‘Sorry, I Don’t Want Them Here.’ Migration in Slovak Political Discourse

Abstract

The issue of international migration in Slovakia was not a topic of public discussion until 2015. A major change in migration discourse can be observed only after the mass migratory processes in 2015, a few weeks before the Slovak parliamentary elections. Just before the elections, politicians had also noticed these processes, putting the spotlight on migration, which became a frequent priority topic of electoral campaigns for several weeks. Our aim with this paper is to answer a question of how Slovak politicians, who had ignored this topic for many years, dealt with the issue of international migration since 2015 and which aspect dominated the emerging migration discourse. We came to the conclusion that Slovak politicians tackled the issue almost uniformly, regardless of their ideological beliefs or coalition-opposition framework. Most politicians presented migration as a threat. In addition to the securitization of migration discourse, we also observe a gradual shift in the understanding of the term migrant. Until 2015, the naming of the particular actor of migration processes was generally understood to be neutral, yet since 2015 the term has acquired a strong negative connotation.

Full text

10 Дискурс профессиональной коммуникации №3-2, 2021
Радослав Штефанчик, Андрей Кинер Исследовательская статья
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
https://doi.org/10.24833/2687-0126-2021-3-2-10-20
‘SORRY, I DON’T WANT THEM HERE.’
MIGRATION IN SLOVAK POLITICAL DISCOURSE
Radoslav Štefančík
University of Economics in Bratislava (Slovakia)
radoslav.stefancik@euba.sk
Andrej Kiner
University of Economics in Bratislava (Slovakia)
andrej.kiner@euba.sk
Abstract: The issue of international migration in Slovakia was not a topic of public dis-
cussion until 2015. A major change in migration discourse can be observed only after the mass
migratory processes in 2015, a few weeks before the Slovak parliamentary elections. Just before
the elections, politicians had also noticed these processes, putting the spotlight on migration,
which became a frequent priority topic of electoral campaigns for several weeks. Our aim with
this paper is to answer a question of how Slovak politicians, who had ignored this topic for many
years, dealt with the issue of international migration since 2015 and which aspect dominated the
emerging migration discourse. We came to the conclusion that Slovak politicians tackled the issue
almost uniformly, regardless of their ideological beliefs or coalition-opposition framework. Most
politicians presented migration as a threat. In addition to the securitization of migration discourse,
we also observe a gradual shift in the understanding of the term migrant. Until 2015, the naming
of the particular actor of migration processes was generally understood to be neutral, yet since
2015 the term has acquired a strong negative connotation.
Key words: political discourse, migration, Slovakia, threat, semantic change.
How to cite this article: Radoslav Štefančík, Andrej Kiner (2021). ‘Sorry, I Don’t Want
Them Here.’ Migration in Slovak Political Discourse. Professional Discourse & Communication,
3(2), pp. 7-20. (in Russian). https://doi.org/10.24833/2687-0126-2021-3-2-10-20
1. INTRODUCTION
Until 1989, the Slovak Republic was considered a typical country of emigration. Economic,
social, but especially political reasons were the most important pull factors of emigration
from the then communist Czechoslovakia [Stojarová, 2019; Onufrák, 2020]. After the
political and economic transformation in 1989, migration ows gradually began to change, but
emigration still dominated. During this period, Slovakia did not yet provide enough push factors

Professional Discourse & Communication Vol. 3 Issue 2, 2021 11
Research paper Radoslav Štefančík, Andrej Kiner
for migrants, due to which they would decide to stay in Slovakia. In the 1990s, Slovakia had a
problem with the consolidation of democracy, and its economy was held back for several years
[Kucharčík & Řádek, 2012; Gbúrová, 2017]. The gradual change did not occur until the accession
of the Slovak Republic to the European Union in May 2004. From traditionally emigrant, the state
began to transform into a country of immigrants. Slovakia, with its right-wing parties at the head
of the government, has undergone deep economic reforms, which generated not only economic
growth or demand for labour. The economic reforms have also contributed to the growing number
of economic migrants. A slight slowdown in migration ows did not occur until 2020, probably
as a result of the global COVID-19 pandemic. At the end of 2020, 150,012 foreigners with a res-
idence permit were registered in Slovakia, which represents less than 2.8 percent of the overall
population.
Despite the gradually upward trend, migration remained outside the scope of main political
discourse until 2015 [Letavajová & Divinský, 2019]. The preparation of migration policy was in-
sucient, and the Slovak asylum policy is thereby one of the strictest in EU countries [Brocková,
2019]. In 2015, Europe experienced an enormous increase in the number of migrants originating
from North Africa and the Middle East to Western European countries [Liďák, 2016]. Although
Slovakia was not aected by these migration inows and migrants only transited the territory of
the country, the topic of international migration has moved from the periphery to the centre of at-
tention of the main political discourse in Slovakia [ÚHCP, 2021].
