The aim of this thesis is to analyse the personal pronoun “we” in a political debate using Conversation Analysis as research method. More specifically, the thesis aims to identify and analyse how the speakers of a political debate use “we” to express different referential domains in terms of group affiliation. Consequently, to support the thesis’s aim, the following research questions have been devised: What different categories of “we” can be found in the debate? How and when are these different categories used to manifest group affiliation and what do they accomplish?

La signification de l’œuvre de Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda, philosophe et historien espagnol du XVIè siècle ne fait aujourd’hui l’objet d’aucun consensus : s’agit-il d’un scolastique attardé au siècle de la Renaissance, d’un précurseur du catholicisme post tridentin, d’un crypto-luthérien, ou de l’un des grands humanistes de son temps ? Quelle est la portée exacte des thèses qu’il formula en 1550-1551 à Valladolid pour défendre la légitimité des guerres espagnoles dans le Nouveau Monde ? Après avoir suivi pas à pas la formation intellectuelle du philosophe, les débats auxquels il prit part (contre Erasme, Luther, ou Las Casas) et analysé son œuvre d’historien, notre recherche fait apparaître l’orientation profondément rationaliste et universaliste de sa démarche. Elle met en lumière l’importance, pour la pensée politique occidentale, de la définition qu’il donne de la barbarie. Dépourvue de toute connotation inégalitaire fondée sur la race ou la religion, cette définition, politique et morale, décrit la barbarie comme résultant d’institutions publiques attentatoires à la loi naturelle. Elle affirme le pouvoir critique de la Raison humaine à l’égard des institutions et des pouvoirs, dans le Nouveau Monde comme dans l’Ancien. / There is currently no consensus as to the significance of the work of sixteenth-century Spanish philosopher and historian Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda: was he an anachronistic scholastic in the century of the Renaissance, a precursor of post-Tridentine Catholicism, a crypto-Lutheran, or one of the great humanists of his time? What is the actual import of the arguments he put forward in Valladolid in 1550–1551 in defending the legitimacy of Spain's conquests in the New World? Founded on step-by-step examination of his intellectual training and the debateshe took part in (against Erasmus, Luther and Las Casas), and on close study of his work as a historian, my research reveals the deeply rationalist and universalist tendency of his approach and sheds fresh light on the importance, for Western political thinking, of his definition of barbarism. Devoid of all inegalitarian connotations based on race and religion, this political and moral definition describes barbarism as produced by public institutions detrimental to naturallaw, and asserts the critical power of human Reason with respect to institutions and constituted authority in the New World as in the Old.

No description available.

The question regarding male circumcision in Sweden became a relevant topic within the public debates during the last three years. Due to the Swedish political party, Centerpartiet’s decision to strive for a ban on male circumcision, this debate surfaced after the 28th of September. Participation in the public debate came from different directions and perspectives on male circumcision. In this thesis I focus on different actors and their public opinions in debate articles published between the years of 2018-2019. The aim of this thesis is to examine how critical arguments are constructed from perceptions of a decreasing significance of religion within late modern societies. This results in a motivation to ban the performance of male circumcision without medical indication. By using the qualitative text analysis of systematic text condensation this thesis closer categorizes the arguments into the three themes of “children’s bodily integrity”, “the delimitation of medicalization” and “the religious other”. In addition to this, the thesis also looks into the argument from the analytical framework on argumentation analysis in order to distinguish “normative” and “factual” arguments in the debate. To look closer at the constructions of the critical arguments within the debate this thesis uses the theoretical framework of Sara Ahmed (2011). From a phenomenological inspired perspective this thesis further looks into the argument’s correlation and construction of a collective body. This in particular is the construction of the secular- in relation to the religious body. Constructions of the religious body allows for secular ideas to circulate around national symbols and principles, which results in an exclusion of religious motives and perspectives. The thesis further sheds light on the cultural imbedded “medical gaze”, from the theoretical perspective on medicalization of Karin Johannisson (2013). This thesis aims to examine the reproduction of the medical superiority within debates on questions regarding the human body, like the one on male circumcision. The thesis illustrates the complexity of religious visibility within the Swedish context. Although the critical arguments reject the religious motives of male circumcision, the debate increases the religious visibility in the public debates.

