The meanings of some key concepts are experiencing stimulating and “even polemical debates” (?zkirimlii, 2000). Key amongst these concepts is diaspora. A few definitions of the concepts challenge essentialist and normative approaches. Some examples are those of Cohen (1997) on diaspora; Giddens (1991), Gilroy (1993), Hall (1996), and Ang (2000) on identity; Anderson (1983), Gellner (1983), Smith (1994) on nationalism; Glick Schiller, et al (1992), Portes (1996, 1997), Robins and Aksoy (2003, 2005) on transnationalism; and Brah (1996), Naficy (1999), Connor (2001), and Hammer (2007) on home and the homeland . Some other works situate definitions within an otherwise restrictive analytical framework. Examples of these are Safran (1991), Marienstras (1999) on diasporas; Kedourie, (1960), Deutsch (1969), Nairn, (1997), on nationalism; and Rapport and Dawson, (1998) on home and the homeland . This paper discusses the concepts based on “how they should be theorised”, rather than “what they are”. This is because of emerging new meanings in a world of constant global changes, such that the productions and reproductions of meanings require regular reviews.
展开▼
