Introduction: The Political and Economic Infrastructure of Academic Practice: The ‘Semiperiphery’ as a Category for Social and Linguistic Analysis

Abstract

For some time now, the terms ‘centre’ (or ‘core’) and ‘periphery’ have been a common feature of discussions about academic writing in recognition of the many inequalities that exist in the world of scholarly publishing. One of the most significant works in this regard was Canagarajah’s 2002 book, The Geopolitics of Academic Writing, which highlighted some of the material and institutional constraints affecting researchers in eco-nomically disadvantaged parts of the globe. Since then, the issues raised (which include themes like access to material resources and disciplinary networks, institutional infrastructures, academic cultures and so on) have been developed and extended by authors such as Lillis and Curry (2010), Salager-Meyer (2008) and Ferguson (2007), while the traditional concern with the linguistic constraints facing non-native English speaker (NNES) researchers has also been recast in terms of the core/periphery dichotomy (for example, Flowerdew 2001, Giannoni 2008, Uzuner 2008). The resulting picture is of a global academic system that is neatly split between a prosperous centre, endowed with ample resources and characterized by a rigorous meritocratic culture based on sound Enlightenment principles, and a disadvantaged periphery where academic departments are run like ‘minifiefdoms’ (Canagarajah 2002, p. 195) and researchers are deprived of even the most basic equipment such as good-quality paper and photocopiers.