Abstract. The article explores the significance held by political myths for legitimacy and politics. To that end, we examine political myth in line with the contemporary theory of political myth, which understands political myths as an integral part of all political communities that is not inherent to just authoritarian and totalitarian regimes. Every political community has their own stories/narratives that are accepted by most of the population and form the base of the legitimacy of the political order, whether it be a democratic or a non-democratic political order. In the final part of the article, we examine which narratives had such a legitimising power by analysing the political speeches of Franjo Tuđman while he was in office. Keywords: legitimacy, politics, political myth, political speech analysis, Tuđman.
The paper discusses the characteristics of modern American presidential political rhetoric with special reference to Barack Obama's speeches in which he addressed the highly publicized killings of black Americans. Three of the analysed speeches contain Obama's rhetorical reaction to the judicial decisions not to indict the police officers responsible for the killings, while one speech gives his immediate reaction to the mass murder of black parishioners by a white supremacist. The study is based on the discourse-linguistic analysis of attitudinal meanings and their functions, which are conceptualized as evaluative frames. Evaluative frames are used to highlight different kinds of discourse participants through judgments of behaviour, attributions of emotions and evaluations of semiotic phenomena and objects. The theoretical framework for the different categories of evaluative frames is based on the theory of news framing and theory of evaluative language within systemic-functional linguistics. The findings of the analysis show that Obama uses an interplay of positive and negative evaluations of different kinds to transcend racial categorizations and avoid a direct attribution of blame. When he acknowledges the continuing relevance of the racial divide in US society, he often applies evaluative frames in such a way that they unify rather than divide the discourse participants on both sides of the divide. ; The paper discusses the characteristics of modern American presidential political rhetoric with special reference to Barack Obama's speeches in which he addressed the highly publicized killings of black Americans. Three of the analysed speeches contain Obama's rhetorical reaction to the judicial decisions not to indict the police officers responsible for the killings, while one speech gives his immediate reaction to the mass murder of black parishioners by a white supremacist. The study is based on the discourse-linguistic analysis of attitudinal meanings and their functions, which are conceptualized as evaluative frames. Evaluative frames are used to highlight different kinds of discourse participants through judgments of behaviour, attributions of emotions and evaluations of semiotic phenomena and objects. The theoretical framework for the different categories of evaluative frames is based on the theory of news framing and theory of evaluative language within systemic-functional linguistics. The findings of the analysis show that Obama uses an interplay of positive and negative evaluations of different kinds to transcend racial categorizations and avoid a direct attribution of blame. When he acknowledges the continuing relevance of the racial divide in US society, he often applies evaluative frames in such a way that they unify rather than divide the discourse participants on both sides of the divide. ; The paper discusses the characteristics of modern American presidential political rhetoric with special reference to Barack Obama's speeches in which he addressed the highly publicized killings of black Americans. Three of the analysed speeches contain Obama's rhetorical reaction to the judicial decisions not to indict the police officers responsible for the killings, while one speech gives his immediate reaction to the mass murder of black parishioners by a white supremacist. The study is based on the discourse-linguistic analysis of attitudinal meanings and their functions, which are conceptualized as evaluative frames. Evaluative frames are used to highlight different kinds of discourse participants through judgments of behaviour, attributions of emotions and evaluations of semiotic phenomena and objects. The theoretical framework for the different categories of evaluative frames is based on the theory of news framing and theory of evaluative language within systemic-functional linguistics. The findings of the analysis show that Obama uses an interplay of positive and negative evaluations of different kinds to transcend racial categorizations and avoid a direct attribution of blame. When he acknowledges the continuing relevance of the racial divide in US society, he often applies evaluative frames in such a way that they unify rather than divide the discourse participants on both sides of the divide. ; The paper discusses the characteristics of modern American presidential political rhetoric with special reference to Barack Obama's speeches in which he addressed the highly publicized killings of black Americans. Three of the