Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T16:38:48.797Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Commentary: Mobility, contexts, and the chronotope

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2017

Jan Blommaert
Jan Blommaert*
Affiliation:
Tilburg University
*
Address for correspondence: Jan Blommaert Department of Culture Studies, University of Tilburg, PO Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlandsj.blommaert@tilburguniversity.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Mobility raises specific issues with regard to what we understand by ‘context’, and in this commentary I suggest that Bakhtin's concept of chronotope could be a useful instrument enabling a precise and detailed, mobile, unit of ‘context’. This unit connects specific time-space arrangements with ideological and moral orders, projecting possible and preferred identities. The articles in this issue offer rich material in this direction.

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 46 , Special Issue 1: Metapragmatics of Mobility , February 2017 , pp. 95 - 99
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agha, Asif (2007). Language and social relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail (1981). The dialogical imagination. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Blommaert, Jan (2005). Discourse: A critical introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blommaert, Jan (2015a). Chronotopes, scales and complexity in the study of language and society. Annual Review of Anthropology 44:105–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blommaert, Jan (2015b). Meaning as a nolinear effect: The birth of cool. AILA Review 28:7–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blommaert, Jan, & De Fina, Anna (2016). Chronotopic identities: On the timespace organization of who we are. Tilburg Papers in Culture Studies, paper 153. Tilburg: Babylon.Google Scholar
Blommaert, Jan; Collins, James & Slembrouck, Stef (2005). Polycentricity and interactional regimes in ‘global neighborhoods’. Ethnography 6(2):205–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cicourel, Aaron (1967). The social organization of juvenile justice. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Cicourel, Aaron (1992). The interpenetration of communicative contexts: Examples from medical encounters. In Duranti, Alessandro & Goodwin, Charles (eds.), Rethinking context, 291–310. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving (1974). Frame analysis. An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Gumperz, John (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hymes, Dell (1996). Ethnography, linguistics, narrative inequality: Toward an understanding of voice. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael (1992). The indeterminacy of contextualization: When is enough enough? In Auer, Peter & DiLuzio, Aldo (eds.), The contextualization of language, 55–76. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael (1996). Monoglot ‘standard’ in America: Standardization and metaphors of linguistic hegemony. In Brenneis, Donald & Macaulay, Ronald (eds.), The matrix of language, 284–306. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael (2003). Indexical order and the dialectics of sociolinguistic life. Language & Communication 23(3):193–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varis, Piia, & Blommaert, Jan (2015). Conviviality and collectives on social media: Virality, memes, and new social structures. Multilingual Margins 2(1):31–45.Google Scholar