Der Staat als Wissensapparat. Konzeptionelle Überlegungen zu einer nicht-funktionalistischen Funktionsanalyse des Sozialstaats

Abstract

Translation of the Bible or any other text unavoidably involves a determination about its meaning. There have been different views of meaning from ancient times up to the present, and a particularly Enlightenment and Modernist view is that the meaning of a text amounts to whatever the original author of the text intended it to be. This article analyzes the authorial-intent view of meaning in comparison with other models of literary and legal interpretation. Texts are anchors to interpretation but are subject to individualized interpretations. It is texts that are translated, not intentions. The challenge to the translator is to negotiate the meaning of a text and try to choose the most salient and appropriate interpretation as a basis for bringing the text to a new audience through translation.

Images and imaginaries of unemployed people: Discursive shifts in the transition from active to activating labour market policies in Germany

“…Nonetheless, the approach adopted here also differs significantly from that developed by IPA, inter alia because from a historical materialist point of view, the macro-context – primarily consisting of the state as a specific type of (political) governance and its relationship to the capitalist economy – plays a more pivotal role (e.g. Brand, 2013; Griesser, 2015). Methodologically, this implies that changes in political economy are considered to represent good starting points for the analysis of changes in certain policy fields or of the welfare state as such since they indicate changing functional requirements of societal reproduction.…”

“…Based on theoretical considerations regarding the relationship between knowledge production and policy formation in different theories of the state (e.g. Stützle, 2011; Griesser, 2015), I aim to show how functional change and policy change are mediated through discursive change and can thus be analysed by means of a critical discourse analysis. In so doing, I seek to contribute to a debate on the parallels and differences between historical materialist and interpretive approaches in policy studies (e.g.…”