Suchergebnisse

Icelandic politics are analysed from the perspectives of three normative models of democracy: the liberal, republican and deliberative democratic theories. While the Icelandic constitution is rooted in classical liberal ideas, Icelandic politics can be harshly criticized from a liberal perspective, primarily because of the unclear separation of powers of government and for the extensive involvement of politics in other social sectors. Despite strong nationalist discourse which reflects republican characteristics, rooted in the struggle for independence from Denmark, republicanism has been marginal in Icelandic politics. In the years before the financial collapse, Icelandic society underwent a process of liberalization in which power shifted to the financial sector without disentangling the close ties that had prevailed between business and politics. The special commission set up by the Icelandic Parliament to investigate the causes of the financial collapse criticized Icelandic politics and governance for its flawed working practices and lack of professionalism. The appropriate lessons to draw from this criticism are to strengthen democratic practices and institutions. In the spirit of republicanism, however, the dominant discourse about Icelandic democracy after the financial collapse has been on increasing direct, vote-centric participation in opposition to the system of formal politics. While this development is understandable in light of the loss of trust in political institutions in the wake of the financial collapse, it has not contributed to trustworthy practices. In order to improve Icelandic politics, the analysis in this paper shows, it is important to work more in the spirit of deliberative democratic theory ; Peer Reviewed

ParlaMint is a multilingual set of comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after October 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the ParlaMint TEI-encoded corpora with the derived plain text version of the corpus along with TSV metadata on the speeches. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. Note that there also exists the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, which is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1405.

ParlaMint 2.1 is a multilingual set of 17 comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after November 1st 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the ParlaMint TEI-encoded corpora with the derived plain text version of the corpus along with TSV metadata on the speeches. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. Note that there also exists the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, which is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1431.

ParlaMint is a multilingual set of comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after October 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, while the text version is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1388. The ParlaMint.ana linguistic annotation includes tokenization, sentence segmentation, lemmatisation, Universal Dependencies part-of-speech, morphological features, and syntactic dependencies, and the 4-class CoNLL-2003 named entities. Some corpora also have further linguistic annotations, such as PoS tagging or named entities according to language-specific schemes, with their corpus TEI headers giving further details on the annotation vocabularies and tools. The compressed files include the ParlaMint.ana XML TEI-encoded linguistically annotated corpus; the derived corpus in CoNLL-U with TSV speech metadata; and the vertical files (with registry file), suitable for use with CQP-based concordancers, such as CWB, noSketch Engine or KonText. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project.

ParlaMint 2.1 is a multilingual set of 17 comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (from November 1st 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, while the text version is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1432. The ParlaMint.ana linguistic annotation includes tokenization, sentence segmentation, lemmatisation, Universal Dependencies part-of-speech, morphological features, and syntactic dependencies, and the 4-class CoNLL-2003 named entities. Some corpora also have further linguistic annotations, such as PoS tagging or named entities according to language-specific schemes, with their corpus TEI headers giving further details on the annotation vocabularies and tools. The compressed files include the ParlaMint.ana XML TEI-encoded linguistically annotated corpus; the derived corpus in CoNLL-U with TSV speech metadata; and the vertical files (with registry file), suitable for use with CQP-based concordancers, such as CWB, noSketch Engine or KonText. Also included is the 2.1 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. As opposed to the previous version 2.0, this version corrects some errors in various corpora and adds the information on upper / lower house for bicameral parliaments. The vertical files have also been changed to make them easier to use in the concordancers.