In Western European countries, we have observed various mobilizing and politicizing con-
cepts, including humanitarianism, security, diversity, protectionism, that should either legitimize
restrictions on immigration and asylum policy or, on the other hand, express the necessity for great-
er solidarity [Krzyzanowski, Triandafyllidou & Wodak, 2018]. Until 2015, international migration
was not portrayed as a primary or marginal issue by Slovak politicians, therefore we will be inter-
ested in answering the question of how Slovak politicians have grasped this topic since 2015. The
article presents how Slovak politicians viewed the actors of migration processes. In this regard, we
seek to identify which aspects of migration processes they emphasized and at the same time which
aspects were marginalized. We will also notice which issues of migration policy Slovak politicians
have not discussed at all. We base our inference on the assumption that the issue of security was
the primary objective of migration discourse, while the positions of the individual parties did not
dier signicantly and the topic of integration policy was absent in migration discourse. We will
strive to identify what types of threats Slovak politicians articulate as the main ones.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The authors who deal with the political aspects of international migration pay their attention
to the migration policy, which can be divided into three sub-policies: integration, immigration
and asylum policy. Following this classication, the analogous internal division of migration dis-
course is suggested. The authors thus analyse the discourse concerning the relevant topics such as
immigration, integration and asylum [Niehr, 2020]. The division of migration discourse into three
subcategories does not exclude the possibility that other topics that do not completely t into this
scheme may become part of migration discourse. The topic of regulated return policy of migrants
to the country of origin can serve as an example, but we can also include herein a discussion of
what lexical means will be used to address particular actors of migratory ows (immigrants, asy-
lum seekers, refugees, economic migrants, etc.). This component of migration discourse can be
identied, for example, in Germany, where a discussion on the use of the term Gastarbeiter and

12 Дискурс профессиональной коммуникации №3-2, 2021
Радослав Штефанчик, Андрей Кинер Исследовательская статья
the gradual transformation of this term from positive to negative took place. Niehr [Niehr, 2020]
identies a similar quality of discourse even after 2015, since when discussions on the use of a
suitable term to refer to actors of migratory ows have been still ongoing. At the centre of migra-
tion discourse are people who are generally perceived as migrants; today, these groups include
economic migrants, their family members, as well as asylum seekers [Niehr, 2020]. The discursive
debate focuses on groups of migrants who are ordinarily attributed common appellations in migra-
tion discourse, such as refugees, economic migrants, asylum seekers, etc., and the usage of these
commonly used terms might often lead to linguistically critical situations.
In addition to the above-mentioned areas in the research of migration discourse, we also iden-
tify studies concerning metaphors on migration [Moullagaliev & Khismatullina, 2017; Arcima-
viciene & Baglama, 2018], views of specic political actors, such as right-wing extremists, on
migration [Wodak, 2016; Štefančík & Hvasta, 2019], as well as research of discourse on selected
groups of actors in migration processes, such as economic migrants [Bilan, 2014], or case studies
concerning a specic country [Cingerová, 2018].
As we noted above, migration discourse can be understood as part of political discourse.
T. van Dijk [van Dijk, 2018] emphasizes that migration discourse is not always only about interna-
tional migration but can also be an essential part of migration as a phenomenon. Current discourse
studies point out that discourse is not only a form of language use, but also a form of social and
political (inter)action. “Migration as a social phenomenon not only consists of (groups of) partic-
ipants, institutions, many types of social and political (inter)action, but also, quite prominently, of
many genres of migration discourse as social and political acts and interaction” [van Dijk, 2018,
p. 230].
3. METHODOLOGY
We share the opinion of the Slovak political linguist Irina Dulebová who claims that “political
discourse reects the struggle for power, and this is the decisive moment for the choice of a com-
munication procedure, the aim of which is always the need to inuence the intellectual, volitional
and emotional sphere of the addressee” [Dulebová, 2012]. It is therefore natural that the study of
political discourse focuses on a wide range of diverse topics and uses a whole range of analyti-
cal methods. We are interested in answering the presented questions in the context of the Slovak
migration discourse through political discourse analysis. As van Dijk [van Dijk, 1997] points out,
the critical-political analysis of discourse deals mainly with the reproduction of political power,
abuse of power or domination through political discourse, including various forms of resistance.
