Colonial Relic: Gibraltar in the Age of Decolonization David Alvarez Grand Valley State University
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Rupert's Land and North-West Territory Order
Rupert's Land and North-Western Territory Order (Order of Her Majesty in Council Admitting Rupert's Land and the North-Western Territory into the Union) At the Court at Windsor, the 23rd day of June, 1870 PRESENT, The Queen's Most Excellent Majesty Lord President Lord Privy Seal Lord Chamberlain Mr. Gladstone Whereas by the "Constitution Act, 1867," it was (amongst other things) enacted that it should be lawful for the Queen, by and with the advice or Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, on Address from the Houses of the Parliament of Canada, to admit Rupert's Land and the North- Western Territory, or either of them, into the Union on such terms and conditions in each case as should be in the Addresses expressed, and as the Queen should think fit to approve, subject to the provisions of the said Act. And it was further enacted that the provisions of any Order in Council in that behalf should have effect as if they had been enacted by the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland: And whereas by an Address from the Houses of the Parliament of Canada, of which Address a copy is contained in the Schedule to this Order annexed, marked A, Her Majesty was prayed, by and with the advice of Her Most Honourable Privy Council, to unite Rupert's Land and the NorthWestern Territory with the Dominion of Canada, and to grant to the Parliament of Canada authority to legislate for their future welfare and good government upon the terms and conditions therein stated. -
Perceptions of Dialect Standardness in Puerto Rican Spanish
Perceptions of Dialect Standardness in Puerto Rican Spanish Jonathan Roig Advisor: Jason Shaw Submitted to the faculty of the Department of Linguistics in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts Yale University May 2018 Abstract Dialect perception studies have revealed that speakers tend to have false biases about their own dialect. I tested that claim with Puerto Rican Spanish speakers: do they perceive their dialect as a standard or non-standard one? To test this question, based on the dialect perception work of Niedzielski (1999), I created a survey in which speakers of Puerto Rican Spanish listen to sentences with a phonological phenomenon specific to their dialect, in this case a syllable- final substitution of [R] with [l]. They then must match the sounds they hear in each sentence to one on a six-point continuum spanning from [R] to [l]. One-third of participants are told that they are listening to a Puerto Rican Spanish speaker, one-third that they are listening to a speaker of Standard Spanish, and one-third are told nothing about the speaker. When asked to identify the sounds they hear, will participants choose sounds that are more similar to Puerto Rican Spanish or more similar to the standard variant? I predicted that Puerto Rican Spanish speakers would identify sounds as less standard when told the speaker was Puerto Rican, and more standard when told that the speaker is a Standard Spanish speaker, despite the fact that the speaker is the same Puerto Rican Spanish speaker in all scenarios. Some effect can be found when looking at differences by age and household income, but the results of the main effect were insignificant (p = 0.680) and were therefore inconclusive. -
Language in the USA
This page intentionally left blank Language in the USA This textbook provides a comprehensive survey of current language issues in the USA. Through a series of specially commissioned chapters by lead- ing scholars, it explores the nature of language variation in the United States and its social, historical, and political significance. Part 1, “American English,” explores the history and distinctiveness of American English, as well as looking at regional and social varieties, African American Vernacular English, and the Dictionary of American Regional English. Part 2, “Other language varieties,” looks at Creole and Native American languages, Spanish, American Sign Language, Asian American varieties, multilingualism, linguistic diversity, and English acquisition. Part 3, “The sociolinguistic situation,” includes chapters on attitudes to language, ideology and prejudice, language and education, adolescent language, slang, Hip Hop Nation Language, the language of cyberspace, doctor–patient communication, language and identity in liter- ature, and how language relates to gender and sexuality. It also explores recent issues such as the Ebonics controversy, the Bilingual Education debate, and the English-Only movement. Clear, accessible, and broad in its coverage, Language in the USA will be welcomed by students across the disciplines of English, Linguistics, Communication Studies, American Studies and Popular Culture, as well as anyone interested more generally in language and related issues. edward finegan is Professor of Linguistics and Law at the Uni- versity of Southern California. He has published articles in a variety of journals, and his previous books include Attitudes toward English Usage (1980), Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Register (co-edited with Douglas Biber, 1994), and Language: Its Structure and Use, 4th edn. -
