3 Data and Workflow
The empirical case study in this article is based on New Year’s speeches of the three
German-speaking countries, Germany, Austria and Switzerland
[2]
covering the years from 2000 to 2021. These three countries were selected, first,
based on the shared language providing us the possibility to compare the use of
language of high politics across these countries. Second, all three countries belong
to the same cultural-political space, Central Europe, with a strong, continental
orientation and a centuries-long experience and tradition of German cultural,
economic, and political influence, but also dominance [
Jordan 2005].
Besides the two more or less uniting criteria, the third selection criterion was a
dividing factor: Germany and Austria are members in the European Union (EU), whereas
Switzerland is only indirectly involved in European integration through its
membership in the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and a set of bilateral
agreements with the EU. Switzerland is also member of the Schengen area allowing any
person, irrespective of nationality, to cross the internal borders without being
subjected to border checks. Currently, most of the EU countries plus the non-EU
countries Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein have joined the Schengen
area. Against this background I expect these three countries to form an “imagined
community” (Benedict Anderson) and to share certain values, interests and world
views reflected by the New Year’s addresses. Further, I expect German and Austrian
New Year’s speeches to share discursive patterns related to EU affairs, especially to
the euro crisis (since 2008), the conflict in Ukraine (since 2014), and the refugee
crisis (since 2015).
[3] I also could explore the impact of the global Covid-19 pandemic
disease on both the content and vocabulary across the three countries yet this impact
is visible only in the speeches for the year 2021.
New Year’s speeches held by leading politicians–mostly prime ministers or
presidents–have a long and firm tradition in Europe and “have
become an institution instead of being a crowing event for conciliatory
efforts”
[
Portman 2014, 89]. From the perspective of political
communication, New Year’s addresses fulfil a triple function in the intersection of
the past, the present and the future. First, they summarise the past year from the
perspective of the political leadership and, hence, recall, reconstruct and remind
the most important events of the year. Second, New Year’s speeches describe the
present and, thus, can be understood and analysed as reality constructions, as
windows to the current state of affairs. And third, New Year’s speeches serve as road
maps to the future, into the new year. In this sense, a New Year’s speeches
summarises the most important future challenges, expectations and opportunities.
There exist only a small number of dedicated studies on New Year’s speeches [
Heikkinen 2006]
[
Portman 2014]
[
Purhonen and Toikka 2016]. I could not identify any specific reason for this,
despite that New Year’s speeches are dominantly given in non-English speaking
countries in Europe. As a text genre, however, New Year’s addresses are comparable
with the Presidential Inaugural speeches of the U.S. and this article
methodologically benefits from the study of [
Light 2014] on the United
States’ Inaugural Addresses. From the perspective of social sciences I am not
primarily interested in the use of language, but issues mentioned and described in
the addresses. This viewpoint is rooted in the assumption that a political
phenomenon, topic or event gains in importance if mentioned in a New Year’s address.
Here I also follow the idea that New Year’s speeches offer insights into shifts in
political priorities, interests, and opinions [
Light 2014, 117].
Against this background I am convinced that a longitudinal, computational analysis of
German, Austrian and Swiss New Year’s addresses can help us to a better understanding
of how the political landscape has changed between 2000 and 2021, but also where the
differences and similarities can be found between these three countries.
The speech corpus covers a period of 22 years and contains 64 speeches. There are two
missing years – 2002 and 2017 – in the Austrian speech collection. In Austria Federal
President delivers the New Year’s speeches and between 2000 and 2004 the speeches
were delivered by Thomas Klestil, between 2005 and 2016 by Heinz Fischer, and since
2018 by Alexander Van der Bellen. Although speeches from 2005 onwards can be
downloaded from the
official website of
the Austrian Federal President. Fortunately, the speeches of 2000-2001 and 2003-2004
could be found in different Austrian media archives. As regards the year 2002,
neither the President’s office nor the National Archive of Austria could provide any
information about where this particular New Year’s speech could be found, so that I
was forced to drop this year from the corpus. In 2017 Austria had an extraordinary
political situation with no Federal President in office, so that no New Year’s speech
was given.
In Germany, the New Year’s speeches are held by Federal Chancellor and full texts are
available on the
official website.
[4]. The
first six speeches (2000-2005) were held by Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, the
remaining sixteen from 2006 to 2021 by Chancellor Angela Merkel. In Switzerland, the
annual New Year’s speech is delivered by the President of the Confederation and all
speeches since 1980 are available online on the
official website of the President of the Confederation. As the term of the
Swiss President is just one year all New Year’s speeches are held by a different
person (except Micheline Calmy-Rey, Pascal Couchepin and Moritz Leuenberger, all of
them re-elected and with two speeches).
