A weave of symbolic violence: dominance and complicity in sociolinguistic research on multilingualism

Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p>This paper discusses symbolic violence in sociolinguistic research on multilingualism. It revisits an archived recording of a group discussion between four boys about their chances of having sex with a female researcher. The data is rife with symbolic violence. Most obviously, the conversation enacted a heterosexist form of symbolic violence. This was, however, not the only direction in which violence was exerted. As argued by (Bourdieu &amp; Wacquant. 1992. <jats:italic>An invitation to reflexive sociology</jats:italic>. Cambridge: Polity), symbolic violence involves two fundamental elements – domination and complicity. In the case at hand, the boys’ sexist banter conformed to dominant expectations about their linguistic behavior, imbued in the research event. This is symbolic complicity of the kind that the Bourdieusian notion foresees. Yet another subordination to the dominant vision occurred when the researchers captured the conversation on tape, but decided to exempt it from publication. Here, we argue that giving deepened attention to sociolinguists’ own run-ins with symbolic violence during research is valuable, because it provides an opportunity to reflexively consider the social conditions of the research practices, in relation to the data produced and analyzed. Ultimately, this reflexive exercise may help sociolinguists sharpen their tools for understanding the give and take of dominance and complicity unfolding in their data.</jats:p>

“Why Should I Not Speak My Own Language (Chinese) in Public in America?”: Linguistic Racism, Symbolic Violence, and Resistance

“…In addition, the linguistically minoritized populations tend to accept the unequal and inequitable realities when they have been chronically suffering from the white gaze and other forms of linguistic racism (Tran et al., 2021). The acceptance of and reconciliation of linguistic racism is a fundamental component of symbolic violence (Ganuza et al., 2020). Constant acceptance or tolerance of linguistic racism results in agency deprivation.…”

“…Constant acceptance or tolerance of linguistic racism results in agency deprivation. The perpetuating and normalization of linguistic racism comes not only from the constant practice of those who are structurally given or actively claiming linguistic privileges but also from the victims' complicity (Ganuza et al., 2020). It is urgent to wake up those who are constantly discriminated against based on their language practice.…”

“…In addition, the white gaze categorizes and shapes minoritized groups to comply with “dominant discourses of normativity” (Block, 2017, p. 8). In fact, the white gaze is one form of symbolic violence, which depends on the tacit acceptance of and reconciliation of inequality (Sapiro, 2015), and it is “perceived as natural and inescapable by both ‘the victims’ and ‘the perpetrators’” (Ganuza et al., 2020, p. 455). It is likely that the chef in the Japanese restaurant is a Chinese descendent and might have been one of the victims of linguistic racism and symbolic violence, so he may have forgotten his heritage language, or he might have felt shameful to speak that language.…”

“…In addition, symbolic violence is “exercised upon a social agent with his or her complicity” (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992, p. 167). In other words, symbolic violence relies on the tacit acceptance of and reconciliation of inequality (Sapiro, 2015), which is “perceived as natural and inescapable by both ‘the victims’ and ‘the perpetrators’” (Ganuza, Karlander, & Salö, 2020, p. 455) because we, including the dominant and the dominated, engage in the process of social and linguistic activities to advertently or inadvertently (re)produce linguistic inequalities (Schubert, 2002). In effect, language itself produces symbolic violence because the ways in which people talk to each other sustain power relations (Žižek, 2008).…”

REPRESENTASI KEKERASAN SIMBOLIK TERHADAP PEREMPUAN DALAM TAYANGAN FILM TELEVISI SUARA HATI ISTRI (Representation of Symbolic Violence against Women in the TV Movie Suara Hati Istri)

“…( 2018), serta Ganuza dkk. (Ganuza et al, 2020), sedangkan bentukbentuk realisasi patriarki pernah dikaji oleh Demirhan dan Çakır-Demirhan (2015), Habiba dkk. (Habiba et al, 2016), Sari dan Haryono (2018), serta Fanaqi (2019).…”