Advertisement

Accounting for the politics of language in the sociology of IR

  • Anne-Marie D'Aoust
Forum

With its 2009 report on the state of the discipline of International Relations (IR), the Teaching, Research, and International Policy (TRIP) Project of the Institute for the Theory and Practice of International Relations aimed to tackle directly Ole Wæver's claim that IR ‘is and has been an American social science’ (Wæver 1998: 687). Driven by the question of whether or not one could see national variations in the way scholars think about the discipline, and if one could agree on the existence of a single IR discipline, the TRIP project engaged in an ambitious ten-country survey about ‘the state of the discipline’ (Jordan et al. 2009). The choice of the ten countries surveyed then (Australia, Canada, Ireland, Israel, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Singapore, South Africa, United Kingdom, and the United States) reflects an obvious yet unmentioned selection criteria: these countries use English as the main language of scientific communication.1If no consensus could be reached as to whether IR...

References

  1. Agarwala, Rina and Emmanuel Teitelbaum (2010) ‘Trends in Funding for Dissertation Field Research: Why Do Political Science and Sociology Students Win So Few Awards?’, PS: Political Science & Politics 43 (2): 283–289.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, Duncan S.A. (2009) ‘Writing the World: Disciplinary History and Beyond’, International Affairs 85 (1): 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blouin-Genest, Gabriel and David Grondin (2010) ‘“This is Africa.” L’empire au coeur des Relations internationales et l’anglais comme langue imperial: le silence postcolonial à travers le cas d’Achille Mbembe’, in Hélène Pellerin, ed., La perspective impériale en Relations internationales, 217–250, Outremont: Athéna éditions.Google Scholar
  4. Büger, Christian and Frank Gadinger (2007) ‘Culture, Terror and Practice in International Relations: An Invitation to Practice Theory’, Paper presented at the workshop ‘The (Re-)turn to Practice: Thinking Practices in International Relations and Security Studies’, 18−19 May, European University Institute, Florence.Google Scholar
  5. Cardinal, Linda, Claude Couture and Claude Denis (1999) ‘La révolution tranquille à l’épreuve de la “nouvelle” historiographie et de l’approche post-coloniale’, GLOBE: Revue internationale d’études québécoises 2 (1): 75–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cornut, Jérémie and Stéphane Roussel (2011a) ‘Un champ et deux univers? Les francophones dans l’étude de la politique étrangère canadienne’, Politiques et sociétés 30 (1): 139–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cornut, Jérémie and Stéphane Roussel (2011b) ‘Canadian Foreign Policy: A Linguistically Divided Field’, Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique 44 (3): 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cox, Wayne S. and Kim Richard Nossal (2009) ‘The “Crimson World”: The Anglo Core, the Post-Imperial Non-Core, and the Hegemony of American IR’, in Arlene B. Tickner and Ole Wæver, eds, International Relations Scholarship Around the World, 287–307, London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Deitelhoff, Nicole and Klaus Dieter Wolf (2009) ‘Der Widerspenstigen Selbst-Zähmung? Zur Professionalisierung der Internationalen Beziehungen in Deutschland’, Politische Vierteljahresschrift 50 (3): 451–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dunn, Kevin C. and Timothy M. Shaw, eds (2001) Africa's Challenge to International Relations Theory, Houndmills: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. García Segura, Caterina (2006) ‘Spain’, in Knud Erik Jørgensen and Tonny Brems Knudsen, eds, International Relations in Europe: Traditions, Perspectives and Destinations, 100–124, Milton Park and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Giesen, Klaus-Gerd (2006) ‘France and Other French-Speaking Countries (1945–1994)’, in Knud Erik Jørgensen and Tonny Brems Knudsen, eds, International Relations in Europe: Traditions, Perspectives and Destinations, 19–46, Milton Park and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Gingras, Yves (1984) ‘La valeur d’une langue dans un champ scientifique’, Recherches sociographiques 25 (2): 285–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gingras, Yves and Sébastien Mosbah-Natanson (2010) ‘Where Are Social Sciences Produced?’, in World Social Science Report: Knowledge Divides, 149–153, Paris: UNESCO Publishing and International Social Science Council.Google Scholar