Despite the varieties in the use of language in the German-speaking Europe, formal
speeches by top-level politicians can be seen as an appropriate source of data, as
policy discourses are comprised of policy addresses and speeches about policy issues
[
Van Dijk 1977].
New Year’s speeches are traditionally broadcasted over TV or radio within a
relatively short time of 10 to 15 minutes. Consequently, these speeches are relative
compact in size. The average speeches length of a German new New Year’s speech was
892 tokens and standard deviation (sd) was 111. In Austria and Switzerland the
average lengths were 719 (sd=58) and 562 (sd=159) respectively (Figure 1). Quite
understandably the amount of unique tokens is somewhat lower, since certain words are
used several times during a speech. For German New Year’s addresses, there were 362
unique tokens in average (sd=33), for Austrian and Swiss speeches the average number
of unique tokens was 317 (sd=27) and 255 (sd=60) respectively. Swiss New Year’s
speeches seem to have become shorter over time, whereas both German and Austrian New
Year’s speeches remain relative stable over time (Figure 1). Generally speaking a
country’s size seem to matter here, as German New Year’s speeches are slightly longer
than the Austrian or Swiss addresses. My explanation for this observed difference
stems from the differences in political and economic importance. Germany’s central
role in European politics results in broader political agenda, so that there are more
issues and topics to be addressed to in a New Year’s address.
As regards the analysis workflow, all collected speeches were saved in separate files
in plain text format. These files were then imported into
RStudio, a graphical end-user environment
for the statistical
package R. The
research data was created and analysed in the four steps. First, I used the package
’udpipe’
[5] to tokenise,
part-of-speech tag, and lemmatise the documents. After this step, the data was
structured as a data table consisting of 53893 words and 5277 unique lemmata,
enriched with descriptive metadata about the country and the year, as well sentence
indices. In the third step, I used text mining and explorative data analysis tools
from the package
’tidytext’ to carry out different text analyses and to transform textual
data to different sets of text network data. The applied text mining methods will be
described in the next section. For the text network network creation I used both
bi-grams by linking two consecutive words, as well skipgrams of length two by
combining non-adjacent words that were three, four or five words apart.
[6] Both the bi-grams and
skipgrams were created within the boundaries of the same sentence based on the
sentence index included in the data structure. (2) in the case of concepts used in a
single country, only concepts which occur more than three times are included. Text
networks were visualised and analysed with ’visone’, a fully-fledged, platform
independent software offering powerful layouts for network visualisations and a
comprehensive set of tools for network manipulation,
transformation and analysis.
4 Results
Figure 2 presents the addresses network for the whole corpus based on the similarity
of the New Year’s addresses. Similarity is here calculated as cosine measure, a
term-based comparison between documents in a document corpus, and has a value range
from 0 (no similarity at all) to 1 (full similarity).
[7] I reduced noise in the document-term matrix
by removing both stopwords and all terms except nouns, verbs, pronouns, and proper
nouns. In the network visualisation nodes represent different New Years speeches and
are coloured with country-specific colours so that German addresses are coloured with
yellow, Austrian with red, and Swiss speeches with white. I have also added labels to
help the reader to identify different addresses. Nodes are connected by edges, of
which width is visualised proportional to the cosine measure of the two speeches
connected by that edge. In my data the cosine measures ranged from 0.103 (between the
Swiss speeches 2006 and 2020) to 0.641 (between the German speeches 2009 and 2010),
but I have removed edges with cosine measure below 0.400 in order to improve the
readability of the network visualisation. Further, I used a force-directed layout and
optimised it to position speeches with higher similarity closer, those with lesser to
each other so that the clusters of more similar speeches are easier to identify.
As regards the similarity network two observations seem appropriate. First, the New
Year’s speeches evidence a stronger similarity within, and weaker similarity across
countries. This is clearly visible in the network structure as well, as speeches from
different countries form clear and distinct cluster in the visualisation (see Figure
2). Overall, the average similarity for cross-country speeches is 0.318 (min=0.114,
max=0.514), for national speeches the average similarity is 0.384 (min=0.103,
max=0.614). If we set the threshold value for cosine measure to 0.5, only two
cross-national combinations, namely Austria 2018 – Switzerland 2020 (0.505) and
Germany 2014 – Switzerland 2018 (0.514), exceed this limit. Varieties of national
political agenda and circumstances seem to explain these observed differences, thus
underlining the primacy of national topical issues. An interesting result is also
that the cosine similarity between German and Austrian speeches is significantly
higher (mean=0.355) than that between German/Austrian and Swiss speeches
(mean=0.277). This difference is at least partly explained by the EU membership, as
certain topical issues both German and Austrian speeches tackle are connected to EU
politics.