analysed speeches contain Obama's rhetorical reaction to the judicial decisions not to indict the police officers responsible for the killings, while one speech gives his immediate reaction to the mass murder of black parishioners by a white supremacist. The study is based on the discourse-linguistic analysis of attitudinal meanings and their functions, which are conceptualized as evaluative frames. Evaluative frames are used to highlight different kinds of discourse participants through judgments of behaviour, attributions of emotions and evaluations of semiotic phenomena and objects. The theoretical framework for the different categories of evaluative frames is based on the theory of news framing and theory of evaluative language within systemic-functional linguistics. The findings of the analysis show that Obama uses an interplay of positive and negative evaluations of different kinds to transcend racial categorizations and avoid a direct attribution of blame. When he acknowledges the continuing relevance of the racial divide in US society, he often applies evaluative frames in such a way that they unify rather than divide the discourse participants on both sides of the divide. ; The paper discusses the characteristics of modern American presidential political rhetoric with special reference to Barack Obama's speeches in which he addressed the highly publicized killings of black Americans. Three of the analysed speeches contain Obama's rhetorical reaction to the judicial decisions not to indict the police officers responsible for the killings, while one speech gives his immediate reaction to the mass murder of black parishioners by a white supremacist. The study is based on the discourse-linguistic analysis of attitudinal meanings and their functions, which are conceptualized as evaluative frames. Evaluative frames are used to highlight different kinds of discourse participants through judgments of behaviour, attributions of emotions and evaluations of semiotic phenomena and objects. The theoretical framework for the different categories of evaluative frames is based on the theory of news framing and theory of evaluative language within systemic-functional linguistics. The findings of the analysis show that Obama uses an interplay of positive and negative evaluations of different kinds to transcend racial categorizations and avoid a direct attribution of blame. When he acknowledges the continuing relevance of the racial divide in US society, he often applies evaluative frames in such a way that they unify rather than divide the discourse participants on both sides of the divide. ; V prispevku so obravnavane značilnosti sodobne ameriške predsedniške politične retorike s posebnim poudarkom na govorih Baracka Obame, s katerimi se je odzval na uboje temnopoltih Američanov. Trije od analiziranih govorov vsebujejo Obamov odziv na sodne odločitve, ki so zavrnile obtožbo policistov, odgovornih za uboj, v enem od govorov pa se je odzval na množični umor temnopoltih faranov s strani belega skrajneža. Študija temelji na analizi jezikovnih kategorij vrednotenja, ki so pojmovane kot okviri vrednotenja. Okviri vrednotenja udeležence v diskurzu osvetlijo s presojami vedenja in pripisovanja čustev ter z vrednotenjem predmetov in pojavov. Koncept okvirov vrednotenja temelji na spoznanjih teorije medijske komunikacije in teorije jezika vrednotenja v sistemsko-funkcijskem jezikoslovju. Ugotovitve analize kažejo, da Obama uporablja preplet pozitivnih in negativnih vrednotenj različnih vrst, da bi presegel rasno kategorizacijo in se izognil neposrednemu pripisovanju krivde. Raziskava pokaže tudi, da Obama rasne razdelitve pogosto uokvirja tako, da udeležence na nasprotnih straneh poenoti z istim okvirom.
In this article is analyzed the essence and importance of soft power in the US foreign speech, as well as directions of activity of this instrument under the conditions of the Republic of Moldova. The soft power concept, its manifestations and its main sources are determined. It is argued that soft power is a mean to obtain favorable results, relying on conviction, voluntary participation, sympathy and attraction, representing the ability to influence other states in order to achieve own goals, through cooperation in certain areas, directed towards persuasion and formation of a positive perception. It is noted that the US government pays particular attention to soft power tools, implemented by both government agencies and a large number of community organizations and individuals, with the purpose of shaping a positive external image of the state. Regarding the implementation of the US soft power instruments under the conditions of the Republic of Moldova, it is concluded that the USA offers real opportunities in order to know and capitalize the achievements of the American nation. Given that the US is a superpower on the international arena, development of a strategic partnership between the Republic of Moldova and the US has a particular relevance in solving several problems that our state cope with, such as state integrity, European integration, democratization of society, etc. US has a rich and successful experience in the use of soft power, that is why the Republic of Moldova should "adopt" some certain aspects of the soft action in its foreign policy.