The main goal of this disertation is to map American pespectives on the position of Central Europe in American foreign policy after the Cold War. Its ambition is to systematize the particular area of American foreign policy thought that deals with Central Europe and, more precisely, with U.S. relations with the region. The goal is to contribute to a better understanding of how have the individual camps and traditions represented in the American foreign policy debate approached this particular issue. To achieve these goals, this disertation employs two existing typologies of American foreign policy thought and, subsequently, attempts to create a new, original typology that would better suit the aim of mapping the whole spectrum of relevant American perspectives on Central Europe. This disertation does not describe what has really happened in Central European-American relations, but rather aims at understanding better the U.S. foreign policy thought or, better said, one specific part of it: Opinions on U.S.-Central European relations and the position of Central Erope in international politics. Analysing the American post-Cold War discourse on Central Europe is the instrument to achieve this goal. This disertation, however, does not pressupose a direct causal link between the discourse and the...

Syftet med denna uppsats är att analysera debatter och diskurser i svenska medier kring  Kulturrådets litteraturstöd från 2009 och fram till och med 2021. Det empiriska materialet består av 22 artiklar  hämtade från dags- och kvällspress. Genom att använda diskursanalys som teori och metod problematiseras flera  debatter. Frågor som ställs är: Vilka föreställningar om litteraturstödet kommer till uttryck i debatten? Vilka  positioner intar de olika rösterna i debatten? Vilka diskurser framträder i litteraturstödsdebatten och vad  kännetecknar dessa? Metod och teori utgår från Hedemarks användning av diskursteori. I analysen framträder tre  diskurser: en armlängdsdiskurs, en kvalitetsdiskurs samt diskursen mångfald och kommersiell likriktning.  Analysen avslöjade att kulturskribenter som politiker ofta har en framträdande position och ett stort inflytande  över innehållet i debatterna, och att dessa upplever att de styrande ignorerar principen om armlängds avstånd till  kulturskapande. Debattörerna är oense om kvalitetsbedömning men även om hur mycket innehållet ska beaktas  vid beslut om stöd. De professionella i form av bibliotekarier deltog inte alls. Vi menar att denna osynlighet är ett  resultat av att bara vissa släpps in i debatten, men också att det i slutänden är upp till varje enskilt bibliotek hur  förmedlingen av litteraturstödda titlar går till. / The aim of this thesis is to analyse debates and discourses in Swedish media about the support of  literature from the Swedish cultural council from 2009 and up to and including 2021. The empirical material  consists of 22 articles derived from the daily press, and by using discourse analysis as theory and methodology,  several debates are problematized. Questions posed in this study are: What views of the support of literature are  expressed in the debates? What positions do the different voices occupy in the debate? What discourses emerge  and what characterises these? The theoretical and methodological framework is based on Hedemark’s use of  discourse theory. In the analysis three discourses appear: an arm's length discourse, a quality discourse and a  diversity and a commercial one-dimensionality discourse. The analysis revealed that cultural writers as well as  politicians often have a prominent position and a great influence over the content of the debates, and that they are  of the perception that the government ignores the principle of arm’s length distance to cultural creation. The  debaters are arguing over quality judgment, but also how much importance should be considered regarding the  content when deciding which titles to support. The professionals, e.g., librarians, however, did not participate in  the debates. We believe that this invisibility is a result of only some being admitted into the debate, but also in the  end, it is up to each library how the dissemination of literature-supported titles takes place.

Este trabajo recoge un análisis de los principales factores que influyen en el uso de las formas de tratamiento, tú y usted, en español. El contexto de este análisis es un debate político televisado previo a las elecciones generales celebradas en noviembre de 2019 en España y en el que participan siete líderes de los principales partidos políticos españoles. Por una parte, la autora realiza una exposición de la visión más clásica sobre los factores que condicionan el uso, donde el trato familiar o de confianza se contrapone al trato formal o de respeto y donde cuestiones como la edad y el género del hablante se presentan como factores determinantes de la elección. Por otra parte, se introduce un modelo más actualizado donde la situación comunicativa, vista desde una amplia perspectiva, se presenta como un factor revalorizado que influye en gran medida en la covariación. El estudio pormenorizado del corpus aporta conclusiones sobre cuáles son los factores que más relevancia adquieren en la elección entre tú y usted por parte de un hablante español en un contexto de lenguaje político.

