Integrating a Nexus: the history of political discourse and language policy research

References

• Beyen, M., and H. te Velde. 2016. “Passion and Reason: Modern Parliaments in the Low Countries.” In Parliament and Parliamentarism: A Comparative History of A European Concept, edited by P. Ihalainen, C. Ilie, and K. Palonen, 81–96. New York: Berghahn.
   Google Scholar
• Blommaert, J. 2005. Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Blommaert, J., and B. Rampton. 2011. “Language and Superdiversity.” Diversities 13 (2): 1–22.
   Google Scholar
• Bösch, F. 2012. “Parlamente und Medien. Deutschland und Grossbritannien seit dem späten 19. Jahrhundert.” In Parlamentarische Kulturen in Europa: Das Parlament als Kommunikationsraum, edited by A. Schulz and A. Wirsching, 371–388. Düsseldorf: Dorste Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Bouchet, T. 2016. “French Parliamentary Discourse, 1789–1914.” In Parliament and Parliamentarism: A Comparative History of A European Concept, edited by P. Ihalainen, C. Ilie, and K. Palonen, 162–175. New York: Berghahn.
   Google Scholar
• Burkhardt, A. 2016. “German Parliamentary Discourse since 1848 from a Linguistic Point of View.” In Parliament and Parliamentarism: A Comparative History of A European Concept, edited by P. Ihalainen, C. Ilie, and K. Palonen, 176–191. New York: Berghahn.
   Google Scholar
• Dagens Nyheter. 1917.
   Google Scholar
• Dubrovskaia, E. 2015. “The Russian Military in Finland and the Russian Revolution.” In Russia’s Home Front in War and Revolution, 1914–22. Book 1: Russia’s Revolution in Regional Perspective, edited by S. Badcock, G. N. Liudmila, and A. B. Retish, 247–266. Bloomington: Slavica Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. 2003. Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Feuchter, J., and J. Helmrath. 2013. Parlamentarische Kulturen vom Mittelalter bis in die Moderne: Reden – Räume – Bilder. Düsseldorf: Droste Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Finlayson, A. 2007. “From Beliefs to Arguments: Interpretative Methodology and Rhetorical Political Analysis.” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 9 (4): 545–563. doi:10.1111/j.1467-856x.2007.00269.x.
   Google Scholar
• Galembert, C. D., O. Rozenberg, and C. Vigour, eds. 2014. Faire parler le Parlement: Méthodes et enjeux de l’analyse des débats parlementaires pour les sciences sociales. Paris: L.G.D.J.
   Google Scholar
• Garrigues, J., and E. Anceau. 2016. “Discussing the First Age of French Parliamentarism (1789–1914).” In Parliament and Parliamentarism: A Comparative History of A European Concept, edited by P. Ihalainen, C. Ilie, and K. Palonen, 49–61. New York: Berghahn.
   Google Scholar
• Haapala, T. 2012. “That in the Opinion of This House”: The Parliamentary Culture of Debate in the Nineteenth-century Cambridge and Oxford Union Societies. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-39-4970-9.
   Google Scholar
• Häkkinen, T. 2014. The Royal Prerogative Redefined: Parliamentary Debate on the Role of the British Parliament in Large-scale Military Deployments, 1982–2003. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-39-5592-2.
   Google Scholar
• Halonen, M., P. Ihalainen, and T. Saarinen. 2015. “Diverse Discourses in Time and Space: Historical, Discourse Analytical and Ethnographic Approaches to Multi-sited Language Policy Discourse.” In Language Policies in Finland and Sweden. Interdisciplinary and Multi-Sited Comparisons, edited by M. Halonen, P. Ihalainen, and T. Saarinen, 3–26. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Harvard, J. 2016. “War and ‘World Opinion’: Parliamentary Speaking and the Falklands War.” Parliamentary History 35 (1): 42–53. doi:10.1111/parh.2016.35.issue-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ifversen, J. 2011. “About Key Concepts and How to Study Them.” Contributions to the History of Concepts 6 (1): 65–88. doi:10.3167/choc.2011.060104.