Application for Gibraltarian Status (Section 9)
H.M. GOVERNMENT OF GIBRALTAR Civil Status and Registration Office Joshua Hassan House 3 Secretary’s Lane Gibraltar APPLICATION FOR GIBRALTARIAN STATUS SECTION 9 OF THE GIBRALTARIAN STATUS ACT BEFORE USING THIS FORM READ THE GUIDANCE NOTES AT THE BACK PLEASE COMPLETE EACH SECTION OF THE FORM IN BLOCK LETTERS AND IN BLACK INK Applicant’s Details (to be filled by all applicants) Surname First Names Date of Birth D D M M Y Y Place of Birth Nationality (tick as appropriate) British British Overseas Territories Citizen Marital Status Date of Naturalisation (if applicable) Address Date of Marriage or Civil Partnership (if applicable) Telephone No. Current Employment email Date of first arrival in Gibraltar Length of residence in Gibraltar Years Family Details Does he/she live in Name Nationality Date & Place of Birth Gibraltar Spouse Yes No Child (1) Yes No Child (2) Yes No Child (3) Yes No Child (4) Yes No Are any of the family members listed above Registered Gibraltarians? Yes No If yes, please give details – DECLARATION I confirm that it is my intention to make my permanent home in Gibraltar. The information given on this form is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I understand that it is a criminal offence to give false information and that I may be prosecuted and fined £1,000, or sent to prison for six months, or both, if I include, or cause to be included, information which I know is false or do not believe to be true. I also understand that the Civil Status and Registration Office holds and uses data in accordance with the Data Protection Act 2004. -
The Hon J J Bossano, Chief Minister
Mr Chairman, Thank you once again for giving me the opportunity to address the Special Committee on behalf of the people of Gibraltar. I would like first to take this opportunity to place on record my appreciation for the warmth of the reception I had from your predecessor, His Excellency, Ambassador Renagi Renagi Lohia, on my first appearance before this Committee in 1992 and indeed on my second one in 1993. I can assure the Committee that I was made to feel at home and amongst friends from the first day that I came. That encouraged me to look to this Committee – and it encouraged the people of Gibraltar to look to this Committee – as the forum where we could express our deep seated feelings on having our right as a colonial people recognised and vindicated. I should like to say that I have reported this back in Gibraltar faithfully. Indeed the text of my presentation and my appearance before the Special Committee has been transmitted over Gibraltar television and widely covered by our own press. In doing this, I believe we have been making a small contribution towards the fulfilment of Resolution 43/46 of the 22 November 1988 of the General Assembly on the dissemination of information on decolonisation which called for the widespread and continuous publicity to be given to the work of the United Nations in the field of decolonisation and in particular to the work of the Special Committee. A Resolution, of course, which the administering power voted against, but which the territorial Government in Gibraltar fully supports. -
The Sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories in the Brexit Era
Island Studies Journal, 15(1), 2020, 151-168 The sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories in the Brexit era Maria Mut Bosque School of Law, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Spain MINECO DER 2017-86138, Ministry of Economic Affairs & Digital Transformation, Spain Institute of Commonwealth Studies, University of London, UK [email protected] (corresponding author) Abstract: This paper focuses on an analysis of the sovereignty of two territorial entities that have unique relations with the United Kingdom: the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories (BOTs). Each of these entities includes very different territories, with different legal statuses and varying forms of self-administration and constitutional linkages with the UK. However, they also share similarities and challenges that enable an analysis of these territories as a complete set. The incomplete sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and BOTs has entailed that all these territories (except Gibraltar) have not been allowed to participate in the 2016 Brexit referendum or in the withdrawal negotiations with the EU. Moreover, it is reasonable to assume that Brexit is not an exceptional situation. In the future there will be more and more relevant international issues for these territories which will remain outside of their direct control, but will have a direct impact on them. Thus, if no adjustments are made to their statuses, these territories will have to keep trusting that the UK will be able to represent their interests at the same level as its own interests. Keywords: Brexit, British Overseas Territories (BOTs), constitutional status, Crown Dependencies, sovereignty https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.114 • Received June 2019, accepted March 2020 © 2020—Institute of Island Studies, University of Prince Edward Island, Canada. -
Empire and English Nationalismn
