Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- naturalization (3) (remove)
Institute
Combining insights from the history of citizenship with contemporary legal analysis, this article both highlights and problematizes what we may call sorting strategies – restrictive closure and selective openness – which rely on ‘varieties of affluence’ (income, wealth, equity, credit, and the like) in shaping possibilities for entry, settlement, and naturalization. By emphasizing the growing significance of income barriers and thresholds on the one hand, and fast-tracked investment-based entryways on the other, this article investigates the role of wealth as both accelerator and barrier to citizenship, contributing to the varied toolbox used by governments to advance goals that may at times appear contradictory; these tools both tighten and relax the requirements of access to membership at the same time. These new developments represent different facets of the same trend. Without explicitly stating as much, programs that turn wealth into a core criterion for admission conceptually reignite an older, exclusive, and exclusionary vision according to which individuals must hold property (in land, resources, or in relation to one’s ‘dependents,’ including women, slaves, and children) in order to qualify as a citizen. While such a trajectory is no stranT8ger to ancient models, it raises profound challenges to modernist accounts of political membership that place equality at their core.
Several translation scholars have recognised translation as a form of discourse mediation or discourse presentation (see, for example, Mossop 1998). In line with this, "universals" of translation have also been re-framed in the larger context of discourse mediation, as mediation universals rather than something strictly translationspecific (Ulrych 2009). In the present article, this line of enquiry is developed by comparing some of the alleged universals of translation, namely standardization and explicitation, with insights from literary and narratological studies on the nature of discourse presentation. The notion of reportive or interpretative interference (Sternberg 1982) and Fludernik’s (1993) claim that all represented discourse is typical and schematic in nature seem to bear curious resemblance to the notion of standardization or normalization, posited as a possible universal of translation (Mauranen & Kujamäki 2004). Drawing on the results of my earlier research (Kuusi 2011), I present examples of free indirect discourse (FID) used in Dostoevsky’s novel Crime and Punishment with their translations into Finnish. Analyzing the translations, I demonstrate how in
translations, the narratological and literary-theoretical notions of reportive interference and typification/schematization coincide with the translation-theoretical notions of explicitation and standardization.
Plant diversity change for cities and their surroundings is well documented. For rural areas such studies are difficult as literature data are mostly insufficient. We reconstructed phytodiversity change in the Feldatal community (Germany, Hesse) by comparison of historical herbarium collections (1945–1976, Hans Hupke) with a recent floristic survey (2012). The study area is a rural area typical for Central Europe, dominated by agriculture and forestry and with a stable human population. Floristic diversity decreased (683 to 497 species; 31% of the total flora), principally by disappearance of species of unimproved grassland, fields and villages. The small number of newly documented species (33 spp.; 5% of total flora) comprises mostly naturalized ornamentals and salt tolerant species along roads. Plant diversity change of the last decades in rural landscapes in Central Europe was mainly dependent on the intensification of agriculture.