According to this author, there are at least two categories of methods in migration discourse re-
search: quantitative and qualitative ones [van Dijk, 2018]. T. van Dijk considers, for example,
corpus-linguistic methods to study vast text corpora among quantitative methods. One of the meth-
ods of quantitative content analysis is to track certain elements of the texts and compare their
frequency with the occurrence of the other elements [Mayring, 2010]. In this paper we will opt for
a qualitative method of content analysis of political texts. Although the object of content analysis
can be dierent types of symbols [Berelson, 1952], in our text we focus on verbal symbols, i.e.
language. As van Dijk [van Dijk, 2018] accentuates, there are several ways of qualitative analysis
of migration discourse. We can examine only one aspect of discourse, such as the use of certain
means of expression (metaphors, euphemisms, superlatives etc.), or we can focus on the way of
argumentation. We can further analyse political communication strategies according to the needs,
goals or participants of communication by choosing phonetic, prosodic, morphological, syntactic,

Professional Discourse & Communication Vol. 3 Issue 2, 2021 13
Research paper Radoslav Štefančík, Andrej Kiner
stylistic and especially lexical means [Spišiaková, 2017]. The object of our analysis is the political
contents of the communication of Slovak politicians who commented on the topic of international
migration. We analyse the means of expression and arguments used by Slovak politicians within
their communication strategies on the given topic.
The following section presents the analysis of the statements of Slovak politicians from rel-
evant political parties on topics related to the processes of international migration. In the article,
we quote politicians from the following political parties (in parentheses, we state the ideological
direction of the party): Smer-SD (social democrats), SaS (liberals), SNS (national conservatives),
ĽSNS (right-wing extremists). The analysed corpus includes statements of holders of political
functions (deputies, ministers, president, etc.), which were published in the press, on social net-
works, or were uttered in plenary talks of the Slovak parliament during the debate. Parliamentary
texts are available in the digital archive of the National Council of the Slovak Republic. In the
present analysis, we have included texts published after 2015 (as more migration inows are reg-
istered) up to the present.
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Although van Dijk argues that not only politicians, but also non-political actors can be includ-
ed in the category of the political discourse actors [van Dijk, 1997], we, in the following section,
primarily focus on the holders of political functions. Based on the analysed texts, we state that
Slovak politicians are willing to agree on international migration, regardless of their party alia-
tion, ideological inclination, or whether they belong to coalition or opposition. Politicians manage
to agree on issues related to migration in spite of the fact that strong tensions between government
and opposition parties are manifestly part of the Slovak political culture. Since 2015, the main
actors in migration discourse have been mainly leading representatives of parliamentary parties, as
well as right-wing extremists, who did not hold any seats in the Slovak Parliament until 2016 (it
cannot be ruled out that it was probably due to their active anti-immigration rhetoric).
The analysis of the statements of Slovak politicians in the period between 2015 and 2020
shows their interest in presenting primarily the security aspect of migration. Many Slovak politi-
cians, regardless of their ideological background, see international migration as a threat. We can
further structure this threat into four dimensions: personal, political, economic and cultural. We
will nd similar attitudes among right-wing extremists and social democrats or liberals.
In the rst – personal – dimension migration is presented as a possible threat to health or
directly to the life of domestic society. Some Slovak politicians present migrants as potential ter-
rorists who pose a serious risk to the health and lives of the inhabitants of the national territory.
Migrants are also presented as carriers of non-native diseases. The security risk arises from the
fact that national security services are not able to verify the identity of all actors in mass migration
ows.
–RobertFico(Smer-SD):Thetruthisthat,excepttheNorwegiancasewhereBreivikred
a huge number of people, it is almost always Muslims who is behind terrorist attacks [Fico,
2015].
–MarianKotleba(ĽSNS):Immigrantsdonotbelonghere.Peoplereallydonotwantthem
and they are afraid of them. We will not allow any Mujahideen to come here [NR SR, 2018].
–NatáliaGrausová(ĽSNS):Crime,terrorism,suppressionoftheindigenouspopulation
and culture are features of migration [NR SR, 2018].

14 Дискурс профессиональной коммуникации №3-2, 2021
Радослав Штефанчик, Андрей Кинер Исследовательская статья
In the second dimension, migrants are presented as a factor threatening state sovereignty. This
dimension is subject to the creation of a common immigration policy of the European Union or is
related to the proposal to introduce mandatory quotas for the redistribution of migrants among the
Member States of the European Union (the EU). The EU wishes to impose quotas on their member
states, whereas Slovakia is losing a signicant part of its own state sovereignty as quotas are con-
trary to the country’s national interest.
