Members’ Publications

The Languages and Anti-Languages of Health Communication in the Age of Conspiracy Theories, Mis/Disinformation and Hate Speech Ed. by Massimiliano Demata, Natalia Knoblock and Marianna Lya Zummo We are calling for abstracts for a special issue of Lingue e Linguaggi focusing on the languages of health communication in both institutional and non-institutional media settings. The special issue will address aspects related to genre and discourse as well as morphosyntactic characteristics of health communication in the current age, an age increasingly characterised by (dis-/mis-)information, conspiracy theories and hate speech as occurring in the context of both mass media and social media. Dis- and misinformation, conspiracy theories and hostile communication are reportedly on the rise and are beginning to receive significant attention among linguists and discourse scholars because of the alternative discourses which are generated through them (Demata et al, forthcoming; Knoblock 2020; Zummo 2018, 2017; Lazaridis et al., 2016). In particular, health communication has been subjected to mis-and disinformation as well as to contributing to conspiracy theories which have become very influential in many countries. With the growing influence of social media in the public sphere (KhosraviNik & Unger 2015; KhosraviNik 2017; Zummo 2017; Demata, Heaney & Herring 2018), the communication of alternative health discourse, often in opposition to that of “official” media and science, has become very difficult to challenge. Furthermore, the narratives supporting alternative health discourses have increasingly become part of the growing consensus for populist parties and leaders in many parts of the world, as distrust in the official science feeds into the typically populist drive against establishment politics (Bergmann 2018). During the last three decades, health discourse has been particularly exposed to mis/disinformation and fake news. Conspiracy theories (CTs) and mis/disinformation about AIDS have been followed by those about the supposed damage brought by vaccines (Archer 2015; Kata 2010). In fact, tension arises between medical science looking out for the collective well-being and the emotive amplification of groups being concerned with their individual health. Such exchanges have developed in anti-vaccination discourses, with online fora working as echo chambers. More recently, the coronavirus outbreak has provided evidence of how the spread of disinformation and conspiracy thinking has reached beyond the narrow confines of individual or group narratives for believers. CTs support alternative views on official science, economy and the news, and construct certain (often radical) beliefs in periods of existential or social uncertainty. They are creating new articulations of discourse in the public sphere because of their innovative, and often subversive, language that mixes urgency, hope, hate speech and suspicions for potential machinations form the establishment. Social media have provided the ideal output for CTs: without “gatekeepers”, polarized communities create an “antagonistic sphere” (Krzyzanowski & Ledin 2017) and foster political engagement (especially against governments and the establishment), which can even lead to extremism and violence (Bergmann 2018; Wodak 2020). The purpose of this special edition to explore the “anti-languages” (Halliday 1976) and the counter-discourses endorsing (mis/dis-)information and CTs in direct opposition to official discourses and challenging social and political hegemony (Terdiman 1985; Van Dijk 1997). We welcome papers that explore the following points, though other pertinent submissions will also be considered: CT production and discourse on a social, linguistic and political perspective(s) Critical analysis of CT on health-related issues and their social impact Intersectional analysis of health and computer-mediated communication Historical overview of Health (and Medical) Humanities and CTs Military language in social representation of medicine Linguistic and cross-cultural analysis of threat assessment levels Othering caused by health issues Hate speech related to/originating from groups opposing official health discourse Analysis of linguistic cues (e.g. the occurrence of certain parts of speech) that distinguish the language of CTs from strictly informative sources. Verbal aggression, “othering”, dehumanization, hate speech in health-related discourse(s) The politicization of health discourse Please send abstracts (maximum 300 words plus references) by 1 April 2021 to: massimiliano.demata@unito.it, nlknoblo@svsu.edu, mariannalya.zummo@unipa.it Confirmation of acceptance: 15 April 2021 Deadline for submission of first drafts: 1 October 2021 Deadline for submission of revised papers: 31 January 2022 Publication: Summer 2022