   Google Scholar
• Ihalainen, P. 2010. Agents of the People: Democracy and Popular Sovereignty in British and Swedish Parliamentary and Public Debates, 1734–1800. Leiden: Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Ihalainen, P. 2013. ““Parlamentsdebatten und der Aufstieg außerparlamentarischer Medien im späten 18. Jahrhundert. Schweden, Großbritannien und die Niederlande.” In Parlamentarische Kulturen vom Mittelalter bis in die Moderne. Reden – Räume – Bilder, edited by J. Feuchter and J. Helmrath, 97–113. Düsseldorf: Droste Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Ihalainen, P. 2014. “Prospects for Parliamentary Government in an Era of War and Revolution: Britain and Germany in Spring 1917.” In The Politics of Dissensus: Parliament in Debate, edited by K. Palonen, J. M. Rosales, and T. Turkka, 423–448. Santander: Cantabria University Press & McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Ihalainen, P., and T. Saarinen. 2015. “Constructing ‘Language’ in Language Policy Discourse: Finnish and Swedish Legislative Processes in the 2000s.” In Language Policies in Finland and Sweden. Interdisciplinary and Multi-Sited Comparisons, edited by M. Halonen, P. Ihalainen, and T. Saarinen, 29–56. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Ihalainen, P. 2015. “The 18th-century Traditions of Representation in a New Age of Revolution: History Politics in the Swedish and Finnish Parliaments, 1917–1919.” Scandinavian Journal of History 40 (1): 70–96. doi:10.1080/03468755.2014.987161.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ihalainen, P., C. Ilie, and K. Palonen. 2016. “Parliament as a Conceptual Nexus.” In Parliament and Parliamentarism: A Comparative History of A European Concept, edited by P. Ihalainen, C. Ilie, and K. Palonen, 1–16. New York: Berghahn.
   Google Scholar
• Ihalainen, P. 2017. The Springs of Democracy: National and Transnational Debates on Constitutional Reform in the British, German, Swedish and Finnish Parliaments, 1917–1919. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society. doi:10.21435/sfh.24.
   Google Scholar
• Ihalainen, P., and K. Palonen. 2009. “Parliamentary Sources in the Comparative Study of Conceptual History: Methodological Aspects and Illustrations of a Research Proposal.” Parliaments, Estates and Representation 29 (1): 17–34. doi:10.1080/02606755.2009.9522293.
   Google Scholar
• Ihalainen, P., and S. Matikainen. 2016. “The British Parliament and Foreign Policy in the Twentieth Century: Towards Increasing Parliamentarisation?” Parliamentary History 35 (1): 1–14. doi:10.1111/1750-0206.12180.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ilie, C. 2016. “Parliamentary Discourse and Deliberative Rhetoric.” In Parliament and Parliamentarism: A Comparative History of A European Concept, edited by P. Ihalainen, C. Ilie, and K. Palonen, 133–145. New York: Berghahn.
   Google Scholar
• Jokinen, A., K. Juhila, and E. Suoninen. 2016. DiskurssianalyysiTeoriat, peruskäsitteet ja käyttö. Tampere: Vastapaino.
   Google Scholar
• Kaarkoski, M. 2016. ‘Energiemix’ versus ‘Energiewende’: Competing Conceptualisations of Nuclear Energy Policy in the German Parliamentary Debates of 1991–2001. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-39-6738-3.
   Google Scholar
• LaCapra, D. 1983. Rethinking Intellectual History: Texts, Contexts, Language. New York: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leonhard, J. 2016. “Comparison, Transfer and Entanglement, Or: How to Write Modern European History Today?” Journal of Modern European History 16 (2): 149–163. doi:10.17104/1611-8944-2016-2-149.
   Google Scholar
• Marjanen, J. 2018. “Begreppshistoria.” In Metod.Guide för historiska studier, edited by M. Gustavsson and Y. Svanström, 97–132. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
   Google Scholar
• McCarty, T. 2011. Ethnography and Language Policy. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mergel, T. 2002. Parlamentarische Kultur in der Weimarer Republik. Politische Kommunikation, symbolische Politik und Öffentlichkeit im Reichstag. Düsseldorf: Droste Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Müller, J.-W. 2014. “On Conceptual History.” In Rethinking Modern European Intellectual History, edited by D. M. McMahon and S. Moyn, 74–93. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nyström, S. 2013. Helsinki 1914–1918.Toivon, pelon ja sekasorron vuodet. Helsinki: Minerva.
   Google Scholar
• Palmstierna, E. 1953. Orostid. Politiska dagboksanteckningar, Vol. 2: 1917–1919. Stockholm: Tiden.
   Google Scholar
• Palonen, K. 2008. The Politics of Limited Times: The Rhetoric of Temporal Judgment in Parliamentary Democracies. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
   Google Scholar
• Palonen, K. 2016. From Oratory to Debate: Parliamentarisation of Deliberative Rhetoric in Westminster. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
   Google Scholar
• Pekonen, O. 2014. Debating “The ABCs of Parliamentary Life”: The Learning of Parliamentary Rules and Practices in the Late Nineteenth-century Finnish Diet and the Early Eduskunta. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-39-5843-5.