– Robert Fico (Smer-SD): We continue to reject quotas, the EU cannot punish us for disa-
greeing [Úradvlády SR, 2015].
–RobertKaliňák(Smer-SD):Ifweareforcedtoimposequotas,itisnot right,itisthe
Brussels dictate [TASR, 2015].
In the third – economic – dimension migrants present a threat to the domestic labour market
or are perceived as a threat to the stability of the social assistance system. Some politicians refer to
migrants as people from poor countries who have migrated to Europe in order to benet from gen-
erous social assistance. Especially in the countries of Western Europe, either illegal employment
of third-country nationals or the so-called “benet tourism” [Verschueren, 2014] is a common
phenomenon. Some Slovak politicians also associate migrants with cheap workforce, which may
jeopardize the employment rate of members of the domestic society.
–NatáliaGrausová(ĽSNS):Theothersarenotrefugees.Theseare,forexample,econom-
ic migrants, which means people who do not want to adapt to the new environment and just
wanttousehelp,orpeoplewhomayevenbecriminalseeingfromjustice[NR SR, 2018].
Eventually, in the last – cultural – dimension, many Slovak politicians present migrants as
bearers of dierent cultures, traditions and, last but not least, religion. Muslims whose culture and
religious traditions are not compatible with and dier from the Christian character of Slovakia, are
presented by many politicians as people who are not welcome in Slovakia because their cultural
and religious traditions are not compatible with Slovak culture.
–RichardSulík(SaS):IdonotwanttoliveinasocietywheremoreMuslimchildrenare
born as non-Muslim [Folentová, 2016].
– Robert Fico (Smer-SD): We have to prevent the emergence of a compact Muslim commu-
nity in Slovakia [Rohac, 2016].
–RichardSulík(SaS):Islamisnotcompatiblewithourculture[Šimečka, 2017].
Part of the migration discourse in Slovakia was the semantic shift of the term migrants,
or migration. Until 2015, this word was generally used in Slovakia as a value-neutral term.
Since the migration situation in 2015, the content of the term migration has begun to change.
Politicians called for a strict distinction between the terms refugee and economic migrant.
Several Slovak politicians labelled a large part of the refugees from the migration situa-
tion in 2015 and 2016 as economic migrants, in other words, migrants who have safe liv-
ing environment at home, with the reason for their arrival in Europe being purely economic.
However, with this semantic drift, the new term “economic migration” took on a negative
implication, although until 2015, economic migration was generally perceived as a neutral
phenomenon.

Professional Discourse & Communication Vol. 3 Issue 2, 2021 15
Research paper Radoslav Štefančík, Andrej Kiner
– Robert Fico (Smer-SD): We must make a strict distinction between political refugees and
economic migrants. Economic migrants should be sent uncompromisingly back to their countries
oforigin.Onthecontrary,refugeeswhoedthewarwillreceiveourhelp [Robert Fico, 2015].
Within the Slovak migration discourse, there even emerged an opinion that the word migrant
cannot be used to describe Slovaks who emigrated from Slovakia to the countries of Western
Europe or the USA. The unwillingness to label emigrant Slovaks as migrant underlined some
politicians’ negative view on migration. This attitude emerges despite the fact that until recently
Slovakia was a typical country of emigration.
–NatáliaGrausová (ĽSNS): Itis an unethical and immoral demagogy to label Slovak
citizensworkingintheEuropeanUnionasmigrants.Scholars,brains,qualiedpeople are
leavingSlovakia.Itisanunethical,immoralliethatwillputSlovakcitizensleavingSlovakia
on the same level as migrants from Africa [NR SR, 2018].
Following the example of migration discourse in Germany, Thomas Niehr [Niehr, 2020] also
observes a specic use of metaphors to dehumanize actors involved in migration processes. In this
context, Niehr speaks primarily of water-metaphors (ood,wave,ow). Manifestations associated
with the attempt to dehumanize the actors of migration processes are also observed in the context
of the Slovak migration discourse. At the same time, such discursive strategy is not observed only
among right-wing extremists, for whom the dehumanization of foreign groups is a distinctive fea-
ture of political communication [Smolík, 2013], but it can also be identied within political parties
from the democratic centre. In addition to Niehr, there are other authors, such as L. Arcimaviciene,
S.H. Baglama [Arcimaviciene & Baglama, 2018], N. Moullagaliev, L. Khismatullina [Moullagal-
iev & Khismatullina, 2017] who observe the frequent use of metaphors in the context of migration
discourse. However, in the case of the Slovak migration discourse, the metaphor of war appears
more often. Metaphors help to understand the abstract world of politics with clearer examples of
everyday life.