Nations and Nationalism 12 (1), 2006, 1–13. r ASEN 2006 Empire and English nationalismn KRISHAN KUMAR Department of Sociology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA Empire and nation: foes or friends? It is more than pious tribute to the great scholar whom we commemorate today that makes me begin with Ernest Gellner. For Gellner’s influential thinking on nationalism, and specifically of its modernity, is central to the question I wish to consider, the relation between nation and empire, and between imperial and national identity. For Gellner, as for many other commentators, nation and empire were and are antithetical. The great empires of the past belonged to the species of the ‘agro-literate’ society, whose central fact is that ‘almost everything in it militates against the definition of political units in terms of cultural bound- aries’ (Gellner 1983: 11; see also Gellner 1998: 14–24). Power and culture go their separate ways. The political form of empire encloses a vastly differ- entiated and internally hierarchical society in which the cosmopolitan culture of the rulers differs sharply from the myriad local cultures of the subordinate strata. Modern empires, such as the Soviet empire, continue this pattern of disjuncture between the dominant culture of the elites and the national or ethnic cultures of the constituent parts. Nationalism, argues Gellner, closes the gap. It insists that the only legitimate political unit is one in which rulers and ruled share the same culture. Its ideal is one state, one culture. Or, to put it another way, its ideal is the national or the ‘nation-state’, since it conceives of the nation essentially in terms of a shared culture linking all members. -
6 November 2008
Volume 13, Issue 45 - 6 November 2008 Rapid communications Measles outbreak in Gibraltar, August–October 2008 – a preliminary report 2 by V Kumar Emergence of fox rabies in north-eastern Italy 5 by P De Benedictis, T Gallo, A Iob, R Coassin, G Squecco, G Ferri, F D’Ancona, S Marangon, I Capua, F Mutinelli West Nile virus infections in Hungary, August–September 2008 7 by K Krisztalovics, E Ferenczi, Z Molnár, Á Csohán, E Bán, V Zöldi, K Kaszás A case of ciguatera fish poisoning in a French traveler 10 by M Develoux, G Le Loup, G Pialoux Invasive meningococcal disease with fatal outcome in a Swiss student visiting Berlin 12 by I Zuschneid, A Witschi, L Quaback, W Hellenbrand, N Kleinkauf, D Koch, G Krause Surveillance and outbreak reports A swimming pool-associated outbreak of cryptosporidiosis in Staffordshire, England, October to December 2007 14 by N Coetzee, O Edeghere, JM Orendi, R Chalmers, L Morgan Research articles The burden of genital warts in Slovenia: results from a national probability sample survey 17 by I Klavs, M Grgič-Vitek Perspectives Developing the Community reporting system for foodborne outbreaks 21 by A Gervelmeyer, M Hempen, U Nebel, C Weber, S Bronzwaer, A Ammon, P Makela EUROPEAN CENTRE FOR DISEASE PREVENTION AND CONTROL of writing this report, occasional cases were still coming in. Prior time the At measles. of cases diagnosed clinically 276 of notified 31 October 2008, the Gibraltar Public Health Department was Europe andgoodstandardsofpublichygiene. Western with par on indicators health with nation affluent generally the spread of some infectious diseases. -
The Toronto-Dominion Bank U.S. Resolution Plan Section I: Public Section December 31, 2018
The Toronto-Dominion Bank U.S. Resolution Plan Section I: Public Section December 31, 2018 THIS PAGE LEFT WAS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY The Toronto-Dominion Bank – U.S. Resolution Plan Public Section Table of Contents Table of Contents I. SUMMARY of RESOLUTION PLAN ______________________________________________ 4 A. Resolution Plan Requirements ______________________________________________________ 4 B. Name and Description of Material Entities ____________________________________________ 6 C. Name and Description of Core Business Lines __________________________________________ 8 D. Summary Financial Information – Assets, Liabilities, Capital and Major Funding Sources _______ 9 E. Description of Derivative and Hedging Activities _______________________________________ 12 F. Memberships in Material Payment, Settlement and Clearing Systems _____________________ 13 G. Description of Foreign Operations __________________________________________________ 14 H. Material Supervisory Authorities ___________________________________________________ 15 I. Principal Officers ________________________________________________________________ 17 J. Resolution Planning Corporate Governance Structure & Process __________________________ 19 K. Description of Material Management Information Systems ______________________________ 20 L. High Level Description of Resolution Strategy _________________________________________ 21 Page | 3 The Toronto-Dominion Bank – U.S. Resolution Plan Public Section I. Summary of Resolution Plan A. Resolution Plan Requirements -
Coarticulation Between Aspirated-S and Voiceless Stops in Spanish: an Interdialectal Comparison
