Advanced

Negotiating Spaces and the Public–Private Boundary: Language Policies Versus Language Use Practices in Odessa

Polese, Abel; Urinboyev, Rustam LU ; Kerikmae, Tanel and Murru, Sarah (2018) In Space and Culture
Abstract
While the so-called “end of public space” literature, focusing on encroachment of private interests and state surveillance, has contributed to critical thinking of access (or the lack thereof) to public space, and the loss of publicity of public space, the conceptual tools such literature offers to understand contestations in and over public space have remained underdeveloped or, at best, underexplored. This article builds on the above debates to provides further empirical evidence on the way actors of a country compete over, and negotiate, the use of public space and the way it should be regulated. Empirically, it illustrates competition and negotiation of the use of language in Odessa, the third largest city of Ukraine, where Ukrainian... (More)
While the so-called “end of public space” literature, focusing on encroachment of private interests and state surveillance, has contributed to critical thinking of access (or the lack thereof) to public space, and the loss of publicity of public space, the conceptual tools such literature offers to understand contestations in and over public space have remained underdeveloped or, at best, underexplored. This article builds on the above debates to provides further empirical evidence on the way actors of a country compete over, and negotiate, the use of public space and the way it should be regulated. Empirically, it illustrates competition and negotiation of the use of language in Odessa, the third largest city of Ukraine, where Ukrainian should be the official language but Russian is widely used. Theoretically, starting from the way public and private are negotiated, and the extent to which this happens, we will suggest that resistance to state measures, and policies, that do not suit a considerable portion of a population may happen not only formally but also informally. The practices, tactics, and mechanisms used may, however, remain “invisible” for some time and then surprise everyone by emerging, all of a sudden, one day. A possible way to notice these dynamics is to engage with an “everyday” approach, thus acknowledging that everyday practices are a meaningful, and useful, site for understanding sociopolitical developments in the process of the construction of “the political.” (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Space and Culture
pages
17 pages
publisher
SAGE Publications Inc.
external identifiers
  • scopus:85058662561
ISSN
1206-3312
DOI
10.1177/1206331218799021
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
4a0471ae-5277-4e65-8602-a7714c4f8b5b
date added to LUP
2018-09-04 17:45:57
date last changed
2019-02-20 11:25:47
@article{4a0471ae-5277-4e65-8602-a7714c4f8b5b,
  abstract     = {While the so-called “end of public space” literature, focusing on encroachment of private interests and state surveillance, has contributed to critical thinking of access (or the lack thereof) to public space, and the loss of publicity of public space, the conceptual tools such literature offers to understand contestations in and over public space have remained underdeveloped or, at best, underexplored. This article builds on the above debates to provides further empirical evidence on the way actors of a country compete over, and negotiate, the use of public space and the way it should be regulated. Empirically, it illustrates competition and negotiation of the use of language in Odessa, the third largest city of Ukraine, where Ukrainian should be the official language but Russian is widely used. Theoretically, starting from the way public and private are negotiated, and the extent to which this happens, we will suggest that resistance to state measures, and policies, that do not suit a considerable portion of a population may happen not only formally but also informally. The practices, tactics, and mechanisms used may, however, remain “invisible” for some time and then surprise everyone by emerging, all of a sudden, one day. A possible way to notice these dynamics is to engage with an “everyday” approach, thus acknowledging that everyday practices are a meaningful, and useful, site for understanding sociopolitical developments in the process of the construction of “the political.”},
  author       = {Polese, Abel and Urinboyev, Rustam and Kerikmae, Tanel and Murru, Sarah},
  issn         = {1206-3312},
  language     = {eng},
  month        = {09},
  pages        = {17},
  publisher    = {SAGE Publications Inc.},
  series       = {Space and Culture},
  title        = {Negotiating Spaces and the Public–Private Boundary: Language Policies Versus Language Use Practices in Odessa},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1206331218799021},
  year         = {2018},
}