No description available.

Bakgrund: Revisionsplikten var länge obligatorisk för alla aktiebolag i Sverige men avskaffades år 2010 för små aktiebolag som ett led i att förenkla för företagare. Avskaffandet skapade en debatt mellan olika aktörer. Debatten har till stor del handlat om den ekonomiska brottsligheten har ökat efter avskaffandet av revisionsplikten och om nyttan av revisionen, om den är värd vad den kostar. Syfte: Studiens syfte är att bidra med en förståelse för debatten om avskaffandet av revisionsplikten för små aktiebolag i Sverige. Varför och hur har de olika aktörerna valt att agera för att nå ut med sina budskap samt vilka aktörerna vill påverka med budskapet. Studiens bidrag är att fånga de skillnader och likheter som finns i debatten i nuläget och hur debatten har utvecklats mellan åren 2008-2023. Metod: Studien har en kvalitativ ansats och genomfördes med hjälp av metoder som dokumentanalys och av semistrukturerade intervjuer. De mest relevanta dokumenten valdes ut för att de ligger till grund för en stor del av debatten. Det kompletterades med en sammansatt intervjuguide som anpassades för att uppnå studiens syfte. Slutsats: Politik är en grund till varför debatten ser ut som den gör eftersom politikerna har makten att fatta beslut och förändra. Budskapen som aktörerna förmedlar i debatten har olika syften, som visar på skillnader och likheter mellan aktörerna. Debatten har två olika sidor där den ena sidan argumenterar för ett återinförande av revisionsplikten och därmed minska den ekonomiska brottsligheten. Den andra sidan fokuserar på att höja gränsvärdena för revisionsplikt för aktiebolag så att fler företag ska kunna välja bort revision. / Background: The audit duty was for a long time mandatory for all limited companies in Sweden, but was abolished in 2010 for small limited companies as part of simplification for entrepreneurs. The abolition created a debate between different actors. The debate has largely been about whether economic crime has increased after the abolition of the audit duty and about the benefit of the audit, whether it is worth the cost. Purpose: The purpose of the study is to contribute to an understanding of the debate about the abolition of the audit duty for small limited companies in Sweden. Why and how have the various actors chosen to act in order to reach out with their messages and who the actors want to influence with the message. The study's contribution is to capture the differences and similarities that exist in the current debate and how the debate has developed between the years 2008-2023. Method: The study has a qualitative approach and was carried out using methods such as document analysis and semi-structured interviews. The most relevant documents were selected because they form the basis of a large part of the debate. It was supplemented with a composite interview guide that was adapted to achieve the purpose of the study. Conclusions: The politics is a foundation for why the debate looks the way it does because the politicians have the power to make decisions and change. The messages that the actors convey in the debate have different purposes, which show differences and similarities between the actors. The debate has two different sides, with one side arguing for a reintroduction of the audit duty and thereby reducing financial crime. The other side focuses on raising the threshold for audit obligation for limited companies so that more companies can opt out of audit.

Past research shows that journalists are gatekeepers to information the public seeks. Using the gatekeeping and agenda-setting theory, this study used a content analysis of tweets from political journalists during the final 2016 presidential debate to examine social media usage in efforts to convey information to followers and whether social media has allowed for journalists to present a more transparent view of candidates to the public. This study used feminist political theory to further analyze whether the tweets from political journalists portrayed Hillary Clinton, the female candidate, with stereotypical “female” traits, such as more emotional and more trustworthy. Applying these theories, this study found that political journalists use social media for personal uses and when discussing politics are still gatekeepers of information. When the debates were discussed, the study demonstrates there was little discussion via tweets of gendered traits and issues in regards to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.