I-LanD Journal – Identity, Language and Diversity International Peer-Reviewed Journal Call for papers for the special issue (2/2020) Hybrid Dialogues: Transcending Binary Thinking and Moving Away from Societal Polarizations This special issue of the I-LanD Journal will focus on hybrid dialogues in various communities of practice across time and space. It will be edited by Cornelia Ilie (Strömstad Academy, Sweden) and Sole Alba Zollo (University of Napoli Federico II, Italy). Submission of abstracts Authors wishing to contribute to this issue are invited to send an extended abstract of their proposed article ranging between 600 and 1.000 words (excluding references) in MS Word format to the two editors by the 18th October 2020. Proposals should not contain the authors’ name and academic/professional affiliation and should be accompanied by an email including such personal information and sent to: cornelia.ilie@gmail.com and solealba.zollo@unina.it. Please put as subject line “I-LanD Special Issue 2/2020– abstract submission”, and include the Journal e-mail address – ilandjournal@unior.it – by using the Cc option. In order to meet editorial processes, the most important dates to remember are as follows: – Submission of abstracts: October 18, 2020 – Notification of acceptance/rejection: November 8, 2020 – Submission of chapters: February 14, 2021 Description Following the successful and fruitful 5th ESTIDIA conference, held on 19-21 September 2019 at the University of Napoli L’Orientale, the theme of this Special Issue was prompted by the risks and challenges posed by the increasing use of virulent polemics both on- and off-line that are constantly shifting the boundaries between traditionally dichotomous forms of communication (e.g., public/private, face-to-face/virtual, formal/informal, polite/impolite) and types of mindsets (e.g., trust/distrust, liberal/illiberal, rational/emotional, biased/unbiased). Binary or dichotomous thinking is responsible for producing and/or maintaining historically unsustainable hierarchies and inequitable power relations. While cyberspace communication environments can trigger and stimulate creative and productive dialogues that can be integrated with face-to-face dialogues, we are still witnessing a growing proliferation of dichotomy-based misperceptions and misrepresentations of world phenomena and societal events (Beaufort 2018), which involve the mismanagement and manipulation of interpersonal relations and institutional power networks, leading to an environment of apprehension, suspicion and insecurity, strongly amplified and aggravated in recent times by anti-social discourse and behavior, extremist movements, and hate speech. As a counterbalance of dichotomy-based beliefs and ways of thinking, new and hybrid forms of dialogue are needed to cross the frontiers of established dichotomies, questioning the legitimacy of increasingly conflictual, aggressive and divisive encounters (Sunstein 2007; Mason 2015) conducted both offline (in public meetings, TV debates, political and parliamentary debates, etc.) and online (on social media, such as Twitter, YouTube, Snapchat). A wide range of analytical tools pertaining to multi-disciplinary frameworks of analysis can effectively contribute to identifying and critically examining dichotomy-based conceptualisation strategies that undermine existing democratic norms and practices, giving rise to polarized, confrontational and downright violent off- and on-line discourses. The questions researchers are called upon to consider, analyse and debate include, but are not limited to, the following: • What types of polarized dialogue are to be found in various communities of practice (e.g. business, politics, education, health sector)? • Has the increasing use of social media had a noticeable impact on the proliferation of the use of aggressive language and person-targeted attacks? • What cross-cultural parallels can be noticed with regard to dichotomy-based polarization patterns in off-line and online dialogues? Is it possible to identify differences in terms of age, gender, education, to name but a few? • What dichotomy-based forms of reasoning and arguing are more likely to be found in spoken, written or hybrid types of discourses, respectively? • How are the audience’s emotions targeted, as well as manipulated, by the use of fallacious dichotomies in online and offline dialogue? • How have radicalised, polarized, confrontational and downright violent discourses of extreme political movements given rise to institutional confrontations and the use of violence in both face-to-face and online interactions? • To what extent is gender an impactful element in adversarial discursive behaviour? Are women and men equally inclined to initiate confrontational types of dialogue? How similar and/or how different are women and men when reacting/responding to