As Tatiana Grigorjanová claims “metaphor in contemporary linguistics is understood not only
as a phenomenon of language, but also of thinking and acting. It’s not just a simple transfer of a
denomination from one object to another, but a complex process of conceptualizing reality through
experience and knowledge” [Grigorjanová, 2017, p. 151]. Metaphor bears a rich pragmatic poten-
tial in political discourse, i.e. the ability to inuence the recipient and to establish a certain type of
decision and political behaviour [Dulebová, 2010]. The use of metaphors in political communica-
tion is part of a discursive strategy that is highly ideological, historically and cognitively anchored
and reinforced through mediation. Metaphors are linguistic means of open or hidden meaning that
are used by political and media actors as a discursive practice with a dened strategic goal [Cam-
maerts, 2012]. Slovak politicians usually express the metaphor of war in the context of migration
discourse through expressions from the military vocabulary (war,toght,todefend,towagewar,
toghttothelastdropofblood,tobeinthefrontline,toattack,terrorists,genocide). We identify
this communication strategy especially among right-wing extremists, but it is also used by politi-
cians from the democratic centre.
– Andrej Danko (SNS): Large groups of migrants should not settle down in our country.
TheydisrupttheEU’sadministrativesystemandareasecuritythreat.Itdoesn’tmatterthat
they are unarmed, it is a mass invasion [TASR, 2016].

16 Дискурс профессиональной коммуникации №3-2, 2021
Радослав Штефанчик, Андрей Кинер Исследовательская статья
–RichardSulík(SaS):Theinuxofrefugeeshasturnedintoaninvasioninthelasttwo
weeks [Sulík, 2015].
The military vocabulary occurs in Slovak migration discourse not only in the form of meta-
phors, but also in the plain-spoken way to reect the migration situation.
–ĽubomírGalko(SaS):ThedeploymentofthearmytoprotectthebordersoftheEurope-
an Union must not be a taboo. Smugglers’ boats must be uncompromisingly sunk or somehow
destroyed [NR SR, 2015].
Based on the analysis of primary sources the conclusion can be made that migration discourse
in Slovakia is not politically correct and often verges on the so-called “new racism,” which is
shown in more subtle and indirect formal expressions and can be presented openly in formal set-
tings by criticizing cultural dierence of others [Leach, 2005]. We observe political correctness
as a linguistic phenomenon largely in Western societies [Matytcina & Grigorjanová, 2018], but
it is very little discussed in Slovakia. Politicians openly express their negative attitudes towards
migrants, and this does not concern only right-wing extremists, but also politicians from a liberal
background:
–ĽubomírGalko(SaS):Sorry,Idon’twantthemhere.Chewmeout,butIdon’twantpeo-
pleofthisdierentcultureinSlovakia [Folentová, 2016].
In addition to the aforementioned manifestations, there is another signicant point typical of
the Slovak migration discourse, namely the absence of discussion on integration policy. While in
typical immigration countries this topic is a natural part of migration discourse [Goodman, 2010;
van Dijk, 2018], this kind of discussion is still insucient in Slovakia. In most cases, academics
are involved in integration discourse, but politicians lack initiative in this regard. The possible
motive for this may be the securitization of migration discourse. For this reason, they avoid a
discussion on such a topic and practically repeat the mistakes of those countries that failed to rec-
ognise their immigration status for many years, even though the number of migrants among them
has been gradually growing from year to year.
5. CONCLUSION
Based on the above, we state that migration discourse has evolved as part of Slovak political
discourse only since 2015. It was that particular year (in the context of mass migration processes
on the European continent) that international migration launched a debate in Slovakia as well. As
politicians emphasized mainly the adverse aspects of migration in the public discussion, the term
migration took on a negative connotation, which was subsequently reected in the extremely dis-
missive reactions of the Slovak citizens [Orgoňová & Bohunická, 2016]. This semantic shift oc-
curred despite the fact that many successful migrants live in Slovak society. They are well integrat-
ed in Slovakia, they speak the Slovak language, or they publicly emphasize pride in the acquired
citizenship. One and well-known example is Anastazia Kuzminova, a successful sportswoman,
a representative of the Slovak Republic in biathlon, originally from Russia. However, political
statements suggest that politicians do not take this type of migrant into account. On the contrary,
they associate the term migrant with the penetration of new, unknown and contradictory values

Professional Discourse & Communication Vol. 3 Issue 2, 2021 17
Research paper Radoslav Štefančík, Andrej Kiner
and traditions into the Slovak society, which may not be compatible with the traditions of the cit-
izens. However, this perspective of thinking subsequently leads to the creation of misconceptions
about international migration as a lexical expression. This type of thinking leads to the creation
of stereotypes, which can have negative eects on the creation of migration integration policy, or
specically on the process of integrating immigrants into the society. At this point we can state
that the nature and tenor of discourse can directly aect social reality, attitudes of the mainstream
society, as well as the ability and willingness of migrants to accept cultural and social patterns of
domestic society, and subsequently the overall result of the integration process.
Acknowledgements
This paper was supported by the Grant Agency VEGA No. 1/0344/20 Language of Right-
Wing Extremism. A View of Political Linguistics.
Conict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conict of interest
REFERENCES
1. Arcimaviciene, L. & Baglama, S. H. (2018). Migration, Metaphor and Myth in Media Rep-
resentations: the Ideological Dichotomy of “Them” and “Us”. SAGE Open, 8 (2), 1-13. doi:
10.1177/2158244018768657.
2. Berelson, B. (1952). Content Analysis in Communication Research. Glencoe: Free Press.
3. Bilan, Y. (2014). About Migration of Ukraine’s Population: Scientic and Public Discourse.
Transformations in Business & Economics, 13 (1), 196–208.
4. Brocková, K. (2019). Reforma Spoločného európskeho azylového systému vs. aktuálny vývoj v
azylovej politike vybraných štátov Európskej únie [Reform of the Common European Asylum
System vs. Current developments in the asylum policy of selected states of the European Union].
In Cibuľa, A. et al. (Ed.), Ekonomické,politickéaprávneotázkymedzinárodnýchvzťahov2019
[Economic,politicaland legal issues ofinternational relations2019] (pp. 47–54). Bratislava:
EKONÓM (in Slovak).
5. Cammaerts, B. (2012). The Strategic Use of Metaphors by Political and Media Elites: the 2007-11
Belgian Constitutional Crisis. InternationalJournalofMedia&CulturalPolitics,8(2/3), 229–249.
6. Cingerová, N. (2018). Nominačné stratégie v súčasnom ruskom diskurze o emigrácii [Nomination
strategies in contemporary Russian public discourse of emigration]. In Štefančík, R. (Ed.). Jazyk a
politika.NapomedzílingvistikyapolitológieIII[Languageandpolitics.Betweenlinguisticsand
politicalscience](pp. 218–223), Bratislava: EKONÓM (in Slovak).
7. Dijk, T. A. van (1997). What is Political Discourse Analysis. Belgian Journal of Linguistics,
11(1), 11–52. doi: 10.1075/bjl.11.03dij.
8. Dijk, T. A. van (2018). Discourse and Migration. In Zapata-Barrero, R. & Yalaz, E. (Eds.). Quali-
tative Research in European Migration Studies (pp. 227–245). Cham: Springer.
9. Dulebová. I. (2010). Svetová kríza a metofora v ruskom a slovenskom politickom diskurze [World
crisis and metaphor in Russian and Slovak politics]. Noválologickárevue,2(4), 66–75 (in Slovak).
10. Dulebová, I. (2012). Politický diskurz ako object lingvistického výskumu [Political discourse as
an object of linguistic research]. Jazykakultúra,3(9). Retrieved from https://www..unipo.sk/
jak/cislo9.html (accessed: 15 February, 2021) (in Slovak).

18 Дискурс профессиональной коммуникации №3-2, 2021
Радослав Штефанчик, Андрей Кинер Исследовательская статья
11. Fico, R. (2015). Problémsmigrantmitrebariešiťtam,kdevzniká[Theproblemofmigrantsneeds
tobeaddressedwhereitarises]. Retrieved from https://www.vlada.gov.sk//robert-co-problem-
s-migrantmi-treba-riesit-tam-kde-vznika/ (accessed: 15 May, 2021) (in Slovak).
12. Folentová, V. (2016). SaS ide do volieb rozpoltená [SaS goes to the polls divided]. Denník N. Re-
trieved from<https://dennikn.sk/372555/bilbordoch-reformy-mitingoch-utecenci-sas-ide-do-vo-
lieb-rozpoltena/?ref=tit> (accessed: 15 May, 2021) (in Slovak).
13. Gbúrová, M. (2017). On the Issues of Deformation of Democracy in Slovakia after the Year 1993.
In Mihálik, J. (Ed.), Annual Conference Faculty of Social Sciences UCM Trnava: Political Sci-
ence and European Studies (pp. 7-18). Trnava: UCM.
