Communication and Language Learning in Virtual Environments through an Eco-semiotic Lens

The paper explores the interface between the new theoretical approach of ecolinguistics and language educational practices in the new digital environments that we have plunged into during 2020-2021. From the standpoint of ecological communication and eco-semiotics, the exploration highlights its impact on language learning and education in general, as re-contextualized in the new digital spaces we have all been experiencing as educators and learners. The theoretical input from semiotics and conceptual linguistics on the one hand, and educational ecology on the other hand, is paired with a direct empirical analysis of the students’ language learning experience at the USAMVBT University of Timisoara, Romania, the University of Tetova, North Macedonia, and Lomza State University from Poland. Our aim is to better understand how to sustain students’ communicational skills and their overall adaptation to the emerging digitalised educational environment across fields of study.

Demoralizing: integrating J.D. Peters’ communication “chasm” with Niklas Luhmann’s (1989) ecological communication to analyze climate change mitigation inaction

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explain the US society’s insignificant mitigation of climate change using Niklas Luhmann’s (1989) autopoietic social systems theory in ecological communication. Specifically, the author’s analysis falls within the context of Luhmann re-moralized while focusing on particular function systems’ binary codes and their repellence of substantive US climate change mitigation policy across systems. Design/methodology/approach The author achieves this purpose by resituating Luhmann’s conception of evolution to forgo systems teleology and better contextualize the spatial-temporal scale of climate change; reinforcing complexity reduction and differentiation by integrating communication and media scholar John D. Peters’s (1999) “communication chasm” concept as one mechanism through which codes sustain over time; and applying these integrated concepts to prominent the US climate change mitigation attempts. Findings The author concludes that climate change mitigation efforts are the amalgamation of the systems’ moral communications. Mitigation efforts have relegated themselves to subsystems of the ten major systems given the polarizing nature of their predominant care/harm moral binary. Communication chasms persist because these moral communications cannot both adhere to the systems’ binary codes and communicate the climate crisis’s urgency. The more time that passes, the more codes force mitigation organizations, activist efforts and their moral communications to adapt and sacrifice their actions to align with the encircling systems’ code. Social implications In addition to the conceptual contribution, the social implication is that by identifying how and why climate change mitigation efforts are subsumed by the larger systems and their codes, climate change activists and practitioners can better tool their tactics to change the codes at the heart of the systems if serious and substantive climate change mitigation is to prevail. Originality/value To the author’s knowledge, there has not been an integration of a historical communication concept into, and sociological application of, ecological communication in the context of climate change mitigation.

Lingwoekologia – ochrona języka przed człowiekiem i człowieka przed językiem

What should be considered the central problem of linguaecology is the issue of protection of language quality (its various manners of existence: language use, system as well as individual and collective linguistic awareness) against destructive human impact, in particular culture, and protection of human health (individuals and human communities) against harmful language. The ecological nature of linguistic communication is determined not only by its axiological (emotional and moral) dimension but also, and foremost, by the intention not to harm oneself and others. In order to meet the challenges of our times (from climate crisis to hate speech), we need to oppose the view that human beings are selfi sh and aggressive by nature. This view contributes to us becoming like that. However, the true human nature is different: human beings are decent, they are homo cooperans. Keywords: ecology – language – human being – emotions – morality – ecological communication – homo cooperans

The Great Discrepancy: Political Action, Sustainable Development and Ecological Communication

The term ‘sustainable development’ was coined to denote a political goal some 40 years ago; debates about sustainability date back considerably further. These debates reflect the growing awareness of the destructive effects of human activities on the natural foundations of life. Numerous initiatives have been launched to trigger a turnaround, with the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs being the latest attempt. However, substantial progress has been rather limited thus far. This discrepancy is the subject of the article. Starting from a historical overview of sustainability politics, the argument develops in three steps. First, it is shown that conventional conceptions to promote environmental change fall short in depicting the broader societal context. To provide a comprehensive picture of the challenges related to transformation processes, a theory of the functional differentiation of societies is presented in a second step. A systems theory perspective offers a convincing theoretical explication of the problem. Third, this approach is scrutinized with regard to the political system and the politics of sustainability. The key finding is that the specific functional logics of the different social subsystems must be taken into account when analysing sustainable development and the discrepancy between the aims and ambitions of (global) environmental policy and the visible consequences. On the one hand, the functional differentiation of modern society guarantees its high degree of effectiveness and flexibility. On the other hand, implementing fundamental change, such as a transition towards sustainability, is not simply a question of strategy or of political willingness and steering. Rather, there is a need for more elaborate explanatory instruments. As a result, we argue for a linking of theories of sustainable development and advanced social theory.