And second, similarity seems to be stronger between between chronologically close
speeches and weaker between speeches with greater temporal distance. I tested this
with a simple Pearson’s correlation test and calculated the correlation between the
cosine measure and the temporal distance in years between the New Year’s addresses.
The correlation was -0.085 (p<0.001), thus confirming the hypothesis that the
similarity measure decreases when the temporal distance between compared speeches
increases. This seems logical when reflected against the fact that New Year’s
speeches tackle topical issues at the end of a year. The longer the temporal distance
between two addresses, the more probable there has been significant changes in
political circumstances affecting the vocabulary used in the addresses. Hence, this
observation also gives support to the argument that New Year’s speeches offer an
interesting and valuable perspective on a year’s prevailing political reality.
Results from the document-level TNA suggested the existence of variance in vocabulary
between the countries and over time. In order to better understand this variance I
applied a specific text mining method, called term frequency, inverse document
frequency (tf-idf) analysis, to adjust the frequency of a word for how
rarely it is used in the collection of New Year’s speeches of each country. A word’s
inverse document frequency (idf) was then applied to explore words that
are not used very much during the whole period from 2000 to 2021. I divided each
national collection of New Year’s speeches into three distinct periods of 2000-2009,
2010-2019, and 2020-2021. Here the idea was to capture changes in the vocabulary over
time within a country, most probably caused by changes in topical issues or political
circumstances. The results of this tf-idf analysis are presented in
Figure 3. In this barplot we can see for each country the most important words in
each distinct period of time. Hence, the Figure 3 highlights temporal changes within
each country, but preserves national differences. In my opinion three central
findings from this analysis are worth being discussed in detail.
First, the connection to topical political issues and circumstances is especially
evident in Germany across the time periods, but also clearly visible in Austrian
speeches of the last two periods. As regards Germany, during the first period
(2000-2009) words like “wiederaufbau” (rebuilding), “betroffen” (upset),
and mitgefühl“” (sympathy, compassion), together with such words like
“naturkatastrophe” (natural disaster), “region” (region), or
“erschüttern” (shock, shake) belonging to the top-30 tf-idf
words in this period, tackle the 2002 European flood. Germany was the hardest hit
country in Europe and the flood resulted in heated political discussions in the eve
of the Federal elections 2002. In Austrian speeches of this period words like
“jahrhudert” (century), “katastrophe” (catastrophe), and
“hilfsbereitschaft” (helpfulness) document the presence of the 2002 flood –
which hit also Austria quite severely – also in Austrian political discourses.
Another issue in this period was the outbreak of the sovereign debt crisis in the
eurozone in 2008/2009. This economic crisis is present in German speeches through
words like “globalisierung” (globalisation), “wirtschaft” (economy),
“arbeitslosigkeit”, (unemployment). Contrary to Germany, the eurozone crisis
is not very present and visible in Austrian speeches in this period of time. A
possible explanation to this difference might be found in the different roles the two
countries played in the early stage of the eurozone crisis. Germany as the strongest
economy in the eurozone played a central, designing role from the very beginning of
the eurozone crisis [
Müller-Brandeck-Bocquet 2010]
[
Jsnning and Möller 2016]
[
Kundnani 2016]
[
Bulmer 2018], whereas Austria were not strongly hit by, nor a central
player in this crisis. In addition to that I would also stress the economy-oriented
political culture in Germany. The strong role of economic questions as a central
shaping factor of German domestic and European politics increases the weight of
topical economic issues in public debates. Against this background it is not
surprisingly that the eurozone crisis occupied a more significant space in public
debates in German compared to Austria [
Allen 2005]
[
Maull 2018].
During the second period (2010-2019) the focus of German New Year’s speeches shifts
from economy to refugee politics. In 2015 Chancellor Merkel decided to keep German
state borders open to refugees coming mainly from the Middle East. Although this
political turn was captured in positive political slogans like
“Willkommenskultur” (culture of welcoming) or – most prominently – “Wir
schaffen das” (we can do it/ we manage it), the fact that words like
“flüchtling” (refugee), “zusammenhalt” (sticking together),
“herausforderung” (challenge), “außengrenze” (outer border), or
“aufnehmen” (receive, welcome) are among the top-20 terms underline the
change the refugee crisis caused in German public and political discourses during
this period of 2010-2019. From the methodological point of view the identification of
terms with a clear connection to the refugee crisis evidence the usefulness of
tf-idf analysis when it comes to explore discursive changes. Contrary
to Germany, the refugee crisis was not central in Austrian New Year’s addresses.
