No, the word literature was fine - and I hardly think that is a word uniquely used by Swedes (surely you would know this living in such a vibrant place that rarely has Swedish spoken in its vicinity :P).

At any rate, 'Textbook' would be an Americanism.

Literature and textbooks can both equally be written by Swedish native speakers. The point I was making is that the distinction would customarily be made between Swedish-language literature and foreign-language literature, ie for me that would be reading translations of Adorno or reading it in the original German. I think perhaps it is rather telling that you automatically assume 'textbooks' would be a good word to describe foreign-language material, as if the material you discuss in University would hardly ever be in Swedish.

To a large extent I can see this being (sadly) true anyway - of course, academic publishing, as with anything (music and film being obvious examples), is victim to the capitalist system - which of course is dominated by America and its English language. American academics can naturally have their work published much easier than Chinese or Swedish ones. So naturally, there will be a much larger glut of English-language 'textbooks' than those in Swedish. So instead of reading Edward Said's Orientalism in Swedish, you read it in the English. But then, why did Said publish in England and not write in his more native tongue of Arabic? Exactly because of this imperial system where English is seen as more important, better to read in.

That was a pretty unfair jab. I'm saying we speak a lot of English, I'm not saying we do it perfectly. I rarely ever meet people who actually have English as a first language. The English spoken at my university is a particular brand of English mixing American and British English widely, filled with swedisms and influences from the many other languages people speak. So is my English. I mix color and colour all the time. I don't even try to be consistent anymore. Neither of them is mine in any way, they're not connected to my culture.

To me, there is a great degree of difference between academic literature and non-academic literature. I've talked at length about stuff like this in another thread, but basically, no matter what system has brought forth the current dominant lingua franca, and I do hate the imperialist system, it's still a de facto lingua franca. Had Edward Said published Orientalism in his native Arabic, what kind of audience could he reach? Which impact would it have had? I don't see this as a value judgment, saying which language is better to read in. I see it as acknowledging that one is more widely globally understood. Furthermore, with the many exchange students we have in Sweden who don't speak Swedish at all, English literature is necessary in school. I see the international exchange as more positive than spending time and money on translating academic literature.

There is, however, a very valid point - language produced in an imperialist culture will be imprinted by that imperialist culture and carry with it certain underlying assumptions, reinforcing that culture. I didn't even consider that when I just wrote that.

I cede this argument to you, sir.

Let me just add that having an "imperialist" language is not that bad. Having learned English, I have the opportunity to read a huge amount of material that encompasses the majority of human knowledge, precisely because everyone is currently converging towards English.

Let's also not forget that French had exactly the same role in the 18th century, and Italian in the 16th. These things change.

There was no jab. Not intentionally.

Besides, you started your response this by calling me 'Sargmacher' which seemed a bit stiff and officious so I just followed in that manner - jokingly calling you your 'full name', Vaftrudner, (which I haven't used for quite some time) but you perhaps didn't pick up on that.

I thought it looked a little bit sarcastic :)

And I actually didn't even notice that I called you Sargmacher and not Sarg, nor that you called me Vaftrudner. Did I do that subconsciously because I was irritated that I had been misunderstood? Not irritated with you mind you, more with myself. It's possible. But I certainly didn't mean anything about it.

"Did I do that subconsciously because I was irritated that I had been misunderstood? "

Yes, exactly. I find such details very interesting.

"I thought it looked a little bit sarcastic."

Virtually all of assmarcher's posts are of this type. Just be careful of not making typos or he'll drag it across every single thread.

Also, lol internet connotations. In my group of friends, ":P" is mostly used sarcastically. As in, "Yeah, you sure did a stellar job there :P" That was probably what did it. It's interesting. And bewildering.

Oh, whenever I use the ":P" sign I always think of it as a pacifier of sorts, symbolising friendliness and light-heartedness.

I imagine him a guy sticking out his tongue at you to rub it in your face how much you fucked up. I want to punch him :D

A pacifier? I interpreted it as a light stab, just like Vaft, and waited for his reaction, so I suppose your usage is slightly off.

Ouch!

But the ":P" guy is pulling a silly face. He would not pull such a silly face if he wanted to be so mean-spirited as to "rub in how much you fucked up". If he wanted to do that he just stick a middle finger up - but I guess there's no 'emoticon' for that.

"A pacifier? I interpreted it as a light stab, just like Vaft, and waited for his reaction, so I suppose your usage is slightly off."

What? My usage is slightly off because 'Vaftrudner' and 'Zmaj' disagree with me?

Please. Don't dictate to me, person who has never spoken to me before.

Haha. You'll have to think of an official long version of Zmaj, I guess.

Follow me and and Vaftrudner and become Zmajer.

I'm glad you added your point of view Zmaj :P

(couldn't resist)

On the topic of middle fingers Sarg, is the backwards V-sign used a lot in Manchester as a fuck you? I was surprised to see it used quite naturally in Ireland by very angry drivers, instead of the imperialist middle finger I was used to.

A backhand V-sign is not really used that often anymore - at least not that I've seen - it's largely been replaced by the cruder middle finger gesture.

Having said that, Octavious will most likely post in a few hours time decrying my ignorance, asking what part of England I supposedly live in, and tell you that all the conservative local people that populate his village all use the backhand V-sign and that this represents true Britain.

Notice how tactfully I specifically asked about Manchester, not Britain. Trollproof.

Indeed.

Although the reference to Ireland leaves you open.

Fuck. Take 2:

On the topic of middle fingers Sarg, is the backwards V-sign used a lot in Manchester as a fuck you? I was surprised to see it used quite naturally at the intersection of Pearse Street and Tara Street in central Dublin in an autumn day in 2007 around 16:30 PM by very angry drivers, instead of the imperialist middle finger I was used to.

Much better. I guess I should clarify my position too now.

A backhand V-sign is not really used that often anymore - at least not that I've seen in the city centre areas of Manchester that I inhabit and frequent - it's largely been replaced by the cruder middle finger gesture.

Now I just imagine people in dark alleys trading backhand V-signs, safe from prying eyes and security cameras, rejoicing in their filthy freedom.

Ah, you must have visited Manchester then.

Is "visiting Manchester" a euphemism for something? If so, then yes, I probably have.

Yes, I imagine it probably is - and yes I can quite imagine that you have.

Let's not define it then, let's just say that when this new gunboat is done, I'll go visit Manchester. Then let your mind buckle under the possibilities.