In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Notes on Language and Names In writing about a linguistic borderland, the use of a nonlocal, third-party language, such as English, might seem to be a way to transcend partisanship . On closer scrutiny, it does no such thing. Almost every Upper Silesian personal name or place-name comes in a German variant and a Polish variant but no English variant (the name Upper Silesia being a blessed exception ), so claims to linguistic “neutrality” are quickly punctured. One solution to this dilemma is to use both versions of a name (e.g., Schwientochlowitz/Swietochlowice). I have considerable sympathy for this approach, but it ultimately seemed too cumbersome for this book. Instead, I have used the version of a particular place-name that was of‹cial at the time—that is, German up until 1922, Polish (for certain areas) after the change of sovereignty. This method is not entirely satisfactory, since it is based on deference to power, but it is reasonably clear, economical, and consistent. Personal names are an even thornier issue, since many people routinely adjusted their ‹rst names (and sometimes even the spelling of their last names) to ‹t the language in which they were writing. But again, I felt a choice must be made, if only to spare readers repeated references to, say, Johann/Jan Kapitza/Kapica. Here, I again went with the “of‹cial” version in notes and bibliography. In the text, however, I went with the version that seemed most consistent with the individual’s overall linguistic and national orientation; someone with polonophile sentiments, for example, is called by the Polish version of his/her name. This is also not an entirely satisfactory method, since I am, after all, arguing throughout this book that many of my central characters had no clear national orientation. Readers will have to endure such contradictions as another example of the distortions imposed by the nationalization of scholarship. ...

Share