   Google Scholar
• Peltonen, M. 2013. Rhetoric, Politics and Popularity in Pre-Revolutionary England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pietikäinen, S. 2012. “Kieli-ideologiat arjessa. Neksusanalyysi monikielisen inarinsaamenpuhujan kielielämäkerrasta.” Virittäjä 116 (3): 410–440.
   Google Scholar
• Pocock, J. G. A. 2009. Political Thought and History: Essays on Theory and Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Riksdagens protokoll vid … riksmötet …. Andra kammaren (AK) [Proceedings of the Swedish Parliament, Second Chamber]. 1867–1948. Stockholm: Riksdagen.
   Google Scholar
• Riksdagens protokoll vid … riksmötet …. Första kammaren (FK) [Proceedings of the Swedish Parliament, First Chamber]. 1867–1948. Stockholm: Riksdagen.
   Google Scholar
• Roussellier, N. 1997. Le parlement de l’éloquence : La souveraineté de la deliberation au lendemain de la Grande Guerre. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.
   Google Scholar
• Schulz, A., and A. Wirsching, eds. 2012. Parlamentarische Kulturen in Europa: Das Parlament als Kommunikationsraum. Düsseldorf: Droste Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Scollon, R. 2003. “The Dialogist in a Positivist World: Theory in the Social Sciences and the Humanities at the End of the Twentieth Century.” Social Semiotics 13 (1): 71–88. doi:10.1080/1035033032000133517.
   Google Scholar
• Scollon, R., and S. W. Scollon. 2004. Nexus Analysis: Discourse and the Emerging Internet. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Seaward, P., and P. Ihalainen. 2016. “Key Concepts for Parliament in Britain (1640–1800).” In Parliament and Parliamentarism: A Comparative History of A European Concept, edited by P. Ihalainen, C. Ilie, and K. Palonen, 32–48. New York: Berghahn.
   Google Scholar
• Skinner, Q. 1996. Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Skinner, Q. 2002. Visions of Politics, Volume I: Regarding Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Social-Demokraten. 1917.
   Google Scholar
• Steinmetz, W. 1993. Das Sagbare und das Machbare. Zum Wandel politischer Handlungsspielräume  - England 1789–1867. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.
   Google Scholar
• Steinmetz, W. 2002. Begegnungen vor Gericht. Eine Sozial- und Kulturgeschichte des englischen Arbeitsrechts (1850–1925). Munich: Oldenbourg Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Steinmetz, W. 2011. Political Languages in the Age of Extremes. London: German Historical Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Steinmetz, W., and M. Freeden. 2017. “Introduction: Conceptual History: Challenges, Conundrums, Complexities.” In Conceptual History in the European Space, edited by W. Steinmetz, M. Freeden, and J. Fernández-Sebastián, 1–46. Oxford & New York: Berghahn.
   Google Scholar
• Steinmetz, W., I. Gilcher-Holtey, and H.-G. Haupt, eds. 2013. Writing Political History Today. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• te Velde, H. 2003. Het theater van de politiek. Amsterdam: Wereldbibliotheek.
   Google Scholar
• te Velde, H. 2005. “Political Transfer: An Introduction.” European Review of History: Revue européenned'histoire 12 (2): 205–221. doi:10.1080/13507480500268995.
   Google Scholar
• te Velde, H. 2015. Sprekende politiek. Redenaars en hun publiek in de Gouden Eeuw. Amsterdam: Bert Bakker.
   Google Scholar
• Toye, R. 2014. “The Rhetorical Culture of the House of Commons after 1918.” History 99 (4): 270–298. doi:10.1111/1468-229X.12051.
   Google Scholar
• Turunen, J. 2015. Semiotics of Politics: Dialogicality of Parliamentary Talk. Uppsala: Uppsala universitet.
   Google Scholar
• Valtiopäiväasiakirjat (VP), Pöytäkirjat [Proceedings of the Finnish Parliament]. 1907–1975. Helsinki: Eduskunta.
   Google Scholar
• Weidner, T. 2018. “Begriffsgeschichte Und Politikgeschichte.” Geschichte Und Gesellschaft 44 (1): 29–53.
   Google Scholar
• Wodak, R. 2001. “What CDA Is About – A Summary of Its History, Important Concepts and Its Developments.” In Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, edited by R. Wodak and M. Meyer, 1–14. London: SAGE Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Wodak, R. 2015. “Critical Discourse Analysis, Discourse Historical Approach.” In The International Encyclopedia of Language and Interaction, edited by K. Tracy, C. Ilie, and T. Sandel, 275–288. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar