2012

This Master’s thesis is born out of a growing unease with the general discourse on im- migration and immigration policy in Norway. What at times appears as an ongoing discussion concerning the amount, and potential negative impact, of immigrants, asylum seekers and refugees that should or should not be admitted into Norway, has become an overarching container for a plethora of important discussions on the underlying issues of globalization, the Norwegian welfare state, secularism and religion, cultural identity, ethnicity, citizenship—and, central to this thesis; what it entails to be Norwegian. Whereas a Norwegian identity may or may not exist as a unique conglomerate—that is, as particular to Norwegians—consisting of a range of cultural, ethnic and political idiosyncrasies, it is never the less present a posteriori, vocally defended when viewed as a target being threatened by external pressure. This external threat, it seems when looking into the Norwegian public debate, is primarily constituted by ‘foreign-culturals’, that is, migrants from beyond the Western cultural community—none more foreign than Muslims. Originating from a range of more or less vocal actors across the Norwegian political spectrum, cries for support in defending Norwegian values and culture is mediated through newspapers, television and radio on a daily basis, creating an environment where the baser instincts of homo Norvegicus are allowed to thrive and flourish. Norwegianness—in the vast majority of its subscribers—is neither problematized nor properly conceptualized until it meets this foreign ‘constitutive outside’, forcing into play a renewed interest in what it means to be Norwegian. The value-oriented tenets of Norwegianness, however, are at times indistinguishable from the core ideas of the more classic conceptions of European enlightenment. The Enlightenment, both as historical epoch as well as ongoing civilizing project (in its multiple understandings and facets), is fundamental as a backdrop in the construction of a binary opposition between the rational and agency-driven (while emphatically good-hearted) ‘Us’ as opposed to the cultural-psychologically driven, abject, immigrant ‘Other’.

2020

The term ‘standard language’ is not widely known in Norwegian. A traditional term in Norway has been normalmål, meaning ‘language norm authorised by the state’, and this has applied first and foremost to our two written language versions: Bokmål and Nynorsk. With respect to spoken language, the situation is more complex, as no single language variety has been authorised as a standard for spoken Norwegian, and language conflict in Norway has stressed exactly the political issue that authorising one variety would give privileges to some specific social group and be intolerant towards other groups. The verb normalisere has been used for ‘speaking in accordance with the norms for written language’, and this corresponds to the use of ‘spoken standard language’ (SSL), as described below. Here we should note, however, that this language is standardised with respect only to vocabulary, syntax and morphology – where the norm for written language is easily transferable. This standardisation d...

Journal of Aesthetics & Culture, 2016

2013

Hyllestad, Whitehead, Olander & Olsen. Language and Prehistory of the Indo-European Peoples. A Cross-Disciplinary perspective. Copenhagen Studies in Indo-European. Museum Tusculanum Press, Copenhagen, 2017

(Originally submitted 2004) Nordic archaeology’s attitude to identity, ethnicity, language and the Indo-European question has been intricate, and has varied through time. The nature of group identities, especially ethnicity was according to cultural historical archaeology something in the very heart of people – people were born into an ethnic identity that was characterized by common language, culture and “blood”. In the wake of Frederik Barth’s seminal introduction to “Ethnic groups and boundaries” (1969) this view was challenged. Barth emphasized the instrumentalist nature of ethnicity, and in his article the important element was not the idea of a primordial ethnic and cultural core, but instead emphasis on the maintenance and negotiation of boundaries. In Barth’s argument, ethnicity becomes a dynamic means of handling difference and a medium of interaction. Continued work on concepts of identity and ethnicity, influenced by sociologists like Bourdieu and Giddens, emphasized the historical depth of ethnic identities, and look beyond an instrumentalist approach to modeling the establishment, constitution and reproduction through over- and along-the-border interaction (Jones 1997). Recent work has sought a “contextual” approach, i.a. looking for the establishment of ideas of shared fundamental institutions, norms, practices and myths. Such shared institutions in themselves do not constitute an ethnic identity, but in time become referential nodes, practically embodied experience and ideas of shared history. Institutions, norms, practices and myths become instruments and cultural capital for the generation of shared identities (Prescott and Glørstad 2012).

Forum Bosnae, 2008

The issue of multiculturalism has become increasingly important in discourses related to European integration processes. 1 in theory, if we take it to mean the plurality of cultures that can coexist, with respect for each other, it certainly makes sense. However, in practice, the existence of different cultures, coupled with recent trends of increased immigration from less developed countries, can cause interesting frictions and uneasiness, as well as raising questions about the limits of tolerance. 2 One relatively recent anthropological attempt to deal with the concept is Watson (2000). Watson uses his own fieldwork experience (especially in Malaysia) to illustrate and explain the complex phenomena associated with multiculturalism. In so doing, he does not really define multiculturalism (which would require a working definition of "culture") but illustrates the ways it manifests itself in everyday life. He demonstrates the distinction people draw between "multicultural" and "multiculturalism," 1 Debates on multiculturalism have also been connected with those on "the Debates on multiculturalism have also been connected with those on "the end of history," with all the necessary implications (

Nordic Journal of Migration Research

The terror attacks in Norway 2011, targeting what the perpetrator described as proponents of immigration and multicultural society, created exceptional circumstances for people to reflect on issues of belonging. In this kind of situation, it is assumed that people emphasise their affinity with the affected country. This, in turn, makes the problematisation of the affinities displayed particularly interesting since the act of expressing them even in a very taxing situation indicates their importance. Texts by individuals from ethnic minorities, written soon after the attacks, are analysed in terms of conceptions of ‘Norwegianness’. Results show explicit support for civic values but also multiple expressions of not feeling recognised as part of majority society also from individuals obviously acculturated to Norwegian lifestyles and cultural codes. These expressions are explained in terms of whiteness – non-whiteness and religion.

Handbook of Pre-modern Nordic Memory Studies, 2018

What should or should not be remembered as part of a national narrative is determined by those holding the power to mold such decisions. For those wishing to assert their authority and power, winning the battle of how the past is defined can be highly advantageous. An analysis of the workings of power reveals how closely history, memory, and the allocation of identity are connected to the concept of the nation as something permanent and inviolable; as an entity that is meant to be – or is in the process of being – fully realised

This article's point of departure is practicing an(other) methodology than those that are dominant within educational research in Norway.

Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development

Norway is known for its dialect diversity and also for the fact that dialects, on the whole, are cherished and used within all social domains and by people in all social strata. Previous studies indicate that also immigrants to Norway tend to acquire and use local speech, and that this generally is positively perceived. However, language alone may not always be enough to be accepted as someone who belongs and claims of local identity may be rejected. This article reports on a study of attitudes towards immigrants' use of dialect by a large number of high school students from six different urban and rural places in Eastern and Western Norway. In order to examine the extent to which adolescents with an immigrant background are seen as legitimate and entitled users of local speech, a visual-verbal-guise and an extensive online questionnaire were designed and focus group interviews were conducted. In the study we ask whether adolescents with an immigrant background are evaluated differently than their non-immigrant peers while speaking the same variety, and whether dialect has an impact on how 'foreign' or 'Norwegian' they are perceived to be.