Eitt af meginmarkmiðum núgildandi aðalnámskrár (Mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytið, 2011/2013) er að búa nemendur undir þátttöku í lýðræðislegu samfélagi. Samkvæmt þessu á grunnskólinn að vera sá staður sem veitir nemendum svigrúm til að öðlast reynslu af lýðræðislegu starfi og vera þátttakendur í því. Markmið þessarar rannsóknar var að kanna mögulegar breytingar á viðhorfum nemenda í þessum efnum yfir fimm ára tímabil, 2010 til 2015. Tveir hópar nemenda í 6.–10. bekk (Nalls = 627) voru spurðir um afstöðu sína til lýðræðis og lýðræðisþátttöku með fimm ára millibili. Rannsóknin var gerð í samvinnu við tíu skóla sem söfnuðu gögnum við reglubundið sjálfsmat. Niðurstöður sýna að viðhorf nemenda til lýðræðis í grunnskólum á Íslandi og lýðræðisþátttaka virðist hafa tekið mjög litlum breytingum á framangreindu tímabili. Engar breytingar var að finna á því sem kallað hefur verið frjálslynd lýðræðissjónarmið, svo sem tjáningarfrelsi og samkeppni í skólastofunni. Aftur á móti mátti greina smávægilega jákvæða breytingu á viðhorfum til þess sem kallað hefur verið samstarfslýðræði, þ.e. til þátttöku og samvinnu. Mikilvægi lýðræðisþátttöku að mati nemendanna virtist dala lítillega yfir þetta fimm ára tímabil. Niðurstöðurnar voru bornar saman við danska rannsókn frá árinu 2001 sem þessi rannsókn tók mið af. Enginn afgerandi munur fannst á viðhorfum dönsku og íslensku ungmennanna. Þó virtust frjálslynd lýðræðissjónarmið vera traustari hjá dönsku ungmennunum. ; The Icelandic national curriculum guide for compulsory schools published in 2011 specially emphasized the importance of preparing students for active participation in a democratic society: "It is expected that children and youth learn democracy by learning about democracy in a democracy" (Mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytið, p. 19). Democracy was furthermore emphasized as one of six fundamental pillars of the Icelandic education system together with literacy, sustainability, health and welfare, human rights, equality, and creativity. Accordingly, knowledge about changes in attitudes towards democracy and democratic participation since the introduction of this new conception in 2011 is of importance. The increased emphasis on issues related to democracy introduced in the Icelandic national curriculum guide for compulsory schools were to be fully implemented in 2013. Studies on how Icelandic students are prepared for an active participation in the constantly changing democratic society are few and far between. Therefore, the results of this study can be considered of importance for education stakeholders such as teachers, parents, students, and scholars. The theoretical model used in the study is based on the works of Danish researchers (Jacobsen, Jensen, Madsen, Sylvestersen, & Vincent, 2004), where democratic perspectives in a Western tradition are conceived as liberal democracy (e.g., emphasizing the rights of the individual) and republican democracy (e.g., emphasizing solidarity). According to the model, both perspectives need to be in place for a democracy to function, and it is in the tension between these two perspectives a democratic process becomes active. The goal of this study is to contribute to an increased theoretical and empirical knowledge about democratic processes and democratic participation in public schools. The research was intended to detect possible changes in the responses of children to questions related to liberal and republican democracy after the full implementation of the Icelandic national curriculum guide from 2011. The goals of the study were approached by asking two groups of children in Grades 6 through 10 (Ntotal = 627) about their attitudes towards democracy and democratic participation in the classroom. The first data collection was conducted in 2010 and the second data collection was conducted in 2015. The study was conducted in collaboration with 10 schools that carried out the data collection as a part of their own internal evaluation. The results show that attitudes towards democracy and democratic participation over the above depicted period had changed remotely during the five-year period. No changes were found in attitudes related to a liberal democracy. A slight positive change was detected regarding opportunities for participation and collaboration in a republican democracy. However, the importance of democratic participation showed a slight decline during this five-year period. According to the model of Jacobsen et. al. (2004) one of the prerequisites for liberal democracy is individuality. A comparison with Danish result from 2001 showed that about 61% of the Danish adolescents indicated that it was very important to "be the way they are" but only 47% of the Icelandic adolescents responded the same way in 2015. These results were in accordance with other manifestations of liberal democracy in the survey, which seemed stronger among the Danish adolescents. The limited change in the attitudes of adolescents towards democracy and democratic participation raises questions about whether compulsory schools had the resources to implement the changes in policy recommended by the 2011 national curriculum guide. More research is needed to explore what was done in schools to increase democracy in the classroom during the 2011-2013 implementation period. Furthermore, it is important to conduct further research to identify efficient ways for teachers and school administrators to meet the policy recommendation for an increased emphasis of democracy in Icelandic classrooms. Finally, comparison with results from other countries give reason to conduct more research on manifestations of liberal democracy (e.g., opportunities for an open and democratic discussion; respect for individuality) among Icelandic adolescents. ; Peer Reviewed

The article recounts the account from the Árna saga about Loftur Helgason's trip to Bergen in 1282 and his stay there over winter, explained in terms of the formal sources about the organization of the government and changes in the law in the latter half of the 13th century. These changes were aimed at introducing into Iceland the power of both the King and the Church and in fact marked the actual changes throughout the Norwegian state. Loftur was Skálholt's official and the story about him was part of a long-standing dispute about the position of the chieftains versus the new power of the Church and the opposition to its introduction. The article defines the political confusion described in the Árna sagain Bergen in the winter of 1282-1283 as, on the one hand, changes in the constitution and, on the other hand, legislation, and at the same time whether the Kings Hákon Hákonarson and his son Magnús had systematically pursued a policy of having the Church be an independent party to the government of the state from 1247 onward until the death of the latter in 1280. When the disagreement is looked at as continuing, it is seen that Icelanders had made preparations for changes in the constitution with assurances of introduction of the power of the Church beginning in 1253 and the power of the King from 1262, but, on the other hand, the disagreements in both countries disappeared in the 1270s in the face of the conflict of interests that resulted from the laws that followed in the wake of the constiututional changes. Árna saga tell of this and how the disputes were described, but also that their nature changed as King Erikur came to power in 1280, as he gave the power of the King a new policy that was aimed against the power of the Church. Ousting of the archbishop from Norway and the Christian funerals of the excommunicated chieftains are examples of the conditions of government that could not have been, if the King had no longer had executive power over Christian concerns, as he had already conceded power over spiritual issues to the Pope in Rome with the Settlement at Túnsberg in 1277.