Instead, the national political and economic setting seem to dominate Austrian
addresses. Terms like “marktwirtschaft” (market economy), “lebensqualität”
(quality of life), or “finanz”(finance) tackle economic consequences of the
eurozone crisis. The word “politikverdrossenheit” (jadedness with politics)
refers to domestic political turbulences behind the rise of the right-wing populist
Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) in the mid-2010s. Although this rise was partly
supported by the refugee crisis, it was also an expression of disillusionment with
the political elite.
Second, as expected the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic disease in Europe in the
first half of 2020 resulted in a clear change, especially as regards the German and
Austrian New Year’s addresses. Words like “pandemie” (pandemic),
“impfung”/“impfstoff” (vaccination), “abstand” (distance), or
“corona” (coronavirus) poke from the results as indicators for this
discursive change in political and public discourse in Germany and Austria. Once
again, the results also confirm the usefulness of tf-idf analysis for
the exploration of discursive changes through changes in vocabulary over time.
And third, the overall results confirm the hypothesis that Germany and Austria are,
what comes to political agenda and circumstances, as well to topical issues, closer
to each other than to Switzerland. It is, however, a somewhat odd observation that
Swiss speeches seem to avoid topical political issues and to concentrate
on the construction of neutral narratives. A possible explanation for this might be
found in the fact that in Switzerland, as opposed to Germany and Austria, the federal
president giving the New Year’s speech is not the head of state, but just the head of
Switzerland’s Federal Council, and only carries out some representative duties.
Hence, the federal president is merely a mediator between the different parts of the
Swiss federal state.
The results presented thus far indicate two main aspects. First, New Year’s addresses
offer a valuable and reliable source to explore topical issues and tackle changes in
political and public discourses. And second, although the national political agenda
and circumstances seem to have a stronger impact on the content of the addresses,
significant European political incidents and events, e.g. the refugee crisis or the
Covid-19 pandemic disease, seem to cause changes across countries. This leads us to
the final analysis, an attempt to explore shared topics. For this analysis I
constructed text networks based on bigrams, i.e. word co-occurrences of two adjacent
words, and of skipgrams, i.e. combinations of two non-adjancent words that are three
to five words apart [
Jelveh et al. 2014, 1805]. The bi- and skipgrams
were created for words occurring within the same paragraph. Since the idea is to
analyse topics across countries all word pairs co-occurring in New Year’s speeches of
one single country only were removed. In the last step I calculated a co-occurrence
weight measure by dividing the number of speeches a word pair co-occurs by the total
number of speeches (64) in the multi-national corpus. The interpretation of this
weight measure is rather straightforward: the higher the value, the more significant
the word pair for the cross-country content.
Figure 4 visualises word co-occurrences network across countries based on bigrams,
whereas Figure5 visualises word co-occurrence network across countries based on
skipgrams. Hence, both visualised text networks present shared word co-occurrences
central for the multi-country corpus of German, Austrian, and Swiss New Year’s
addresses, i.e. word pairs that can be interpreted as fundamental for the – put in
Benedict Anderson’s (1991) famous terminology – imagined discursive community of
these three German-speaking countries. The bigram-based core text network consists of
336 words and 565 co-occurrences, whereas the skipgram-based core text network
consists of 423 words and 1157 co-occurrences.
In order to visually highlight the most important structural properties both
visualisations apply identical visualisation effects:
- Node size is mapped to the node’s degree centrality value and node label size
is mapped the nodes betweenness centrality measure. In network theory centrality,
in general, indicates a node’s position in the network and can be calculated
either relative to a node’s direct neighbours or the whole network. A node’s
degree is the simplest centrality measure and equals to the number of connections
the node has to other nodes. Betweenness, as the term itself indicates, defines
centrality by analysing where a node is placed within the network. Consequently, a
node’s betweenness centrality score is computed by taking into consideration the
rest of the network and by looking at how many times a node sits on the shortest
path linking two other nodes together, thus helping to identify nodes having
“a high probability of occurring on a randomly chosen
shortest path between two randomly chosen vertices”
[Hasu and Kao 2013]
[Prell 2012, 103–104]. Considering meaning circulation across
the entire network, the latter capability is assumed to be more relevant, since
betweenness centrality “shows the variety of contexts where
the word appears, while high degree shows the variety of words next to which
the word appears”
[Paranyushkin 2011, 13]. This difference is important to keep
in mind and therefore I use betweenness centrality to measure a concept’s general
status in the text network. As both [Paranyushkin 2011] and [Shim et al. 2015] point out concepts with high betweenness and degree
centrality play a meaning circulation role across texts in the document corpus,
whereas concepts with low centrality measures are peripheral concepts and, thus,
typical only for a certain part of documents. Between these two extremes are
located concepts with high betweenness but low degree centrality and concepts with
low betweenness but high degree centrality. The former play an important role as
bridging concepts between local communities, the latter, in turn, are local hubs
within a cluster [Shim et al. 2015, 59f]. This mapping strategy allows
us to easily identify the most important and influential words in the
graph.