aggressive language? • What types of argumentation and contra-argumentation strategies are particularly prevalent in female and male professionals/leaders when engaging in adversarial debate? • How can new, hybrid dialogues help to address the polarization which reinforces the current social and political crises in a vicious circle of multiplying conceptual dichotomies, deceptive binary thinking and fearmongering slogans or ‘shockvertising’? Researchers are warmly welcome to propose contributions from diverse fields of enquiry, including linguistics, media studies, journalism, cultural studies, psychology, rhetoric, political science, sociology, pedagogy, philosophy and anthropology. More about I-LanD Journal Editors in chief: Giuditta Caliendo (University of Lille) and M. Cristina Nisco (University of Naples Parthenope) Advisory board: Giuseppe Balirano (University of Naples L’Orientale) Marina Bondi (University of Modena and Reggio Emilia) Delia Chiaro (University of Bologna) David Katan (University of Salento) Don Kulick (Uppsala University) Tommaso Milani (University of Gothenburg) Oriana Palusci (University of Naples L’Orientale) Paul Sambre (KU Leuven) Srikant Sarangi (Aalborg University) Christina Schäffner (Professor Emerita at Aston University) Vivien Schmidt (Boston University) Stef Slembrouck (Gent University) Marina Terkourafi (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) Girolamo Tessuto (Seconda Università di Napoli) Johann Unger (Lancaster University) The I-LanD Journal (http://www.unior.it/index2.php?content_id=15279&content_id_start=1& titolo=i-land-journal&parLingua=ENG) reflects a commitment to publishing original and high quality research papers addressing issues of identity, language and diversity from new critical and theoretical perspectives. All submissions are double-blind peer-reviewed. In fulfillment of its mission, the I-LanD Journal provides an outlet for publication to international practitioners, with a view to disseminating and enhancing scholarly studies on the relation between language and ethnic/cultural identity, language and sexual identity/gender, as well as on forms of language variation derived from instances of contamination/hybridization of different genres, discursive practices and text types.  

The Journal of English-Medium Instruction will publish its inaugural issue in early 2022. Please visit the journal’s website (https://benjamins.com/catalog/jemi) and find attached a call for papers for a themed issue to be published as the second issue in 2022.    

‘A Glass of Godly Form’: Shakespeare as the Voice of Established Power special issue of Parole Rubate / Purloined Letters (http://www.parolerubate.unipr.it/) edited by Giuliana Iannaccaro and Alessandra Petrina In recent years, a large number of Shakespearean studies have investigated the use of Shakespeare’s works in order to question and debunk the way in which the political, religious and cultural establishment has supported its hegemonic agenda for centuries through the voice of the Bard. In the last forty years at least, Shakespeare’s plays have catalysed the creative efforts of artists in all fields: stage adaptations, transpositions, parodies, and translations, which have come under critical scrutiny since the 1980s, have often been made to speak the voice of the oppressed and marginalised to react against a dominant, Anglo-centric ideology. Scholars from all over the world have enthusiastically taken up the challenge and analysed this new and unexpected lease of life given to the writer. Together with contemporary re-readings of Shakespeare’s plays as a way to speak forcefully – and, paradoxically, ‘authoritatively’ – against oppression, discrimination and racism, there are fewer (but no less significant) recent critical investigations that take up the challenge of exploring a more dated but persistent phenomenon: the use of Shakespeare’s status as a ‘classic’ within the English, and indeed worldwide, literary tradition in order to impose and enforce political and cultural domination. Shakespeare (as an icon of quintessentially English principles and values) has become, very early in the history of British imperialism, one of the basic cultural products of the colonial enterprise within and without the national borders. Before representing the voice of the oppressed, between the eighteenth and the twentieth century Shakespeare was celebrated as the ideal spokesman for those who wanted to extol the voice of the English Bard in order to enforce and justify a white, male, anglocentric / protestant / suprematist discourse. With the rise of Bardolatry in England and events such as David Garrick’s first Shakespeare Jubilee the establishment of Shakespeare as a national myth proved inexorable. That myth enhanced the rising popularity of the playwright and singled him out as the ideal mouthpiece