We find ourselves in a time that has brought significant changes to the way we communicate. The technological progress and rise of social media have shaped both the news media and the contemporary political landscape, impacting and altering political discourse. As a result, the role of social media in political communication has become pervasive, and politicians now tend to communicate more directly with the public without the intermediary of traditional media. The position of the mainstream media as a neutral actor in reporting the news has also been tainted as the media has become increasingly dependent on advertising and thus more vulnerable to the pressures of corporate or state sponsors. Combined, we find ourselves situated in an era where more people are turning to social media for their news, while terms such as disinformation, fake news, post-truth, hate speech and conspiracy theory have become commonplace. In this new public square of communication, it often happens that one person's conspiracy theory is another person's truth, one person's facts are another's fake news, and one person's hate speech is someone else's freedom of speech. ; We find ourselves in a time that has brought significant changes to the way we communicate. The technological progress and rise of social media have shaped both the news media and the contemporary political landscape, impacting and altering political discourse. As a result, the role of social media in political communication has become pervasive, and politicians now tend to communicate more directly with the public without the intermediary of traditional media. The position of the mainstream media as a neutral actor in reporting the news has also been tainted as the media has become increasingly dependent on advertising and thus more vulnerable to the pressures of corporate or state sponsors. Combined, we find ourselves situated in an era where more people are turning to social media for their news, while terms such as disinformation, fake news, post-truth, hate speech and conspiracy theory have become commonplace. In this new public square of communication, it often happens that one person's conspiracy theory is another person's truth, one person's facts are another's fake news, and one person's hate speech is someone else's freedom of speech. ; We find ourselves in a time that has brought significant changes to the way we communicate. The technological progress and rise of social media have shaped both the news media and the contemporary political landscape, impacting and altering political discourse. As a result, the role of social media in political communication has become pervasive, and politicians now tend to communicate more directly with the public without the intermediary of traditional media. The position of the mainstream media as a neutral actor in reporting the news has also been tainted as the media has become increasingly dependent on advertising and thus more vulnerable to the pressures of corporate or state sponsors. Combined, we find ourselves situated in an era where more people are turning to social media for their news, while terms such as disinformation, fake news, post-truth, hate speech and conspiracy theory have become commonplace. In this new public square of communication, it often happens that one person's conspiracy theory is another person's truth, one person's facts are another's fake news, and one person's hate speech is someone else's freedom of speech. ; We find ourselves in a time that has brought significant changes to the way we communicate. The technological progress and rise of social media have shaped both the news media and the contemporary political landscape, impacting and altering political discourse. As a result, the role of social media in political communication has become pervasive, and politicians now tend to communicate more directly with the public without the intermediary of traditional media. The position of the mainstream media as a neutral actor in reporting the news has also been tainted as the media has become increasingly dependent on advertising and thus more vulnerable to the pressures of corporate or state sponsors. Combined, we find ourselves situated in an era where more people are turning to social media for their news, while terms such as disinformation, fake news, post-truth, hate speech and conspiracy theory have become commonplace. In this new public square of communication, it often happens that one person's conspiracy theory is another person's truth, one person's facts are another's fake news, and one person's hate speech is someone else's freedom of speech. ; We find ourselves in a time that has brought significant changes to the way we communicate. The technological progress and rise of social media have shaped both the news media and the contemporary political landscape, impacting and altering political discourse. As a result, the role of social media in political communication has become pervasive, and politicians now tend to communicate more directly with the public without the intermediary of traditional media. The position of the mainstream media as a neutral actor in reporting the news has also been tainted as the media has become increasingly dependent on advertising and thus more vulnerable to the pressures of corporate or state sponsors. Combined, we find ourselves situated in an era where more people are turning to social media for their news, while terms such as disinformation, fake news, post-truth, hate speech and conspiracy theory have become commonplace. In this new public square of communication, it often happens that one person's conspiracy theory is another person's truth, one person's facts are another's fake news, and one person's hate speech is someone else's freedom of speech. ; Današnji čas je prinesel pomembne spremembe v načinu, kako komuniciramo drug z drugim. Tehnološki napredek in razmah družbenih medijev sta vplivala tako na informativne medije kot na sodobni politični prostor, kar ima pomembne posledice za politični govor. Vloga družbenih medijev v politični komunikaciji se je povečala, saj politiki čedalje bolj neposredno komunicirajo z javnostjo brez posredništva tradicionalnih medijev. Poleg tega je čedalje bolj pod vprašajem nevtralnost osrednjih medijev pri poročanju, saj so vedno bolj odvisni od oglaševanja in tako pod posrednim ali neposrednim vplivom različnih korporativnih ali državnih sponzorjev. Tako smo se znašli v času, ko vse več ljudi informacije pridobi v družbenih medijih, medtem ko so izrazi dezinformacija, lažne novice, postresničnost, sovražni govor in teorije zarote postali vsakdanji del govora. V novem javnem prostoru komunikacije se pogosto zgodi, da je to, kar kdo dojema kot teorijo zarote, za koga drugega resničnost, da so to, kar kdo dojema kot dejstva, za koga drugega lažne novice, in da je to, kar kdo dojema kot sovražni govor, za koga drugega svoboda govora.