- Node colour is mapped to the topic cluster the node belongs to. One of the
proposed key advantages of TNA is bound with the possibility to exploit network
community detection techniques.[8] The underlying idea here is that when textual
documents are reconstructed as text networks a word’s position in the network is
not random but determined relative to the context it appears in. Consequently,
words belonging to the same (or similar) context are assumed to cluster across
documents, so that we could be able to identify groups of words in the network
structure having dense connections within the group, but sparse
connections to other parts of the text next. These groups are here interpreted as
topics describing the main thematic content of the document corpus. By leaning on
the promising results of [Paranyushkin 2011] and [Shim et al. 2015] I applied a modularity-based community detection method
called “Louvain method” based on the assumption, that nodes
being more densely connected together than with the rest of the network construct
a network community [Blondel et al. 2008]. The method identified in total
13 clusters - in my interpretation: topics - in the bigram-based and 12 topics in
the skipgram-based text network.
- Edge width is mapped to the weight of the co-occurrence of the word pair. The
more often two words co-occur in the document corpus, the wider the connecting
edge is visualised in the network graph. Since the graph includes only word pairs
shared by at least two countries, edge effects help us to identify word pairs used
together frequently across countries.
- Layout used for the visualisation is a radar-like centrality layout, in which a
node’s position is determined by its topic cluster and links are arranged
according to their weights. The underlying idea of this layout is to gather nodes
belonging to the same cluster on the same circumference. Further, the
visualisation makes also connections between the clusters – i.e. word pairs, of
which words belong to different topic clusters – easier to identify. As regards
the meaning circulation across the multi-country text network word pairs
connecting two topics can be analysed from the perspective of structural holes.
These connections bridging two separate topics by closing a structural hole in a
network can make us aware of possibly existing latent similarities between these
two topics [Burt 2004].
Bigram text network core communities |
(Total # of clusters: 13, modularity: 0.55) |
Cluster
|
Core content words of the topic(a) |
#1: Solidarity / Sense of community (55 words in total) |
bürgerin/bürger, frieden, geschichte, hilfbereitschaft, sicherheit,
stabilität, verantwortung, wiederaufbau, zukunft, zusammenhalt |
#2: Crisis recovery (41) |
einsetzen, ereignis, erinnern, freuen, generation, glauben, krise,
verbinden, weltkrieg, überwinden |
#3: Covid-19 era (36) |
erfolgreich, familie, friedlich, meistern, pandemie, phase, resignation,
schwierig, zeit, zusammenleben |
#4: Europe (32) |
entwicklung, erweiterung, europäisch, hoffnung, krieg, mitgliedstaat,
parlament, terror, union, wählen |
Skipgram text network core communities |
(Total # of clusters: 12, modularity: 0.35) |
Cluster
|
Core content words of the topic(a) |
#1: Crisis recovery (62 words in total) |
erinnerung, friedlich, krieg, mauer, notwendig, optimismus, pandemie,
vergessen, verlust, wirtschaftskrise |
#2: Faith in the future (51) |
aufschwung, bemühen, gestaltung, neugier, selbstvertrauen, technik,
wirklichkeit, wissenschaft, zufriedenheit, zuversicht |
#3: Economy (46) |
arbeitsplatz, beitrag, einsatz, erreichen, global, idee, leisten, offen,
unternehmen, wirtschaft |
#4: Solidarity / Sense of community (45) |
alltag, bürgerin/bürger, demokratie, entwicklung, familie, frieden,
gemeinsam, gemeinschaft, stehen, welt |
Table 1.
Most important topics in the New Year’s speeches across countries.
(a) Core content words include ten (10) most influental words relative to the topic
of the cluster (listed in alphabetical order). Bold words indicate top ranking words
both in degree and betweenness centrality, i.e. words being central for meaning
circulation across the text network.
Table 1 summarises the most significant results of the community detection analysis
of both the bigram based and the skipgram based text network by focusing on the four
largest communities found by the Louvain algorithm. As expected there is some
variance across topics between the bigram and skipgram networks. I consider this
variation as normal when the differences in network data creation is taken into
account. Actually, against this background, the two networks should not be considered
as exclusionary but complementary to each other. I have given each community a
descriptive label based on a manual evaluation of the vocabulary linked to the
community.
