The influence of ethnolinguistic diversity on discourses in the National Assembly of the Surinamese Parliament A remote ethnographic discourse analysis Sezanne Audry Bron Master Thesis Culture Studies Track Global Communication Tilburg University School of Humanities and Digital Sciences August 2020 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Name: Sezanne Audry Bron ANR: 455731 SNR: 2017321 Supervisor: prof. dr. J.W.M. Kroon Second reader: prof. dr. K. Yagmur Title of thesis: The influence of ethnolinguistic diversity on discourses in the National Assembly of the Surinamese Parliament; A remote ethnographic discourse analysis Abstract: Three-quarters of the worlds’ population speaks at least two languages, which indicates that most people worldwide are multilingual. Many countries, therefore, have a multilingual character through their multilingual population. Multilingualism is, in fact, a naturally occurring process in many communities around the globe. This natural process occurs when there is a voluntary accepting attitude towards other languages resulting in linguistic synergy. The number of languages that the people speak in those countries reflects their linguistic capital. A persons’ linguistic capital can be measured by the number of languages that a person can speak, the fluency in those languages, and the comfort of using those languages. Those who are endowed with linguistic capital can also use it as an instrument of power to be believed, obeyed, respected, and distinguished by others through their speech. In some instances, indigenous languages or dialects can overrule the privileged linguistic capital and symbolic power of a popular world language or the country’s institutional language depending on the situation and context in which it is used. In a general sense, language is a political phenomenon that concurrently plays a discursive role, which is imperative in a political context. That is, language has a mediating function in politics that, when employed strategically and intelligently by politicians, can result in the acquisition and retention of power, fame, and popularity. The many languages spoken by the population of countries with a multilingual character can also reflect in the governing institutions such as the parliament of those countries. Suriname can be characterized as a multilingual country since at least 20 languages are spoken 2 in the country. The languages of the population also reflect in the linguistic repertoire of the members of the Surinamese Parliament’s National Assembly through their discourses. The Surinamese Parliament’s discourses revealed an inclusive linguistic environment wherein next to the institutional language Dutch, Sranan, English, and other indigenous languages are allowed for meaning-making, as long as a translation or explanation follows to enable all the participants to follow the meetings. Languaging strategies also seemed to be a common phenomenon in some of the parliamentairians’ discourses. This being said, the use of the English language in Surinamese laws derived from international conventions is not always appreciated by some of the parliamentarians. Keywords: Suriname, Discourse, National Assembly, Parliament, Language diversity, Multilingualism Word count: 26.011 3 PREFACE Herewith, I present my thesis “The influence of ethnolinguistic diversity on discourses in the National Assembly of the Surinamese Parliament; A remote ethnographic discourse analysis”. This thesis results from qualitative research that I have conducted to complete my master’s study in Global Communication at Tilburg University. The inspiration to write this thesis was triggered through the courses that I have followed during the master track Global Communication and Management of Cultural Diversity. My interest in researching multilingualism started with an article that I wrote for the courses Language, Culture, and Globalization during my pre-master Management of Cultural Diversity. The article is about my linguistic background and my experience with multilingualism. The article “Migration, the common thread through my existence” can be found on Diggit Magazine (https://www.diggitmagazine.com/articles/migration-my-existence). I would not have been able to conduct this research without the help of others. I want to thank Ms. Ruth de Windt (Chief Registrar of the Surinamese Parliament), Mr. Sharman (Head of the Legal Department of the National Assembly in Suriname), for helping with everything that I needed to collect data for this research. I would also like to thank my supervisor, professor Kroon, and my second reader, professor Yagmur. They inspired me to write this thesis through the courses that I received from them during my study at Tilburg University. I am also grateful for the patience, advice, and guidance that I have received from professor Kroon during my research and writing this thesis. Finally, I want to thank my family, particularly my husband, for emotionally supporting and motivating me while I completed this thesis. I wish you a pleasant and inspiring reading. Haaren, August 2020 Audry Bron TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND INFORMATION ....................................................................................... 2 4 PREFACE ................................................................................................................................ 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................ 4 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 7 2. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ...................................................................................... 9 2.1 Discourse with a small d; Language ............................................................................ 9 2.1.1 What is (a) language? ............................................................................................. 9 2.1.2 Language diversity in multilingual societies ...................................................... 11 2.1.3 Multilingual conversation strategies ................................................................... 12 2.1.4 Symbolic power and linguistic capital ................................................................ 13 2.1.5 Parliamentary language ....................................................................................... 15 2.2 Discourse with a big D and Parliamentary discourse .............................................. 16 2.2.1 Parliamentary discourse ...................................................................................... 17 2.2.2 Identity making in discourse ............................................................................... 18 2.2.3 Identity making in parliamentary discourse ...................................................... 20 2.2.4 Discourse specific features ................................................................................... 21 2.2.5 Discourse specific features in parliamentary debates ....................................... 23 2.3 Summary ...................................................................................................................... 26 3. THE FIELD OF RESEARCH .......................................................................................... 28 3.1 Ethnic composition of Suriname ................................................................................ 28 3.2 Language diversity in Suriname ................................................................................ 31 3.3 The political composition of Suriname ...................................................................... 34 3.4 Summary ...................................................................................................................... 36 4. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 36 4.1 Research design ........................................................................................................... 37 4.2 Research strategy ......................................................................................................... 38 4.3 Participants .................................................................................................................. 39 4.4 Data collection .............................................................................................................. 39 4.5 Data analysis ................................................................................................................ 41 4.6 Research quality indicators ........................................................................................ 42 5. FINDINGS .......................................................................................................................... 44 5.1 MP Somohardjo’s (PL) language; an example of language practices in the parliamentary meetings .................................................................................................... 44 5.2 Issues with the English language ................................................................................ 48 5.3 Using group demographic affiliation for the interest of the people and making your voice heard ................................................................................................................ 54 6. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................... 61 6.1 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................