| Summary/Abstract |
In this article, I argue that seemingly ‘un-noteworthy’ interactions between states can demonstrate the significance of language for social relationships and foreign policy partnerships. Using language game analysis, I apply Peter Howard’s four-stage model to the case of the US–Turkish Economic Partnership Commission’s proposal for qualified industrial zones shortly after 9/11 and examine how the expectations for enhancing partnership are shaped and at times dashed through the language used among a network of actors. A language game analysis provides an explanation for how actors’ expectations rise and fall and provides an understanding of the maintenance, enhancement, and dismantling of state relationships in a social and practice-centered context. I utilize author interview data as well as texts from newspapers, speeches, and organizations to show how partnership between allies is vulnerable to social expectations signaled in and through the common language they both hold.
|