14. Goodman, S. W. (2010). Integration Requirements for Integration’s Sake? Identifying, Categoris-
ing and Comparing Civic Integration Policies. JournalofEthnicandMigrationStudies,36(5),
753–772. doi: 10.1080/13691831003764300.
15. Grigorjanová, T. (2017). Metafora v politicko-ekonomickom diskurze [Metaphor in political-eco-
nomic discourse]. In Štefančík, R. (Ed.). Jazykapolitika.NapomedzílingvistikyapolitológieII
[Languageandpolitics.BetweenlinguisticsandpoliticalscienceII] (pp. 150–159). Bratislava:
EKONÓM (in Slovak).
16. Krzyzanowski, M., Triandafyllidou, A. & Wodak, R. (2018). The Mediatization and the Politici-
zation of the “Refugee Crisis” in Europe. JournalofImmigrant&RefugeeStudies,16(1-2), 1-14.
doi: 10.1080/15562948.2017.1353189.
17. Kucharčík, R. & Řádek, M. (2012). Politické strany a vývoj straníckeho systému na Slovensku
od roku 1992 [Political parties and the development of the party system in Slovakia since 1992].
In Štrauss, D. (Ed.). Voľby 2012 [Elections2012] (pp. 228-247). Trenčín: Transparentnosť (in
Slovak) .
18. Leach, C. W. (2005). Against the Notion of a ‘New Racism’. JournalofCommunity&Applied
SocialPsychology,15, 432–435. doi: 10.1002/casp.841.
19. Letavajová, S. & Divinský, B. (2019). Common Home Publication. Migration and development in
Slovakia. Bratislava, Caritas Slovakia.
20. Liďák, J. (2016). International Migration from Asia and Africa – Issues and Challenges for Eu-
rope. Asian and African Studies, 25 (2), 231–248.
21. Matytcina, M. & Grigorjanová, T. (2018). Osobitosti prekladu politicky korektných eufemizmov
[Politically correct euphemisms and their translation peculiarities]. In Štefančík, R. (Ed.). Jazyka
politika.NapomedzílingvistikyapolitológieIII[Languageandpolitics.Betweenlinguisticsand
politicalscienceIII] (pp. 389–396). Bratislava: EKONÓM (in Slovak).
22. Mayring, P. (2010). Qualitative inhaltsanalyse grundlagen und techniken [Qualitative content
analysis. Basics and techniques]. Weinheim and Basel: Beltz Verlag (in German).
23. Moullagaliev, N., & Khismatullina, L. (2017). Metaphors in Media Discourse on Migration. Jour-
nalofHistoryCultureandArt Research,6(5), 131–138. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7596/taksad.
v6i5.1242.
24. Niehr T. (2020). Migrations diskurs [Migration discourse]. In Niehr, T., Kilian, J. & Schiewe, J.
(Eds). Handbuchsprachkritik[Languagecriticism] (pp. 225–232). Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler (in
German).
25. NR SR (2015). Meeting of the National Council of the Slovak Republic, 24 June 2015. Spoločná
Česko-Slovenská Digitálna parlamentná knižnica, Archív [Czech-Slovak digital parliamentary li-
brary, Archives]. Retrieved from https://www.nrsr.sk/dl (accessed: 15 February, 2021).
26. NR SR (2018). Meeting of the National Council of the Slovak Republic, 28 November 2018.
Spoločná Česko-Slovenská Digitálna parlamentná knižnica, Archív [Czech-Slovak digital parlia-
mentary library, Archives]. Retrieved from https://www.nrsr.sk/dl (accessed: 15 February, 2021).

Professional Discourse & Communication Vol. 3 Issue 2, 2021 19
Research paper Radoslav Štefančík, Andrej Kiner
27. Onufrák, A. (2020). Migrácia v Európe po druhejsvetovej vojne v kontexte európskej integrácie
[Migration in Europe after the Second World War in the context of European integration]. In Šutaj, Š.
(Ed.). ZmenyhranícapohybobyvateľstvavEurópepodruhejsvetovejvojne[Borderchangesand
populationmovementsinEuropeaftertheSecondWorldWar] (s. 40–60) Košice: UPJŠ (in Slo-
vak).
28. Orgoňová, O. & Bohunická, A. (2016). Imigrácia ako predmet xenoslovakistiky a kritickej
analýzy diskurzu na Slovensku [Immigration as a subject of xenoslovak studiesand of critical
discourse analysis in Slovakia]. In Štefančík, R. (Ed.). Jazykapolitika.Napomedzílingvistikya
politológie[Languageandpolitics.Betweenlinguisticsandpoliticalscience] (pp. 79–93). Brati-
slava: EKONÓM (in Slovak).