There are two shared topics. I have labelled the first “Solidarity / Sense of
community” and it is the largest topic in the bigram and fourth largest topic
in the skipgram text network. Both includes words “bürger/bürgerin” (citizen)
and “frieden” (peace). In the bigram network this topic is with respect to
content more focused on helpfulness and security, indicated through words like
“hilfebereitschaft” (helpfulness), “sicherheit” (security),
“stabilität” (stability), “verantwortung” (responsibility), and
“zusammenhalt” (togetherness, solidarity). The skipgram network, in turn, has
in this topic a stronger bias towards democracy and society embodied by words like
“alltag” (everyday life), “demokratie” (democracy), “familie”
(family), and “gemeinschaft” (community).
This topic appears in different contexts over time. In the German New Year’s speech
in 2006 the topic is used to emphasise the inter-linkages between Germany and the
international, global community:
[9]
Deutschland ist keine Insel. Wir stehen
in einem internationalen Qualitätswettbewerb, der alle Bereiche unseres
Zusammenlebens betrifft: Welcher Nation gelingt es am besten, die
schöpferischen Kräfte ihrer Menschen zu wecken? Wie offen ist eine Gesellschaft
für Neues? Was bietet sie jungen Familien? In welchem Land gibt es die besten
Schulen und Hochschulen? Wie gut gelingt das Miteinander von Einheimischen und
Zuwanderern?
(Germany 2006)
In the German speech of 2015, the topic is used in the context of the refugee crisis
to foster solidarity among citizens, but also to strengthen confidence and commitment
to the community and its values:
Genauso klar ist: Nur mit offenen
Diskussionen und Debatten können wir Lösungen finden, die langfristig Bestand
haben und von Mehrheiten getragen werden. Wir sind es, die Bürger und ihre
gewählten Repräsentanten, die entwickeln und verteidigen werden, was dieses
unser liberales und demokratisches Land so lebenswert und liebenswert macht.
Wir sind es, die Lösungen finden werden, die unseren ethischen Normen
entsprechen, und den sozialen Zusammenhalt nicht gefährden. Lösungen, die das
Wohlergehen der eigenen Bürger berücksichtigen, aber nicht die Not der
Flüchtlinge vergessen.
(Germany 2015)
The Austrian speech of 2007, in turn, highlights the role of persons in different
positions of trust for the security, stability and confidence of the community:
Lassen Sie mich abschließend die
Gelegenheit benutzen, um den vielen Frauen und Männern herzlich zu danken, die
in den verschiedensten Funktionen für unser Gemeinwohl, für unsere Sicherheit,
für unsere Gesundheit und für den Zusammenhalt unserer Gesellschaft
buchstäblich oft Tag und Nacht beruflich, oder auch als freiwillige Helferinnen
und Helfer tätig sind. Der Wert dessen, was hier geleistet wird, kann gar nicht
hoch genug eingeschätzt werden.
(Austria 2007)
And finally, the following two quotes from the Swiss speeches of 2017 and 2021
establish connections between the economic welfare, sovereignty and stability of the
country and the solidarity and togetherness of the society:
Stabil und erfolgreich wollen wir auch
in Zukunft sein. Dazu braucht es mehr denn je den Zusammenhalt. Unsere
Gesellschaft ist stark, weil wir erprobt sind im Versöhnen von
Ansprüchen.
(Switzerland 2017)
Wir Schweizerinnen und Schweizer müssen
zusammenstehen. Nur so können wir als Land einstehen für die Interessen von uns
allen: für unsere Gesundheit und unser wirtschaftliches Wohlergehen, für
Frieden und Verbundenheit, für Freiheit und Unabhängigkeit, – kurz: für alles,
was uns seit Langem lieb und teuer ist.
(Switzerland 2021)
The second shared topic is labelled “Crisis recovery”. The content vocabulary of
this topics indicates that this topic is not limited to the Covid-19 pandemic disease
only. Instead, this topic seems to be used over time to embed a current, topical
crisis into a wider, historical context. Although the clustering algorithm allocates
topical words like “pandemie” (pandemic) or “wirtschaftskrise” (financial
crisis) to this cluster, in my interpretation other content words like
“generation” (generation), “krieg / weltkrieg” (war / world war),
“überwinden” (overcome), “optimismus” (optimism), “mauer” (wall),
and “erinnern” (remember) stand for this wider historical context.
