Rätt som argument : Leo Mechelin och finska frågan 1886-1912

Right as an Argument. Leo Mechelin and the Finnish Question 1886-1912 At the turn of the 20th century the Finnish Question rose up as a political and juridical issue at the international arena. The vaguely précised position of Finland in the Russian empire led to diverse conclusions concerning the correctness of the February manifesto of 1899. It was predominantly among a European elite of politicians, cultural workers and academics the issue rose some interest. Finns were active making propaganda for their cause, and they put an emphasis on the claim that the right was on the Finnish side. In the study Elisabeth Stubb compare the Finnish, Russian and European statements about the Finnish Question and analyse their use of right as an argument. The Finnish Question offers at the same time a case study of a national entity which possesses a political sphere of life but is not fully independent, and its possibilities to drive its interests in an international context. Leo Mechelin (1839-1914), the leader of the Finnish propaganda organization abroad, is used as a point of departure. The biographical stance is formed into a triangle, where Leo Mechelin, the idea of right and the Finnish Question abroad are the three cornerstones. The treatment of one cornerstone sheds a ligth on the two others. The metaphor of triangulation also worked as a method to reach "a third stance" in a scinetific and political issue that usually is polarised into two opposite alternatives. An adherence to a strict legal right could not in the end offer a complete, unquestionable and satisfactory solution to the Finnsih Question, it was dependent on "the right of state wisdom and sound insight". The Finnish propaganda abroad used almost completely alternative ways of making politics. The propaganda did not have a decisive effect on countries' official politics, but gained unofficial support, especially in the public opinion and in academic statements. Mechelin claimed that the political field was dependent on public opinion and scientific research. Together with the official politics these two fields formed a triangle that shared the task of balancing the political arena and preventing it from making unwise decisions of taking an unjust turn. The international sphere worked as a balancing part in the Finnish Question. Mechelin tried by claiming the status of state for Finland's part to secure the country a place at the official international arena. At the same time, and especially when the claim was not fully adopted, he emphasised, and in a European context worked for, that right would become the guiding light not only for international relations, but also for the policy making in the inner life of the state.

Finlandismer och språkvård från 1800-talet till i dag

The aim of the study is to investigate the use of finlandisms in an historical perspective, how they have been viewed from the mid-19th century to this day, and the effect of language planning on their use. A finlandism is a word, a phrase, or a structure that is used only in the Swedish varieties used in Finland (i.e. in Finland Swedish), or used in these varieties in a different meaning than in the Swedish used in Sweden. Various aspects of Finland-Swedish language planning are discussed in relation to language planning generally; in addition, the relation of Finland Swedish to Standard Swedish and standard regional varieties is discussed, and various types of finlandisms are analysed in detail. A comprehensive picture is provided of the emergence and evolution of the ideology of language planning from the mid-19th century up until today. A theoretical model of corpus planning is presented and its effect on linguistic praxis described. One result of the study is that the belief among Finland-Swedish language planners that the Swedish language in Finland must not be allowed to become distanced from Standard Swedish, has been widely adopted by the average Finland Swede, particularly during the interwar period, following the publication of Hugo Bergroth s work Finlandssvenska in 1917. Criticism of this language-planning ideology started to appear in the 1950s, and intensified in the 1970s. However, language planning and the basis for this conception of language continue to enjoy strong support among Swedish-speaking Finns. I show that the editing of Finnish literary texts written in Swedish has often been somewhat amateurish and the results not always linguistically appropriate, and that Swedish publishers have in fact adopted a rather liberal attitude towards finlandisms. My conclusion is that language planning has achieved rather modest results in its resistance to finlandisms. Most of the finlandisms used in 1915 were still in use in 2005. Finlandisms occur among speakers of all ages, and even among academically educated people despite their more elevated style. The most common finlandisms were used by informants of all ages. The ones that are firmly rooted are the most established, in other words those that are stylistically neutral, seemingly genuinely Swedish, but which are nevertheless strongly supported by Finnish, and display a shift in meaning as compared with Standard Swedish.