for national and nationalistic sentiments. The present volume proposes to investigate Shakespeare as an ideological prop of established power or conservative discourse. Given the general mandate of Parole rubate, we focus on words rather than on visual or non-verbal adaptations, and indeed invite explorations on textual and philological issues. The collection of essays edited by Regula Hohl Trillini, Casual Shakespeare (Routledge, 2018) is proposed as a possible model for this kind of investigation, as is (in a more specifically literary frame) Kate Rumbold’s Shakespeare and the Eighteenth-century Novel (Cambridge University Press, 2016). The European appropriation of Shakespeare has been studied, among others, by Ton Hoenselaars and Clara Calvo (The Shakespearean International Yearbook (European Shakespeares, Routledge, 2008) and more recently by Balz Engler (Constructing Shakespeare, Signathur, 2019). One recent work retracing the steps of the colonial appropriation of Shakespeare is Leah S. Marcus’ How Shakespeare Became Colonial (Routledge, 2017). Quotations and misquotations from Shakespeare’s plays, often taken disastrously out of context, supported the image of the writer as the repository of a supposed national greatness that became, in turn, the greatness of the dominant classes. We welcome investigations both of Shakespeare in ‘his own words’, and of the Shakespeare of rewritings, parodies, adaptations – even of attributed words that do not belong to him, as well as of incoherent/inconsistent textual references to his plays and to his very lines. We also welcome contributions that explore the way in which the very icon of the poet was enough to legitimise both English and European educational syllabi, and the ‘exportation’ of British culture abroad. Considered a pillar of the national and colonial educational enterprise, the very name of Shakespeare was also evoked by the repositories of pedagogical programs, in order to lay claim to an acquired ‘universal’ knowledge and to dignify their own aesthetical, spiritual and especially moral advancement. Please send an abstract (ca. 500 words) and a short bio (max 200 words) in Italian or in English by 30 June 2020, to the following email addresses: giuliana.iannaccaro@unimi.it alessandra.petrina@unipd.it *** ‘Sacro specchio della moda’: William Shakespeare, voce del potere numero speciale di Parole Rubate / Purloined Letters http://www.parolerubate.unipr.it/ a cura di Giuliana Iannaccaro e Alessandra Petrina In anni recenti, molti studi dedicati a Shakespeare si sono concentrati sull’uso dei suoi testi per interrogare e denunciare la loro appropriazione da parte del potere politico, religioso, o culturale: per molto tempo la voce del Bardo è stata di supporto all’ideologia dominante. Negli ultimi quarant’anni, i drammi shakespeariani hanno catalizzato lo sforzo creativo e artistico di chi li ha messi in scena, adattati, trasposti, parodiati o tradotti. Tali rielaborazioni danno spesso voce agli oppressi e/o ai marginalizzati, stimolando il pubblico a ripensare i rapporti di forza all’interno della società e a reagire contro un’ideologia culturale anglocentrica. Studiosi di tutto il mondo hanno raccolto questa sfida e celebrato la nuova ‘giovinezza’ delle opere shakespeariane. Oltre alle riletture contemporanee di Shakespeare come risposta forte (e paradossalmente ‘autorevole’) all’oppressione, alla discriminazione e al razzismo, altri approcci critici si sono occupati – forse in misura minore, ma non meno significativa – di un fenomeno più datato e più persistente: l’uso dello status di ‘classico’ di Shakespeare nella tradizione letteraria inglese (se non mondiale) per imporre o rafforzare un’ideologia dominante. Shakespeare, icona di principi e valori essenzialmente inglesi, diviene in quest’ottica uno dei prodotti culturali fondamentali dell’imperialismo britannico, all’interno e all’esterno dei confini nazionali. Prima di diventare portavoce degli oppressi, lo scrittore, tra il diciottesimo e il ventesimo secolo, è stato celebrato come bandiera di un discorso anglocentrico, protestante, suprematista, maschilista e razzista. La nascita del culto di Shakespeare, con fenomeni come il Giubileo creato da David Garrick nel 1769, ha portato alla mitizzazione nazionale del bardo: il mito così fondato ha contribuito alla crescente popolarità del drammaturgo, proponendolo come espressione primaria di sentimenti nazionali e nazionalistici. Questo volume si propone di investigare Shakespeare come supporto ideologico del potere

CfP: Human Reproduction and Parental Responsibility: New Theories, Narratives, Ethics https://journals.fupress.net/call-for-paper/human-reproduction-and-parental-responsibility-new- theories-narratives-ethics/ Phenomenology and Mind invites submissions for a special issue dedicated to “Human Reproduction and Parental Responsibility: New Theories, Narratives, Ethics”. We welcome contributions that are related – but not limited – to the following questions:  How do conceptions and cultural representations of parental responsibility inform bioethical, legal and political approaches towards the introduction and use of reproductive technologies?  Conversely, to what extent have new reproductive technologies been altering the concepts of parenthood and parental responsibility?  What are the emergent transformations and moral challenges associated with new forms of parenting?  How can artistic practice create a space for political and bioethical reflection, and what is the role of specific forms, genres and media (e.g. performance and video art; Science Fiction; life writing etc).  How have stories about parents and children evolved? How will they evolve in the future?  What is the impact of advanced reproductive technologies on legal and philosophical debates about biological and social parenthood, gender, and the rights of the unborn?  How do planetary environmental pressures affect theories and narratives of parenthood? What is the meaning of procreative liberty, parental responsibility and procreative beneficence on a warming planet? Deadline for submissions: 15 March 2020 Notification of acceptance: May 2020 Publication of the issue: December 2020 Guest editors: Simona Corso (Università degli Studi Roma Tre) simona.corso@uniroma3.it Florian Mussgnug (UCL) f.mussgnug@ucl.ac.uk Virginia Sanchini (San Raffaele University; University of Milan; KU Leuven)sanchini.virginia@hsr.it Confirmed invited authors: Rachel Bowlby (UCL); Carmen Dell’Aversano (Università di Pisa); Roberto Mordacci (Università San Raffaele); Laura Palazzani (Università di Roma Lumsa) Zoe Papadopoulou (visual artist, London); Aarathi Prasad (UCL); Maria Russo (Università San Raffaele).  

Call for Papers relativa alle sezioni Saggi e Teoria e pratica della traduzione di «Ticontre. Teoria Testo Traduzione» per il primo numero del 2020 («Ticontre» XIV, novembre 2020). Per gli interessati, la proposta di articolo, da inviare all’indirizzo proposal@ticontre.org, deve contenere il titolo, uno stringato profilo dell’autore (massimo 150 parole), un abstract esteso (minimo 800 parole, massimo 1200 parole) e una bibliografia di riferimento. All’interno dell’abstract devono essere indicati anche il taglio critico e/o le metodologie che si intende adottare. La scadenza per l’invio degli abstract è il 3 marzo 2020; la Redazione comunicherà l’esito della valutazione entro il 19 marzo 2020. Il termine ultimo per inviare gli articoli selezionati sarà il 10 maggio 2020. Per maggiori informazioni consultare il link: http://www.ticontre.org/ojs/index.php/…/announcement/view/26

“Semiosis of coloniality and cultural dynamics at times of global mobility” Mobility intended either as departure/escape from the native place for political or economic reasons or as desire to conquer “new worlds” is deeply rooted in the human experience of all individuals and communities. In the last twenty years of the 20th century – while the Western colonisation of many areas outside Europe was excluded from mainstream discourse – scholars, theorists, and creatives opened up a discussion on the encounter/clash of cultures and powers. Since then, the experiences of colonised, diasporic, and racialised subjects have been brought back to the fore by anti-colonial Caribbean scholars. Books such as Contrapunteo cubano del tabaco y el azúcar (1940) by Fernando Ortiz Fernández, Discours sur le colonialisme (1950) by Aimé Césaire, and Peau Noire, Masques Blancs (1952) by Ibrahim Frantz Fanon represented a departure from traditional and established Western canons. Therefore, a novel “discourse” was framed by Francophone, Anglophone, Lusophone, and Hispanophone artists and theorists (whose languages, together with Italian, have dominated the modern world) which developed along two different paths: postcolonial and decolonial thinking. Both had the same goal, to achieve epistemic decolonisation as well as political and cultural emancipation from the Western imperium. Consequently, the postcolonial perspectives (mostly related to British colonialism) adopted by Edward Said (Orientalism, 1978), Gayatry C. Spivak (“Can the Subaltern Speak?”, 1988) and Homi Bhabha (The Location of Culture, 1994) as well as the decolonial perspectives (mostly related to Spanish colonialism) adopted by Aníbal Quijano (Colonialidad y modernidad / Racionalidad, 1991) and Enrique Dussel (1492: El encubrimiento del Otro. Hacia el origen of the “mito de la Modernidad”, 1992) are closely linked with the concepts of belonging, roots, nativism, and authenticity. This gradually led to the culturalist/translation discourse of “contact zone” (M.L. Pratt), centre and margin (bell hooks), hybridisation and creolisation (Édouard Glissant), “provincialising Europe” (Dipesh Chakrabarty), and the theorization of the poetic/politics of mestizaje (Gloria E. Anzaldua), “border communities” (Ngũgĩ wa T hiong’o), and (black) diaspora (Paul Gilroy, Stuart Hall, among others). The forced exodus and/or the status of refugees (due to the “democracy” exported by Western powers in a context of globalism and capitalism) demonstrated that colonisation practices did not stop after World War II. Moreover, it showed that the postcolonial system did not implement real decolonisation processes either in the former colonial countries or in the former imperial countries; in fact, these processes were conceived and implemented in the context of the nation-state model inherited from Europe. This led the decolonialidad/modernidad group to propose a distinction between “colonialism” and “coloniality”. ECHO invites scholars from any discipline and trans-discipline as well as creatives in the fields of music, cinema, literature, visual, and digital arts to submit a proposal. Essays may deal with literature, cultural politics, demographics, economics, cultural geography, social and linguistic phenomena, semiotics, epistemology, religion, environment as well as gender, race, and class in the media and the arts. The aim of this issue is to offer new comparative and transnational perspectives which may challenge the Eurocentric concepts of nation and continent, West and East, thus opening a new debate on the categories of world and planetarity. Suggested topics and research fields: Reworking of the concept/feeling of belonging in literary, linguistic, and visual narratives of creative residents and migrants. The concepts of origin/root and here/elsewhere/now as represented/narrated in relation to race, language, nationality, religion, and gender by forcibly displaced individuals or groups. Postcolonialism and decolonisation: the evolution of perspectives, practices, theories, and poetics in the languages of creativity, social policies, and “geo-body-spellings”. Border-crossing theories and practices in the linguistic, visual, literary, multimedia, and transmedia domains, including studies on fashion/clothing, advertising, video art, street art, photography, etc. Postcolonial representations and/or alternatives to postcolonial discourse on identity, gender, and sexuality, including transnational perspectives (in the fields of music, cinema, TV, and other visual media). Connectivity and technology: impact of traditional media (radio and TV), smartphones, social media, and other ways of connecting to (resident) users, power groups, people “on the move”, and displaced individuals. Economics: work and social security for diasporic communities. Diaspora and power: production and evolution of arts and languages in contexts of liminality, (in)visibility, semi-segregation, and in-betweenness. Beyond the limits of authenticity and nativism: the elaborations of the Afro-Futurist model in different cultures of postcolonial diaspora. Deadlines: Abstract (500 words): 8 March 2020 Notification of acceptance: 30 March 2020 Article submission: 14 June 2020 Publication: 30 November 2020 Length of articles: max 7000 words To submit an article write to: rivista.echo@uniba.it https://ojs.cimedoc.uniba.it/index.php/eco/pages/view/callpapers?acceptCookies=1  

CFP: “Minorities in / and Ireland”, ed. by Patrick Mc Donagh Studi irlandesi. A Journal of Irish Studies, 10, 2020 <http://www.fupress.net/index.php/bsfm-sijis> Guest editor, Patrick McDonagh, European University Institute, Florence (<Patrick.Mcdonagh@eui.eu>) In recent years, events such as the 2018 Abortion Referendum, 2017 recognition of Travellers as an ethnic minority, the 2015 Same-Sex Marriage Referendum, 2015 Gender Recognition Act and the 2013 State apology to women sent to Magdalene laundries, amongst others, have all symbolised a dramatic positive transformation in Irish society. These developments heralded the emergence of a more tolerant, welcoming and inclusive society, willing to acknowledge the wrongs of its past. For many, they have signalled a new dawn in Ireland’s history, leaving behind the image of a socially conservative society. While the overwhelming majority of politicians and political parties speak out in support of minorities and those once marginalised in society, championing their right to dignity, equality, respect and basic human rights, this has not always been the case. On the contrary, for much of the twentieth century Ireland’s political class remained silent, or turned a blind eye to issues affecting minorities and those who did not conform to the status quo, whether that be as a result of their gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, creed, ethnic minority, disability, etc. In fact, until only recently, this cohort often found themselves at the margins of Irish society, with many forced to emigrate in search of a better life. While many issues still remain to be addressed, most notably the controversy surrounding direct provision and questions of equality, same-sex marriage and abortion in the North, the aforementioned changes in Irish society are particularly noteworthy, demonstrating the extent to which a small cohort of marginalised individuals and groups can bring about social, cultural and political change in the face of considerable constraints. To date, however, these groups have been understudied in Irish historiography; a historiography which has for decades primarily adopted a top down, rather than bottom up approach to understanding change in Ireland. With this in mind, this special edition seeks to bring minorities to the fore and explore their role in transforming Irish society. In particular, it seeks to explore issues such as; how have minorities sought to make their voices heard in Ireland, what strategies have they adopted to bring about social and political change, where were the sites of these efforts taking place; and how have representations of minorities evolved over time. We are interested in papers from a range of different disciplinary backgrounds which seek to explore the role and impact of any of the below in bringing about social, cultural and political change in Ireland. Fields of investigation and topics may include: Disability/disability rights Ethnic and linguistic minorities Health/Patients’ Rights Advocacy HIV/AIDS activism LGBT+ rights advocacy Migrants/refugees Religious minorities Sex Workers Those sent to institutional homes (i.e. Magdalene laundries) Travelling community Please send abstracts of 250 to 400 words, as well as a short biography of 50 to 100 words, by 31st October 2019 to the Guest Editor, Patrick McDonagh (<Patrick.Mcdonagh@eui.eu>), to the General Editor, Fiorenzo Fantaccini (<ffantaccini@unifi.it>) and to Dieter Reinisch (<dieter.reinisch@eui.eu>) assistant editor for the 10th issue. Submissions accepted for publications will be announced by 15th November 2019. Finalized contributions for submission to referees must reach the editors by 1st February 2020: Articles must be formatted in accordance with the journal editorial guidelines <http://www.fupress.net/publ…/journals/…/sijis_guidelines.pdf> and should not exceed 12000 words, including endnotes and bibliography. Informal enquiries to the Guest editor and General Editor are welcome and should be addressed to the contacts above. The 10th issue of Studi irlandesi. A Journal of Irish Studies will be published in June 2020. http://www.fupress.net/index.php/bsfm-sijis?fbclid=IwAR1gMmY0SYWBKI5k1PcaOxNWs1e7X8TDIKQeRZxh9y_t-_NrUSbeRE0jPeo

Volume 15 (Spring 2020) of Iperstoria (www.iperstoria.it) Special Section Theme: Populism and Its Languages Editors:         Massimiliano Demata (University of Turin) Maria Ivana Lorenzetti (University of Verona)  Iperstoria is a multilingual, international, double-blind peer-reviewed biannual journal (ISSN 2281-4582) with a focus on English and American Studies. Call for Papers Today the term Populism is a trendy delegitimising term used by politicians to criticise the modus operandi of their opponents, portrayed as demagogues or manipulators. In political science, however, it is an ambiguous and complex phenomenon that ultimately entails putting into question the institutional order by constructing a dualistic view of society. Populism has taken on many forms and connotations through time, also shifting from right-wing to left-wing orientation. Nowadays populist movements on both sides of the political spectrum exploit a feeling of disillusion, widely felt in the public sphere of many countries, in the traditional workings of representative democracy and in the establishment (or the “elite”) by claiming to represent the true will of the “people” and are founded on a divisive rhetoric (us vs. them) . Populism has been the subject of a vast literature and the source of intense scholarly debate. Many definitions of populism have been proposed, as it has been considered an ideology, or “thin-centred ideology” (Mudde), a discourse (Laclau), a style (Moffitt), a discursive style (Hofstadter) or a form of political strategy (Weyland).  