  15. Huysmans, Jef (2006) The Politics of Insecurity: Fear, Migration and Asylum in the EU, Milton Park and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Ives, Peter (2006) ‘“Global English”: Linguistic Imperialism or Practical Lingua Franca’, Studies in Language and Capitalism 1 (1): 121–141.Google Scholar
  17. Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus (2011) The Conduct of Inquiry in International Relations: Philosophy of Science and Its Implications for the Study of World Politics, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Jordan, Richard, Daniel Maliniak, Amy Oakes, Susan Peterson and Michael J. Tierney (2009) One Discipline or Many? TRIP Survey of International Relations Faculty in Ten Countries, Williamsburg: Institute for the Theory and Practice of International Relations, College of William and Mary.Google Scholar
  19. Jørgensen, Knud Erik and Tonny Brems Knudsen (2006) ‘Introduction’, in Knud Erik Jørgensen and Tonny Brems Knudsen, eds, International Relations in Europe: Traditions, Perspectives and Destinations, 1–16, Milton Park and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Kacowicz, Arie M. (2009) ‘Israel: The Development of a Discipline in a Unique Setting’, in Arlene B. Tickner and Ole Wæver, eds, International Relations Scholarship Around the World, 191–207, London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Ling, L.H.M. (2010) ‘Journeys Beyond the West: World Orders and a 7th Century Buddhist Monk’, International Affairs at the New School Working Papers 2010-02, January, http://www.gpia.info/files/u16/Ling_2010-02a.pdf (accessed 1 September, 2011).
  22. Lipson, Michael, Daniel Maliniak, Amy Oakes, Susan Peterson and Michael J. Tierney (2007) ‘Divided Discipline? Comparing Views of US and Canadian IR Scholars’, International Journal 62 (2): 327–343.Google Scholar
  23. Macleod, Alex and Dan O’Meara, eds (2010) Contestations et résistances: les théories des relations internationales depuis la fin de la guerre froide, 2nd edn., Outremont: Athéna éditions.Google Scholar
  24. Mignolo, Walter (2000) Local Histories/Global Designs: Coloniality, Subaltern Knowledges, and Border Thinking, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Neufeld, Mark and Teresa Healy (2001) ‘Critical Reflections on a Discipline: A View from North of the 49th Parallel’, in Robert Crawford and D.S.L. Jarvis, eds, International Relations — Still an American Social Science?, 243–253, Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  26. Nossal, Kim Richard (2000) ‘Home-Grown IR: The Canadianization of International Relations’, Journal of Canadian Studies/Revue d’études canadiennes 35 (1): 95–114.Google Scholar
  27. Pennycook, Alastair (1994) The Cultural Politics of English as an International Language, Harlow and New York: Longman Publishers.Google Scholar
  28. Porter, Tony (2001) ‘Can There Be National Perspectives on Inter(National) Relations?’, in Robert Crawford and D.S.L. Jarvis, eds, International Relations — Still an American Social Science? 131–147, Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  29. Pouliot, Vincent (2010) International Security in Practice: The Politics of NATO-Russia Diplomacy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schwartzwald, Robert (2005) ‘Rush to Judgement? Postcolonial Criticism and Quebec’, Revista Mexicana de Estudios Canadienses (nueva época) 10: 85–108.Google Scholar
  31. van Parijs, Philippe (2004) ‘Europe's Linguistic Challenge’, European Journal of Sociology 45 (1): 113–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. van Parijs, Philippe (2010) ‘Linguistic Justice and the Territorial Imperative’, Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 13 (1): 181–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wæver, Ole (1998) ‘The Sociology of a Not so International Discipline: American and European Developments in International Relations’, International Organization 52 (4): 687–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Walt, Stephen (2011) ‘Is IR Still “An American Social Science”?’, Foreign Policy, 6 June, http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/06/06/is_ir_still_an_american_social_science (accessed 16 September, 2011).

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne-Marie D'Aoust
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations