Language, discourse and politics

After discussing the meaning of the word politics, this paper shows that there are four possible approaches to the issue of the relationships between language, discourse and politics: a) the intrinsic political nature of language; b) the relations of power between discourses and their political dimension; c) the relations of power between languages and the political dimension of their usage and; d) linguistic policies. This paper addresses only the first two of these items. Languages have an intrinsically political nature because they subject their speakers to their order. The acts of silencing operationalized in discourse manifest a relation of power. The spread of discourses in the social space is also subject to the order of power. The use of language may be the space of pertinence, but is also that of exclusion, separation and even the elimination of the other. Therefore, language is not a neutral communication tool, but it is permeated by politics, by power. Because of the dislocations that it produces, literature is a form of swindling language, unveiling the powers that are imprinted on it.

Language and interdisciplinarity

Since language is multifaceted and heterogeneous, interdisciplinarity is natural to linguistic studies. In this article, after demonstrating that, I present two basic ways of doing science. One is ruled by the principle of exclusion, whereas the other is ruled by the principle of participation. The former leads to specialization, whereas the latter leads to the surpassing of specialization. From that, I discuss the advantages and problems of disciplinarity, and present the reasons why nowadays interdisciplinarity is a positive universal in scientific and pedagogical discourses. Also, based on etymology, I discuss the concepts of interdisciplinarity, multidisciplinarity, pluridisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity. Finally, I examine the bonds between linguistics and other sciences, by drawing a brief history of the relations between linguistics and literature in Brazil.

Language strategies in the attribution of blame for HIV and AIDS

This article examines the language strategies used in everyday explanation by young heterosexual adults to attribute blame for the transmission of HIV: Seventy-two-female and 60 male Australian university students took part in the study. They were formed into groups of four, with each group taking part in discussions about HIV: AIDS, and related matters. Transcripts were examined for instances of blaming, and a coding scheme for levels of attributed responsibility applied to those instances found. Language strategies of distancing self from HN and AIDS were then coded, including checks for who was blamed whether they were members of participants' ingroups or outgroups, and whether justifications were used. These findings are discussed in terms of positioning the self vis-a-vis HIV and AIDS, as well as the ways in which negative stereotypes were used in attributing blame to members of outgroups.

Emerging Issues Concerning the Education of Speech and Language Pathologists and Audiologists in Brazil and South America

Diversity is one of the major characteristics of Brazil and all South America. This paper presents an overview of the current situation of the education of speech and language pathologists (SLP) and audiologists in Brazil and in several other countries of South America. This paper also discusses the main challenges shared by these countries. The discussion is focused on the mutual interferences between education and the areas of professional practice, cultural diversity and continued education. There are many emerging issues about the education of SLP and audiologists in South America. The suggested conclusion is that, despite the many differences, the South American SLP and audiologists` education would benefit from joint efforts and collaborative experiences. Copyright (C) 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel