Abstract (eng)
Language ideologies and intertextuality in Austrian asylum procedures. The discursive construction of (in)credibility.
The following thesis deals with discourses about language, and more specifically, the (re)production of language ideologies in Austrian asylum procedures and their manifestations on a linguistic level. An additional focus is put on intertextual phenomena (narration and renarration of fugitive stories, protocol extracts, incorporation of quotations, etc.) and their role in the construction of (in)credibility through legal authorities. The data set used in this study comprises published written decisions of second level jurisdiction by the Austrian Asylum Court (Asylgerichtshof, until the end of 2013) and the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht, since 2014).
The operationalization is achieved through a critical discourse analytical approach, for example through the investigation of predication- and perspectivation strategies, as well as argumentation analysis. The examination of these rationalizing modes enables the identification and comprehension of implicit underlying language ideological notions. To this end, discourse strategies used in narrative incorporation by asylum seekers are investigated.
The results show clearly that a number of dominant language ideologies in asylum discourses are based on nation-state language concepts. With regard to these ideas, interconnections between the “general” migration discourse – especially the “integration through language”-discourse – and the asylum discourse can be drawn.
In addition, the analytical results underline the significance of intertextuality because the authors of legal documents repeatedly refer to earlier versions of texts in order to generate considerable doubt as to the authenticity of the applicants’ statements. Therefore, intertextual references are not only inherent textual features, but constitute a consciously employed legal strategy in the reasoning of asylum procedures.