Multi-sited and historically layered language policy construction: parliamentary debate on the Finnish constitutional bilingualism in 1919

Saarinen, Taina; Ihalainen, Pasi

doi:10.1007/s10993-018-9474-6

Cited by 11 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Section: Constitutional Debate 1919mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The decision on a constitution with two national languages took place in the intersection of various political debates, highlighting the fact that 'language' emerged as proxy for different policies (Engman, 2016;Saarinen & Ihalainen, 2018). Discourses on language and ethnicity, economic and political class distinctions, and certain active politicians came together in the parliamentary debate (Saarinen & Ihalainen, 2018), which was further contextualized by the bloody and traumatic civil war that took place immediately after independence in the spring of 1918. Class conflict relating to population growth, industrialization and the rise of a labor movement also unearthed some of the social tensions between different language groups, which were then reflected in the polarized political discourses between the 'elites' and 'common people' (Saarinen & Ihalainen, 2018).…”

Section: Constitutional Debate 1919mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the heart of our counterfactual alternative is an imaginary constitution declaring Swedish a (regional) minority language rather than a national language, a viable scenario in the geopolitical situation of the post-independence and post-civil-war Finland of 1919 (Saarinen & Ihalainen, 2018). By discussing this counterfactual, we aim at problematizing the often assumed and self-evident language policies, particularly from the point of view of vulnerable minoritized speaker groups.…”

Section: Introduction: At-risk Minorities In Different Language Policy Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In our discussion we utilize the analytical tool of counterfactual histories (see Villstrand & Karonen, 2017 for a discussion), a form of historiography that attempts to answer 'what if' questions known as counterfactuals (Rodwell, 2013;Bunzl, 2004). Through this, we attempt to illuminate the risks of language policy for different minoritized speaker groups by presenting an alternative to the mainstream analysis and thus opening historical developments and processes for critical scrutiny from a new perspective.At the heart of our counterfactual alternative is an imaginary constitution declaring Swedish a (regional) minority language rather than a national language, a viable scenario in the geopolitical situation of the post-independence and post-civil-war Finland of 1919 (Saarinen & Ihalainen, 2018). By discussing this counterfactual, we aim at problematizing the often assumed and self-evident language policies, particularly from the point of view of vulnerable minoritized speaker groups.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

6. Challenging Constitutional Bilingualism with ‘What if …’: Counterfactual Histories and At-risk Minorities in Finland

Ennser–Kananen¹,

Saarinen²

2021

Vulnerabilities, Challenges and Risks in Applied Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: At-risk Minorities in Different Language Policy ScenariosThis chapter analyzes language ideologies in Finnish language policy through a lens of risk. More specifically, it presents a meta-analysis of Finnish language policy spanning a 100-year period since 1917, discusses this policy against the concept of risk (Beck, 1992) and examines the implications for language minoritized groups since the establishment of Finnish constitutional bilingualism in 1919, when Finnish and Swedish were designated equal status as national languages. In our discussion we utilize the analytical tool of counterfactual histories (see Villstrand & Karonen, 2017 for a discussion), a form of historiography that attempts to answer 'what if' questions known as counterfactuals (Rodwell, 2013;Bunzl, 2004). Through this, we attempt to illuminate the risks of language policy for different minoritized speaker groups by presenting an alternative to the mainstream analysis and thus opening historical developments and processes for critical scrutiny from a new perspective.At the heart of our counterfactual alternative is an imaginary constitution declaring Swedish a (regional) minority language rather than a national language, a viable scenario in the geopolitical situation of the post-independence and post-civil-war Finland of 1919 (Saarinen & Ihalainen, 2018). By discussing this counterfactual, we aim at problematizing the often assumed and self-evident language policies, particularly from the point of view of vulnerable minoritized speaker groups.

show abstract

Section: Constitutional Debate 1919mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Constitutional Debate 1919mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introduction: At-risk Minorities In Different Language Policy Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

6. Challenging Constitutional Bilingualism with ‘What if …’: Counterfactual Histories and At-risk Minorities in Finland

Ennser–Kananen¹,

Saarinen²

2021

Vulnerabilities, Challenges and Risks in Applied Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After this Civil War, the Finnish right-both the initially emancipatory Finnish Party and the Swedish People's Party that safeguarded the status of a linguistic minority as opposed to majority parliamentarism 23 -had doubts about the ability of the Finns as a people to establish a balanced democratic polity. The right aimed at a regulated autocracy (a constitutional monarchy of the German type) to limit parliamentarism and raised the issue of restrictions to universal suffrage.…”

Section: Long-term Structures Supportive Of Representative Governmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The fragility of Finnish parliamentary democracy at the moment when Prussianism fell

Ihalainen

2019

J Mod Eur Hist

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Finnish case is in many ways illustrative of the complexities of democratisation after World War I. Finland found itself at the nexus of a Swedish constitutional tradition, legalism and ideological controversies adopted from Imperial Germany, the radicalised Russian Revolution, and Western parliamentary democracy. After having been a model for reformers demanding women’s suffrage, for instance, the country found itself in autumn 1918 going in the opposite direction to almost all other European countries. This article analyses the fragility of Finnish parliamentary democracy then, contrasting it with longer-term trends supportive of democratisation. ‘Democracy’ had been the goal for most Finnish political parties since the adoption of universal suffrage in 1906, but the meaning of the concept remained contested and became increasingly so after the Russian Revolution in disputes concerning parliamentary sovereignty, the declaration of independence, a civil war, monarchical reaction, and the search for a republican compromise. For as long as Germany was expected to win the war, democracy in Finland remained fragile, challenged from within first by the revolutionary far-left and then by the reactionary right. The victory of ‘Western democracies’ forced both the left and the right to rethink their opposition to ‘Western’ parliamentary democracy and to adapt to a constitutional compromise. The ideological contestability of democracy remained but confrontations were confined by extremism’s loss of credibility, the growing influence of centrist groups, and a shared determination to avoid another civil war.

show abstract

Tensions on Finnish Constitutional Bilingualism in Neo-nationalist Times: Constructions of Swedish in Monolingual and Bilingual Contexts

Saarinen

2020

Language Perceptions and Practices in Multilingual Universities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multi-sited and historically layered language policy construction: parliamentary debate on the Finnish constitutional bilingualism in 1919

Cited by 11 publications

References 25 publications

6. Challenging Constitutional Bilingualism with ‘What if …’: Counterfactual Histories and At-risk Minorities in Finland

6. Challenging Constitutional Bilingualism with ‘What if …’: Counterfactual Histories and At-risk Minorities in Finland

The fragility of Finnish parliamentary democracy at the moment when Prussianism fell

Tensions on Finnish Constitutional Bilingualism in Neo-nationalist Times: Constructions of Swedish in Monolingual and Bilingual Contexts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About