The article analyses the frequency of interview addresses, as typologically defined by Korošec (1998), in four radio interviews and four interview podcasts featuring the same guests. In addition, some other textual strategies, such as supporting signals and role reversals, are analysed. The journalistic interview is a highly institutionalised form of one-way dialogue, which has indeed been proven in radio interviews to a considerable extent. In podcasts, however, due to the different production and listening practices, speech usually displays more characteristics of everyday discourse, as was displayed in the choices of interview addresses and other textual strategies in the analysed podcasts. Keywords: interview, interview address, radio, podcast, everyday speech
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 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.
Politična korektnost predstavlja velik problem v današnji družbi, ki skuša biti inkluzivna. V inkluzivni družbi je namreč pomemben jezik, ki ga uporabljamo, saj ne želimo nikogar diskriminirati ali izključiti iz družbe. Magistrsko delo se osredotoča na politično korektne in nekorektne izraze, ki se pojavijo na socialnem omrežju Twitter v času predvolilne kampanje v ZDA in v Avstriji. Zanimal me je predvsem jezik štirih predsedniških kandidatov: Donalda Trumpa in Hillary Clinton iz ZDA ter Norberta Hoferja in Alexandra van der Bellena iz Avstrije. S pomočjo izbranih objav na socialnem omrežju Twitter sem skušala poiskati povezave med Avstrijo in ZDA. V teoretičnem delu sem navedla vse potrebne definicije in prikazala politično korektnost v povezavi z drugimi jezikovnimi fenomeni, kot so tabuji, stereotipi in predsodki. Ločeno sem obravnavala politično korektnost v Avstriji in politično korektnost v ZDA. Zanimala me je tudi povezava politične korektnosti s svobodo govora. Raziskala sem, s katerimi zakoni je urejena pravica do svobode govora v Avstriji oz. Evropi ter v ZDA. V empiričnem delu sledi analiza izbranih objav. Vse politično nekorektne in politično korektne izraze, ki so se pojavili v času predvolilne kampanje, sem razdelila v kategorije in jih analizirala tako statistično kot tudi jezikovno. Rezultati so pokazali razliko med ZDA in Avstrijo glede rabe politično korektnega jezika in zmage na volitvah. V ZDA je namreč zmagal kandidat, ki je med kampanjo uporabil največ politično nekorektnih izrazov. V Avstriji pa je zmagal politično najbolj korekten kandidat. Največ različnih politično nekorektnih izrazov se je pojavilo na področju rasnega/etničnega razlikovanja, kar sem tudi pričakovala. ; Political correctness matters for inclusive society. Language that we use is very important in an inclusive society because we do not want to discriminate or exclude anyone from society. This master's thesis focuses on politically correct and politically incorrect terms that appeared in the social network Twitter during the election campaign in the USA and Austria. I was interested in the language of the four presidential candidates, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton from the USA, and Norbert Hofer and Alexander Van der Bellen from Austria. I tried to find similarities and differences between Austria and the USA with the help of selected posts on Twitter. The theoretical part, contains the definition of political correctness and show political correctness in relation to other linguistic phenomena, such as taboos, stereotypes and prejudices. Political correctness in Austria and political correctness in the USA are compared and political correctness is associated to the freedom of speech. The legislation regulating right to the freedom of speech in Austria and in the USA is discussed. The empirical part presents an analysis of selected Twitter posts. All politically incorrect and politically correct terms that were found during the election campaign were divided into categories and analyzed both statistically as well as linguistically. I have found out that politically correct language is not necessary for an election victory. In the USA a candidate who used the most politically incorrect expressions during the campaign won. In Austria, on the other hand, the most politically correct candidate won. Most politically incorrect expressions appeared in the category racial/ethnical discrimination, which was expected.