29. Rohac, D. (2016). Vote Here for Cronyism, against Liberal Democracy. Politico, February 29,
2016. Retrieved from https://www.politico.eu/article/slovakia-election-robert-co-visegrad-or-
ban/ (accessed: 24 March, 2021).
30. Smolík, J. (2013). Krajněpravicové politickéstrany v zemích V4: historie a současnost [Right-
wing political parties in V4 countries: history and today]. Sociológia,45(4),385–410 (in Slovak).
31. Spišiaková, M. (2017). Obraznosť v jazyku politikov a v jazyku o politike [Figurativeness in the
language of politicians and in the language of politics]. In Štefančík, R. (Ed.). Jazykapolitika.
NapomedzílingvistikyapolitológieII[Languageandpolitics.Betweenlinguisticsandpolitical
scienceII] (pp. 171–181). Bratislava: EKONÓM (in Slovak).
32. Stojarová, V. (2019). Migration Policies of the Czech and Slovak Republics since 1989. Restric-
tive, Liberal, Integrative or Circular? TransylvanianReviewofAdministrativeSciences,56E, 97-
114. doi: 10.24193/tras.56E.6.
33. Sulík, R. (2015). Invázia migrantov [Migrant invasion]. Retrieved from https://sulik.sk/inva-
zia-migrantov/?doing_wp_cron=1621155703.8401260375976562500000 (accessed: 16 May,
2021) (in Slovak).
34. Šimečka, M. M. (2017). Richard Sulík: Áno, som slovenský nacionalista [Richard Sulík: Yes,
I am a Slovak nationalist]. Denník N. Retrieved from https://dennikn.sk/688253/richard-su-
lik-sas-som-slovensky-nacionalista-rozhovor (accessed: 15 May, 2021) (in Slovak).
35. Štefančík, R. & Hvasta, M. (2019). Jazykpravicovéhoextrémizmu[Thelanguageofright-wing
extremism].Bratislava: EKONÓM (in Slovak).
36. TASR (2015). So sýrskymi kresťanmi robíme pohovory a privezieme ich sem [We interview
SyrianChristiansandwebring them here]. Retrieved from https://www.markiza.sk/spravy/do-
mace/1804828_kalinak-so-syrskymi-krestanmi-robime-pohovory-a-privezieme-ich-sem (ac-
cessed: 24 March, 2021) (in Slovak).
37. TASR (2016). Šéf SNS Danko: Veľké skupiny moslimov by sa u nás nemali usadiť! [SNS-Leader
Danko: Large groups of muslims should not settle in our country!]. Plus1deň. Retrieved from
http://www.pluska.sk/-spravy/z-domova/sef-sns-danko-velke-skupiny-moslimov-nas-nemali-us-
adit.html (accessed: 15 Mai, 2021) (in Slovak).
38. ÚHCP –Bureau of Border and Foreign Police (2020). Azyl a migrácia. Štatistika [Asylum and
migration. Statistics]. Bratislava: Ministerstvo vnútra SR. Retrieved from https://www.minv.
sk/?statistiky-20 (accessed: 24 March, 2021) (in Slovak).
39. Úradvlády SR (2015). Povinnékvótynaďalejodmietame,EÚnásnemôžetrestaťzaodlišnýnázor
[Werejectmandatoryquotas;theEUcannotpunishusfordisagreeing].Retrieved from https://
www.vlada.gov.sk//robert-co-povinne-kvoty-nadalej-odmietame-eu-nas-nemoze-trestat-za-od-
lisny-nazor/ (accessed: 24 March, 2021) (in Slovak).
40. Verschueren, Herwig (2014). Free Movement or Benet Tourism: the Unreasonable Burden of
Brey. EuropeanJournalofMigrationandLaw,16(2), 147–179. doi:10.1163/15718166-12342052.

20 Дискурс профессиональной коммуникации №3-2, 2021
Радослав Штефанчик, Андрей Кинер Исследовательская статья
41. Wodak, R. (2016). Politikmit der Angst. Zur Wirkung rechtspopulistischer diskurse [The Politics
offear.Whatright-wingpopulistdiscoursesmean]. Wien, Hamburg: Edition Konturen (in Ger-
man).
About the authors:
Radoslav Štefančík is doc. PhDr., MPol., Ph.D, Dean of the Faculty of Applied Languages at the
University of Economics in Bratislava (Slovakia)
Andrej Kiner is a PhD student in the Department of International Economic Relations and Eco-
nomic Diplomacy at the Faculty of International Relations at the University of Economics in Bratisla-
va (Slovakia)