Wettbewerb als „Glaubensbekenntnis“? „Religiöse“ Semantiken im Deutschen Handelstag (1861–1914)

B. Gehlen
{"title":"Wettbewerb als „Glaubensbekenntnis“? „Religiöse“ Semantiken im Deutschen Handelstag (1861–1914)","authors":"B. Gehlen","doi":"10.1515/jbwg-2020-0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract On the basis of general discussions, the paper examines the “religious” functions of competition within the Deutsche Handelstag: firstly, the sensegiving function of “competition”, secondly, its relevance in questions of interest policy and thirdly, semantic change and ritualised communication. By referring to cultural studies approaches, the paper shows that institutions and market practices were discursively (or “religiously”) rationalised and legitimised even if they had nothing in common with competition anymore. The concept of competition remained undefined in content, was sometimes only ritualised rhetoric and changed semantically as was opportune. Nevertheless, given that interest politics are specific to space and time, an analysis cannot solely rely on abstract cultural studies approaches: The DHT's policy positions cannot be explained by “religious” belief in competition alone as pragmatism was strong. At the same time, a cultural studies perspective contributes to a better understanding of the logic of organisation because it focuses on the changes in semantics and (ritualised) acts of self-assurance.","PeriodicalId":195429,"journal":{"name":"Jahrbuch für Wirtschaftsgeschichte / Economic History Yearbook","volume":"201 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jahrbuch für Wirtschaftsgeschichte / Economic History Yearbook","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jbwg-2020-0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract On the basis of general discussions, the paper examines the “religious” functions of competition within the Deutsche Handelstag: firstly, the sensegiving function of “competition”, secondly, its relevance in questions of interest policy and thirdly, semantic change and ritualised communication. By referring to cultural studies approaches, the paper shows that institutions and market practices were discursively (or “religiously”) rationalised and legitimised even if they had nothing in common with competition anymore. The concept of competition remained undefined in content, was sometimes only ritualised rhetoric and changed semantically as was opportune. Nevertheless, given that interest politics are specific to space and time, an analysis cannot solely rely on abstract cultural studies approaches: The DHT's policy positions cannot be explained by “religious” belief in competition alone as pragmatism was strong. At the same time, a cultural studies perspective contributes to a better understanding of the logic of organisation because it focuses on the changes in semantics and (ritualised) acts of self-assurance.
"信心竞赛"德国商业节的宗教“语义”(1861—1914)
摘要在一般性讨论的基础上,本文考察了德国商事议会内部竞争的“宗教”功能:首先,“竞争”的赋予意义功能,其次,它在利益政策问题上的相关性,第三,语义变化和仪式化沟通。通过参考文化研究方法,本文表明,制度和市场实践被话语(或“宗教”)合理化和合法化,即使它们不再与竞争有任何共同之处。竞争的概念在内容上仍然不明确,有时只是仪式化的修辞,并在适当的时候改变语义。然而,考虑到利益政治是特定于空间和时间的,分析不能仅仅依靠抽象的文化研究方法:DHT的政策立场不能仅仅用对竞争的“宗教”信仰来解释,因为实用主义很强。与此同时,文化研究的视角有助于更好地理解组织的逻辑,因为它关注语义和(仪式化的)自我保证行为的变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信