However, very little attention has been devoted to how populism is structured in discourse: while both media observers and scholars debate on who or what is truly “populist”, there are still gaps in the literature about the language – and most crucially the discursive strategies – used by populist actors as well as their electorate.This special section of Iperstoria on “Populism and Its Languages” will focus on the discursive strategies used by those political leaders, movements and segments of the electorate who are ritually branded as “populist” within political and media discourses. The ultimate aim of this collection is to explore the possibility that there are certain common features in discourse that can be characterised as quintessentially populist. We welcome contributions in English from scholars working within a wide range of theoretical approaches, both from a quantitative or qualitative perspective, addressing discourses (by leaders, parties, media as well as the public) in the Anglo-American public spheres that may be characterised as “populist”, that discuss populist performances, rhetoric and practices, or focus on different textual typologies (e.g. speeches, newspapers articles, social media posts). Papers may also include contrastive studies, but a focus on the Anglo-American perspective is required. Abstracts, of no more than 300 words plus references and a short bio sketch of the author(s), should include a clear indication of the methodology used and should be submitted to both editors Massimiliano Demata (massimiliano.demata@unito.it) and Maria Ivana Lorenzetti (mariaivana.lorenzetti@univr.it) by 30 September 2019. Papers will be subjected to a double-blind peer review process. Submission Schedule: 30 September 2019: abstracts submission to the editors 15 October 2019: notification of acceptance 31 January 2020: first draft sent to the editors 30 March 2020: reviewers’ comments sent to authors 30 April 2020: submission of final manuscript   All inquiries regarding the issue should be sent to massimiliano.demata@unito.it and mariaivana.lorenzetti@univr.it

CFP: WiN: The EAAS Women’s Network Journal (Issue 2) ***Deadline extended to July 15, 2019*** The second issue of the EAAS open access journal, WiN, will be based on the Thessaloniki 2019 symposium theme, “Feminism and Technoscience” (http://www.enl.auth.gr/technoscience/cfp.html). In light of contemporary sociopolitical developments and prevailing technological practices, The EAAS Women’s Network Journal will explore the connection between feminism and technoscience. In particular, it will examine feminist activism in relation to central notions such as the body, nature, and subjectivity within the context of current technoscientific discourses. The long history of the feminist movement and the great diversity it displays when approached through the perspectives of race, ethnicity, age, and class underscores its strong political impetus and dynamic evolution. Especially when viewed in the context of technoscience, feminism reveals different socio-cultural, political, and media practices at work that not only affect but also shape public perceptions of femininity with respect to gender-defined skills, relations, and reproductive abilities. A number of contemporary feminist theoreticians, such as Judith Butler, Donna Haraway, and Rosi Braidotti, have commented, each from her own unique perspective, on the impact that technology has had on female labor, bodies, and subjectivity within the context of transnational and global capitalist control. We invite articles that explore all aspects of this theme. Scholars who participated in the symposium are particularly encouraged to submit their articles, but the call is certainly not limited to them. Possible subthemes may include: • Gendered technoscience/technophobia • Feminism and the biopolitics of reproductive technologies • Feminism and transnational capitalism • Feminism and digital networks/the (social) media • Feminism and political advocacy/online activism • Misogyny and the (social) media • Domestic technologies and activism • Feminism and technological innovation • Ecofeminism and industrialization • Feminism and posthumanism • Performing gender in virtual environments • Cyberfeminism and gendered cyborgs • Feminism and cybersexualities • Feminism, technoscience and literature • Feminist game studies and game production • Queer(ing) technology • Ethnicity, femininity and technology • Feminism, technology, and workforce politics • Technological representations of feminism • Transnational feminism and technology If you would like to submit a manuscript for consideration, please email your submission (of 5,000-8,000 words, in MLA style) by July 15, 2019 to eaaswomensnetwork@gmail.com. Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial review will undergo double-blind external peer review over the summer. For more information about the journal, please consult our website: http://women.eaas.eu We would also like to take this opportunity to announce the new and old members of our steering committee: Elisabetta Marino (Italy), Izabella Kimak (Poland), Marta J. Lysik (Poland), and Ingrid Gessner (Germany). Johanna Heil (Germany) will join the new team in 2020. We look forward to your submissions and to your participation in future events, including the next EAAS Women’s Network symposium, which will take place in Debrecen, Hungary in March/April 2021. Sincerely, The EAAS Women’s Network Steering Committee