Coarticulation between Aspirated-s and Voiceless Stops in Spanish: An Interdialectal Comparison Francisco Torreira University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 1. Introduction In a large number of Spanish dialects, representing many of the world’s Spanish speakers, /s/ is reduced to or deleted entirely in word-internal preconsonantal position (e.g. /este/ → [ehte], este ‘this’), in word-final preconsonantal position (e.g. /las#toman/ → [lahtoman], las toman ‘they take them’), and/or in prepausal position (e.g. /komemos/ → [komemo(h)], comemos ‘we eat’). In those dialects considered the most phonologically innovative (such as the Spanish of Andalusia, Extremadura, Canary Islands, Hispanic Caribbean, Pacific coast of South America), /s/ debuccalization is also found in prevocalic environments word-finally (e.g. /las#alas/ → [lahala], las alas ‘the wings’) and even word-internally, this phenomenon being less common (e.g. /asi/ → [ahi], así ‘this way’). When considered in detail, the manifestations of aspirated-s can be very different depending on dialectal, phonetic and even sociolinguistic factors. Only in preconsonantal position, for example, different s-apirating dialects behave differently; and, even within each dialect and in preconsonantal position, different manifestations arise as a result of the consonant type following aspirated-s. In this study, I show that aspirated-s before voiceless stops has different phonetic characteristics in Western Andalusian, on one part, and Puerto Rican and Porteño Spanish on the other. While Western Andalusian exhibits consistent postaspiration and shorter or inexistent preaspiration, Puerto Rican and Porteño display consistent preaspiration but no postaspiration. Moreover, Andalusian Spanish voiceless stops in /hC/ clusters show a longer closure than voiceless stops in other conditions, a contrast that does not apply for Porteño and Puerto Rican Spanish. -
An Overlooked Colonial English of Europe: the Case of Gibraltar
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................WORK IN PROGESS WORK IN PROGRESS TOMASZ PACIORKOWSKI DOI: 10.15290/CR.2018.23.4.05 Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań An Overlooked Colonial English of Europe: the Case of Gibraltar Abstract. Gibraltar, popularly known as “The Rock”, has been a British overseas territory since the Treaty of Utrecht was signed in 1713. The demographics of this unique colony reflect its turbulent past, with most of the population being of Spanish, Portuguese or Italian origin (Garcia 1994). Additionally, there are prominent minorities of Indians, Maltese, Moroccans and Jews, who have also continued to influence both the culture and the languages spoken in Gibraltar (Kellermann 2001). Despite its status as the only English overseas territory in continental Europe, Gibraltar has so far remained relatively neglected by scholars of sociolinguistics, new dialect formation, and World Englishes. The paper provides a summary of the current state of sociolinguistic research in Gibraltar, focusing on such aspects as identity formation, code-switching, language awareness, language attitudes, and norms. It also delineates a plan for further research on code-switching and national identity following the 2016 Brexit referendum. Keywords: Gibraltar, code-switching, sociolinguistics, New Englishes, dialect formation, Brexit. 1. Introduction Gibraltar is located on the southern tip of the Iberian Peninsula and measures just about 6 square kilometres. This small size, however, belies an extraordinarily complex political history and social fabric. In the Brexit referendum of 23rd of June 2016, the inhabitants of Gibraltar overwhelmingly expressed their willingness to continue belonging to the European Union, yet at the moment it appears that they will be forced to follow the decision of the British govern- ment and leave the EU (Garcia 2016). -
Gibraltar's Constitutional Future
RESEARCH PAPER 02/37 Gibraltar’s Constitutional 22 MAY 2002 Future “Our aims remain to agree proposals covering all outstanding issues, including those of co-operation and sovereignty. The guiding principle of those proposals is to build a secure, stable and prosperous future for Gibraltar and a modern sustainable status consistent with British and Spanish membership of the European Union and NATO. The proposals will rest on four important pillars: safeguarding Gibraltar's way of life; measures of practical co-operation underpinned by economic assistance to secure normalisation of relations with Spain and the EU; extended self-government; and sovereignty”. Peter Hain, HC Deb, 31 January 2002, c.137WH. In July 2001 the British and Spanish Governments embarked on a new round of negotiations under the auspices of the Brussels Process to resolve the sovereignty dispute over Gibraltar. They aim to reach agreement on all unresolved issues by the summer of 2002. The results will be put to a referendum in Gibraltar. The Government of Gibraltar has objected to the process and has rejected any arrangement involving shared sovereignty between Britain and Spain. Gibraltar is pressing for the right of self-determination with regard to its constitutional future. The Brussels Process covers a wide range of topics for discussion. This paper looks primarily at the sovereignty debate. It also considers how the Gibraltar issue has been dealt with at the United Nations. Vaughne Miller INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AND DEFENCE SECTION HOUSE OF COMMONS LIBRARY Recent Library Research Papers include: List of 15 most recent RPs 02/22 Social Indicators 10.04.02 02/23 The Patents Act 1977 (Amendment) (No.