary scientific-academic “lingua franca” may convey the idea that knowledge produced in English is the only knowledge that exists; The imposition of English as a presumed scientific-academic “lingua franca” is a manifestation of the unequal distribution of knowledge production and uptake; Languages/ varieties function as powerful resources for knowledge making; Choosing a language for publishing or presenting is a sociolinguistic right; Choosing a language to publish or present in is a political act; Convention organizers should have the right to promote the language(s) of their choice; Convention organizers and scholars should be as creative and sensitive to including as diverse an audience as possible.

The first objective of this class is to encourage students to read and express themselves in English on topics and notions usually tackled in Political Science. The idea is also, however, to take this opportunity to study in greater depth than usual (or maybe even discover) authors, approaches and intellectual traditions that are central in the English-speaking world (understood widely as not only comprising Great Britain and North America but also the Indian peninsula, the West Indies and English-speaking Africa). We will also reflect on the conditions of the international circulation of texts, authors and notions, as well as the effects of the import (or lack of import) of these ideas: first on the French intellectual and political fields, and second on the concepts and ideas themselves. Last but not least, it will also be a chance, when relevant, to help students in the preparation of their final exam ("Grand O").

PS: Political Science & Politics, 1993

International Journal of Urban Sciences, 2019

Polity, 2006

Traditionally, the scientific study of politics has been associated with a valueneutral approach to the subject. One seeks to uncover what is, not what ought to be, in the political realm. This is what distinguishes a ''positive'' science from opinionizing, social engineering, or political philosophy. In recent decades, one detects a growing uneasiness with the venerable fact/value dichotomy, at least as it was traditionally understood. It is not clear, however, where this leaves us. (Is the fact/value dichotomy dead?) Against this backdrop, we present the following argument. If political science is to matter to policymakers or citizens, as most political scientists believe it should, authors must be clear about how their subject ties into some broader telos that others might share. Thus, one might fruitfully distinguish three sorts of issues. First, how does a particular subject of political science affect the broader public? (What is its relevance?) Second, how can one demonstrate this relevance empirically? And finally, how might other ways of viewing this issue change the way the ''goodness'' of the subject is perceived? The first issue is simply a matter of clarification, the second a matter of demonstration, and the third a matter normally reserved for political philosophy. All are necessary components of a relevant and useful political science discipline.