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.
Spinoza, Pufendorf and Locke all championed freedom of thought (including freedom of religion) and of speech; all three thinkers deserve credit for having forged the fundamental principles of the liberal tradition. Spinoza, in particular, was the first writer in modern times to articulate a systematic defence of democracy. He believed that the state should promote the welfare of its citizens, while maximising their freedom. Although he equated right with power, he also advocated respect for the moral law, stressing the importance of being good to other people. Keywords: Spinoza, Pufendorf, Locke, freedom of religion, freedom of thought, liberalism
The particle still remains a challenge for linguists given that its meaning is determined each time it is used in a specific text. From a propositionality aspect, particles are a kind of communication by an author, including their mood; from a functional point of view, particle use can be either primarily in modal (interpersonal) or connecting (text) roles. It was particularly this communicative-pragmatic perspective, which includes the speaker or author in the system of dictionary explanations, accompanied by definitions of particles as part of speech, that featured among the many other reflections on language that occupied Prof. T. Korošec. The article therefore describes how the presentation of particles and particle use is solved in the new explanatory dictionary of standard literary Slovenian. The most comprehensive and functional semantic-circumstantial evaluation of particles can be found in lexical representation. Keywords: particles, particle use/role, modality, text, dictionary
Magistrsko delo proučuje diskurzivni vidik varnosti izražen skozi parlamentarni diskurz poslancev, ki so delovali v slovenskem parlamentu v obdobju t. i. begunske krize, od septembra 2015 do marca 2016. Skozi mikrodiskurzivno in jezikovnostilno analizo poskuša prikazati, ali so poslanci begunce obravnavali skozi prizmo varnosti, torej vprašanje beguncev sekuritizirali. Z analizo parlamentarnih sej je prikazan proces sekuritizacije kopenhagenske šole, ki sekuritizacijo opisuje kot govorno dejanje, ki referenčnemu objektu predstavi vprašanje kot eksistenčno grožnjo in s tem zahteva izredne ukrepe, ki odstopajo od 'običajne' politike. Če občinstvo to sprejme je sekuritizacija uspešna. V parlamentarnem diskurzu so analizirana jezikovna sredstva, kot so vršilci dejanj, metafore in druge stilno zaznamovane besede, pomembna pa je tudi ustrezna raba terminov beguncev in migrant. V ozadju je predstavljena t. i. begunska kriza na ravni EU, zahodnobalkanski poti in v Sloveniji. Opisan je tudi slovenski parlament ter politični oziroma parlamentarni diskurz, ključne pa so varnostne študije, znotraj katerih je kopenhagenska šola predstavila teorijo sekuritizacije, ki jo proučuje magistrsko delo ; The master's thesis examines the discursive aspect of security, expressed through the parliamentary debates, which took place in the Slovenian parliament during the 'refugee crisis' in Slovenia, September 2015 – March 2016. Through micro-discursive and linguistic analysis, this work seeks to show whether refugees were securitized, treated by the members of Parliament as a security issue. The analysis of parliamentary debates tries to show the process of securitization initially outlined by the Copenhagen School, which focuses on the speech act, that presents an issue to the referent object as an existential threat and demands extraordinary measures outside of normal politics. If the audience accepts this, securitization is successful. The use of linguistic means is analysed in the parliamentary discourse, such as agents, metaphors and other expressive words, and the correct usage of terms refugee or migrant. The master's thesis background is presented by the 'refugee crisis' in the European Union, on the Western Balkan Route and in Slovenia. The emphasis is also on the Slovenian parliament and parliamentary discourse, but the most important are security studies, within which the securitization theory is presented by the Copenhagen School, which is analysed in the master's thesis.