Both in the Swiss speech in 2010 and German speech in 2011 this topic was used to
frame the eurozone crisis. Both quotations manifest a clear optimism that the crisis
has been successfully fought and the country will recover rather quickly:
Wir verfügen über eine starke Wirtschaft
und eine solide Finanzpolitik. Wir haben es geschafft, trotz grosser
Wirtschaftskrise die Schulden nicht übermässig wachsen zu lassen. Das wird uns
im Aufschwung stärken.
(Switzerland 2010)
Deutschland hat die Krise wie kaum ein
anderes Land gemeistert. Was wir uns vorgenommen hatten, das haben wir auch
geschafft: Wir sind sogar gestärkt aus der Krise herausgekommen. Und das ist
vor allem Ihr Verdienst, liebe Mitbürgerinnen und Mitbürger.
(Germany 2011)
In 2020, the Austrian speech used this topic in a totally different context combining
the most important crises and challenges of the current time, i.e. climate change,
digitalisation, and migration, as well questions related to gender equality and
welfare state reforms.
Zur Klimakrise kommen weitere große
Herausforderungen: Wie werden wir künftig arbeiten? Welche Antworten geben wir
in Österreich auf die Digitalisierung? Wie soll sich unser Wirtschaftsstandort
entwickeln? Wie gehen wir mit Migration um? Und was tun wir, um Frauenrechte zu
stärken? Haben wir ausreichend drüber nachgedacht, das Nötige im
Bildungsbereich anzugehen? Welche Reformen sind im Gesundheits- und
Sozialsystem notwendig, um soziale Sicherheit und sozialen Zusammenhalt für die
Zukunft zu gewährleisten?
(Austria 2020)
Both text networks produce also distinct topics. In the bigram network we can
identify the unique topics labelled by myself “Covid-19 era” and “Europe”,
in the skipgram network such topics include “Faith in the future” and
“Economy”. As regards the bigram-specific topics, “Covid-19 era” not
only embodies the strenuousness of the pandemic disease by content words like
“pandemie” (pandemic), “resignation” (resignation), or the word
combination “schwierig” + “zeit” (hard times), but also seeks to create
hope through words like “erfolgreich” (successful), “familie” (family),
“meistern” (control), “zusammenleben” (life together). The topic
“Europe”, in turn, tackles both current European issues like terrorism
(“terror”), European parliamentary elections (“wählen” (vote),
“parlament” (parliament)) and European integration as a wider context
(“europäisch” + “union” (EU), “erweiterung” (enlargement),
“mitgliedstaat” (member state)). This latter topic clearly evidences the role
and status of the EU as the most important political, economic, and geographical
context.
The topic “Covid-19 era” is a mixture of resignation and hope. The Austrian
speech in 2021 well exemplifies this mixture:
Ein neues Jahr liegt vor uns. Wir spüren
noch die Last des alten, die Last der Pandemie. Aber viele von uns spüren trotz
allem eine hoffnungsfrohe Erwartung, wie sie nur am Beginn von etwas Neuem
stehen kann, wenn alle Möglichkeiten offen und alle Träume noch frisch
sind.
(Austria 2021)
The German address, in turn, acknowledges the dramatic changes caused by the Covid-19
pandemic disease. At the same, however, the quotation has a positive trait, stressing
the supportive and stabilising role of the federal state in the times of crisis:
Die Aufgaben, vor die die Pandemie uns
stellt, bleiben gewaltig. Bei vielen Gewerbetreibenden, Arbeitnehmern,
Solo-Selbstständigen und Künstlern herrschen Unsicherheit, ja Existenzangst.
Die Bundesregierung hat sie in dieser ganz unverschuldeten Notlage nicht allein
gelassen. Staatliche Unterstützung in nie dagewesener Höhe hilft. Verbesserte
Kurzarbeitsregeln greifen. Arbeitsplätze können so bewahrt
werden.
(Germany 2021)
Contrary to Austria and Germany, the Swiss speech of 2021 is marked by negative
ambience, even resignation underlining the deep societal impact the Covid-19 pandemic
disease has caused in Switzerland:
Selten haben wir Vergleichbares erlebt:
Unsere Tätigkeiten kamen zum Stillstand. Die ganze Gesellschaft befand sich in
noch nie dagewesener Isolation. Wir mussten lernen, ohne Händeschütteln
auszukommen. Dieses wichtige Begrüssungsritual gefährdete plötzlich unsere
Gesundheit.
(Switzerland 2021)
The topic “Europe” is mostly used, as the following quotations exemplify, to
remind the citizens about the fundamental importance of European integration as a
uniting community of Europeans, but also as provider for economic and political
security in a global world:
Es geht nun darum, dass die Union nicht
nur wirtschaftlich, sondern auch verstärkt politisch und emotional
zusammenwächst. Die Bürger müssen spüren, dass es sich lohnt, in diesem
erweiterten Europa zu leben und zu arbeiten.
