small ideological digression: I think that there are at least two identifiable ideological groundings of these debates about language and the internet. There is the gramscian concept of hegemony and its requisite subaltern/ s . Then there is the more pervasive hegelian teleology of history, where the spirit of the age or spirit of man is embodied in the idea of one leading state/national entity. The hegelian thematics were very prominent in english history during the empire, they parallel the american ideology today, the extension of the manifest destiny into the future pax americana or 'new american century'. In any case, I think that AoIR and all international organizations have a responsibility to resist these ideologies of dominations in the name of the equality and merit of their members and their members global citizenship as exemplified in the organization. There is a cosmopolitan politics that should be promoted above and beyond any identity politics. If we take a cosmopolitical ideal as the foundation for our normativity, we can resist tendencies to assert identities, nationhoods, and even academic tribalisms in the name of an inclusive global purpose. Thus the languages of the internet debate in my mind is often a debate about ideologies as represented by repurposed facts, either hegelian or gramscian. I think Nancy's post exemplifies how the british repurposed facts for their ideological purposes and how by stating these facts clearly and without emphasis, and that by appealing to the brute fact of the divergent narratives, we can see that there is a place for agreement about Marconi outside of national, linguistic, or other portrayals. This critical space where truth can be seen between the stories is far more important for global awareness then whether the internet is, will be, can be, the hegemonic territory of a linguistic system that becomes the defacto 'right' or 'good' language. Isn't the cosmopolitan goal to have a plurally linguistic internet for all, with global access and its related cultural production as appropriate to the people/s participating? Granted of course... the internet is still mostly owned by corporations... which are owned by people.... On Mar 23, 2006, at 10:58 AM, Nancy Baym wrote:
Michel writes:
Prof. Crystal mentioned by Alex Kuskis
"Every significant cultural innovation of modern times - from the invention of the radio, to the Internet, to air traffic control - began in an English-speaking country or was immediately facilitated by an English-speaking country. It really is amazing." it is sort of ... hum, symptomatic of the kind of cultural chauvinism human kind would be well inspired to keep away from. Note the absence of a mention of television and a few other things.
I have been reading (finally) Carolyn Marvin's When Old Technologies Were New and she has a lovely section on how the British discounted Marconi over and over (insisting on calling him "Senor Marconi") until it couldn't be denied that he was responsible for the invention of the radio and then suddenly they started emphasizing that he had a British mother and wasn't really all that Italian afterall... _______________________________________________ The air-l@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http:// listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
jeremy hunsinger jhuns@vt.edu www.cddc.vt.edu jeremy.tmttlt.com www.tmttlt.com () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail /\ - against microsoft attachments http://www.stswiki.org/ sts wiki http://cfp.learning-inquiry.info/ LI-the journal