Search

The sociological literature has always paid great attention to the role of work in structuring the life courses of young people (Cavalli, 1980; Giddens, 1991; Blossfeld, 2011). The processes of renovation of the labor market of the last twenty years, consequence of regulatory changes in Europe (Fudge & Strauss, 2013; Elia, 2013), «did not deliver enough “good jobs” » (Schmid, 2015. 70), need an even more deep and accurate analysis of the contractual positions. This is true especially regarding the analysis of how the professional status (employed or unemployed) and the type of contract (stable in time or temporary) influence the empowerment process in the different institutional frameworks (Bertolini, Hofäcker & Torrioni, 2014). With the end of the old system of social security based on the role of the male breadwinner as head of a nuclear family and holder of the typical form of so-called “stable and employed work” (Jansen, 2011), the adaptability to the new labor market is leading to an ever more stringent process of individualization (Standing, 2014). How the young couples with unstable employment build the basis of their independent life together ? In an effort to explore this complexity, in this paper we try to shift the focus of the analysis from the simple comparison of the general conditions of young couples, to the differences emerging by comparing their situation to what we defined “dimensions of precariousness”. These are five different areas of insecurity - each distinct from the other - representing two possible threats to the creation and continuation of the daily life of the couple: working and occupational. The interviews conducted in our empirical research (Bronner, 2015), highlight the concerns for the renewal of the contract (Gallino, 2007), in the absence of a true realization, in Italy, of a social security system that gives the opportunity to live less harsh and uncertain transitions between different unstable employments.

The emphasis of the new spirit of capitalism about “employability” has affected the european educational policies of the last decades (Boltanski, Chiapello, 2005). In particular, at Community level, the rhetoric of lifelong learning has been always linked to a strong neo-liberal sense, emphasizing the presence of both winners and losers, as the inevitable result of a changing economy (Holford, 2008). Within a political agenda strongly oriented to conceive a new stra-tegic vision for the realization of the welfare measures, Lifelong learn-ing is actually the focus of the new social policies (Griffin, 2002). In this sense, if learnfare is the promotion of skills through lifelong learn-ing (De Luca Picione, 2015), a reform of the educational system con-cerning the whole period of formal studies, from the first years of school to the higher education experiences and lifelong training, is of primary importance (Giddens, 2014). How to rethink the policies of Adult education in the XXI century in the different national contexts? (Milana, 2017). The study that is presented here, as a result of a substantive curiosi-ty about the mechanisms and processes that have guided social action of the institutions of Italy and France in the path towards the estab-lishment of the national system of adult education in a lifelong learn-ing perspective emphasizing the role of various actors in different lo-cal contexts in which policies are implemented, is located in this per-spective. Given the need for shared survey on social basic tools and the actu-al function of capacitation of these interventions, that are able to offer a structured framework, rooted in reality (Holford, 2014) of the trajec-tories of inclusion / exclusion of citizens-users, who do not disregard the recognition of "voices" of learners (Formenti, 2014), we propose the first empirical evidence of exploratory field survey on the adult population.

La “qualità” del capitale umano prodotta dalle istituzioni educative in Italia è fortemente condizionata dai ritardi nel livello di scolarizzazione, in particolare nelle corti di età più avanzate della popolazione. Sebbene alla base dello status occupazionale vi sia ancora il titolo di studio, a sua volta strettamente legato alle origini sociali, il reclutamento e la progressione economica si basano su un “credenzialismo” scarsamente meritocratico, che deve farci riflettere anche sul grado di equità del nostro sistema scolastico. L’analisi di alcuni dati sembra infatti contraddire gli assunti sulla “convenienza” dell’accumulazione di capitale umano, evidenziando elementi di riflessione su quello di capitale sociale.

Sur la base de l’étude du lexique de l’égalité, nous voulons proposer une réflexion sur le problème de la synonymie dans la traduction des « termes ». Nous ferons notamment référence aux langues française et anglaise. Notre approche se veut absolument discursive, par conséquent nous considérerons la synonymie comme mécanisme discursif, sur l’exemple du paradigme désignationnel de Mortureux (2004 : 100). Partant du paradigme "Egalité de(s) genre(s) / Egalité des sexes / Egalité entre (les) hommes et (les) femmes"… en tant que traduction de l’anglais "Gender equality", tout un lexique se met en place dans des discours hétérogènes autour du terme – pivot "Gender" qui reste allogène à la culture française et par conséquent adapté à celle-ci (Degarve 2007). Le choix d’un équivalent ou d’un autre est-il fait en fonction d’un contexte précis ou bien renvoie-t-il à un positionnement discursif (Muchielli 1998) faisant fonctionner les termes comme des désignants et des formules (Krieg-Planque 2003) ? Dans le premier cas, il s’agirait alors de ce qu’ailleurs (Raus, 1999 : 96) nous avons défini « funzionalità semantica » , à savoir « il criterio su cui si basa un locutore quando, entro un contesto particolare, preferisce utilizzare, in modo più o meno consapevole, un elemento di un insieme piuttosto che un altro elemento, sinonimico e perciò appartenente allo stesso insieme ». Dans le deuxième cas, l’utilisation d’un terme correspondrait à la volonté d’un énonciateur de se positionner d’une manière précise vis-à-vis de l’objet du discours et des autres acteurs de la scène publique. Les deux explications possibles laissent en tout cas supposer que la traduction des termes reste étroitement liée aux contextes discursifs spécifiques (Bourigault et Slodzian 1999). Ainsi, nous analyserons un corpus hétérogène constitué en majorité par des documents de l’UE, où nous avons à disposition les deux versions française et anglaise, mais nous élargirons aussi notre réflexion à quelques discours politiques français pour voir de quelle manière la traduction d’un terme venu d’ailleurs et donc son « acculturation » (Alexandru et Gaudin : 2) dans une langue – culture d’arrivée va à la rencontre d’exigences extralinguistiques. Autant de preuves ultérieures que les termes, tout comme les mots, restent des « signes vivants » (Depecker 2002 : 57).