(Austria 2003)
In den vergangenen Jahren habe ich oft
gesagt, dass es auch Deutschland auf Dauer nur dann gut geht, wenn es auch
Europa gut geht. Denn nur in der Gemeinschaft der Europäischen Union können wir
unsere Werte und Interessen behaupten und Frieden, Freiheit und Wohlstand
sichern.
(Germany 2020)
Wirtschaftlich sind wir weltweit
verflochten. Geografisch, historisch und kulturell sind wir ein europäisches
Land. Die Beziehungen zu unseren Nachbarländern und zu den anderen
Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Union regeln wir in bewährter Weise bilateral.
(Switzerland 2005)
Within the skipgram network, the topic “Faith in the future” represents a strong
faith in technological and scientific development as the most important fundament for
a better future. This is especially evident when we consider such content words like
“technik” (technology), “wissenschaft” (science), “aufschwung”
(boom, economic expansion), “selbstvertrauen” (self-confidence), and
“zuversicht” (confidence). Interestingly, this topic also contains words with
strong, dynamic connotation to the shaping the future (“gestaltung”) and the
putting oneself out (“bemühen”). How this topic is used to generate optimism
towards the future is well illustrated by the following quotations:
Wie wichtig es ist, auch im scheinbar
größten Durcheinander Gelassenheit, Mut und Zuversicht zu bewahren.
(Austria 2020)
Zusammenhalt, Offenheit, unsere
Demokratie und eine starke Wirtschaft, die dem Wohl aller dient: Das ist es,
was mich für unsere Zukunft hier in Deutschland auch am Ende eines schweren
Jahres zuversichtlich sein lässt.
(Germany 2017)
Dennoch bin ich zuversichtlich. Denn ich
glaube an die Fähigkeit des Menschen zu gestalten. Es gibt immer einen Weg.
Manchmal braucht es Mut und Kraft.
(Switzerland 2010)
Finally, the topic “Economy” is characterised by very concrete, economic content
words like “arbeitsplatz” (job, post), “global” (global[isation]),
“unternehmen” (company), and “wirtschaft” (economy). But this topic also
has a forward-looking content embodied by words like “erreichen” (reach),
“idee” (idea), or “leisten” (perform). An excellent example of how this
topic is present in the speeches is the following quotation from the German speech of
2008: “Deutschland kann seine alte Kraft als das Land der Sozialen Marktwirtschaft
wieder neu unter Beweis stellen, der Verbindung von Freiheit und Gerechtigkeit,
Fleiß und Unternehmergeist”. The same spirit can be found in the following
Austrian and Swiss addresses:
Unsere Bevölkerung hat nicht nur ein
Recht auf sichere Grenzen und innere Sicherheit, sie hat auch ein Recht auf ein
möglichst hohes Maß an wirtschaftlicher Stabilität und sozialer
Sicherheit.
(Austria 2013)
Starke Unternehmen sind der beste Garant
für Arbeitsplätze. Und Arbeitsplätze sind die Basis für soziale Sicherheit und
Wohlstand. Noch gehört die Schweiz zu den wirtschaftlich erfolgreichsten
Ländern. Sorgen wir mit freiheitlichen Rahmenbedingungen dafür, dass das so
bleibt.
(Switzerland 2016)
Overall, the topics identified by the Louvain method seem appropriate and reliable in
the context of these three countries. The main topics discussed above not only
connect well to the political and economic reality in these countries or in Europe in
more general terms, but also evidence that TNA tools offer – as the previous studies
of [
Paranyushkin 2011], [
Light 2014], or [
Shim et al. 2015] already suggest – a reliable alternative to traditional
methods of text mining. Further, the differences between topics identified in the
bigram and the skipgram based network seem to give support to the study of [
Jelveh et al. 2014] that the complementary use of both methods can help us to
reliably identify topics that use similar vocabulary but show differences in the text
structure. And finally, it is worth being noted that the most important content words
of each topic contain only a few words with both a high degree centrality and a high
betweenness centrality. This means that the most important content words are those
enjoying higher relevance within the topic and, thus, are descriptive for the topic.
A closer look at words used for meaning circulation across topics and countries
reveals that these words include words related to peace (“frieden”,
“friedlich”) and war (“krieg”), security (“sicherheit”), crisis
(“krise”), community (“gemeinschaft”), economy (“wirtschaft”), and
future (“zukunft”). All these “glueing” words are less topical and more
contextual, thus framing and embedding the topical issues into a wider context of
European (integration) history.