Kolektivna agentivnost i toposi u funkciji gradnje rimskog nacionalnog i nadnacionalnog identiteta u historiografskom narativu V. Paterkula / Collective agency and topoi in the function of creating Roman national and supranational identity in the historiographical narrative of Velleius Paterculus
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54524/2490-3930.2023.85Keywords:
national and supernational identity, discourse strategies and macrostrategies, toponyms, lexical and grammatical choices, collective agency and topoiAbstract
Language, as the linguistic manifestation of extralinguistic experiences, often functions as a means for the creation and expression of societal inequality. In addition to the fact that the participants of social reality are almost never socially equal, which means that someone has power over others, the linguistic reflection of those relationships always derives from the author, who has the power to control the context; his practical instrumentation comes from his own lexical and grammatical choices, as well as their conscious and targeted combination. In this paper, the focus is on noticing and distinguishing, and analyzing and interpreting the choices of V. Paterculus as an author within the framework of collective agency and the topoi with which the Roman national identity is first built, and then positioned as superior to the identities of the peoples with whom the Romans came into contact. While for authors from the 1st century A.D. the language strategies touched on in this paper were not available, since they were neither described nor defined before the 20th century, ancient writers used them completely unconsciously in their spontaneous writing; therefore, these texts, as well as modern ones, are subject to linguistic analysis, interpretation and criticism precisely according to the guidelines of modern language criteria. In this paper one of the possible methods of analysis of the construction of the national and supranational identity of a nation in the historiographical discourse will be offered; the analysis will be based on discursive strategies and macro-strategies offered by the discursive-historical approach and based on empirical data gathered in tabular reviews. An indispensable part of the analysis will be the analyst’s criticism, which derives from democratic norms, human rights and the criteria of rational argumentation from today’s temporal, cultural and political context, because the purpose of critical discourse studies is to expose and point out how domination, i.e., the abuse of social power and inequality, are realized and reproduced in text and speech, but also on how to oppose them in a social and political context (van Dijk 2001, 352).
References
Bamberg et al. (ur.) 2007 – M. Bamberg, A. De Fina, D. Schiffrin, Selves and Identities in Narrative Discourse, John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2007.
De Fina 2003 – A. De Fina, Identity in narrative: a study of immigrant discourse, John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2003.
De Fina et al. 2006 – A. De Fina, D. Schiffrin, M. Bamberg, Discourse and Identity, Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Fairclough 1989 – N. Fairclough, Language and Power, Longman, 1989.
Mathisen 2006 – R. W. Mathisen, Peregrini, Barbari, and Cives Romani: Concepts of Citizenship andthe Legal Identity of Barbarians in the Later Roman Empire. The American Historical Review, 111(4), 2006, 1011–1040.
Morley 2010 – N. Morley, The Roman Empire: Roots of Imperialism, Pluto Press, 2010.
Reisigl 2017 – M. Reisigl, The Discourse-Historical Approach, The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies, Routledge, 2017.
Richardson 2004 – J. E. Richardson, (Mis)Representing Islam: the racism and rhetoric of British Broadsheet newspapers, John Benjamins – Routledge, 2004.
Rubel 2020 – A. Rubel, What the Romans really meant when using the word “Barbarian”: Some thoughts on “Romans and Barbarians”, Rubel in A; Curcă R. -G; Symonds R. -U. Voβ P; H. (eds., Rome and Barbaricum: Contributions to the Archeology and History of interaction in European Protohistory, Archaeopress, 1–21.
Schiffrin 1996 – D. Schiffrin, Narrative as Self-Portrait: Sociolinguistic Constructions of Identity, Language and Society 25, 1996, 167‒203.
Sanford 1948 – E. M. Sanford, Bibliophile and Barbarian in Ancient Rome. The Classical Journal, 44(1), 1948, 57–58.
Škiljan 1992 – D. Škiljan, Dijalog s antikom. Latina et Graeca, 1992.
Van Dijk 2001 – T. A. Van Dijk, Critical Discourse Analysis, D. Tannen et al. eds.
Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Blackwell Publishers, 2001.
Van Dijk 2003 – T. A. Van Dijk, Ideology and discourse, Ariel, 2003.
Van Dijk 2007 – T. A. Van Dijk, Discourse as Social Interaction: Discourse Studies, A Multidisciplinary Introduction, vol. 2; Sage, 2007.
Van Dijk 2008b – T. A. Van Dijk, Discourse and Power, Houndmills Palgrave Macmillan, 2008b.
Van Dijk 2018 – T. A. Van Dijk, Socio-cognitive discourse studies, in Flowerdew J; Richardson E. (eds), The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies, Routledge, 2018.
Wodak et al. 1999/2009 – R. Wodak, R. de Cillia, M. Reisigl, K. Liebhart, The discursive construction of national identity. 1st and 2nd ed. Edinburgh University Press, 1999/2009.
Wodak, Meyer 2006 – R. Wodak, M. Meyer, Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, London: Sage, 2006.
Yanakieva 2018 – S. Yanakieva, Language and Ethnic Identity of the Thracians during the Roman Age and Late Antiquity, Lyudmil Vagalinski et al. (eds), Proccedings of the First International Roman and Late Antique Thrace Conference “Cities, Territories and Identities” (Plovdiv, 3rd – 7th October 2016), Bulletin of the National Archeological Institute, XLIV, Sofia 2018, 131‒139.
Ž. Žagar 2021 – I. Ž. Žagar, Four Critical Essays on Argumentation. Dostupno na: (https://www.pei.si/ISBN/978-961-270-336-3.pdf ). (Pristupljeno: 6. 4. 2023.)
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Journal of BATHINVS Association ACTA ILLYRICA / Godišnjak Udruženja BATHINVS ACTA ILLYRICA Online ISSN 2744-1318
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.